2 ms·

Companies cannot legally provide a lot of services to minors. For other services there is enough bureaucracy that it's easier to avoid by not providing the ser

by rrwo 4y ago

Companies cannot legally provide a lot of services to minors. For other services there is enough bureaucracy that it's easier to avoid by not providing the service to minors. It's also easier to ban accounts for life when they lie about who they are. You don't run the risk of aiding fraud and being fined if you make a mistake, because you banned them. There was nothing preventing the kid from creatibg content. It was in using Ad Sense to make money off it.

Method-X 4y ago
Sure but that doesn’t mean they should be banned for life. If you commit a crime as a minor does that follow you around for the rest of your life? At least where I live, it doesn’t.
- ska 4y ago
  > doesn’t mean they should be banned for life. It doesn't mean that it shouldn't though, either. I can't imagine any other way around this that doesn't amount to forcing a company to provide a service to someone they have rational reasons to not trust, which seems like globally at least it could cause more problems than it solves. To be clear I'm not saying we shouldn't encourage a company to re-consider when the person is older, but it's hard to see how they should be forced to.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    > forcing a company to provide a service Nothing wrong with that. Just do it. Force them to provide service to the kids they banned for life due to frivolous violations of contracts nobody really reads anyway. > it's hard to see how they should be forced to It's really easy actually. Someone getting permabanned from a service for the unforgivable offense of being a child is completely out of proportion. We already force them to provide service to the disabled and impaired without discrimination. It's okay to do it. Corporations don't have feelings. Nobody really cares how hard life is for the hundred billion dollar corporation either.

by rrwo 4y ago

Method-X 4y ago

Sure but that doesn’t mean they should be banned for life. If you commit a crime as a minor does that follow you around for the rest of your life? At least where I live, it doesn’t.

ska 4y ago
> doesn’t mean they should be banned for life. It doesn't mean that it shouldn't though, either. I can't imagine any other way around this that doesn't amount to forcing a company to provide a service to someone they have rational reasons to not trust, which seems like globally at least it could cause more problems than it solves. To be clear I'm not saying we shouldn't encourage a company to re-consider when the person is older, but it's hard to see how they should be forced to.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > forcing a company to provide a service Nothing wrong with that. Just do it. Force them to provide service to the kids they banned for life due to frivolous violations of contracts nobody really reads anyway. > it's hard to see how they should be forced to It's really easy actually. Someone getting permabanned from a service for the unforgivable offense of being a child is completely out of proportion. We already force them to provide service to the disabled and impaired without discrimination. It's okay to do it. Corporations don't have feelings. Nobody really cares how hard life is for the hundred billion dollar corporation either.