Lurker > bigblu89

Tmaster148 posted...

To note, streaming services like Max can allow you to restrict access to r rated content. Plus they are paid services. Not a good comparsion to youtube.

In theory, so does YouTube via YouTube Kids.

But as has already been discussed, they aren't as vigilant about policing that.

LightningThief posted...

You aren't even following along with the posts you quote as they say the complete opposite. You literally quoted a post from me that says if YouTube wants to platform adult content, put it behind an age consent wall. Your response to that was to quote that, and reply with a fabricated talking point that I argued "because youtube has kids that use it doesn't mean 18+ content can't be platformed there."

No to hijack the conversation, but if you truly feel that way, do you feel the same about other apps and platforms such as Max, Showtime Anytime, Netflix, Prime, etc?

Because I can just as easily log onto Paramount+ and watch SpongeBob one minute, then Wolf of Wall Street the next.

And your counter would be "Well then set the age restrictions" which is exactly what you can do with YouTube.

And finally, these videos are all part of an algorithm. So you're not seeing them unless past viewing habits have lead you to them. Like I said before, my YouTube feed is filled with music videos (becasue I mainly use it to stream music) and wrestling interviews (because I subscribe to a few wrestler's channels).

LightningThief posted...

Idk who this board considers the sexiest women, but I doubt most would turn her down over her name.

Exactly.

If I was single and someone that looked like Salma Hayek started hitting on me and they said their name was Roger, that wouldn't deter me.

Had to do the opposite. Switch from Rite Aid to CVS

I dont really know what is considered a mans name.

Like, would I date a girl named George?

Tmaster148 posted...

I don't see why you can't just go to the sites designed for this content instead of forcing it onto others.

Based on your own arguments it would be perfectly fine to set up an adult store right next to a children's playground otherwise it would be censorship or anti consumer choice.

The Showtime and MAX app have soft core porn movies on them, and they arent hidden behind age restrictions.

They also have a ton of programming for children.

I wouldnt consider either of those apps Adult Sites.

If you dont want see it, dont watch it. If you dont want your kids seeing it, do a better job at monitoring what they have access to.

To flat out say it shouldnt be there because theres other places you can go see it is just you being mad fur the sake of being mad.

Soliloquy_Rhap posted...

You've gotten this without seeking it out? I didn't know this was a thing until this topic.

Theres also this.

My YouTube feed is filled with music videos and wrestling interviews, because thats really all I use YouTube for.

I have yet to see any of these try on porn videos

REAL Ramen is one of my favorite meals.

Tmaster148 posted...

And there's no reason for youtube to be a place to host adult content. You have dedicated sites for it, use those.

There's also dedicated sites for children's material.

So if you're so concern that they may stumble upon them, have them use those sites.

As with anything, no one is forcing you to use YouTube. Also, no one is forcing you to click on any YouTube video that you chose not to.

ClayGuida posted...

Man, Brunson is GOAT in the regular season but has been abysmal in the playoffs.

Playoff Randle 2.0

Cant help but wonder what the NY papers would be like if they were down 2-0 instead of up 2-0 with the way hes been playing

divot1338 posted...

They could probably circumvent everything you did in the time it took to type this out. I say that not as a dig but as an honest assessment.

Ive been saying that this whole time.

Doesnt mean I shouldnt at least TRY to shield my children, maybe not now at 15 but especially at a younger age, for things I considered inappropriate.

Every year I think my Isles are going to stink.

And they do for most of the year.

Then they go on a run and make the playoffs.

Then I think why not them?

And then games like tonight happen.

And then I say Oh yeah. Thats why.

Dinner?

Maybe lunch?

LightningThief posted...

Ya, the sounds like he either lives in a bubble that keeps him innocent, or he doesn't live in a bubble and knows more than he's letting on.

The latter in particular wouldn't shock me (this 100% is not a shot at you, many children are more savvy than their parents.)

There are many workarounds and versatile ways to watch content without your parents being none the wiser.

Oh, 100%. I remember what I was doing at 15. Like I said, it would be naive of me to think he isnt figuring things out on his own as well.

I can only control so much.

LightningThief posted...

Sorry to tell you, your son just isn't resourceful or tech savvy for his generation. Likely in a bubble I hope doesn't pop.

It is most definitely not "easier" given how versatile and readily available and workarounds available to view content.

If what BlueTigerLion said is true, the people advocating this type of content absolutely needs to be readily available on YouTube, are exactly the type of disingenuous people I'm talking about.

It's disingenuous to act like normal YouTube is for adults when it (the non Kids YouTube) is most definitely aimed at children as well. As normal YouTube is literally not hidden by an age consent wall.

My wife and I are just very open and honest with our children, to the point where they dont feel the need to hide anything from us. At least I dont think they do.

Plus, its not like I restrict all that much. They have YouTube. My sons 15, and I remember what I was thinking about when I was 15. So for me to sit here and think any restrictions I put on him are truly stopping him from seeing certain things would just be naive on my part.

Doesn't mean I shouldnt at least TRY to shield him as much as I can, combined with open dialogue about things he may be curious about.

specialkid8 posted...

It's not even about prudishness. These women are gaming the system and pretending to be actual content creators in order to sell porn. How is that not strange to you? Complaining about "twitchthots" is all the rage. Why are they protected on youtube?

Strange? No.

Maybe it's becasue I don't really encounter them. I see it happening on Facebook more than on YouTube. But either way, it doesn't bother me in the least. I treat it like any other video I have no interest in seeing. I just swipe past it an go on with my day.

That's funny, becasue I've always been able to express myself better through my writing than any sort of oral communication.

I think it's the ability to think and edit when I am writing, as opposed to the pressure of public speaking.

Whiterun_Guard_ posted...

false

For you, maybe.

Mike Tyson

specialkid8 posted...

Why are y'all still going on about kids when no one has even tried to justify why people should be allowed to advertise porn on youtube to begin with? Whether kids can see it is completely beside the point.

Because unless you're the most conservative of conservatives, no one cares.

If an adult stumbles upon it, they either go "oh, that's odd" and move on, or are into it and seek out more videos.

So the concern then falls on whether it is age-appropriate material. Otherwise it's just needless peral clutching.

Makeveli_lives posted...

Do you not leave your house to get water as is? Tap water is shown to be unhealthy long term.

No. Becasue I drink the water that is filtered through my refrigerator.

That I have to pay for.

You're making my point for me. The original post I replied to was saying that water was a necessity that people do not pay for, where that cannot be further from the truth.

Xethuminra posted...

Water fountains

Have a sweet day!

So you're expecting people to leave their places of residence to find a random source of water like we're in some 3rd world country?

This has to be a troll job.

Psyloshsr posted...

We're not actually pretending America is the only place with water bills are we?

Not at all.

But the poster said "Imagine having to pay for a necessity like water?" in a way to compare it to housing being a necessity, and how housing should be free, unaware that water isn't free unless you're catching it as it falls from the sky.

Xethuminra posted...

I think people should be entitled to basic necessities, as part of their right to the pursuit of a greater happiness.

Imagine being at risk of dying from dehydration because a hypothetical place charges for water

Hold the spit btw

That hypothetical place is America.

I get a water bill based on my usage every month.

WarfireX posted...

TC is making a proposal for something that could work, so of course the CE know it alls have to parrot a bunch of corporate nonsense on cost efficiency even though they are always the first to call other people shills.

It's not corporate nonsense, it's literal fact.

You're asking for the solution to the housing problem to be making dangerous, bathroom-free apartments.

Now, if the proposal is to take the PROPERTY these malls are on, have it re-zoned, and use it to create rent controlled apartment buildings, then you have a potential solution.

But saying "hey, why don't we take the old abandoned Sears and make it some death trap apartments" is not a great idea.

divot1338 posted...

The hubris of thinking your capable of doing any such thing

I can only control what I can control, and what my children watch/download on devices I purchased for them is in my control.

Are there ways around them? Maybe. Are my kids smart enough to know them? I don't know.

Do I feel like my kids are the type that live such a sheltered life that they would feel the need to circumvent certain restrictions that I've put on them? No, becasue I'm rather lenient with what I allow my children to watch. That, along with having a MUCH more open relationship with my children than my parents did with me and my sister, I feel like they would have no issues hiding their viewing habits from us.

Psyloshsr posted...

Men can't get pregnant though

Amazingly, this is a very controversial statement in 2024.

LightningThief posted...

This isn't exactly the 1990s or even early 2000s where watching your kids content is easy.

It's actually easier.

Shared parent/children accounts literally let the parent chose what apps and sites kids can and can't go on, how long they can be on said apps/sites, and what times of the day they can be on them. And you don't even need to have the device in your hand. My son is 15, and he STILL needs my permission to add an app on his phone, make a purchase, or use his phone past 11pm on a weeknight.

As a parent, if you know what you're doing, limiting what your child sees is easier than ever.

Only caveat to that is you cannot control what other children show them, but there's only so much you can control.

Guide posted...

A tangent, but I've seen more fucked up stuff in the "kids" section than just browsing normally. There's a whole niche culture of making the most fucked up thing you can figure and disguising it as kid friendly. Fucking, Sonic family abuse series. I think it got taken down, but youtube's track record with that sort of thing is spotty.

Then, again, it's on the parent to monitor what their kid is watching. If, as a parent, you notice a few too many not-kid-appropriate videos sneaking onto YouTube Kids, then maybe delete that app from the kid's iPad/phone/streaming TV.

Plus, keeping specific to what TC is talking about, there's FAR worse things a kid can stumble upon on the internet than a woman showing skin and (assuming he they are accurate in their assessment) linking their video to an adult site that the kid probably couldn't get access to anyway.

How has this post lasted this long?

If you're a parent and do not want your kids to potentially be exposed to something like this, set restrictions on which apps your kids have access to.

It's as simple as that.

My kids are now 15 and 18, and I have/had (stopped my daughter's when she turned 18) full control (via family share on Apple) over what apps they can put on their phone, and I can also restrict their phone use based on time used and when they can use it.

Be active in your child's life and don't let the machines raise your children.

Only real regret is not taking my academics, especially in high school, more seriously

EPR-radar posted...

This isn't just a problem with Faux News. It's a larger problem affecting at least the media and the judicial system. The facts that could have outed this juror were widely reported, so that's a strike on the media as a whole. The trial is a circus, and there is a media feeding frenzy. The judicial system is not equipped to deal with either a circus act or a rich and powerful defendant, and the problem is greatly magnified when the rich defendant is a lifelong media whore.

This, as everyone seems to be ignoring this part:

Other outlets including NBC News, CNN, CBS News, and ABC News also publicized details about the juror, including additional identifying information.

So it wasn't just Watters, who is a literal human bag of shit, doing this. Every media outlet is making this, and all of his trials, a circus.

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

Money. I already do all that grooming for free.

You don't have to pay for soap/toothpaste/deodorant/laundry detergent?

Plus the water/electric bills to pay services?

Solid_Sonic posted...

???

I mean I live a pretty hygienic lifestyle as is so I don't consider it a chore to stay clean.

It's not a chore at all. But the part about never having to wash your clothes clinched it for me.

Plus $50k wouldn't even pay off my mortgage. Anytime one of these "would you" topics come up on here, the first thing I ask is "Is the money enough to make me debt free?"

That ability would definitely help with my OCD of 1) always having to have my hands feel like they are freshly washed and 2) keeping multiple outfit changes in my car becasue my other OCD is having any stain on my clothes.

Sheiky-Baby posted...

If his heart issues were that bad, it would mostly likely be the end of his career as well if he have lived right? I think that might have put him in denial, hence not listening to the doctor.

I believe the issue was that his BP would drop to dangerous levels when he slept, which is why he only needed the defib when he was asleep.

ironman2009 posted...

RC pro am

Im thinking the same

gamepimp12 posted...

when yall say stuff like this it makes it painfully obvious yall dont know what youre talking about.

The WNBA has been profitable for a few years now which is why theyre going into the massive expansion plan with one team already announced with a second third and possibly fourth to come in the near future.

They also have a new tv deal after next year. Which is going to massively change the amount of money they make.

unless something catastrophic happens the WNBA will be thing million dollar contract within the next five years.

Theyve already been doing the investing your asking for.

So, in other words...

A league that is only 27 years old, which is still considered to be in it's infancy compared to the NBA (72 years), NFL (104 years), NHL (107 years), and MLB (123 years) is JUST starting to turn a profit and reinvesting in the league.

That's how business works.

ClayGuida posted...

"Rules are rules" only seems to apply when it's stifling wages. These teams have no issue cutting players and backing out of contracts.

And players have no issue holding out of training camp and actual games (Like Chris Jones did with the KC Chiefs this season) becasue they feel they are being underpaid.

A Madden franchise would give me the most replay value.

Krojen posted...

I say this as this boards only genuine WNBA supporter.

Hey! I've been going to 2-3 Liberty games every year since the Teresa Weatherspoon days!

I'm no superfan, but I support the league more than 90% of the people that clamor online about player's pay.

Tanthalas posted...

Normally it's the people making the claim that should provide the info supporting it.

And the answer is that things just aren't that simple.

For example, contrary to your claim that the male team didn't earn any money, in most years both teams actually drew in similar amounts of revenue, some year the women earned more, some years the men. So, you know, you could have just said that instead of pretending that only the women's team was making money.

Also, lets no sit here and pretend that the USWNT Player's Association isn't to blame for being terrible negotiators when it comes to the CBA. Becasue if you actually followed this story prior to it becoming a hot button issue, the Player's Association was constantly agreeing to terrible deals. up until around 2020, when they finally were generating enough money on their own, via endorsements and other avenues, to actually have negotiating power.

ClayGuida posted...

The problem with that reasoning is that the US Mens team never drew a dime. It was playing various other nations teams that did. While the women's team drew ratings and money and never earned a pittance.

This is false, becasue USWNT and USMNT pay was based on the money generated across the World stage, not just nationally.

So the Men's team still pulled from a lager pie than the Women's team did, regardless of the team's successes on the World scale.

Women's soccer is no where near the money juggernaut that Men's soccer is on a world scale. And THAT's there the money disparity always came from.

ClayGuida posted...

I'm not fighting any fight. There's nothing we can do since it's all a CBA but I am stating outright facts. If people want to disregard said facts, that's on them.

True. The facts are whoever negotiated the current CBA did a terrible job. But also argued from a place of zero power, considering the money the WNBA generates.

Clay, youre fighting a good fight, but like I said before, it took the NBA DECADES to become the juggernaut that it is now.

The NBA Finals was aired on tape delay in the 1970s and early 80s.

One incredible talent will not change the landscape overnight.

ClayGuida posted...

She's bringing in a shit ton of money to the WNBA already. Her game against Connecticut is already sold out and tickets are going for like 800 for nose bleeds on the aftermarket.

Ok. Now do that again and again for nearly 40 years, like the NBA has since Magic, Bird, and Jordan turned what was a dead league that didn't even have a national TV deal into the juggernaut it is now.

3.

One Personal, One Work, and one strictly for my financials (Paypal, Venmo, etc)

I'd have to go with Ice, assuming they aren't so cold that they would give your mount frostbite.

Because teeth that have flames emanating from them would obviously burn your mouth.

Sad_Face posted...

I think the bigger misconception, to the point of society's detriment (I honestly think this is intentional), is the focus on a singular effort to grow wealth as opposed to respecting that wealth is a team and generational effort. From your parents investing in your education and personal interests from young to financially supporting your business and helping you get your feet off the ground and get established, those are tried and true tactics. There's a book called Creativity by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, psychologist, who interviewed top people in their fields. Many echoed the same support from their family.

Definitely this.

My parents were firmly in the "boomer generation" but both worked their way from entry level jobs to higher-end supervisor roles. Mom went from a bank teller to the VP of the Consumer Lending Department of a bank. Dad went from a literal janitor to being the maintenance staffing supervisor of 5 Targets on Long Island.

We lived firmly in the middle class my whole life. Never wanted for anything, but never had anything considered "high end".

That being said... I completely recognize that I was awarded opportunities that others my age did not, and others my age were awarded opportunities that I wasn't. I went to Community College while many of my friends went away to private schools, and others didn't go to college at all. I got a hand me down car that was older than I was when I got my license, some of my friends got brand new cars, others had to save up to buy their own car, or didn't get one at all.

Now, at 46 years old and firmly in whatever is left of the middle class, I recognize that I wouldn't be in the spot I'm in now without my parents (and my In-Laws) help. But I also do apologize for being in the spot I'm in compared to others that are worse off than I am.