Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Youtube Government

YouTube Kids 'a Vapid Wasteland', Say US Lawmakers (bbc.com) 105

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
A US government committee has described YouTube Kids as a "wasteland of vapid, consumerist content." From a report: In a letter to YouTube chief executive Susan Wojcicki, the US sub-committee on economic and consumer policy said the platform was full of "inappropriate... highly commercial content". Google launched YouTube Kids in 2015 as a safe place for children to view appropriate content. YouTube said it had worked hard to provide "enriching content for kids."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YouTube Kids 'a Vapid Wasteland', Say US Lawmakers More

YouTube Kids 'a Vapid Wasteland', Say US Lawmakers

Comments Filter:

  • And everything else is OK? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 ) <gameboyrmh&gmail,com> on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:49PM (#61247984) Journal

    Doesn't that describe at least 90% of all media produced for profit?

    • Not okay but better though no where near good. Childrenâ(TM)s programming on TV is regulated in most first world counties including the United States; not to say itâ(TM)s regulated properly. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
    • Walt Disney got very rich indeed producing vapid, consumerist content, and the corporation he founded has continued the tradition. No reason Google should do anything different.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      However when it is targeted at minors, with total disregard for psychological damage, especially when peer pressure is a major point of attack as in ie child you are worthless piece of shit if you do not own this product, if you do you are way better than the worthless pieces of shit who do not and you should mock and ridicule them (lets not pretend the sugar coating they do on that, makes the damage any less).

      That adults, professional would target children in that manner, the sheer unadulterated psychopath

  • No Different from TV. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bjwest ( 14070 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:51PM (#61247986)

    In a letter to YouTube chief executive Susan Wojcicki, the US sub-committee on economic and consmer policy said the platform was full of "inappropriate... highly commercial content".

    So, just like the kids networks on TV since the 80's when they were launched then.

    • Re:No Different from TV. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by NoNonAlphaCharsHere ( 2201864 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:59PM (#61248028)
      Anybody remember Saturday morning cartoons? Six straight hours of cartoons, toy and sugary cereal commercials.

      • Re:No Different from TV. (Score:4, Funny)

        by SirSpanksALot ( 7630868 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @03:03PM (#61248042)
        The glory days! Modern kids cartoons are boring "educational" junk... Bring back GI Joe and the X-Men
        • Hahahahahaha.... Rip me Herc! Rip me! https://youtu.be/BbvbtJpAlCs [youtu.be]

        • Re:No Different from TV. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @04:16PM (#61248306) Homepage

          The only decent "kids TV show" ever was Sesame Street.

          • Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood was up there, too.

            • 3 2 1 contact

              The electric company

              Captain kangaroo

              Reading rainbow

              Most TV of any genre is garbage. But not all TV is crap.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by narcc ( 412956 )

                Let's not forget about Square One TV.

                I don't think we'll ever see anything like Mathnet again.

                • "Let's not forget about Square One TV.
                  I don't think we'll ever see anything like Mathnet again."

                    I remember that well. Who could forget the "Angle Dance" or spending a nice day the beach with your friends singing about tessellations?

              • I used to watch Picture Pages as well. It's just too bad that I can't watch the episodes I grew up with on Youtube with the same joy because of certain issues surrounding the host of that show. =(

              • Reading Rainbow was great but one of my favorite characters Geordi La Forge was totally ruined when I found out he wasn't actually blind.

            • Mister Rogers (IIRC) is considered 'sacred ground' and that's why you don't see many parodies of him out there. They exist, but are far and few between.

              That trolley always facinated be, the way it came out of a cubbyhole, under the windows, and into another cubbyhole by the video monitor, and into the "Land of Make-Believe. I'm sure this was largely responsible for my facination with trains shortly afterward.

              I'm old enough to remember when Mr. Rogers would put a film reel instead of a video

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Kisai ( 213879 )

          eh, the 80's, early 90's cartoons were made to sell toys, because they were TV shows made directly about selling toys.

          That said, A lot of those shows were actually good, and had story elements to them, even if they were bottle-episodes.

          Current generations of Y7/primary-school content on TV is rather vapid as well and still made to sell toys. They just glue morality issues to the show up front rather than as a PSA at the end.

      • The cartoons were primarily toy commercials themselves. Check out the Netflix series "The Toys That Made Us"

      • Re:No Different from TV. (Score:5, Informative)

        by invid ( 163714 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @03:21PM (#61248124)
        Hey, I learned my multiplication tables watching Schoolhouse Rock! Not to mention learning what a conjunction is, how a bill becomes law, and I can still sing the preamble to the US Constitution!

        • Did you grow up in the 70s? The cartoons and shows didn't sell as hard back then. I really don't remember them being extended infomercials. I have a feeling that started with Transformers, and by then I was only vaguely aware of them because I was too old to care.

          I remember Saturday mornings having things like Flinstones, Bugs Bunny, and live action like Wonderama, Land of the Lost and... HR Puffenstuff.

          If anything, they were selling us psychedelic drugs, but the advertising wasn't effective to me.

          And th

          • I watched the Flinstones, and now every evening I kick back and smoke a Winston. #1 doctor recommended.

            • LOL, I've seen those clips. By the time I was watching re-runs they were no longer associated with Winston. NASCAR was though. Nothing else will ever say "goold ol' boy" the way "Winston Cup" did.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by invid ( 163714 )
            Yeah, I'm a 70s kid. The shows themselves weren't commercials yet. Not a lot of merch associated with Scooby-Doo, Looney Tunes, or Sigmund the Sea Monster at the time. The only merch I remember were lunch boxes.

            • Oh boy, story time. Yes. Lunch boxes. Like you say, Scooby, Flintstones, anything popular had a lunch box. Close Encounters even had one! Well, in 4th or 5th grade my mom goes and buys me a lunchbox at the PX. I didn't think too much of it, because it was just some generic Western-themed box with a cowboy that was not on any TV show. Literally, a cowboy without a show. The un-Roy Rogers if you will. It must have been something they made in Taiwan or wherever and decided that a product tie-in was no

      • Of which people are nostalgic [youtu.be] about.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by ac22 ( 7754550 )

        But some of them were educational. Remember the "lessons" at the end of each episode of He-Man? My life was a moral vacuum until I listened to the wisdom of He-Man.

        He-Man Lessons Compilation:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      • Those are even more stunning when realize just how many kids cartoons were created specifically to sell toys, not that the toys were a convenient second income stream from popular cartoons.

    • In a letter to YouTube chief executive Susan Wojcicki, the US sub-committee on economic and consmer policy said the platform was full of "inappropriate... highly commercial content".

      So, just like the kids networks on TV since the 80's when they were launched then.

      Exactly. Why do I have a feeling those who are shocked and appalled about this get their news from AM radio, and gather 'round the record player at night for entertainment. A virtual army of Karens who carry around spare pearls to clutch all day.

  • Weird Kids' Videos and Gaming the Algorithm (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dackroyd ( 468778 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:55PM (#61247992) Homepage

    Dan Olson has a very good video on how gaming the algorithm has led to some bizarre results: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    And this behaviour is a symptom of systems behaviour: "IF THINGS ARE ACTING VERY STRANGELY, CONSIDER THAT YOU MAY BE IN A FEEDBACK SITUATION." https://twitter.com/SysQuotes/... [twitter.com] So studying Systemanticsis is still a valid thing to study: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    • YouTube Kids isn't the same as regular YouTube, even if the uploader checked the "appropriate for kids" box.

      YouTube curates YouTube Kids. Some poor employee at YouTube has to watch every video that the uploader asks to put on YouTube Kids. They then assign an age range, and assign content flags so parents can filter stuff out.

      Which means crap like Elsagate [wikipedia.org] doesn't get there. There's also no YouTube ads, so the usual "game the algorithm" tricks on regular YouTube aren't worth the effort. The only revenue

      • Clearly, that's Youtube's bullshit handwave... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by denzacar ( 181829 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @05:59PM (#61248772) Journal

        YouTube curates YouTube Kids. Some poor employee at YouTube has to watch every video that the uploader asks to put on YouTube Kids. They then assign an age range, and assign content flags so parents can filter stuff out.

        From the TFA:

        ...one mother had reported a video that contained advice on how to commit suicide. After the video was reported, the [US sub-committee on economic and consumer policy] letter alleges YouTube failed to remove it for eight months.

        The only substantial difference between Cocomelon and procedurally generated videos from a few years back is a slightly higher production quality.
        Content of the video is as vapid as before.

        Meanwhile, stuff like Kids Diana Show [wikipedia.org] is basically just a bunch of ultra-consumerist ads for toys presented under a guise of educational content.
        Besides the obvious abuse of algorithm, it's also child abuse.

        Channel has been active since 2015, when its namesake was only 14 months old.
        At the moment it has 840 videos, over 74 million subscribers and over 54 BILLION views.
        I.e. That's around 12 videos per month, or one video filmed, edited and uploaded every 3 days - since the kid was 14 months old.

        Again... these are videos staring a child, since its second year of life, up until it is seven.
        Can you imagine producing a video of a child every three days? Can you imagine the toll it takes on the child? The burnout it will eventually experience?
        Again, this is a child during ages 1 to 7. During which, every three days a video had to be produced.
        The child is not a professional actor nor are there any protections available - for most of the time of the channel, they were living in Ukraine.
        And you know... it's just parents filming their kids playing with toys and learning. Except it's a franchise now.

        But don't worry. It's fine.
        Her parents have already produced a replacement baby brother cause Diana and her other brother, Roma, are aging out of the bracket.
        It's basically trafficking children for the purposes of begging, only with extra steps.
        But it's fine... Don't worry. YouTube will reach down with its invisible algorithm hand and fix everything. It is a good and benevolent AI.

        • Once again, YouTube Kids isn't regular YouTube with "safe for kids" checked on a video. But conflating them sure helps attack YouTube Kids!

          is basically just a bunch of ultra-consumerist ads for toys

          Have you seen literally any broadcast or cable TV show for kids in the last 50 years? Because this complaint indicates you probably haven't.

          Can you imagine producing a video of a child every three days?

          When you prioritize "parental rights" over the health and safety of the kid, that's what happens. The solution isn't to ban YouTube Kids, because that won't help the kids that are worked every day by their parents but not on video

      • YouTube often flags things as "for kids" against the will of the uploader.

  • Dear madam/sir in charge of the committee,

    Please cite a perfect medium for our kids' content.

    Sincerely,
    A parent that uses YouTube for babysitting

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SirSlud ( 67381 )

      What's being pointed out is that it's not even good, not that it's not perfect. Address the claim being made.

      For all that people are saying, "Isn't everything like this? Or wasn't it always this way?" or something along those lines, yes television isn't perfect, but as a medium things that are broadcast must adhere to certain a standards that youtube content farms needn't where the separation between advertising and content - and what is suitable for various ages - is obliterated. The television shows of ou

      • What's being talked about is YouTube kids, not YouTube.

        YouTube kids exists because it's curated, so you don't run into things like Elsagate [wikipedia.org] crap. It also doesn't show any YouTube ads.

        Which means content farms generally don't make videos for it, because they don't get any ad revenue. The only people who go through the effort to get approved by google are either doing product placement/sponsors in the video, or trying to build their channel's numbers for 'regular' YouTube to show ads.

        The complaint is the vi

    • Honest question:

      Since you seem to rely on YouTube to keep your children occupied and entertained while you're too busy to tend to them yourself, have you at least reviewed and vetted what they've been watching?

      I mean, if you were to hire a human babysitter, surely you'd do at least a minimum amount of monitoring to be sure they aren't grossly negligent, or worse.

      Your kids may be getting a facefull of some really questionable stuff.
      =Smidge=

      • What an interesting loaded question fallacy. Meanwhile, you didn't even begin to address what he actually said.

        I give your trolling a B-

      • Since you seem to rely on YouTube to keep your children occupied and entertained while you're too busy to tend to them yourself, have you at least reviewed and vetted what they've been watching?

        Honest question: Do you always shit on people's parenting decisions while knowing nothing about the subject at hand?

        YouTube Kids is curated by Google. You can use their default standards for "child-appropriate", and the age ranges they assign to the videos. If that's not good enough for you, you can apply additional filters on the parent side of the app.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by stikves ( 127823 )

          Thank you!

          People do not realize how useful online platforms are, especially when you can pre-select the content.
          How else can you find a temporary sitter for 30 minutes in 2 minutes notice?

      • I didn't spend time monitoring my kid's daycare. I don't think many people (pre-covid) spent time monitoring schools.

        Expecting something labeled Kids to be structured for kids from a "reputable" company like Google isn't that outrageous. (I personally don't think Google is a reputable company but understand people feeling it is.)

  • Sounds like America (Score:3, Insightful)

    by EmoryM ( 2726097 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:56PM (#61248012)
    "A vapid wasteland full of inappropriate and highly commercial content" - sounds a lot like driving down the street. Whatever happened to predictability? The milkman, the paperboy, the evening tv?

  • Film at eleven.

    I mean, targeting kids directly with the vapidness is ruthless, but it's not like it's something new.

  • Disney Shill (Score:1, Troll)

    by fermion ( 181285 )
    YouTube is a wasteland. So pay $80 a year for the curated wasteland known as Disney+. These people are never happy unless they are pushing Noahâ(TM)s ark and genocide.
    • If you're going to copy and paste your answer from some other site, at least fix the unicode fuckup that Slashdot creates.

      • If you're going to copy and paste your answer from some other site, at least fix the unicode fuckup that Slashdot creates.

        Uh... https://i.imgur.com/z1DExrX.pn... [imgur.com]

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
        hmm my suspicion is the the unicode fuckups does not show up on GPs device, so she/he does not see a need to fix anything, ans since slashdot does not allow you to edit later (come on dice it's 2021 and edit feature is not that hard, even bldy Disqus has it)

    • YouTube kids is already curated by YouTube. Some poor shmuck has to approve every video that gets pushed to it, and assign content flags and an age range for the parents that want tighter filters than the default.

  • I don't like coming across something I saw 40 years ago, and seeing that "Youtube Kids" banner of death. That means no comments and no playlist.

    I don't understand the second as saving a 40 year old episode of "Thundercats" does not enable "pEdOz!" to do their disgusting deeds.

    And for some reason THIS https://youtube.com/watch?v=Kh... [youtube.com] is marked as "kidz" video.

    • I;m guessing Youtube/Google's "AI" picked up line drawings and ASS-U-MEd it was ment for kids. Never mind that in tge beginning of WESTERN animation history, cartoons were often not aimed at kids at all, and often featured themes regarding alcoholism, opium/drug use, raunchy sexual acts, and murder.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      The uploader probably didn't know any better.

      They saw the "suitable for children" checkbox and thought "no 'adult' content" and checked it.

      I know my friend did that by accident since he didn't know any better.

    • "Appropriate for kids" on YouTube is not the same as YouTube Kids.

      Some poor shmuck at YouTube watches every video that the uploader asks to put on YouTube Kids. Approves/disapproves the video, and assigns an age range and content flags so that parents can filter on those if they want.

      YouTube Kids also doesn't show ads, so you can't get money from YouTube for the videos on it. Your only cash streams are either external (patreon, the-show-is-really-just-an-ad, sponsors), or building view numbers for your vi

  • Of course it is. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Chas ( 5144 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @03:06PM (#61248058) Homepage Journal

    This is why there are so many weirdo videos exposing kids to all manner of bizarre crap.

    Because nobody's actually watching it.

    They're turning it on, dropping their kid in front of it and walking away.

  • I wonder if B. F. Skinner would tell us to raise kids in a populated only with kids, teachers, and super productive role models? Would he tell us to filter out all the garbage, and only allow their smart devices to connect to a kid-friendly library populated with the greatest works ever created? Imagine taking the best 1% of text books, literature, and such. Put it all on a NAS.

    POLICE! WE HAVE YOU SURROUNDED! COME OUT WITH YOUR HANDS UP! SHOOT THE DOG FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT; THAT MINNIE MOUSE COLLAR MAY

  • It seems YouTube doesn't know what 'enrichment' means. They should google it.

  • When you can't validate every piece of uploaded content, all that is left is only allow access by commercial entities that can be held accountable and have stake to lose. In turn, of course those companies were going to fight for the coveted brand loyalty such manipulation causes.

    The real question should be why kids need such a platform at all.

  • In otherwords if reflects the internet in general

  • We tried to use it (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    We tried to use it for a little while, intending it to be a rare reward, but killed it after a week. I strongly confirm that it's full of creepy, bad videos. An unholy mix of unboxing crap (thanks Ryan's Toy Review), odd and violent video game footage featuring Disney characters, and pedophile-adjacent garbage (i.e. elderly train fanatic prancing on the rails wearing only an adult diaper).

    All the would have had to do would have been to let me create a playlist and lock the app to that playlist and not
  • As a parent of a 6yo that watches (most likely too much) Youtube kids. I can say that there is a ton on there that is just as described above. HOWEVER! There is a ton of content that is truly wonderful. I loosely monitor what the kiddo watches and sometimes have to say "Move on" because the video is bad. But just as many times I've seen him learning the basics of chemistry, cosmology, Newtonian and particle physics. Sometimes he just wants to watch kids play with toys or their parents (and then wants me to

  • So? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by malphiusII ( 6451652 )

    My kid loves Youtube Kids. He likes watching Bowsers Fury, Transformers and Ryan's World. There are commercials between videos, just like there are commercials between cartoons and everything else. The only problem is when he goes to skip them by tapping the screen and clicks on one, which is probably intentional to some extent.

    I think Youtube Kids is great and I see no issue with it. Everyone on Youtube is out to make money, so I'm not sure what world this busy-body government body is living in.

  • As the parent of a 4 year old, there is certainly a lot of vapid content out there. For example, there are 10s of thousands of variations of the same video (algorithmically generated) , which involves variations of computer animated cars changing colors after being submerged in "paint". The are often labeled "learn colors", and include various copyright infringing characters.

    But at the same time, there is actually some decent content out there that is certainly no worse than what I watched as a kid. As he's

  • Newt Minow famously called TV a vast wasteland in 1961 https://time.com/4315217/newton-minow-vast-wasteland-1961-speech/ [time.com]. Apparently labeling new media a vast wasteland has to occur every few years. I look forward to the politician who describes our interstellar cybernet as a vast wasteland.
  • Aren't ads how Google makes money?
  • Any time someone complains about content being 'vapid' or 'without merit', I wonder what they are comparing it to since I suspect whatever they value is probably vapid to someone else.

  • My youtube kids solution (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ljw1004 ( 764174 ) on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @03:31PM (#61248166)

    My child is 7 years old, in 2nd grade. The teachers make use of youtube links to stories and other material for their remote learning, so I can't block youtube entirely.

    What I did was work with a Chrome extension which lets me write some javascript to rewrite on-the-fly the HTML delivered by youtube.com. I removed the comments section and the "up next" section and indeed every thumbnail. It turned Youtube into something that's actually quite tolerable to use. I left the search box - it's nice that my child is motivated to learn typing and research, and rewarded for it, but I monitor after-the-fact what's searched for.

    All those youtube thumbnails of idiots doing pranks and children opening toys was so eyeball-grabbing, it was hard for an internet-inexperienced 7yo to resist. At that age the child is still learning discernment - I'm still teaching discernment - and they don't have a fully-formed-enough brain to make good choices by themselves, nor to develop good-choice-making skills by themselves under the onslaught of click-bait thumbnails and ads. I could hover over their shoulder every minute of their time to help them make the right choices, but that undermines their fledgling autonomy. I want to parcel out age-appropriate autonomy at the right rate, parcel out age-appropriate challenges to them at the right rate. The right rate emphatically does NOT include Google's powerful clickbait and advertising, refined through billions of dollars of behavioral science and research and tweaking, for a 7 year old.

  • Saying it is a "US committee" implies that it is a government agency or other body with direct regulatory authority.

    The more correct term, "Congressional committee" correctly communicates that it's a bunch of elected politicians doing some good old fashioned grandstanding, with zero teeth to it besides some headlines. It is not a policy statement, a legal action, or anything besides a campaign speech meant for campaign purposes written on Congressional letterhead.

    You may agree or disagree with the content o

  • YouTube said it had worked hard to provide enriching content for kids.

    Guess they stopped reading after the keyword enriching and assumed it was about their own pockets.

  • OMG its all ads!

    Always has been

  • I mean unless it was on PBS, what children safe content isn't trying to sell a toy or some other brand merchandise deal? Cartoons'shows are mostly a loss leader. What brings in the real cash are the toys and merchandise and now video games.

    Only difference being the toys from today suck major ass. GI Joes and G1 Transformers and MASK and He-Man. :D

    Oh and Thundercats. :)

  • As long as it doesn't have age inappropriate material (Cardi B anyone?), is it any of business of Congress? OTA television was a bit different because the frequency was licensed by the government. Oh, noes, it's commercialized programming on YouTube Kids. Does anyone expect a company to provide FREE programming with getting a return on their investment?
    If parents don't want their kids watching it, turn off the damn computer. And please get off my lawn.

  • What's wrong with Saturday morning cartoons?

  • I have manually selected many videos and some channels that I think can benefit learning but I would like to share this list with other parents and there is no option to do so because kid's cant share anything otherwise it could violate some law... so I think those LAW makers must be dumbing down youtube kids...
  • Curated content meant for young eyes, eh?

  • For our kid, we ended up installing youtube vanced on his device after he hated the vapid wasteland that is youtube kids (he'd used youtube on computers before, so he knew what he was missing). To be honest, I almost think (not seriously!) a filter which disallowed content that is allowed on youtube kids would be a more fulfilling experience - get rid of the hellscape.

    To be fair, your mileage will absolutely vary - I assume most nine year olds don't like deep dives into electronics, phone tear downs, and p

  • We need to let the free market sort this out.

  • Aww and everyone thought the internet was so awesome at making quality children's content!
  • Much to no one's surprise, my kid (8 year old boy) is a budding nerd like his parents. He's on YouTube all the time, but he hates the kids version with a passion. He's interested in how planes work, what atoms are made of, how to build excellent paper aeroplanes etc. etc. Happily YouTube is chock full of actually really well made content along these lines. Mostly created by big nerds who happen to be really good at, say, fixing old electronic devices - look for Fran's Lab for example. We do vet the channels
  • The only hard work that was done was by the sales team selling adverts to companies that wanted to target children. Safe content should include being safe from being turned into a product at a young and impressionable age. Shame on you Google, don't you make enough money? Oh wait, you're listed now, there will never be enough profit.

    GOOGLE: HOW CAN WE MAKE MORE MONEY? LETS SELL OUT THE KIDS!
  • Because no one in their right mind who uploads any other kind of videos flags their videos as "appropriate for children" cause they don't want to deal with all the extra scrutiny that comes with flagging as such. What that leaves you left with is the commercial companies that make a profit off targeting children.
  • It's true, there's a vast amount of sickeningly exploitative and commercial content on the platform - "surprise eggs", unboxings, toy reviews and so on. This vile garbage is deliberately engineered to be addictive to young minds, and often deliberately misrepresented as educational. By the same token, those same young minds should NOT be given unfettered access. It takes some effort, but tools are made available to parents to curate which channels the kids have access to, and there are some very good one

  • It is enriching.

    It increases Google's wealth.

  • I can remember when television programming was called a vast wasteland and social media is worse than a vast wasteland. It causes people to be anti-social egomaniacs who produce nothing of value.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll

Close