When YouTube does this it means that they tacitly endorse the behaviour of everyone who is currently monetised at the moment. I’m sure it would be easy to find many monetised channels with similar allegations as well as people who have actually been convicted of crimes.
Edit: for example, someone like Chris Brown is convicted of domestic abuse as well as accused of many other incidents. He appears to be monetised on youtube.
>If a creator's off-platform behaviour harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action.
So why does this apply to Russell Brand but not to Chris Brown who is convicted of violence against another YouTube user? It must mean that youtuber endorses the behaviour and criminal activity of Chris Brown.
Needing a licence to create or possess models is what they’re planning here right? It obviously makes sense for openai and other big companies because it makes it more difficult for smaller competitors but it is really scary. It is probably way more dangerous for society than some theoretical artificial super intelligence because of opportunity cost and that it would certainly lead to more and more authoritarianism.
But he would have had the opportunity to manage the payment himself whether that be not accepting credits cards, using a payment processor with charge back insurance or at the very least trying to verify that the credit card actually belongs to the client. As far as I know he can't do any of these things because the client isn't paying him, they are paying upwork and upwork is paying him.
>The customer paid Upwork using someone else's card, he didn't pay the freelancer. So the party that got duped is Upwork.
For me that is the key here. Upwork is the one accepting payment so it's their responsibility to verify that payment. It's actually impossible for the freelancer to do that.
Edit: for example, someone like Chris Brown is convicted of domestic abuse as well as accused of many other incidents. He appears to be monetised on youtube.
>If a creator's off-platform behaviour harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action.
So why does this apply to Russell Brand but not to Chris Brown who is convicted of violence against another YouTube user? It must mean that youtuber endorses the behaviour and criminal activity of Chris Brown.