YouTube asks channel owner to verify phone, permanently overwrites personal info

Dependence on YouTube and viability of VTubing

• Many argue “just stop using Google,” but others note VTubers are effectively locked into YouTube or Twitch for reach and income.
• This leads to questioning whether VTubing is a sustainable profession if a single platform can arbitrarily jeopardize livelihoods.
• Some say creators should proactively plan alternative careers; others counter that “quit preemptively” is not realistic and that risk may still be preferable to giving up creative work.

Privacy, platform choice, and abandoning Google

• Several commenters have replaced most Google services with Apple/Microsoft, while others argue privacy differences between big tech firms are overstated due to all being opaque and non‑transparent.
• Mixed anecdotes: Microsoft and Apple are criticized for account lockouts and quality issues, but Apple’s support is seen as materially better than Google’s.
• Some nostalgia for pre‑platform web, piracy/torrent ecosystems, and P2P/federated alternatives that had better UX and privacy.

Phone numbers as identity and data sharing

• Strong criticism of using phone numbers as proof of legal identity or account ownership, especially when the payer differs from the user (family plans, corporate phones, reused numbers).
• Many reference “Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Phone Numbers” and say Google is violating its own documented cautions.
• Surprise and concern that Google (and others) can apparently query telco or verification APIs to map numbers to billing names; telco opt‑out and Verizon’s “identity verification” setting are mentioned.
• Others stress that mandatory phone collection is mainly about spam/bot mitigation but increases SIM‑swap and takeover risks.

Legal and regulatory angles (GDPR, KYC, sanctions)

• For EU/UK users, commenters recommend invoking GDPR rights to correction and threatening legal action; terms of service can’t waive statutory rights.
• Debate over whether platforms could just delete accounts in response; some argue courts would likely reject that if it undermines data rights.
• KYC, tax reporting, and sanctions screening are cited as reasons YouTube/AdSense want a verified legal name for payouts, though the specific implementation is seen as “idiotic.”

Google’s account and support dysfunction

• Confusion around the split ecosystem: Google accounts, YouTube channels (brand vs non‑brand), AdSense, Google Fi/Voice — with opaque, coupled behavior (e.g., profile changes affecting AdSense).
• Many view Google’s support as effectively nonexistent and policy‑driven, with low‑level staff unable to override systems.
• Several note that escalations often only succeed via public outcry on Hacker News/Reddit or by physically visiting an office and persuading staff informally.

Alternatives and self‑hosting limits

• Self‑hosting or building independent streaming sites is discussed but seen as impractical due to discoverability, payment friction, app expectations, transcoding costs, and reliability.
• Some advocate wider refusal to share phone numbers/PII and stronger general data‑protection regulation, but others are pessimistic about collective action.