Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 162 posts

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#131

Post by donarb »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #105

Why not remove Chrome, Safari and E-mail clients for inappropriate content too? Why not WhatsApp, Skype or iMessage? Telegram is just a wire, it's up to the users if they want to use it to talk to other users that speak 'inappropriate'. This is why I will never buy an iPhone (though I don't mind a MacBook as long as root access and legal ways to install Linux have not been locked on them yet) - I want to use the devi…

No fascism here, just a buggy program. All the developer has to do is to follow Apple's rules whereby the user is given the opportunity to control inappropriate content. As was mentioned in the article, the developer expects to fix their filters and resubmit the program.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#132

Post by oakesm9 »

igloofoo wrote: post #77

There may be political motive to this. Why is Telegram X issued by "Telegram Messenger LLP" while the original Telegram is issued by "Telegram LLC"? Telegram LLC, which issues the original Telegram app on the App Store has been undergoing litigation with regards to its ownership. It is based out of Russia and a company called UCP with Krelim ties who 'bought' VKontakte has been suing Durov for full Telegram ownership…

Interestingly the companies are the other way around on the Google Play Store. Not sure why that might be...

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#133

Post by skinnymuch »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #31
Frank2312 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix (and other similar platforms), Amazon Prime, Twitch subscriptions. Those are only 3 examples a ton of people pay for. If you provide a good service, you will get subscribers. News have been available for free for decades thanks to OTA TV broadcasts. That's why people don't pay for it. Niche journalism needs to have subscriptions since they can have way less views and people looking for news on that niche are…

They're also not exactly something a developer can launch and start making money off of. Would you pay a subscription for Flappy Bird?

Flappy Bird didn’t make money from selling the app though. The example actually hurts your argument. Flappy Bird and many sites make money the same way - ads.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#134

Post by skinnymuch »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #62
Frank2312 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix (and other similar platforms), Amazon Prime, Twitch subscriptions. Those are only 3 examples a ton of people pay for. If you provide a good service, you will get subscribers. News have been available for free for decades thanks to OTA TV broadcasts. That's why people don't pay for it. Niche journalism needs to have subscriptions since they can have way less views and people looking for news on that niche are…

What makes you (and others) think that citing three (or even half a dozen) examples constitutes some kind of refutation of the general rule? There are somewhere over a billion web sites, dude. The number of those that are profitable with a subscription model (as opposed to being supported by advertising, or not being profitable at all ) is a rounding error -- in the fourth or fifth decimal place.

How many apps are profitable and of those how many are made by independent people?

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#135

Post by floatboth »

m12k wrote: post #93
squarefoot wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"except the websites are mini apps, and a mega corporation gets to control whats on it" There is more to it. Using apps instead of websites we're killing the whole concept of making information and services available using a standard protocol. That's like going back over 30 years, even before gopher. Then there is the cloud->mainframe similarity, with data and services being moved somewhere into the net where the use…

> Using apps instead of websites we're killing the whole concept of making information and services available using a standard protocol I think the interesting thing to note here is that for most end users a standard protocol is not nearly as appealing as a standard user interface. Like how most iOS apps follow common navigation paradigms, so users don't need to spend time learning each new one. And how people tend t…

One of the most appealing things for end users is instant loading. That's why apps are preferred on mobile, but websites on desktop.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#136

Post by contrarian_ »

vinay427 wrote: post #89
phoneboy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The store is their way to control their ecosystem, has nothing to do with the OS. This effort is a power-play against decentralized apps that threaten the centralized platform model.

Yes, but my point is that the Play Store inherently allows for competition and limit's Google's control because they chose to develop it on a platform that allows for competing app stores and sideloading. Regardless of Google's choices in managing the Play Store, that stark difference between Google's approach and Apple's approach remains.

> Play Store inherently allows for competition

Really?

https://play.google.com/intl/en_us/about/developer-distribut...

> (4.5) Alternative Stores. You may not use Google Play to distribute or make available any Product which has a purpose that facilitates the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of Google Play.

You have no chance of bootstrapping an alternative store outside of Google Play. Sideloading APKs is not how users get software on Android. Amazon failed hard with their attempt, and they pumped tons of money into it by paying developers to give away their apps for free; that, and they shipped hardware that has their store preloaded. Still didn't even make a dent.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#137

Post by dTal »

alex_hitchins wrote: post #52
danpalmer wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh the App Store. It's just like the Play Store, except no viruses, far fewer scam apps, and there's a legitimate and thriving market for paid apps.

This is a big plus for me. A vetted walled garden where I can give things a try without much fear of nasties is a big plus.

You might enjoy F-Droid then. All apps are built from source from public repositories, with known malicious libraries stripped, with a broad definition of "malicious" (tracking and advertising). Also everything's free, in both senses. No need to wall up the garden.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#138

Post by morganvachon »

Animats wrote: post #102

Because it allows users to send inappropriate content? What next, automatic voice censorship? That's technically feasible now.

It may have been triggered by one of the sets of "stickers" available as alternatives to emoji. I've browsed through them and while they all seem PG-13 or tamer to me, I can see how someone with sensitivity towards suggestive cartoons would be offended. There are a few with female cartoons showing cleavage, and at least one that is obviously targeted at furries.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#139

Post by teddyfrozevelt »

debt wrote: post #123
escherize wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should they pull their Messages app for the same reason? How about any ios email clients?

Maybe?

No, they definitely should not.

Telegram isn't even responsible for what people send using their service as long as they take reasonable steps towards stopping abuse. Apple has no liability here at all.

Re: Telegram removed from the App Store for 'inappropriate content'

#140

Post by [deleted] »

bovermyer wrote: post #130
debt wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple would be held liable if someone uses Telegram to coordinate a terrorist attack or if it's used for human trafficking or whatever highly illegal activity it could be used for. Potentially both in the court of law and the court of public opinion; the latter Apple has no control over. It's just not worth it financially for Apple to assume that liability.

So, to carry your argument to a slightly (but only slightly) more extreme version, doesn't that mean that postal mail could be held liable if someone coordinated a terrorist attack by letter? Think about what you're suggesting.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN