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

Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 345 posts

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#321

Post by dang »

atomical wrote: post #270
dang wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment was in fact heavily upvoted. It takes time for the vote totals on a comment to work themselves out. I'm personally responsible for HN and can tell you that "keeping Saudi Arabia happy" has never entered my awareness until you brought it up. We just banned your throwaway account for trolling. If you continue to use HN for flamewars, trolling, or personal attacks, we will ban your main account as well. http…

I don't use a throwaway account. Please post proof before attacking me.

I assumed that https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thatoneyouthrow was you because the comments were so similar.

If it wasn't you, that was my mistake and I'm sorry. The main point, though, is please don't do any more flamewar, trolling, or flamebait on HN.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#322

Post by romwell »

int_19h wrote: post #151
romwell wrote: post #122

There's a lot of discussion here, but I don't see the important question being asked: How (and whether) the removal of this app will help the women in Saudi Arabia: 1)In the short term 2)In the long term I.e. if the alternative to using the tracking app is not being able to travel (in the realities of that horrible state), then removal will make life of many women worse in the short term. Calls for bans and removals…

The logic here is very, very simple: You don't help bad people do bad things. Period. End of discussion. If they still do it without your help, that's unfortunate; and yes, you should probably do something to stop it. But if they do it with your help, then you are directly responsible for it, and the rest of us have a moral obligation to hold you responsible.

>The logic here is very, very simple: You don't help bad people do bad things. Period. End of discussion.

Yes, that's the logic behind Zero Tolerance everything, and also FOSTA/SESTA.

It makes one look/feel good to say it. The downside? It doesn't help address the problem.

Again, effect of the ban on women is missing from your answer.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#323

Post by buboard »

romwell wrote: post #320
buboard wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can easily offer the app as a web app (i think it is already a web app) And actually you are wrong, without tracking women have at least a chance to escape undetected

>They can easily offer the app as a web app (i think it is already a web app) More details on this: what does the native app offer? What would be the effect of banning the app? >And actually you are wrong, without tracking women have at least a chance to escape undetected My understanding is that without tracking, women are not free to travel in SA. And escape... where? Still, it's not tracking that we are discussing…

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/aorrb8/apple_googl...

> The app doesn’t track women, the government facilities do so (e.g. security checks at airports), they send SMS messages to the guardian when his minor son/daughter or his wife/mother/adult daughter leaves the country through a government check point.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#324

Post by glangdale »

wongarsu wrote: post #251
glangdale wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea that the Peace of Westphalia somehow is endangered by Apple or Google deciding to make business decisions that pertain to Saudi Arabia. I'm also enjoying your Total Commitment to this principle, extending to guarded support for the hypothetical "Apartheid Black Management App". The fact that you're talking in hushed tones of reverence about the glorious principle of sovereignty in a discussion of Saud…

You didn't provide any actual arguments, instead just dismissing what I said out of hand (in a needlessly snarky way).

I would imagine that you could have read between the lines here, but since you apparently can't....

How about - 1 - the Peace of Westphalia has nothing to do with the behavior of private companies or 'influence' within other countries, which has been rampant ever since, and 2 - Saudi Arabia has been one of the top offenders in both dodgy 'influence' in other countries and outright intervention (including things that actually violate the principles you set out) ever since it has been around.

So it's pretty funny to imagine that KSA should be handled with kid gloves in this situation, especially when we're talking about the behavior of private companies.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#325

Post by glangdale »

nogenerix wrote: post #254
glangdale wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a typical argument from 'neutral principles'.In this kind of thinking, the notion of 'being fair to everyone in a principled fashion that is easily and mechanistically describable' is more important than say, the notion of 'not oppressing women, even if the Saudis think it's OK'. This is itself a value judgement and comes down to your opinion. Like the old joke about turtles, it's opinions all the way down. I…

I'm trying to understand the 'neutral principles' line of thinking here. Obviously, the situation with this app seems straightforward on the surface (the app is immoral, it violates human rights), but articulating the reality of the situation is complex and requires nuance. Say I don't want to argue from 'neutral principles' but I still want to give other people's value systems a fair trial? Then I would consider thi…

> .. but I still want to give other people's value systems a fair trial?

Why?

That's a moral judgement like any other ("we should exercise fairness and take seriously any system of values that operates within a recognized national boundary circa 2019"). It would suggest you are committed to that principle above other ones, like "the right of women to self-determination". If that's a decision you want to make, knock yourself out, but it leads to rather strange situations.

Note that I made it sound extra absurd by limiting in time and to national boundaries; but conversely I could take off that limit and have you giving Aztec human sacrifice fair consideration ("strokes beard... well, actually, given population pressures... ummmn... ").

You're still flailing around looking for neutral principles: considering "intentions and outcomes" doesn't get you out of trouble as who is to say what intentions and outcomes are good?

A homophobe in Uganda or Russia might claim that their intentions are "save our young people from the gays" and their desired outcomes are "now all the gays are dead or hiding" as a Good Thing; they would not recognize your principles ("don't harm innocent people for no reason") as valid.

In the end it just comes down to 'fighting your corner'. There is no magical conjuration trick that will make our values objectively better in some way that stands outside our values. Who cares?

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#326

Post by glangdale »

xkapastel wrote: post #281
glangdale wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea that the Peace of Westphalia somehow is endangered by Apple or Google deciding to make business decisions that pertain to Saudi Arabia. I'm also enjoying your Total Commitment to this principle, extending to guarded support for the hypothetical "Apartheid Black Management App". The fact that you're talking in hushed tones of reverence about the glorious principle of sovereignty in a discussion of Saud…

What exactly are you trying to say? This post is nothing but empty snark. For example, are you trying to say that Saudi Arabia is not a sovereign nation?

Both you and GP are overly in love with HN's prohibition of snark, to the point that you don't seem to be able to read any meaning into anything that seems a little snarky. Frankly, I think HN's official stance on snark is regrettable - the net effect is that, no matter how absurd or obnoxious the proposition, we need to shift the Overton Window by acting as if the proposition is worthy of Serious Discussion. I think we've crossed that line a while ago, when GP asserted that we'd just have to go ahead with Apple and Google having "Kaffir Manager" on the app store because that would have been OK with South Africa at one point - these being companies that regularly exercise judgement way beyond the strict letter of local law (e.g. banning adult content that would be legal with age-verification in most countries).

In this case, it (the prospect that the Peace of Westphalia needs to be invoked to explain app store approvals) is not really worthy of serious discussion. Anyone who has, I dunno, read a newspaper semi-regularly at any time would find the idea that the Peace of Westphalia somehow applies to 'influence' within other countries absurd on the face of it (such influence has been incredibly common since WWII) and to particularly apply this starchy and ahistoric interpretation to Saudi Arabia - not exactly noted for its own policies of non-interference, to say the least - is doubly absurd.

You and GP may have noticed at some point that the discussion was about Apple and Google choosing to allow an app, not whether the USA should invade the KSA and free the women, but apparently bringing the Peace of Westphalia and a discussion of sovereignty into it was a temptation that was overwhelming.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#327

Post by stickfigure »

wongarsu wrote: post #289
lenkite wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't take rocket science. Are people being directly harmed by this product ? The answer in this case is clearly yes. Take down the app immediately. Freedom of speech is one thing. This app is _specifically_ created to harm women who want refuge.

I highly suspect "directly harmed" is a moral judgement, not an objective measure. If female genital mutilation "direct harm"? If yes, does the same apply to circumcision of males? If yes, is denying jewish people a religious practise (and thus potentially entry to heaven) "direct harm"? Different people will answer this very differently, even in the same country and culture. More applicable to this case: Is it ok fo…

These questions are easy to answer.

If female genital mutilation "direct harm"? Yes.

does the same apply to circumcision of males? Not to the same extent, because the harm is less - despite using the same word, cutting off the foreskin is objectively less harmful than cutting off the clitoris.

However, this is an area where the prevailing opinion is shifting as we speak. Male circumcision used to be normal (in the US), now it's considered in most polite circles to be somewhere between antiquated and barbaric. The loudest argument in favor seems to be "it's my religious tradition!" but ask the mormons how that argument faired WRT plural marriage and excluding blacks. Public opinion shifts slowly but it's not hard to imagine a future where even religion doesn't cut it as an excuse for cutting off bits of a baby's junk. We may revisit this question in a few more decades.

Is it ok for parents to see where their children are? Yes. Parents in every modern society are granted extremely broad powers over their children.

If in a culture the husband is viewed as the guardian of his wife, is it ok if the husband uses the same app for his wife? No. Women are not property. That's the moral judgement of modern society. Cultures which violate this moral judgement should do so without our help.

These are not thorny issues or deeply philosophical problems.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#328

Post by stickfigure »

philwelch wrote: post #315
stickfigure wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question: Would you be willing to make this same argument for a (hypothetical) Apartheid-era app that enabled whites to manage blacks? I think it's pretty reasonable for the court of modern political opinion to pass judgement on the more egregious examples of injustice in the world. Yes, morality is relative, but there's a strong majority opinion on this - especially in the countries that build the technology…

That's a poor analogy, because in apartheid, individual black people did not have individual white "guardians" responsible for supervising their movements and behavior. Would you be willing to make the same argument you're making for a similar app that allows parents to supervise their children? Would it depend on the age of the child in question? And, for a more sticky question: even in the case of this app, does th…

It's not a perfect analogy; a "slave management app" just seemed overly anachronistic. I think the point is clear enough.

Would you be willing to make the same argument you're making for a similar app that allows parents to supervise their children?

Parents get broad supervisory powers over their children. That seems pretty universal and uncontroversial.

Would it depend on the age of the child in question?

Of course. The exact age of majority is not agreed upon even among the most progressive societies. I think we can all agree that parents should be able to make travel decisions for a 12yo. A 17yo is more complicated.

does the consent of the supervised woman matter?

This is a specious line of argument, since the app is being used against women who do not consent.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#329

Post by pvg »

glangdale wrote: post #326
xkapastel wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly are you trying to say? This post is nothing but empty snark. For example, are you trying to say that Saudi Arabia is not a sovereign nation?

Both you and GP are overly in love with HN's prohibition of snark, to the point that you don't seem to be able to read any meaning into anything that seems a little snarky. Frankly, I think HN's official stance on snark is regrettable - the net effect is that, no matter how absurd or obnoxious the proposition, we need to shift the Overton Window by acting as if the proposition is worthy of Serious Discussion. I think…

you don't seem to be able to read any meaning

The GP comment (about the Peace of Westphalia) is bananas and the dementors might be a little uptight when it comes 'snark' but you're way past snark - 'lol, reading comprehension much' is not snark it's just crappy namecalling. You should edit it out.

Re: Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women

#330

Post by philwelch »

stickfigure wrote: post #328
philwelch wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a poor analogy, because in apartheid, individual black people did not have individual white "guardians" responsible for supervising their movements and behavior. Would you be willing to make the same argument you're making for a similar app that allows parents to supervise their children? Would it depend on the age of the child in question? And, for a more sticky question: even in the case of this app, does th…

It's not a perfect analogy; a "slave management app" just seemed overly anachronistic. I think the point is clear enough. Would you be willing to make the same argument you're making for a similar app that allows parents to supervise their children? Parents get broad supervisory powers over their children. That seems pretty universal and uncontroversial. Would it depend on the age of the child in question? Of course.…

I wouldn't object if Apple and Google did withdraw the app because of these concerns, but there are still legitimate concerns about the degree to which commercial involvement in places with significantly different cultural values should be affected by cultural differences.
Post reply on HN