181–190 of 577 posts
In most of these stories featuring Google abusing their power to remove apps, it's usually a matter of some automated tool gone wrong and the problem is solved a couple of days later. But this time it's different, they are actually asking developers to censor themselves if they are not affiliated with a gov.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would be really nice, yes. Then we could just use the same tools we configure our computers with on our phones too.
Here you go: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/ and https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/
This is like Google banning the YouTube app from the play store for having videos about covid that aren't from government sources. Insane stuff.
> Insane stuff Google is actually applying the same standard in this case (or at least attempting to). They're also fighting conspiracy theories on YouTube.
It's too bad google is so insanely incompetent that there are more every day instead of less. It's enough to make you think that they aren't staggeringly incompetent, have talented engineers, and aren't trying to fight conspiracy theory videos that are among the stickiest content on their sites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Insane stuff Google is actually applying the same standard in this case (or at least attempting to). They're also fighting conspiracy theories on YouTube.
"They're also fighting conspiracy theories on YouTube" It's too bad google is so insanely incompetent that there are more every day instead of less. It's enough to make you think that they aren't staggeringly incompetent, have talented engineers, and aren't trying to fight conspiracy theory videos that are among the stickiest content on their sites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except in this case it's not the government, but private corporations taking some kind of political stance. Google in particular has been very "active," not to forget also: https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-will-ban-anything-ag... ("video that 'goes against' WHO guidance on the pandemic will be blocked")
> private corporations taking some kind of political stance. It's not a political stance, it's a moderation action. Google, Facebook, etc. are just bad moderators of their platforms. Selective enforcement of moderations policies is bad moderation. Implementing automated moderation without proper quality control is bad moderation. Implementing automated moderation without proper appeal processes is bad moderation. The…
Given that there is selective attention given to different political subjects it is by definition a political stance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's a service to public health to take down crap . People spreading "covid19 is fake" propaganda are literally getting themselves, their parents and friends killed . Freedom of speech also comes with responsibility - the responsibility of not endangering others with your speech. Similar as inciting hatred and screaming "fire" in a crowded restaurant will earn you jail time, people should be happy it's only their…
>"fire" in a crowded restaurant I'm so sick of hearing this "argument" against free speech. Yelling fire is not free speech. Never has been. Inciting hatred is however, and since you're inciting hatred yourself, with wanting innocent people to die or throw them in jail, I hope you live in a country that has free speech laws, or you might be looking at jail time yourself.
If we interpret this expression metaphorically rather than literally, then curiously it would most directly apply to people claiming COVID is dangerous and everyone needs to run out of the building (economy) and then wait for government assistance. If there is in fact no fire, as more and more data implies, then it's the people claiming there's a killer virus on the loose who are crying fire and should - by this logic - be suppressed, with people saying "it's all clear" being the ones who get amplified.
My favorite (and only) podcasting app. I hope someone who works at Google reads this and flag it internally. This quote really sums up how ridiculous Google is being: > What Google is asking of Podcast Addict would be comparable to Google asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts that reference the coronavirus unless the reference comes from an official government entity…
Now is the perfect time to get more censorship in place, be it for commercial or policial reasons.
My favorite (and only) podcasting app. I hope someone who works at Google reads this and flag it internally. This quote really sums up how ridiculous Google is being: > What Google is asking of Podcast Addict would be comparable to Google asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts that reference the coronavirus unless the reference comes from an official government entity…
You can try Pocket Casts [1] who are my favorite and only Of course that's assuming that they don't get the same play store treatment from GOOG It's a little too ironic that Goggle, who has countless times made the argument that they aren't responsible/liable for what their users do on a service ("honestly senator its just a platform we provide"), and then here they are the ones calling for some downstream accountabi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the proof of inefficacy? For the record, there's no proof of efficacy either, because all the trials done that prove or disprove efficacy of hydroxychloroquine were flawed in one point or the other (at least the ones I've read). To give an answer to this endless debate, a proper, randomized clinical trial is needed. And the conditions set correctly, too: lopinavir and ritonavir were, per NEJM, not successful…
> Where is the proof of inefficacy? It doesn't work that way. New drugs are assumed ineffective until proven otherwise. A government official with no medical training recommending an unproven drug based on a few anecdotes is the height of irresponsibility.
I would say HCQ is a "lead" in the pharmacological sense (after all there's an effect in vitro), but of course there's no guarantee it will work properly (work as in "higher efficacy than placebo or other treatments") in vivo.
The reason for my comment is that the announcement by the "government official" (who was not the first, the first being the eccentric Dr.Raoult) turned what should have been scientific debate into a political flamefest (at least in the media). And science (aka, proper, randomized clinical trials) got lost in the way (at some point the U of Minnesota trial struggled to get new people).
I personally don't have any particular love for HCQ: chances are, like remedisivir, that if there is an effect, it is small. But I want to point out that so far science is still out on this one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts Except usually a web browser doesn't include a index of sites, You go to a another site (Google/Bing) for that. If a browser does include "recommended sites" the landing pages of those sites best keep to Google's and Apples rules. For an extreme example, If Firefox was promoting PornHub on the new tab page we could understand w…
YouTube constantly recommends me COVID-19 conspiracy videos since I dared to watch one that was popular here in Germany. Basically on every video I watch I have now german conspiracy videos as recommendations. I did neither like the video or did I subscribe the channel. It's beyond fucked up what Google is doing.