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

Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 577 posts

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#321

Post by rukittenme »

scarface74 wrote: post #292
rukittenme wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should Apple/Google be forced to carry pornographic apps? White supremacists apps? Apps that invade people’s privacy? My computer allows racist pornography and its the greatest invention in the history of mankind. As far as I can tell, iPhones have not lived up to that legacy.

Yes, but should Apple be forced to sell it? You can buy a DVD player and a TV from Walmart that allows you to view pornographic and racist content but aren’t forced to sell it.

Apple preventing the sale of a product != Apple not selling a product.

I don't ask Apple for permission to visit a website on my iPhone. Why should I ask their permission to install applications? Would it be so awful if I were allowed to run my own software?

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#322

Post by scarface74 »

gwright wrote: post #316
koheripbal wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're advocating moving this power from massive corporations to the government, because at least the government has some accountability, whereas Google has NONE.

You are constructing a false choice. We have a general principle of due process and contract law that can be applied here in insisting that "massive corporations" play nice. Reigning in "massive corporations" doesn't require any new governmental powers. I'm saying this as someone who leans libertarian but I don't think that is in conflict with the concepts of due process and reasonable contracts. The Devil is always…

There is no law that says “play nice”. What laws are they in breach of by only allowing certain products to be sold in their store? Every retailer has the right to decide what is sold in their store. Especially since Android is supposedly “open” and you can sideload.

At various times, HN users want the government to decide what gets sold in Apple and Google’s stores and decide what Amazon can and can’t sell. I’ve even seen that they want the government to intervene when it comes to how the game console makers operate. I guess if it were up to them Nintendo should be forced to sell “Debbie Does Dallas” next to “Animal Crossing” in their online store.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#323

Post by dcist »

tomohawk wrote: post #233
heinrichhartman wrote: post #211

This is the result of out-sourcing juristic work to private companies: If we treat Android, Window, Twitter, Facebook, as public spaces/goods, then private companies should not have a say in what is allowed/not-allowed on their platforms. This is work for the courts and police to decide and enforce. If we treat those platforms as private. Then we are playing in s/o's backyard. You are totally at their mercy. They hav…

Telcos are private. They are not allowed to disconnect calls when people are talking about things they don't like. They are not allowed to drop accounts for organizations saying things they don't like. Electric companies are mostly private. They are not allowed to cut off electricity to people/orgs that say things they don't like.

Telcos and utilities are regulated as common carriers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#324

Post by scarface74 »

rukittenme wrote: post #321
scarface74 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but should Apple be forced to sell it? You can buy a DVD player and a TV from Walmart that allows you to view pornographic and racist content but aren’t forced to sell it.

Apple preventing the sale of a product != Apple not selling a product. I don't ask Apple for permission to visit a website on my iPhone. Why should I ask their permission to install applications? Would it be so awful if I were allowed to run my own software?

But you don’t have to ask Google permission to install software. So why are people asking for intervention in this case?

Choice is amazing. You had a choice to buy into Apple’s “walled garden” or buy an Android. You didn’t need the nanny state to make that choice for you.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#325

Post by frosted-flakes »

jbj wrote: post #200

Although you sometimes have to manually copy the RSS feed in, SoundWaves is not bad at all: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.bottiger.podcast/ I am actually curious if any of you have other recommended apps from F-droid

Sadly, SoundWaves is super buggy if you have a larger font size set, and it's auto-playlist function is super annoying.

I prefer AntennaPod, another open-source app podcast app that's much less opinionated and has a few more features (but not bloated like most podcast apps).

https://f-droid.org/en/packages/de.danoeh.antennapod/

It's also available on the Google App Store.

I like how both of these apps actually let you manually set the RSS address, because most don't.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#326

Post by spians »

This "Not approved by Government or Public Health Organizations" rule seems to apply to all the indie apps except for the apps built by mega corps

- Twitter app asks users to follow Covid-19 related news as the first item in their home screen after login (and has a separate tab for news related to Covid-19 in Search screen).

- Reddit official app asks users to subscribe to /r/Coronavirus (that subreddit is not moderated by any government).

- Quora android app has a banner at the top that is similar (follow Coronavirus Space - all the content in that topic seems to be generated by users).

- YouTube app currently has a featured video related to Covid on my feed from one of their official Spotlight channels.

I'm sure Facebook has something similar to follow news related to Covid.

So there's no consistency of banning non-official speech on Covid-19

Also this is not the first time it happened. Same thing happened to

- A meme generator app because one of the memes contained word Corona (https://www.reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/fn0wzl/app_with...).

- An RSS reader app for showing news related to Covid (https://www.reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/ggb3s7/a_week_s...)

- A self improvement app that curates articles (https://reddit.com/r/androiddev/comments/gem317/our_app_was_...)

And in all of these examples, app seems to be restored after talking to someone at Google. Shouldn't that be the first thing done by the Google play team (before suspending the app) instead of dev losing all the installs and revenue for the time the app is suspended?

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#327

Post by heinrichhartman »

scarface74 wrote: post #310
heinrichhartman wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No?

That’s exactly the choice you make in the US.

I am not talking about any particular existing nation state. I am saying that the problems we are experiencing could be solved by having some form of "constituted digital public spaces and platforms". I am well aware of the practical difficulties in establishing these. But it's our inability to create those spaces that is hurting us here.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#328

Post by api »

heinrichhartman wrote: post #211

This is the result of out-sourcing juristic work to private companies: If we treat Android, Window, Twitter, Facebook, as public spaces/goods, then private companies should not have a say in what is allowed/not-allowed on their platforms. This is work for the courts and police to decide and enforce. If we treat those platforms as private. Then we are playing in s/o's backyard. You are totally at their mercy. They hav…

Centralized walled gardens are going to face this no matter what policy they have. Too loose? They run afoul of laws and offend people. Too strict? They develop a reputation for censorship and offend people. There is no way they can win.

That's why everything has to go decentralized, encrypted, headless, and amorphous. The endpoint should be the end of platforms in favor of protocols and interfaces to those protocols.

Get to work.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#329

Post by ipnon »

heinrichhartman wrote: post #211

This is the result of out-sourcing juristic work to private companies: If we treat Android, Window, Twitter, Facebook, as public spaces/goods, then private companies should not have a say in what is allowed/not-allowed on their platforms. This is work for the courts and police to decide and enforce. If we treat those platforms as private. Then we are playing in s/o's backyard. You are totally at their mercy. They hav…

Join the Fediverse!

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#330

Post by carapace »

heinrichhartman wrote: post #211

This is the result of out-sourcing juristic work to private companies: If we treat Android, Window, Twitter, Facebook, as public spaces/goods, then private companies should not have a say in what is allowed/not-allowed on their platforms. This is work for the courts and police to decide and enforce. If we treat those platforms as private. Then we are playing in s/o's backyard. You are totally at their mercy. They hav…

Nationalize FAANG?
Post reply on HN