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

Post by scarface74 » Mon, May 18, 2020, 10:06 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #407

scarface74 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really trust the US court system to be impartial? Should Apple/Google be forced to carry pornographic apps? White supremacists apps? Apps that invade people’s privacy? Which government should hold this responsibility? Should we have an international committee deciding this?

> Should Apple/Google be forced to carry pornographic apps? White supremacists apps? Apps that invade people’s privacy? Which government should hold this responsibility? Should we have an international committee deciding this? We already have a situation in which two companies effectively decide what can go on anyone's cellphone (sideloading is not and will not be a meaningful solution for any more than a fraction of…

Post by scarface74 » Mon, May 18, 2020, 10:08 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #353

scarface74 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s even worse. They care about their own ideologies that are often at odds with mine. The difference is that it is much easier to not be beholden to the private corporations you mentioned than the government. Private corporations don’t have the power of the state to take away my liberty, property or life.

You do realize the context of this conversation, correct? We're not talking about your liberty, property, or life. We're talking about apps on a smartphone or tablet. > Private corporations don’t have the power [] to take away my liberty, property or life. No, they can only demand you come in for overtime, require you to move where they want you to, or force you to come in while sick, at the risk of taking away your…

Post by scarface74 » Mon, May 18, 2020, 10:09 PM UTC

cft wrote: post #380

scarface74 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You sort of do: before you sideload an app, you have to toggle a switch, agreeing that you are going to do something potentially unsafe . In the similar arrogant manner, they care about your safety purging Podcast Addict app, like parenting you. The best solution would be an emergence of an Android fork and the corresponding platform, but this seems unlikely due to enormous (as in 100bn perhaps) startup capital requi…

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 18, 2020, 10:15 PM UTC

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.

Post by dmix » Mon, May 18, 2020, 10:17 PM UTC