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

501–510 of 577 posts

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

#501

Post by etherealmachine »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #281
mantap wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might have been correct to say there's no evidence in March (which is not a reason to not do something, we would still be in the Stone Age if every action we took required evidence.). There's plenty of evidence now as we have data for both going into and coming out of lockdown.

There's plenty of weird, contradictory evidence. Many places have come out of lockdown early, been told they're facing certain doom ("Georgia's Experiment in Human Sacrifice" [1]), and then been quietly forgotten when the predicted consequences don't come. It's hard to believe that lockdowns don't do anything at all, but I don't think anyone can honestly say we have definitive proof they were necessary. [1] https://w…

Georgia has 164 deaths per million residents, versus 82 in South Carolina next door and 87 in California. Are you sure you still want to call that a bad prediction?

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

#502

Post by bitcrazy »

I hadn't seen this discussed yet, but how did Google know that Podcast Addict was indexing corona-related content? What was the mechanism that triggered the ban? The developer's twitter said that he didn't include any corona keywords in the play store metadata, nor in the source code. The consensus seems to be that some automated system was too aggressive in banning.

My best guess is that the source for the info used to ban PA would be the reviews, i.e. someone posted a review mentioning "great podcasts about corona" or something. But I can't imagine it's that simple, because then I can just put "corona" in any review and get somebody's app banned.

Unless Google has some other way of tracking PA's content?

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

#503

Post by Elzear »

techntoke wrote: post #271
nisa wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between genuine alternative views and just cultish conspiracy content created for clicks that defies any law of physics - is it reasonable to recommend a video from someone who argues the lockdown is not warranted? Why not. Is it reasonable to recommend someone who denies the existence of the virus and want's to sell you his quack treatments? I don't think so.

> is it reasonable to recommend a video from someone who argues the lockdown is not warranted So you're saying we should censor the President of the United States from Twitter?

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are removing some posts and videos from Bolsonaro.

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

#504

Post by peterwwillis »

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…

A platform isn't public or private. It's a platform. You can use it any way you want. But if it's not your platform, you don't get to make the rules of how it can be used or how it works.

I don't think people realize how ridiculous they sound when they reach this far just to get Google to do whatever the user wants with Google's service. It's a very millennial/zoomer/i-only-know-life-since-Google-has-existed point of view. It implies that people don't think they can fairly live a human existence without using Google (which is the truly disturbing thing about all this).

I mean, jesus. Nobody has forced you to use any of Google's services, you literally do not need to use any of their services at all. And there are alternate service providers. We didn't even go this far with Ma Bell, an actual monopoly.

If this is about "boo hoo I can't make money off of their platform", why not the same complaint about literally any other business? It's a much more reasonable thing to fight for, say, right to repair, than right-to-make-an-app-that-will-be-published-no-matter-what-by-Google.

At the moment, the best comparison I can come up with is food trucks. Say you own a giant empty lot. You offer it to food trucks to come and sell their food in your lot. It's a big success. You make money, the food trucks make money. Then one day, you want to kick out a food truck, for whatever reason. And they say, this is so unfair. We should form a government committee to manage this parking lot because the owner of the lot won't let me sell hotdogs here anymore. Even though they could just, you know, do what they do somewhere else, and still make basically the same living.

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

#505

Post by Yhippa »

blhack wrote: post #286

At this point: I wish they’d just take a stronger stance and ban everything they don’t like. Just ban the political party they don’t like, ban anything that speaks out against China, just ban it all. We need to go back to the web, where anybody could install Apache and off they went. Bandwidth is cheap now. BitTorrent exists. I hope google and twitter and Facebook and all the rest just hurry up with all this. Some ot…

> HE IS A DOCTOR RUNNING A STUDY AT A MAJOR UNI, and twitter is telling him he is misinformation.

The best part is that they let actual fake news and misinformation run amok on their platforms.

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

#506

Post by gamblor956 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #485
nyolfen wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there can be more than one reason, but the censorship began in earnest after trump's election and before covid.[1] this isn't even a controversial position and i'm nowhere near the only person to have remarked upon it. [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/08/06/636030043/youtube-apple-and-f...

It didn't start after Trump's election. It started with the "cancel culture" thing a couple of years before that and pressure on companies to participate in the war on crimethink. I tend to think that it contributed to Trump's election, because it has the effect of creating massive polarization. You can't segregate sites by viewpoint and thought filter everything in favor of one side or the other and expect it not to…

The modern polarization of the media began in the 1990s with Newt Gingrich...with help from his patron Rupert Murdoch, an ultra-conservative Australian who owned television stations, tabloids, and newspapers in the US, Australia, and the UK.

Before them, politics was still very cutthroat but not polarized along party lines.

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

#507

Post by whatshisface »

dane-pgp wrote: post #488
blhack wrote: post #286

At this point: I wish they’d just take a stronger stance and ban everything they don’t like. Just ban the political party they don’t like, ban anything that speaks out against China, just ban it all. We need to go back to the web, where anybody could install Apache and off they went. Bandwidth is cheap now. BitTorrent exists. I hope google and twitter and Facebook and all the rest just hurry up with all this. Some ot…

Perhaps a better strategy would be for Google to create an account for the head of government of each country, and give that account the ability to ban any app or video or search result in the respective country. (Such accounts would also have the ability to delegate their powers to other users as required). Google could write a public blog post saying "We've sacked all our internal moderators and censors, so if you…

You don't think they would want that power?

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

#509

Post by pmlnr »

newacct583 wrote: post #479
blhack wrote: post #286

At this point: I wish they’d just take a stronger stance and ban everything they don’t like. Just ban the political party they don’t like, ban anything that speaks out against China, just ban it all. We need to go back to the web, where anybody could install Apache and off they went. Bandwidth is cheap now. BitTorrent exists. I hope google and twitter and Facebook and all the rest just hurry up with all this. Some ot…

> At this point: I wish they’d just take a stronger stance and ban everything they don’t like. Is there even any evidence that this app was banned because they "don't like" it? I mean, come on. This surely got flagged by an automatic system that thought it was a covid app. Google and Apple and social media and basically everywhere are absolutely flooded with apps and content designed to scam people by using fear of t…

What kind of spam app detector is so bad that it doesn't claculate wirh maturity, popularity, and reviews?

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

#510

Post by ptx »

ipsum2 wrote: post #3

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…

AntennaPod[1] (my favorite and only) is open source and distributed through F-Droid, so it can't be arbitrily removed by Google. (And if for some reason it were to be removed from F-Froid, you can compile and install it yourself.)

[1] https://f-droid.org/app/de.danoeh.antennapod

Post reply on HN