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

Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 191 posts

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#71

Post by echelon »

caslon wrote: post #70
fareesh wrote: post #65

The "private company can do whatever it wants" crowd will not show up for this one because it doesn't suit their politics

I've said it before, and I'll say it now: private companies can ban what they want! It's good for corporations to have ethics, even if I don't agree with said ethics, whether it's banning Gab or this. It's their constitutional right, and it's a responsibility that comes with having the power they do.

The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps.

1990-2010's Internet didn't have this problem.

Nobody cares if Xbox bans your game. There are a dozen plus other platforms. But if Apple or Google say no, you're toast.

We need a bill of rights to protect us against megaplatforms.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#72

Post by Griffinsauce »

throwawaysea wrote: post #17
alfalfasprout wrote: post #6

This is the dangerous flip side to having two players be the gatekeepers as to what can and cannot be an app (yes, I'm aware on android apps can be installed outside google play technically... but the audience is tiny). With Parler, for example, I remember reading tons of posts in support of taking the app down. But that same process can be easily used to silence apps like these.

Taking down Parler was certainly not justified, but I agree it was one step down the slippery slope that normalizes this kind of brazen gatekeeping on essential public utilities like app stores. Facebook played a much larger role in the planning of the riot at the capitol riots ( https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/02/07/shery... ) and they faced no consequences, presumably because they share the same po…

> How was it at all justifiable for AOC to demand Parler be shutdown, for tech companies to immediately fall in line

That's not what happened and you know it. AOC wasn't a singular voice, there were lots of people calling for Parler to be shut down.

I'm not going to engage with the rest of it, but this point is important because it's being used to demonize another human being. You're repeating a narrative without scrutinizing it, please be more critical.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#73

Post by caslon »

echelon wrote: post #71
caslon wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've said it before, and I'll say it now: private companies can ban what they want! It's good for corporations to have ethics, even if I don't agree with said ethics, whether it's banning Gab or this. It's their constitutional right, and it's a responsibility that comes with having the power they do.

The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. 1990-2010's Internet didn't have this problem. Nobody cares if Xbox bans your game. There are a dozen plus other platforms. But if Apple or Google say no, you're toast. We need a bill of rights to protect us against megaplatforms .

> The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers.

Neither has a monopoly, or anything close to a monopoly. Duopolies are legal.

> Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps.

This isn't a bad thing. People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the App Store has, and Google makes it easy to sideload anything.

The world doesn't owe you a business model, and you can't take away people's rights because you want a better way to sell your wares.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#74

Post by fakedang »

caslon wrote: post #73
echelon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. 1990-2010's Internet didn't have this problem. Nobody cares if Xbox bans your game. There are a dozen plus other platforms. But if Apple or Google say no, you're toast. We need a bill of rights to protect us against megaplatforms .

> The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Neither has a monopoly, or anything close to a monopoly. Duopolies are legal. > Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. This isn't a bad thing. People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the…

Fun fact, duopolies are often regulated in other industries precisely because price matching is illegal.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#75

Post by caslon »

fakedang wrote: post #74
caslon wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Neither has a monopoly, or anything close to a monopoly. Duopolies are legal. > Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. This isn't a bad thing. People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the…

Fun fact, duopolies are often regulated in other industries precisely because price matching is illegal.

Google nor Apple is guilty of that.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#76

Post by Griffinsauce »

echelon wrote: post #69
Griffinsauce wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, they are well within their rights (as usual) but we can still say it's bs and makes no sense. The difference with the things you're likely defending is that this app does no harm and is only being blocked for puritanical reasons. Ethically they are similar but not the same.

> they are well within their rights (as usual) Then maybe it's time to make laws that prohibit Google and Apple from wielding this power. We're letting the majority of customers that are okay with these decisions punish the minority. Platforms already wield undue economic power and impose stresses on small players that the utopia of pre-smartphone web didn't have. Dealing with these fat clowns is a joke. Natural tech…

Sure, I'll agree with most of that. I think most people do, including those on the other side of the political spectrum from you. This is why the binary political system in the US is insanely ineffective.

> Dealing with these fat clowns is a joke

Could you clarify this? I'm not following this sentence.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#77

Post by echelon »

caslon wrote: post #73
echelon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. 1990-2010's Internet didn't have this problem. Nobody cares if Xbox bans your game. There are a dozen plus other platforms. But if Apple or Google say no, you're toast. We need a bill of rights to protect us against megaplatforms .

> The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Neither has a monopoly, or anything close to a monopoly. Duopolies are legal. > Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. This isn't a bad thing. People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the…

> Duopolies are legal.

This shit we have to put up with shouldn't be legal! I dream for the day that the DOJ forces Apple and Google to make an interoperable native platform. Or when it forces both to spin off their app marketplaces. Or requires them to allow easy installs from the web.

> People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them

That's not at all correct. You can count the percentage of people that can do this on one hand.

> The world doesn't owe you a business model, and you can't take away people's rights because you want a better way to sell your wares.

The world doesn't owe you clean air, either. But thankfully we've decided to artificially limit business to make the world a better place.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#78

Post by ardit33 »

caslon wrote: post #70
fareesh wrote: post #65

The "private company can do whatever it wants" crowd will not show up for this one because it doesn't suit their politics

I've said it before, and I'll say it now: private companies can ban what they want! It's good for corporations to have ethics, even if I don't agree with said ethics, whether it's banning Gab or this. It's their constitutional right, and it's a responsibility that comes with having the power they do.

no.... we put a limit into what private companies can discriminate against. Private taxis would routinely refuse you service because of your ethnic background

it still can happen, but it is illegal for good reasons

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#79

Post by leggenda47 »

caslon wrote: post #73
echelon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. 1990-2010's Internet didn't have this problem. Nobody cares if Xbox bans your game. There are a dozen plus other platforms. But if Apple or Google say no, you're toast. We need a bill of rights to protect us against megaplatforms .

> The problem is the iPhone and Android platforms are the only two ways to reach many customers. Neither has a monopoly, or anything close to a monopoly. Duopolies are legal. > Web isn't first class, and there's no open standard or easy way to distribute native apps. This isn't a bad thing. People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the…

> People who want native apps from a source other than Apple or Google can pretty easily get them: Cydia's existed longer than the App Store has, and Google makes it easy to sideload anything.

It might be easy for tech-savvy people but not for the average customer. Installing Cydia on an iPhone requires jailbreaking, I think. Sideloading is easier but you have to jump through a few hoops to be able to install apps.

> The world doesn't owe you a business model, and you can't take away people's rights because you want a better way to sell your wares.

I may be misunderstanding this but how does this take away people's rights?

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#80

Post by linspace »

Telcos must for example provide net neutrality and are usually not duopolies even on the same country, not to mention world wide. Are there any significant difference between them and app stores?

Companies are not people, they don't have "rights". My car or my computer don't have rights. Call me humanist.

Post reply on HN