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

Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 229 posts

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#161

Post by jlgreco »

delinka wrote: post #128
danielweber wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If my kid someone ordered a cellphone without my knowledge and got it shipped to my house and opened it and set it up, I have a lot bigger problems than him finding sex or "wrong" political opinions on that phone. While I know some people at HN would still be mad if the App Store defaulted to "kid safe," it's a fix with much smaller side-effects than outright bans. Assuming "to protect the kids" is really the motive.

Now suppose that clueless suburban soccer mom got her kid an iPhone and doesn't [want to] know anything about configuring this device. Box arrives, she hands it to the kid. Yes, this parent has problems. And it's this situation that Apple thinks they're watching out for.

Then the kid stumbles across adult material on his new fancy phone, and is apparently scarred for life.

Oh wait, this already "happens". The phones come with webbrowsers.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#162

Post by veidr »

nivla wrote: post #61
stephengillie wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if both Google's and Amazon's app stores reject an app, there are still other markets. And you can just download APKs from websites/ftp/etc and install them to your android, no market required.

That is until all the three (Apple, Google and Microsoft) decides to only allow installs from the maketplace, you know for "security" reasons. The problem is if one company gets away with it, others follow suit.

It's not a very effective defense of Apple to say, "Yeah, Google's phones and tablets don't currently have the same central, fundamental limitation that all Apple's iOS devices do, but someday they probably will."

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#163

Post by nivla »

nivla wrote: post #139
cheald wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose enforcing that on an open-source operating system?

The same way chromium has become obsolete with chrome becoming less and less open-source. The same goes with MySQL. In case of android, most consumers will deal with what the manufacturers decides to put on their phones and less than 1% will resort to installing another O/S. Keep in mind even with Android you are forced to register a Google account. What if you din't want to use Google or worst case, they ban you fro…

What is with the downvotes and no comment? I would love to hear your side of the argument too.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#164

Post by zmmmmm »

ralfd wrote: post #105
nutjob123 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many malicious apps were in the Android store? A few? A dozen? Thats a pretty good ratio out of the hundreds of thousands available.

On a similar line of argument: "How many blocked apps were in the App Store? A few? A dozen? Thats a pretty good ratio out of the hundreds of thousands available."

> How many blocked apps were in the App Store?

An oxymoron?

Part of the problem with the app store is a chilling effect - people don't even try to make controversial apps if they run a large risk of being blocked.

Perhaps you could look at the number of apps in Cydia, since the primary reason to put an app on Cydia is that it does something that would be blocked in the App store. I couldn't find an actual figure but simple searches on the Cydia store show > 35,000 results. I'd say that's much higher than the number of truly malicious Android apps that made it into Google's store and lasted any length of time there.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#165

Post by orangecat »

enraged_camel wrote: post #147
cageface wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather live in a world where grownups are allowed to make their own choices than in one where daddy decides what's best for everyone.

As long as the full ramifications of said decisions are clear, sure, allow people to make their own. But it's not possible to know at a glance what Android app is malicious and which is not. Even an application that looks legitimate and works legitimately may steal your data behind the curtain without you knowing, which is what usually happens anyway. This is why an approval process for the app store is good. It's tr…

So would you agree that Mountain Lion's Gatekeeper is insufficient, and that Apple should lock down Macs in the same way? If not, what's the difference?

It's true that Apple's is a bit draconian, but that's because they care about protecting their users.

I hear the TSA's marketing department is hiring.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#166

Post by orangecat »

nivla wrote: post #163
nivla wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same way chromium has become obsolete with chrome becoming less and less open-source. The same goes with MySQL. In case of android, most consumers will deal with what the manufacturers decides to put on their phones and less than 1% will resort to installing another O/S. Keep in mind even with Android you are forced to register a Google account. What if you din't want to use Google or worst case, they ban you fro…

What is with the downvotes and no comment? I would love to hear your side of the argument too.

It was a combination of FUD and objective falsehood. You presented no evidence that Google intends to close off Android source, and Android doesn't force users to create or use a Google account.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#167

Post by cageface »

enraged_camel wrote: post #147
cageface wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather live in a world where grownups are allowed to make their own choices than in one where daddy decides what's best for everyone.

As long as the full ramifications of said decisions are clear, sure, allow people to make their own. But it's not possible to know at a glance what Android app is malicious and which is not. Even an application that looks legitimate and works legitimately may steal your data behind the curtain without you knowing, which is what usually happens anyway. This is why an approval process for the app store is good. It's tr…

I support Apple's right to offer you that choice as long as they're not using a broken patent system to take away my choice.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#168

Post by cageface »

Steko wrote: post #153
chimeracoder wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was actually remarkably offended when they removed the former app. Exodus is wrong and ex-gay conversion violates APA guidelines, but that doesn't make the app inherently bigoted , which is a remarkably weighty term that I'd prefer leave reserved for people like the Westboro Baptist Church. Exodus claims to 'provide support' for people who want to 'recover' from homosexuality. Predatory? Misleading? Sure. Immoral?…

"Predatory? Misleading? Sure. Immoral? I'd say so. But unlike homophobes, I don't agree with censoring speech that I disagree with and forcing my beliefs on other people." Does this even follow? "Predatory" and "misleading" should be enough to remove the app in the first place -- you don't need to assume they removed it because they disagreed with its politics.

One man's "predatory and misleading" is another man's gospel truth. Putting the authority to decide who is right and wrong on these matters in the hands of a single, all-powerful arbiter is just begging for abuse.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#169

Post by cageface »

Kerrick wrote: post #144

From the reddit comments -- I'm surprised nobody on Hacker News brought this up before reddit! > Mobile app developer here... It was probably rejected because all it is is a web page wrapped in an app. > > 2.12 Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected > Which this app clearly is. It's not even using the mapkit API. It's just…

Nope. As quoted directly in the article:

The Cupertino company says the content is “objectionable and crude,” according to Apple’s latest rejection letter.

Re: Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes

#170

Post by cageface »

eevilspock wrote: post #10
AndrewDucker wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You support a walled garden, but not if it blocks information? I'm sorry, but that's completely contradictory. The point of the wall is that it blocks things Apple don't approve of.

You can support an approach and also believe someone is doing it stupidly, or even unethically, all without being contradictory. For example, do you support the right of a newspaper editor to pick and choose which letters to the editor get published? How about a restaurant's reserved "right to refuse service to anyone"? If you do, you still reserve the right in each of these cases to object to individual decisions, a…

But that's exactly the problem with the benevolent dictatorship model. Sooner or later this kind of absolute power is used unwisely or outright abused and you have no recourse.

This is why almost every country in the world has abandoned monarchy. It's ultimately too error-prone and inefficient.

Post reply on HN