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

Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

forum.f-droid.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 199 posts

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#151

Post by cakeday »

BizarroLand wrote: post #143
cakeday wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"authoritarian regimes" It seems someone at F-Droid may have a political axe to grind with the current US presidency and the majority of the population of America who elected (1.)them. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia...

majority of voting population Don't get me wrong, I hold the "eligible but didn't vote" group equally accountable for the current regime, but it was not the majority of the population that voted for him. "If "Did Not Vote" had been a presidential candidate, they would have beaten Donald Trump by 9.1 million votes, and they would have won 21 states, earning 265 electoral college votes to Trump's 175 and Harris's 98."…

[flagged]

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#152

Post by dang »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #122
dang wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't take HN threads into religious flamewar please. Last thing we need here.

I honestly meant this in a "no religion in the office" sense, but people started responding with bible quotes.

I believe you that you didn't mean it as a generic religious flamestarter, but in that case your intent didn't come across in the comment. So it's predictable that people responded with flaming reactions of their own.

This may be helpful for avoiding this sort of outcome in the future: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#153

Post by jaykru »

cma wrote: post #15
inglor wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem to disagree https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/merge_requests/27861#... > We don't flag general apps, e.g., ebook readers and browsers. But bible readers are not general apps. They are designed to read bible and there are NSFW contents in bible. Honestly I think their argument is pretty weak, especially since like you said in this case it was a bible reading tracker.

A Penthouse reading tracker might get flagged NSFW too without much fanfare, even without any content from Penthouse.

It seems like the point of this comment is to concoct an example for which anyone agreeing with the parent comment would supposedly hold an inconsistent opinion. I'll insert my own consistency: neither should be flagged NSFW.

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#154

Post by BizarroLand »

cakeday wrote: post #151
BizarroLand wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

majority of voting population Don't get me wrong, I hold the "eligible but didn't vote" group equally accountable for the current regime, but it was not the majority of the population that voted for him. "If "Did Not Vote" had been a presidential candidate, they would have beaten Donald Trump by 9.1 million votes, and they would have won 21 states, earning 265 electoral college votes to Trump's 175 and Harris's 98."…

[flagged]

I have been told that Magats tend to not be able to accept information that disputes their previously held beliefs.

Thank you for providing such a crystal clear demonstration of that.

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#155

Post by altairprime »

begrid wrote: post #100
altairprime wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From an App Store rating perspective, this particularly affects children, which leads to a much more focused question: Should minors have the right to install and use apps without parental approval that grant them access to content that is accepted to contain: > genocide, slavery, casual murder, infanticide, sexual abuse And if so, then what categories of apps are exempt from otherwise-mandatory content restriction p…

> Should minors have the right to install and use apps without parental approval that grant them access to content that is accepted to contain: >> genocide, slavery, casual murder, infanticide, sexual abuse Like wikipedia?

Any world history source, such as Wikipedia, yes. (If that’s not the reason you brought it up, I only saw your first two words in the discussion; perhaps your reply was truncated unexpectedly?)

This definitely ties into a weakness in the U.S. speech laws — we rarely view obscenity as relevant to non-erotic topics, so our social edifices are ill-equipped at considering this topic at all: by social assumption, a non-erotic text such as the old testament bible is unconsciously assumed exempt from obscenity concerns even though it is blatantly NSFW. (I can’t speak to how other countries handle this topic.)

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#156

Post by bentley »

WolfeReader wrote: post #133
nathanaldensr wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I have read it, as have billions of others, and we don't agree with you. Your personal political sensibilities are not shared by all. For what it's worth I wouldn't flag any of your chosen religious texts either no matter what they were.

Do you read Ezekiel chapter 23 at work and to your family?

As a 12‐year‐old I encountered this passage during my first complete read of the Bible and wasn’t bothered by it. It’s a colorful metaphor that uses sexual promiscuity to symbolize Israel’s religious impiety, a common theme that occurs elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Hosea whose commitment to his unfaithful wife was used as a symbol for the love of God to an unfaithful Israel). These are basic theological ideas that were not hidden from me at church even at that age.

I encountered actual prurient material on the shelves of the school library, and heard far worse obscenity in the locker room during gym class. The most erotic stuff in the Bible, Song of Songs, is quaint by the standards of a century ago, let alone today.

If F‐Droid is trying to drum up opposition to the UK’s extreme suppression of pornography, they've muddled it. They could have defied the unjust restrictions, or they could have leaned into it and marked Wikipedia apps, Reddit apps, Mastodon apps, and Project Gutenberg apps the same way.

That they did neither indicates that they have chosen to specifically target religious content, and not just by marking it. F-Droid developers openly state (https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/252#note_2578531026) that (1) new NSFW apps will not be added, and (2) existing NSFW apps will be removed.

It's bad on principle: F-Droid is akin to a distribution package repo, and should not prohibit apps based solely on ideology (nor should Debian, Gentoo, BSD ports…); and it's also impractical: given the looming threat of government suppression of app stores, F‐Droid (already an underdog) should not be driving away supporters by taking up anti‐religious ideology.

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#157

Post by bigbadfeline »

pndy wrote: post #98

Maybe I'm in the minority but I consider religious text books, prayer tracking/reading apps as the low-effort ones - doesn't matter which religion it is. These will eventually show up in the "store" in countless versions. But I get it at the same time - some people may want them on their devices. I'm more concerned in this case that NSFW section contains "political incorrectness". Who's going to decide here what's in…

> Who's going to decide here what's incorrect and what's not in some cases?

It's the same question as "Who watches the watchers?", I don't think a centralized architecture, like F-Droid or Android itself, can solve it.

In this case PWAs appear to be a good option for that kind of content, if only we could make their installation and use as seamless as using the playstore. They might be on par with F-Droid, however.

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#158

Post by 1718627440 »

akshitgaur2005 wrote: post #110
1718627440 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I don't disagree with you here. In my opinion this doesn't describe anything happening in this world, so it is not relevant, whether to label it NSFW, and it isn't encouraging you to be violent in this world.

subjecting people to eternal punishment for a fleeting crime and dehumanising some people is okay?

The entity is not part of this world and is not affected by what information we distribute, so how would that matter? What dehumanising?

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#159

Post by lunias »

NSFW should mean something akin to Not Safe for Work lol. If you're going to use that tag at all, the tag should exist on pretty much anything that exists purely for entertainment value. I would argue that religious texts (as well as sexually explicit scientific articles) are not NSFW, but pretty much every game is.

Re: Bible and Quran apps flagged NSFW by F-Droid

#160

Post by greycol »

watwut wrote: post #141
Hizonner wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> label that accuses the text of being offensive Abrahamic religious texts, and a lot of others as well, are offensive. They clearly and directly glorify oppressive and/or genocidal violence in the past. There's a very strong argument that they demand similar violence in the present and future. They definitely demand a whole bunch of evil and oppressive social institutions. They're more offensive than hardcore porn.…

> They're more offensive than hardcore porn. No they are not. Not unless you are intentionally taking in super weird definition of "offensive" or "hardcore porn". And I am saying that as someone who is not Christian and finds a lot of what Christianity stands for off-putting or even unethical. There is a reason people who want quick individual fun go for porn and not for a bible.

It's all about interpretation, which is the point where you mark something as not appropriate for children so that parents can actively make the choice on if their kids should be exposed to it. In this case there's very little argument about whether we want more people following the voice in their head to kill their son, which is from the bible, or having vanilla sex, which is the definition of hardcore porn (as opposed to softcore porn, not hardcore as in extreme at least that was the definition I'm used to perhaps the meaning has drifted).

People are comfortable with religious texts because they are bought up with them and know which pieces to ignore, just look at the moral panic around teenagers getting hold of a Qaran and going off to join ISIS after 9/11. Hell I find the prevalence and acceptance of genital mutilation encouraged by religious texts horrendous when I spend time considering it.

It's not a hardship to let parents decide whether kids should have access to this stuff. That being said what the tag does in context of the f-droid shop is not really helpful behavior. It's not what most people would expect for parental control and outside of countries where the texts may be proscribed it's not really helpful behavior to hide these apps.

Post reply on HN