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

Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 90 posts

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#11

Post by Zev »

timdorr wrote: post #2

This is the part I'm most worried about: As is clear from the screenshots, Qingwen doesn’t bombard you with words like “cock” and “penis” the moment you start it up. No, the Apple employee who took those screenshots specifically searched for those words. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the same thing as opening a website that contains swear words (like the page you’re reading, for instance) on the iPhone. If they don’t…

I don't like the idea that reviewers are doing their best to try and make my apps fail approval. That comes across to me as a developer that Apple doesn't want me to succeed.

Just to present an alternate viewpoint, where app reviewers manage to do good: That depends. If the reviewer was trying to make my app fail by crashing it — and managed to do so — I'd want to hear about it and have it fixed before I heard about it from the public.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#12

Post by calambrac »

A quick search on Wiktionary.org easily turns up a number of offensive “urban slang” terms that you won’t find in popular dictionaries such as one that you referenced, the New Oxford American Dictionary included in Mac OS X.

We're totally fine with established rich white vulgarity, but new poor black vulgarity? Come on now, that's just crossing the line.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#13

Post by FiveFiftyOne »

The problem here is two fold. Apple conduct a deliberate search for swear words and slang, find it, flag it to the developer, and bounce the app. Technorati goes mad, sets the blogosphere alight with vitriol and damns Apple to hell, scant months after worshipping the self-same company. Alternatively, Apple fail to conduct said search, pass the app, and someone's rosy cheeked darling is caught scanning naughty words on their iPhone. Consumer advocacy groups and parental groups set the blogosphere alight with vitriol and damns Apple to hell. The honeymoon for Apple is over. They fought, they gained market and mindshare, and now they find themselves in a position where their former fans wish to slay them, and they're high profile enough to piss off the non-techs who buy their tech. Will be watching the Apple hate with interest in the coming months, same as with the Google hate. How we do loathe a victor.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#14

Post by zach »

There will always be decisions which seem arbitrary and subjective in these situations because what's going on here is a very rough categorization with no room for nuance. And the very idea of age as a measure of appropriateness is pretty arbitrary to begin with, after all.

Parental controls and ratings are a quagmire. And the more technological the product, the stickier it gets.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#15

Post by FiveFiftyOne »

FiveFiftyOne wrote: post #13

The problem here is two fold. Apple conduct a deliberate search for swear words and slang, find it, flag it to the developer, and bounce the app. Technorati goes mad, sets the blogosphere alight with vitriol and damns Apple to hell, scant months after worshipping the self-same company. Alternatively, Apple fail to conduct said search, pass the app, and someone's rosy cheeked darling is caught scanning naughty words o…

Retrospectively, this "content" flagging could apply to Mail, Safari, multimedia apps etc, so I guess my argument doesn't hold much water. I do maintain that the brouhaha and anger at Apple at the moment is interesting to behold. 'Scuse me while I return to panel beating FOSS from source onto my belligerent MacBook ;)

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#16

Post by phil »

timdorr wrote: post #2

This is the part I'm most worried about: As is clear from the screenshots, Qingwen doesn’t bombard you with words like “cock” and “penis” the moment you start it up. No, the Apple employee who took those screenshots specifically searched for those words. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the same thing as opening a website that contains swear words (like the page you’re reading, for instance) on the iPhone. If they don’t…

Gruber is uncharacteristically imprecise in the paragraph you quote.

If you look at the parental controls interface on your iPhone (Settings -> General -> Restrictions), it's obvious that Safari, Mail, YouTube, and so on can be individually restricted. There's also the more general option that allows restriction of third party apps based on rating.

The goal of the parental controls is to secure the device against anything that goes beyond a given rated standard. That explains these decisions that seem silly, like requiring an adult rating because if you search for 'fuck' you get a definition, or because an app provides a webkit view of a totally innocuous wikipedia page. These are security holes that an enterprising 12 year old who wanted to circumvent the parental controls might be able to exploit.

Yeah, you have to turn off Safari and YouTube and the rest to get a fully locked down phone, but you can do that. Doing so might be lousy parenting, but that's not at issue. The parental control feature is designed to allow a complete lockdown, that's what Apple claims it does, and the app review policy has to be strict, or it won't work.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#17

Post by jrockway »

ihumanable wrote: post #6

The problem that I see is that Apple has no business being in the censorship or rating business period. Sure there are "business reasons" to perform these roles, but they are antithetical to a free society. The free market answer would be, if you don't like it don't buy an iPhone. That's great, but as technology marches forward there can only be a finite number of companies with the skills and resources to create sma…

The free market answer would be, if you don't like it don't buy an iPhone. That's great, but as technology marches forward there can only be a finite number of companies with the skills and resources to create smart phones, Apple being one of the nicest offerings.

The key here is "one of the nicest". Is it nice if they use your money to control what people can and can't think? And anyway, there is Android, which is just as nice as the iPhone.

I really don't see any major differences between the iPhone and Android, except that Android has the notification drawer and the iPhone shows notifications on the app icon. They both have fine apps available in the same areas, with Android leaning towards more useful apps, like IRC in the background. The basic functionality is the same (except I can use Google Voice for my calls), the browser is the same codebase, etc., etc. So anyone that says they "have to have" an iPhone is probably wrong; Android will get them everything the iPhone has, minus any Apple evilness. (HTC makes nice phones.)

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#18

Post by jsz0 »

ivankirigin wrote: post #10

They essentially said "ohh, we don't mind the 'swear' words, just the really bad ones" Fuck that. It is exactly the same thing, but the lexicon has evolved.

I agree with that but someone who has parental controls enabled may not. That's why the feature exists. The "dirty words in dictionaries" battle has already been fought in schools and libraries and it seems Apple is taking the same route. Some words are OK, some aren't. It's not as though an NC-17 rating on the App Store really causes any problems for a developer unlike a movie getting an NC-17 rating which is a big deal still.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#19

Post by roc »

"Apple did not censor"

You don't split hairs with a weasel-word defense if you're committed to any sort of change. Note the difference between this (we didn't do anything wrong. we'll do better in the future) and Bezo's letter (we fucked up. even if we were technically right, it was still wrong. we'll do better in the future)

I can believe Bezos. Schiller? Not for a second.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#20

Post by umjames »

FiveFiftyOne wrote: post #13

The problem here is two fold. Apple conduct a deliberate search for swear words and slang, find it, flag it to the developer, and bounce the app. Technorati goes mad, sets the blogosphere alight with vitriol and damns Apple to hell, scant months after worshipping the self-same company. Alternatively, Apple fail to conduct said search, pass the app, and someone's rosy cheeked darling is caught scanning naughty words o…

So, who will you be cheering for in these Apple/Google vs. the people fights?

Personally in the Apple vs. the people fight, I'll be cheering for the people who decide that they can do a better job policing themselves and their children than Apple can. I know it's not easy, but it is a parent's job to prepare their children to live in the world as it actually is. That includes the vulgar, violent, and hateful things in the world.

Post reply on HN