Perhaps Apple should rebrand themselves as the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.
Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
21–30 of 90 posts
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#22This 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 any…
That it's possible isn't the relevant bit.
The fact that you can lock down all third party browsers based on rating, but have to explicitly lock down Safari separately exposes the absurdity and inconsistency of this policy.
If Apple 'rated' Safari 17+ and youtube something like 14+, and the parental controls were applied universally, their policy wouldn't be nearly so bad.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#23They 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…
You know, I went to see Transformers last weekend, which is PG-13 and included a rich variety of swear words and sexual innuendo.
The problem is not so much that Apple is censoring NinjaWords, as that Apple is penalizing them for engaging in censorship, while approving and/or offering (via Safari etc.) apps which allow access to the exact same 'offensive' information. This seems to me to be an unfair restraint of trade.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#24They 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…
School censoring and rating systems are both bullshit. They oppress minorities and creativity. A software platform has far less justification to follow a similar pattern.
The idea that children shouldn't see swear words is leading to a categorical error. The debate is about how much, for which there is no right answer, instead of if at all.
As a parent, let me put some authority behind it and say the parental control is the off switch. If parents aren't there to turn it off - guess what: your kids are already looking at donkey porn, and there is nothing you can do about it.
The whole issue is such a farce, where Apple is really looking to give the impression that it cares and controls the situation, when it doesn't. They make a web browser that can easily search for porn. Is there effectively a difference between that and an app where you can search for a dry definition of a dirty word?
There is a difference - the browser is far worse. And not restricted. And made by Apple itself.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#25They 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…
"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."
I wonder about that.
I wrote the Nihongo app, which, like NinjaWords, kept getting rejected until I finally set the rating to 17+.
When it was finally in the AppStore, friends told me that an "are you sure, since this app has Frequent/Intense Sexual Content or Nudity and Frequent/Intense Mature/Suggestive Themes"-type warning came up just before they hit "Buy".
I wonder how many people hesitated or declined to buy the app b/c of that.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 any…
That it's possible isn't the relevant bit. The fact that you can lock down all third party browsers based on rating, but have to explicitly lock down Safari separately exposes the absurdity and inconsistency of this policy. If Apple 'rated' Safari 17+ and youtube something like 14+, and the parental controls were applied universally, their policy wouldn't be nearly so bad.
Yeah, you get more granular control over the built-in apps. Why would it make the policy better or more consistent if that ability were taken away?
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#27A 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.
Because urban dictionary is populated by poor minority kids in the city?
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
School censoring and rating systems are both bullshit. They oppress minorities and creativity. A software platform has far less justification to follow a similar pattern. The idea that children shouldn't see swear words is leading to a categorical error. The debate is about how much, for which there is no right answer, instead of if at all. As a parent, let me put some authority behind it and say the parental control…
I completely agree with pretty much everything you're saying, but to be fair, the iPhone's parental controls do allow you to lock down the browser.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
" 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. " I wonder about that. I wrote the Nihongo app, which, like NinjaWords, kept getting rejected until I finally set the rating to 17+. When it was finally in the AppStore, friends told me that an " are you sure, since this app has Frequent/Intense Sexual Cont…
That's troubling. I've been thinking that it's OK if the ratings are strict or inflated, as long as there's no stigma attached to a 17+ rating.
But a warning before you buy certainly stigmatizes 17+ apps. I bet lots of people hesitated.
Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring
#30The 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 i…
"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."
That must mean children growing up in war zones and neighborhoods with a lot of crime must be the best "prepared" children, and parents should try to emulate such environments for their children's benefit.