Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
magazine.artstation.com
Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
1–10 of 216 posts
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#2Any sufficiently-dominant corporation is indistinguishable from a government. -- Anonymous
Or, apparently, from a church.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#3Apple or Google don't ban URLs or websites on their Safari or Chrome browsers. Is that due to historical reasons or are there any laws regarding this?
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#4Apple or Google don't ban URLs or websites on their Safari or Chrome browsers. Is that due to historical reasons or are there any laws regarding this?
It should be illegal to do that.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#5I wonder why the other app showing identical content didn’t get banned, maybe it is a bigger revenue earner for Google?
And yes, there is far more of this on Insta.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#6Apple or Google don't ban URLs or websites on their Safari or Chrome browsers. Is that due to historical reasons or are there any laws regarding this?
I think it's due to how they cultivated the image of their walled garden app stores as curated and moderated against "bad stuff" like adware etc and now you have people with a puritan/sex-regressive stance leaning on that image and sesta / fosta bills to "protect us all".
With the recent push for PWAs, it will be interesting to see if communities like artstation use these instead.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#7Apple or Google don't ban URLs or websites on their Safari or Chrome browsers. Is that due to historical reasons or are there any laws regarding this?
I think it's due to how they cultivated the image of their walled garden app stores as curated and moderated against "bad stuff" like adware etc and now you have people with a puritan/sex-regressive stance leaning on that image and sesta / fosta bills to "protect us all". With the recent push for PWAs, it will be interesting to see if communities like artstation use these instead.
I am wondering why are not just tagging this apps, then by default not allow you to install unless you confirm on an alert box and put your password. Seems a win-win, you keep both camps happy and probably spend less on attempting to filter your content so not to trip over AIs detection algorithms and bad moderation from the stores.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#8Any sufficiently-dominant corporation is indistinguishable from a government. -- Anonymous Or, apparently, from a church.
It’s very strange wording that they use, they don’t want anything to be sexually “gratifying”. Like if it’s explicit content but you don’t find it “gratifying” they’re OK with that? It’s as if they don’t care about the content itself they just don’t want you to enjoy it.
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#9There's a growing class of apps that are clearly intended to be used as image boards, but don't actually advertise themselves as being intended for any specific website. One common pattern are apps that require that the user type in a certain domain in order for them to work. Most *chan browser apps in this way. You manually specify a domain and board code, and only then does the app function.
I can see this type of scheme increasing, as it puts a degree of indirection between the app itself and the objectionable content. There's a stronger element of deniability: the user is the one that's navigating to a separate website that hosts objectionable content. The app itself is "clean" so to speak (even though it's obviously not the case in practice).
Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content
#10There's a lot of Wikipedia content that would match forbidden content in this policy too.