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

Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 577 posts

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#111

Post by switch007 »

jml7c5 wrote: post #105
switch007 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. It’s badly affected air travel and who knows what changes will result (or what contracts for pointless bio-security theatre have been made) In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. We have set up a bio security unit, currently headed by the security services. UK has a “threat level” system for coronavirus similar to the terror…

>In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. I'm leery of what you may be trying to imply here. This isn't some conspiracy thing, is it?

I'm leery of what you may be trying to imply. That I think coronavirus was a conspiracy? No. Please don't head towards slander territory just because someone questions a piece of legislation.

I said "reminiscent", i.e it invokes memories. Hastily enacted, a blunt instrument, huge, sweeping changes to legislation, makes human rights organisations nervous etc.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#112

Post by jeltz »

laumars wrote: post #34
square_usual wrote: post #11

This is like Google banning the YouTube app from the play store for having videos about covid that aren't from government sources. Insane stuff.

That’s an interesting example because YouTube are also removing COVID-19 content from some disreputable sources. To be clear: I’m not defending Google, I also don’t agree with the podcast takedown.

I found this very quickly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgln8rjuIMU&feature=share

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#113

Post by thu2111 »

jml7c5 wrote: post #105
switch007 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. It’s badly affected air travel and who knows what changes will result (or what contracts for pointless bio-security theatre have been made) In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. We have set up a bio security unit, currently headed by the security services. UK has a “threat level” system for coronavirus similar to the terror…

>In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. I'm leery of what you may be trying to imply here. This isn't some conspiracy thing, is it?

You don't need conspiracies. Just naive people who think that in times of crisis you need to centralise power and who don't think through the consequences.

What does that mean in the UK context specifically ... for example, the COVID law repeals a reform that was made some years ago, after police finally caught the most prolific serial killer in history. He is believed to have killed perhaps 250 people without being caught, because he was a doctor who was forging death certificates. So the rules were changed to require multiple sign-offs on the cause of death, because multiple signoffs on cremation forms were the only way he was originally detected.

In the COVID panic that rule has been removed. Doctors can now put any cause of death they want without anyone checking them. In many countries there are now widespread reports of elderly relatives being assigned COVID as a cause of death in care homes, when the family members know they repeatedly tested negative and weren't sick.

Even better, the rule that said multiple psychiatry opinions are required to involuntarily commit someone was also repealed. In other words the government anticipated their policies would lead to both mass mental breakdown and civil disobedience; allowing a single doctor to effectively imprison someone indefinitely without any trial or any checks/balances at all, looks like a rather neat solution to that, doesn't it?

All these changes are in a sense well intentioned, the lawmakers believed speed is more important than accuracy. Those beliefs are wrong.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#114

Post by xerxesaa »

Like many others, this is also my favorite podcasting app.

Just a couple of weeks ago, I was using this exact app to listen to the "Making Sense" podcast by Sam Harris, on the topic of covid-19. This is clearly not a government source, but as usual, Sam probes with some of the most intelligent, nuanced questions on this topic. It would be sad to see discussions like these get suppressed with the rest under Google's policy.

I've been a Pixel/Nexus user for about a decade. I'm feeling it's finally time to get out of Google-land and move to a more open phone with F-Droid. I don't trust Google to use their power fairly. Any recommendations for devices?

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#115

Post by ezoe »

>has been suspended on the grounds that some of the podcasts it indexes reference the coronavirus but aren’t approved by government entities or public health organizations.

I don't know. The google should ban itself for they indexes reference the coronavirus but... oh well.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#116

Post by mrkramer »

MattGaiser wrote: post #15

What is going on with Google? We had PushBullet being threatened with removal over vague problems just a few days ago. I don't buy the "evil monopoly" narrative as what does this accomplish for Google?

I also don't buy the "evil monopoly" narrative I think it is automated flagging algorithms, humans are only "approving" bans.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#117

Post by random32840 »

ipsum2 wrote: post #3

My favorite (and only) podcasting app. I hope someone who works at Google reads this and flag it internally. This quote really sums up how ridiculous Google is being: > What Google is asking of Podcast Addict would be comparable to Google asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts that reference the coronavirus unless the reference comes from an official government entity…

More like:

> What Google is asking of Podcast Addict would be comparable to Google asking Google to remove all references to the websites and social media posts that reference the coronavirus unless the reference comes from an official government entity or public health organization.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#118

Post by random32840 »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #92
gundmc wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think this is something other than another (awful) high profile case of automation gone wrong?

Because their action seems consistent with their stated intention of banning all non-official speech on Covid-19? It could still be reversed if they feel public opinion swings the other way. That wouldn't mean it's automation gone wrong.

It may be automated based on frequency of reports, but either way this is unlikely to be company policy. The people who make these decisions are relatively low-level employees following a company guidebook. The guidebook says it has to go? It has to go. The employee doesn't want to get fired.

I doubt it'll stick.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#119

Post by indymike »

Tepix wrote: post #81
weiming wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except in this case it's not the government, but private corporations taking some kind of political stance. Google in particular has been very "active," not to forget also: https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-will-ban-anything-ag... ("video that 'goes against' WHO guidance on the pandemic will be blocked")

There is a lot of pressure on the large tech companies to stop spreading misinformation. This is one of their measures.

So? That pressure is unconstitutional in the US and should be ignored completely and resisted utterly.

Re: Google bans Podcast Addict app over non-approved Covid-19 content

#120

Post by snakeboy »

jml7c5 wrote: post #105
switch007 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. It’s badly affected air travel and who knows what changes will result (or what contracts for pointless bio-security theatre have been made) In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. We have set up a bio security unit, currently headed by the security services. UK has a “threat level” system for coronavirus similar to the terror…

>In the UK, a 300+ page law was basically pre-written and enacted very quickly, reminiscent of the early anti terrorism law. I'm leery of what you may be trying to imply here. This isn't some conspiracy thing, is it?

I think the implication is that there is always a block for government over-reach and waiting for a convenient excuse to execute it.

Just as the implication isn't that the PATRIOT act authors did 9/11, they certainly took the momentum of the aftermath of a tragedy to push their pre-existing agenda.

Post reply on HN