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

Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 693 posts

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#411

Post by kortex »

0xEFF wrote: post #359
webmobdev wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the transition. Apple will definitely appreciate it if all of us would just shut up and let them screw us. While I appreciate your well-meaning advise to the author - pick your battles in life carefully - I'd like to add that using your anger constructively at some injustice is a positive move to…

Do you expect to see a box on a shelf of any retail store labeled, “Amphetamine” with a colorful picture of drugs? It’s entirely reasonable for the retail store to tell the vendor to rename the product or else it will be removed from the shelf.

Tell that to Cocaine Energy Drink.

https://www.caffeineinformer.com/cocaine-energy-drink-is-bac...

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#412

Post by nsajko »

crazygringo wrote: post #168

I mean, on this point I'm actually inclined to think Apple's general policy is reasonable, even if it sucks that Apple is only now adding or enforcing this rule. It doesn't want apps that jokingly call themselves "Crack Cocaine", "Crystal Meth", or "Mango Vape". It doesn't have anything to do with them actually promoting drug use, but it helps normalize illegal drug use in a way, while Apple wants to keep a "family f…

No. Amphetamine is the name of a chemical with both legal medicinal and illegal applications. I might agree with you if the app's name was "Meth" or some other slang term for a stimulant drug associated with illegal use.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#413

Post by berryjerry »

gnopgnip wrote: post #385
smnrchrds wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't HOAs widely hated?

The congressional approval rating has been between 10 and 30% for the last 8 years, and over this same time the re-election rates of incumbent congressional reps is 89% or higher. People are largely happy with their own congress members, and vote to reelect them and their own HOA, and they will choose to purchase homes with an HOA, and not disband them.

No, everyone thinks they could do a better job but no one actually wants those jobs.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#414

Post by joseph_grobbles »

ihunter2839 wrote: post #398
joseph_grobbles wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drove by a cop over the speed limit yesterday. He didn't pull me over. Therefore I can always drive over the speed limit and it is "approved". This is childish, nonsensical argumentation. The app has always been in contravention of the rules of the app store.

You want to talk about a nonsensical argument, take a look at the comparison you just made. In the first situation, you have no way of knowing whether the cop even saw you. Or if they were on duty. Or if they were previously occupied responding to some other call. In the second, the app was explicitly submitted for review and approved by Apple. Even more egregious, the app was explicitly mentioned, by name , by Apple…

Let me be more explicit for you, then: I speed past a cop who is pointing his radar gun at me, staring at me, but for some reason he doesn't decide to pursue me (an experience many of us have actually had).

Maybe it's an off day for him and he just doesn't care. Maybe he was confused about the speed limit on that stretch. Maybe he is waiting for a bigger fish. Maybe he likes my car (or skin) color and decided to look the other way. Regardless, I got away with speeding.

If I then at some future date pointed to that as legalizing my speeding for all time, that would be ignorant nonsense. Yet we see this exactly this sort of childish argument in all realms: Some guy deducts something unlawful for years and then one day the tax man says "Uh no...that isn't allowed", and they point to their prior years as if that makes it suddenly lawful. That getting away with it before grandfathers it in or something.

Some random Apple employee writing a story linked it (or a tax employee accepting a tax return, or a cop giving a pass to speeding), therefore it is officially sanctioned for all time. Give me a break. That isn't how any of this works.

But it makes for a lot of crybaby stories.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#415

Post by smnrchrds »

owenmarshall wrote: post #400
smnrchrds wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The housing market continues to show a preference towards communities with HOAs. Is it the housing market as homeowners who favours HOAs, or is it the builders who favour them? Are HOAs opted in by homeowners in existing communities because of their benefits, or do builders create them force them upon new communities because it benefits them somehow? I am asking because while I do not have any knowledge of HOAs, I…

I’m assuming that the long term contract also carries with it a warranty? So if your furnace fails while in the contract it is repaired/replaced free or at a pro rated price? If so, I could see people liking it as it serves the same function as an HOA: a hedge against bad things happening. Water heater died? Plumber comes out, no charge. Neighbor starting a junkyard on his front lawn? HOA sends a letter, no confronta…

> I’m assuming that the long term contract also carries with it a warranty?

I believe so. But the price is so unreasonably high that you could replace the furnace literally 3 to 5 times and you would still be ahead compared to renting the furnace. How many people would purchase an extended warranty that is priced at multiples of the price of the object they are buying? More than none, but a very small number. New rentals are signed overwhelmingly by builders and not homeowners.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#417

Post by akerro »

It's similar situation to removal of slave/master terminology from IT. Without context such accusations are pointless. "I don't like the word you use so you are not allowed to use it." We're seeing the same thing. Apple doesn't like you using the word that's also name of a drug, so you're gone. No context needed.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#419

Post by glitchc »

mmaunder wrote: post #23

You’re angry. I’ve felt this in a trademark lawsuit. You think the world should get behind you and change the corrupt system. My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the transition. They kind of have a point which doesn’t make them right, but they hold all the cards and you will lose this one and regret the wasted bandwidth.

I concur with OP. Rebrand ASAP. Apple is looking for an excuse to shut your app down so that they can replace it with an in-house version. This is on purpose, they want you to feel outraged. If you take the bait and start a legal battle, you’ll play right into their hands. They will drag it out for years or until your money runs out.

Far better to keep the money you have earned, recognizing that even the rebrand won’t save your app in the long run. It’s done.

Re: Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

#420

Post by andai »

panta wrote: post #375
webmobdev wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the transition. Apple will definitely appreciate it if all of us would just shut up and let them screw us. While I appreciate your well-meaning advise to the author - pick your battles in life carefully - I'd like to add that using your anger constructively at some injustice is a positive move to…

Apple doesn’t give a scheise about developers anymore. IMHO this is going to devalue the platform in the long term, but they seem to think differently.

Consumers don't give a scheise about developers either.
Post reply on HN