51–60 of 78 posts
There's a reason why centrally curated platforms are dangerous, and why Free Software Principals reject them.
What's with the downvotes? More censorship?
Reminds me of Apple's censorship of US assassinations: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/538kan/apple-just... There's a reason why centrally curated platforms are dangerous, and why Free Software Principals reject them. What's with the downvotes? More censorship?
Isn't this just "Apple complies with local laws in China (etc.) requiring them to remove VPN apps and hand over data belonging to political dissidents?" Greatfire is right: Apple could indeed take a stand for freedom - if the shareholders demanded it and and were willing to shut down Apple's iPhone sales and manufacturing business, which is responsible for the bulk of Apple's income and profits. Google famously left…
Reminds me of Apple's censorship of US assassinations: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/538kan/apple-just... There's a reason why centrally curated platforms are dangerous, and why Free Software Principals reject them. What's with the downvotes? More censorship?
That app shows up in the app store. What changed?
For context, the app was created to track human rights abuses during the disclosure of the US's covert surveillance and assassination program in the Middle East. This was a scandal for the United States because it was disclosed that they were killing innocent people with knowledge and through reclassification, even killing children (internally using the terminology "fun sized terrorists").
The pressure to remove the app was brought to Apple during a sweep to control the scandal and public perception of the program.
(Given the public conversation has moves far past the scandal, and the Trump administration continues the indiscriminate assassinations, that censorship program does seem to have succeeded)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do retail entities refer to the Super Bowl by pseudonyms (e.g "The Big Game") rather than its true name?
This is a good question, and there's some more information about it here: https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2013/01/articles/advertiser... In summary: "If “Super Bowl” is used by an individual or business to describe the event and not used for commercial intent, then individuals and businesses can use the term. For example, a grocery store can say “Make sure to stock up on chips for the Super Bowl” but the store canno…
Maybe everyone is afraid to be first into the breach, like so many avoided using "Happy Birthday to You" for decades in fear of the bogus, broad copyright claim
Please note that while Apple itself may censor applications in regions, creators of the apps may choose to limit their distributions as well. For example: Bank of America's mobile banking app isn't available in Pakistan where I currently am, but this website wouldn't differentiate between that type of censorship or Apple's censorship. But, personally, I still think this is a great idea!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That app shows up in the app store. What changed?
It mentions it in the article. Supporters keep putting it back up and Apple continuously takes it down (under pressure of the US gov). For context, the app was created to track human rights abuses during the disclosure of the US's covert surveillance and assassination program in the Middle East. This was a scandal for the United States because it was disclosed that they were killing innocent people with knowledge and…
It's also a fairly low-value proposition for a native app, in my opinion. It's really the kind of content worthy of a web page, that's about it. Not sure that contributes to Apple's vendetta against it, however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It mentions it in the article. Supporters keep putting it back up and Apple continuously takes it down (under pressure of the US gov). For context, the app was created to track human rights abuses during the disclosure of the US's covert surveillance and assassination program in the Middle East. This was a scandal for the United States because it was disclosed that they were killing innocent people with knowledge and…
Just speculation, but I wonder if Apple kicks it out simply because it is controversial and very political, and they just don't want to deal with it. It's also a fairly low-value proposition for a native app, in my opinion. It's really the kind of content worthy of a web page, that's about it. Not sure that contributes to Apple's vendetta against it, however.
I agree with you, and think its endemic of the app ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would hesitate to call that "censorship" at all. Some apps simply aren't relevant in a country because they're associated with a physical service which doesn't exist there. For example, a number of food delivery apps (like Uber Eats and Grubhub) don't operate in China, and as such have chosen to not make their app available there.
And nobody ever leaves the country. Or if they do, they're totally willing to go through the entire giant hassle of switching their account for a few days.