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

Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

gigaom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#61

Post by sentenza »

hawkharris wrote: post #20

In related news, developers are welcome to cast shootings, stabbings, explosions and other gory images. Graphic violence seems to enjoy greater protection than nudity, both culturally and legally, in the U.S. For example, there's the variable obscenity standard, which shields children from sexual images but not images of extreme violence: http://www.communitydefense.org/cdcdocs/obscenityman/ch10.pd...

I hope the prolonged exposure to low-sex-high-violence content from the US doesn't damage our moral compass over here. When I was a kid, there was still the occasional female toplessness in movies targeted at the whole family.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#62

Post by mkching »

true_religion wrote: post #60
vanattab wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not religious but that does not mean I think its fine to watch porn. Much of the porn out there is absolutely disturbing (rape and what not) and the people who produce that grabage are the worest of the worest. Not all of it is that way of course but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. I don't think the goverment should ban porn or anything but I have zero problems private companies banning it on…

I don't usually do this but... > I think its fine to watch porn. and > ... but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. Seem to be directly contradictory. Unless you're saying its a-okay to do unhealthy things every so often [which is also valid].

The original quote was "but that does _not_ mean I think its fine to watch porn" (emphasis added).

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#63

Post by Ensorceled »

gtaylor wrote: post #24
fidotron wrote: post #2

It'll be interesting to see if they stick to this globally. The distinctly American prudishness regarding sex is almost a mirror image of large parts of the world with respect to cinematic violence. It's part of why you can be so sure these west coast companies will never monopolise the market in Germany, for example.

That prudish stereotype is a bit over-blown by a smaller (but louder) subset of Americans that really are prudish. I'm in the "bible belt" (southeast US), and even here there's plenty of people who don't get too up in arms about this kind of stuff. The internet has been the great equalizer for the younger generations. Smut, graphic video, violence, and all sorts of other things are only a keystroke away.

It's not a "stereotype" when it's enforced with the full weight of the law in some cases and by self censorship in many others.

If Google and Apple feel the need to restrict adult content to the level they do it's not really a stereotype; it's a real problem.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#64

Post by girvo »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #52
girvo wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I spoke to some Canonical devs, it's still being worked on, with a target for 14.04 as an alpha I think. I'd love to have ARM Ubuntu-everything; ARM laptop, Ubuntu TV stick, Ubuntu phone that turns into a full desktop when plugged in... The tech is so nearly there. Sigh, one can dream :) EDIT: the main issue is ARMs lack of anything remotely similar to a BIOS. That's sort of changing, linux now has some stu…

I'm familiar with the BIOS issue, the devtree work is an interesting response to that. I wonder if they are waiting for 14.04 so that they can use Mir as the compositing platform. As for protocols, good question. I see the streaming protocols which work reasonably well, I keep hoping for something like the DisplayLink protocol over ethernet with say WPA2, basically "connect" have it show up as a frame buffer to your…

Yeah devtree was what I was thinking of. And yes, Mir was the reason given to me, though these are just devs, not spokespeople for Canonical.

Also, I just giggled, cause I just remembered we have "streaming" in X as is, from decades back... Though it's not quite the same thing I suppose!

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#65

Post by tempodox »

What a bunch of hypocritical Presbyterian nuns. A 3-feet pile of dead bodies is OK on TV for 16-year olds, but people actually undressing before having sex is morally corrupting. I propose capital punishment for every U.S.-ian who was not born from a virgin.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#66

Post by sdegutis »

sdegutis wrote: post #58
gtaylor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pornography is awful stuff. It exploits the way our minds work, and ruins peace and happiness. Is it OK for you to tell someone else what they are allowed to watch? That's the sticking point, and what is being done by Google (and so many others). You may not like porn, but there are a massive number that are OK with it. Is it right for you to impose your morals on others? Definitely don't take this as inflammatory,…

> I personally (as an American) don't want my morals and beliefs forced on others Impossible. At the end of the day, all laws and rules come from someone's morals and beliefs, regardless of who that is or what they've named those morals and beliefs.

I honestly can't even guess why someone downvoted that.

Morals/beliefs are a fundamental part of human thinking. Whether it's named, whether it comes from a religion or just a person's own experience in life, it always exists in the brain. That's kind of a fact. So, pretty confused about the downvote right about now...

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#67

Post by gtaylor »

GnwbZHiU wrote: post #57
gtaylor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pornography is awful stuff. It exploits the way our minds work, and ruins peace and happiness. Is it OK for you to tell someone else what they are allowed to watch? That's the sticking point, and what is being done by Google (and so many others). You may not like porn, but there are a massive number that are OK with it. Is it right for you to impose your morals on others? Definitely don't take this as inflammatory,…

On the other hand, you also can't impose Google (and others) to sell porn. you may like porn, but some sellers don't like it. so what's the problem?

Nobody is imposing porn selling on Google.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#68

Post by gtaylor »

sdegutis wrote: post #66
sdegutis wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally (as an American) don't want my morals and beliefs forced on others Impossible. At the end of the day, all laws and rules come from someone's morals and beliefs, regardless of who that is or what they've named those morals and beliefs.

I honestly can't even guess why someone downvoted that. Morals/beliefs are a fundamental part of human thinking. Whether it's named, whether it comes from a religion or just a person's own experience in life, it always exists in the brain. That's kind of a fact. So, pretty confused about the downvote right about now...

Because it's a bit petty and flat out wrong. Many laws exist not for moral reasons, but to keep the whole system running. If we were allowed to murder one another without consequences, society would be vastly different. If we were allowed to cheat on our taxes without punishment, the system itself may collapse.

While there are certainly buffoons legislating their morals on others, I think the greater chunk of modern legislation is corporate/profit driven rather than this pressing of morals you mentioned. There are, of course, exceptions, but I think your comments harped on only one motivator (of many) for legislation.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#69

Post by sdegutis »

gtaylor wrote: post #68
sdegutis wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't even guess why someone downvoted that. Morals/beliefs are a fundamental part of human thinking. Whether it's named, whether it comes from a religion or just a person's own experience in life, it always exists in the brain. That's kind of a fact. So, pretty confused about the downvote right about now...

Because it's a bit petty and flat out wrong. Many laws exist not for moral reasons, but to keep the whole system running. If we were allowed to murder one another without consequences, society would be vastly different. If we were allowed to cheat on our taxes without punishment, the system itself may collapse. While there are certainly buffoons legislating their morals on others, I think the greater chunk of modern…

> If we were allowed to murder one another without consequences, society would be vastly different

There's an inherent belief that the difference in society would be bad. Is that true? Bad is pretty qualitative, so it comes down to a belief.

> If we were allowed to cheat on our taxes without punishment, the system itself may collapse.

There's an inherent belief that "the system" is a good thing, and that we don't want it to collapse. But again, this is a subjective belief, not universally held.

Your comment is based on implicit beliefs of what is "best" for society (or even humanity) as a whole. I'm pretty sure you can't prove that your beliefs are "correct", because I'm sure most people would argue that subjective beliefs can't be correct or incorrect, they're just beliefs.

Re: Google makes it official: no porn apps for Chromecast

#70

Post by sdegutis »

sdegutis wrote: post #69
gtaylor wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's a bit petty and flat out wrong. Many laws exist not for moral reasons, but to keep the whole system running. If we were allowed to murder one another without consequences, society would be vastly different. If we were allowed to cheat on our taxes without punishment, the system itself may collapse. While there are certainly buffoons legislating their morals on others, I think the greater chunk of modern…

> If we were allowed to murder one another without consequences, society would be vastly different There's an inherent belief that the difference in society would be bad. Is that true? Bad is pretty qualitative, so it comes down to a belief. > If we were allowed to cheat on our taxes without punishment, the system itself may collapse. There's an inherent belief that "the system" is a good thing, and that we don't wan…

By the way, my debating this point does not imply that I agree with it.
Post reply on HN