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

Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

magazine.artstation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 216 posts

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#81

Post by thaumasiotes »

laumars wrote: post #74
thaumasiotes wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll quote from Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical ( https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EU96DSK/ ) (I'm pulling text from subchapter III.2.7, "Aphrodite", but my pulls are not necessarily contiguous in the original.) > Aphrodite's sphere of activity is immediately and sensibly apparent: the joyous consummation of sexuality. Aphrodisia , aphrodisiazein as a verb, denotes quite simply the act of love, and in the Odyssey ,…

There was a lot that happened in Ancient Greece that doesn’t happen now. If your entire point about it being sexual is based on the sensibilities of a population 2000 years ago then I suggest perhaps your view of the world needs an update. Eg Things like blood sports are now widely disliked and we no longer believe in multiple in Greek gods nor that the sun is pulled up via chariot.

>>>> I think what they would say is that the statue was not created nor are photos provided with an aim to ‘appeal to a prurient interest’.

>>> It would be hard to defend that claim as to the creation of the statue.

On the other hand, I feel fairly confident in claiming that women wearing nothing but a sheet that doesn't quite cover their butt are considered sexy in the modern day too.

Would you believe that, say, souvenir postcards of nude Aphrodites sell better than souvenir postcards of Zeus? Why do you think that might be?

If you want to argue that the Venus de Milo is "nonsexual" nudity because it's historical art, you need to deal with its historical significance, which is as a tawdry sex icon.

If you want to argue that the way the Greeks viewed the statue doesn't matter, you need to deal with the way a statue of a naked woman failing to cover herself with a sheet would be viewed in the modern day, which is... as a tawdry sex icon.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#82

Post by lozenge »

manfredo wrote: post #24
ReptileMan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm... Isn't this app called web browser? There is not much more than it is needed when it is for consuming content.

Yeah, it's a web browser in essence. But the UI, scrolling behavior, etc. are all handled by the app rather than the website. The result is often a much cleaner experience, especially compared to the average website's mobile web experience. There's also often extended functionality, like saving entire galleries of images, saving threads, etc. What I'd imagine Artstation doing is releasing a "generic art showcase app"…

And how will they include ads? API users can just not display those.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#83

Post by fulafel »

DanBC wrote: post #60
yulaow wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, their solution just destroyed whoever used nude art or in general their bodies as a mean of expressing themselves while doing nothing to abusers (especially pornbots are still active just as before)

Sure, but they're not responding because they're puritan idiots, they're responding because not doing so risks their business. Specifically, they risked being added to European block lists in use by almost all EU ISPs. Of course there are ways around this, but no business wants to tell its users to install Tor Browser Bundle to visit a website.

Do you have a reference for this block list rumor? Sounds worrying.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#84

Post by pjc50 »

DanBC wrote: post #51
pmlnr wrote: post #38

In the Tumblr ban threads, people mentioned that all of these companies should simply make their progressive web apps and give the finger to the puritan idiots calling these decisions. I agree. The questions, however, are: how much growth can be achieved without play store/ios app? Is it viable? If yes, how? Can art be more important for a site (and it's investors), than immediate, quick growth?

Tumblr was sharing images of child sexual abuse, not just regular porn. It's only when they discovered the images of child sexual abuse that they took action. They'd left user generated porn content alone for many years. That's not "puritan idiots", that's people who are aware of the harm caused by the distribution of images of child sexual abuse to the survivors of that abuse and to their business from law enforceme…

I don't buy this on timing grounds; there will have been people posting child abuse and moderators deleting it from day 1 of Tumblr. What changed now? It has to have been FOSTA/SESTA fallout or pressure from their payment processor. Or the cost/benefit of the moderation got out of hand.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#85

Post by pjc50 »

fulafel wrote: post #83
DanBC wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but they're not responding because they're puritan idiots, they're responding because not doing so risks their business. Specifically, they risked being added to European block lists in use by almost all EU ISPs. Of course there are ways around this, but no business wants to tell its users to install Tor Browser Bundle to visit a website.

Do you have a reference for this block list rumor? Sounds worrying.

Most ISPs use the "Internet Watch Foundation" blacklist. I'm not convinced that there was any real risk of Tumblr being added to it en masse.

(I believe there was an incident a few years ago where an image of an Iron Maiden album cover on wikipedia got flagged, though)

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#86

Post by LeifCarrotson »

thinkingemote wrote: post #68
pmlnr wrote: post #38

In the Tumblr ban threads, people mentioned that all of these companies should simply make their progressive web apps and give the finger to the puritan idiots calling these decisions. I agree. The questions, however, are: how much growth can be achieved without play store/ios app? Is it viable? If yes, how? Can art be more important for a site (and it's investors), than immediate, quick growth?

With PWAs that are installed to a phone's home screen, and where Firefox is installed with privacy and blocking extensions, does it launch the website in a Firefox runtime with these extensions running? My question is, are PWAs a way for platforms to promote websites with less privacy and adblocking? Similar to how an electron based app which just runs a website (like Discord) can also get around user added blocking…

Yes, but if getting around app store blocks is the only reason to use such a channel, the only apps that will be delivered this way are those that would be blocked in the app store. That's a tough crowd to support.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#88

Post by pjc50 »

krn wrote: post #69
brian-armstrong wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they'll want to, if they're ad supported. Adblockers don't run on native apps, and in general apps have better access to relevant ad sell info. A lot of ad supported companies are giving up on the web.

I take this as the best explanation why Reddit is pushing its app so hard, even though it has a one of the most visited websites in the world. It's not about user engagement with content. It's about user engagement with ads.

Indeed. A lot of work has been put into degrading the mobile experience with banners and prompts and delays to force users onto the app. Sensible people use BaconReader, but I wonder how long that will be allowed to continue.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#89

Post by qwertay »

askvictor wrote: post #42
pmlnr wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is if you find the .apk from a source you trust, and this is not a simple trick.

F-droid is generally trustworthy, and has put a lot of effort into this.

Fdroid is the only 3rd party source of APKs I trust.

Re: Google Takes Down Artstation Android App for Explicit Content

#90

Post by josephg »

ttoinou wrote: post #71
Fnoord wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also an example of the USA shoving down its morals to the rest of the world. Especially areas where partial nudity is accepted. One of the very first things in life a baby does is searching the nipple (which is darker than the rest of the breast) and sucking on it. Breast are very much part of nature and human life, yet we censor it as if it is something which shouldn't be seen. At the same time, we have no iss…

but let me as European at least apply the norms of my country Why do you want others to adapt to your culture ? Typically an european attitude if you ask me ;)

I know you write this in jest, but the problem is that when Germans talk purely to other Germans on Facebook, they still have to do so according to American cultural standards. I can stage a protest on the street outside here in Melbourne and the social rules, expectations and conventions that I am subject to are Australian. But there’s no equivalent online - if I organise that protest with other Australians on FB or Twitter, the discussion is bizarrely at the whim of Californian corporate moral police.

I love my iPhone to bits but the fact that I’m prevented by a US company from buying apps with sexual content is grating in the same way. Why is a nipple considered harmful to children while graphic displays of violence aren’t? I will never understand that norm. I wouldn’t have to grapple with it, except that my own phone enforces your nonsense moral code. It’s super aggravating.

Post reply on HN