Live data from Hacker News

Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

daringfireball.net

1–10 of 90 posts

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#2
This is the part I'm most worried about:

As is clear from the screenshots, Qingwen doesn’t bombard you with words like “cock” and “penis” the moment you start it up. No, the Apple employee who took those screenshots specifically searched for those words. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the same thing as opening a website that contains swear words (like the page you’re reading, for instance) on the iPhone. If they don’t want Qingwen on the iPhone because it can show you “objectionable material”, then why allow Safari, Mail, YouTube and pretty much any other app, which can easily show you all sorts of even more “objectionable material”?

I don't like the idea that reviewers are doing their best to try and make my apps fail approval. That comes across to me as a developer that Apple doesn't want me to succeed. And based on how they have been treating developers lately, that definitely seems to be the case.

At the very least, this shows that the execs at Apple at least know about the problem. I know it's hard to miss, but I honestly thought they could have not heard about these issues by now. It's that bad. The utter silence that their corporate culture encourages is creating a horrible situation for them and for us. They need to realize that the traditional ways of secrecy and black boxing that normally works for other areas of their business is not going to work here.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#3
post #2

This is the part I'm most worried about: As is clear from the screenshots, Qingwen doesn’t bombard you with words like “cock” and “penis” the moment you start it up. No, the Apple employee who took those screenshots specifically searched for those words. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the same thing as opening a website that contains swear words (like the page you’re reading, for instance) on the iPhone. If they don’t…

"We’ve reviewed your submission and determined that we cannot post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store at this time. The following criteria did not meet App Store guidelines: Application stopped responding after iPhone was thrown against concrete.

Regards,

iPhone Developer Program"

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#4
How can a person on one hand say "Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear words" and on that other hand know that the app was being banned because they wanted a 17+ rating due to the availability, to quote the article, of the words "shit, fuck, and cunt, specifically." Are not the former common swear words, and is not the restriction of material from wider audiences censorship?

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#6
The problem that I see is that Apple has no business being in the censorship or rating business period. Sure there are "business reasons" to perform these roles, but they are antithetical to a free society.

The free market answer would be, if you don't like it don't buy an iPhone. That's great, but as technology marches forward there can only be a finite number of companies with the skills and resources to create smart phones, Apple being one of the nicest offerings. This concern will probably never effect enough consumers for this to ever hurt Apple's bottom line, and so they will never feel a free market pressure to change their behavior.

A sort of net neutrality type of guarantee must be struck here, market forces will not prevail because this simply isn't an issue enough people care about. Rights are being infringed however and that must be addressed.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#7
It's nice that Schiller took the time to respond, but his letter doesn't make them look any better. They're still acting like useless self-appointed meddling busybodies with rigor mortis of the anal sphincter. I can accept them setting standards for hardware and software quality, but when they start imposing their standards on the flow of information, services (Google Voice) and ideas, they've lost me forever.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#8

The problem that I see is that Apple has no business being in the censorship or rating business period. Sure there are "business reasons" to perform these roles, but they are antithetical to a free society. The free market answer would be, if you don't like it don't buy an iPhone. That's great, but as technology marches forward there can only be a finite number of companies with the skills and resources to create sma…

I don't think that a rating system is antithetical to a free society. It is reasonable for consumers to want to know if there is material they would consider objectionable in a product, and it is reasonable for businesses to provide this information. A problem that Apple does have is that they appear to be applying standards for what might be considered objectionable in inconsistent ways.

Re: Phil Schiller Responds to App Store Dictionary Censoring

#9
post #4

How can a person on one hand say "Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear words" and on that other hand know that the app was being banned because they wanted a 17+ rating due to the availability, to quote the article, of the words "shit, fuck, and cunt, specifically." Are not the former common swear words, and is not the restriction of material from wider audiences…

Yes. Gruber touts Schiller's response as 'thoughtful', but what Schiller says is inconsistent with Gruber's own excerpted reporting so far. Bottom-line:

Dictionary.com's app contains 'fuck', was released in April (before parental controls), and now has an "age 4+" rating.

NinjaWords was given 'fuck' as one of several examples of problem vulgar terms in screenshots and told to resubmit and/or wait for parental controls that would put them in the "17+" category.

At the very least, Apple's prior guidance to NinjaWords was confusing and incomplete, if it did not clearly state that 'fuck' was fine and the other slang was the problem.

Schiller (at least as Gruber has excerpted) doesn't address this failing at all.

Post reply on HN