3 ms·

Apps that do controversial things with respect to Apple or Google seem to get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. What does it even mean for

Apps that do controversial things with respect to Apple or Google seem to get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. What does it even mean for code in a packaged program to be "visible"? It should be invisible! That's the whole point of packaging!

sqldba 11y ago
Yes. It's bad news and exactly why free software supporters need to keep fighting the good fight and spreading the word. We can't allow technical oligarchies control over what we do with our computing, enacting stupid policies, with no outside visibility or accountability.
eli 11y ago
Apps that do non-controversial things get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot too.
deelowe 11y ago
> Apps that do controversial things with respect to Apple or Google seem to get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. This is regarding the chrome web store, not the play store. Also, I'm aware of Apple taking a pretty heavy handed approach, but I'm not convinced Google has a history of this. > What does it even mean for code in a packaged program to be "visible"? It should be invisible! That's the whole point of packaging! Perhaps you are assuming this is the play store instead of the chrome web store? Web store apps are just web pages. They want to ensure the packages are easy to inspect and understand. It's a rule that appears to be attempting to maintain open web standards. Given that this is HN, I assume that's enough of a justification for anyone reading this comment.
- emodendroket 11y ago
  It's hard to wonder if Google doesn't "have a history" when they banned all ad blockers from the Play Store and are (maybe) rejecting ad blockers from the Chrome Web store for vague technical reasons, particularly when their business model revolves around ads.
- cballard 11y ago
  I am fully aware of which app store this is. Chrome web apps support NaCL. Why do JS-based apps need to have readable source code? https://developer.chrome.com/native-client/devguide/distributing https://developer.chrome.com/native-client/devguide/distribu...
markbao 11y ago
Could this just be survivorship bias? We don't hear about all the non-ad-blockers that got rejected by Apple or Google for the same reasons. If they wanted to ban apps like this, they would likely just ban them, instead of stirring the pot by taking them down and then putting them back online.
kalleboo 11y ago
All apps get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. Apps that do controversial things end up on the front page of Hacker News/Reddit, so you actually hear about them. The other apps just... die.

sqldba 11y ago

Yes. It's bad news and exactly why free software supporters need to keep fighting the good fight and spreading the word. We can't allow technical oligarchies control over what we do with our computing, enacting stupid policies, with no outside visibility or accountability.

eli 11y ago

Apps that do non-controversial things get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot too.

deelowe 11y ago

> Apps that do controversial things with respect to Apple or Google seem to get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. This is regarding the chrome web store, not the play store. Also, I'm aware of Apple taking a pretty heavy handed approach, but I'm not convinced Google has a history of this. > What does it even mean for code in a packaged program to be "visible"? It should be invisible! That's the whole point of packaging! Perhaps you are assuming this is the play store instead of the chrome web store? Web store apps are just web pages. They want to ensure the packages are easy to inspect and understand. It's a rule that appears to be attempting to maintain open web standards. Given that this is HN, I assume that's enough of a justification for anyone reading this comment.

emodendroket 11y ago
It's hard to wonder if Google doesn't "have a history" when they banned all ad blockers from the Play Store and are (maybe) rejecting ad blockers from the Chrome Web store for vague technical reasons, particularly when their business model revolves around ads.
cballard 11y ago
I am fully aware of which app store this is. Chrome web apps support NaCL. Why do JS-based apps need to have readable source code? https://developer.chrome.com/native-client/devguide/distributing https://developer.chrome.com/native-client/devguide/distribu...

markbao 11y ago

Could this just be survivorship bias? We don't hear about all the non-ad-blockers that got rejected by Apple or Google for the same reasons. If they wanted to ban apps like this, they would likely just ban them, instead of stirring the pot by taking them down and then putting them back online.

kalleboo 11y ago

All apps get rejected for seemingly random technical reasons a lot. Apps that do controversial things end up on the front page of Hacker News/Reddit, so you actually hear about them. The other apps just... die.