3 ms·

Google banned disconnect.me -- a popular privacy app that blocks various tracking mechanisms (without blocking advertising itself) -- from Android[0]. Apple had

by kentonv 11y ago

Google banned disconnect.me -- a popular privacy app that blocks various tracking mechanisms (without blocking advertising itself) -- from Android[0]. Apple had no problem with the iOS version. It seems that each big centralized walled garden has their targets. [0] http://www.businessinsider.com/why-google-banned-connect-mobile-2014-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/why-google-banned-connect-mob...

panarky 11y ago
> It seems that each big centralized walled garden has their targets. This is false equivalence. Just because you can find an example where Google banned an app does not mean that all platforms are equally unethical. Google Play simply doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. That's the reason the disconnect.me app was removed. It's telling that other apps from Disconnect are still available on Google Play. Disconnect Search[1], for example, is contrary to Google's interests, but Google does not ban it because it doesn't interfere with other apps. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.disconnect.search https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.disconnect....
- kentonv 11y ago
  > does not mean that all platforms are equally unethical. I would agree that Google is more ethical than Apple, for now. But they still do bad things, and they could easily get worse in the future. We need to move away from this kind of centralization, so that no one has the power to unilaterally gag legitimate content. > Google Play doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. Almost every app "interferes" with others in some way. The "no interference" clause seems clearly intended to target interference which was unwanted by the user, but that is not how Google applied it here. If the user expressly intends that the app interfere with other apps, then I think that it is unethical to prohibit them from doing so on their own device. Disconnect is not malware; users install it for exactly the purpose it implements.
  - Natanael_L 11y ago
    Interference here is targeted functional manipulation. Not fifth degree unintended side effects. The user's wish is not considered. There's a reason not a lot Xposed modules are on Google Play. Don't like it? Enable 3rd party sources (a function added by Google!) and install those apps from elsewhere.
    - kentonv 11y ago
      > 3rd party sources (a function added by Google!) It's great that Google allows this. That's one thing that makes them better than Apple (in my opinion). However, it is still the case that being banned from the Play store can kill an app. Few users know how to sideload things. In a world where there are several competing app markets that users can easily switch between, it would not be a big deal for Google to refuse to carry apps they don't like on their market, but when 99% of the users realistically can't get apps anywhere else than Google Play, then it becomes problematic.
      - Natanael_L 11y ago
        And then developers who get their apps handicapped by apps promoted next to them takes their apps down. I understand your reasoning, but Google's focus is the ecosystem. If it was trivial for everybody to disable all adds and in-app purchase functions in all free apps with just a few taps, there'd be far fewer of exactly those apps you want to use. So the rest of us simply have to get Xposed from outside Google Play and root with unofficial methods to make all apps, including proprietary ones, behave exactly as we want on our devices.
- Dylan16807 11y ago
  > Google Play simply doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. Or apps that play youtube videos while not having focus. There is no defense to that rule. Just trying to act the same as a desktop browser, with ads intact, is not allowed.
nrb 11y ago
Google's response: "Our Google Play policies (specifically clause 4.4) have long prohibited apps that interfere with other apps (such as by altering their functionality, or removing their way of making money). We apply this policy uniformly — and Android developers strongly support it. All apps must comply with these policies and there’s over 200 privacy apps available in Google Play that do." https://theintercept.com/2015/06/23/google-disconnect-antitrust-privacy-app-europe/ https://theintercept.com/2015/06/23/google-disconnect-antitr...

by kentonv 11y ago

panarky 11y ago

> It seems that each big centralized walled garden has their targets. This is false equivalence. Just because you can find an example where Google banned an app does not mean that all platforms are equally unethical. Google Play simply doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. That's the reason the disconnect.me app was removed. It's telling that other apps from Disconnect are still available on Google Play. Disconnect Search[1], for example, is contrary to Google's interests, but Google does not ban it because it doesn't interfere with other apps. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.disconnect.search https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.disconnect....

kentonv 11y ago
> does not mean that all platforms are equally unethical. I would agree that Google is more ethical than Apple, for now. But they still do bad things, and they could easily get worse in the future. We need to move away from this kind of centralization, so that no one has the power to unilaterally gag legitimate content. > Google Play doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. Almost every app "interferes" with others in some way. The "no interference" clause seems clearly intended to target interference which was unwanted by the user, but that is not how Google applied it here. If the user expressly intends that the app interfere with other apps, then I think that it is unethical to prohibit them from doing so on their own device. Disconnect is not malware; users install it for exactly the purpose it implements.
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  Interference here is targeted functional manipulation. Not fifth degree unintended side effects. The user's wish is not considered. There's a reason not a lot Xposed modules are on Google Play. Don't like it? Enable 3rd party sources (a function added by Google!) and install those apps from elsewhere.
  - kentonv 11y ago
    > 3rd party sources (a function added by Google!) It's great that Google allows this. That's one thing that makes them better than Apple (in my opinion). However, it is still the case that being banned from the Play store can kill an app. Few users know how to sideload things. In a world where there are several competing app markets that users can easily switch between, it would not be a big deal for Google to refuse to carry apps they don't like on their market, but when 99% of the users realistically can't get apps anywhere else than Google Play, then it becomes problematic.
    - Natanael_L 11y ago
      And then developers who get their apps handicapped by apps promoted next to them takes their apps down. I understand your reasoning, but Google's focus is the ecosystem. If it was trivial for everybody to disable all adds and in-app purchase functions in all free apps with just a few taps, there'd be far fewer of exactly those apps you want to use. So the rest of us simply have to get Xposed from outside Google Play and root with unofficial methods to make all apps, including proprietary ones, behave exactly as we want on our devices.
Dylan16807 11y ago
> Google Play simply doesn't allow apps that interfere with other apps. Or apps that play youtube videos while not having focus. There is no defense to that rule. Just trying to act the same as a desktop browser, with ads intact, is not allowed.

nrb 11y ago

Google's response: "Our Google Play policies (specifically clause 4.4) have long prohibited apps that interfere with other apps (such as by altering their functionality, or removing their way of making money). We apply this policy uniformly — and Android developers strongly support it. All apps must comply with these policies and there’s over 200 privacy apps available in Google Play that do." https://theintercept.com/2015/06/23/google-disconnect-antitrust-privacy-app-europe/ https://theintercept.com/2015/06/23/google-disconnect-antitr...