3 ms·

Honestly don't think they should allow apps like hide Hillary or punch trump. They're low value and only promote hate towards the person.

by dawnerd 10y ago

grej 10y ago
Yeah, I'm of two minds on it. On the one hand, it reflects the current climate and allowing both would be the more "free speechy" way to go. But on the other, I think apps that target an individual person - any individual not just a political leader - I think are exactly as you said - really low value and promoting hate. Either way they go, they should clearly stick to one policy for both sides.
iLoch 10y ago
Not sure I'd put the two apps in the same category other than the fact that they're both political. I haven't played them, but one is appears to be raising awareness about very controversial (and possibly corrupt) behaviour, the other is inciting violence against a presidential candidate. If Apple wants to say "no politics allowed" that's fine by me, they can do what they want. But I think they should follow through with that, and not take sides. At the same time, they should be free to operate however they please within the confines of the law. So to me the only thing wrong with what they're doing is that it just looks bad.
wyager 10y ago
How does "Hide it Hillary" promote hate? It's satirizing something she actually did in real life. "Punch Trump", on the other hand, has violence in it, but even that is not sufficient to claim that it promotes violence.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  As pointless as they may seem, the web has a long history of games allowing users to pretend to punch various celebrities, and the "punch famous person X" genre probably predates that. There have also been TV shows like Celebrity Deathmatch, and IIRC one popular show for teens/tweens had its main character use her computer to put the face of another character into a boxing simulation. I think the cat is out of the bag on the punch X genre for now, but society's tastes can still change over time.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    Very curious why some disagree with a factual description of the history of a particular genre of game..
the8472 10y ago
Why should they police what users can do with their devices at all? Providing strong guidance for the purpose of security seems reasonable considering that not everyone is computer-literate. Anything else, that is policing content, seems self-serving (upholding brand image or whatever), dictatorial (imposing moral values, such as nudity == evil) and user-hostile.
- dawnerd 10y ago
  Oh completely agree. But since they've built this walled garden of apps it just makes sense for them to be consistent.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

Honestly don't think they should allow apps like hide Hillary or punch trump. They're low value and only promote hate towards the person.

by dawnerd 10y ago

Honestly don't think they should allow apps like hide Hillary or punch trump. They're low value and only promote hate towards the person.

grej 10y ago

Yeah, I'm of two minds on it. On the one hand, it reflects the current climate and allowing both would be the more "free speechy" way to go. But on the other, I think apps that target an individual person - any individual not just a political leader - I think are exactly as you said - really low value and promoting hate. Either way they go, they should clearly stick to one policy for both sides.

iLoch 10y ago

Not sure I'd put the two apps in the same category other than the fact that they're both political. I haven't played them, but one is appears to be raising awareness about very controversial (and possibly corrupt) behaviour, the other is inciting violence against a presidential candidate. If Apple wants to say "no politics allowed" that's fine by me, they can do what they want. But I think they should follow through with that, and not take sides. At the same time, they should be free to operate however they please within the confines of the law. So to me the only thing wrong with what they're doing is that it just looks bad.

wyager 10y ago

How does "Hide it Hillary" promote hate? It's satirizing something she actually did in real life. "Punch Trump", on the other hand, has violence in it, but even that is not sufficient to claim that it promotes violence.

nitrogen 10y ago
As pointless as they may seem, the web has a long history of games allowing users to pretend to punch various celebrities, and the "punch famous person X" genre probably predates that. There have also been TV shows like Celebrity Deathmatch, and IIRC one popular show for teens/tweens had its main character use her computer to put the face of another character into a boxing simulation. I think the cat is out of the bag on the punch X genre for now, but society's tastes can still change over time.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  Very curious why some disagree with a factual description of the history of a particular genre of game..

the8472 10y ago

Why should they police what users can do with their devices at all? Providing strong guidance for the purpose of security seems reasonable considering that not everyone is computer-literate. Anything else, that is policing content, seems self-serving (upholding brand image or whatever), dictatorial (imposing moral values, such as nudity == evil) and user-hostile.

dawnerd 10y ago
Oh completely agree. But since they've built this walled garden of apps it just makes sense for them to be consistent.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]