20 ms·
Apple, Google criticised for Saudi Absher app that tracks women
- jumelles 8y agoSaudi Arabia needs to be shunned by the rest of the world for all its barbaric practices. Truly an awful government with repugnant laws.
- NoblePublius 8y agoI can’t believe that Lyft doesn’t cover the Bay Area with billboards that say “Saudi Arabia beats women and owns 10% of Uber.” “Saudi Arabia murders gay people and owns 10% of Uber.” “Saudi Arabia crucified two people last year and owns 10% of Uber.”
- thatoneyouthrow 8y agoThis is a great idea. But outside of this would anyone be interested in meeting up at tech companies and protesting?
- ng12 8y agoFor what? So Apple removes the app from the store. Does that materially impact Saudi Arabi's institutional oppression of women?
- thatoneyouthrow 8y agoIf CEO's don't care about women in Saudi Arabia do you think they care about women in the USA? We have to start somewhere.
- inferiorhuman 8y agoYes. The app makes it much more difficult for women to subvert the oppression. Before the app the government used little paper slips to grant travel permission, now the "guardians" get SMS notifications when a woman's passport is scanned.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- diebeforei485 8y agoSo, how will getting rid of an app stop the SMS notification system?
- peteradio 8y agoHow will getting rid of the technology that makes this possible stop it?
- natch 8y agoLittle by little. Yes faster ways would be better... got any?
- diebeforei485 8y agoThe app is not the technology that makes this possible. It's just a webview around their website, and the SMS messages (not push notification) are sent directly to the phone via the cellular network. Will anyone be able to silently leave the country if this app was pulled from the store? No, the SMS messages would still be sent, because they have nothing to do with the app.
- natch 8y ago
- joejerryronnie 8y agoIt’s interesting that we’re all terrified of big tech’s growing base of power over our lives, yet more and more we expect big tech to take care of problems that governments are typically responsible for.
- geofft 8y agoBig tech is already very powerful, and there are very few feasible ways to stop that. But it is a bit more feasible to demand that big tech use its power in certain ways. They are already at the point where almost anything they do will have an impact with moral implications, the way that an elephant walking through a field is going to crush some flowers or grasses. (See, for instance, Twitter aiding the Arab Spring by basically just existing, Facebook aiding the Rohingya genocide by basically just existing, and WhatsApp enabling mob violence in India by basically just existing.) So, we might as well demand that they step on the things we wish them to step on.
- joejerryronnie 8y agoThis quickly leads to unintended consequences. What happens if a large group of people (perhaps wearing red hats with a four letter acroynym) decide they want big tech to step on a flower you hold dear?
- geofft 8y agoI don't think I'll be able to prevent them from making that demand simply if I don't make demands either. (I certainly don't think that they're not smart enough to realize that a demand could be made until they see me make one, for instance, nor that they're that exact shade of polite that thinks this is an illegitimate tactic until they see it used at which point it becomes legitimate.) So I don't think this is, in any way, a consequence. Even asking big tech to step on them seems to have a better chance of accomplishing my goals.
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago> I don't think I'll be able to prevent them from making that demand simply if I don't make demands either. (I certainly don't think that they're not smart enough to realize that a demand could be made until they see me make one, for instance, nor that they're that exact shade of polite that thinks this is an illegitimate tactic until they see it used at which point it becomes legitimate.) It's not that they won't make demands, it's that they'll use your demands to legitimize theirs. If you don't make any then you can credibly defend against theirs by saying that nobody should. If you do, what will you say to theirs? Do as I say not as I do? > Even asking big tech to step on them seems to have a better chance of accomplishing my goals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence)
- openloop 8y agoAwesome.
- option 8y agoi think I am actually going to switch to Lyft after reading this
- tombert 8y agoSame here, I didn't realize that Saudi Arabia was a huge investor. That sickens me.
- shittyadmin 8y agoDon't worry, they own some Lyft too.
- natch 8y agoLess, though. So Lyft it is. Not that there’s really any way you can ever control who owns shares of a public company, but if the government or its proxy is on record as a large shareholder, that’s something.
- rgbrenner 8y agoThey can't because Saudi Arabia also owns part of Lyft (2.3%): https://www.reuters.com/article/lyft-kingdom-holding-ma/saudis-kingdom-holding-among-group-investing-247-7-mln-in-lyft-idUSL8N14D09I20151224 https://www.reuters.com/article/lyft-kingdom-holding-ma/saud...
- FuckOffNeemo 8y agoI... I think that was the joke. :)
- whatshisface 8y agoThat's a 7.7% delta. If there was a 7.7% price delta then people would opt for Lyft every time.
- redwall_hp 8y agoIt's like those starburst things on foods at the supermarket. "Lift: 7.7% less Saudi Arabia!"
- m-p-3 8y agoSo if they're not happy they'll sell their parts? Win-win.
- darkpuma 8y agoOr they'd buy more and put a stop to advertising campaign.
- burtonator 8y agoSA is diversifying as they know their oil empire is failing.
- NoblePublius 8y agoI live in NYC and dont use either. Juno FTW.
- int_19h 8y agoWhat we really need with respect to Saudi Arabia is a popular campaign similar to the one that was directed at South Africa in 1980s. Boycott everything they have a stake in. Push your government to embargo everything they buy or sell. They're in a much weaker position than SAR, too, in terms of what they need to import, so it'd be much more effective.
- travmatt 8y agoThey’re still the predominant player in the world oil markets, and the leader of OPEC. Oil is too deeply ingrained in the modern economy to seriously consider boycotting them, and even if possible, the resulting economic shock from a successful boycott would be severe.
- int_19h 8y agoIt is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation, For fear they should succumb and go astray; So when you are requested to pay up or be molested, You will find it better policy to say: – "We never pay any-one Dane-geld, No matter how trifling the cost; For the end of that game is oppression and shame, And the nation that plays it is lost!"
- avip 8y agoUnless you conquer Venezuela first.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- buboard 8y agopfft can't they just go back to building giant penis shaped buildings?
- amanzi 8y agoThe precedent has already been set (e.g. Infowars) that hosting an app on your platform is an endorsement of the content and the publisher of the app.
- el_dev_hell 8y ago> hosting an app on your platform is an endorsement of the content and the publisher of the app What's the context behind this claim?
- 51lver 8y agoIt seems to me that US domestic interest in excluding foreign objectionable content mean that the DMCA safeharbor provision's days are numbered.
- duskwuff 8y agoI don't see how that follows. OCILLA is exclusively concerned with copyright, not other content issues.
- bduerst 8y agoThere isn't any. Infowars and company were banned from various content platforms for violating platform policies. i.e. There's flat earth content on Youtube, that doesn't mean Youtube endorses flat earth conspiracies.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- hopler 8y agoWhat happens if a woman goes to passport control without the app? Is she allowed to pass through?
- Crosseye_Jack 8y agoIt’s basically up to the person running passport control that day but first of all they also need their other travel documents like their passport if they are flying internationally. They are often not allowed access to them (Not denied access in any legal sense, but their families will “look after” the documents making it hard to gain access to such documents). But if it’s the case of a foreign national returning home their home country can provide emergency travel documentation and help see the person thought passport control. But if they are not a foreign national, they have little options. They will often (but not always) try and contact the legal guardian of the woman (if they are not already present, but as you said without the app. I presume they are also travelling without their “legal guardian”) and return the women to their family if they are instructed to do so by them.
- pault 8y agoHoly shit, I can't believe this is happening in the 21st century.
- not_a_cop 8y agoTechnology only gives you gadgetry, not morals. Hasn't anyone in Silicon Valley realized this yet? They're building a huge technological cage to control the masses.
- klyrs 8y agoA coworker literally said this in response to me raising objections over Saudi investment: "I believe Chomsky remarked that socially responsible investing is a contradiction in terms." And I must say, the logic is impeccable: money is incompatible with morals, therefore morals are worthless.
- 8y ago
- thatoneyouthrow 8y agoBoth Sundar Pichai and Tim Cook met and shook the hand of MBS. All smiles. None of these men care about women or LGBT unless it's legally enforced. Yes, the irony that Tim Cook is gay is not lost on me. Even Sam Altman says he doesn't understand the significance of a journalist being murdered by MBS in a consulate. Big surprise people here don't like when the truth about Sam Altman is revealed.
- clubm8 8y ago"Apple and Google accused of hosting Saudi gov't app that tracks women " is a weird phrasing. It's absolutely, 100% verifiably true they host it, as the article plainly states: >Both Google Play and iTunes host Absher, a government web service that allows men to specify when and how women can cross Saudi borders, and to get close to real-time SMS updates when they travel.
- rdiddly 8y agoKind of beside the point, too. The bigger news and greater surprise is that the Saudis have an app to track & apprehend women who try to leave! Like "What an outrage that Google hosts this" isn't quiiite what I was thinking...
- sandworm101 8y agoIn saudi arabia, women are property. This is no different than an app to track a stolen car or lost pet. Compared to all the stuff men are allowed to do to/with their women... this app is probably the least outrageous wrong. We need to get mad at the countries who support the real physical harms, those that enable abuse or at least do very little to prevent it.
- natch 8y agoIn Saudi Arabia, women are erroneously considered property. ftfy.
- int_19h 8y ago> We need to get mad at the countries who support the real physical harms So, Saudi Arabia?
- sandworm101 8y agoAnd the UK. They have turned a blind eye several times when saudi women have asked for help while traveling in the uk. And all those countries who refuse saudi women refugee status.
- 50656E6973 8y agoIts alarming how these increasingly powerful and consolidated silicon valley groups preach progressive morality but practice regressive totalitarianism.
- atomical 8y agoIt's telling how comments like this are downvoted. But then again YCombinator has an interest in keeping Saudi Arabia happy.
- trumped 8y agoDon't listen to what they say, look at what they do...
- watwut 8y agoSo basically, you are saying that radical feminist activists are right?
- krapp 8y agoWhy "radical feminist activists" as opposed to just "feminists?" Objecting to companies only embracing progressive or feminist ideals publicly for the sake of PR or marketing while not actually taking any risks within their own culture isn't exactly radical.
- 8y ago
- the8472 8y agoIs this qualitatively different from providing wiretapping interfaces to law enforcement in countries which have laws we find morally objectionable?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- atomical 8y agoIt's interestinghow comments like this are downvoted. But then, YCombinator has an interest in keeping Saudi Arabia happy.
- dang 8y agoThe comment was in fact heavily upvoted. It takes time for the vote totals on a comment to work themselves out. I'm personally responsible for HN and can tell you that "keeping Saudi Arabia happy" has never entered my awareness until you brought it up. We just banned your throwaway account for trolling. If you continue to use HN for flamewars, trolling, or personal attacks, we will ban your main account as well. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- atomical 8y agoI don't use a throwaway account. Please post proof before attacking me.
- dang 8y agoI assumed that https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thatoneyouthrow https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thatoneyouthrow was you because the comments were so similar. If it wasn't you, that was my mistake and I'm sorry. The main point, though, is please don't do any more flamewar, trolling, or flamebait on HN.
- rgbrenner 8y agoThey let you download the app... but they do NOT host the service. That's run by the Ministry of Interior. EDIT: I had a paragraph below this saying the laws were really the problem and would still exist without the app.. but I forgot one key point: how easy it was to subvert the system before the app existed. I've removed that section. I fully support removing the app from the app stores and forcing SA to go back to the old system.
- sriram_malhar 8y agoI agree, but I don't see why we shouldn't do both. We should press both Google and Apple to remove the app, as it helps out a horrible practice. What next, a database on female genital mutilation? Both Google and Apple have removed apps for far more trivial reasons.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- femGenMutilate 8y agoBut isn’t the removing of the genitals of transexual males a thing to be praised?
- natch 8y agoThe app binary is hosted for download on Apple’s CDN. I don’t know about Google, but it’s a safe assumption it works that way with Google too.
- alacombe 8y agoCounterpoint: Apple has been censoring apps it morally disagree with here in the US.
- int_19h 8y agoIt doesn't matter if the system would still be in place - hosting the app is still aiding and abetting, and carries full ethical responsibility as such.
- unethical_ban 8y agothatoneyouthrow got flagged for commenting on the hypocrisy of the tech Elite for their support of a government in Saudi Arabia that kills journalists and oppresses females with no apologies - that funds radical Islam throughout the world - in the comments of an article discussing Apple and Google distributing government oppression apps on their stores. It is odd. The keep from being too meta, I pose this question (since it seems like a controversial stance): Should Google and Apple formally decline to host applications in their stores that actively assist governments in oppressing their population? This isn't a philosophical discussion about how we are already tracked by phones, or how Facebook knows everything. This app literally is built by the government to check women in, so they do not have freedom of travel.
- nl 8y agothatoneyouthrow got flagged for his personal attacks on people. The quote "None of these men care about women or LGBT unless it's legally enforced." is clearly untrue, and simply doesn't address what is a multi-faceted issue. It's worth noting that if citizens of the US are concerned about this, then the citizens have the power - via government - to fix this by imposing trade sanctions.
- thatoneyouthrow 8y agoI posit that there are two issues here: profit and rights for women. Now it seems to me that the real issue is profits over the rights of women. But please educate me on how this is a "multi-faceted" issue if I have left something out. Maybe Apple and Google are entitled to make money from Saudi Arabia's oppression of women? Once again, please make your case.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- nl 8y agoNo I don't believe that Google or Apple should make money from the oppression of women. I believe this app is free, so they don't appear to be in this case. Nevertheless, I'd like to see it removed. But nor do I believe that Sundar Pichai or Tim Cook were aware of this app previously or had any personal responsibility for it. Nor do I think they should be vilified for shaking hands with MBS prior to the murder of Khashoggi, and especially not prior to the Yemeni war.
- jammygit 8y agoIts hard for Google to point to some TOS violation when roughly half the app ecosystem revolves around tracking people in order to manipulate their behaviour (ads, gambling, etc). Their app is doing what most mobile apps are designed to do. Its just more successful than usual since the creator is a nation state.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- S_A_P 8y agoI don’t agree with the kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s stances, but I also feel like keeping a list of each state that violates human rights is not in Tim Cook’s or Sundar Pichai’s job description. If we are just being honest with ourselves the list of countries in which you can do business approaches 0 if we call out the violators. Secondly, the last time I checked a company’s mandate is to abide by the laws of the country in which it conducts business and to make a profit for shareholders. I’m all for exceeding this goal, but it should not be incumbent upon a company to follow the geopolitical climate and react.
- thatoneyouthrow 8y agoThey are helping them violate human rights. Therefore, they do have a list. It's just the wrong type of list.
- S_A_P 8y agoA lot of assumptions here. Do they know that is the explicit purpose of the app? Has it been reported? Again I don’t agree with their policies, but who’s job is it to keep track? I would think the press. However since the business mandate seems to be peddling outrage it’s easy for things to get lost in the Twittersphere.
- lern_too_spel 8y agoAccording to Business Insider's reporting, in addition to setting travel restrictions for dependents (which includes adult women in KSA), the app also allows you to pay parking tickets.
- wnevets 8y agoSo if its legal to commit genocide in a particular country, you're totally ok with US companies helping to do so?
- asdff 8y agoYou don't need to follow geopolitics very closely to see the piss poor optics of having any association with Saudi Arabia.
- beefeater 8y agoWhy is this author more mad at Apple and Google than Saudi Arabia itself? Literally anybody can upload an app to the app store. Apple and Google likely made no value judgment on this app whatsoever.
- m0dest 8y agoA pragmatic view: 70% of the mobile devices in Saudi Arabia run Android. Outcome 1- Apple bans Absher but Google does not. Absher usage continues. Android gains market share over time. Outcome 2- Apple and Google both ban Absher. Android users install it via sideload from the government website. Carriers preload the sideloaded Absher app onto new phones. Absher usage continues. Android market share grows over time. I don't see a victory here other than taking a moral stance.
- m-p-3 8y agoOutcome 3- Google ban Absher and automatically remove it from device using Google Play Protect on the basis that it's a spyware.
- walrus01 8y agoOutcome 4 - Saudi mobile phone carriers partner with Chinese device manufacturer to deploy custom built versions of Android with 'play protect' ripped out, and Absher app as a non-removable default install. Basically think of what you could do if OnePlus went fully evil and built an 'evil' version of OxygenOS, their custom android variant.
- halfjoking 8y agoOutcome 5 - After the custom evil Android is a success, Saudi men decide that the default government app isn't enough. They decide to have all their wives chipped/tagged when they take them in for their vaccinations. A Saudi startup that basically is the 'Google Nest of oppression' becomes a unicorn company by plugging into the GPS from the chip which enables new forms of tracking. They'll get live video feeds, sentiment analysis and child rearing effectiveness scores all rolled into one app. Multiple wives? No problem - you can compare and contrast all of them in the app. So glad everyone got Google to remove the original app, instead of thinking of ways to combat the root cause of the problem. At least there's another unicorn startup because of it. /s
- int_19h 8y agoLet me rephrase that. Saudis will still make it work, so why care? By the same logic, it's okay help someone kill a man, if you know they'll succeed in doing that anyway, with or without your help. But that's not how it works.
- femto 8y agoThis topic (and the associated app) has been getting a lot of press in Australia recently, due to recent cases of Australian customs refusing to acknowledge asylum claims from Saudi women who have made it to Australia and sending them back to an uncertain fate in Saudi Arabia. Also tactics like Australian officials intercepting fleeing women at transit points (such as Hong Kong) and turning them over to Saudi authorities. See the first link below. Background on the methods used to control women in Saudi Arabia: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-04/escape-from-saudi-the-women-who-made-it-and-the-ones-who-dont/10763324 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-04/escape-from-saudi-the... "Escape From Saudi", a 4corners report on the same: https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/escape-from-saudi/10778838 https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/escape-from-saudi/10778838
- ixacto 8y agoHere is the Saudi abasher web-app hosted on the interior ministry. https://www.moi.gov.sa/wps/portal/Home/Home/!ut/p/z1/04_iUlDgAgP9CCATyEEmKOboR-UllmWmJ5Zk5ucl5uhH6EdGmcVbBro7e3iYGHm7GzqaGTh6mhv5G3iaGrp7Gul76UfhVxCcmqdfkB2oCABPX762/ https://www.moi.gov.sa/wps/portal/Home/Home/!ut/p/z1/04_iUlD... Feel free to hack this website. Because this kind of behavior is not acceptable, this is a literal totalitarian nightmare.
- artificial 8y agoWhen will the raid on the Social Credit system begin?
- alacombe 8y agoRetaliatory unprovoked attacks are not acceptable either.
- SauciestGNU 8y ago>unprovoked I think you could argue the existence of a platform for managing women as chattel is provocation enough.
- alacombe 8y agoI'm pretty sure you can find a group seeing the existence of a platform for managing X (replace with something you disagree with) the same provocation. Does that give them an licence to retaliate ? How far do you go through the rabbit-hole of so called "provocation" before it's deemed "too much" ?
- darkpuma 8y ago> Retaliatory unprovoked Contradiction in terms.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- andreasley 8y ago
- xyzzy123 8y agoI am surprised that no-one has brought up a neutrality argument yet. The app is legal within Saudi Arabia and in fact published by their government. Are we to take down any app which violates anyone’s morals? Or just the morals of particular countries? If an app is blasphemous by the standards of say Mormonism or Islam, should we take it down? After everyone is done, how many apps will be left? If we enforce some morals and not others in our app stores, who exactly do we choose as the arbiters of morality? U.S. public opinion? Chinese public opinion? Maybe the U.N? Just to be clear I’d prefer this app not exist, and I would not be unhappy if it gets “unpublished”. I also think it would be cool if the major platforms just came out and made an unambiguous statement on what they will and won’t stand for.
- burtonator 8y agoInstead of Hooli someone is going to launch Halali ... Cloud hosting according to the laws or the Koran.
- Animats 8y agoIt exists, sort of. There's a "halal search engine"[1]. Iran has something like the Great Firewall of China.[2] Saudi Arabia has official censorship, and they're open about it; there's a web form for requesting that something be censored, and blocked sites divert to a page saying it's blocked.[3] It seems that Iran's system is fairly tight, but the Saudi system isn't really that strict. On the other side, there are multiple "kosher ISPs" with cloud-based filtering. There are even "glatt kosher" ISPs.[4] "The Secured program will block pornography and violence; Secured Plus will also block women wearing intimate apparel; Secured Squared and Protected will filter out any immodest clothing; and Sealed will enable access only to sites with religious and modest content." In Israel, there are "kosher phones", which are either voice only or can't access the web at all. They just run rabbi-approved apps.[5] [1] https://www.rferl.org/a/internet-searching-islam-halalgoogling/25042250.html https://www.rferl.org/a/internet-searching-islam-halalgoogli... [2] https://www.dailydot.com/news/hewlett-packard-iran-censorship-halal-internet/ https://www.dailydot.com/news/hewlett-packard-iran-censorshi... [3] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2017/saudi-arabia https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2017/saudi-arabi... [4] https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3446129,00.html https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3446129,00.html [5] https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-israel-unveils-kosher-smartphone-for-haredim-1.5338700 https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-israel-unveils-koshe...
- gerash 8y agoYes, the app is ridiculous. No, tech companies don't need to become morality police for the world. Perhaps removing scams and malware should remain the bar for policing apps.
- romwell 8y agoThere's a lot of discussion here, but I don't see the important question being asked: How (and whether) the removal of this app will help the women in Saudi Arabia: 1)In the short term 2)In the long term I.e. if the alternative to using the tracking app is not being able to travel (in the realities of that horrible state), then removal will make life of many women worse in the short term. Calls for bans and removals are the easiest form of moralizing without addressing the actual problem in any way. The same kind of logic brought us FOSTA/SESTA, which few people here are happy about. Let's not fall into the same trap.
- ALittleLight 8y agoIt's certainly a question worth pondering. I don't see why the default assumption should be that this app is a net good though. I wonder too, if this app didn't exist, and they didn't let women travel at all, if their society would pay a cost that would eventually become untenable. Thus, while it's possible this would be bad in the short term (not demonstrated though) it's possible that it would also be good in the long term (also not demonstrated). In my opinion, without really compelling evidence, we should opt not to participate in the subjegation of women.
- romwell 8y ago>I don't see why the default assumption should be that this app is a net good though. It should not, and I agree with your assessment. Wish there was more thought in the same vein. It's just that women are missing from discussion of the effects of the course of action taken. People talk about how it would affect market share, but not day-to-day life of women in other threads.
- int_19h 8y agoThe logic here is very, very simple: You don't help bad people do bad things. Period. End of discussion. If they still do it without your help, that's unfortunate; and yes, you should probably do something to stop it. But if they do it with your help, then you are directly responsible for it, and the rest of us have a moral obligation to hold you responsible.
- gammateam 8y agoI'm loosing touch here, why is this not a manufactured controversy and instead an actual complaint that has any merit? Why aren't we "accusing" ISPs from routing to the website? "Accusing" wayback machine of caching it? "Accusing" CDNs of not null-routing it? so this article gets to masquerade Apple and Google's power consolidation as a good thing and you guys eat it up? I'm going to call my publicist and start my own word games if this is so effective.
- JetSpiegel 8y agoThe web is an open platform. Apple and Google have a walled garden, they are responsible for what they provide.
- gammateam 8y agoThe only reason they would take down this app is because its more like a web page inside of an executable wrapper, which does violate their quality policy. They arent responsible to anybody here, and the faux protest will only gives the options of switching to one of thoss two services or becoming a luddite. This is funny to me.
- buboard 8y agoPlease no, we don't want any censorship on the web. App stores are walled gardens, lets keep the censorship inside those walls
- aaron695 8y agoIt's just an app version of the website of MOI eServices, including things like banking and the stated guardianship services, you could just go to the website on your phone and do the same thing. The app doesn't SMS you anything. So it's not a "Apple and Google hosted" app that "tracks women", but given the racism here this title seems to keep people happy. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=sa.gov.moi&hl=en&showAllReviews=true https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=sa.gov.moi&hl=... https://www.moi.gov.sa https://www.moi.gov.sa
- buboard 8y agoThe service is run by KSA. If google removes the app, they can still offer it through a website , or SMS. I don't see why they wouldn't ban it , considering they have banned far more innocuous stuff.
- Zecar 8y agoDidn't they ban Infowars? Conspiracy theories: not ok Treating women as property: ok
- cobbzilla 8y agoI've heard of women escaping SA by getting ahold of their guardian's phone, approving travel, then getting through the airport with that approval. If this app is banned, we'd be closing off at least one escape route that has been known to work.
- 908087 8y agoWhat the fuck is going on in this thread? It seems that either numerous pro-SA trolls are hard at work, or SV liberals are suddenly just fine with women being kept on digital leashes and treated as property?
- snambi 8y agoDisgusting... Take down the app right away.