4 ms·
Except there are thousands of people that would say it isn't fraudulent. I am not defending it, but "offensive" here is subjective.
by sigzero 16y ago
Except there are thousands of people that would say it isn't fraudulent. I am not defending it, but "offensive" here is subjective.
- Alex3917 16y agoIf they can present peer reviewed evidence of its efficacy then it should stay, otherwise they shouldn't be allowed to make false medical claims.
- spindritf 16y agoWhat about an app "curing shyness"? Would you expect a peer reviewed evidence of its efficacy? IMVHO that's a ridiculous standard for a lifestyle app.
- Alex3917 16y agoI'm only arguing in favor of applying this standard of curation to apps that provide medical advice, I wouldn't currently apply the same standard to other industries. This is as much for social signaling reasons as anything else. For whatever reason, the medical industry is responsible for more spam and hucksterism than all other industries combined, so if you don't curate what people are providing then the entire app store loses it's value and credibility really fast.
- gte910h 16y agoSo you're saying bye bye hypnotism apps too? And bye bye business books? I think the app is absurd, but I think the call for apple to censor it is wrong.
- stretchwithme 16y agoI guess fraud combined with the oppression of fellow humans is probably what pisses people off about this app.
- gte910h 16y agoYeah, but doing something because it pisses you off instead of because it's right is the mentality of the lynch mob and the totalitarian gov't. I think its crap we don't have gay marriage, I think Exodus is laughable and a bad idea, but I think the idea they should be censored even worse.
- stretchwithme 16y agoThis is a private business, not government. It isn't a lynch mob when someone decides not to do business with you. This isn't censorship. When the government prohibits you from speaking, that's censorship. When the New York Times decides to deliver some ideas over others, its not censorship. They own the printing press, they can use it for whatever they like. The iOS platform has ads, crossword puzzles and a set of ideas. It has the same rights as anyone else to decide what its going to disseminate. Freedom of the press rests on property rights, in this case the right to use your property to promote the values you choose.
- gte910h 16y agoEntities other than governments can censor. Government censorship is the worse type, but others are also bad. It's completely the mentality of a lynch mob when you say "go get em boys, they did something we dislike" without stopping to say "Wait, should what they do be allowed? Could banning this have repercussions for other cases? Do I have the full story or just a filtered side of it". The lynch mob is about the attempted boycott and press pressuring the press to pressure Apple to censor the app.
- stretchwithme 16y agoPeople have the right to object to things and people have the right to choose what they're going to promote. These are legitimate actions citizens can and should take when they encounter evil. There's no lynch mob. A lynch mob decides to ignore due process of law and take the law into its own hands and carry out a sentence it thinks is justified. In this case, the citizens are only doing what they are allowed to do.
- stretchwithme 16y agoFortunately, Apple is able to reach an opinion of their own.