5 ms·

> Your app contains content that doesn't comply with the Sexual Content and Profanity policy. What the fuck is "profanity"? Are we a religious society? Why sho

by bambax 6y ago

> Your app contains content that doesn't comply with the Sexual Content and Profanity policy. What the fuck is "profanity"? Are we a religious society? Why shouldn't we able to say "ass" (!) or show nipples?? The ban on porn is defensible outside of any moral framework because once you allow porn then all what's left is porn (although it would be useful to think about why that is). But "profanity"? Come on.

ironmagma 6y ago
Yes we are a religious society. Our roots are in puritanism, in fact that's one of the main differentiators from the (Catholic-based) European countries from which we sprang.
- tpmx 6y ago
  "We"? Google is booking less than 50% of its revenue in the US.
  - ironmagma 6y ago
    Is this about Google's revenue as a whole (mostly ads) or a particular market (Android play store in the USA)?
    - tpmx 6y ago
      That level of granularity isn't provided by Google in their financial reports, so Google as a whole. That said, Android seems to be doing better outside the US than in the US. I wouldn't be very surprised if US revenue was dominant within the Android BU (or whatever they call it today). Last time I heard (probably outdated) there were at least 2 billion non-US Google Play devices active; compared to the 120 million US Google Play devices figure that's widely available. Also: Wouldn't surprise me if Google makes more from licensing the Google Play store to non-US markets than they do from the Google Play sales revenue globally.
  - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
    The authoritarian shall always be more powerful than the libertarian, simply because he will leave with his wallet, if he find something that offends him, but the libertarian will not leave if he cannot find something that would offend the authoritarian. Therefore, it is commercially more viable to keep the authoritarian happy.
    - tpmx 6y ago
      That is unfortunately true, and the reason for so much injustice. Thanks for that succinct way of describing this.
- Triv888 6y ago
  They need to take god out of politics and public schools... from the dollar bill, for example.
  - ironmagma 6y ago
    I disagree. God is already out of most schools, and it isn’t working well at all. Each school needs its own fully-integrated approach based on the students at the school and what works for them.
    - Triv888 6y ago
      Why would it be good to lie to them? What are the consequences when you don't?
      - ironmagma 6y ago
        We lie to children all the time to protect them. Reality isn't actually good to be exposed to when you are a child; it's much better to encounter it in a safer, nonthreatening way, which is why we have euphemisms and hide the fact of death and (extreme) evil for so long. All of that however is separate from whether we should teach religion, which is more or less orthogonal to objective reality. Religion covers that which is unobservable, almost by definition.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      God being in schools is usually much more about the parents of the students in the school.
      - ironmagma 6y ago
        Obtaining favor of the parents is important. Children can't thrive at school if the parents aren't on the side of the teacher and doing their part.
jaspax 6y ago
Religion's got nothing to do with it. Racial slurs are a subset of "profanity", and I wager that you support Google's desire to not have apps in their store which prominently feature racial slurs. Every culture has its "bad words" which are forbidden to use in polite company. (Of course the actual app in question is still completely innocent, because Google's vetting process is a trash fire.)
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  > Religion's got nothing to do with it. Racial slurs are a subset of "profanity", and I wager that you support Google's desire to not have apps in their store which prominently feature racial slurs. I have no objection. > Every culture has its "bad words" which are forbidden to use in polite company. I'm not so sure that that is true. I do not think there is but a single word in the Dutch language that cannot be featured even on children's programming. Some cultures have a concept of “taboo words”, and others seem to lack it.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    Wikipedia has quite a long list, including wide assortment of racial slurs. Would all of this really be acceptable in kids tv? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity Also this entry is interesting: > Kankerlijer means "cancer sufferer". It is a strong insult: an example of its legal status can be found in a 2008 court case, in which using the word kankerlijer to insult a police officer was cited as a serious offense. Though, little surprise if "offensive to an authority figure" is a lower bar than "offensive to parents"
    - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
      > Wikipedia has quite a long list, including wide assortment of racial slurs. Would all of this really be acceptable in kids tv? > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity Absolutely. They simply feature such swearwords as well as genitals. > > Kankerlijer means "cancer sufferer". It is a strong insult: an example of its legal status can be found in a 2008 court case, in which using the word kankerlijer to insult a police officer was cited as a serious offense. > Though, little surprise if "offensive to an authority figure" is a lower bar than "offensive to parents" It isn't about offending, but insulting. It isn't legal in the Netherlands to insult police officers in function regardless of how polite the language is. One can't walk up to one and say “I find your face most æsthetically displeasing.” for instance. Certainly not a law I agree with, in any case, and thankfully it's becoming more and more of a dead letter, but occasionally people are prosecuted for it.
Blikkentrekker 6y ago
> The ban on porn is defensible outside of any moral framework because once you allow porn then all what's left is porn (although it would be useful to think about why that is). Reddit and 8chan allow the creation of pornography subboards and never even approached that state.
- meibo 6y ago
  That's because they both allow for creation of very segregated sub-groups that don't inherently interact. You won't see a lot of porn on /r/all because Reddit doesn't want you to, even though at least 50% of Reddit is porn, it's just bad for business. It's basically a "mini internet".
  - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
    Can the same not be implemented for such a so-called “app store”?
protomyth 6y ago
Well, speaking of religion or at least Christianity, the word "ass" is used quite a bit in the Bible. [edit]The dangers of such filters can be observed at this link http://bash.org/?178890 http://bash.org/?178890 [/edit]

by bambax 6y ago

ironmagma 6y ago

Yes we are a religious society. Our roots are in puritanism, in fact that's one of the main differentiators from the (Catholic-based) European countries from which we sprang.

tpmx 6y ago
"We"? Google is booking less than 50% of its revenue in the US.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  Is this about Google's revenue as a whole (mostly ads) or a particular market (Android play store in the USA)?
  - tpmx 6y ago
    That level of granularity isn't provided by Google in their financial reports, so Google as a whole. That said, Android seems to be doing better outside the US than in the US. I wouldn't be very surprised if US revenue was dominant within the Android BU (or whatever they call it today). Last time I heard (probably outdated) there were at least 2 billion non-US Google Play devices active; compared to the 120 million US Google Play devices figure that's widely available. Also: Wouldn't surprise me if Google makes more from licensing the Google Play store to non-US markets than they do from the Google Play sales revenue globally.
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  The authoritarian shall always be more powerful than the libertarian, simply because he will leave with his wallet, if he find something that offends him, but the libertarian will not leave if he cannot find something that would offend the authoritarian. Therefore, it is commercially more viable to keep the authoritarian happy.
  - tpmx 6y ago
    That is unfortunately true, and the reason for so much injustice. Thanks for that succinct way of describing this.
Triv888 6y ago
They need to take god out of politics and public schools... from the dollar bill, for example.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  I disagree. God is already out of most schools, and it isn’t working well at all. Each school needs its own fully-integrated approach based on the students at the school and what works for them.
  - Triv888 6y ago
    Why would it be good to lie to them? What are the consequences when you don't?
    - ironmagma 6y ago
      We lie to children all the time to protect them. Reality isn't actually good to be exposed to when you are a child; it's much better to encounter it in a safer, nonthreatening way, which is why we have euphemisms and hide the fact of death and (extreme) evil for so long. All of that however is separate from whether we should teach religion, which is more or less orthogonal to objective reality. Religion covers that which is unobservable, almost by definition.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    God being in schools is usually much more about the parents of the students in the school.
    - ironmagma 6y ago
      Obtaining favor of the parents is important. Children can't thrive at school if the parents aren't on the side of the teacher and doing their part.

jaspax 6y ago

Religion's got nothing to do with it. Racial slurs are a subset of "profanity", and I wager that you support Google's desire to not have apps in their store which prominently feature racial slurs. Every culture has its "bad words" which are forbidden to use in polite company. (Of course the actual app in question is still completely innocent, because Google's vetting process is a trash fire.)

Blikkentrekker 6y ago
> Religion's got nothing to do with it. Racial slurs are a subset of "profanity", and I wager that you support Google's desire to not have apps in their store which prominently feature racial slurs. I have no objection. > Every culture has its "bad words" which are forbidden to use in polite company. I'm not so sure that that is true. I do not think there is but a single word in the Dutch language that cannot be featured even on children's programming. Some cultures have a concept of “taboo words”, and others seem to lack it.
- klyrs 6y ago
  Wikipedia has quite a long list, including wide assortment of racial slurs. Would all of this really be acceptable in kids tv? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity Also this entry is interesting: > Kankerlijer means "cancer sufferer". It is a strong insult: an example of its legal status can be found in a 2008 court case, in which using the word kankerlijer to insult a police officer was cited as a serious offense. Though, little surprise if "offensive to an authority figure" is a lower bar than "offensive to parents"
  - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
    > Wikipedia has quite a long list, including wide assortment of racial slurs. Would all of this really be acceptable in kids tv? > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_profanity Absolutely. They simply feature such swearwords as well as genitals. > > Kankerlijer means "cancer sufferer". It is a strong insult: an example of its legal status can be found in a 2008 court case, in which using the word kankerlijer to insult a police officer was cited as a serious offense. > Though, little surprise if "offensive to an authority figure" is a lower bar than "offensive to parents" It isn't about offending, but insulting. It isn't legal in the Netherlands to insult police officers in function regardless of how polite the language is. One can't walk up to one and say “I find your face most æsthetically displeasing.” for instance. Certainly not a law I agree with, in any case, and thankfully it's becoming more and more of a dead letter, but occasionally people are prosecuted for it.

Blikkentrekker 6y ago

> The ban on porn is defensible outside of any moral framework because once you allow porn then all what's left is porn (although it would be useful to think about why that is). Reddit and 8chan allow the creation of pornography subboards and never even approached that state.

meibo 6y ago
That's because they both allow for creation of very segregated sub-groups that don't inherently interact. You won't see a lot of porn on /r/all because Reddit doesn't want you to, even though at least 50% of Reddit is porn, it's just bad for business. It's basically a "mini internet".
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  Can the same not be implemented for such a so-called “app store”?

protomyth 6y ago

Well, speaking of religion or at least Christianity, the word "ass" is used quite a bit in the Bible. [edit]The dangers of such filters can be observed at this link http://bash.org/?178890 http://bash.org/?178890 [/edit]