7 ms·

I have been using Android since Nexus 2 and iPhone since 6s. Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. If they are agai

I have been using Android since Nexus 2 and iPhone since 6s. Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. If they are against the monopolized market make a clear argument, preferably consumer-focused. Don’t hide behind “censorship” and abstract ideas that have proven not to scale - such as users should be able to chose who they trust. This shows such an insane disconnect from the reality of the vast majority of consumers that it’s laughable to include it. And as usual, a great example of a censorship free open market - China.

Bilal_io 4y ago
> Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. You're thinking of censorship as a consumer that I presume lives in a developed country. Consumers elsewhere can face censorship [0][1]. I hope this can change your perspective a little bit. 0. Apple takes down Quran app in China https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58921230.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58921230.amp 1. Apple Removes New York Times Apps From Its Store in China https://nyti.ms/2hTHtWd https://nyti.ms/2hTHtWd
- carewell 4y ago
  I mean… yes, censorship exists in many countries, including the US. If China forced _Apple_ to abide by their rules I struggle to imagine how an alternative store would avoid that. Biggest Chinese app stores are tightly managed by the state, same as the entirety of their tech market.
  - eighthave 4y ago
    With free software and decentralized repositories, users in each country can decide which software they want to distribute and how. If someone thinks a local ban is unjust, they know they have the right and the tools to redistribute any app that is in f-droid.org, or other free software repositories. Free software is central to an effective decentralized ecosystem.
- duped 4y ago
  Any app store would have to comply with government regulation in the markets they serve.
  - _aavaa_ 4y ago
    A) just calling it government regulation doesn’t mean it isn’t my censorship. B) lots of content online that doesn’t my comply with government censorship. The app store model simply presents an easy choke point.
    - carewell 4y ago
      Any local alternative app store is a far easier target for government censorship. Look at Chinese and Russian Android app stores. They comply immediately, often without even publicizing that. Apple at least takes longer to force to comply.
      - _aavaa_ 4y ago
        I’ll repeat my comment: > The app store model simply presents an easy choke point.
meowkit 4y ago
>Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. Alternative frame: How could you possibly know? Have you experienced an app store system outside the western duopoly?
- carewell 4y ago
  I have never had a need to install a specific app and then not find it in the default App Store.
  - dboreham 4y ago
    Fridge door, light, etc.
  - cma 4y ago
    Never needed a browser with a real ad blocker?
    - Jwarder 4y ago
      You can install uBlock Origin on Firefox for Android.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - carewell 4y ago
      That’s not due to censorship though. And yes - both iOS and Android have great adblockers. I use AdGuard Pro on iOS and my experience is as good as using uBlock origin on desktop. Saying that, I agree that alternative rendering engines should be allowed in AppStore. Don’t think we need an alternative app store for that. I have worked in IT for a few years and dealt with many very tech illiterate people. Apple AppStore is a relatively safe space for them, if they get scammed into installing an alternative MyApps store with a ton of trackers and other scam software they will suffer tremendously.
pessimizer 4y ago
> And as usual, a great example of a censorship free open market - China. If China looks like a more competitive and healthy ecosystem, as an anti-China person you can respond either by thinking that's a problem, or by smirking about China. > make a clear argument Their arguments are a lot clearer than yours, which seem to be an expansion of "oh, come on!" You're appstore-splaining to people who run a successful appstore by telling them they're out of touch.
- carewell 4y ago
  Chinese market is tightly controlled by the state. They have very strict rules for how western tech companies must behave. They have forced even the biggest players to abide by their censorship laws. And yes, they are out of touch. But not from ignorance - they are intentionally appealing to our sense of fairness while pursuing their own interests.
  - guntherhermann 4y ago
    I'm genuinely surprised at this axe you seem to need to grind with f-droid. If you don't like it, don't use it, but it's not a "bad" thing for it to exist. I think it's great that we have the option of different app stores. Is there some ulterior motive they have that I am not aware of?
    - carewell 4y ago
      I am arguing against their appeal. Censorship, decentralization, freedom to chose who you trust, etc. It’s the same appeal crypto uses to deceive inexperienced people into believing that these things are really relevant to their life. It’s manipulative. Personally I think these aspects are important and will probably play a bigger part in the future. But censorship is not why I think we should open up such a huge risk surface on iOS.
      - pxoe 4y ago
        here's one example where app store policy disrupted one platform and thousands of people's lives: tumblr. the way it played out ended up very directly impacting online communities and creators. even those who might've been not as directly affected by policy changes, still end up getting disrupted by shifts in audience. those appstores end up affecting users well outside of where their reach supposedly ends, not limited to the actual customers of those appstores. they continuously engage in censorship, and it doesn't stop at 'good censorship', it can be opinionated, prudish, or materialistic and self-serving (such as, prohibiting apps from telling people that they can subscribe directly, instead of going through the appstore). personally I don't need a frigid nanny with a hollier-than-thou 'let us decide for you' attitude. but even when you pick a platform that won't involve being beholden to such decisions, you still end up getting fallout from other platforms that do make decisions like that, even though you're not using them. and this is why it's worth raising a huge stink about monopolistic control over platforms. some policy decisions end up spreading to everyone, no matter what platform they use. with vague talk about twitter possibly getting some kind of boot from appstores, which will invariably result in some kind of act of censorship to mold it to fit the appstore policies, i don't really get how one could go 'yeah, these things aren't actually impacting people in their day-to-day life'. they absolutely do. literally all of those things mentioned are playing out in real time for twitter and people who use it or affected by it in some kind of way. which turns out to be increasingly everyone.
isaacaggrey 4y ago
I agree that censorship is not the best angle the article concludes on but I don't think "user choice, decentralization, and community-controlled curation" are abstract ideas. The article is concrete what this looks like practically speaking: > This means F-Droid gives you selected apps by default without bans or censorship. When you install the F-Droid app, it automatically connects to the collection on f-droid.org that is maintained by this community. F-Droid also makes it easy for anyone to publish their own repository, with their own curation rules. i.e., yes, you do get the "F-Droid List" by default, but you are welcome to connect to a different list or publish your own "list" of apps that has its own curation rules. Imagine if you could view Apple or Google's app store with an "awesome app" list curated by a list of experts you follow without all the junk of suggested apps or ads. That would go in the direction of "meta-curation" akin to what /u/hinkley is referring to in a another comment [1]. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33776244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33776244
- carewell 4y ago
  This distinction is very minor. From my perspective there is almost no difference whether I am viewing a curated app list as a web page or as an alternative App Store. This has almost no consumer advantage and a vastly increased risk surface as an obvious downside.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    This, from my perspective anyway, seems to be one of the biggest drivers of adoption for closed ecosystems. Users want to feel safe and not vet everything ( because it is hard to do well ) and it is genuinely hard to argue with that stance from a very pragmatic POV. As my friend once put it 'I don't want to spend my valuable time left fiddling'. For the argument you mention, I think I agree, because I still remember getting calls from family members, who installed something and now had constant unremovable popups everywhere. That said, Apple seems to be more targeted now precisely ( compared to non-Apple linux and Windows ) because it has more people, who are lulled by the sense of security Apple curation model provides. edit: I kinda get that the article is mostly about mobile devices, but the app-store concept appears to have moved to desktop world as well.
Barrin92 4y ago
>And as usual, a great example of a censorship free open market - China. the article is talking about the Chinese consumer application ecosystem, not the state and is indeed correct on this. The platform ecosystem offers significantly more choice and Apple for example does not enforce its monopolistic powers as it does in the Western market. As a result you have genuine competition on the distribution end, like WeChat.
- carewell 4y ago
  Alternatives are not competition in a highly state-controlled environment. It’s an appearance of competition. Exactly what the Chinese government wants.
waboremo 4y ago
On your iPhone, why don't you try installing a browser that doesn't use the webkit engine? How about installing an emulator to play some classic games? It's a little ironic you're demanding they make a clear argument when your argument is just a simple anecdote that doesn't even hold up well. Sure you haven't experienced censorship in default app stores because you aren't actually trying to do much with your device.
- carewell 4y ago
  It's a matter of priorities. Do I want you to be able to install an emulator? Of course. This is pure protectionism by a monopoly. Do I want my family to be able to install a fake banking or health app? No. So based on this principle, I would say jailbraking is a viable option for tech-savvy people who really need something special on their phone that is being unfairly restricted by Apple.
- warkdarrior 4y ago
  > On your iPhone, why don't you try installing a browser that doesn't use the webkit engine? What is the benefit to me (as a user) to install a non-webkit browser? Do most users know what webkit is? Do they care?
  - Karellen 4y ago
    Maybe one of the websites you use frequently doesn't have good support for WebKit. They make sure Chrome works, and often test Mozilla, but 80% of the time they roll out a new feature it's broken in WebKit for a couple of weeks before the devs fix it. Yeah, you'd like to go to a different website, but you've had an account on this one for over a decade and know a lot of other users, or they get scoops that none of their competitors do, so that's just not going to work for you. Or, the other browser implements part of the `webext` API that WebKit does not, and there's an extension out there that you'd really like to use. Maybe one that integrates with your existing password manager, or rewrites Twitter URLs to nitter.net, or whatever, and the extension just won't work with WebKit. Or, maybe WebKit's JavaScriptCore just isn't fast enough for some web-based game you like, and you'd like to run a browser that uses V8 or SpiderMonkey instead. You're right, a lot of users don't have these problems, and don't care... until maybe one day they do. And maybe 99% of users will never have these problems at all, but 1% of Apple's userbase is still a lot of users who could benefit from browser choice, one day.

Bilal_io 4y ago

> Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. You're thinking of censorship as a consumer that I presume lives in a developed country. Consumers elsewhere can face censorship [0][1]. I hope this can change your perspective a little bit. 0. Apple takes down Quran app in China https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58921230.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58921230.amp 1. Apple Removes New York Times Apps From Its Store in China https://nyti.ms/2hTHtWd https://nyti.ms/2hTHtWd

carewell 4y ago
I mean… yes, censorship exists in many countries, including the US. If China forced _Apple_ to abide by their rules I struggle to imagine how an alternative store would avoid that. Biggest Chinese app stores are tightly managed by the state, same as the entirety of their tech market.
- eighthave 4y ago
  With free software and decentralized repositories, users in each country can decide which software they want to distribute and how. If someone thinks a local ban is unjust, they know they have the right and the tools to redistribute any app that is in f-droid.org, or other free software repositories. Free software is central to an effective decentralized ecosystem.
duped 4y ago
Any app store would have to comply with government regulation in the markets they serve.
- _aavaa_ 4y ago
  A) just calling it government regulation doesn’t mean it isn’t my censorship. B) lots of content online that doesn’t my comply with government censorship. The app store model simply presents an easy choke point.
  - carewell 4y ago
    Any local alternative app store is a far easier target for government censorship. Look at Chinese and Russian Android app stores. They comply immediately, often without even publicizing that. Apple at least takes longer to force to comply.
    - _aavaa_ 4y ago
      I’ll repeat my comment: > The app store model simply presents an easy choke point.

meowkit 4y ago

>Never in my life I felt like I have experienced censorship in default app stores. Alternative frame: How could you possibly know? Have you experienced an app store system outside the western duopoly?

carewell 4y ago
I have never had a need to install a specific app and then not find it in the default App Store.
- dboreham 4y ago
  Fridge door, light, etc.
- cma 4y ago
  Never needed a browser with a real ad blocker?
  - Jwarder 4y ago
    You can install uBlock Origin on Firefox for Android.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - carewell 4y ago
    That’s not due to censorship though. And yes - both iOS and Android have great adblockers. I use AdGuard Pro on iOS and my experience is as good as using uBlock origin on desktop. Saying that, I agree that alternative rendering engines should be allowed in AppStore. Don’t think we need an alternative app store for that. I have worked in IT for a few years and dealt with many very tech illiterate people. Apple AppStore is a relatively safe space for them, if they get scammed into installing an alternative MyApps store with a ton of trackers and other scam software they will suffer tremendously.

pessimizer 4y ago

> And as usual, a great example of a censorship free open market - China. If China looks like a more competitive and healthy ecosystem, as an anti-China person you can respond either by thinking that's a problem, or by smirking about China. > make a clear argument Their arguments are a lot clearer than yours, which seem to be an expansion of "oh, come on!" You're appstore-splaining to people who run a successful appstore by telling them they're out of touch.

carewell 4y ago
Chinese market is tightly controlled by the state. They have very strict rules for how western tech companies must behave. They have forced even the biggest players to abide by their censorship laws. And yes, they are out of touch. But not from ignorance - they are intentionally appealing to our sense of fairness while pursuing their own interests.
- guntherhermann 4y ago
  I'm genuinely surprised at this axe you seem to need to grind with f-droid. If you don't like it, don't use it, but it's not a "bad" thing for it to exist. I think it's great that we have the option of different app stores. Is there some ulterior motive they have that I am not aware of?
  - carewell 4y ago
    I am arguing against their appeal. Censorship, decentralization, freedom to chose who you trust, etc. It’s the same appeal crypto uses to deceive inexperienced people into believing that these things are really relevant to their life. It’s manipulative. Personally I think these aspects are important and will probably play a bigger part in the future. But censorship is not why I think we should open up such a huge risk surface on iOS.
    - pxoe 4y ago
      here's one example where app store policy disrupted one platform and thousands of people's lives: tumblr. the way it played out ended up very directly impacting online communities and creators. even those who might've been not as directly affected by policy changes, still end up getting disrupted by shifts in audience. those appstores end up affecting users well outside of where their reach supposedly ends, not limited to the actual customers of those appstores. they continuously engage in censorship, and it doesn't stop at 'good censorship', it can be opinionated, prudish, or materialistic and self-serving (such as, prohibiting apps from telling people that they can subscribe directly, instead of going through the appstore). personally I don't need a frigid nanny with a hollier-than-thou 'let us decide for you' attitude. but even when you pick a platform that won't involve being beholden to such decisions, you still end up getting fallout from other platforms that do make decisions like that, even though you're not using them. and this is why it's worth raising a huge stink about monopolistic control over platforms. some policy decisions end up spreading to everyone, no matter what platform they use. with vague talk about twitter possibly getting some kind of boot from appstores, which will invariably result in some kind of act of censorship to mold it to fit the appstore policies, i don't really get how one could go 'yeah, these things aren't actually impacting people in their day-to-day life'. they absolutely do. literally all of those things mentioned are playing out in real time for twitter and people who use it or affected by it in some kind of way. which turns out to be increasingly everyone.

isaacaggrey 4y ago

I agree that censorship is not the best angle the article concludes on but I don't think "user choice, decentralization, and community-controlled curation" are abstract ideas. The article is concrete what this looks like practically speaking: > This means F-Droid gives you selected apps by default without bans or censorship. When you install the F-Droid app, it automatically connects to the collection on f-droid.org that is maintained by this community. F-Droid also makes it easy for anyone to publish their own repository, with their own curation rules. i.e., yes, you do get the "F-Droid List" by default, but you are welcome to connect to a different list or publish your own "list" of apps that has its own curation rules. Imagine if you could view Apple or Google's app store with an "awesome app" list curated by a list of experts you follow without all the junk of suggested apps or ads. That would go in the direction of "meta-curation" akin to what /u/hinkley is referring to in a another comment [1]. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33776244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33776244

carewell 4y ago
This distinction is very minor. From my perspective there is almost no difference whether I am viewing a curated app list as a web page or as an alternative App Store. This has almost no consumer advantage and a vastly increased risk surface as an obvious downside.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  This, from my perspective anyway, seems to be one of the biggest drivers of adoption for closed ecosystems. Users want to feel safe and not vet everything ( because it is hard to do well ) and it is genuinely hard to argue with that stance from a very pragmatic POV. As my friend once put it 'I don't want to spend my valuable time left fiddling'. For the argument you mention, I think I agree, because I still remember getting calls from family members, who installed something and now had constant unremovable popups everywhere. That said, Apple seems to be more targeted now precisely ( compared to non-Apple linux and Windows ) because it has more people, who are lulled by the sense of security Apple curation model provides. edit: I kinda get that the article is mostly about mobile devices, but the app-store concept appears to have moved to desktop world as well.

Barrin92 4y ago

>And as usual, a great example of a censorship free open market - China. the article is talking about the Chinese consumer application ecosystem, not the state and is indeed correct on this. The platform ecosystem offers significantly more choice and Apple for example does not enforce its monopolistic powers as it does in the Western market. As a result you have genuine competition on the distribution end, like WeChat.

carewell 4y ago
Alternatives are not competition in a highly state-controlled environment. It’s an appearance of competition. Exactly what the Chinese government wants.

waboremo 4y ago

On your iPhone, why don't you try installing a browser that doesn't use the webkit engine? How about installing an emulator to play some classic games? It's a little ironic you're demanding they make a clear argument when your argument is just a simple anecdote that doesn't even hold up well. Sure you haven't experienced censorship in default app stores because you aren't actually trying to do much with your device.

carewell 4y ago
It's a matter of priorities. Do I want you to be able to install an emulator? Of course. This is pure protectionism by a monopoly. Do I want my family to be able to install a fake banking or health app? No. So based on this principle, I would say jailbraking is a viable option for tech-savvy people who really need something special on their phone that is being unfairly restricted by Apple.
warkdarrior 4y ago
> On your iPhone, why don't you try installing a browser that doesn't use the webkit engine? What is the benefit to me (as a user) to install a non-webkit browser? Do most users know what webkit is? Do they care?
- Karellen 4y ago
  Maybe one of the websites you use frequently doesn't have good support for WebKit. They make sure Chrome works, and often test Mozilla, but 80% of the time they roll out a new feature it's broken in WebKit for a couple of weeks before the devs fix it. Yeah, you'd like to go to a different website, but you've had an account on this one for over a decade and know a lot of other users, or they get scoops that none of their competitors do, so that's just not going to work for you. Or, the other browser implements part of the `webext` API that WebKit does not, and there's an extension out there that you'd really like to use. Maybe one that integrates with your existing password manager, or rewrites Twitter URLs to nitter.net, or whatever, and the extension just won't work with WebKit. Or, maybe WebKit's JavaScriptCore just isn't fast enough for some web-based game you like, and you'd like to run a browser that uses V8 or SpiderMonkey instead. You're right, a lot of users don't have these problems, and don't care... until maybe one day they do. And maybe 99% of users will never have these problems at all, but 1% of Apple's userbase is still a lot of users who could benefit from browser choice, one day.