4 ms·

Apple demanded our apps filter some search terms from being returned

56 points by pannSun 4y ago

UncleEntity 4y ago
This gem from the twitter feed: > Apple has mostly stopped advertising on Twitter. Do they hate free speech in America? — Elon Musk No, Elon, I think it’s just you…
alexb_ 4y ago
>Regarding 1.1, we continue to find that your app or metadata includes content some users may find upsetting, offensive, or otherwise objectionable. Specifically, Pepe the Frog. This is hilarious. Apple's ability to remove apps because they feel like it is horrible. Remember how they killed tumblr?
- atkailash 4y ago
- favorited 4y ago
  Tumblr killed itself by failing to act on its rampant CSAM problem, until its only viable option was to nuke all NSFW content. Sooner or later, something was going to give.
rolenthedeep 4y ago
To be fair to Apple, there is an awful lot of truly horrible shit on lbry. Anywhere from anti-vax and covid deniers, to straight up nazis to actual snuff vids. If you were a corporation like Apple, you probably don't want an app on your store that allows any user to stumble onto an uncensored video of people getting decapitated. That's a big part of why I quit using it. Lbry is the next best thing to YouTube, but I just don't want that kind of shit popping into my search results every day. There's also the whole bit where it's also a cryptocurrency. For some goddamn reason.
- Dig1t 4y ago
  I mean, Apple could just put a warning on it in the app store. Give parental controls, don't run ads on it. But effectively shutting down access to it is egregious IMO in a time where they are a gatekeeper of information for 55% of the population (at least in the US).
  - rolenthedeep 4y ago
    You can always access it through a browser. The app is kind of terrible on its own, the browser version is generally better. Apple can't paste parental controls over an external service. The only thing they can do is not distribute the app until it does provide parental controls, which is what's happening now. Apple is declining to distribute the app on their store because it doesn't meet their safety and moderation standards. Lbry clearly doesn't meet the standards, and AFAIK don't really intend to moderate the service at all. This isn't censorship. Censoring lbry would be blocking the domain on all ios devices, meaning you couldn't even access it through a browser. The app store has rules, and lbry doesn't want to follow those rules, and this is the consequence. Whether or not those rules are a good thing is a separate conversation, but it's in the general category of Brands and Moderation that's being discussed everywhere these days.
- woojoo666 4y ago
  > you probably don't want an app on your store that allows any user to stumble onto an uncensored video of people getting decapitated. Google Chrome, Firefox, and Safari will all allow any user to stumble onto those videos. People who use browsers know the risk. And the people who use LBRY also know the risk.
  - novia 4y ago
    Yeah, I've seen a nine year old stumble upon a snuff video on youtube ... using his mom's youtube account, not youtube kids.
  - rolenthedeep 4y ago
    > the people who use LBRY also know the risk I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. How did you find out that lbry was largely uncensored and unmoderated? If you showed lbry to your parents, what would they think? My bet is they'd think it is or is like YouTube. I doubt very seriously that any random person just finding out about lbry would expect to find snuff videos when they're searching for anything. Even on an open browser, you just don't randomly bump into extreme shit on the same scale of lbry. I've run into such things maybe a dozen or so times in the decades I've been online, and then several dozen times in the year or two I used lbry. The scale is different, and the expectation is different. People understand and expect that a browser can show you anything, and we've had parental controls on browsers for decades. Also, browsers don't host and distribute content, they allow you to access anything from anyone, and you generally have to make a conscious effort to find something. Lbry hosts and distributes extreme content, with no real intention to moderate it. In addition, it's extremely common to accidentally run into something like a snuff video or straight up porn. Lbry could moderate this kind of thing on their service, a browser cannot moderate the entire internet. That's what Apple is objecting to.
ngcc_hk 4y ago
Given Twitter better to have some and at least one garden to none.
yucky 4y ago
How do they justify having browsers in the app store then? There is more objectionable content found on browsers than any other type of app, and it's not close.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Legacy reasons I guess. If browsers didn’t already exist. There is no way apple would have allowed them.

56 points by pannSun 4y ago

This gem from the twitter feed: > Apple has mostly stopped advertising on Twitter. Do they hate free speech in America? — Elon Musk No, Elon, I think it’s just you…

alexb_ 4y ago

>Regarding 1.1, we continue to find that your app or metadata includes content some users may find upsetting, offensive, or otherwise objectionable. Specifically, Pepe the Frog. This is hilarious. Apple's ability to remove apps because they feel like it is horrible. Remember how they killed tumblr?

atkailash 4y ago
favorited 4y ago
Tumblr killed itself by failing to act on its rampant CSAM problem, until its only viable option was to nuke all NSFW content. Sooner or later, something was going to give.

rolenthedeep 4y ago

To be fair to Apple, there is an awful lot of truly horrible shit on lbry. Anywhere from anti-vax and covid deniers, to straight up nazis to actual snuff vids. If you were a corporation like Apple, you probably don't want an app on your store that allows any user to stumble onto an uncensored video of people getting decapitated. That's a big part of why I quit using it. Lbry is the next best thing to YouTube, but I just don't want that kind of shit popping into my search results every day. There's also the whole bit where it's also a cryptocurrency. For some goddamn reason.

Dig1t 4y ago
I mean, Apple could just put a warning on it in the app store. Give parental controls, don't run ads on it. But effectively shutting down access to it is egregious IMO in a time where they are a gatekeeper of information for 55% of the population (at least in the US).
- rolenthedeep 4y ago
  You can always access it through a browser. The app is kind of terrible on its own, the browser version is generally better. Apple can't paste parental controls over an external service. The only thing they can do is not distribute the app until it does provide parental controls, which is what's happening now. Apple is declining to distribute the app on their store because it doesn't meet their safety and moderation standards. Lbry clearly doesn't meet the standards, and AFAIK don't really intend to moderate the service at all. This isn't censorship. Censoring lbry would be blocking the domain on all ios devices, meaning you couldn't even access it through a browser. The app store has rules, and lbry doesn't want to follow those rules, and this is the consequence. Whether or not those rules are a good thing is a separate conversation, but it's in the general category of Brands and Moderation that's being discussed everywhere these days.
woojoo666 4y ago
> you probably don't want an app on your store that allows any user to stumble onto an uncensored video of people getting decapitated. Google Chrome, Firefox, and Safari will all allow any user to stumble onto those videos. People who use browsers know the risk. And the people who use LBRY also know the risk.
- novia 4y ago
  Yeah, I've seen a nine year old stumble upon a snuff video on youtube ... using his mom's youtube account, not youtube kids.
- rolenthedeep 4y ago
  > the people who use LBRY also know the risk I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. How did you find out that lbry was largely uncensored and unmoderated? If you showed lbry to your parents, what would they think? My bet is they'd think it is or is like YouTube. I doubt very seriously that any random person just finding out about lbry would expect to find snuff videos when they're searching for anything. Even on an open browser, you just don't randomly bump into extreme shit on the same scale of lbry. I've run into such things maybe a dozen or so times in the decades I've been online, and then several dozen times in the year or two I used lbry. The scale is different, and the expectation is different. People understand and expect that a browser can show you anything, and we've had parental controls on browsers for decades. Also, browsers don't host and distribute content, they allow you to access anything from anyone, and you generally have to make a conscious effort to find something. Lbry hosts and distributes extreme content, with no real intention to moderate it. In addition, it's extremely common to accidentally run into something like a snuff video or straight up porn. Lbry could moderate this kind of thing on their service, a browser cannot moderate the entire internet. That's what Apple is objecting to.

ngcc_hk 4y ago

Given Twitter better to have some and at least one garden to none.

yucky 4y ago

How do they justify having browsers in the app store then? There is more objectionable content found on browsers than any other type of app, and it's not close.

Gigachad 4y ago
Legacy reasons I guess. If browsers didn’t already exist. There is no way apple would have allowed them.