3 ms·

In related news, developers are welcome to cast shootings, stabbings, explosions and other gory images. Graphic violence seems to enjoy greater protection than

In related news, developers are welcome to cast shootings, stabbings, explosions and other gory images. Graphic violence seems to enjoy greater protection than nudity, both culturally and legally, in the U.S. For example, there's the variable obscenity standard, which shields children from sexual images but not images of extreme violence: http://www.communitydefense.org/cdcdocs/obscenityman/ch10.pdf http://www.communitydefense.org/cdcdocs/obscenityman/ch10.pd...

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
gtaylor 13y ago
I wish software companies would stop trying to play moral police like this. It's so entirely subjective, and as you mentioned, moral standards vary wildly. But whatever. I'm sure this is going to keep kids from seeing "graphic" material, right? None of us ever went around our parents to see something we shouldn't have...
- mikeash 13y ago
  It's especially strange on platforms that provide a full web browser. Apple won't let you sell a porn app on the App Store, but nothing stops you from using Safari to look at all the porn in the world. Chromecast lets you display arbitrary browser tabs, right? If so, same thing here. It seems that it's not so much trying to play moral police as just not wanting to be to blame. People know that a web browser is just a conduit and that the device maker isn't responsible for what you browse. People don't have the same attitude toward apps, even though there's nothing fundamentally different.
- harshreality 13y ago
  I doubt Google cares about keeping people from seeing nudity or porn. They probably care a lot more about the legal consequences of distributing porn apps, and the market consequences if religions try to get everyone to boycott Chromecast because it's sinful.
  - GnwbZHiU 13y ago
    "and the market consequences if religions try to get everyone to boycott Chromecast because it's sinful." I doubt Google cares about that. We live in a heavily secularized world today.
    - vanattab 13y ago
      I am not religious but that does not mean I think its fine to watch porn. Much of the porn out there is absolutely disturbing (rape and what not) and the people who produce that grabage are the worest of the worest. Not all of it is that way of course but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. I don't think the goverment should ban porn or anything but I have zero problems private companies banning it on their platforms.
      - judk 13y ago
        Banning porn is not the same as banning rape. I hate the racist materialism of the Disney Channel, and the ecologically abusive NASCAR. Let's have Google ban that, shall we?
      - true_religion 13y ago
        I don't usually do this but... > I think its fine to watch porn. and > ... but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. Seem to be directly contradictory. Unless you're saying its a-okay to do unhealthy things every so often [which is also valid].
        mkching 13y ago
        The original quote was "but that does _not_ mean I think its fine to watch porn" (emphasis added).
thret 13y ago
Who enjoys violence? Why possible value does graphic violence have for entertainment? There is nothing laudable about it. It is simply evil for evil's sake. On the other hand, there's nothing abnormal about the desire to look at nudity or sexually explicit material.
- johnjay 13y ago
  I enjoy it. Very much indeed. To be more specific I love epic war battles like those of Lord of the Ring. I do not, however had the need to inflict violence on others. I guess I'm weird that way.
Nav_Panel 13y ago
> developers are welcome to cast shootings, stabbings, explosions and other gory images Although I strongly agree with your general sentiment regarding the USA's backwards policies on sexual content, I'm not sure it's accurate in this particular case. From the article: > Also verboten are hate speech, violence and bullying and online gambling. It appears to me that Google is simply attempting to block all "R-rated content" as opposed to just nudity, sex, etc.
ryandvm 13y ago
It's true that on the surface, this schism seems absurd. However, I believe there's a little more nuance to it than you realize. Middle-class parents in a low crime neighborhood don't really have to worry about young Sally growing up to be a psychotic warrior because they to occasionally watch blockbuster movies like 300 or Saving Private Ryan. But if family movie night regularly included films like Eyes Wide Shut or Fifty Shades of Grey, one can certainly imagine it may influence a young adult's sexuality. And at a time when they are exceptionally impressionable and have particularly poor judgement no less. This is an unsettling thought to most parents. That said, I do believe that Americans generally overexpose their children to bombastic, violent movies. I'm certain that this has something to do with our relatively higher violent crime rates. I'm not sure if our media shapes our collective consciousness or the other way around. I suspect it's both.
- napoleond 13y ago
  Your use of a hypothetical scenario to defend puritan American values (with regards to sex on TV) strikes me as odd considering that its real-life variant exists... all of Europe, for example.
sentenza 13y ago
I hope the prolonged exposure to low-sex-high-violence content from the US doesn't damage our moral compass over here. When I was a kid, there was still the occasional female toplessness in movies targeted at the whole family.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

gtaylor 13y ago

I wish software companies would stop trying to play moral police like this. It's so entirely subjective, and as you mentioned, moral standards vary wildly. But whatever. I'm sure this is going to keep kids from seeing "graphic" material, right? None of us ever went around our parents to see something we shouldn't have...

mikeash 13y ago
It's especially strange on platforms that provide a full web browser. Apple won't let you sell a porn app on the App Store, but nothing stops you from using Safari to look at all the porn in the world. Chromecast lets you display arbitrary browser tabs, right? If so, same thing here. It seems that it's not so much trying to play moral police as just not wanting to be to blame. People know that a web browser is just a conduit and that the device maker isn't responsible for what you browse. People don't have the same attitude toward apps, even though there's nothing fundamentally different.
harshreality 13y ago
I doubt Google cares about keeping people from seeing nudity or porn. They probably care a lot more about the legal consequences of distributing porn apps, and the market consequences if religions try to get everyone to boycott Chromecast because it's sinful.
- GnwbZHiU 13y ago
  "and the market consequences if religions try to get everyone to boycott Chromecast because it's sinful." I doubt Google cares about that. We live in a heavily secularized world today.
  - vanattab 13y ago
    I am not religious but that does not mean I think its fine to watch porn. Much of the porn out there is absolutely disturbing (rape and what not) and the people who produce that grabage are the worest of the worest. Not all of it is that way of course but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. I don't think the goverment should ban porn or anything but I have zero problems private companies banning it on their platforms.
    - judk 13y ago
      Banning porn is not the same as banning rape. I hate the racist materialism of the Disney Channel, and the ecologically abusive NASCAR. Let's have Google ban that, shall we?
    - true_religion 13y ago
      I don't usually do this but... > I think its fine to watch porn. and > ... but even the "classy" stuff is unhealthy in my opinion. Seem to be directly contradictory. Unless you're saying its a-okay to do unhealthy things every so often [which is also valid].
      - mkching 13y ago
        The original quote was "but that does _not_ mean I think its fine to watch porn" (emphasis added).

thret 13y ago

Who enjoys violence? Why possible value does graphic violence have for entertainment? There is nothing laudable about it. It is simply evil for evil's sake. On the other hand, there's nothing abnormal about the desire to look at nudity or sexually explicit material.

johnjay 13y ago
I enjoy it. Very much indeed. To be more specific I love epic war battles like those of Lord of the Ring. I do not, however had the need to inflict violence on others. I guess I'm weird that way.

Nav_Panel 13y ago

> developers are welcome to cast shootings, stabbings, explosions and other gory images Although I strongly agree with your general sentiment regarding the USA's backwards policies on sexual content, I'm not sure it's accurate in this particular case. From the article: > Also verboten are hate speech, violence and bullying and online gambling. It appears to me that Google is simply attempting to block all "R-rated content" as opposed to just nudity, sex, etc.

ryandvm 13y ago

It's true that on the surface, this schism seems absurd. However, I believe there's a little more nuance to it than you realize. Middle-class parents in a low crime neighborhood don't really have to worry about young Sally growing up to be a psychotic warrior because they to occasionally watch blockbuster movies like 300 or Saving Private Ryan. But if family movie night regularly included films like Eyes Wide Shut or Fifty Shades of Grey, one can certainly imagine it may influence a young adult's sexuality. And at a time when they are exceptionally impressionable and have particularly poor judgement no less. This is an unsettling thought to most parents. That said, I do believe that Americans generally overexpose their children to bombastic, violent movies. I'm certain that this has something to do with our relatively higher violent crime rates. I'm not sure if our media shapes our collective consciousness or the other way around. I suspect it's both.

napoleond 13y ago
Your use of a hypothetical scenario to defend puritan American values (with regards to sex on TV) strikes me as odd considering that its real-life variant exists... all of Europe, for example.

sentenza 13y ago

I hope the prolonged exposure to low-sex-high-violence content from the US doesn't damage our moral compass over here. When I was a kid, there was still the occasional female toplessness in movies targeted at the whole family.