Churches, public schools, and broadcast television don't allow porn. Let's conclude it's a degradation of those platforms.
Yes, except you are refusing to address the point. Apple does allow Apps to carry porn IF the apps are from a big company. For instance, it allows both the Google and Bing apps, which allow me access to porn.
Out of curiosity I did a test using a few common porn terms using Safari and the Google app then chose images for results. Safari returned G results, in other words nothing like the terms entered. Safari will show you a lot of cats and roosters though if that is your fetish.
Google on the other hand returned the expected results as did a few other browsers. So it seems like Apple is even limiting Safari as well or certainly make it far harder to see nude picts. If you want to see any nude picts, the Google app/browser, along with twitter, and even Instagram make it very easy to find them. So why pick on this Vine app?
Seems very overly the top puritanical and inconsistent.
Both Google and Bing remember your IP address. Safe search is set by default. So, if you use Safari to search using one of these search engines both Google and Bing will remember the settings attached to your IP address. For instance, on Bing.com there is a settings link. The same is true for Google (just don't remember what it is called as I use Bing). There you can turn off safe search. Do that and the results of the search through mobile Safari will be different. The same is true in the apps. Both with the Bing and Google apps you can turn safe search off, which is my point about why Apple is not enforcing its policy fairly.
Are the policies 100% consistent across every single app and situation in the store? No, because a rational person would realize that its impossible to maintain full consistency with hundreds upon hundreds of millions of apps. Apple tries to maintain some common sense guidelines and I'm sure the people working those jobs try to make the best decisions possible.
Yes, except one of the most popular apps in the App Store, namely the Google Search App allows you to view porn. Apple isn't trying that hard. Moreover, last I checked there is less than a million apps on the App Store.
Agree completely. If Apple wants to police apps that need a safe-search mode, they should always require the "restrictions" (i.e., parental controls) password to be typed to turn off safe search on iOS (if such a password has been set). Note that it's not really true that you can't put restrictions on Safari, but it's clearly a losing battle.
Your idea is a good one. The problem could be solved with a parental password needed to shut off safe search across all apps. Microsoft actually has a decent feature in Windows Phone where you can hand your phone off to your kid and certain apps are quarantined from the kid so you don't have to worry about your kid messing up your phone or accessing things you don't want.
Both Google and Bing remember your IP address. Safe search is set by default. So, if you use Safari to search using one of these search engines both Google and Bing will remember the settings attached to your IP address. For instance, on Bing.com there is a settings link. The same is true for Google (just don't remember what it is called as I use Bing). There you can turn off safe search. Do that and the results of the search through mobile Safari will be different. The same is true in the apps. Both with the Bing and Google apps you can turn safe search off, which is my point about why Apple is not enforcing its policy fairly.
Thanks for the tip. Google was set on moderate but I changed it to view all but had to sign in to settings. Bing was far easier to switch.
Thanks for the tip. Google was set on moderate but I changed it to view all but had to sign in to settings. Bing was far easier to switch.
No problem. Prior to the recent Google update, I'd say Bing was the better app as well. Even though I still use Bing, Google's voice search though was a nice update.
This stuff is silly on Apple's part. Take the 500x app. If you shut off the safe search on the desktop, you could pull up nude photos. Apple's beef was you aren't allowed to do that in an App. However take either the Bing or Google apps and shut off safe search which is easy to do within the apps. You can search for porn successfully all day long. Apple's policy isn't implemented fairly. To be fair, Apple would have to get rid if these search apps.
The policy encourages jail breaking. Apple also removed the excellent iKamasultra App, but left tens of knock off apps.
Yea, im waiting for apple to use its policy on what you can search in mobile safari. They could easily make it impossible to type some search keywords. Then its policy would be consistent.
Anyway I think its just cencorship with a twist of good old greed (eg playboy fo those who dont understand). Its actually sad when you go that way... Whats next? removing politicaly incorrect views? Politicaly/ sexualy incorrect content in books?
I am in favor of this censorship. For people who want porn, the web is so full of it you could probably watch it every day for the rest of your life and never get through it all!
Let the people who don't want porn have a place they can go and not have to worry about accidentally stumbling upon it (the app ecosystem).
I am in favor of this censorship. For people who want porn, the web is so full of it you could probably watch it every day for the rest of your life and never get through it all!
Let the people who don't want porn have a place they can go and not have to worry about accidentally stumbling upon it (the app ecosystem).
Not to mention that is NOT censorship. No government is stepping in and telling you what you can and cannot watch/listen to/etc.
If Apple, as a private company, wants to police their App Store then they are more than free to do so. Also, as everyone has pointed out, you can use Safari to get all the pr0n you want. And I say this as someone who has been known to peruse some of the adult sites. I am definitely not against it. It's just so easy to find, I can understand Apple not wanting to be associated with apps that they see as enabling porn.
Are they 100% fair in the way they deal with these things? Absolutely not. Does that mean that something nefarious is going on? Absolutely not. When you have that many apps, some will slip through, some won't. That's life.
And yes, you're right: There's more porn out there than anyone could watch in a lifetime.
The 500px app was taken down despite users having to going out of their way to find... a few nude photographs.
Do you agree that it should have been taken down?
Yes, I think that one should have been taken down. Vine is just, it's a generic sharing service, and some people have uploaded inappropriate content, and created inappropriate tags, and Twitter is trying to clean in up. But 500px is not trying to clean it up, they support it, by adding a dedicated section. It is the difference in approaches which I think is making Apple uncomfortable.
Anyone reading up on the history of art, photography, the camera, video and now the internet would learn that porn has been one of the, if not the driving force behind development and adoption. Just put an age restriction warning and parental controls on things and move on. A web browser is all anyone needs to access porn so what on earth is the fuss over an app? Tumbler's app will be next! I love Apple but IMHO Apple need to stop trying to be the gate keeper and simply insist on the age and parental control abilities and leave it at that.
Don't laugh. What if the Internets fell out of the sky tomorrow? What if the cloud stopped working? How then would you get yer porn if it's not on your hard disk?
Think about it.
I'd try and make sure it was on a portable drive though - he should be happy he doesn't have a Mac Pro to haul out there. Worst case, if the internet broke and I had no offline media, I'd have to make some skin flicks of my own - Pornichet looks like a nice place to find some babes. Internet services are very volatile and that makes closed services and products more vulnerable. If you couldn't connect to the App Store or Apple banned your device ID, you'd pretty much be stuck with a worthless device - Microsoft does this with XBoxes though. Open Source OSs and 3rd party services means an eco-system can outlast a company.
It's true that if the whole internet was run according to conservative policies, it would be a lot less interesting. Google and ISPs have already censored things:
While people would argue that those blockades could also block the spread of information like wikileaks and other things the government doesn't want you to look at, the companies provide a service and they don't want you doing certain things with that service.
Obviously people argue from the point of consumers but if you had to step into their shoes and protect your business and brand, you'd probably make a lot of the same decisions.
Apple does allow Apps to carry porn IF the apps are from a big company. For instance, it allows both the Google and Bing apps, which allow me access to porn.
Anyone reading up on the history of art, photography, the camera, video and now the internet would learn that porn has been one of the, if not the driving force behind development and adoption.
Ok but would porn apps really drive anything in the App Store? It might make more people buy Apple devices, it would generate more money for those companies but it's not likely to make any technological advances and the App Store is already massively popular.
I think there is one big difference between Vine/500px and Bing/Google and Safari that explains what initially seems an unequal policy.
In the case of Vine and 500px the content is held within those 'content networks', specifically it is within the ambit of those outfits to control that content. So they potentially have editorial control over what is viewed through those apps.
In the case of Google/Bing etc. the content in question is not actually hosted on those systems, they are just indexes.
This is understandable, but actually at some level it still doesn't entirely make sense. However because Vine both controls the content AND the viewer of that content (the app) it can be argued that they have more responsibility for ensuring that Apple's content guidelines are followed.
Lets face it, teens want to 'sext' each other so its natural that apps like these end up being used for this purpose.
In the end, its daft to blame the tool, when its the fool using it thats the problem, but that's the reality.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Churches, public schools, and broadcast television don't allow porn. Let's conclude it's a degradation of those platforms.
Yes, except you are refusing to address the point. Apple does allow Apps to carry porn IF the apps are from a big company. For instance, it allows both the Google and Bing apps, which allow me access to porn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Out of curiosity I did a test using a few common porn terms using Safari and the Google app then chose images for results. Safari returned G results, in other words nothing like the terms entered. Safari will show you a lot of cats and roosters though if that is your fetish.
Google on the other hand returned the expected results as did a few other browsers. So it seems like Apple is even limiting Safari as well or certainly make it far harder to see nude picts. If you want to see any nude picts, the Google app/browser, along with twitter, and even Instagram make it very easy to find them. So why pick on this Vine app?
Seems very overly the top puritanical and inconsistent.
Both Google and Bing remember your IP address. Safe search is set by default. So, if you use Safari to search using one of these search engines both Google and Bing will remember the settings attached to your IP address. For instance, on Bing.com there is a settings link. The same is true for Google (just don't remember what it is called as I use Bing). There you can turn off safe search. Do that and the results of the search through mobile Safari will be different. The same is true in the apps. Both with the Bing and Google apps you can turn safe search off, which is my point about why Apple is not enforcing its policy fairly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Are the policies 100% consistent across every single app and situation in the store? No, because a rational person would realize that its impossible to maintain full consistency with hundreds upon hundreds of millions of apps. Apple tries to maintain some common sense guidelines and I'm sure the people working those jobs try to make the best decisions possible.
Yes, except one of the most popular apps in the App Store, namely the Google Search App allows you to view porn. Apple isn't trying that hard. Moreover, last I checked there is less than a million apps on the App Store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormM
Agree completely. If Apple wants to police apps that need a safe-search mode, they should always require the "restrictions" (i.e., parental controls) password to be typed to turn off safe search on iOS (if such a password has been set). Note that it's not really true that you can't put restrictions on Safari, but it's clearly a losing battle.
Your idea is a good one. The problem could be solved with a parental password needed to shut off safe search across all apps. Microsoft actually has a decent feature in Windows Phone where you can hand your phone off to your kid and certain apps are quarantined from the kid so you don't have to worry about your kid messing up your phone or accessing things you don't want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Both Google and Bing remember your IP address. Safe search is set by default. So, if you use Safari to search using one of these search engines both Google and Bing will remember the settings attached to your IP address. For instance, on Bing.com there is a settings link. The same is true for Google (just don't remember what it is called as I use Bing). There you can turn off safe search. Do that and the results of the search through mobile Safari will be different. The same is true in the apps. Both with the Bing and Google apps you can turn safe search off, which is my point about why Apple is not enforcing its policy fairly.
Thanks for the tip. Google was set on moderate but I changed it to view all but had to sign in to settings. Bing was far easier to switch.
I can remove access to safari if I wish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Thanks for the tip. Google was set on moderate but I changed it to view all but had to sign in to settings. Bing was far easier to switch.
No problem. Prior to the recent Google update, I'd say Bing was the better app as well. Even though I still use Bing, Google's voice search though was a nice update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
This stuff is silly on Apple's part. Take the 500x app. If you shut off the safe search on the desktop, you could pull up nude photos. Apple's beef was you aren't allowed to do that in an App. However take either the Bing or Google apps and shut off safe search which is easy to do within the apps. You can search for porn successfully all day long. Apple's policy isn't implemented fairly. To be fair, Apple would have to get rid if these search apps.
The policy encourages jail breaking. Apple also removed the excellent iKamasultra App, but left tens of knock off apps.
Yea, im waiting for apple to use its policy on what you can search in mobile safari. They could easily make it impossible to type some search keywords. Then its policy would be consistent.
Anyway I think its just cencorship with a twist of good old greed (eg playboy fo those who dont understand). Its actually sad when you go that way... Whats next? removing politicaly incorrect views? Politicaly/ sexualy incorrect content in books?
Let the people who don't want porn have a place they can go and not have to worry about accidentally stumbling upon it (the app ecosystem).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
I am in favor of this censorship. For people who want porn, the web is so full of it you could probably watch it every day for the rest of your life and never get through it all!
Let the people who don't want porn have a place they can go and not have to worry about accidentally stumbling upon it (the app ecosystem).
Not to mention that is NOT censorship. No government is stepping in and telling you what you can and cannot watch/listen to/etc.
If Apple, as a private company, wants to police their App Store then they are more than free to do so. Also, as everyone has pointed out, you can use Safari to get all the pr0n you want. And I say this as someone who has been known to peruse some of the adult sites. I am definitely not against it. It's just so easy to find, I can understand Apple not wanting to be associated with apps that they see as enabling porn.
Are they 100% fair in the way they deal with these things? Absolutely not. Does that mean that something nefarious is going on? Absolutely not. When you have that many apps, some will slip through, some won't. That's life.
And yes, you're right: There's more porn out there than anyone could watch in a lifetime.
I don't feel a threat here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
Let the people who don't want porn have a place they can go and not have to worry about accidentally stumbling upon it (the app ecosystem).
The 500px app was taken down despite users having to going out of their way to find... a few nude photographs.
Do you agree that it should have been taken down?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
The 500px app was taken down despite users having to going out of their way to find... a few nude photographs.
Do you agree that it should have been taken down?
Yes, I think that one should have been taken down. Vine is just, it's a generic sharing service, and some people have uploaded inappropriate content, and created inappropriate tags, and Twitter is trying to clean in up. But 500px is not trying to clean it up, they support it, by adding a dedicated section. It is the difference in approaches which I think is making Apple uncomfortable.
I'd try and make sure it was on a portable drive though - he should be happy he doesn't have a Mac Pro to haul out there. Worst case, if the internet broke and I had no offline media, I'd have to make some skin flicks of my own - Pornichet looks like a nice place to find some babes. Internet services are very volatile and that makes closed services and products more vulnerable. If you couldn't connect to the App Store or Apple banned your device ID, you'd pretty much be stuck with a worthless device - Microsoft does this with XBoxes though. Open Source OSs and 3rd party services means an eco-system can outlast a company.
It's true that if the whole internet was run according to conservative policies, it would be a lot less interesting. Google and ISPs have already censored things:
http://gizmodo.com/5942006/google-has-officially-started-censoring-the-pirate-bay-in-search-results
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57457001-93/u.k.s-largest-isp-blocks-the-pirate-bay-but-to-no-avail/
While people would argue that those blockades could also block the spread of information like wikileaks and other things the government doesn't want you to look at, the companies provide a service and they don't want you doing certain things with that service.
Obviously people argue from the point of consumers but if you had to step into their shoes and protect your business and brand, you'd probably make a lot of the same decisions.
Google and Microsoft don't host the porn though.
Challenge accepted.
Ok but would porn apps really drive anything in the App Store? It might make more people buy Apple devices, it would generate more money for those companies but it's not likely to make any technological advances and the App Store is already massively popular.
In the case of Vine and 500px the content is held within those 'content networks', specifically it is within the ambit of those outfits to control that content. So they potentially have editorial control over what is viewed through those apps.
In the case of Google/Bing etc. the content in question is not actually hosted on those systems, they are just indexes.
This is understandable, but actually at some level it still doesn't entirely make sense. However because Vine both controls the content AND the viewer of that content (the app) it can be argued that they have more responsibility for ensuring that Apple's content guidelines are followed.
Lets face it, teens want to 'sext' each other so its natural that apps like these end up being used for this purpose.
In the end, its daft to blame the tool, when its the fool using it thats the problem, but that's the reality.