Exactly WHAT is rated 17+ if not "explicit" content? I mean, what's the point of being able to download a variety of Kamasutra apps, but you can't download an app that might *possibly* be used to access *some* pictures that *might* be construed as being pornographic?
Apparently sexual content and nudity is allowed but not graphic content. That word 'graphic' is really what's the problem. The following apps have nudity and have managed a 17+ rating:
so I guess it would come down to the presentation and the amount. If you uploaded an app full of topless girls, the nudity wouldn't be graphic in the sense of pornogaphy but the app's purpose would be titillation. If it makes you reach for your zipper, it's graphic. I haven't seen many people doing that in an art gallery so that kind of nudity has to have a more acceptable presentation.
"We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone ... Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone"
"You know, there's a porn store for Android. You can download nothing but porn. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That's a place we don't want to go - so we're not going to go there."
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open. Yes they can find that in Google if they search for it and turn off the filter, yes they would technically be downloading an app with a rating they shouldn't be downloading and it's the parents to blame but the app is still violating Apple's policies.
As long as porn is legal, and as long as the app is rated 17+, Apple should stand back.
Yes and while we're at it, let's get porn in all the gas stations, post offices and supermarkets. If I want porn, I should have easy access to it. In fact, let's just get it on daytime TV after Sesame Street. If the kids don't want to watch, they can have a 5 minute ad break to switch the channel.
Microsoft doesn't put porn on XBox Live, Sony doesn't put it on PSN, you can bet it won't be in the Windows 8 Store, there's none in Steam or Netflix or Hulu. And yet, Apple gets the criticism for being uptight.
Just imagine you buy a butter knife and it came with an EULA that prohibits you from using that butter knife as a putty spatula, or to spread oil paint on a canvas. Or you go to an art supply warehouse and the oil paint comes with an EULA that prohibits you from using the paint for nude paintings
Apple isn't preventing you from using an iOS device to view porn, they just don't want to facilitate it. Microsoft and Sony are the real enemies here. It's way harder to get porn on their consoles.
Apple DOES have ratings on the apps, you CAN restrict apps according to age ranges.
Not really though, it's like the dialogs you get on websites "Are you over 18 - yes/no".
Well, I'm not aware how to bypass parental restrictions short of jail-breaking the device or something. And if you're not really a kid, and it's not your parent that set the restrictions, then of course, it's OK that you can click through: you have been warned, and you're a responsible adult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
Exactly WHAT is rated 17+ if not "explicit" content? I mean, what's the point of being able to download a variety of Kamasutra apps, but you can't download an app that might *possibly* be used to access *some* pictures that *might* be construed as being pornographic?
Apparently sexual content and nudity is allowed but not graphic content. That word 'graphic' is really what's the problem. The following apps have nudity and have managed a 17+ rating:
so I guess it would come down to the presentation and the amount. If you uploaded an app full of topless girls, the nudity wouldn't be graphic in the sense of pornogaphy but the app's purpose would be titillation. If it makes you reach for your zipper, it's graphic. I haven't seen many people doing that in an art gallery so that kind of nudity has to have a more acceptable presentation.
The thing is, "real" art should not have any age restriction. Do you really think they stop kids from seeing the Acropolis in Athens or the Arthistorical Museum in Vienna or any decent art museum in the world, because there are nude sculptures or paintings in there? Art collectors all over the world have nude paintings in their living rooms, in full sight of creatures of all ages. Heck, until Ashcroft decided to drape a curtain over her, even the statue of Justice in de DOJ was a nude sculpture. You can walk into many catholic cathedrals and you see naked Adam and Eve on paintings. The whole point of age restrictions is exactly for when it stops being art and it starts being porn.
After all, tits are made for kids. Are they going to blindfold babies and tie their hands behind their backs before they can be breast fed? Or is it now child porn when parents take pictures of their 2 year old running naked on the beach? And what if iPhoto and Aperture start having nudity detection? Can't upload your private pictures to your photostream anymore or have the feds knock down your doors because of child porn because of some nude baby pictures on a photostream for relatives?
Someone in Cupertino please start having a brain, the situation is absurd.
Didn't know Apple, with the devil's symbol of the bitten Apple of Eve as corporate logo, is now run by the Amish or some other puritans...
"We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone ... Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone"
"You know, there's a porn store for Android. You can download nothing but porn. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That's a place we don't want to go - so we're not going to go there."
I'm all for Apple not having porn in their store, if they allow for alternative sources of content download. If Google blocks porn in their store, then you can go to some other store. But if Apple wants to be the single source of content, they should then allow more liberal policies, provided things are rated according to the content. I have no problem with them banning people who try to sneak in software with a lower than applicable rating, but that was not the case from what I understand.
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open. Yes they can find that in Google if they search for it and turn off the filter, yes they would technically be downloading an app with a rating they shouldn't be downloading and it's the parents to blame but the app is still violating Apple's policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
As long as porn is legal, and as long as the app is rated 17+, Apple should stand back.
Yes and while we're at it, let's get porn in all the gas stations, post offices and supermarkets.
You may not be aware of it, but that's pretty much the reality. The post office will gladly deliver porn magazines to your P.O.Box, and just about any gas station magazine rack has plenty of porn available, at least if Playboy etc. count as such; same goes for most major super markets that have a magazine section.
If I want porn, I should have easy access to it. In fact, let's just get it on daytime TV after Sesame Street. If the kids don't want to watch, they can have a 5 minute ad break to switch the channel.
which is exactly why you have *very* easy access to the various pay-per-view channels on your cable box. Heck, here's a predition: if Apple really decides to enter the TV business, you can pretty much decide its fate by whether or not something like Playboy TV and other channels like it will be available on it. Looking at cable providers revenues, that's a major source of income, and you can bet that all these customers won't switch to an AppleTV if they are cut off from their little private pleasures; it's too big of a business.
Microsoft doesn't put porn on XBox Live, Sony doesn't put it on PSN, you can bet it won't be in the Windows 8 Store, there's none in Steam or Netflix or Hulu. And yet, Apple gets the criticism for being uptight.
Game consoles are primarily for kids of various ages... (yes, some of them are over 30) But the hypocrisy that wanton violence in games is OK, but sex is not, is another subject that's neck-hair-raising, because I consider the violence i.e. the termination of life a lot more offensive than human procreation and the various games related to it (various S&M practices excluded)
However, again, the game boxes are an accessory to your TV, so if you don't get the content over your game box you'll get it over your DVD player or your cable provider's pay per view or premium subscription channels, so it's not like your TV is locked out. The problem is that because content on iOS devices is a single-source affair (unless you jail-break), the hypocrisy and inconsistency in the application of the "rules" is infuriating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
There's really no need for a corporate entity to be the arbiter of what constitutes good or bad taste outside their very own product.
Who's product is the App Store?
I personally don't give a damn about porn, I've seen it, and I consider it boring. But I consider censorship of any shape or form, be it governmental or corporate, even more offensive. In a world in which ever more things that used to be public sphere become privatized, the reasoning that it's private and thus under corporate control, starts to stink ever more. Let's do a few more rounds of privatization, and you can light the bill of rights on fire, because there's no public ground left on which it's applicable, even though theoretically it's still in force.
This much like certain states revoking abortion clinics their license to operate even though not officially forbidding abortions. The result is that something that's federally protected is being defacto outlawed, by skirting federal law with state regulations.
I mean, nobody would stand for it if Apple would say we don't sell iOS devices to women, because we believe in male superiority, and we're a private entity, so we choose whom we sell to. But it's supposed to be acceptable for them to decide what is or isn't "decent" when it comes to art, particularly when there are multiple levels of protection as is the case with the 500px site where all nude pictures are by default blacked out anyway, and by far the minority of the provided content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
Just imagine you buy a butter knife and it came with an EULA that prohibits you from using that butter knife as a putty spatula, or to spread oil paint on a canvas. Or you go to an art supply warehouse and the oil paint comes with an EULA that prohibits you from using the paint for nude paintings
This is a warning, not a prohibition Apple can warn all they want about potentially offensive content, as long as they don't prohibit it.
Apple isn't preventing you from using an iOS device to view porn, they just don't want to facilitate it. Microsoft and Sony are the real enemies here. It's way harder to get porn on their consoles.
They do more than "not facilitate". They actively get in the way. And as I said, I don't even care about the porn, I do care about the slanted values when it comes to sex and violence on the one hand, and the wholesale classification of porn of a content that's largely non-sexual at all, has a reasonably small number of artistic nudity, and a few traces of pornography if you care to hunt for it long enough; none of which is visible at all, unless you first specifically enable it to be visible AND allow 17+ rated apps on the iOS device.
Well, I'm not aware how to bypass parental restrictions short of jail-breaking the device or something. And if you're not really a kid, and it's not your parent that set the restrictions, then of course, it's OK that you can click through: you have been warned, and you're a responsible adult.
That's a fair point - if parents take on the responsibility of enabling the controls, it would help things but companies always tend to make it easier for the parents. It's easier to make people who want it have to actively acquire it.
Just because it's old and people want to preserve it in public places doesn't mean it's appropriate for all ages. Different people have different views on the naked body. You wouldn't want to see this kind of thing on every billboard. It just works best for everyone to have it conservative and let people who really need to see it, go where they can see it. On the App Store, they get about 50 million downloads a day so they have to be a bit more responsible.
if Apple wants to be the single source of content, they should then allow more liberal policies
External sources can introduce security issues though and they have no obligation to allow more content sources. If people want that, Android is the platform to go to. If most people end up on Android for this reason, Apple might loosen up a bit.
the hypocrisy that wanton violence in games is OK, but sex is not, is another subject that's neck-hair-raising, because I consider the violence i.e. the termination of life a lot more offensive than human procreation
The depiction of sexual scenes can lead players to become sexually aroused. Violent imagery doesn't really have an equivalent effect.
But I consider censorship of any shape or form, be it governmental or corporate, even more offensive.
Ah the old 'it's not about porn, it's about rights' argument. By that logic no company should be allowed to censor any offensive imagery that is legal and so you'd have to force everyone to sell everything. It's just not feasible and sellers have rights too.
I mean, nobody would stand for it if Apple would say we don't sell iOS devices to women, because we believe in male superiority, and we're a private entity, so we choose whom we sell to. But it's supposed to be acceptable for them to decide what is or isn't "decent"
That's not the same thing though. If someone makes a living selling pancakes, you can't force them to sell sausages because you like sausages. The seller can't discriminate against the buyer but they can choose what to sell.
the wholesale classification of porn of a content that's largely non-sexual at all
I found a lot of pretty sexual images in there. I've only been looking for a couple of days too. It's tough going having to click all the images multiple times but I've already classified it as a source of porn.
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open.
I was born back in the dark ages when most kids had to rub two sticks together to see nudes.
But I learned the secret of the Library's photography section and it was great! (also the pagan/wiccan books had some "skyclad ceremonies" in them). Were some of those images pornographic? Probably, but not nearly as much as my uncle's Hustler/Penthouse collection under the bed. Or the even skeezier magazines I occasionally found in the local ELKs club trash can. Or the porn VHS tapes hidden in my friend's dad's secret compartment in the hutch by the VCR. Before I was a teenager I'd seen it all, because I wanted to see it and no one, not my mother, priests and nuns who taught me in school, or God himself was going to stop me.
Did it damage me? Did it turn me into some kind of misogynist who hates women and views them solely as objects to be used for my own pleasure? Obviously I don't think so, or I wouldn't be making this post because I'd be too busy out using women or looking for more gonzo porn on my android.
It's an uncomfortable fact of life that many children begin to develop a sexual drive long before they're emotionally ready for a sexual relationship. I recall that decade as one of agonizing desire without real hope of relief. Probably all of the above served to amp it up a little, but I was all over the Encyclopedia, Sears Catalogs and Nat Geos long before my library card opened a whole new world of porn. Even the most innocuous nudity was arousing and pornographic to my dirty little mind.
The idea that the app store is protecting any child from viewing porn (or art nudes, or whatever) is completely ridiculous. If they want it, they will find it. And many of them do want it.
So the irony of all this is that my interest in pornography started my interest in photography.
Even the most innocuous nudity was arousing and pornographic to my dirty little mind.
The idea that the app store is protecting any child from viewing porn (or art nudes, or whatever) is completely ridiculous. If they want it, they will find it. And many of them do want it.
Apple only really has two options - they either facilitate the acquisition of pornographic material or they don't. I don't think they expect that it's going to protect kids from it but they don't want to make it easier for kids to get it. Google removes adult content too:
""Reddit Is Fun" was ejected for linking to pages on Reddit that in turn link to NSFW content.
The Google Developer Content Policies explicitly state that apps may not link to content Google deems "Pornography, obscenity, nudity, or sexual activity.""
"Sexually Explicit Material: We don't allow content that contains nudity, graphic sex acts, or sexually explicit material.
Violence and Bullying: Depictions of gratuitous violence are not allowed.
Hate Speech: We don't allow the promotion of hatred toward groups of people based on their race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity.
Gambling: We don’t allow content or services that facilitate online gambling, including but not limited to, online casinos, sports betting and lotteries."
Boo Google - no violence, nudity, gambling or making fun of old people. Let's all have a go at Google for taking Reddit Is Fun down when they've left 500px in and the web browser. Hypocrites!
Comments
Not really though, it's like the dialogs you get on websites "Are you over 18 - yes/no".
That gets covered here:
http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/29/heres-how-iphone-app-store-ratings-work-hint-they-dont/
Apparently sexual content and nudity is allowed but not graphic content. That word 'graphic' is really what's the problem. The following apps have nudity and have managed a 17+ rating:
http://www.appannie.com/app/ios/classic-nude-paintings-puzzle/
http://www.appannie.com/app/ios/pathways/
so I guess it would come down to the presentation and the amount. If you uploaded an app full of topless girls, the nudity wouldn't be graphic in the sense of pornogaphy but the app's purpose would be titillation. If it makes you reach for your zipper, it's graphic. I haven't seen many people doing that in an art gallery so that kind of nudity has to have a more acceptable presentation.
"We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone ... Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone"
"You know, there's a porn store for Android. You can download nothing but porn. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That's a place we don't want to go - so we're not going to go there."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/steve-jobs-reiterates-fol_n_544045.html
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open. Yes they can find that in Google if they search for it and turn off the filter, yes they would technically be downloading an app with a rating they shouldn't be downloading and it's the parents to blame but the app is still violating Apple's policies.
Yes and while we're at it, let's get porn in all the gas stations, post offices and supermarkets. If I want porn, I should have easy access to it. In fact, let's just get it on daytime TV after Sesame Street. If the kids don't want to watch, they can have a 5 minute ad break to switch the channel.
Microsoft doesn't put porn on XBox Live, Sony doesn't put it on PSN, you can bet it won't be in the Windows 8 Store, there's none in Steam or Netflix or Hulu. And yet, Apple gets the criticism for being uptight.
Who's product is the App Store?
http://www.steripen.com/media/wysiwyg/user-guides/classic-user-guide.pdf
"Do not insert into bodily orifices."
Bummer.
Apple isn't preventing you from using an iOS device to view porn, they just don't want to facilitate it. Microsoft and Sony are the real enemies here. It's way harder to get porn on their consoles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
Apple DOES have ratings on the apps, you CAN restrict apps according to age ranges.
Not really though, it's like the dialogs you get on websites "Are you over 18 - yes/no".
Well, I'm not aware how to bypass parental restrictions short of jail-breaking the device or something. And if you're not really a kid, and it's not your parent that set the restrictions, then of course, it's OK that you can click through: you have been warned, and you're a responsible adult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
Exactly WHAT is rated 17+ if not "explicit" content? I mean, what's the point of being able to download a variety of Kamasutra apps, but you can't download an app that might *possibly* be used to access *some* pictures that *might* be construed as being pornographic?
That gets covered here:
http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/29/heres-how-iphone-app-store-ratings-work-hint-they-dont/
Apparently sexual content and nudity is allowed but not graphic content. That word 'graphic' is really what's the problem. The following apps have nudity and have managed a 17+ rating:
http://www.appannie.com/app/ios/classic-nude-paintings-puzzle/
http://www.appannie.com/app/ios/pathways/
so I guess it would come down to the presentation and the amount. If you uploaded an app full of topless girls, the nudity wouldn't be graphic in the sense of pornogaphy but the app's purpose would be titillation. If it makes you reach for your zipper, it's graphic. I haven't seen many people doing that in an art gallery so that kind of nudity has to have a more acceptable presentation.
The thing is, "real" art should not have any age restriction. Do you really think they stop kids from seeing the Acropolis in Athens or the Arthistorical Museum in Vienna or any decent art museum in the world, because there are nude sculptures or paintings in there? Art collectors all over the world have nude paintings in their living rooms, in full sight of creatures of all ages. Heck, until Ashcroft decided to drape a curtain over her, even the statue of Justice in de DOJ was a nude sculpture. You can walk into many catholic cathedrals and you see naked Adam and Eve on paintings. The whole point of age restrictions is exactly for when it stops being art and it starts being porn.
After all, tits are made for kids. Are they going to blindfold babies and tie their hands behind their backs before they can be breast fed? Or is it now child porn when parents take pictures of their 2 year old running naked on the beach? And what if iPhoto and Aperture start having nudity detection? Can't upload your private pictures to your photostream anymore or have the feds knock down your doors because of child porn because of some nude baby pictures on a photostream for relatives?
Someone in Cupertino please start having a brain, the situation is absurd.
Didn't know Apple, with the devil's symbol of the bitten Apple of Eve as corporate logo, is now run by the Amish or some other puritans...
"We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone ... Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone"
"You know, there's a porn store for Android. You can download nothing but porn. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That's a place we don't want to go - so we're not going to go there."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/steve-jobs-reiterates-fol_n_544045.html
I'm all for Apple not having porn in their store, if they allow for alternative sources of content download. If Google blocks porn in their store, then you can go to some other store. But if Apple wants to be the single source of content, they should then allow more liberal policies, provided things are rated according to the content. I have no problem with them banning people who try to sneak in software with a lower than applicable rating, but that was not the case from what I understand.
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open. Yes they can find that in Google if they search for it and turn off the filter, yes they would technically be downloading an app with a rating they shouldn't be downloading and it's the parents to blame but the app is still violating Apple's policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
As long as porn is legal, and as long as the app is rated 17+, Apple should stand back.
Yes and while we're at it, let's get porn in all the gas stations, post offices and supermarkets.
You may not be aware of it, but that's pretty much the reality. The post office will gladly deliver porn magazines to your P.O.Box, and just about any gas station magazine rack has plenty of porn available, at least if Playboy etc. count as such; same goes for most major super markets that have a magazine section.
If I want porn, I should have easy access to it. In fact, let's just get it on daytime TV after Sesame Street. If the kids don't want to watch, they can have a 5 minute ad break to switch the channel.
which is exactly why you have *very* easy access to the various pay-per-view channels on your cable box. Heck, here's a predition: if Apple really decides to enter the TV business, you can pretty much decide its fate by whether or not something like Playboy TV and other channels like it will be available on it. Looking at cable providers revenues, that's a major source of income, and you can bet that all these customers won't switch to an AppleTV if they are cut off from their little private pleasures; it's too big of a business.
Microsoft doesn't put porn on XBox Live, Sony doesn't put it on PSN, you can bet it won't be in the Windows 8 Store, there's none in Steam or Netflix or Hulu. And yet, Apple gets the criticism for being uptight.
Game consoles are primarily for kids of various ages... (yes, some of them are over 30) But the hypocrisy that wanton violence in games is OK, but sex is not, is another subject that's neck-hair-raising, because I consider the violence i.e. the termination of life a lot more offensive than human procreation and the various games related to it (various S&M practices excluded)
However, again, the game boxes are an accessory to your TV, so if you don't get the content over your game box you'll get it over your DVD player or your cable provider's pay per view or premium subscription channels, so it's not like your TV is locked out. The problem is that because content on iOS devices is a single-source affair (unless you jail-break), the hypocrisy and inconsistency in the application of the "rules" is infuriating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
There's really no need for a corporate entity to be the arbiter of what constitutes good or bad taste outside their very own product.
Who's product is the App Store?
I personally don't give a damn about porn, I've seen it, and I consider it boring. But I consider censorship of any shape or form, be it governmental or corporate, even more offensive. In a world in which ever more things that used to be public sphere become privatized, the reasoning that it's private and thus under corporate control, starts to stink ever more. Let's do a few more rounds of privatization, and you can light the bill of rights on fire, because there's no public ground left on which it's applicable, even though theoretically it's still in force.
This much like certain states revoking abortion clinics their license to operate even though not officially forbidding abortions. The result is that something that's federally protected is being defacto outlawed, by skirting federal law with state regulations.
I mean, nobody would stand for it if Apple would say we don't sell iOS devices to women, because we believe in male superiority, and we're a private entity, so we choose whom we sell to. But it's supposed to be acceptable for them to decide what is or isn't "decent" when it comes to art, particularly when there are multiple levels of protection as is the case with the 500px site where all nude pictures are by default blacked out anyway, and by far the minority of the provided content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
Just imagine you buy a butter knife and it came with an EULA that prohibits you from using that butter knife as a putty spatula, or to spread oil paint on a canvas. Or you go to an art supply warehouse and the oil paint comes with an EULA that prohibits you from using the paint for nude paintings
http://www.steripen.com/media/wysiwyg/user-guides/classic-user-guide.pdf
"Do not insert into bodily orifices."
Bummer.
This is a warning, not a prohibition
Apple isn't preventing you from using an iOS device to view porn, they just don't want to facilitate it. Microsoft and Sony are the real enemies here. It's way harder to get porn on their consoles.
They do more than "not facilitate". They actively get in the way. And as I said, I don't even care about the porn, I do care about the slanted values when it comes to sex and violence on the one hand, and the wholesale classification of porn of a content that's largely non-sexual at all, has a reasonably small number of artistic nudity, and a few traces of pornography if you care to hunt for it long enough; none of which is visible at all, unless you first specifically enable it to be visible AND allow 17+ rated apps on the iOS device.
That's a fair point - if parents take on the responsibility of enabling the controls, it would help things but companies always tend to make it easier for the parents. It's easier to make people who want it have to actively acquire it.
That giant erect drawing is pretty obscene:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerne_Abbas_Giant
Just because it's old and people want to preserve it in public places doesn't mean it's appropriate for all ages. Different people have different views on the naked body. You wouldn't want to see this kind of thing on every billboard. It just works best for everyone to have it conservative and let people who really need to see it, go where they can see it. On the App Store, they get about 50 million downloads a day so they have to be a bit more responsible.
External sources can introduce security issues though and they have no obligation to allow more content sources. If people want that, Android is the platform to go to. If most people end up on Android for this reason, Apple might loosen up a bit.
The depiction of sexual scenes can lead players to become sexually aroused. Violent imagery doesn't really have an equivalent effect.
How dare you, sir. You take that back. Perhaps you haven't seen Grand Theft Anal 3.
Ah the old 'it's not about porn, it's about rights' argument. By that logic no company should be allowed to censor any offensive imagery that is legal and so you'd have to force everyone to sell everything. It's just not feasible and sellers have rights too.
That's not the same thing though. If someone makes a living selling pancakes, you can't force them to sell sausages because you like sausages. The seller can't discriminate against the buyer but they can choose what to sell.
Do you notice people wearing gloves a lot when they come to your house?
I found a lot of pretty sexual images in there. I've only been looking for a couple of days too. It's tough going having to click all the images multiple times but I've already classified it as a source of porn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Although people are calling everything on 500px 'art' simply on a reactionary basis, the fact is a lot of it is also pornographic art. I don't want it to be banned from the store but that's because I like looking at it. I wouldn't want young kids who are interested in photography to be able to download it and see women bent over tables with their legs spread open.
I was born back in the dark ages when most kids had to rub two sticks together to see nudes.
But I learned the secret of the Library's photography section and it was great! (also the pagan/wiccan books had some "skyclad ceremonies" in them). Were some of those images pornographic? Probably, but not nearly as much as my uncle's Hustler/Penthouse collection under the bed. Or the even skeezier magazines I occasionally found in the local ELKs club trash can. Or the porn VHS tapes hidden in my friend's dad's secret compartment in the hutch by the VCR. Before I was a teenager I'd seen it all, because I wanted to see it and no one, not my mother, priests and nuns who taught me in school, or God himself was going to stop me.
Did it damage me? Did it turn me into some kind of misogynist who hates women and views them solely as objects to be used for my own pleasure? Obviously I don't think so, or I wouldn't be making this post because I'd be too busy out using women or looking for more gonzo porn on my android.
It's an uncomfortable fact of life that many children begin to develop a sexual drive long before they're emotionally ready for a sexual relationship. I recall that decade as one of agonizing desire without real hope of relief. Probably all of the above served to amp it up a little, but I was all over the Encyclopedia, Sears Catalogs and Nat Geos long before my library card opened a whole new world of porn. Even the most innocuous nudity was arousing and pornographic to my dirty little mind.
The idea that the app store is protecting any child from viewing porn (or art nudes, or whatever) is completely ridiculous. If they want it, they will find it. And many of them do want it.
So the irony of all this is that my interest in pornography started my interest in photography.
Apple only really has two options - they either facilitate the acquisition of pornographic material or they don't. I don't think they expect that it's going to protect kids from it but they don't want to make it easier for kids to get it. Google removes adult content too:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/violetblue/why-developers-should-worry-about-google-play/1148
""Reddit Is Fun" was ejected for linking to pages on Reddit that in turn link to NSFW content.
The Google Developer Content Policies explicitly state that apps may not link to content Google deems "Pornography, obscenity, nudity, or sexual activity.""
https://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html
"Sexually Explicit Material: We don't allow content that contains nudity, graphic sex acts, or sexually explicit material.
Violence and Bullying: Depictions of gratuitous violence are not allowed.
Hate Speech: We don't allow the promotion of hatred toward groups of people based on their race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity.
Gambling: We don’t allow content or services that facilitate online gambling, including but not limited to, online casinos, sports betting and lotteries."
Boo Google - no violence, nudity, gambling or making fun of old people. Let's all have a go at Google for taking Reddit Is Fun down when they've left 500px in and the web browser. Hypocrites!