theotherphil
About
- Username
- theotherphil
- Joined
- Visits
- 32
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 124
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 51
Reactions
-
Apple's dominance means it needs stricter controls, says Germany's antitrust regulator
-
Developers cautiously welcome prospect of third-party app stores
22july2013 said:It's not the 30% fee that will drive most developers out of the Apple App store, it's the Apple App Store Review Guidelines. Let's look at the first 10 rules just as an example of the things that developers will now be freed from adhering to if they use someone else's app store. These are just the first few items in a document spanning roughly 1000 different requirements. A third party App Store will be motivated to remove as many of these restrictions as possible, or won't bother to enforce their own restrictions like Apple does. App developers will look upon third party app stores as a new golden age for app development where there are fewer rules.1. Safety
When people install an app from the App Store, they want to feel confident that it’s safe to do so—that the app doesn’t contain upsetting or offensive content, won’t damage their device, and isn’t likely to cause physical harm from its use. We’ve outlined the major pitfalls below, but if you’re looking to shock and offend people, the App Store isn’t the right place for your app.- 1.1 Objectionable Content Apps should not include content that is offensive, insensitive, upsetting, intended to disgust, in exceptionally poor taste, or just plain creepy. Examples of such content include:
- 1.1.1 Defamatory, discriminatory, or mean-spirited content, including references or commentary about religion, race, sexual orientation, gender, national/ethnic origin, or other targeted groups, particularly if the app is likely to humiliate, intimidate, or harm a targeted individual or group. Professional political satirists and humorists are generally exempt from this requirement.
- 1.1.2 Realistic portrayals of people or animals being killed, maimed, tortured, or abused, or content that encourages violence. “Enemies” within the context of a game cannot solely target a specific race, culture, real government, corporation, or any other real entity.
- 1.1.3 Depictions that encourage illegal or reckless use of weapons and dangerous objects, or facilitate the purchase of firearms or ammunition.
- 1.1.4 Overtly sexual or pornographic material, defined as “explicit descriptions or displays of sexual organs or activities intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.” This includes “hookup” apps and other apps that may include pornography or be used to facilitate prostitution, or human trafficking and exploitation.
- 1.1.5 Inflammatory religious commentary or inaccurate or misleading quotations of religious texts.
- 1.1.6 False information and features, including inaccurate device data or trick/joke functionality, such as fake location trackers. Stating that the app is “for entertainment purposes” won’t overcome this guideline. Apps that enable anonymous or prank phone calls or SMS/MMS messaging will be rejected.
- 1.1.7 Harmful concepts which capitalize or seek to profit on recent or current events, such as violent conflicts, terrorist attacks, and epidemics.
-
Apple Watch sensor has racial bias, claims new lawsuit
freeassociate2 said:Welp, looks like the racists (”it doesn't effect me so it can’t be racism”) are out in force.
They key here is that even though the limits of oximeters are known, Apple went ahead and introduced the feature regardless of how it would impact users’ experience. No disclaimers. No apparent skin tone detection. No on Watch warning or dialogue allowing you to adjust for skin tone. And do on. It’s marketed, engineered, and now defended as working for the default skin color assumption... i.e light-skinned people. It’s not a leap to assume that has there been more people with darker skin tones involved in the decision making, this would have been flagged as a bug or a non-starter. So yes, this is the sort of structural or chain of casual racism that you can encounter.
https://www.apple.com/healthcare/docs/site/Blood_Oxygen_app_on_Apple_Watch_October_2022.pdf
I've had a number of people claiming on the Garmin Forums how they're outraged that their $1,000 watch doesn't give the same readings as a cheap pulse oximeter from Ebay. I highlight that their cheap eBay pulse oximeter also isn't FDA approved, and it could technically be a random number generator. Comparing 2x non-calibrated devices against each other and liking one set of numbers better than the other....laughable.
I then point out that I have 2x expensive AF, medical grade, calibrated devices and my Garmin is reading exactly the same.....but fake news.
-
Apple Watch sensor has racial bias, claims new lawsuit
maestro64 said:This lawsuit isn’t about what Apple did it was about what happen in NYC and how people of color were treated during Covid. As it was stated O2 skin sensor are less accurate or completely wrong the darker the skin becomes. If medical professionals did not know this that is their fault not the device you have to know the limitations of your tools. But I’m this country you can sue for any reason. -
ITC finds Apple guilty of heart rate monitoring patent infringement