Entries Tagged as 'censorship'

Why the hell not?

Jeff LaMarche writes:

This really needs to stop, Apple. There is nothing in the SDK agreement or documentation that you can point to that would reasonably justify this rejection. It’s your store. If you want to set up concrete rules and enforce them, that’s fine. I think you’d be better off letting the market decide, but it’s your house, I’m okay with you making rules about what goes on there. But… make real rules and enforce them fairly. This arbitrary, capricious shit has got to stop. Applications shouldn’t get rejected because some reviewer got in a fight with their spouse, got a speeding ticket on the way into work, or just hasn’t gotten laid recently.

The capricious and some might say haphazard way that some apps are permitted and others rejected and some are removed after a time, tells me that it’s not one person making the decisions, it’s a team. And some of them don’t like fun.

I’m unlikely to buy apps like iFart, Sound Grenade or Nails on Chalkboard but I’m inclined to think that if people want to buy that sort of shit and if it’s only a couple of dollars, why the hell not?

I’m not suggesting they open the doors but I’d appreciate some sort of consistency in the screening process and more description of why in the rejection process. At the moment it’s a lot of chickenshit posturing and vague pointing to things that are ‘inappropriate’ or in their heads ‘don’t offer sufficient value’.

IT Bullies

Twenty years ago the most intimidating person in a company was the person with the key to the stationery cupboard. They’d query why you wanted two pens instead of one, complain about how quickly you were going through your notebooks (as if documenting less would be better) and positively sniffed at you if you needed pens and notebooks at the same time especially if you were a new start.

The grumpy sod in charge of the stationery has been replaced with the IT Bully. They still hold the keys to productivity but they actively attempt to stymie you, or so it would seem.

They don’t enable
The more functionality you have, the more the IT Bully has to manage. This can be simple (like preventing the user from changing his desktop background) to complex (hiding the Connections tab in Internet Options so not only can you not change the proxy setting but you can’t even view them – should you need to, for example, attach to a different network or try and get a machine working on your current network) to inane (setting up all of the machines on the LAN to talk to a Time Server in order to keep the clocks in sync – but that clock is not only 10 minutes fast, you’re also blocked from changing it manually).

They don’t care about your work
It’s not their work. Their world is all wrapped up in WINS, Active Directory, Forests, DOMAINS, Policies and Profiles. The ports they use are tied up in Windows-specific services, MAPI, their own monitoring ports. They don’t consider that you may need to access services in high order ports, use IMAP/POP3 services outside the LAN, connect using SSH/SFTP or any number of other possibilities.
For example, changing the firewall and proxy settings over the weekend and not telling the client which means that anything they have added to the network stops working on Monday morning. The event which inspires this rant involved exactly that – a forced change which we were not informed about, when queried, was initially denied and then responded to with aggressive language designed to intimidate.

They exploit fear, uncertainty and doubt
This serves to intimidate the non-technical using language like “I’m sure you can all appreciate the importance to retain the highest level of security feasible…” or “I’m sure you understand the need to maintain the need for review of security on the ICT systems and the importance of authorisation to open service ports to the Internet” while stripping us of essential services or denying us products and services which might actually make our job easier. Sadly things haven’t changed – they don’t like it if you want to use a Mac or if you want to use an Smartphone or PDA with the system. They’re not keen on new software, on web-based services which bypass their provisions and claim ignorance if you ask for the settings which would enable you to sort things out yourself.

When cornered, they attack.
Another memorable IT Bully was Justin. He talked the talk but never quite managed to walk the walk. He claimed knowledge of UNIX and network that he could never demonstrate and had to be guided through even the simplest processes but he was in charge of the Windows IT network on site. For nine months he ‘evaluated’ a top spec laptop running the latest Windows build yet in the end it had to come down to the other members of his team to deliver the promises he made – and even then the build was lacking multimedia (promised), PCMCIA support (essential), Sleep/Suspend support (obvious for laptops) and support for additional monitors, IrDA, modems or wireless. When confronted at a project meeting with the problems, his response to me was “Shut up, Macboy” which thankfully ended his participation in any of the important projects that we had to manage.

BOOBS

Coverage of the FaceBook furor

“Nearly 85,000 people have joined a Facebook group formed to protest against the networking site banning overly revealing breastfeeding photos from online profiles…
…According to Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt, photos of a fully exposed breast (defined by showing the nipple or areola) violate Facebook rules and may be removed.
‘We take no action on the vast majority of breastfeeding photos because they follow the site’s terms of use,’ Mr Schnitt said, but added that some photos were removed to ensure the site remains safe for all users, including children.”

Safe for all users, including children?

FaceBook’s terms and conditions state:

Membership in the Service is void where prohibited. This Site is intended solely for users who are thirteen (13) years of age or older, and users of the Site under 18 who are currently in high school or college. Any registration by, use of or access to the Site by anyone under 13, or by anyone who is under 18 and not in high school or college, is unauthorized, unlicensed and in violation of these Terms of Use. By using the Service or the Site, you represent and warrant that you are 13 or older and in high school or college, or else that you are 18 or older, and that you agree to and to abide by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

Are FaceBook seriously suggesting that 13 year olds are to be protected from seeing breasts? This rule was written by a man, isn’t it obvious? Someone who personally feels titillated by seeing a “nipple or areola” so they ban it. Isn’t this a little like homophobes who experience homosexual arousal (yes, there was a study).

Notting Hill even covered this nearly a decade ago:

Anna Scott: What is it about men and nudity? Particularly breasts? How can you be so interested in them?
William: Well…
Anna Scott: But, but, seriously: they’re just breasts. Every second person in the world has them.
William: Oh, more than that, when you think about it: you know, Meat Loaf has a very nice pair.
Anna Scott: [laughs] But they’re… they’re odd looking, they’re for milk, your mother has them, you’ve seen a thousand of them… What’s all the fuss about?

What is the fuss about? The more I think about it, the more I think our laws were put in place by the very deviants we’re trying to identify.

Available in comic shops …to any age

Grrrrr….

1000 fans? And save yourself 30%

From MacRumors:

“Hello Developer,

We’ve reviewed your application Pull My Finger. We have determined that this application is of limited utility to the broad iPhone and iPod touch user community, and will not be published to the App Store.

It may be very appropriate to share with friends and family, and we recommend you review the Ad Hoc method on the Distribution tab of the iPhone Developer Portal for details on distributing this application among a small group of people of your choosing.

Regards,

Victor Wang
Worldwide Developer Relations
Apple, Inc.”

Victor Wang, the name behind the callous rejection of the excellent MURDERDROME from the App Store, strikes again. Apple don’t have consistent rules for what applications do go onto the store. Seems they’re issuing takedowns based on whether anyone complains.

And “Limited Utility”? They have room for half a dozen tip calculators but not a Fart machine?

Anyway.

Note the recommendation.

Ad-Hoc Distribution allows you to distribute 100 copies of your app to 100 iPhones. Enterprise distribution allows you to distribute to 1000 iPhones. Neither method involves the App Store at all.

Can you see the silver lining here?

At 100 fans (for the $99 certificate), you could sell an extremely useful application on a subscription basis. Say, for instance, NetShare. And I bet you could find 100 people to pay $100 for it. Apple wouldn’t see it and you’d end up with the FULL $10,000 rather than Apple taking 30% and risking it being removed. How about $20 a month? That’s $2000 in income every month and if someone doesn’t pay up, you remove their iPhone ID from your certificate and *boom*.

At 1000 fans, things start getting interesting. Same situation – create an application that is worth $100 and distribute to 1000 fans using Enterprise Distribution ($299 certificate). You’ve now got $100,000. That’s not a bad rate and again Apple doesn’t see it at all and they certainly don’t get their 30%. The irony here is that distribution to 1000 iPhones isn’t likely to be enough for large companies.

So, you want independent application development for the iPhone? Time to lobby Apple. If you can get them to extend the Ad-Hoc distribution to 1000 iPhones and the Enterprise Distribution to 100 000, then you’ve got a real business to build. It requires constant excellence but then that’s what it’s all about.

Time to stop complaining and start talking.