Apple May Loosen Restrictions With iPhone 3.0 178
mr100percent writes "Apple rejected the iPhone aggregator app Newspapers because of a topless photo in one of the app's subscribed-to papers. In the rejection message, Apple noted that Parental Controls have been announced for iPhone OS 3.0, adding that it 'would be appropriate to resubmit your application for review once this feature is available.' Rumor sites are speculating that Apple will relax their content restrictions once the 3.0 update puts parental controls in place. This may mean that apps like NIN will be allowed in the future."
Right. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll be over here using my blackberry to browse porn and run whatever the hell I want. Shame I can't make the copy/paste joke anymore though.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, the application approval process Apple is using is totally fucked up. They seem to have a group of people doing it, most of whom are reasonable, but there are a couple of them with suspenders attached to their thongs, rejecting apps for all kinds of stupid reasons.
But this whole 'objectionable content' thing is total crap, because the way Apple seems to be applying it, they should be rejecting all the 3rd party browsing applications (which just wrap WebKit in different ways), because they all permit
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't this mean that if Apple's own browser had to apply to be on the iPhone, it would also be rejected?
Re: (Score:2)
But it's not disabled by default. And even if it were: You can still enable it. Try that with rejected AppStore apps...
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that on other phones, you are free to download apps from wherever you want, without hacking the phone.
So even if the official app-place has rules about content, that's not a problem as you can go elsewhere. Just as with the recent store about Microsoft and disallowing VoIP apps - it's simply not comparable to Apple where you aren't free to download elsewhere.
'Mature Content' Label? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:'Mature Content' Label? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apparently according to TFA one of the UK tabloids posted topless photos, which in America would be "Mature content" and hidden in newsstands next to porn.
Oh, America, land of the free puritans and perverts [economist.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Yay, premium content. Guess who's not going to sign up for the Economist to read it? Anybody.
Got any links we don't have to pay to read? (Not that the site works without js anyway. Tards.)
Re:'Mature Content' Label? (Score:5, Informative)
one of the UK tabloids posted topless photos
If by 'one of' you mean 'all of, every issue'. It's called Page 3 [wikipedia.org] and it's a national institution. The German papers [wikipedia.org] are worse.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a controversy for us Americans.
We're prudes, and are sure you should be too.
still fairly ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if those changes are forthcoming, it's still ridiculous that an expensive piece of technology used primarily by adults has such puritanical restrictions on it. I realize it does reflect poorly on Apple to have apps that are in very poor taste (e.g. the one where you shake the baby...), but it's pretty obvious that mainstream bands like NIN are an acceptable part of American culture.
I work in technology (but not a tech-only office) and this fiasco is definitely getting noticed and is clearly reflecting badly on Apple.
I'm not sure whether the concept of a parental-controls setting was the product of a deliberate leak to address this issue or if it was just part of the plan all along, but I seriously doubt that a significant portion of the iPhone userbase is comprised of children who might have not been given the phone if the app store weren't policed. It seems pretty clear to me that Apple is more than happy to piss off their users and snub even Trent (who is considered rather avant-garde in the music biz) if there's any risk to their image.
Re:still fairly ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
The iPhone is a nice technology demonstrator, but it's things like this that make it useless. Complete control over content, no tethering, no background apps, no user space that mounts as a USB thumbdrive, severely restricted syncing options (you can only sync to one computer, so if you want to load some stuff from your laptop on to your iphone while on the road, you have to erase everything you put on it with your desktop, for example.) No apps allowed that 'duplicate existing functionality' on the iPhone - meaning you have to wait for apple to fix the ongoing bugs in the mail client and Safari - namely that the mail client doesn't properly download POP3 messages even when you ask it to ("0 bytes remaining" and never displays the message unless it connects to Wifi) and Safari still has that dumb bug where it re-loads pages when you switch between windows. Painful when you're not on 3G.
There's a lot you can do with a hacked phone, but then you're missing out on everything else. It's kind of a lose-lose situation. It works well within its very limited scope, and if you're happy with that scope, it's a great product. If you want it to be more useful, it's deeply frustrating.
Re:still fairly ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
Usless to who? Most people, including my mother, don't need those for their iPhone. The average user does not have those complaints. My sister's biggest complaint with the iPhone is that you can't use the keyboard in landscape mode for texting the way other touchscreen phones can (and that's why she eagerly wants the 3.0 update)
Those features would all be nice, and I think 3.0 will fix many of those complaints like tethering and background notifications.
Re: (Score:2)
Those features would all be nice, and I think 3.0 will fix many of those complaints
No it won't. And if the average user does not care either way, it makes more sense to give the sophisticated user the ability to run the applications of their choice, since the naive user won't be bothered to, if they actually cared about serving the customer's needs. But they don't. They serve Apple's needs, not the user, and not the developer.
It's called expectation management. If people don't know what is actually possible
Re: (Score:2)
Usless to who? Most people, including my mother, don't need those for their iPhone. The average user does not have those complaints.
Most people don't complain about censorship either, yet it still affects their lives negatively because they don't even know what they're missing.
I wouldn't compare this to actual censorship; Apple is not the only smartphone manufacturer. It's still lame, and yes, one more reason not to buy an iPhone. Who knows what other fantastic applications will never exist because of the chilling effects of Apple's iron hand?
Not really accurate (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPhone is a nice technology demonstrator, but it's things like this that make it useless.
The millions of people who bought one because of the functionality it offers may disagree.
Complete control over content
Except that anyone can jailbreak them if that bothers them.
no tethering
Again, jailbreaking if that is important to you.
no background apps
Well, no app store background apps. Some of the built in apps do in fact operate in the background.
no user space that mounts as a USB thumbdrive
As the saying goes,
Re:Not really accurate (Score:5, Insightful)
Suggesting jailbreaking is a stupid answer to legitimate complaints about failings of the device. The average user is not going to do it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The "average user" won't need to do most of what the GP was whining about either, so I think it's a draw.
Re: (Score:2)
The "average user" won't need to do most of what the GP was whining about either, so I think it's a draw.
Uh what? Let's just take a look at that list:
Complete control over content, no tethering, no background apps, no user space that mounts as a USB thumbdrive, severely restricted syncing options (you can only sync to one computer, so if you want to load some stuff from your laptop on to your iphone while on the road, you have to erase everything you put on it with your desktop, for example.) No apps allowed that 'duplicate existing functionality' on the iPhone - meaning you have to wait for apple to fix the o
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, most users will not be doing
- tethering - generally only heavy travelers, with laptops.
- USB thumbdrive - most users don't have thumbdrives.
- syncing options - most people with an iPhone have most of their media in one place, iTunes.
- bugs - yeah, waiting for vendor fixes is unique to Apple.
Just because your mom does some of these things, doesn't mean MOST people do. Respectfully, your mom is an edge case.
I'm not saying these wouldn't be nice options, they would be. An
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, behind the times.
That's why the entire mobile device world is trying to make an iPhone killer.
Re: (Score:2)
If people are doing it with other devices, they certainly don't need the iPhone to do it.
The people who use iPhones don't need all that functionality to make the device useful to them.
The people who need that functionality do not use the (non-jail-broken) iPhone.
There's no problem here. Different devices for differing needs. I fail to see how there is an actual problem.
Re: (Score:2)
The solution to despotic control over the things you own is to exploit security flaws within it? And that is praise for the despot?
Rationalize, you magnificent fanboy, rationalize!
getting up to snuff with their own application solutions
Oh, you ruined it! You can do more with a five year old Symbian phone than you can do with the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
you can only sync to one computer
technically true, however, you don't have to sync your device with a computer in order to load music onto it. In fact, I've found that you only need to sync for pictures, and apps. I never sync music, not even from one computer, but I use 3 different computers regularly to load music onto my iTouch (the limitations in this area are the same between touch and phone) and have used 2 others as well with no problems.
Just drag and drop inside of iTunes
Jumping to conclusions (Score:2)
used primarily by adults
Really?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You need to be 18 to get a cellphone in your name.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
These restrictions should not be a surprise to anyone who hasn't been living under a rock. It is exactly the same type of restrictions that Apple applies to all their products; be it iPod, iPhone, OSX or whatever else you can think of.
Apple controls the products and they control the distribution channels (iTunes, App Store, etc). Most people who buy iPhones are slaves to the App store, just as most people who buy iPods are slaves to iTunes, and most people who buy OSX are slaves to buying Apple Hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
It is exactly the same type of restrictions that Apple applies to all their products; be it iPod, iPhone, OSX or whatever else you can think of.
The NIN content that Apple found objectionable can currently be bought from iTunes, just not as an app. Similarly, OSX is a pretty well understood platform that really only needs hardware developers to bother creating compatible drivers. You can put any content you want on iPods, and there are a wide variety of secondary apps to do this if you don't like iTunes. [yamipod.com]
Re
Re: (Score:2)
Even the app can be purchased, just not the update. Which contains a song that is already available on iTunes.
As someone else said, if Andy Kaufman was still with us, he'd be doing this all over the place and having a great laugh at the retarded & hypocritical controversies that he stirred up.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I realize it does reflect poorly on Apple to have apps that are in very poor taste
No, it doesn't. It reflects poorly on those that created the app.
Some people are just retarded, and would call the street builder criminal because someone got killed on their streets.
Which reflects poorly on those people.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I like Nine Inch Nails. Quite a bit. But, let's be real - what America are you living in that makes you think that NIN are an acceptable part of American culture? First, I would imagine that a majority of Americans have never, in their lives, even heard of NIN (which makes it obvious they aren't remotely a part of "American culture"). Second, I would imagine that a very large percentage (possibly eve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kids with iPhones? (Score:5, Funny)
Who the fuck buys their kid an iPhone?
I want to be adopted.
Re:Kids with iPhones? (Score:5, Funny)
Ballmer's kids had to buy their own.
with apologies to some cartoon (Score:3, Funny)
Ballmer's kids: Daddy, Daddy, will you show me how to work my Zune?
Ballmer: Sure, let me see show you...
kids: HAHA just kidding Daddy we have ipods like everyone else in the world!
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that I buy my kids an iPhone, but they do occasionally get to play with the iPod Touch (for example on long flights I pop a kids' film on there, or they play a game). Having parental controls makes sense, I suspect.
Re: (Score:2)
WHY do parental controls make sense?
I have a 4 & 7 year old boys.
I have an iPhone that they play on occasionally.
I make sure the games, movies & music that are on there when I give them the phone are appropriate to my family morals.
Re: (Score:2)
Rich New Yorkers it seems. I was in line for an Apple Store Grand opening and met two 7-year-olds with iPhones. It's enough to make you jealous.
Yeah, if only I had an iPhone when I was 7 I could have spent all my time playing tilt the marble games on it instead of riding my BMX.
Hopefully today I will have time to bleed the rear brake on my all-mountain.
I had video games and other doodads when I was a kid (no portables though) but I think that shit has gotten out of hand.
Topless? Ptah! (Score:5, Funny)
"because of a topless photo in one of the app's subscribed-to papers"
That is indeed a tasteless photo. How could they not be wearing a turtle neck sweater? This reeks of disrespect for The Jobs!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm always up for viewing some topless pics. I wish somebody would post a link to it. I tried to watch the whole video but seeing Trent do an Apple advertisement had me wanting to claw my eyes out and jam chopsticks into my ears {aside ... currently eating ... join the dots on what /aside}
At Apples whim. (Score:2, Insightful)
In simpler terms restrictions will remain the same, applications will be accepted or rejected entirely at Apples whim.
Baby shaker out (Score:2)
Initial acceptance can be a little random but stuff that does not meet guidelines does get filtered eventually.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention Flash Lite 3. Could easily be on the iPhone but Jobs won't let it because it 'runs too slow'. Goodbye easy streaming audio/video.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Will they loosen restriction on Java as well ? (Score:2, Interesting)
I mean, here you got hardware with Java native support (processor chosen by Apple got the Jazelle option), with a license that prevent JVM to be installed on it !!!
All right, we all know that "Java is too slow" was touted by Steve simply because he need exclusive application to ensure the success of his pay-per-download platform.
Allowing Java would have simply killed the exclusivity, because Java is né multiplatform and some order of magnitude easier to develop with. Having let people the choice
Someone thought it was a good idea... (Score:2)
The JVM weighs in at around 2MB, and the libraries were about half a meg each, IIRC. JocStrap is described as a Java/Objective C connection library.
So far as JocStrap goes, I haven't had a chance to look at it; not sure if 'connection' means bindings or wrapper classes or what. However, the fact that the JVM is included makes me ass
My Only Real iPhone Complaint (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not allowed to interact with my customers.
I frequently get feedback (both positive and negative) on the applications I've written. I'd love an opportunity to comment on this feedback, either to address concerns or to graciously accept the accolades. However, Apple keeps a stranglehold on all feedback from customers, and does not permit you to know much of anything about how to contact the customer directly.
I wish this was different, and is one of the reasons I've taken a break from iPhone development for a while.
Re: (Score:2)
I did both with Rogue Touch (yep, iPhone programmer in my spare time too). I post regularly at TouchArcade and also created my own forum for people to socialize and get help (at http://www.chronosoft.com/ [chronosoft.com]). It's been a great way to get suggestions and interact with users of my game, and I recommend it highly over
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But for Velocity, (which was done in my spare time rather than for my day job) I've not bothered. Why? Well, really because Velocity is such a stupid-simple app that there is l
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. We get those 1-star "reviews" from people who can't be bothered to read the in-store documentation, the in-app help, or even be bothered to just experiment with the app for 5 seconds before claiming a certain advertised feature is missing and therefore we are outright lying. I would love to reply to those and say "you are either too dumb to use this app or are 10, go away" and revoke their "review".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:My Only Real iPhone Complaint (Score:4, Interesting)
I think there needs to be some kind of a tagging mechanism so that all users - authors and customers alike - can bring problem reviews to Apple's attention for consideration.
There's an app to stream local National Public Radio stations. Last time I checked, it was filled with reviews like "needs more alt rock: 1 star" or "only had people talking boring!: 1 star". I wish I could tag those "nonsensical".
I've seen plenty of reviews like "this works exactly as described - I love it!: 1 star" because the reviewer mis-selected the rating before posting their review. Maybe we could tag those "inconsistent"?
I saw a review this morning that said they'd been using it for over a month, but the app was first published three days ago. That deserves a "shill" tag.
If I were implementing the system, you'd only be able to see your own tags so that you couldn't unduly influence others with poor moderation. They'd be strictly for Apple's use in identifying bad reviews.
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't you do like others do?
1. Update the description with how-to's, bug fixes coming soon, etc.
2. Reply to feedback with feedback. ie reply to the reviews with your own reviews.
It's certainly not ideal, but it is one way to interact with your customers.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I frequently get feedback (both positive and negative) on the applications I've written. I'd love an opportunity to comment on this feedback, either to address concerns or to graciously accept the accolades.
The reviews suck for customers, too. There's a budget app from iBearSoft called "Money". It got great reviews, but after buying and installing the app, I discovered that it was just awful. I mean, really horrid. You have to put end dates on all recurring income and expenses for some reason, and when I put an end date of January 1, 2039 on my paycheck, it literally took over 5 minutes to recalculate my budget. Also, it doesn't matter that my wife gets paid a monthly salary: it insisted on dividing that
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But I could only add one.
Do these unscrupulous developers just create a bunch of iTunes accounts and buy their own apps so they can post lots of favorable reviews?
That's just stupid.
This is truly mad (Score:5, Insightful)
We have some company deciding that people should not be able to install an application which contains a graphic of ladies with no blouses. You can buy every day at a newstand in the UK two or three newspapers which have, on page 3, pictures of ladies with no blouses. Anyway, Apple does not want you to see these pictures as part of an application on the phone you have just bought.
But then, after you've bought the phone, you can browse the web to the page 3 sites or others, and see those same pictures.
So what on earth are they thinking? Do they really think there is something terrible that people should not be allowed to see in something as commonplace as ladies without blouses? What exactly is so terrible about it? Do they really think that banning this awful stuff from the apps makes any difference at all to what people look at and see on iPhones?
These people are going completely mad in terms of an obsession with interference which they mistake for control. But worse than that, their values about what they want to control are all screwed up.
Do you all still think this is "cool"?
So don't buy their damn phone then. (Score:3, Insightful)
There's lots of alternatives. Even in Soviet USia.
Re: (Score:2)
But then, after you've bought the phone, you can browse the web to the page 3 sites or others, and see those same pictures.
An interesting angle I hadn't even considered — Apple is engaging in protectionism. They have an artificial monopoly on tits on the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll admit, I buy The Sun for 30p each morning. Mainly for the football news (news?). All the men in the office have a quick gander. It is British culture. It is a bit of fun. It's a giggle.
"Trudy, 22, Middlesfield says 'I can't beleive the news...'" - these are true comedy gold comments.
Loose (Score:2)
I'm just overjoyed that someone on the internet used "loose" correctly.
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Interesting)
Instructing a device I own not to display content that I find offensive is not censorship, by any stretch of the imagination. ...and considering that I am a long-haired, Bush-hating, free software-loving, paranoid Slashdot denizen, my definition of censorship is probably on the permissive side.
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'. They allow people that want to use them to filter content and for those who don't care don't have to. I think it is quite useful actually. Without these controls you can't even do an image search for anything on Google without getting porn. So these content filtering features can even aid someone in finding useful information rather than just porn. (Even though we all know that is all the internet was made for.)
Or is it that people can't stand to have what they look at labeled as 'explicit' or 'mature'?
I am not sure but I just don't see how, as pointed out in the parent, allowing the USER to filter content doesn't anything other than help the user.
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Informative)
The other thing that's stupid about this (Score:3, Insightful)
Newspaper app: allows a user to see an image of a topless woman. Status: denied.
Mobile Safari: allows a user to see as much hard-core porn as he/she wants. Status: open for all users, baby!
NIN app: allows a user to hear disturbing lyrics from one of the band's albums. Status: denied.
Mobile Safari: allows access to Nazi hate sites, al Qaeda recruiting sites, any other hateful site you can think of, and oh, by the way - the same song lyrics that appear in the NIN application. Status: all systems go!
If there
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As Trent Reznor said...
I'd also like to point out all the urine/feces/flatul
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Two issues
1)Parental controls presume that there's an adult mode- a mode where the owner (or their parent) can choose not to be censored
2)There should be multiple groups doing the filtering, not just one. If one group makes all the decisions its ripe for abuse- it's too tempting to censor competitors, negative views of the company, or fold to interest groups. If multiple groups compete, you can choose one that does a good job of it without those worries, since at least 1 group is likely not to do so.
Nei
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
How did this get a +5?
The ENTIRE POINT OF THIS ARTICLE is that apple is adding the ability to allow or disallow adult apps in 3.0. The same as you can currently do with itunes.
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not the jailbroken ones.
I am way above 18 (Score:2, Insightful)
Why do I need parental controls in any device of mine?
Parental controls just give lazy parents the feeling of doing something when in reality they are doing nothing about the education of their offspring.
I can decide myself if an application is tasteful or not and if I want it in any device of mine.
Which is why I don't have an iPhone, but all the rest of you that feel compelled to be treated like an audience of captive putative children, enjoy your poison (and to think people actually pay for the privilege
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because "parental control" is always about porn? It's never about filtering offensive material, if you want to do that, you'll have to make your own filter. Where is the parental control that allows me to filter Christian propaganda, politicians (aka. professional liars), the MAFIAA, Microsoft and Apple? Without blocking porn, of course. Porn
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'.
The "slippery slope" — first you make them live in the ghetto, then you send them to the camps, then you send them to the showers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think a lot of it is that a decent portion of Slashdot's population is teenagers. Not all (maybe not even most), but you have a lot of 13-17 year old teenage males who are going to complain about legitimate filters. When they're overly broad they (along with everyone else, and fairly I might add) will complain about the situation as restricting what consenting adults can look at. But even when the filter gets properly narrowed down to the appropriate groups those teenagers are still going to complain b
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'.
Children have a fundamental human right to free speech and free expression and to be exposed to free ideas every bit as much as adults. It's MORE important for children to have access to ideas so that they cannot be brainwashed by propaganda that sees itself as so flimsy that the only way it can prevail in the wild is by suppressing facts and arguments that would destroy it, long enough for the brainwashing to take hold.
Beyond that, if parents can filter children's content, then national censors can filter
Re: (Score:2)
Not censorship, I agree, but instructing a device I own not to display content that doesn't offend me is far from ideal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you appear to be speaking ironically. However Pixar's successful track record in making hugely popular family-friendly and adult-friendly movies indicates that (as far as judging the appeal and appropriateness of content goes) there's actually a good basis of truth in your statement, no matter how ironically it was intended.
The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
I hereby submit my new app for app store approval. My app is aimed at teaching parts of the sacred bible to kid, most specifically Ezekiel 23:19-20.
19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were like those of donkeys, and whose emissions was like that of horses.
Since the app is aimed at little kids, it graphically depicts the holiness and splendid beauty of this biblical moment with the Egyptians' donkey-sizes penises as ejaculating like horses.
AMEN.
Re: (Score:2)
Which translation is that from? I'm not disputing the content - on the contrary, I think we all know what they mean by "flesh" and "issue" in the more common translations - but I don't think I've seen it put quite so bluntly before. I can put a copy of that translation to *very* good use, making heads explode.
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:4, Informative)
That's the English Standard Version [esv.org] (ESV).
Re: (Score:2)
That's the English Standard Version [esv.org] (ESV).
Not quite:
[19] Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt [20] and lusted after her paramours there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose issue was like that of horses.
I suspect linhares may have taken a liberty or two for dramatic effect. On reflection, and further searching, the God's Word [godsword.org] translation seems to fit the purpose at hand well enough, without need for further massaging:
She remembered how she had been a prostitute in Egypt when she was young. So she took part in even more prostitution. She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose semen was like that of horses.
It somehow lacks the dramatic resonance of the ESV or KJV, though.
Mind you, on further reading, it's clear that ALL of this misses the essential point that you can't take it as literally talking about a woman who liked men who were hung like donkeys and who blew their loads like hor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
That's nothing:
Exodus 12:29-30: And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.
Let's not forget:
Isaiah 13:15-16: Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
And:
Samuel 15:2-3: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
I would rather let my children read about Egyptians donkey penises than about mass murder of women and children being depicted as a good thing that god encourages and occasionally commits himself.
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree... It appears most Americans are more easily offended by even mild nudity than by horrible acts of violence.
The newspaper that Apple didn't like, The Sun [thesun.co.uk], is the best selling newspaper in Britain, available from every corner shop and supermarket.
They have a special website [page3.com] for their page 3 content.
If you want more topless women in your newspaper, try the Daily Star [dailystar.co.uk]. If even that has too much writing, there's always the Sunday Sport [sundaysport.com] and Daily Sport [dailysport.co.uk].
(Three of those websites are blocked as "Adult - Sexually Explicit" at my work, which should give you a clue.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My opinion is easily summed up by this quote:
If man were meant to be naked he would have been born that way.
-Oscar Wilde
Re: (Score:2)
It appears most Americans are more easily offended...
THANK YOU, that is most perceptive. That is the real issue, not Apple censorship. Its the US that is to blame, the moral majority. Apple is merely complying with national sentiment, like American broadcast and cable compannies. Apple doesn't dictate morality!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you've not seen this, it's worth a look.
I have a question about this passage (Score:3, Funny)
Is there really that much difference between a horse and a donkey in this regard? I mean, why must the word of God clarify that they had donkey-size penises and ejaculated like horses? Do horses shoot significantly more (or less) "emission" than donkeys? Or are their genitals significantly larger or smaller? What if they had horse-size genitals and had emissions like donkeys -- would that make the girl in this passage more or less of a whore? It just seems like a strange detail to be hung up on, but if
Re:I have a question about this passage (Score:5, Funny)
If you lived in an agrarian society all of your life, these differences would be significant.
How about this revision:
19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were the size of Playstation 3s, and whose emissions burned with the fire of the Xbox 360.
Re: (Score:2)
whose genitals were the size of Playstation 3s, and whose emissions burned with the fire of the Xbox 360.
What, no wiiwii jokes?
Re: (Score:2)
19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were like those of donkeys, and whose emissions was like that of horses.
[...] with the Egyptians' donkey-sizes penises as ejaculating like horses.
Technically, the "she" is Jerusalem, and the paramours in Egypt are all the countries of the (then) known world. See Ezekiel 23:1-18 for context. But, your main point stands; it's not a chapter reviewed in Sunday School...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oblig. Bash.org [bash.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what their built-in web browser makes of that news site...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well we'll certainly miss whatever the fuck it is you were maybe going to write but didn't due to this.
Do you have a link to what you've written for mobile phones thus far (android I'm guessing?)?
Re: (Score:2)
I hope that the USA splits up in retardo-country and a normal country as soon an possible. So good people don't have to be punished for the idiocy of others.
It's never going to work that way. The only way it's splitting is into haves and have nots. The good news is that it's a limiting factor. Those people think they're so fucking great that only their blood is pure, eventually they start fucking their own sisters and then you have totally insane monarchs who blow the whole system. The bad news is that we're still on the way in to this cycle.
If you like money, make apps for the iPhone. Principles are more important... in principle. heh heh.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me rephrase this for you...
I will *never* publish anything for possibly the most profitable platform for developers, as long as there is something about it that I don't like. I don't care, even if I lose most of my potential clients because of it.
And you think people who _buy_ the iPhone are dumb?
You're saying flat out that you don't care if you lose most of your business? Ethical standpoints are nice and all, but not when there are people who would like to give you money!