Apple removes app created by Andrew Tate::Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-1 points

The reason why you should not have an iPhone. It is a walled garden and Apple is the ministry of truth in this walled garden.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Sounds like you’re trying to justify defending a rapist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I am criticizing the closed garden iOS ecosystem. This has nothing to do with Andrew Tate except the fact his app was censored for being “contraversal”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

“Controversial”? No - he’s an asshole and horrible person.

If your think he’s simply controversial then that says a lot more about you than Apple.

Apple should allow installing apps from third parties.

Apple should not let this asshole sell his app on their store.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Dunno… this feels like the first genuinely good news I’ve heard apple linked with in a long while.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

How is censorship good news? Yeah this is all about Andrew Tate, but that is not the point. The point is that censorship is bad and censorship can occur on centralized app stores were it is done for “politicial” reasons.

I don’t care if you think Andrew Tate is evil, it is the action of banning an app because “we do not like you”. That is the problem and Apple users have no choice since they are in a walled garden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Some censorship is good tbh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I mean, sure, I will almost always die on this hill - but for something that supports harming women (or people in general), and/or is part of a pyramid scheme? Naw dawg ima dip out for a second and go get some smokes (and also never come back).

Now, if it was like an app that was supporting human rights or something that is being removed, sure, it’s bad to have an entity control what you see/hear/interact with. And there may be gray areas between those two examples. But suppressing a human(s) just because the developer has a tiny pp and needs to overcompensate to the max? And try to gain traction and supporters to do the same? Uhh, no fucking way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I mean, sure, I will almost always die on this hill - but for something that [Insert excuse here]

Now, if it was like an app that [Insert app that I like], sure.

Really bro? Lets say you liked Jimmy. Jimmy was a contraversal guy and Jimmy had the Jimmy app on the App Store. Then Apple took down the Jimmy app since they do not like Jimmy, Jimmy is too contraversal, Jimmy triggers too many people online.

You either die on this hill of being against censorship or you don’t.

You do not have to like or support Andrew Tate to be against his app being taken off the App Store.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I feel like your negative opinion of censorship is so strong that it overpowers your morality. Would you let a serial killer walk around shouting that we should kill everyone just for the sake of preventing censorship, or would you insist they’re locked up? See, even you have your limit.

Its a less extreme example, but the same logic applies here. We shouldn’t just let misogyny grow for the sake of ‘freedom’. That’s how you end up with stuff like the Nazis. Classic bystander mentality.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

This app didn’t get taken down because it was by a “controversial” guy. It got taken down because content in the app encouraged violence and because the app itself was a pyramid scheme (People had to pay $50/month just to use the app, with promises of rewards if they got more people to join).

Google removed the app from their store, too. Yes, you can still probably install it from their website or a third party app store on Android, and yes, it would be great if third party app stores and sideloading existed for iOS (and they kinda do, though they’re very limited) but even if they did exist it would be reasonable to expect every single one of them to refuse to host this app (especially if “hosting” entails accepting payments).

Tate can still host this via the web. He can even build a progressive web app for it. I suspect he’ll run into issues collecting that $50 monthly payment any way other than by crypto, though, since I suspect most payment processors will refuse to work with him.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.1K

    Posts

  • 92K

    Comments