Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

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

  • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1781·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Midnight Wolf@lemmy.worldEnglish
      231·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
        544·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Lantern@lemmy.worldEnglish
          112·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
            125·
            1 year ago

            An app won’t kill anyone on its own. Just like how guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

            • Lantern@lemmy.worldEnglish
              91·
              1 year ago

              Looks like we found the libertarian. Are you really willing to let others die or be abused for the sake of ‘freedom’? Here’s the thing; we can prevent civil freedoms from being infringed upon by increasing regulation. Yes, people are the root of all evil, but that doesn’t mean we can’t manage the spread of evil by regulating the tools that make it easier for it to grow. You’re really just proving my point here. The bystander is almost just as bad as being the one doing wrong.

        • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.worldEnglish
          12·
          1 year ago

          It’s not censorship. Censorship is something demanded of by a government. As a business owner if you use the assets of my business I am passively participating and enabling you to spread your message. If I find out what you do is horrible I have the right to retract any level of my participation from your endeavor. You are still allowed to say whatever you want but I am NOT compelled to help you even passively.

          We have protected classes to stop people from uaing this right to exile vulnerable groups from being able to use all servicea in society this way as a counter measure to this right but if the form of removal is not based automatically out of what body you are walking around in or what your religious beliefs are and the ban doesn’t apply unilaterally to all members of your group for that sole reason - then it is valid.

      • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
        324·
        1 year ago

        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”.

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          132·
          1 year ago

          “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.

          • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
            110·
            1 year ago

            Sigh. Your pro censorship and think those who are not are horrible. What a surprise.

            Read my other comments in this thread to see why I can care less who it is. Weather it is an asshole or an angel.

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              32·
              1 year ago

              Oh, I’ve read a ton of your naive “censorship is bad m’kay” takes. You think it’s sheltering your argument from criticism when it’s really not.

              Some censorship is fine. Who is doing it, the magnitude, and why all matter. This is not a black and white issue.

    • gmtom@lemmy.worldEnglish
      182·
      1 year ago

      I love going onto the profiles of people that make dumbass comments like this because it’s never a 1 off dumb comment that got downvotes, it’s always that their profile is filled with either lazy troll comments or just stupid bullshit.

      And this guy is certainly no exception, my favourite is him denying climate change and trying to claim that its all just a communist conspiracy.

      • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
        27·
        1 year ago

        Or stuff like:

        Someone needs to firebomb the school board.

        oh wait, that was you…

        Honestly, I don’t care if he’s a climate denier or full on conspiracy theorist about everything, even a broken clock is right twice a day right? So when they say something right, I acknowledge it (and even people like you that, based on their profile are usually a bit less crazy, occasionally say crazy things as above).

    • nyctre@lemmy.worldEnglish
      131·
      1 year ago

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

      • Cam@lemmy.worldEnglish
        337·
        1 year ago

        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.

          • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.worldEnglish
            91·
            1 year ago

            It’s funny, because not only does he really not get what a sheep he is, but I’ve pasted the link to it on Wikipedia to him twice already. He’s really trying his hardest to stay as ignorant as possible.

            Ask him his opinion of tertiary education if you want a laugh :)

          • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
            414·
            1 year ago

            I’m not the person you were replying to, but here’s my take.

            We don’t need to tolerate intolerance, but that’s different than “freedom of speech”. We can still refuse to tolerate intolerance while still protecting freedom (I’m purposefully ignoring the whole “inciting violence” and “pyramid scheme” that would make this illegal, not just controversial, for the sake of this argument).

            Example: on Android, you can still sideload apps at your own risk, protecting freedom, while Google can still remove it from their store, and so refusing to tolerate intolerance. (wow am I really defending Google? Well I guess at least they used not to be evil).

    • body_by_make@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      10·
      1 year ago

      Google had this removed from the play store before lmao sure you could download the APK, but that’s way less user friendly and people he’s trying to target aren’t going to

      • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
        513·
        1 year ago

        Right, Google still allows some kind of freedom by allowing you to sideload the apk, while still doing the right thing and removing this abominations their store. Win win. Apple sucks (imho).

    • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
      513·
      1 year ago

      While I would never need anything with Andrew Tate’s name on it, I absolutely agree with the statement and that’s why I stick with android. Upvoted.