Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for June 20, 2013
Pencil, Pencil, and Pencil
Dividing the Linux desktop
LWN.net Weekly Edition for June 13, 2013
A report from pgCon 2013
QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com)
Posted Mar 16, 2010 15:26 UTC (Tue) by trasz (guest, #45786)
Posted Mar 16, 2010 17:18 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Posted Mar 16, 2010 19:41 UTC (Tue) by trasz (guest, #45786)
Posted Mar 17, 2010 1:15 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
(A lot of this blame must be laid at the door of SGML, though.)
Posted Mar 16, 2010 17:23 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
The iPhone vision of the mobile Internet's future omits controversy, sex, and freedom, but includes strict limits on who can know what and who can say what.
That's an absolutely factual statement. Take a look at the EFF's expose of the iPhone developer's agreement.
Apple's agreement definitely includes strict limits on what you can say. You can't even make any "public statements" about the agreement itself!
What I see here is just a plain old FUD.
Then you are closing your eyes to reality.
Posted Mar 16, 2010 19:40 UTC (Tue) by trasz (guest, #45786)
Also, notice that the agreement doesn't include any limits on what one can say, except for the usual NDA stuff, which is pretty common practice.
Posted Mar 17, 2010 6:35 UTC (Wed) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047)
What, seriously? You're trying to refute the argument by scanning for specific words, rather than reading for meaning?
There needs to be a new fallacy name for this thing: argumentum ad regexum, perhaps.
Posted Mar 17, 2010 8:31 UTC (Wed) by trasz (guest, #45786)
Right. Was is peace, Freedom is slavery and Ignorance is strength
Posted Mar 17, 2010 8:55 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
Ok. Show me where it says anything that is even remotely
related to controversy, sex or freedom.
It's kinda pointless to discuss anything with you.
1. Ignorance is strength: if something is not written directly in EULA
it does not exist. Acts of Big Brother^W^W Steve Jobs^W^W Party ^W^W Apple
2. War is peace: when Big Browser^W^W Steve Jobs says it's bad idea to
allow Flash or Opera on the device it's not a war, it's peaceful
coexistence of Oceania and Eurasia.
3. Freedom is slavery. When you get approval and later your program is
removed because it contains sex it's
freedom. Steve Jobs^W^W Big Brother imposes antisexualism so of course such
programs must be removed. Actually they were never admitted - check
archives of Minitrue if in doubt!
It's scary to talk with citizen of Oceania like you - they can always
accept any fact and fit in their worldview where Steve Jobs ^W^W Big
Brother is always right and Party ^W Apple can do no wrong.
P.S. Oh and I like the infamous
clip too. They did one thing wrong, of course: David Graham played Big
Brother, not Steve Jobs. But I must admit that David Graham looks much
better in this role on TV... Steve Jobs plays it much better in real
Posted Mar 17, 2010 13:21 UTC (Wed) by trasz (guest, #45786)
I's hard to argue with Party member, but I'll try...
Posted Mar 17, 2010 14:22 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
I replied that the agreement doesn't say anything that would
Ignorance is strength, right? Agreements says quite straight: "You
understand and agree that Apple may cease distribution of Your Licensed
Application(s) and/or Licensed Application Information or revoke the
digital certificate of any of Your Applications at any time". Apple is
Judge, Jury & Executioner, but obviously it's not a shot against
freedom because freedom is slavery, after all.
And as for sex, yes, it's not written in agreement - it does not need to
be: Apple can do anything it wants and developer is absolutely powerless so
why write dirty words in the agreement?
Posted Mar 17, 2010 15:01 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784)
For example, 3.3.14 talks about "content or materials... that in Apple's reasonable judgment may be... considered pornographic, or defamatory" - that's talking about "sex" and "controversy", by the way.
Now, as a lot of the apologists for Apple might say (and have done in comments on the referenced article), this just applies to Apple's own store, which sounds like you can take your ball away and play elsewhere. Except that to do so requires you to jailbreak your phone and encourage others to do so, something which Apple regards as a DMCA violation. That, including a section (3.2e) in the developer agreement, pointed out in what you all too readily regard as "FUD" (a feeble debating tool when used as often as you have done) from the EFF, is a direct influence on "freedom".
Who isn't paying attention again?
Posted Mar 17, 2010 15:19 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
From the iPhone developer's agreement:
3.3.14 Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content...
Note that Apple in its sole discretion gets to decide what is "obscene", "pornographic" or "offensive".
See also Sec. 7.3 of the Agreement, which forbids you from distributing your apps except via Apple. And see Sec. 8(l) which allows Apple to revoke your application if it feels like it.
Posted Mar 16, 2010 15:56 UTC (Tue) by Zack (guest, #37335)
"If it's pro-apple, anything goes."
Posted Mar 17, 2010 1:16 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds