←back to thread

1525 points garyclarke27 | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.719s | source
Show context
lord_erasmus ◴[] No.23219890[source]
In most of these stories featuring Google abusing their power to remove apps, it's usually a matter of some automated tool gone wrong and the problem is solved a couple of days later. But this time it's different, they are actually asking developers to censor themselves if they are not affiliated with a gov.
replies(5): >>23220004 #>>23220611 #>>23220957 #>>23220962 #>>23221130 #
gundmc ◴[] No.23220004[source]
What makes you think this is something other than another (awful) high profile case of automation gone wrong?
replies(3): >>23220108 #>>23220199 #>>23221080 #
fauigerzigerk ◴[] No.23220108[source]
Because their action seems consistent with their stated intention of banning all non-official speech on Covid-19?

It could still be reversed if they feel public opinion swings the other way. That wouldn't mean it's automation gone wrong.

replies(2): >>23220303 #>>23221604 #
random32840 ◴[] No.23220303[source]
It may be automated based on frequency of reports, but either way this is unlikely to be company policy. The people who make these decisions are relatively low-level employees following a company guidebook. The guidebook says it has to go? It has to go. The employee doesn't want to get fired.

I doubt it'll stick.

replies(1): >>23220339 #
fauigerzigerk ◴[] No.23220339[source]
>...but either way this is unlikely to be company policy

Perhaps you haven't seen the article because it's behind an Apple News link. There's a screenshot of a message stating company policy as follows:

"Pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Developer Agreement and the Enforcement policy, apps referencing Covid-19, or related terms, in any form will only be approved for distribution on Google Play if they are published, commissioned or authorized by official government entities or public health organizations"

replies(3): >>23220810 #>>23221168 #>>23222515 #
1. mc32 ◴[] No.23221168[source]
We’re stuck between a rock and a hard place. With new diseases or any new phenomena knowledge changes frequently. Oftentimes official organs are lagging and independent voices are at the forefront and have the freshest information.

Unfortunately both of the above can have counter agenda (could have good intentions such as calming hoarding), even worse is that you can have kooks, active disinformation, lulz, etc. There is no good answer to this.

replies(1): >>23221541 #
2. fauigerzigerk ◴[] No.23221541[source]
I think our traditional answer was good enough. Trust the people to weigh a wide range of information and opinions. Delegate more detailed analysis and decision making to political representatives and independent institutions.

It's not like there wasn't any anti-scientific rubbish, hate speech and manipulation in book shops, newspapers and on TV. Entire countries used to be run by media barons (literally or effectively).

Regarding Covid specifically, I find it pretty ironic that free speech should be restricted to government officials by an oligopoly of US corporations while the head of the US government routinely spreads anti-scientific disinformation on that very subject (and on others).

replies(1): >>23221782 #
3. mc32 ◴[] No.23221782[source]
I agree. Not only the US but even the WHO is very susceptible to manipulation (it’s not human transmissible, then yes it is, masks don’t work, then yes they do). We also see politics dictate policy (viz Taiwan). Then Gates alarms almost everyone with his “disease free certificates”.