Slashdot Mirror
Apple's Schiller Responds To iPhone Dictionary App Fiasco
beef curtains writes "Phil Schiller, Apple senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, responded by e-mail to a blog post discussing Apple's rejection of a dictionary app. If Schiller's e-mail is to be believed, it offers an interesting perspective on this whole issue. He said, 'The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable. ... The Ninjawords developer then decided to filter some offensive terms in the Ninjawords application and resubmit it for approval for distribution in the App Store before parental controls were implemented. Apple did not ask the developer to censor any content in Ninjawords, the developer decided to do that themselves in order to get to market faster. ... You are correct that the Ninjawords application should not have needed to be censored while also receiving a 17+ rating, but that was a result of the developers' actions, not Apple's.' PC World has an article summarizing the drama-to-date, the blog post, and Schiller's response."
Because a dictionary getting any age rating is a good idea how?
Apple didn't force him to censor the app. The developer "voluntarily" did it. Of course, it was his only option if he wanted to get it published...
A dictionary corrects misspelled words, it doesn't write them.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
It provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable.
words I often find upsetting and objectionable:
censorship
groupthink
DRM
paternalism
authoritarianism
proprietary
patronizing
Thus I have an Android phone. Though it had to be rooted too. But at least when I try to install a program, it asks for my permission rather than the other way around.
But don't worry, he wouldn't be lying this time...
The developers may have 'chosen' to censor their work, but only because it was the only way their work could exist at all. That's still censorship.
Apple claiming that the developers chose to do it is like saying someone chose to jump in front of a bullet that was aimed at their child. Yes, they chose to... But it's hardly their fault.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
'The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable. ...
I'd like to see Schiller respond to the developer's allegation that the reviewers sent screenshots of specific common swear words - fuck, etc. explicitly typed in by Apple employees.
Schiller's denial is so vague as to be a non-denial - note he doesn't actually specifically say which words they were rejected for, just hints that this was really quite a dirty, unsavoury dictionary and had no place on a nice store like ours. His implication does contradict the message sent to the developers, which homed in on quite common words which belong as slang in a normal dictionary.
Much like the Kama Sutra rejection, this brings home how farcical Apple trying to be gatekeeper and arbiter of taste on the app store really is. They should give up now before their reputation sinks under the weight of their hypocrisy - every week I hear of a new stupid and arbitrary decision by their app store reviewers.
The Google Voice one was worse than this though - at least these guys got a reason which made some sort of sense.
The dictionary was based on Wiktionary. So I would imagine it could quite possibly contain the fabled seven words and many others. Regardless, it's disingenuous to say that you aren't censoring apps and that the developer did it voluntarily, when the actual truth is you were rejecting the app and the developer had the choice of waiting for an undetermined amount of time (till you actually implmented the partenal controls) or 'self-censoring'.
That's like saying, "No, we didn't force a confession out of him, we just kept hitting him till he felt like talking."
Blackadder said it best :
Samuel Johnson: Ah, I see you've underlined a few (takes dictionary, reads): `bloomers'; `bottom'; `burp'; (turns a page) `fart'; `fiddle'; `fornicate'?
George IV: Well...
Samuel Johnson: Sir! I hope you're not using the first English dictionary to look up rude words!
Edmund Blackadder: I wouldn't be too hopeful; that's what all the other ones will be used for.
You just got troll'd!
Keeping dictionaries away from children is always a good idea. Nothing good ever came out of letting children use dictionaries.
You just got troll'd!
Obviously the dictionary he's using has a rather different definition of reasonable people than mine does.
Mine says reasonable people aren't upset by words, especially the ones they write themselves. Reasonable people also have no expectation of going through life without encountering something they might find offensive, as they know that that idea itself is offensive to some people.
Why can't we, as a group, start using the names of idiots like that as slang for 'offensive' things? Like ...
Schiller - verb: To use ones tongue to clean a toilet bowl.
Intelligent Design - noun: The act of writing ones name in faeces.
Break out the smelling salts, I think I just saw the word "piss" in Ninjawords!
*I've probably left a couple of inconsequential things out, it doesn't matter.
"words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable"
These are not reasonable people. These are people looking through a dictionary in order to be offended.
Fuck those people. Shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfuckers.
How old is the youngest IPhone user you've seen? For me its 15. No elementary school kid needs to be running around with a $100/mo bill and an expensive phone. By 12, most kids already know these words. Who is this censorship for?
It's for two groups of people: parents groups who might protest this despite it being quite far from a real issue as you pointed out, and Apple's PR department that would rather nip it in the bud than face what is apperantly impossible: trying to sell a product through parents to their kids while telling the parents that they're responsible for being parents rather than the product.
You left out George Soros and fluoridation.
I apologise in advance for the bad language but in the interests of having a complete public record on Slashdot, here's a list of the words and phrases that Apple censors from their iPhone dictionaries:
---
Reality Distortion Field
egomaniac
vendor lockin
exploding iPod
making unfreedom hip
iCon
backdated stock options
Lisa
fanboyism
---
There you go. I feel dirty now, and shall wash my keyboard out with soap.
Your problem is that you probably don't live near enough or don't know the wingnuts that ARE requiring this kind of censorship. Sadly your education and intelligence are sufficient to realize that this kind of censorship is both useless and offensive to the rest of the sane thinking world. But since the bible belt does have a lot of people in it and we want their money too...
To date I fail to see any average good done by any religion in the world. At one time or another they have impeded the development of civilization, technology or social interaction on a less than war like level. But if that's your thing, go right ahead and practice. I'm tired of having other peoples standards and morals shoved down my throat.
Such is the world we live in.
Why bother
Only if you look them up, fool!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
And that's different...how? Is the RAM of my iPhone somehow "soiled" because the bad Mr. App Store allowed doo-doo words to get on it? The application would work the same whether it stored a local copy or not.
Breakfast served all day!
Does Safari need a 17+ age limit to be used? Will it be removed from the iPhone and iPod Touch? From Mac OS X? It can access even darker places outside there in the virtual world! Oh my godness! :-O
Canadian App store users, try this: search for "redskins" As in the Washington Redskins NFL team.
In each of the resulting 7 or so apps, each of their descriptions has Redskins censored, i.e. "R*****ns."
(Non-Canadians can verify this by downloading either Pandora Box or AppMiner apps, which download app lists for each country separately, and setting them to use Canadian currency)
Native American sensibilities is one thing, but censoring the name of a recognized sports team is pretty damn ridiculous. This raises a question: what was the process for getting it censored, and who demanded it be censored?
but can I zing the next person who decries the fact the parents are not being responsible for the activities of their children?
Parents cannot win here; Slashdot or the world in general. Because on one hand we have people who pummel them for every inaction and then turn around and berate them for any infraction their kid does.
Parental Controls do not affect those who do not use them. They however do affect what those of use responsible enough to adhere to a self described sense of morals but live in a world where such control is considered an infringement on some mysterious right thereby imposing such control on us outside of our domain.
In other words, either provide the means necessary for parents or anyone in general to filter the content relevant to themselves or those in the protection else suffer the decisions of others over the content you have available.
Parents would have an easier time if people quit moving the line.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I don't think you people realize just how close we came to having an app on iPhones that contained vulgar words.
Disaster was narrowly averted.
These things start innocently enough. A dictionary, for example, that defines the word "crap" and includes a phonetically-spelled pronunciation. Before you know it, iPhone users will be using those words, and then it's a straight path downward to public displays of affection between members of different races, laughter at fat people in stretch pants, and ultimately universal health care for everyone.
This is how societies are destroyed. I'm sure if you were to read The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, you would see that this is how it happened. And where is Rome today? "In Italy" you might say, but I mean the spiritual Rome of civilized behavior, regular bathing (for the upper classes) and great philosophers like Plato and Jesus.
Don't scoff. You look like you're getting ready to scoff, so just...don't. I mean it. I've had enough of you scoffers.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The full American Heritage Dictionary app has all of the seven deadly words (and more) stored on the ipod/iphone with audible pronunciation available with net access. Obviously there are different standards for different sources of apps.
Yes you do need to search and I don't believe Apple when they say they have done this.
Anecdote: When my daughter was in HS she came home one day and said her teacher told her that swear words are not in the dictonary. I grabed the family dictionary (a large 1980's Macquarie hardback). We looked up the word "fuckwit" and found it had a one word definition of "nincompoop". From that day forward my brother-in-law has been known to my kids as uncle nincompoop.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Because a dictionary getting any age rating is a good idea how?
Apple isn't doing this because they think children shouldn't read dictionaries. In fact, any person of any age can run a 17+ app. The only limits are:
1. Parents can lock them out.
2. You get a warning, so that if you become offended, it's your own damned fault, not Apple's.
From Apple's point of view, this has nothing to do with dictionaries, it has to do with having an age rating system to begin with. Once you have such a system, and if the system is based, in part, on "vulgar" words, then dictionaries containing such words end up with an appropriate (under the rating criteria, at least) rating.
The only way to really end this whole mess is to do away with age ratings altogether, which is incompatible with Apple's intent for concerned parents (read: repressed fuckwads) to be able to buy their products without fear that it may despoil the minds of their children.
Ratings systems like these are inherently problematic, but given that, Apple really did act reasonably in this situation.
I have no idea what ninjawords is about (sounds completely irrelevant to me) but it sure got some serious exposure out of all this.
Dear Steve and Steve:
Seriously, this is beyond ridiculous:
* Anyone can receive e-mail that contains profanity and porn. Please remove MobileMail.app from everyone's iPhone.
* Anyone can access or stumble upon profanity, porn and more while web browsing. Please remove MobileSafari.app from everyone's iPhone.
* Anyone can download and purchase songs full of profanity and sexual references. Please remove the iTunes Music Store from everyone's iPhone.
Until you remove those three apps as well, it's obvious that you're full of iShit.
To date I fail to see any average good done by any religion in the world.
Then what do you believe in if you don't believe in yourself?
I'm not religious myself but I fail to see a belief system that really addresses the underlying philosophic and moral dilemmas and some people need comfort or answers, for those people faith might work.
We need a philosophy renaissance to specifically address the needs we've so far only successfully addressed with religion.
Quack, quack.
There were no parental controls when the app was submitted and there was no indication of a release date for parental controls.
Parents need to raise there children! Don't give the child a credit card and make sure you know what they load on the ipods. If for any reason anyone here thinks that parental controls will stop children from accessing inappropriate content then I have news for them... I have yet to see parental controls work. What parents need to do is raise their children. Yes I am a parent of three and all three are capable of bypassing the parental controls on almost all the devices. Because they can read!
When I was young ALL of this material was available. P0rn is not new. Dictionaries were always available. Encyclopedias had pictures. This is just the tame stuff. Talk to your child and communicate with them. Teach them how and what is important. Don't ever expect technology to do your job.
As for Apple. They have no explanation as to why they refused so they are inventing an excuse. Hindsight is 20/20 and Apple is offering a plausible explanation unless you ask yourself this. If the developer was told that it would be approved in 30 to 60 days why would the developer spend extra time and money correcting something that will be corrected?
Nothing prevented Apple from posting parental warnings on iTunes on "adult" material. Children are not issued credit cards therefore children should not have an iTunes account!!!! Therefore a parent is required to make the purchase! If Apple was concerned about the clients "children" they had every means possible to WARN the potential client that it contained ADULT material. If Apple is so concerned about the children then why don't they setup a children's iTunes store? Apple is not the peoples keeper and if you believe Apple's excuse then they are doing a horrible job because what I can get on my iPhone and my children's iPod, parental controls or not, is a lot worse than a few vulgar definitions. I am pretty sure most of us can too.
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
Parents need to raise there children!
Is the fact that you posted this in an article about a dictionary an attempt at irony?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News