Slashdot Mirror
Apple Rejects Drone Strike App
eldavojohn writes "Developer Josh Begley, a student at Clay Shirky's NYU Media Lab, created an application called Drones+ that allows users to track U.S. drone strikes on a map of Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Far from innovative, the app in question merely relays and positions strikes as available from the U.K.'s Bureau of Investigative Journalism. First Apple rejected the application claiming it was 'not useful or entertaining enough,' then it was rejected for hiding a corporate logo. And the latest reason for objection is that Begley's content is 'objectionable and crude' and 'that many audiences would find [it] objectionable." Begley's at a loss for how to change information on a map. He's not showing images of the drone strikes nor even graphically describing the strikes. From the end of the article, 'The basic idea was to see if he could get App Store denizens a bit more interested in the U.S.' secretive, robotic wars, with information on those wars popping up on their phones the same way an Instagram comment or retweet might. Instead, Begley's thinking about whether he'd have a better shot making the same point in the Android Market.'"
with a ten foot pole.
Apple is, and should be, free to prohibit any content they want on their store. It's their store, we shouldn't force them to add stuff they don't want.
The problem here is the locked down devices. You have no other way of installing things on an iPhone. Which is precisely why I don't own one.
If the 'app' is rated as objectionable and 'crude'', what does that make the actions themselves? Are we all so content as a society to hide our heads under our pillows, all the while chanting 'freedom in the USA!'?
I think the guy had a valid point -- If the app exists or doesn't exist, it doesn't change the data points that are being created (Monthly/Weekly/Daily?) nor the map itself.
Correlation is not causation - Apple should know this.
A Drone Strike app which can't initiate strikes is like an email client which can't send email.
Apple deserves our thanks for keeping unfinished apps out of the App Store.
I'm not surprised that Apple has rejected an App that has the purpose of getting people interested in the author's own political agenda. Not that I agree or disagree with it what he's trying to do. Just that Angry Birds may be angry, but pigs aren't representing countries, political affiliations or sensitive topics in general.
I'm not saying there is not a place for this type of App. But think about it, Apples App store is frequently referred to as a "Walled Garden" It's not a place to rock the boat so to speak. Regardless of whether or not that's "right" doesn't matter. It's Apple's garden, and they can do as they please.
Now personally, I won't buy an Apple product that walls me in from information that could potentially be enlightening to me. And I'm sure Apple doesn't care.
I want an app that pops up a map pointer to each court that Apple wages battle in.
Put it on a website!
Why does everything have to be an app these days? If you just want to display information, isn't that exactly what the Web was designed for? Why turn it into something that only a minority of your potential audience can make use of?
We already went through this whole proprietary wrappers nonsense back in the early days of the Internet. I thought we learned our lesson. Apparently not.
End rant.
Oh yeah, and get off my lawn!
The big new "magical" feature in the upcoming iPhone 5 is the ability to track drone strikes.
-Lod
In other words, this guy has discovered first hand what happens when content gets censored on grounds of being "objectionable."
It doesn't matter what the subject is, SOMEONE will find it objectionable.
Evolution? Creationists.
Fluffy Kittens? PETA.
Babies? Malthists
Picking flowers? Botanical conservationists.
Vaccination? Antivac-ers.
Birth control? Catholics
Lipstick? Orthodox muslims
Etc.
If the metric for rejection was "objectionable", then the only way for apple's store to remain open is if it has nothing to sell.
Rather, Apple has taken the shister path, and has conflated "unpopular" with "objectionable", since the real application of that word would exclude all products.
As such, anything sociologically or politically unpopular, regardless of factual content, is banned.
The description of the article is misleading..
"available from the U.K.'s Bureau of Investigative Journalism."
-makes it sound like it is a government-sponsored website when it is fact a privately owned and operated site.
from the site:
"About the Bureau
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is a not-for-profit organisation based at City University, London. The Bureau bolsters original journalism by producing high-quality investigations for press and broadcast media with the aim of educating the public and the media on both the realities of today’s world and the value of honest reporting."
"Donations
The Bureau was established with a £2 million donation from the David & Elaine Potter Foundation. We have also received funding from the Andrew Wainwright Reform Trust, and the Green Park Foundation (based in the US).
Media income
We have received part payment for our stories from the BBC, Channel4, Al Jazeera, ITN, The Mail on Sunday, The Sunday Times, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph.
Non media income
We have received monies from Oxfam.
City University
The Bureau receives subsidised office space and facilities from City University. The Bureau has an ongoing relationship with City University’s Department of Journalism which includes offering work experience and internships to its journalism students. Senior members of the Bureau’s staff guest lecture at the department.
Google
The Bureau receives free email and document-sharing services from Google.
Simons Muirhead & Burton Solicitors
The Bureau has a relationship with Simons Muirhead & Burton, one of London’s leading law firms. The firm provides a comprehensive range of legal services particularly to those in the media. It advises the Bureau on a wide range of legal issues, with some of the work done on a pro bono basis.
Managing Editor
Iain Overton is employed by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. His annual salary is just under £65,000 with an additional pension provision on top. He has no political or commercial affiliations."
also misleading from the description:
" the app in question merely relays and positions strikes as available"
-the app writer may not have permission to relay this information:
also from the site:
"Steal our stories
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is an independent, not-for-profit organisation that carries out research in the public interest. Unless otherwise stated our articles and graphics can be republished without charge. However, there are a few things we ask you to bear in mind:
- If republishing online please link to us and include all of the links from our story.
- Our material cannot be sold separately.
- Photographs and video cannot be republished without specific permission from the licence holder.
- If quoting from our research the Bureau of Investigative Journalism must be credited.
The Bureau is licenced under Creative Commons, which provides the legal details. "
oldhack: "Security is a waste of money until shit hits the fan. 5 minutes later, it becomes waste of money again. "
"Begley's thinking about whether he'd have a better shot making the same point in the Android Market.'"
He'd be allowed to try. Considering there are considerably more Android users than iThing users, he'd also have a bigger impact if his app was popular.
Freedom: it's not really so bad, despite what Apple would have you believe.
-Lod
to question or challenge US authority. He should be grateful his house isn't on the map.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The pigs represent THE MAN, man.
rewriting history since 2109
http://pastebin.com/YEbM3Brv
Pastebins which are usable via Tor and do not require javascript to use
WHEN YOU NEED TO POST SH*T RIGHT NOW, BEHIND Tor.....
The List of No Bullsh*t Pastebins Usable Via Tor is here for you!
To me the pigs represent you.
Is anyone keeping track of the apps that Apple has forbidden from the appstore?
I used to be reduced to pointing at the bouncy-boobs type apps (shake the phone and watch a girl's tits bounce) until recently when a friend had to deal with an abusive spouse.
I went looking for an iphone app that records video and audio with the screen turned off - she wanted evidence of him being violent - but as far as I could tell apple doesn't permit such apps. There are some available in the jail-break version of the appstore, but jail-breaking is not an option for the typical battered woman.
Then we went looking for an app that would automatically forward all received text messages to an email address, because the guy likes to send threatening texts and it would be helpful to automatically archive them. Again no go - apparently you have to cut-n-paste them one at a time or rely on a significant level of technical expertise to manually extract them from the icloud(?) backups of the phone.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
The problem is of course the current namby-pamby nanny-state commie liberal president you've got, who insists on signing every drone death warrant personally.
A real red blooded conservative president, who upheld the US citizen's right to bear arms properly, would allow users of the app to kill foreigners with drones as easily as they are currently allowed to kill fellow Americans with handguns.
I don't see why they should pull this app(based on the description in the summary) but this:
" interested in the U.S.' secretive, robotic wars,"
wow, What a loon.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
In Soviet Union Apple bites YOU.
Time to break out of the walled garden folks.
I think we can safely conclude that Apple considers journalism that falls outside of the narrow range of MSNBCNNBBCBSFOX to be objectionable.
-- QED
There are "many audiences" that would find the content on the Adult Swim app "objectionable and crude", too, but Apple doesn't have a problem with that.
Here's the reason walled gardens are bad for you: Because you don't get to choose how to use your own device.
You are welcome on my lawn.
ifart should have been rejected too for some of those reasons. Obviously apple worries that the gubberment wont like this hence the ban - dont remind the citizens that their tax $$ are being used in ways they probably wont like- just keep everyone calm and consuming
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a reference to Godwin's Law approaches 1
In Soviet Russia, the godless religion of political correctness censors your apps.
If apple censored every other political app, one could argue that apple does just like a random webhost who doesn't allow pornography. If apple lets some political apps through and this one gets blocked, it's like a society where female must wear a burqa and males are exempted.
I am not surprised either, anyway.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
I'm not surprised that Apple has rejected an App that has the purpose of getting people interested in the author's own political agenda.
This is true, Apple never approves applications that have the purpose of fostering a particular political agenda. I bet if Mitt Romney's campaign submitted an Amercia app, it would be rejected promptly.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
Begley's content is 'objectionable and crude' ... 'many audiences would find [it] objectionable."
It's, uh, "interesting" to read of this description being used while Apple's App Store sells the iFart app.
Or maybe they really haven't received any complaints about iFart. Ya think?
(And is it available for Android yet?)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
The government could very well see this as a negative reflection on both sides of the ruling party. They would have every reason to put the squeeze on Apple to minimize this,and instead recommend that the app indicates where a fluffy kitten is born with little pink hearts.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I think that the app ought to the approved and all, but "Secretive"? It seems like not a single day goes by without news of the use of drones... that is hardly secretive...
Why not just a website with a map? What's this obsession with apps?
There was a short window when MAME was available for IOS. I'm pretty sure that if you look hard enough and are willing to bend a few presumptions, you can still have it. I have it.
I'm not surprised that Apple has rejected an App that has the purpose of getting people interested in the author's own political agenda.
There's a Mitt Romney app (and other politicians), apps for newspapers and TV news channels galore, and lots and lots of other apps that are about one political agenda or other. How is this one different?
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
I know you are, but what am I?
rewriting history since 2109
Phoneview (mac) from ecamm software will archive voicemails and texts, or she can drop her iphone off at the police station.. they can get it off. I believe there's one called iphone explorer for the PC Good luck.
I'm an iOS developer, and keep in mind when you read this that there is an entire industry of developers whose business plan is to submit pointless novelty/spam games and apps to the App Store as fast as humanly possible. Because of this, Apple has made it so you can't submit any app that simply aggregates web content or has limited functionality, and I think it's good for the App Store to impose this. On the iOS forums I follow, people get rejected constantly for simple aggregator apps like this.
So being a bit of a collector of these spam apps and having seen a lot of them, I don't really blame Apple for not being able to tell the different between those spam apps and this -- which maybe deserves a bit more consideration than the average spam aggregator app. I blame the app spammers who have wrecked the system, not Apple.
And anyway, geez, just make the project a webpage and twitter account and it has the same effect and you aren't limited to iOS. Oh, but then it's not as "cool" because it's not an iPhone app!
http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-movement/latest-updates/10-12-23/Apple_Says_No_to_Manhattan_Declaration_App_2_0-1562643600.aspx
Apple wants diversity of sexual preference, but not ideas.
(posting as anon to avoid being brutalized by the PC police).
...on one of their key jurors!
There is a large difference between "I have a legal right to do it" and "It is good to do it".
I have a legal right to say black people are inferior. Does not mean it is a good idea.
Apple has the legal right to censor political/philosophical/religious ideas (see [1]), but at the same time we have a right and maybe even a duty to boycott it.
1. http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-movement/latest-updates/10-12-23/Apple_Says_No_to_Manhattan_Declaration_App_2_0-1562643600.aspx
I'm not surprised that Apple has rejected an App that has the purpose of getting people interested in the author's own political agenda.
There's a Mitt Romney app (and other politicians), apps for newspapers and TV news channels galore, and lots and lots of other apps that are about one political agenda or other. How is this one different?
This one is made by some filthy peasant... a mere citizen. The others were submitted by corporate partners, job creators, you know, the real American people.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Just hook drone strike update into angry birds and have the birds do what birds do best on the map. Then have the guano spots morf into apple logos. Integrate it online with a multiplayer version and presto a hit.
Have I said "FUCK APPLE" yet today? Yes I have, and I'll say it again.
Apple are clearly working on their own iStrike app, allowing users to remotely control iOS powered iReapers and drop mini iNukes on unsuspecting Android users, with iTunes credits being awarded for hitting Samsung lawyers.
> Josh Begley's at a loss
Come now, Josh. Apple is all-wise and even if their excuses don't make sense - and deep down they don't agree with your political beliefs - they only have your best interests at heart. Yield to their decision. You should be happy they even allow you to play with everyone else in their walled garden. If you don't like it, you can leave. Sense the moment, because this is as close to unbridled, unaccountable power as you will ever come.
Seriously: It sucks. Talk to the EFF and ACLU. Apple refusing to rebroadcast information like this is like your phone company cutting your life because they don't like your politics.
Apple's position highlights the inherent dangers to freedom from a wall garden approach. While the app is certainly controversial, it is not without some justification considering the US is actually at war in Western Pakistan and it makes sense for free people to know what is going on. Nonetheless, Apple now serves as a wall against political thought that falls outside of its garden walls.
The more people buy Apple's approach, the more their freedom of information is threatened.
It's sad that the problem everyone's having with this is Apple's rejection of the app, rather than the fact that the US is spending billions to illegally murder people with flying robots.
(1) Apple won't allow it because it's a general purpose emulator/interpreter; to use it, you'd have to bundle it with the ROMs so there was no download capability
(2) You'd have to offer it for free, because the first term in the MAME license is "Redistributions may not be sold, nor may they be used in a commercial product or activity."
Together, this means the MAME developers most certainly would not help you out unless you were laying out the costs ($99 + time and effort) with no way of recouping your sunk costs. This would also include an inability to recoup costs for ROM license fees for the game(s) you include, so basically you'd be paying the ROM owner a per copy royalty for a free download, which means an uncapped bleeding expense for you.
So its a bit more than a matter of "not bothering".
If you missed Orwell's novel (perhaps in Amazon's remote erasing)... there is a war going on, somewhere in the World and we are winning, Big Brother is something good, and we are eing watched on what we do and what we consume by our gadgets' app stores - and everything is fine as far as we are not informed enough
-><- no
Suspicion: The audiences that would find the app objectionable are the US government leaders.
a little d1.ck suk that needs a lambasting. Nothing worthy of /.
You will not be able to stay home, brother.
You will not be able to slide to unlock, tap open and app out.
You will not be able to lose yourself in birds and pigs,
iTune in and swill beer during the keynote,
Because the revolution will not be an app.
The revolution will be... um, Live... oh hell, that's a Microsoft product.
Eventually kills their golden goose ... forgetting what country made them rich, and what we're about.
Maybe if we actually want to share information without being at the whim of a third party, we should focus on a universally accessible, distributed medium... a locus of information in some sort of world wide web....
Phone apps combine the absolute worst elements of web sites and installed programs.
Was it Apple's idea to reject it or were they told to by someone in the US government with connections to the military?
I lose all faith in them.. pity .
what a great App, it's up there with an app that shows traffic crash sites, aircraft disasters and similar. And what would be really useful is a button to click on that shows the death and injury stats! /sarcasm
There was an unknown error in the submission.
This isnt about censorship. The App is a giant pile of meh. A Mapkit view and a few buttons does not make a store worthy app. It could be knocked together in a day or two. Its similar in concept to all the me-too single radio station apps which came out.
a killer app for Android.
The Open Source Framework ushahidi from http://ushahidi.com/ might just enable the App developer to do what he wants for his audience with the use of a link imnstead. While Apple may, or may not engage in filtering links in their browsers, other browsers on the Apple platform should be able to convey the information properly - Apple could off course begin filtering content in other ways on your/their devices - But don't give up just because Apple are misguided regarding the sharing of information. This is exactly the reason to drop coding for iPhone or Android specifically - Create your stuff in HTML5 (the living standard) and they'll have a harder time shutting you up.
MS, ALS, Aphasia ? http://globability.org - Me http://einarpetersen.com
This is another reminder of why I am so glad I did not buy an iPhone. Compared to my phone, iPhones look like yesteryear's products anyway.
What you thought Apple's censorship was politically neutral? The company's run by a gay man, of course your homophobic shit app got banned. You should have supported open computing if you wanted to be free to spread your hatred.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
out of sight, out of mind
They should know better than to think anyone with an iPhone has the slightest awareness, much less so much that they are interested in the absolute impending globalist take over of our world. The sheople don't want to know about people being droned while they try to mind their own business, they are interested in fun apps.
This is the problem with allowing Apple to determine for you wat is and is not appropriate. If you like a manufacture deciding what you can and can not do, keep paying them for this.
Every fanboi I knew 15 years ago looks like a total asshat for supporting these guys back in the 90s.
John Young from Cryptome.org once applied for a Chrysler Award for political innovation or some such thing. It went something like this:
Anonymous money means you can create an assasination betting pool where people bet on the date of the assasination of a politician (or anybody). The assasin is most likely to win the pool. The pool might grow larger when one makes an unpopular decision, therefore decisions might become more democratic because of the increased risk of assasination as the pool grows.
Couple that with drone crowdsourcing and we could democratize assasination!
Think of the possibilities ...
Politicians. CEO's. Lawyers. Reuters journalsists. Makers of Inconvenient Map Apps. Hippies and so on! Fox News whipping up the nation into a doubleplusgood 3-minute Hate with a side of a drone controlling frenzy. We'll need drone Republics to protect against the tyrany of the majority! And flooding attacks ... and ... and ... I know ... I know ... I'm a bit twisted! /sickhumor