Slashdot Mirror
Taliban App's Publication Points To Holes In Google's App Review Process (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader writes: A propaganda app developed by the Taliban was live on the Google Play store for two days before being removed, raising questions about Google's app review process, which includes a combination of human editors and algorithms. According to a Taliban spokesperson speaking with Bloomberg, the app was "part of our advanced technological efforts to make more global audience." Its creation signaled how the group was expanding its use of technology to reach a wider audience. When the app was first removed two days after it went live, the Taliban claimed it was due to "technical issues." In actuality, Google removed the app itself, as it was in violation of its policy that bans apps promoting hate speech, violence and illegal activities. The app's publication is a high-profile example of a failure in Google's app review process, and one that raises questions about how thorough its human reviewers are with the apps they test. The company announced last March that it had actually begun using algorithms along with an internal team of reviewers to analyze apps for policy violations prior to publishing. It said apps would be reviewed by this team, hands-on, before the apps go live on Google Play. Since Google relies heavily on its community of users and developers to flag apps for additional review, some apps are bound to fall through the cracks, leaving Google to reactively ban them instead of prohibit their publication in the first place. It's fair to say Google's review process isn't perfect and could use some tweaking.
Two days of a bad app being available doesn't seem like the end of the world to me. They caught it, removed it, all done. If that's the price for not having a walled garden I think it's worth paying.
Why not instead use it and feed them tons and tons of bogus data?
Let them waste their time responding to spam instead of hurting people.
It's a walled garden. It just has slightly different walls.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Last time I looked, the Taliban were a political faction in the war-torn country of Afghanistan. Back when they conquered Kabul - after ~20 years of continous war between local militia - they were welcome by the population as bringers of peace. Sure, their medieval opinions and the the many restrictions they imposed on individual freedom decreased their popularity in the years to follow, but their rule was not really unlike that of "US friends" like Saudi Arabia.
The Taliban are not "Al Quaida" or "ISIS", they actually were supported for years financially and by delivering weapons from the US. I understand that later on, the US disliked them because of differences on the handling of terror suspects based in Afghanistan. But what part of this actually reasoning to remove an App or theirs? If preaching a radical interpretation of Islam is "hate speech", I suppose all Apps published by Saudi Arabia etc. are banned, too? Or if having been an US-opponent in some war is reason enough for App bans, all Japanese, Italian and German Apps are banned, too?
That's history. They've morphed from being a repressive regime that tolerated & protected terrorists (which I guess you think is no big deal, although personally I think that should disqualify one from Google Play) to actually being a terrorist organization.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Moron. Do you know what the Taliban would do to a person like you if they had their way? They would cut your head off, literally. They consider you an infidel. It is nice to sit in your suburban house and wax romantically about politics, but the Taliban would literally cut your head off if they were allowed to.
If the Germans were still Nazi's and were publishing cute little videos of gassing chambers then I suspect Google would be shutting them down as well.
I think Saudi Arabia is a hot bed of disgusting thought. The question is how best to deal with this (especially if we're dependent on them for oil). As dependency drops I hope that our government(s) tolerance for an oppressive theology diminishes.
Of course it would help if private citizens would not be so cowardly and not hesitate to denounce those branches of Islam that are willing to use force and intimidation to further their aims.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
When "Trump 2016" = Hate Speech, that label has lost all meaning.
No, I am not voting for him, he is a douchebag. But when Precious Snowflakes can't handle a few chalk marks without running off to the Campus President, and he caves (of sorts) I weep for our country!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Looking at the terms that were violated:
Google pulled the app because it was in violation of its policy that bans apps promoting hate speech, violence and illegal activities
If this app was in violation based on say, promoting violence, I don't think it would matter if the app was published by the Taliban, the Saudi government, a 12 year old Saudi citizen, a farmer in Thailand, the grand wizard of the KKK, or Citibank. If they're censoring (or whatever word works here) based on content, that's one thing-- this was called a "propaganda app" whatever that may mean. But if they only count it being from the Taliban as itself being propaganda, I think that's f'd up.
In other words, if it was the Taliban's app for making pasta and rice dishes, I would hope Google would let it stay up.
A Taliban smartphone app?? What is that? What does it do? I want it on my phone! Where can I get it now if it has been removed?
I sure don't sympathize with the Taliban, and your assertion might be right that if I relocated to a Taliban-ruled region without keeping my opinions to myself I would end under the sword of some deathsman. But that wouldn't be any different in Saudi Arabia. So it seems arbitrary to me why a "Taliban App" would be defined "evil" per se, while Apps from other medieval factions are "ok".
Last time I looked, the Taliban were a political faction in the war-torn country of Afghanistan. Back when they conquered Kabul - after ~20 years of continous war between local militia - they were welcome by the population as bringers of peace. Sure, their medieval opinions and the the many restrictions they imposed on individual freedom decreased their popularity in the years to follow, but their rule was not really unlike that of "US friends" like Saudi Arabia.
The Taliban are not "Al Quaida" or "ISIS", they actually were supported for years financially and by delivering weapons from the US. I understand that later on, the US disliked them because of differences on the handling of terror suspects based in Afghanistan. But what part of this actually reasoning to remove an App or theirs? If preaching a radical interpretation of Islam is "hate speech", I suppose all Apps published by Saudi Arabia etc. are banned, too? Or if having been an US-opponent in some war is reason enough for App bans, all Japanese, Italian and German Apps are banned, too?
WHAT
THE
FUCK?!?!?!
Taliban rape, torture then execute woman for adultery
Might just as well say the KKK had "differences in the handling of poor black farmers".
Wow. Just wow.
That's a good question. Unfortunately most publications reporting on the story are think on the tooth in terms of what if any actual hate speech was being espoused by the software.
One could 'assume' that any sort of movement espousing and promoting Sharia which is very very poor on Women and homosexuals would certainly fall into the category of hate speech. Though banning it falls into banning their own quaint ethic customs. I guess the question is if the KKK, or at the least segregation promoting apps also get the same treatment *shrugs*.
Bye!
As curator of Google store, this app post happen purely by mistake. I take full reponsibilities.
OT: look foward to live minimum wage!!!
I love how when a company America loves has a foreign person communicate to them, they correct any issues with the translation.
But when it's an entity they hate, it's quoted and used to make them appear dumb and a mockery.
The fact that they quoted the poor translation speaks volumes more than any message the terrorists actually said. It's funny because if they just let them speak without bias, most people would already come to the conclusion they are nutjobs. I don't need the news publication working to teach me that... just let them speak. Meet free speech with some more free speech.
Cowards.
Provide a really nice list of users to target for investigation?
Did the app do anything useful, or was it just essentially something that played propaganda video?
Today he would be considered a terrorist and enemy of America.
Islamic fundamentalism and the radical right and the founding fathers of the USA are natural allies. Hillary Clinton and the liberal elite are natural enemies of everything middle east.
Somehow through some bizarre wacky quirk of reality the religious right wants to carpet bomb people who believe in family values, religious conservatism and gun rights.
I hate Obama, yet he was absolutely correct when he said Islam is not an existential threat to the USA. Unfortunately Mexico, Russia, China, and the USAian government all are.
Whether the Taliban actually "tolerated & protected terrorists" while they were in power in Afghanistan is still a matter of dispute. Even western sources wrote that the Taliban indicated willingness to prosecute Osama & friends, but under their jurisdiction. The US insisted that they had to hand over the suspects to the US immediately, long before there was evidence presented connecting Osama to the 9/11 acts of terror. The Taliban standpoint on the terror suspects looked like a welcome pretense to quickly start a war against this "no-longer-our-bad-guys" group - which didn't even result in capturing Osama, who took shelter in yet another of those "friend"-countries ruled by religious fundamentalists.
They've outsourced the reviewing to teams located in third world countries, because they are cheap.
Guess what religon most of them are ?
So "Death to the Infidels" or "kill all the jews" gets a sly wink and a nod, while "Mohammud was a murderous pedophile sex offender" while true, is immediately censored.
The recent suicide bombing in Lahore Pakistan which killed Christian woman and children celebrating Easter in the park was done by the Taliban.
... while Apps from other medieval factions are "ok".
Could you please post a link the specific app(s) that you are complaining about? Does Saudi Arabia actually have an app that advocates beheading infidels?
The problem I have with this news is that there is no mention of any particular content of this App that the ban is reasoned with. If Google was imposing consistent rules to ban religious fundamentalism - fine with me. Start banning the historic scriptures of basically every large religion, all of which are clearly calling for violence against non-believers of their faith. Yet, there are dozens of Apps which convey, for example, hate messages like: "[W]hen the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance of them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord . . . (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)." or “[H]e that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36).
Yes it would. In SA they wouldn't behead you for that. They would just kick you out. The Taliban is much much worse.
(especially if we're dependent on them for oil)
We are not dependent on SA for oil. America is mostly self-sufficient in oil, and what we do import comes mostly from Canada and Mexico.
As dependency drops I hope that our government(s) tolerance for an oppressive theology diminishes.
To his credit, Obama's administration vigorously protested the recent execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr. So there is some hope that America will grow a backbone, and oppose despotism from "allies" as well as enemies.
All you'd be doing by using an app is ensuring a higher chance of being caught. If that works then the FBI/NSA should be pumping out honeypot apps because that's just free terrorist info and a direct to secret prison membership. So.. no, sorry. Terrorist apps in the app store are not going to be a thing, no should we be scared of terrorists voluntarily handing their info over. There just is no way to use Android and be secure. Android is, without one tiny doubt, the least secure AND most proliferated OS on the planet.. so if terrorists want to use Android.. go for it! You don't ever see the FBI asking for help cracking Android phones, because 99% of them are trivial to crack and not nearly hard enough to remote exploit. Terrorists are no smarter in real life than any other criminal. They use simple and proven methods.. burner phones and hide in plain site. Most humans are talented enough liars that it makes it quite easy to blend into a society while also planning to attack it. Technology didn't start terrorism and in the end has almost nothing to do with terrorism. ISIS PR campaign is effective locally. The global impact is insignificant from a perspective of growing the organization. They really aren't using technology effectively to communicate anymore than any other stupid criminal, because just like any gang 98 or 99% of them are just brainless peons. They don't need most of the technological PR. They are roaming gang of people with drugs and stuff and sex slaves. They don't need technology one little bit to do that. The whole social networking thing and to a degree the production level of the videos is done FOR the west. To show and impress the west, because a lot of the people they want to recruit don't yet have cell phones, computers or televisions and there is no mass global ISIS recruitment wave. They do that to get in the news so they can say to their people.. HEY look at us in the news.. now have some drugs and forced sex and join us... and for the most part they have them at drugs and forced sex. The need to then sit them down and show them a propaganda video is actually quite limited.
Such search the Google Play Store to yield numerous hits of Apps that convey instructions like: "So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates” (Koran 47:4).
Perhaps they didn't promote the spiritual Jihad and some kind of community support program, Kibbutz style, but called people to come and take arms for them. That would fall into the category of promoting violence.
Saudi Arabia decapitated numerous people in its recent history. Check out this.
A major and significant difference between the two literatures you're trying to compare is that Jesus tells his followers "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth...If a man strikes you on one cheek turn to him the other cheek also. If a soldier from an oppressive, totalitarian regime forces you to be a pack-slave for a mile, instead be his slave for two miles...Vengeance is mine, says the Lord God almighty."
Jesus teaches that wrath, vengeance, destruction, etc. on unbelievers is the sole province of God (and Jesus) to execute, whereas radical islam says that they, the believers, should make war on and destroy their enemies personally. That's the difference between calling the cops because your roommate is selling something they shouldn't be selling, versus taking your entrepreneurial roommate out back and breaking his kneecaps. It's a big difference.
Thank you for saying this. I thought I was the only one who considered that. I hate terrorism as much as anyone, but seeing g this is disturbing. What bothers me is seeing how many people are willing to cheer censorship, government spying, etc. because it involves "terrorists". It is a real scary thing to see how governments around the world increasingly become authoritarian to cheer and applause. Sadly I don't see the beacon of hope that certain governments once represented anymore. They are all crooked and trying to increase their power and control of the masses.
The problem I have with this news is that there is no mention of any particular content of this App that the ban is reasoned with. If Google was imposing consistent rules to ban religious fundamentalism - fine with me. Start banning the historic scriptures of basically every large religion, all of which are clearly calling for violence against non-believers of their faith. Yet, there are dozens of Apps which convey, for example, hate messages like: "[W]hen the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance of them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord . . . (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)." or “[H]e that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36).
Way to go with context. Those verses are talking about what happens after death by God's actions, not humans'.
Did you not read just a few verses after (as in verse 11), "With this in mind, we constantly pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his calling, and that by his power he may bring to fruition your every desire for goodness and your every deed prompted by faith."
Scripture is not demanding currently-living persons to behead, nor inflicted any other level of violence or harm to any other persons. It is God's judgment, not the people's.
Please see your local Koran/Quran for contrast.
Look at the bright side: Those human reviewer(s) who voted to approve the app are supporters / sympathizers to the moslem terrorism movement, and as long as we can keep a close tap on them, we might be able to flush out others who actively supporting moslem terrorism
Hey asshole! Your quote from 2 Thessalonians is NOT advocating violent action against non-believers. It says that *god* will punish the people who are persecuting the Thessalonians. GOD repays with affliction. JESUS is revealed from heaven, inflicting vengenace on those who do not know God. There's NOTHING there inciting people to take up arms against the unbelievers - it tells them, "Endure your persecutions patiently, because sooner or later, God's gonna whup those bad dudes."
And your quote from John is ALSO apparently completely devoid of reading comprehension. That quote basically says, "If you reject Jesus, God's gonna be SO FUCKING PISSED at you." Again: there is no call to violence by believers against non-believers in that passage. You're generating lots of heat, but very little light here.
There are a LOT of Old Testament apps across all app stores, yes.
As your parent is likely a christian he is not an infidel ... ... and plenty of religions are counted as believers in islamic view.
Infidels are non belivers
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
I don't think that is a difference that is relevant. It is either that they believe in Jesus Christ or they take the atheist views of it being fictional. Either way, the quoted section describes someone in the future doing something that may or may not happen. The Taliban encourages people in the present to do something.
In other words, there is a difference between saying "tom will kill someone next month" and "you should kill someone next month" for whatever reason.
"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners
That does NOT advocate executing anyone. Only killing of belligerents in battle, who are to be taken prisoner as soon as they stop resisting. That is not extreme in the least, and is about as mainstream as a policy can be.
Okay, an app by and for terrorist is banned. That's good. But this app went through the filters of the algorithm. What kind of apps does this filter ban? Are non terrorist apps that might not fit in the current world view of the elite and political correct leader also banned? When I look at European media, one might expect that non political correct opinions are buried under accusations of xenophobia, racism, and even Nazism.
Politic Correct has become more and more fascist. Not national socialist this time, but international socialist or intercultural socialist. But they are dictating what people are allowed to hear or see. Facebook has become the number one communication tool for many people and it is censored by an American Judo-Christian world view where a nipple is one of the most offending 'things' one can be confronted with, but where glorifying Anglo-Saxon pop-culture is encouraged and even pushed through unwanted ads. So it is not 'the' independent alternative to get your news. And it is filled with ignorant people anyway. I still wanted quality news, but that is independent from the too powerful and strict political correct filters. Claiming that you don't see a problem with a woman who chooses to stay home to raise her children is all of the sudden sexism, even when you simply want to say that woman should have a choice and should not be forced to start working again a couple of days after giving birth. I don't understand what's wrong with such an idea.
Singers, movie stars, television stars, 68-movement people are all controlling what is good and give the label racism, xenophobe or sexist to everyone who isn't into the hippie culture. An example:
Previous week some not so bright group of football supporters wanted to show their respect to the 'small heroes' that helped victims in the Brussels bombing. They started at the police stations, and walked around the city to applaud for the police, fire fighters, military, hospitals until they arrived at the place where other people were burning candles, throwing flowers and hugging each other. Then the football supporters uncovered their message: stop IS, stop Terrorism, casuals united. Casual is a nickname for football supporters of different teams that follow their teams. Some of them have a past of or simply still are hooligans. But they wanted to show that they also could unite to show their respect to the victims and especially the police who are normally 'their enemies'.
When their slogan on a large flag was uncovered they started to shout the slogan, just like football supporters do. Not a bright thing to do, even stupid. But these are not the brightest people, often people without an education, people who have a problem to understand that shouting slogans is not a good idea at that time on that location. But at least it was well meant even when inappropriate.
They were immediately countered by the left 'we solve all world problems with hugging and singing' with boos and anti fascist slogans. A drunken (or high?) leftist charged into the 'casuals' and tore a Belgian flag. A few pushed the man back to his group and tried to explain that they didn't want trouble.
Then another of the leftist went to the middle of the flower carpet and stood on the American flag and wiped his feet and shouted that America was behind the attacks. Then he went to the Israeli flag and wiped his feet on the flag and started to shout antisemitic slogans. He was cheered at by some of the left wing crowd.
One of the 'casuals' went to the man, making the (universal?) sign of pointing his index finger to his head, 'Are you crazy?', and wanted to guide the man out of the flower carpet. Than that antisemitic, left wing man shouting antisemitic slogans fell to the ground, while nobody touched him. He started to tear the Israeli flag, he even had his teeth in the flag. Two of the casuals picked the man by his legs and arms and carried him back to his group. Then another drunken or high person started to shout at the casuals and slapped
Hey asshole!
What a kind way to address someone when engaging in a discussion of Biblical interpretation. Did you learn to speak that way in church?
Whoever it was that said "I like your Christ; I do not like your Christians, for they act nothing like your Christ" was right.
"Hook up with a hot goat or sheep in your local hills tonight"
Tell that to the IRA...
The Taliban asked for evidence that Osama had anything to do with 911 before they handed him over. The United States never supplied any evidence then or since that Osama had any involvement.
Meanwhile, Google still allows Apps created by Israel. If Google was being even handed they would ban Apps both by the Taliban and by Israel.
Moron. Do you know what the Taliban would do to a person like you if they had their way? They would cut your head off, literally. They consider you an infidel. It is nice to sit in your suburban house and wax romantically about politics, but the Taliban would literally cut your head off if they were allowed to.
Doctors Without Borders worked in Afghanistan for 30 years, delivering health care to all in need regardless of their politics or religion. They were unarmed and were respected by everyone.
They only ran into trouble when the US forces under Colin Powell started a program in which they delivered health care, food and other services to local people, in return for informing on the "terrorists." That made all foreign medical service providers suspect.
I wonder where you got the idea that the Taliban would cut off his head.
Bullshit. As soon as they were in power, they abused it and started to destroy ancient monuments once the West had armed and funded them. At which point it was too fucking late to put them back in the bag. They are every bit as evil as ISIS, but now the West had stopped funding them, the next well funded extremist religious bunch of murderers are repeating the show. This time it's Saudi money, not the £$€. Fast-forward a decade - it'll be another group of extreme muslins terrorist funded by another wealthy nation.
When is a monopoly large enough for such things to become censorship?
Or is it only censorship when Apple does it?
The problem I have with this news is that there is no mention of any particular content of this App that the ban is reasoned with. If Google was imposing consistent rules to ban religious fundamentalism - fine with me. Start banning the historic scriptures of basically every large religion, all of which are clearly calling for violence against non-believers of their faith. Yet, there are dozens of Apps which convey, for example, hate messages like: "[W]hen the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance of them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord . . . (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)." or “[H]e that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36).
Perhaps because the taliban has sanctions against it and the bible thumpers do not?
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
I'll bet the app was downloaded by 95% of the big fish. Small fish would have trickled in after the cut off date.
But maybe - just maybe - the release was planned and monitored by the dark agents. Then cut off so people wouldn't ask questions allowing Google to save face ("oh we caught it just in time").
Conspiracy? It's a conspiracy man!! just throwing it out there. :-)
now lets not bring reason into this discussion. Didn't you notice he said "Koran" and "smite the necks"?
Oh, I see your confusion - I'm not a Christian, I just happen to believe in two things:
1) Honest debate;
2) Not taking quotes out of context and misrepresenting them as if they say something they demonstrably do not say.
Are you really claiming that those two traits are exclusively the purview of Christians? Because I guess maybe I'm a Christian if you're right... but I'm not a Christian in the "believe in God, the infallibility of the bible, and Jesus Christ's divinity," sense.
Given that GP was taking quotes out of context and misrepresenting them in a grotesquely twisted interpretation, I assumed he was an asshole, and addressed him as such. If he has those quotes handy, then SURELY he's read the context around them. If he's read the context around them, then SURELY he understands that they do not say what he's claiming they mean. And if he understands that they do not say what he's claiming they mean, but claims it anyway, then he is an asshole, q.e.d.
In short: if you make a statement that reveals you to be an asshole, don't be surprised when somebody says, "Hey asshole!" to you.