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.
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".
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!
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?
You're pretty stupid.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
It points to holes, obviously. Don't ask me why anyone would want that.
Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
When is a monopoly large enough for such things to become censorship?
Or is it only censorship when Apple does it?
Google has every right to decide what applications it will and won't accept in its app store; and what developers it will and won't accept. In so doing, however, they create a walled garden -- some are allowed in, and some are not.
Android in general, on the other hand, can be more open, and that is something to be grateful for, in my view, inasmuch as Google's app store content policies impose limits I can do without.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
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"?