Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 5, 2009, 12:45 PM   #1
clevin
macrumors G3
 
clevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Apple's new low: censoring a dictionary

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/05/a...ary/#continued
http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/ninjawords
Quote:
Apple censored an English dictionary.
A dictionary. A reference book. For words contained in all reasonable dictionaries. For words contained in dictionaries that are used every day in elementary school libraries and classrooms.
Quote:
"We were rejected for objectionable content. They provided screenshots of the words '****' and '****' showing up in our dictionary's search results. What's interesting is that we spent a good deal of time making it so that you must type vulgar words in their entirety, and only then will we show you suggestions in the search results. For instance, if you type 'fuc', you will not see '****' as a suggestion. This is in contrast to all other dictionaries we're aware of on the App Store (including Dictionary.com's application), which will show you '****' in the search results for 'fuc', '****************' for 'mother', etc."

In essence, you would have to already know the word in order to be able to look it up in the app -- your mind would have had to be already poisoned with the sinful idea.
clevin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 01:16 PM   #2
sl1200mk2
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Completely ridiculous.

I'm not giving up my iphone anytime soon, but Apple will definitely lose some degree of market share from people willing to move to more open or at least better policy defined platforms like Android and Palm. Google and Palm are more than happy to pick up and capitalize on all the apps and functionality Apple seems to be willing to give away. Case in point, the Google Voice apps that were pulled.
__________________
15" 2.4Ghz MacBook Pro 4GB RAM; 32GB iPhone 4; 16GB iPad
sl1200mk2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 01:31 PM   #3
KingYaba
macrumors 68040
 
KingYaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Up the irons.
Send a message via AIM to KingYaba
That's pretty pathetic.
__________________
Texas: illegally acquired; universally admired.
KingYaba is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 02:35 PM   #4
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple Censors 'Ninjawords Dictionary' iPhone Application



Daring Fireball's John Gruber reports on the case of Ninjawords Dictionary [App Store, $1.99], a dictionary application for the iPhone based on Wiktionary offering a high-quality user experience and information content that was recently approved by Apple for inclusion in the App Store. Unfortunately, Apple's approval process for the application required several months and multiple rounds of refinement for the application, ultimately resulting the application carrying a "17+" age rating and also lacking a number of words deemed "objectionable" by Apple's reviewers.
Quote:
Apple censored an English dictionary.

A dictionary. A reference book. For words contained in all reasonable dictionaries. For words contained in dictionaries that are used every day in elementary school libraries and classrooms.
Gruber's lengthy post details the seemingly ridiculous hoops the application's developers jumped through to win Apple's approval, from adding the mature age rating to preventing "objectionable" words from appearing as suggestions for partial word matches when searching to finally removing the "objectionable" words entirely. A number of the words that Apple objected to and have been removed from the application also carry entirely non-objectionable definitions, and it is unclear why those entire entries were required to be removed instead of merely the offending definitions for those words.
Quote:
Every time I think I've seen the most outrageous App Store rejection, I'm soon proven wrong. I can't imagine what it will take to top this one.

Apple requires you to be 17 years or older to purchase a censored dictionary that omits half the words Steve Jobs uses every day.
Article Link: Apple Censors 'Ninjawords Dictionary' iPhone Application
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 02:41 PM   #5
ouimetnick
macrumors 68020
 
ouimetnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Beverly, Massachusetts
Send a message via AIM to ouimetnick Send a message via Yahoo to ouimetnick Send a message via Skype™ to ouimetnick
Angry

Apple's own dictionary on OS X. has the definition for words like *****, a*s, b*tch and more. Apple must remove safari from the iPhone , as anyone can view porn and bad things on Safari on the iPhone.

DUMB Apple! ;(
__________________
ACMT
MacBook Pro 13" (Mid 2010) 2.4GHz C2D, 4GB RAM, 750GB HD; Mac Pro Mid 2007; various MacBooks; Power Mac G5; iPhone 4s; iPhone 5s
ouimetnick is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 02:47 PM   #6
dejo
Moderator
 
dejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Centennial State
Sounds very similar to the hoops that my company, Another Roadside Attraction, had to jump through in order to get our craigslist app, CraigsHarvest, approved. It took over two months of back and forth with Apple to finally get it OKed. First, we had to remove the Personals and Erotic Services categories (this was back in December before craigslist moved Erotic to Adult and way before ratings; we've been allowed to include those in our latest version). That wasn't sufficient, though. We also had to prevent the user from using search terms of profane words. And we had to guess what that list of objectionable words was. Apple never gave us any direction as to what that might be, other than to provide specific examples of searches that weren't allowed. We could never get an answer to the question "what are all the other words you find objectionable?".
__________________
dejo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 02:49 PM   #7
griz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New London, NH
The App approval process must go through a series of people who are oblivious to the rest of the world around them. I love my Mac, but I am beginning to think that Apple is run by a bunch of people with their heads buried in ** Censored **.
griz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:01 PM   #8
Stargaze
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Someone needs to put an end to this pointless "REVIEW" process apple has in place..

they are Playing "God" and for some reasons i see why but they are taking their power and going too far!
__________________
iPhone 3G 16 gig(sold)(Black); iPhone 3GS 32gb (white) - Rogers Network Canadian Eh!
Stargaze is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:03 PM   #9
ilfn143
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Enron by the Sea
what's next? i can't type those words in "Notes" or "Calendar"? can i? i better double check...
ilfn143 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:13 PM   #10
Doctor Q
Administrator
 
Doctor Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
This is extremely draconian of Apple. I wonder if the bad publicity will get them to change their minds.

In the meantime, I guess Urban Dictionary isn't going to become an iPhone app anytime soon.
__________________
Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this 12-core Mac Pro with three 4K displays, FirePro graphics, and Thunderbolt 2 could be very dangerous.
Doctor Q is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:15 PM   #11
rockosmodurnlif
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York, NY
Send a message via AIM to rockosmodurnlif Send a message via Yahoo to rockosmodurnlif
Well, there'd never be a George Carlin app.
__________________
Wish list
☐ Linked contacts, phone numbers, addresses, etc. in Reminders for iOS
☐ Swipe between notes in Notes for iOS
☐ Word wrap in Reminders for Mac OS X
rockosmodurnlif is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:16 PM   #12
dasmb
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by griz View Post
The App approval process must go through a series of people who are oblivious to the rest of the world around them. I love my Mac, but I am beginning to think that Apple is run by a bunch of people with their heads buried in ** Censored **.
Let's say there's a set of criteria for rating an app. And let's say that criteria states that the use of certain language is grounds for a higher rating.

If an app has its rating increased for using this language -- even if it's only to define it -- this isn't being oblivious, it's being consistent.

Besides -- this isn't a set in-memory dictionary with content developed and controlled by Ninja -- it's a window on user generated content. If an app is based on user content, and that content isn't policed, technically there's no way to judge that app's age appropriateness. Similar to the "ESRB will change when you go online" warning with games, once you enter an unpoliced environment the complexity of maintaining age propriety increases dramatically. I could, for example, visit the Wiktionary site and edit the entry for "feather" to include an erotic example. It's likely that the entry would be reverted -- but not guaranteed, and certainly can't be guaranteed by the app's authors.

Of course, they could likely offer an in-memory dictionary with the same functionality, omit the naughty bits and obtain a different rating...but that would require owning the distribution rights to the content.

In the end, though, who gives a ****. If a parent has to clear their child's purchase of an application, that's about as much of a censorship issue as their having to sign a permission slip for them to watch an R rated movie.

Last edited by dasmb; Aug 5, 2009 at 03:23 PM.
dasmb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:27 PM   #13
jazz4ivo
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Angry

Apple are starting to piss me off to be honest with their stupid review process. I hope the FCC gives them more stick and make them change their tunes (pun intended)!!
__________________
www.dowletter.com - if you trade stocks, get some help here!
jazz4ivo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:31 PM   #14
Eso
macrumors 68000
 
Eso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
It's clear that the only solution that will make every party happy is sllowing apps to be purchased and downloaded directly from the developers and imported directly into iTunes.

Apple wins because they can approve/reject any app they want without everyone getting into a big fuss.

Developers win because they don't have to submit to Apples subject review to reach their market.

Consumers win because they won't be limited to apps deemed appropriate by a coporation.
Eso is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:45 PM   #15
griz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New London, NH
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasmb View Post
Let's say there's a set of criteria for rating an app. And let's say that criteria states that the use of certain language is grounds for a higher rating.

If an app has its rating increased for using this language -- even if it's only to define it -- this isn't being oblivious, it's being consistent.
Well then they should apply that same consistency to Safari. It is an App that gets content outside its own code. If they are going to police everyone else who creates an app that gathers content, then they need to police themselves. And stay consistent.
But wait there is another side to the coin. USE SOME JUDGEMENT!!. Obviously Apple feels that it is ridiculous to police Safari given it is a web browser. Well then they need to find a way to allow content delivery apps by posting, as you said, a "rating may change" warning when you go to download it. Otherwise, they need to back off, and leave these developers alone.
griz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:47 PM   #16
Doctor Q
Administrator
 
Doctor Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eso View Post
It's clear that the only solution that will make every party happy is sllowing apps to be purchased and downloaded directly from the developers and imported directly into iTunes.
It's not clear to me.

If the approval process protects me from faulty, misadvertised, or malicious software, or produces ratings that help me make informed choices, I don't mind Apple's approval process, even if it causes release delays. Buying directly sounds tempting but could invite risks I'd rather avoid.

On the other hand, if Apple prevents me from buying apps I might want, or causes developers to remove features of their apps I might want to use, then Apple's heavy-handedness is hurting me as a consumer.

It's the latter case for anyone who wanted to buy this dictionary app.
__________________
Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this 12-core Mac Pro with three 4K displays, FirePro graphics, and Thunderbolt 2 could be very dangerous.
Doctor Q is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:49 PM   #17
toddgarvin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
So... let me see...

So... let me see...
I can't view "dirty" words on my iPhone, but I can open the Dictionary app that comes with EVERY MAC and see all the "dirty" words I want??
Can Apple be any more hypocritical??

WTF?

Last edited by xUKHCx; Aug 5, 2009 at 05:27 PM. Reason: lets just says that the words can be found in the dictionary built into OSX we don't need pictures
toddgarvin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:49 PM   #18
griz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New London, NH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eso View Post
It's clear that the only solution that will make every party happy is sllowing apps to be purchased and downloaded directly from the developers and imported directly into iTunes.

Apple wins because they can approve/reject any app they want without everyone getting into a big fuss.

Developers win because they don't have to submit to Apples subject review to reach their market.

Consumers win because they won't be limited to apps deemed appropriate by a coporation.
I think you miss the point of why Apple does this. They don't want unapproved apps being loaded onto the phone. 2 main reasons. They don't want malicious code being anywhere near the iPhone and secondly they want control of the outward appearance of the phone's contents. In other words, by approving the apps, they guarantee the users showing off their iphone will be showing off only what they know they have cleared. Keeps the waters clean so to speak. Not that I agree with part 2 though.
griz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 03:56 PM   #19
pimentoLoaf
macrumors Demi-God
 
pimentoLoaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The SimCity Deli
The gov't's investigation of Apple over App approval can come none too soon.
__________________
Porkchops and bacon, my two favorite animals....Homer Simpson
pimentoLoaf is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:00 PM   #20
The Phazer
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London, UK
Apple's app review panel needs a good sorting out frankly. It's a shambles.

Phazer
The Phazer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:13 PM   #21
slu
macrumors 65816
 
slu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Buffalo
Quote:
Originally Posted by griz View Post
I think you miss the point of why Apple does this. They don't want unapproved apps being loaded onto the phone. 2 main reasons. They don't want malicious code being anywhere near the iPhone and secondly they want control of the outward appearance of the phone's contents. In other words, by approving the apps, they guarantee the users showing off their iphone will be showing off only what they know they have cleared. Keeps the waters clean so to speak. Not that I agree with part 2 though.
The main reason Apple does this is to get their 30%.

What is happening now is downright ludicrous. The GV Mobile episode drove me to jailbreak, and I am glad I did. I only use two apps from Cydia (Cycorder and GV Mobile), but just the satisfaction that I can do what I want with MY phone is worth it. And how easy it is to do. I knew it was easy, but I didn't think it would be that easy.
__________________
MacMini 2.3 GHz i7 / Nexus 4 / iPod classic 160 GB / iPad 2 / Nexus 7 / AppleTV2&3
slu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:18 PM   #22
Eso
macrumors 68000
 
Eso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Q View Post
It's not clear to me.
Apps would still be available in the App Store, subject to Apple's approval, but they wouldn't be exlusive to the Appe store alone.

If a developers app gets rejected, they could simply offer it through their own channels and fund their own advertising, distributing, etc.

If functionality of an app is restricted on the App store, the developer could also market it through their own efforts, which would be great for apps like Skype, Slingplayer, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by griz View Post
They don't want malicious code being anywhere near the iPhone
Apps are still produced with the official SDK. It's nice that they want to keep malicious code out (has any app EVER been rejected from the app store for malicious code?), but that is their store. I don't need Apple to babysit me so I don't get malicous code on my iPhone. Luckily the App store would still exist for those that do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by griz View Post
secondly they want control of the outward appearance of the phone's contents. In other words, by approving the apps, they guarantee the users showing off their iphone will be showing off only what they know they have cleared.
Obviously this is just where they are plain wrong, but I agree that it is rather the motivation to make the 30% commission. Apple is too stubborn to change on their own, so hopefully the FCC inquiry and this type of press will force their hand.

Last edited by Eso; Aug 5, 2009 at 04:25 PM.
Eso is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:25 PM   #23
Silencio
macrumors 68000
 
Silencio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz4ivo View Post
Apple are starting to piss me off to be honest with their stupid review process. I hope the FCC gives them more stick and make them change their tunes (pun intended)!!
How exactly does the FCC have jurisdiction over the App Store WRT a dictionary app? And even if they did, you think they would go after Apple for not allowing naughty words?

Agreed that Apple is really doing a horrible job with the App Store and the app approval process in general. They need to be a lot more clear, communicative, and consistent with developers as to what is acceptable and what is not, and they should give developers specific advice on how to fix their apps.

Couldn't a dictionary app in theory tie in to the parental controls in iPhone 3.0 and block the "bad" words from users who are parentally controlled? Couldn't the developers add that functionality to their app?

On the other hand, we all know what would happen if Apple let an app like this through with the "bad" words intact: some high school kid would look up said words, their parents would find out about it, they'd run to their lawyer and attempt to sue the pants off of Apple.
__________________
"The times they are a changin', and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is."
Silencio is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:34 PM   #24
esquire360
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockosmodurnlif View Post
Well, there'd never be a George Carlin app.
LOL, snoop dog got an app... I'd tell apple to stick it up their *** but they would not be able to define what that was.
esquire360 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 5, 2009, 04:36 PM   #25
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silencio View Post
On the other hand, we all know what would happen if Apple let an app like this through with the "bad" words intact: some high school kid would look up said words, their parents would find out about it, they'd run to their lawyer and attempt to sue the pants off of Apple.

Then why do all Macs ship with Dictionary.app and all its "objectionable" words?
__________________
If your religion is worth killing for, please start with yourself.
rdowns is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Converting .pdb and .bgl dictionaries to Apple .dictionary format quijote1971 iPad Apps 1 Nov 29, 2013 10:56 AM
Using Apple 3-finger double tap dictionary in Word 2011 brilliantthings Mac Applications and Mac App Store 0 Oct 29, 2013 09:05 PM
Custom Dictionary in the native OS X Dictionary App gtx383 Mac Programming 1 Apr 10, 2013 04:42 PM
English-Spanish Dictionary for iPad/iPhone wordmagicsoft iPhone and iPod touch Apps 0 Aug 17, 2012 08:51 AM
Why does the iPhone store obvious misspellings in its dictionary? TH55 iPhone 24 Jul 30, 2012 10:24 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC