Who said he was against porn? He doesn't want porn apps on the iPhone OS, yes, but Steve Jobs knows he knows who Julia Bond is.
and if you want porn, Safari is right there on your iPhone OS device waiting for you...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
SJ and Ryan Tate go at it via email at 2AM!
- Thread starter derekamoss
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Who said he was against porn? He doesn't want porn apps on the iPhone OS, yes, but Steve Jobs knows he knows who Julia Bond is.
and if you want porn, Safari is right there on your iPhone OS device waiting for you...
You people remind me of Huxley's Brave New World. He was a smarter man than Orwell.
That is just about the most illogical and nonsensical comment of this whole thread, and that's really saying something!
I'm not defending Flash in the battery hogging area...I realize that... I'm just saying that there are still a large number of people that require flash for their needs.
If they (apple) issue a disclaimer that states their view and recommendation against it but still allow it you'll make a lot of people happy. Maybe put something in your Settings that can disable flash for everyone else.
Adobe has to make Flash player more suitable for mobile devs anyway so in time it'll just balance itself out. Look at the 10.1 release.
Ok better yet, let forget the gas and use gas stations... right i have a choice of gas stations for my car... each offering the 3 or 4 flavors of gas. Now imagine if I was told I can only get X gas from Y STATION.
again where does apple ownership of YOUR device end and your ownership begin?? Do you ever own your device if OS level control of it is based on another entity?
Also for those who say jailbreaking is another choice you have.. apple doesnt give you that choice at all.. they are actively trying to curtail the jailbreaking community... their software is not open... so therefore you cannot say they are "inviting" or "accepting" of the jailbreak community.
I think another issue is if apple is going to play moral police... then there are more apps they should block for obscene material... but instead they give a 17+ warning before installing... why can they do that for all? And we are not talking NUDE men and women they are trying to block.. but women in bathing suits and such.
Yes, damn you Jobs for not selling porn!
Oh wait, there's also:
WalMart
Target
Best Buy
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
RIM
Palm
Netflix
Nintendo
Microsoft
Sony
And about a billion other businesses.
Where's your outrage?
(P.S. I (and many others) like that Apple doesn't sell porn.)
- Do you cut your own hair - or do you pay someone else to do it?
- Build your own house?
- Make your own clothes?
- Grow all your own food?
- Diagnose your illnesses?
- Do your own dentistry?
- Police your own borders?
- Make your own music?
That's the point I was making. Believe me, I'd love to be smart enough and have all the time in the world to do all those things myself, but I just don't.
Freedom???
Revolution means freedom? What are they teaching kids nowadays?
I always thought that revolution meant replacement of an established system; a radical and pervasive change; or coming full circle.
Did the agricultural revolution ultimately mean freedom from hunger? Um many thousands of years and counting.
Did the industrial revolution mean freedom for working classes?
Who exactly did the Russian Revolution mean freedom for the Tsar the proletariat those sent to gulags?
I would have trashed the email before reading further, or retuned it to the sender with a trademark educate yourself.
We also live in an increasingly Orwellian world where freedom means extracting your wants from some other individual or organization. If its not an individual or businesses model to provide a product or service, how is it freedom to demand that they do so? In the interest of equality and freedom, should Coke be required to make and sell Pepsi?
Revolution means freedom? What are they teaching kids nowadays?
I always thought that revolution meant replacement of an established system; a radical and pervasive change; or coming full circle.
Did the agricultural revolution ultimately mean freedom from hunger? Um many thousands of years and counting.
Did the industrial revolution mean freedom for working classes?
Who exactly did the Russian Revolution mean freedom for the Tsar the proletariat those sent to gulags?
I would have trashed the email before reading further, or retuned it to the sender with a trademark educate yourself.
We also live in an increasingly Orwellian world where freedom means extracting your wants from some other individual or organization. If its not an individual or businesses model to provide a product or service, how is it freedom to demand that they do so? In the interest of equality and freedom, should Coke be required to make and sell Pepsi?
Oh DON'T get me started on the sales retards at Best-Buy...ask them about RAM sometime if you want a good laugh...
I was looking for a new monitor about a year ago and was comparing two 22" monitors with different resolutions but otherwise the same specs and this moron comes over to "help (*snort*)" me and tells me that they are identical and the resolution means nothing really... I really wish you could bitch-slap people in public for being stupid...and legally get away with it
I would honestly prefer that no corporation was the moral police. That job should be left up to the parents to instill on their childeren or up to adults to feel whether that is within there moral compass.
Therefore I believe, in apples case, they should just give access to whatever and let US adult and PARENTS think for ourselves instead of having a corporation do it for us. There may not need to be a store for it specifically but SJ coming out an saying "freedom from porm" its like he is setting moral compass for something he should have VERY little control over after the point of sale.
This is also why I hate the FCC!
Your new example suffers from the same problems as the old example - Apple doesn't tell you what you can do. It is YOU that are trying to tell APPLE what to do. Apple has made a choice not to sell you certain apps, and Apple has made a choice to not include certain features in the products it sells. You are trying to force them to include what you want. It's like going to an ice cream shoppe and complaining that they are bastards for not selling you french fries. Apple offers you a menu of choices. If you don't like what's on the menu, move along. Don't try and force them to bend their menu to your demands.
If a car manufacturer tells me I can only use certain gas stations, what happens if I choose to use another one? Do they sue me? Apple sues no one. Apple is not stopping you from doing anything. They are just refusing to help you do what you want. Tough.
Finally, your "it's my device" rant is silly and misleading. You own the device. You do not own the software - you have only a license to the software.
And show me any evidence apple is actively trying to prevent jailbreaking. They've done nothing to stop it in a very long time.
That would be a reasonable compromise. Default it to off and I'd be fine.
But then again, that would remove any incentive for the rest of the internet to do things more efficiently.
How is that? It's completely logical. Apple is allowed to 'censor' what apps they distribute. They are not a governing body, therefore they have no inherent and absolute authority over you. YOU CHOOSE THEM and you CHOOSE to be constrained by the 'limits' of their products if you buy one. They are also not a monopoly on the market. They don't have to sell porn if they don't want to. You can get that elsewhere if you want it.
If you disagree with Apple's business model, then move on and buy something else. You can't sit around and complain they aren't giving you what you want. They have NO obligation to you or anyone else other than to provide you with what you agreed to at purchase.
I know my vtech example exhibits a bit of hyperbole, but the basic concept is similar.
I don't think he meant selling porn on the app store but that it makes it harder to view most porn sites since they mainly use flash player anymore for their videos.
Except you have an understanding of neither. You BUY an Apple product. You CHOOSE to use an Apple product. You do not HAVE to buy it or use it. There are plenty of alternatives. Huxley and Orwell wrote about worlds where you are FORCED to live a certain way and you have NO alternatives.
That may be the case, but the web developers of the world are the ones who generally "run" the WWW. So if they are educated properly then they would have to develop around that. Forcing Adobe (or others) to model their programs to meet the dev's needs. Right?
Also, can the w3c regulate what the standards of Flash would have to be? Could they force it on Adobe to make the necessary changes?
You're suggesting that because i don't cut my own hair I shouldn't be responsible for my own moral policing?
If you need flash to look at porn on the internet, then go buy another mobile device that properly runs flash. You're never going to get it on Apple iProducts and Jobs has made that very clear. If you still choose to buy Apple iProduct knowing that, well you've got no one but yourself to blame.
Apple can "limit" their products how ever they want, just like every other company does. They can start selling a $5000 mac tomorrow with only 512mb of RAM and Pentium processor. They'd have every right because it's THEIR product. If you buy such a thing, then shame on you, not shame on Apple.
It's like people are covering their own eyes and then crying that it's dark.
Hmmm. I'm sure they'd like to make everything work better, but if it's still working the old way (albeit inefficiently) then they're not going to be given the resources (time and money) by the companies that employ them.
Jobs completely pulling the plug on Flash actually helps the techs justify (up the tight-fisted management chain) why they need to modernize.
Because the one deciding to block it thinks it is bad.
Let me break down the take aways points as this is getting tiresome.
1. Your original argument does not work if it is talking about absolutes. Badness is not attributed based on the decision to block something. In fact, I was charitable in my reconstruction of your argument, it should be phrased as a converse error which is a fallacy.
2. You later added the additional information, namely that you were speaking of relatives. This contradicts your original statement that the proposition was false, as this is an absolute claim. This rendered the entire discussion meaningless.
3. You are now asking me why someone would make the decision to block something and how that is a good thing. There are two ways this can be true.
Absolutes: Although, no moral propositions are truly absolute, for the sake of argument we take rape which in America and most of the world is wrong. The decision to block, prevent and deter individuals from performing a rape comes after rape has been determined to be a moral wrong. Meaning that to block, prevent or deter individuals from performing rape is a good thing in virtue of it having been decided that rape is bad, absolutely.
Relatives: As an individual, I have the right to form my own opinion and act upon the basis of that opinion. If I think rape is bad then I will refrain from raping and prevent rapes when possible. Thus, blocking, preventing and refraining from rape are good actions relative to the individual. My stating that refraining, preventing or blocking rape is a good thing in no way defines rape as a bad thing in an absolute sense.
Your original argument took a relative position and extrapolated that the speaker was stating porn was bad, absolutely. This was made clear by your phrasing and it was a fallacy.
If you are now going to take a relative position and extrapolate a relative position, you are wasting your time as this is plainly obvious.
The funniest thing about Gawker... they "audition" public comments on their site and decide what gets published. You have to be approved beforehand and it's all based on their judgement. Hypocrisy anyone?
No. Where's the hypocrisy?
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that Jobs has always been focussed on the education market - Apple II, Mac, eMate, eMac, iMac... and now iPad. I'll put my next bit in bold it's so important:
If Gooooogle don't go the non-porn route as well (which they won't), Jobs has in a single stroke virtually guaranteed the iPad #1 position in the education market around the entire globe.
Unlike Google, Apple's a hardware company. State school systems buying tens of thousands of units. Frikkin genius.
Porn freee.. as free as the wind blows...
If Gooooogle don't go the non-porn route as well (which they won't), Jobs has in a single stroke virtually guaranteed the iPad #1 position in the education market around the entire globe.
Unlike Google, Apple's a hardware company. State school systems buying tens of thousands of units. Frikkin genius.
Porn freee.. as free as the wind blows...