Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Based on Sweeney's response, it seems he'll be condemning the removal of any app - regardless of the reason. That'll take up a lot of his time, unless he decides to wait to find the reason before delighting us with his opinion.
Unless Apple remove Safari until they ban a user for accessing csam, then it's all a bit hypocritical isn't it?
 
The issue is that an app was taken down based on one user. By that logic, let's remove Safari or Instagram or Facebook or TikTok or iMessage or WhatsApp or why not go the whole hog and shut down the internet because all these platforms host questionable or illegal content. Let's ban all knives or baseball bats because someone used them to injure or 'unalive' someone. Phones and computer are the medium that kind of content is consumed, let's ban them too based on one user or account. Let's ban cameras too while we're at it.

How far do you want to go banning everything that could cause harm? This is not justifying the content or user that uploaded that material but banning a platform when everything else could also be responsible is pretty dystopian wouldn't you say?

COMING SOON...

1785846192026.png
 
CSAM is awful, but I don't see iMessage going away and I'm sure CSAM has been shared via iMessage. Not that I have ever, or hope to ever receive it.

You have successfully misconstrued a valid point about competition, and gatekeeping, into something it's not.

Tim Sweeney seems far more passionate about promoting “competition” than about protecting children because he is personally frustrated that Apple has built a successful business and has the right to set the rules for its own platform.

Thankfully, that’s exactly how it works, and dangerous content like this is blocked immediately by Apple. Sweeney should be ashamed of both his comments and the fact that he is using a situation like this as a weapon against Apple.

Any reasonable person would say: “Even if I don’t like restrictions on competition, I recognize that in a situation like this it was the right thing to do to take every possible step to prevent harmful content from spreading.”
 
You're missing the point here.

They removed the app based on the actions of one user they happened to see. Despite hundreds of thousands of similar cases before. Then they reinstated the app based on a single user ban. Despite likely many, many similar ongoing cases.

How is this reasonable? Is anyone claiming the app was harmful for exactly 40 minutes?
when did Apple contact Telegram? do you know? how many people were viewing that content from one person? could it not be hundreds/thousands? if you don't know these details, your argument doesn't work. and you're missing the point of my response anyways.
 
Apple removed Telegram from the App Store after a review found content that violated its guidelines on child sexual abuse material. Tim Sweeney believes that decision was wrong. What a remarkable stance.
After one user posted it - it's not a feature like the ones for "X", "grok", and "nudify"-apps. Banning the whole app is excessive, so I understand Sweeney in this case.

They haven't banned Grok though - an actual service that does nudification and creates CSAM, and even sues Minnesota who passed a law against it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: robvalentine
That’s a very odd situation, 1 user means the app gets removed.

So how does Apple justify Safari being available when illegal content could be viewed, downloaded or even uploaded via it?
Because Safari is not an *app* per se but a web browser, and the web is an “open platform” which Apple does not moderate. An App on the App Store can be sold and monetized so Apple can moderate what it “sells” or “hosts” through its own store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dg1974
Tim Sweeney seems far more passionate about promoting “competition” than about protecting children because he is personally frustrated that Apple has built a successful business and has the right to set the rules for its own platform.

Thankfully, that’s exactly how it works, and dangerous content like this is blocked immediately by Apple. Sweeney should be ashamed of both his comments and the fact that he is using a situation like this as a weapon against Apple.

Any reasonable person would say: “Even if I don’t like restrictions on competition, I recognize that in a situation like this it was the right thing to do to take every possible step to prevent harmful content from spreading.”
The dangerous content isn't blocked by apple is it? Safari is still available on my iPad and Macbook Pro. This isn't about safety. This is most likely an over zealous app store employee, and Apple making up rubbish for better PR. One user out of millions does not warrant a ban. if they refused to ban them, fair enough, but they banned the user once they were made aware.

Your last sentence essentially calls for a privatised version of the great firewall of China, or indeed north Korea;s "Internet". Any claims it's for safety is laughable, and a reasonable person would see it as such. Given how much cyber bullying there is via iMessage, is it reasonable to ban that?
 
Leave it to Sweeny to be so self absorbed and wrapped around the axle that he comes down on the side of kiddy porn lmaoooo
 
Leave it to Sweeny to be so self absorbed and wrapped around the axle that he comes down on the side of kiddy porn lmaoooo
That is clearly not what Tim Sweeney is saying. He said no corporation should be able to remove an app used by billions because of the action of a singular user. If all it took was for a single person to post something illegal then no communications app can operate at scale including imessage because there will be people who use those apps for illegal activities. Should apple remove imessage from all iPhones because some people use it to send illegal content?
1785854663636.png
 
*Apple removes app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? This is why we need to be able to sideload"

*Apple doesn't remove app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? App Store doesn't catch everything"

damned if you do, damned if you don't, users will complain about everything.
Every region with alternate stores leaves Apple in charge of removing any app they don’t want to appear on any of the stores… That is not what “alternate store” people want, but it is precisely what those governments want. And, in every region, the hit to Apple’s bottom line will be negligible as they just don’t have content enough people want.
 
*Apple removes app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? This is why we need to be able to sideload"

*Apple doesn't remove app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? App Store doesn't catch everything"

damned if you do, damned if you don't, users will complain about everything.
If by users you mean Tim Sweeney, I agree. He will complain about everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mittencuh
*Apple removes app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? This is why we need to be able to sideload"

*Apple doesn't remove app from App Store that harms users*
users: "See? App Store doesn't catch everything"

damned if you do, damned if you don't, users will complain about everything.
It was expected as attacks on Telegram coming there and there and there. Durov suck blood of parasites and they won't let it go just like that.
It is time to move to distributed networks.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.