[HN Gopher] Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the ...
___________________________________________________________________
Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store
Author : giuliomagnifico
Score : 740 points
Date : 2021-01-01 19:19 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| coffeemug wrote:
| _> Apple became the place that I lost feeling of physical and
| psychological safety and the terror that it inflicted on me has
| impacted me on such a core level that the painful memories and
| flashbacks have replaced my dreams and they will hunt me until I
| am alive._
|
| I'm sure Apple is a political quagmire, but if you describe your
| experience working there the same way someone might describe
| their time at Auschwitz, it's probably you and not them.
| __m wrote:
| Oh come on, you use it as a drug to let the Mac stay awake.
| Whether or not the guideline makes sense, you are obviously
| violating it, just change the name.
| burnthrow wrote:
| Well, it's a play on Caffeine.app's name. I'll make an ever
| better Mac force-wake program called Crack Binge.app, anyone who
| dislikes this name is a puritan Apple sycophant.
| ur-whale wrote:
| Funny how that kind of problem doesn't even exist on Linux.
|
| I really don't understand how people can willingly buy and use
| Apple products given the kind of paternalistic, I-know-
| what's-best for-you attitude this abomination of a company has.
| im3w1l wrote:
| I agree with the author: if Apple wants to tighten up rules
| around drugs, they should have a grandfather clause for popular
| apps with an established brand.
| ineedasername wrote:
| I wonder if app store moderation is run on a quota system. It
| would explain why we continuously have stories about app X
| getting banned under a very loose interpretation of a guideline
| if moderators are "poor performers" when they don't find
| offending apps.
| null_object wrote:
| I genuinely don't understand the outrage in these HN threads
| about Apple. This is an application undoubtedly built with Apple
| hardware, probably using an Apple-developed programming language
| and an IDE made by Apple, to be used on machines created and
| manufactured by Apple, and provided on a store that's setup and
| run by Apple.
|
| This isn't even a so-called 'walled garden'. Let's take Instagram
| for instance: built on technologies provided freely by others
| (HTML, JavaScript, CSS) and exploiting user-created content, I
| still need to sign-up to a Facebook service to be able to see
| that freely-provided content.
|
| If these apps were boxes on a Walmart shelf, why would it be seen
| as some sort of civil-liberty infringement if you got a call
| someday, to say that Walmart had decided to discontinue selling
| your product?
|
| Just change the name and move on.
| SCAQTony wrote:
| Perhaps change one letter of the name to APPhetamine?
| DeafSquid wrote:
| We all know Steve Jobs dropped acid. What's the big deal if an
| app is named after a prescription drug?
| newbie789 wrote:
| I don't mean to sound pedantic (though I certainly will), but
| Focalin, Ritalin, etc are formulations of methylphenidate which
| is absolutely not an amphetamine. It's a DARI, not a VMAT2
| inhibitor. They work in very different ways and are not
| chemically related.
|
| I only bring this up because if you're trying to educate folks on
| compounds in this sphere, being accurate is a nice thing to do.
|
| I wish this project all the best. It's absolutely silly that the
| name of a commonly prescribed compound should be so maligned.
| What if I named an app "Metformin"? Would that be at risk of uh,
| encouraging type 2 diabetes?
| ExcavateGrandMa wrote:
| lolz
| silentsea90 wrote:
| The name was approved by Apple years ago. The developer built the
| brand on that name. What changed? Apple's policies (on their
| whims). If Apple has to come down hard, they should bear the cost
| of the re-branding at least to measurably communicating widely
| regarding the rename. It is sad that Apple exercises so much
| power callously.
| joseph_grobbles wrote:
| "The name was approved by Apple years ago"
|
| This isn't going to be popular, however getting away with
| something for a period of time is not the same as being
| approved/sanctioned/etc. In the petition the author claimed
| that the app "spontaneously began violating" one of the
| guidelines, when clearly it has violated it all along. Yet that
| disingenuous angle is used constantly when people get away with
| something for a while and suddenly aren't.
|
| As an aside, it's interesting that anyone thinks that making a
| big noise about this will cause Apple to revert their stance
| (as app using a pill as their icon, naming it after a
| controlled substance, and using narrative like "the most
| awesome keep-awake"). That is improbable. It seems much more
| likely that Apple will be very certain this app is renamed, and
| the narrative changed.
| Daho0n wrote:
| This is not "getting away with it":
|
| >"When you leave your Mac idle, it smartly goes to sleep to
| conserve power and reduce wear and tear. But this can also
| stop a big download short or prevent a lengthy compile or
| render from finishing. Instead of having to periodically
| wiggle the pointer to keep your Mac awake, launch Amphetamine
| and rest assured your Mac won't sleep until you want it to.
| Amphetamine sits unobtrusively in the menu bar until you
| Control-click it (or press Command-I) to kick it into gear.
| That's it. Your Mac will stay awake until you end the
| session."
|
| https://apps.apple.com/us/story/id1470456860
| silentsea90 wrote:
| Apple approved of the app. Hence the name was approved. Not
| sure what we mean by "getting away" here
| joseph_grobbles wrote:
| I drove by a cop over the speed limit yesterday. He didn't
| pull me over. Therefore I can always drive over the speed
| limit and it is "approved".
|
| This is childish, nonsensical argumentation. The app has
| _always_ been in contravention of the rules of the app
| store.
| Daho0n wrote:
| Apple wrote a story about the App. They approved it _and_
| approved of it.
| dinkleberg wrote:
| Apple isn't a singular entity, it is made up of lots of
| people. I'd find it unlikely the people approving apps
| are the same as those who pick the apps to showcase. And
| neither of those groups are likely involved with making
| up the rules.
| ihunter2839 wrote:
| You want to talk about a nonsensical argument, take a
| look at the comparison you just made.
|
| In the first situation, you have no way of knowing
| whether the cop even saw you. Or if they were on duty. Or
| if they were previously occupied responding to some other
| call.
|
| In the second, the app was explicitly submitted for
| review and approved by Apple. Even more egregious, the
| app was explicitly mentioned, _by name_ , by Apple.
|
| Next time, I recommend you speed up and catch the cop to
| make sure they know you were speeding and see how things
| play out.
| joseph_grobbles wrote:
| Let me be more explicit for you, then: I speed past a cop
| who is _pointing his radar gun at me, staring at me_ ,
| but for some reason he doesn't decide to pursue me (an
| experience many of us have actually had).
|
| Maybe it's an off day for him and he just doesn't care.
| Maybe he was confused about the speed limit on that
| stretch. Maybe he is waiting for a bigger fish. Maybe he
| likes my car (or skin) color and decided to look the
| other way. Regardless, I _got away_ with speeding.
|
| If I then at some future date pointed to that as
| legalizing my speeding for all time, that would be
| ignorant nonsense. Yet we see this exactly this sort of
| childish argument in all realms: Some guy deducts
| something unlawful for years and then one day the tax man
| says "Uh no...that isn't allowed", and they point to
| their prior years as if that makes it suddenly lawful.
| That getting away with it before grandfathers it in or
| something.
|
| Some random Apple employee writing a story linked it (or
| a tax employee accepting a tax return, or a cop giving a
| pass to speeding), therefore it is _officially sanctioned
| for all time_. Give me a break. That isn 't how _any_ of
| this works.
|
| But it makes for a lot of crybaby stories.
| solidsnack9000 wrote:
| If (a) there is no definite speed limit, just an
| imprecise policy statement (like "don't drive too fast")
| and (b) a person drives by the same cops for years at the
| same speed and gets clocked and doesn't get ticketed, and
| then (c) is one day pulled over and told that they're
| driving imprudently, then they indeed have a basis for
| complaint. That is exactly how this works. The interplay
| between vague policies and regular practice is how people
| gain clarity in the absence of a bright line rule --
| playing ball.
| joseph_grobbles wrote:
| An app named "amphetamine" (a controlled substance in
| most countries), using a pill as its icon, with narrative
| like the "most awesome keep-awake".
|
| Yeah, there isn't a lot of ambiguity here. This was
| absolutely _getting away with it_.
|
| A lot of noise and bluster in here, but I'd peg the
| probability that Apple stays firm at 100%.
| ihunter2839 wrote:
| Down vote away, my challenge still stands for you to
| catch up to the cop or to pull over and ask "Hey I was
| just going x over the limit, do you want to give me a
| ticket?" :P
|
| All jokes aside, I feel that this is a poor analogy that
| really misses the key issues (in my mind).
|
| A developer creates an app and then submits an app for
| review. The app is _approved_ and the app starts to build
| an organic following. At some later date, and without any
| explicit changes to the app or to the terms, Apple
| decides that the app is in violation of the terms for
| information that was available upon review. The developer
| and app are unfortunately the ones to pay the cost, as
| the organic growth is deterred. Will the new app be able
| to recapture the same market share? Hard to say.
| Regardless of Apple 's action in this case, I think it
| would be in the company's best interest to consider the
| developer's experience when proceeding with issues like
| this.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _What changed? Apple 's policies_
|
| Companies change policies all the time. I get dozens of terms
| of service revision alerts in my e-mail each year.
|
| Same goes for government policies, and even personal policies.
| You wouldn't make decisions today based solely on things you
| thought ten years ago.
|
| Life changes. Policies change. Things change.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| Doesn't make it right. I shouldn't be shocked to find some
| contrarian/nihilist defending EULAs and corporate bullshit on
| HN, but here we are.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| We really shouldn't normalize the kind of thought control,
| censorship, and morality policing that underlies this Apple
| guideline. We need to break up and heavily regulate any company
| that is so powerful that there is effectively no choice but to
| cave to their demands. These companies, like with the Apple-
| Google App Store duopoly, are powerful enough such that even
| though they are technically private, their actions are as direct
| and impactful as the government enforcing such rules.
| xwalltime wrote:
| Well, this is pretty silly. Surely this won't last. I've only
| tried apps like Caffeine and Amphetamine a few times, but I never
| associated it with a bad thing.
|
| Also, why is Apple making a political statement that doctors
| should not prescribe Retalin or Adderall ?
|
| It doesn't seem like Apple's place to be making judgements on
| what medicines are good or bad.
|
| Would Apple ban an app called NyQuil that puts your computer to
| sleep when it gets hot?
| nodesocket wrote:
| Would rebranding as Caffeine also be against terms of service?
| jimsmart wrote:
| It's a pre-existing competing(?) product.
|
| https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/24120/caffeine
| yurielt wrote:
| It is truly amazing how some of the people in the comment section
| keep defending apple dishonest practices, almost like they are
| bots or something...
| joemi wrote:
| I think it's pretty dismissive to presume or imply that
| comments you disagree with here must all be from bots.
|
| Edit: To expand, Apple inspires strong opinions in a lot of
| people. They have a lot of fans for various reasons, and a lot
| of detractors for various reasons. And then there's everyone in
| between those extremes too. It's to be expected that any
| comment thread about Apple will have a lot of opinions that you
| disagree with, no matter what your viewpoint is.
| didibus wrote:
| I wonder what's the rationale behind this policy. I can think of
| three reasons:
|
| 1) They are worried of bad PR from a headline being published
| that goes: "Apple encourages drug abuse with multiple apps such
| as Amphetamine".
|
| 2) They are worried of a lawsuit if it is found some app
| contributed to the sell of illegal drugs.
|
| 3) They are worried of parents complaints being concerned that
| they've found an app called Amphetamine on their kid's device.
|
| And in some way, I can agree that as a Company, I'd rather not
| take my chances with any of them. Now, the policy being applied
| inconsistently is another issue. And ya, I wish the world wasn't
| so that a company needed to worry about these, but it isn't, so
| I'm not sure I can blame Apple that much for it. This also seems
| like a silly cause for them to champion.
| xwalltime wrote:
| I would agree, but I can't because Apple is a monopoly. If
| monopolies are allowed to exist then they must be required to
| reflect the principles of the governments in which they
| operate.
|
| If everyone could see this decision and easily move over their
| apps to 1 of 20 other iOS app markets then it might be
| reasonable for Apple to have self-determined restrictions in
| place.
| smarx007 wrote:
| My manager (who uses Windows as a daily driver) overheard me
| recommending a colleague to install Amphetamine and gave me a
| _very_ puzzled look. Another time I had to explain secops
| people why do I have an executable called "riot" on my machine
| (part of Apache Jena if you are curious). So I can imagine
| Apple just got tired replying to complaints (semiautomated?)
| from IT sec departments that Amphetamine has nothing to do with
| drugs and decided to force Amphetamine to rebrand instead.
|
| PS: I vote for Redeye as a new name
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-eye_flight, just as
| Amphetamine was used by pilots in the past https://en.wikipedia
| .org/wiki/History_and_culture_of_substit...).
| teruakohatu wrote:
| > secops people why do I have an executable called "riot"
|
| No doubt your secops are trying to justify their existence
| like app store reviewers if this is what worries them!
| [deleted]
| rvz wrote:
| So with the way Apple is going with this, is Amphetamine's cousin
| 'Caffeinated' [0] going to be next?
|
| > A little taste of 'Caffeine'.
|
| This will prove to be a complete waste of time for Apple.
|
| [0] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/caffeinated-anti-sleep-
| app/id1...
| ktm5j wrote:
| They explicitly wrote "illegal drugs" in the policy, so no.
| thrower123 wrote:
| The problem here is that there is a centralized app store that
| can gate your product.
|
| On Windows, you could just host the msi or exe on your website.
| jtdressel wrote:
| This is a Mac app, not iOS.
|
| This would be analogous to Microsoft kicking them off the
| windows app store. You could still download it manually.
| matsemann wrote:
| For now. The walls are getting higher on MacOS lately.
| appletrotter wrote:
| Of course the same is true on mac, as well. Both OSs have
| stores, but allow sideloading.
| kepler1 wrote:
| Easy, adopt new name.
|
| iViagra(TM): Keeps your Mac up
| bussetta wrote:
| Would this have been OK if Apple acknowledged the popularity of
| the app and acknowledged pointing it out after 6 years?
| bluefox wrote:
| These things happen when you depend on a middleman to distribute
| your product.
| KingMachiavelli wrote:
| This is pure censorship and nothing but a ridiculous, culturally
| damaging move from Apple. Forcing developers to pick from
| particular, puritan subset of the human language and banning apps
| relating to whole segments of the human experience will do
| nothing but hamper creativity and expression.
|
| It is also extremely hypocritical, Apple distributes and profits
| from existing works of art that depict and describe drug use,
| among other topics, through Apple TV, iTunes, and Apple Music.
| Apple has no concerns with profiting from art _after_ someone
| else approved it whether some other movie producer or record
| label. As long as some other large institution vouches for it
| then Apple will look the other way. But if every institution
| operated like Apple, most of the best works of literature, music,
| and film would never have been approved.
|
| Honestly, I can not fathom why so much open source and free
| content is produced for Apple's ecosystem. Everything from the
| desktop MacOS operating system to Apple's app store policies is
| counterproductive for developers and anyone who disagrees with
| Apple's rules. The opportunity of the App store makes sense for
| commercial and profit driven apps but there is no reason to give
| charity to the most valued company on the planet.
|
| Finally, I really doubt there is any legal ramification for Apple
| here. Apple can ban any app they want for any reason which is
| fine. I just think anyone starting to get into developing should
| consider anything but app development for this reason. If the
| product has to be an 'app' then try to make it a web app.
| Anything besides putting your life in Apple's hands.
| S_A_P wrote:
| This does seem like a weird shift on Apples part. They even
| featured the app in "app stories" at one point in time. I'm a
| user of this app and found it when I couldn't find caffeine which
| I used on an older MacBook.
|
| As an aside I've noticed that it's Apples day to feature on the
| hn front page. Seems to be an unusual influx of bad apple press.
| I'm curious if it is coordinated? I've wondered the same about
| anti google/Facebook/Amazon as well. They all seem to come in
| waves.
| solidsnack9000 wrote:
| It is bad for them to apply such a policy so inconsistently, to
| the point that it's subjectivity.
|
| It's also bad to name apps after drugs that are widely abused.
| It's just too extra. Call it something positive and pro-social
| like "matcha" or "oolong" or maybe "dark roast" or "espresso" or
| something.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| I'm sympathetic, but it's not a great argument.
|
| _Adderall(r), Concerta(r), Dexedrine(r), Focalin(r),
| Metadate(r), Methylin(r), Ritalin(r) are all "brand name"
| amphetamines._
|
| Yup, and they're controlled substances that you can't buy without
| a prescription and which are only supplied in limited quantity.
| Your app is literally branding is literally a kind of drug abuse
| - using a drug to stay awake rather than its medical use to just
| be normally functional.
|
| This isn't to endorse Apple, which ought to apply its guidelines
| more consistently instead of ignoring or enforcing them in
| arbitrary manner, and which should be more transparent with
| communities of users rather than using its leverage against
| individual developers with no real process or recourse.
|
| But when you get down to it, you are in violation of the ToS and
| there isn't a great moral crusade here. Rebrand and be happy.
| DarkmSparks wrote:
| rename it
|
| to ApplePhet
| layoutIfNeeded wrote:
| Surely there aren't any songs or movies in Apple's catalog that
| might be promoting drug use.
| ece wrote:
| Another day...
| lylo wrote:
| Insomnimac.
|
| You're welcome.
| cocaine wrote:
| Shockingly bad name.
| lsiebert wrote:
| I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, but the App store
| may constitute an essential facility for a desktop program
| developed specifically for Apple Computers.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_facilities_doctrine
| GavinMcG wrote:
| Sure, but they're not denying access to competitors. They're
| setting rules for use of the facility. "You can't illicit
| promote drug use in our facility" is a reasonable rule.
|
| Whether the name "Amphetamine" does in fact promote illicit
| drug use may be up for question, of course, but that's got
| nothing to do with monopoly power.
| fortran77 wrote:
| It's annoying, and unfair, but I'd take advantage of the
| "publicity" around this name change, and change it to
| "StimulusCheck" or something trendy, and move on with things.
| null4bl3 wrote:
| Well. It is their store.
|
| Come join the happy world off Linux if you want to avoid that
| sort of corporate control
| [deleted]
| paozac wrote:
| That's very silly. The times are ready for a new job title:
| software product namer, to make sure a name won't offend anyone
| or violate trademarks and store guidelines.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _The times are ready for a new job title: software product
| namer, to make sure a name won 't offend anyone or violate
| trademarks and store guidelines_
|
| This profession already exists, and has for at least a century.
| Where do you think the name "Exxon" came from?
| happytoexplain wrote:
| Avoiding offense while choosing product names is already a well
| developed and ubiquitous task, and has been for a very long
| time. It's a reasonable thing to want to do. But I understand
| the point you're trying to make.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Honestly the real enemy (if people are genuinely offended I
| tend to side with them) is people being offended _on behalf_ of
| other people.
| rxhernandez wrote:
| This kind of crap has been around long before people started
| caring about how marginalized people feel. Look no further
| than obscenity laws which have been in place a lot longer
| than this wave of empathy.
| happytoexplain wrote:
| In most cases where a group-defining parameter is simple,
| it's best to avoid classifying them as "the enemy".
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| It may be a little nastier than that.
|
| In some cases, they're selective about which groups will and
| will not be sheltered from offense. And they may refuse to
| admit that, let alone engage in a public, civil debate about
| their choices.
| pydry wrote:
| You're assuming that this is actually the reason. It smells
| to me like the real reason they kicked it off the platform
| has fuck all to do with the name, but feigning "wokeness"
| serves as a decent cover for a variety of evils.
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| Not advocating drug use has exactly nothing to do with
| wokeness.
| akerro wrote:
| It's similar situation to removal of slave/master terminology
| from IT. Without context such accusations are pointless. "I don't
| like the word you use so you are not allowed to use it." We're
| seeing the same thing. Apple doesn't like you using the word
| that's also name of a drug, so you're gone. No context needed.
| [deleted]
| piker wrote:
| Seems pretty clear.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| I think finding molecular differences of amphetamine is missing
| the point. There is a lot of knee jerk reactions I see here.
| This is primarily an image thing for Apple.
|
| Personally, I think this is a bad name for an app of this
| sorts. Caffeine is good one, amphetamine is borderline.
| matsemann wrote:
| > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't
| cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. _Please don 't sneer,
| including at the rest of the community._
|
| From the guidelines linked at the bottom.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| I am sorry. Thanks for the reminder, I edited it.
| highmastdon wrote:
| The whole world is starting to cuddle everyone to death. It's so
| disgusting to see the walled gardens censoring, boycotting,
| deciding what is truth, interfering with ones beliefs and trying
| to modify them. Also everyone feels offended by something thus
| entitled to tell what I can and cannot say. Grow the hell up!
| Sticks and stones may break my bones, but facts don't care about
| your feelings. Pampering society will lead to a generation of
| incompetent crybabies just because they can't handle another
| view/perspective
| pengaru wrote:
| Makes me wonder what proportion of Apple employees use
| Amphetamines regularly... Adderall is quite popular especially
| among techies.
| greggturkington wrote:
| > Apple [...] featured Amphetamine in a Mac App Store Story
|
| Ouch
|
| > _Customize Your Mac's Sleep Settings_
|
| > _Amphetamine gives you granular control_
|
| https://apps.apple.com/us/story/id1470456860
| urbandw311er wrote:
| This needs to be upvoted
| NeutronStar wrote:
| The amount of people complaining about the name while this
| being the top comment is absurd.
| Ceezy wrote:
| First I m just wondering why can't they change the name of their
| app... And eventually ask for help from Apple to reroute confused
| customers. Second apple is not responsible for your brand
| identity. A lot of people associate their brand with drugs. And
| it always come with drawbacks. Should the app store promote
| drugs? Would you want that on the mac of your children?
| epx wrote:
| Next, some app named Nitrogen will be banned because it is
| related to explosives and therefore to terrorists.
| fishnchips wrote:
| Nitrogen is an element, and a very common one at that.
| Explosives are a fringe use case.
|
| Amphetamine on the other hand has only one very well defined
| use case.
|
| I get the reference to another similar app (Caffeine) but this
| is a step too far, indeed portraying a dangerous drug in a
| positive light.
| izacus wrote:
| I seriously doubt your nerdsniping changes the point of the
| original poster. Which you could easily figure out if you
| weren't so eager to jump upon every single minute detail and
| consequently missed the forest for the trees.
| fishnchips wrote:
| I wouldn't call it nerdsniping. I found OPs argument to be
| a strawman.
| dekhn wrote:
| which use case did you mean? treatment for narcolepsy? ADHD?
| gambiting wrote:
| Like the author pointed out, millions of Americans take legal
| amphetamines every year. I'd wager a bet that legal users of
| amphetamines outnumber the illegal users 10,000 to 1.
| Besides, amphetamine is just the name of the compound, it
| doesn't suggest anything. If you imply that simply knowing
| that amphetamines can keep you awake is dangerous, then I'd
| like to point you towards centuries of proof that not telling
| people about sex totally stops them from having it.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| It's not portraying anything in a positive light. The fact
| that this is the name of the app implies no value judgement.
| Unklejoe wrote:
| > Amphetamine on the other hand has only one very well
| defined use case.
|
| Are you referring to the widespread use of it as an ADHD
| medication for children all throughout the nation?
| rasputin243 wrote:
| And adults as well
| fishnchips wrote:
| Apologies, where I come from this is not a common treatment
| for ADHD. I'm not a specialist but as a father of two
| lively boys I did my share of reading about diagnosing and
| treating ADHD in Europe.
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| I apologize if I'm misunderstanding your comment. But
| just to help others avoid confusion, ADHD isn't the same
| as being extra energetic.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| What drugs are, according to your reasearch, widely used
| in Europe? Here in Canada, Amphetamines are widespread,
| from Vyvanse to Adderall to Evekeo.
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| Ritalin is the dominant drug in that regard, and while it
| is very similar in every respect, it is not amphetamine-
| the-substance nor, I believe, technically in the class of
| substances also referred to as amphetamines.
|
| (someone stated that amphetamines are now available in
| the EU market. But, if so, it's likely that few people
| will know, mostly because discussions of ADHD have
| somewhat faded)
| Daho0n wrote:
| It is, they just call it something else like Adderall,
| Evekeo or whatever.
| dekhn wrote:
| Vyvanse was approved in Europe ~5+ years ago and is a
| hugely successful and widely used product.
| [deleted]
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Or perhaps to its widespread use as a stimulant for
| narcolepsy sufferers - which is clearly what the app's name
| is alluding to.
|
| It's like banning an app called fertilizer because
| fertilizer can be used to make bombs.
| spullara wrote:
| Just change the name and move on. It is stupid to waste energy
| fighting it. How about Insomnia? Keepup? Stayup?
| hyperman1 wrote:
| This is one more example of a pattern of abuse by the app stores
| of apple, google, and maybe even microsoft.
|
| Any app store vendor is the alpha and omega on its platform. Any
| app store has a monopoly on its walled garden. There are some
| good aspects like user protection against bad apps, but on the
| whole, is it worth the price.
|
| Main question now is how society should deal with this. Some
| ideas from the top of my head
|
| * One option is to simply break the monopoly. A platform could be
| obligated to implement a store API, and the default platform
| store should use that same API as any other.
|
| * Another option is a separation of duties. Just like lawmaker,
| judge and police can't be the same entity in a democracy, they
| could be split up in the app stores.
|
| * Maybe the safety of the user device can be guaranteed
| independently from the app store. If the OS enforced walls
| between apps are strong enough that malicious apps can always be
| removed and no data theft is possible, the damage done by bad app
| stores can be lowered?
| valuearb wrote:
| Where would developers be without Amphetamines? There is no way
| Zuckerberg hasn't consumed a mountain of Adderal.
| o_p wrote:
| Developing mobile apps sounds painful, imagine building an app
| and its userbase for many years and some faceless corp destroys
| all your work on a whim. Maybe web apps arent so bad
| DonHopkins wrote:
| They should collaborate with Simone Giertz and re-brand it the
| "Wake Up Machine"!
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh2-iJj3dI0&ab_channel=Simon...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61FaYVGVY_I&ab_channel=Simon...
| umvi wrote:
| Change the name to "Amph" and change the icon to remove pill. You
| can't fight Apple, they make and enforce all the rules. If you
| want to protest Apple, stop developing software for their
| platforms.
| andromeduck wrote:
| Nah rename it to modafinil
| theelous3 wrote:
| Cant help but feel some level of whatever that german word is for
| finding misery funny.
|
| Watching devs willingly deal with apple is like watching someone
| pay for the privilege of being oliver twist.
| leppr wrote:
| Can we stop endlessly puting Apple's various authoritarians
| missteps under the spotlight? It's been literally decades now, we
| know they can and will do whatever they want in their walled
| garden. Stop giving them attention. Complaining clearly _does
| not_ work, if you want to make a difference, change platforms.
| Nobody is forcing you to develop for Apple.
| dane-pgp wrote:
| Do you similarly think that American newspapers should stop
| publishing articles about China's various authoritarian
| missteps?
|
| You could just ignore articles that don't interest you, and you
| certainly don't need to go to the trouble of commenting on
| them, although I support your efforts to encourage people to
| change platform (and reduce their customer base by half).
| reaperducer wrote:
| Are you seriously equating a company choosing not to host an
| app with the genocidal policies of a communist government?
| dane-pgp wrote:
| I'm not equating Apple's policies with China's, I'm just
| trying to understand if "Complaining clearly does not work"
| is a good enough justification for preventing people from
| learning about bad policies.
|
| Perhaps the argument is that people have a duty to learn
| about genocides going on in the world, whereas there is no
| moral imperative to learn about bad policies of tech
| companies, but by that logic nearly every discussion on
| this site should be removed.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| HN is not a newspaper.
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| Apple is under heightened antitrust scrutiny IIUC, so it's
| plausible that past and current discussions were/are actually
| helpful.
|
| And fwiw, you're welcome to just ignore any threads or stories
| that you feel are getting repetitive. Many of us have a
| personal list of such topics, but our lists may not match.
| scrose wrote:
| > Can we stop endlessly puting Apple's various authoritarians
| missteps under the spotlight?
|
| I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or if you think the
| whole 'if you don't like something then shut-up and move'
| strategy is actually a logical solution.
| amelius wrote:
| Can we stop upvoting Apple stories on HN then? If not, then the
| best solution is to at least show us a balanced account of
| things.
| Bud wrote:
| Not sure you understand what "authoritarian" actually means.
| crististm wrote:
| How can you tell he doesn't? I've read the same post and the
| semantics seem fine to me.
| crististm wrote:
| There are a number of cases where the publicity helped to
| reverse a not favorable decision. I think this is the same
| strategy used here and they seemed to have made their homework
| before going public.
|
| I don't know for how many cases this didn't work but it's clear
| that it works for _some_. They don't want to make a difference
| and don't want to change platforms.
|
| For what is worth, I'm glad for this publicity for it's clear
| it's part of a continuing stream of issues that should steer
| away any newcomer with open eyes.
| Vaslo wrote:
| Just change it to Cocaine. Problem solved!
| smashah wrote:
| Despite the valid arguments on both sides, I fall on the side of
| this being stupid. Let them keep the name!
| mwnivek wrote:
| FYI, there is an open-source alternative with the less catchy but
| less controversial name, KeepingYouAwake. (Note that Amphetamine
| has more advanced features, if you need them.)
|
| https://github.com/newmarcel/KeepingYouAwake
| lstamour wrote:
| You can also just use the built-in Terminal app and run the
| built-in executable named "caffeinate", it's free and provided
| by Apple: https://ss64.com/osx/caffeinate.html While the
| command has a few options, just typing the word at the terminal
| and hitting enter will stop your Mac from going to sleep, etc.
| A long time ago I worked for a company that had a terrible
| policy for inactivity screen lock that kept interfering with my
| ability to get work done, and the caffeinate command helped me
| prevent screen lock when I needed it to.
| trestenhortz wrote:
| Incredibly insensitive product naming.
|
| I'm guessing the software authors don't have children and don't
| have multiple friends and family who's lives have been destroyed
| by meth.
|
| Instead it's just a bro having cool fun with words "hey keeps
| your computer awake! Get it? Ha! So clever!"
| IX-103 wrote:
| It's a successor of the (now-defunct) caffeine app which did
| mostly the same thing.
|
| Given that most other coffee names were already taken, I can
| understand the logic of why they chose the name.
|
| As you said though, it is now considered by many to be
| insensitive. So Apple it's probably in the right here.
|
| I'm sure they would welcome suggestions on how to rebrand.
| ketamine__ wrote:
| Maybe they have a child with ADHD whose life was saved by
| amphetamines?
| mhh__ wrote:
| Your username has its uses too.
|
| Not bad for a night out although not really to my taste.
| bserge wrote:
| That's the problem I guess. Some people will abuse it, then
| everyone will be denied access to it because of them.
| ketamine__ wrote:
| Ketamine for treatment resistant depression. We've got to
| kick the mind expansion folks out though. They are going to
| ruin everything like Timothy Leary ruined LSD.
| DeafSquid wrote:
| Go fuck yourself if you think you should be denying
| anyone from using a substance you yourself benefit from.
| Others benefit from it in different ways too.
| ketamine__ wrote:
| Sorry, but I can't support recreational use when I have a
| legitimate medical need. It makes the activism too
| complicated.
| bserge wrote:
| I agree, but the problem is that one idiot overdoses on
| something and suddenly it's a big deal and it "needs to
| be banned". This mentality is just a$$-backwards. Use it
| for whatever you want, don't blame the drug if you suffer
| side effects.
| adhder wrote:
| You are just displaying your ignorance here. Amphetamines are
| used in medications prescribed for narcolepsy (i.e.
| unwanted/inappropriate sleepiness), ADHD and obesity.
|
| If you look at this and think of street meth, that's your own
| problem.
| fabatka wrote:
| Amphetamine and metamphetamine (meth) are two different things.
| throwaway201103 wrote:
| In the context of illegal/recreational usage, not really.
| Chemically they are similar, and affect the body in pretty
| much an identical way. Methamphetamine metabolizes to
| amphetamine. Methamphetamine has more potent effects for the
| same dose. And of course street meth is a crap-shoot.
| kortex wrote:
| Yes, really. That methyl group makes a big difference. It
| increases potency, toxicity, absorption rate and overall
| addictiveness, hence why amph is commonly prescribed, while
| meth (desoxyn) is reserved for severe narcolepsy.
| lhoff wrote:
| You didn't read the post, did you?
|
| Please go and read the post. Especially the following section:
| https://github.com/x74353/SaveAmphetamine#what-arguments-can...
|
| The App is named Amphetamine and not Meth which imho is a big
| difference.
| trestenhortz wrote:
| You pointing out semantics makes zero difference to how I
| feel about meth/amphetamines and how regardless of semantics
| these are insensitive product names.
|
| When I hear "Amphetamine" I instantly think if they people I
| know who's lives have been destroyed, but you feel I'm
| mistaken and you've got a good argument against my line of
| thinking.
|
| Telling me how to think.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| So they are insensitive _to you_. But this does not
| generalize because knowing many meth addicts does not
| generalize either.
| xwalltime wrote:
| Amphetamine is what our drug companies use to make
| medication for those suffering with ADHD. I think you have
| watched too much Breaking Bad.
| netsharc wrote:
| To quote Stephen Fry on what I think of your argument:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzdpxKqEUAw
| TheRealSteel wrote:
| How you feel has no bearing on altering the fabric of
| chemistry or reality.
|
| Amphetamine is not meth and no amount of crying will change
| that.
|
| Nor does someone naming an app "amphetamine" cause an
| increase in drug usage.
| valuearb wrote:
| Were you one of those German soldiers issued Meth during
| WW2 to help them fight longer and with less human emotion?
| Cause that's all I think about when you talk about meth
| destroying lives.
| [deleted]
| TheRealSteel wrote:
| By your logic nobody should be able to call their app
| "lemonade" since it's a drink and some people are
| alcoholics
|
| What about all the people with ADHD, eating disorders, and
| other problems whose lives have been saved due to
| amphetamine?
|
| Also I take it you'll be demanding the removal of WINE from
| all package managers due to the existence of alcoholics?
| simongr3dal wrote:
| Take it easy, it was named after an older similar app,
| Caffeine.
|
| It's a clever name because it rhymes and they're both
| stimulants. That's all.
| TheRealSteel wrote:
| You're the one who brought up meth.
|
| Amphetamine isn't meth.
|
| Looks like it's you that has the meth obsession. Shouldn't you
| be ashamed with yourself for having used the word? What about
| all the people whose children's lives have been destroyed by
| meth? Shouldn't you delete your comment?
|
| Also can you please link me to a study that shows a causal link
| between names of apps, and an increase in usage in that drug
| the app is named after?
|
| And then one that shows an increase in usage in a different
| drug (because again, amphetamine is not meth)?
|
| I'd really, really like to read that study.
|
| Presumably you want to ban WINE too, because of all the people
| who know someone who was an alcoholic? Have you written to the
| WINE maintainers telling them how evil they are?
| zepto wrote:
| Meth is amphetamine.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine
| TheRealSteel wrote:
| No, meth is _an_ amphetamine. Meth is not amphetamine,
| amphetamine is a different molecule.
| zepto wrote:
| Amphetamine is a general term as well as a proper noun.
| Both are valid and widely accepted meanings.
|
| Meth is amphetamine.
| kortex wrote:
| Not really, it's pretty confusing and when I worked at a
| medicinal chemist working on substituted phenethylamines,
| no one referred to molecules aside from amphetamine
| proper as "amphetamine".
| dekhn wrote:
| This is simply technically incorrect as many people are
| pointing out to you. There is a named molecule called
| "amphetamine" short for alpha-methylphenethylamine, it
| has a unique IUPAC name ((RS)-1-phenylpropan-2-amine).
|
| Methamphetamine is a derivative in the class of
| amphetamines (amphetamines being the family that was
| originally established by amphetamine). I know that's
| confusing. But, it has its own chemical structure,
| N-methylamphetamine, which is chemically distinct (yet
| extremely similar).
|
| If your point is 'meth is an amphetamine', that's fine
| but it doesn't strengthen your arguments.
| zepto wrote:
| My only argument is that it's reasonable for the GP to
| say that meth is amphetamine, even if it's grammatically
| more correct to say _an_ amphetamine.
|
| It's basically bullshit to dismiss what they were saying
| on the basis of this pedantry.
|
| Amphetamine _is_ a structural class.
|
| It's also clearly true that people not versed in
| chemistry associate meth with amphetamine.
|
| What's 'technically' correct to a chemist really isn't
| relevant to this debate.
|
| We wouldn't generally argue that it's incorrect to say
| that champagne is wine, even though it's more technically
| accurate to say that champagne is _a_ wine.
|
| In the case of amphetamine, we feel the need to make the
| distinction more strongly because the word has _two
| meanings_.
|
| This is only true for those of use who are aware of the
| presence of both meanings.
|
| Those who think of amphetamine as a class and don't
| distinguish it from the substance are not _wrong_. They
| are just less precise.
| ganstyles wrote:
| It's not a problem with grammar when the "incorrect"
| grammar changes the whole meaning of something. No one
| would be jumping on the comment if it had said, "meth is
| a amphetamine," which has the same meaning despite the
| incorrect grammar. Removing the "an" completely changes
| the meaning.
|
| This should be clear?
| zepto wrote:
| It only completely changes the meaning _for someone
| technically versed_. Most people are not.
|
| This should be clear?
|
| A lot of people are going to think of meth when they see
| the word amphetamine. Likely most people.
| crististm wrote:
| The relevancy to the debate is established by the meaning
| of the word. Which is a technical issue. Leaving the
| definition of a precise term to the whims of layman
| results in that we can't any longer say if we are talking
| about the same things.
|
| Look no further then to this very thread.
| zepto wrote:
| There is a technical definition and there are lay
| understandings.
|
| This has always been true. Wouldn't you say?
| crististm wrote:
| True.
|
| The end result is that the merge of the two ends up in
| the dictionary. Perhaps it's time to update the
| definitions but I doubt that 'amphetamine' will be
| defined as slang for 'meth' when in fact 'meth' is slang
| or short for 'methamphetamine'.
| zepto wrote:
| Yeah - I'm not expecting it to end up as slang.
|
| Just that as a lay term people think of meth as
| amphetamine in the way that people think of champagne as
| wine.
| bigphishy wrote:
| I'll just leave this here,
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_proposition
| dekhn wrote:
| Sort of? It's more like a derivative (has an extra methyl
| group) and it's far more potent. So it would not be correct
| to say it "is amphetamine".
| layoutIfNeeded wrote:
| Yeah sure, meth is _an_ amphetamine.
|
| Just like how the hydrocortisone I'm using for my eczema is
| _a_ steroid, yet it would be unwise to confuse it with
| Winstrol or Dianabol.
| im3w1l wrote:
| > Also can you please link me to a study that shows a causal
| link between names of apps, and an increase in usage in that
| drug the app is named after?
|
| How about this one? Considering that the app also has a
| picture of a pill as a logo, I think it would be ill-advised
| for former addicts to have the app installed.
| https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-004-1828-4
|
| Also have this blog post from psychology today
| https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-
| addiction/...
| blatherard wrote:
| I thought I should look at the App Store and see what this app is
| doing in comparison to similar apps.
|
| The logo is basically a big pill and the tagline "Powerful keep-
| awake utility" which is clearly alluding to the drug.
| https://imgur.com/a/RJXHaBa
|
| This was consistent with the feedback the author received: "[the]
| app appears to promote inappropriate use of controlled
| substances. Specifically, your app name and icon include
| references to controlled substances, pills"
|
| Almost all of the other top apps in the app store in the same
| category use some reference to caffeine either in the name or
| tagline or description (e.g. "Jolt of Caffeine" or "Owly" which
| has a logo of an owl in a cup of coffee)
| https://imgur.com/a/yySBqEL
|
| There's one other, much less popular app called "Coca" which
| appears to reference cocaine, but doesn't also have a drug-
| referencing icon or tagline, and which only has 15 reviews. By
| comparison, Amphetamine seems to be the most popular result, at
| least for the search term "awake", with 1.37K reviews
|
| The guideline in question doesn't seem to consider excessive use
| of caffeine as problematic to encourage. "1.4.3 Apps that
| encourage consumption of tobacco and vape products, illegal
| drugs, or excessive amounts of alcohol are not permitted on the
| App Store. Apps that encourage minors to consume any of these
| substances will be rejected. Facilitating the sale of marijuana,
| tobacco, or controlled substances (except for licensed
| pharmacies) isn't allowed."
|
| Overall, Amphetamine did seem to be pushing the drug-use angle
| much harder than other apps in the category based on the logo,
| tagline and title, especially if you consider caffeine abuse not
| problematic.
|
| Added: I don't have a strong opinion on this one either way,
| other than edgy naming has pros and cons. Word of mouth is
| easier, but sometimes a problem like this happens.
| aardvarkr wrote:
| "1.4.3 Apps that encourage consumption of tobacco and vape
| products, illegal drugs, or excessive amounts of alcohol are
| not permitted on the App Store. Apps that encourage minors to
| consume any of these substances will be rejected. Facilitating
| the sale of marijuana, tobacco, or controlled substances
| (except for licensed pharmacies) isn't allowed."
|
| Taking this literally, is an amphetamine an illegal drug? It's
| a class of Schedule II drugs that are legal in all 50 states.
| solidsnack9000 wrote:
| It's a "controlled substance", which means it is illegal
| under many circumstances. Most illegal drugs are actually
| illegal in that way.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| It's not illegal, it is perfectly legal, but like driving a
| car you need to go through a process for it that not everyone
| can clear.
|
| For example, if you have issues staying awake from narcolepsy
| it's possible to legally obtain amphetamines, and our society
| generally accepts this to be a good thing.
| solidsnack9000 wrote:
| One way it's different from driving a car is that you can
| own a car without having a license -- car _possession_ is
| not regulated -- whereas the possession of controlled
| substances is what 's regulated.
| judge2020 wrote:
| Opioids are often prescribed for good reason as well but
| there's still an opioid epidemic and referencing them in
| your app's name or icon probably isn't a good thing to do.
| Some amphetamines are schedule 2 drugs in the US so
| possession is illegal in most circumstances.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act#cit
| e...
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Most amphetamines except for methamphetamine are
| generally possessed legally. Surprisingly, most of the
| illegal market for non-meth amphetamine is misdirected
| legal pills.
|
| They're also quite different from opiods because unlike
| them, they aren't inherently addictive if prescribed
| properly. For example, prescribed for ADHD, all cause
| addiction rates do not increase from amphetamine use. In
| general, it's about as addictive as alcohol, and that's
| perfectly acceptable as the name for software such as
| WINE.
| wasdfff wrote:
| Considering the context can be helpful. Apple has their
| caffeinate utility, seems to me amphetamine is an appropriate
| name for a more powerful "stimulant" utility, given the naming
| convention Apple themselves have laid out.
| kortex wrote:
| What drug-use angle are they pushing? The pill logo is actually
| pretty typical of generic 15mg amphetamine/dexamphetamine
| salts, a common ADHD prescription, and nothing about the
| tagline strikes me as drug-adjacent. "Powerful keep-awake
| utility"? It does what it says on the tin.
| turbinerneiter wrote:
| Don't develop for Apple platforms.
|
| Don't tie your income to a platform you can't control.
|
| App store, youtube, ... they all can lock your out without reason
| and recourse. Don't rely on them.
| TakuYam wrote:
| It sucks and Apple is really over protective with this stuff so
| just change the name.
|
| If you're feeling brave/stupid, try calling it something like
| Khat.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat
| [deleted]
| twirlock wrote:
| Apple is wrong for switching up after six years, but stop trying
| to act like it's not a deliberately edgy reference to speed.
| trynewideas wrote:
| The iPhone X, also known as the iPhone XTC, iPhone Adam, iPhone
| E, iPhone Molly
| danso wrote:
| From the writeup:
|
| > _Argument #1: Amphetamine Does Not Promote the Use of Illegal
| Drugs or Facilitate the Sale of Controlled Substances_
|
| > _Amphetamine does not promote the use of illegal drugs. Not
| only that, Amphetamine does not promote the recreational use of
| legal /prescribed drugs. In the United States, amphetamine is
| prescribed by doctors to adults for narcolepsy and to children
| for ADHD..._
|
| > _...Just like amphetamine (the organic compound) can be legally
| used to keep humans awake and attentive, Amphetamine (the app)
| can be legally used to keep your Mac awake. "_
|
| While "amphetamine" isn't itself an "illegal" drug, _promoting_
| the use of amphetamines for anything other than the FDA-approved
| indications (e.g. narcolepsy and ADHD) is something that can
| approach illegality [0]. For example, Pfizer and many other
| companies have had to pay billions to settle charges of promoting
| drugs for non-approved indications [1].
|
| The author doesn't help his case when he asserts, " _amphetamine
| can be legally used to keep humans awake and attentive_ ". Yes,
| that's an effect of the drug, but it's only official legal uses
| are for treating narcolepsy and diagnosed ADHD. Adderall's
| manufacturer would get in big trouble if it started a campaign to
| convince doctors (who can basically prescribe for any reason they
| judge necessary) to get patients on Adderall for general boosting
| of performance and productivity.
|
| Of course, the author (I assume) isn't in the pocket of Big
| Pharma. it's also not a stretch to see how this falls afoul of
| Apple' policy against encouraging the illegal use of drugs, in
| that the application's very name creates an association between
| "Amphetamine" and "making your computer more productive". Alcohol
| isn't an illegal drug either, but as the author notes, Apple
| explicitly bans encouragement of _" consumption of...excessive
| amounts of alcohol"_ - i.e. a harmful use of an otherwise legal
| drug.
|
| To use a hypothetical example, if a developer created an app that
| reduced screen glare and excessive contrast in UI elements, and
| then called it Fentanyl, I'd imagine Apple would have the same
| complaints as it does against Amphetamine, even though Fentanyl
| is a drug legally prescribed for severe chronic pain.
|
| [0]
| https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20160719.05588...
|
| [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-
| announces-...
| reaperducer wrote:
| I suggest changing the name to "Speed Apple." That way you can
| take a slam at Apple, and use an icon of poop, because in some
| western states "speed apple" is slang for quadruped manure on the
| road.
|
| See also: "Speed goat" which is another word for "antelope."
|
| (Yes, I'm mostly joking. Just change the name.)
| avipars wrote:
| change the name
| saagarjha wrote:
| Sigh, this is disappointing. I've been using Amphetamine for
| years and it's quite literally one of a handful of utility apps
| on the App Store that isn't a scam or neutered by the policies of
| the store. Apple was right to recognize it it in the past, and
| they are wrong today in their reinterpretation of the guidelines.
|
| FWIW, I do app review policy for iSH, which went though a similar
| situation recently
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25028252) where we managed
| to convince Apple that they had misinterpreted their review
| guidelines. If you're looking for help to get Amphetamine
| approved as it should, feel free to contact me at
| saagar@saagarjha.com. I'd be really disappointed to see
| Amphetamine lose its years of brand value over such a petty
| review decision.
| Shank wrote:
| As someone who depends on amphetamines to function daily, it's
| disheartening to see their use further stigmatized. For many
| people like me, amphetamines help them live a normal life. The
| app isn't called "meth" or "methamphetamine" and it's not
| referring to a street drug.
|
| I'm saddened to see so many equating amphetamines to illicit
| drugs, when that's simply not the full story. This perception is
| exactly what stops people from taking their medication when they
| should and balking at the idea of a medication being able to help
| them.
| adhder wrote:
| Exactly this! And yet again we see arrogant HNers bask in their
| own ignorance of anything outside of writing shitty web apps.
| wittyreference wrote:
| Cocaine is also used as a medication. We use topical spray
| cocaine for anesthetizing the nasal cavity and pharynx before
| certain procedures.
|
| Just saying.
| casion wrote:
| Hah! I use methamphetamine (desoxyn) to function!
|
| Some irony there in complaining about the stigmatizing of a
| drug with high abuse potential then immediately stereotyping
| another.
| jMyles wrote:
| While I wholeheartedly agree with the thrust of your argument
| (particularly that stigmatization is detrimental)...
|
| > it's not referring to a street drug.
|
| Amphetamine (and other amphetamines) are certainly available as
| 'street drugs'. The stigmatization of 'street drugs' (and
| generally, drug use as part of someone's self-directed diet) is
| also harmful.
| kortex wrote:
| Exactly. If you were to describe objectively to someone the
| properties of alcohol or tobacco without saying the name,
| people would be clamoring to crack down on the "epidemic"
| claiming thousands of lives and costing billions.
| croes wrote:
| So apps with the words pep or speed in the name are also
| inappropriate?
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Speed can refer to a drug, but it can refer to a lot of
| other things too; people will think very different things
| depending on whether they see the word next to a picture of
| pills or one of a running shoe.
|
| You surely know this already.
| jMyles wrote:
| Uhhh, no. I don't think this name, nor any name based on a
| psychoactive compound, is a bad or inappropriate name on
| that basis.
| tome wrote:
| Change your apps name. Not that big of a deal.
| arghwhat wrote:
| Amphetamine isn't exactly an innocent name. Of all the app
| takedowns that occur, this one seems pretty normal and
| actionable.
|
| It's important to remember that reviews are superficial, and
| passing review is not at all the same as being compliant with the
| terms. Compliance is the burden of the submitter.
|
| Now, that app store monopoly makes terms unfair and arbitrary is
| another discussion entirely.
| crististm wrote:
| I agree with most (actually all) of your conclusions but...
|
| They start with the premise of culpability of a name. Which
| _is_ the problem in the first place.
|
| That culpability was not demonstrated but was simply declared
| by remote association. The same arbitrary judgement can be made
| for an innumerable list of other words without making that
| judgement neither correct nor just.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| There are gambling games in the app store marketed to children.
| You can sink 10s of thousands of dollars into gatcha games and
| they make every effort to make it _easy and desirable_ to do
| so. If Apple wants to be a moral arbiter I 'm not sure why it
| doesn't have a problem with those and even highlights them as
| "featured" apps from time to time.
| helsinki wrote:
| It's a great app! I do tend to agree with them, as every time I
| looked in the corner of my screen, I was reminded of how much
| harder I could work if only I had some adderall.
| florin0x01 wrote:
| Try HyperCaffeine or smth. Oh wait,the name is not as
| breathtaking as amphetamine.
| jimwalsh wrote:
| So OP created a product very similar to Caffeine, with an edgier
| name and now it's becoming an issue. Where I think you chose the
| name just to help get into a similar space as Caffeine in the
| first place.
| cmckn wrote:
| I don't think Apple has a strong argument, given the feature set
| of the app, but I also think the name is kind of tacky/in poor
| taste. I used an identical app for years called Caffeine. Yes,
| Apple should buzz off, but choose your battles.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _I also think the name is kind of tacky /in poor taste._
|
| I agree. When I turned my wife's old MacBook into a media
| server, I needed an app like this. I chose one that didn't
| share its name with controlled substance.
|
| Branding 101. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
| oauea wrote:
| The best thing to do is to let Apple remove the app. Do not
| rebrand it. Do not try to restore it. Eventually Apple will
| realize that their platform is worthless if they have no
| developers making apps for them.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| Back in the very early days of the App Store, I got contacted by
| Apple regarding the submission of my app "!@#?!% Allergies", as
| they believed the name may lead users to think their iPhone
| Springboard app was buggy :(
| zabzonk wrote:
| There is obviously a range of names of drugs and chemicals from
| Aspirin to ZyclonB that could be considered harmful and/or
| offensive. But I personally would not use any of them as a name
| for a software product, if only to avoid confusion.
| riffic wrote:
| You're not going to win against Apple. Change your app's name.
| valuearb wrote:
| There is still an appeals process, change it after you exhaust
| that.
| ganstyles wrote:
| Strategically I would say don't bother, personally. Just
| change the name.
| valuearb wrote:
| It all depends on how much value the name has as a brand.
| If there are a ton of positive reviews and mentions of the
| app using that name, it's not going to hurt to appeal.
|
| But if almost all of the materials referring to the app by
| that name are on your own web site, I agree with you,
| change it and move on. Use those efforts in better places.
| jabbany wrote:
| I have used this while using Macs before and it's a pretty good
| tool. The name also some what makes sense since it's a "stronger"
| variant of the past tool.
|
| What's really sad is why this kind of feature even needs to be
| implemented through a third-party application when it should
| really be handled on the OS side...
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| I want to suggest rebranding as Beige - the most harmless,
| boring, and forgettable "color" in the universe. But then even
| that would likely offend someone, somewhere, somehow.
|
| Maybe Apple should change their name? Given what apples did for
| Adam & Eve?
|
| Yes, words are important. But so is context and intention. If we
| keep eliminating words - removed from context and intent -then
| all we'll have left are emojis.
|
| Oh wait...nevermind.
|
| Botton line: Come on Apple, really? Of all the fights to fight in
| the world, this is a good one? Shame on you.
| floatingatoll wrote:
| I couldn't have guessed the purpose of the app from this name,
| and now that I know what it does, I would specifically avoid
| giving money to it due the name alone.
|
| I'm glad someone made an alternative to Caffeine.app but "they're
| both drugs" doesn't weaken my personal objection to the choice of
| name. I am glad that Apple is compelling the name to be changed,
| and I hope the author complies. This is where "universal freedom"
| clashes directly with "common sense for a department store" for
| me, and while I understand others aren't on my side, I prefer
| department stores to flea markets.
| matsemann wrote:
| Why should your "personal objection" be a reason for someone
| else to change? You do you and choose an app based on naming if
| you want, but don't go pushing your puritan views on everyone
| else.
| floatingatoll wrote:
| My personal objection is shared by others, unpalatable as
| that may be to some. Thankfully, my celebration of this
| outcome is wholly irrelevant to Apple's decision-making
| process, as I neither work for Apple, influence Apple, nor
| participate in any app store review processes on behalf of
| Apple, or any other either. So you may take comfort that had
| I exerted any effort to push my view -- which I haven't -- it
| would have meant just as much to the outcome as our
| discussion here in this thread: Absolutely nothing
| whatsoever.
|
| Demeaning me with the phrase "pushing your puritan views" is
| is tasteless and inappropriate, and makes incorrect
| assumptions not only about the root of my objection but also
| about the belief systems surrounding it. You are wrong about
| both.
| jjcon wrote:
| As someone I guess not in the loop with the latest in outrage
| culture... what exactly is offensive about the name?
| floatingatoll wrote:
| My issues with it stem from something unpublished in the late
| 90s, which is not something 'dismissable' that you can simply
| set aside using the negation-by-framing of 'outrage culture',
| so I can't offer any reply to your question. Please accept my
| apologies for how far off the mark my reasons are from your
| assumptions; perhaps another time we'll be better aligned.
| jjcon wrote:
| > something unpublished in the late 90s
|
| Why should anyone care about this? I'm still confused.
| ubercow13 wrote:
| On the contrary, intentionally obtuse and unsubstantive
| references to some unpublished something-or-other, and
| unspecified personal objections which are claimed to be
| 'common sense', are pretty vapid and dismissable.
| adultSwim wrote:
| I would change the name.
| skywhopper wrote:
| Interesting. It's annoying that the review process is so
| inconsistent. But although the amphetamine-based drugs listed are
| legal, it would be _illegal_ to prescribe for the purpose of
| "staying awake", so the implication of the app's name that an
| "amphetamine" is a safe and legal means to "stay awake" does
| probably violate the spirit of the rule.
| FrameworkFred wrote:
| I don't have a dog in the fight since I'm no longer a Mac user
| and, when I was, I didn't use the app.
|
| But, when I read the name, it didn't register as offensive to me.
| Amphetamines are a class of drugs and there are both legal and
| illegal ones...it doesn't immediately equate in my mind to
| crystal meth. But it does immediately equate to "keeps you
| awake", which seems appropriate.
|
| It also seems a bit unfair after 6 years and 500k downloads. Had
| Apple made an issue of it originally, the author might have built
| all the goodwill and ratings with some other, more acceptable
| name.
|
| The internet is a pretty big place to have to launch a product.
| Picking a name that suggests a purpose seems like a big win to me
| and coming up with a string of words that won't offend _someone_
| is a pretty big challenge these days.
| niekverw wrote:
| Caffeinate is now a default preinatalled command, just saying..
| andai wrote:
| Could you change it to Modafinil?
| speedgoose wrote:
| The developer uses Github but I cannot see source code, only
| compiled binaries.
| yarcob wrote:
| Developer probably has a private Github repo for source code
| and a public repo for things they want publicly accessible.
|
| It's funny that much of the public only associates Github with
| Open Source even though all their paying customers use it for
| closed source development...
| speedgoose wrote:
| I also use Github for non open-source development at work.
| But I don't distribute binaries through git. That's weird.
| [deleted]
| Shorel wrote:
| I'm with Apple on this one.
|
| Even for legal use the use of the name seems like an endorsement
| of sorts.
| marmaduke wrote:
| I don't use this and don't care. But I can imagine my kids
| asking, what are amphetamines, why is it named that way, did you
| ever try them, what is it like.
|
| Just like you'd say to kids, you don't ever need to take those
| pills, maybe you should use your energy to push Apple so that
| your app isn't necessary? I certainly try to educate my kids such
| that they will not be in a position to need those meds.
|
| We like to think we own our hardware and make decisions about how
| it works and Apple sucks cuz they take away ownership, but cmon
| like you got to choose sensible defaults for your brain? "What's
| in your .brainrc?" Random lines from your parents and friends at
| school, that's what
| adhder wrote:
| If your kids asked you that, I hope you'd give a reasonable
| answer about these being prescribed medications for narcolepsy
| and ADHD, that much improve the quality of life for people
| afflicted with these conditions. Rather than ignorant shit like
| "you don't ever need to take those pills".
| marmaduke wrote:
| Sure if that was the case. How many abusers have you seen
| tho? Have you seen their MRIs after the damage?
| adhder wrote:
| Of course it's the case, stop being so damn ignorant.
| People like you are the reason that taking ADHD medication
| is so stigmatized, because you assume the default is to
| abuse.
| [deleted]
| kortex wrote:
| Wow, this whole thread has prompted me to get off mobile and onto
| a keyboard, because I have many thoughts on this matter. I have
| ADHD, delayed phase sleep disorder, a dual BS in chemistry and
| psychology, I have studied addiction and drug reform, and even
| worked on synthesizing phenethylamine derivatives. I have _many_
| thoughts.
|
| First, methamphetamine is _not_ amphetamine. Meth belongs to the
| broad class of molecules properly known as "substituted
| amphetamines" or "phenethylamines." No one in-the-know refers to
| meth as "amphetamine" by itself, though some do broadly refer to
| assorted substituted amphetamines as "amphetamines" but this is
| pretty sloppy and if you want to refer to the class and
| "substituted amphetamines" is a mouthful, just use
| "phenethylamine" (PEA).
|
| The name, of course, one of the most clever elisions in
| chemistry, Alpha-Methyl-PHenyl-ETthylAMINE, refers to the methyl
| group alpha to (the 1st substituent on the carbon backbone) the
| amine. This makes PEAs structural analogs of dopamine (DA, aka
| 3,4-OH-PEA) and norepinephrine (NE, aka 3,4,b-OH-PEA), and their
| the ability to modulate DA/NE receptors is what gives PEAs their
| general stimulating properties.
|
| Meth-amphetamine has a methyl group on the amine. This seemingly
| small structural change makes a big difference pharmacologically.
| Methylation of amines makes drugs more fat-soluble, which makes
| them better at penetrating the blood-brain barrier and cellular
| membranes, while inhibiting its breakdown and clearance. This
| makes METH harder hitting, better at receptor binding, faster
| acting, and with far stronger effects than AMPH. Modelling
| addiction is tricky, but we can loosely approximate how strongly
| habit-forming a drug can be by multiplying the blood plasma curve
| by an exponential decay. The faster and higher a drug peaks, the
| more likely it will be addicting.
|
| METH's lipophilicity also means it tends to cause DA to leak into
| places it shouldn't, resulting in unwanted chemical side-
| reactions which can damage neurons and glia, making it more toxic
| than AMPH. (this is a huuuge oversimplification; there are reams
| of studies on the mechanism of METH toxicity, and yes the
| literature uses METH as the abbreviation, I'm not being dramatic
| by all-capsing it)
|
| Together, this makes METH much more dangerous than AMPH, and
| hence why AMPH and prodrugs such as Vyvanse (lysine-
| dexamphetamine) are commonly prescribed for ADHD, sleep disorders
| and eating disorders, while METH (under the name Desoxyn) is much
| more obscure medicinally (but still used! In fact another comment
| in this post mentions it).
|
| Both are DEA Schedule II. Scheduling has basically no correlation
| to actual addictive potential or harm in any way. Psilocybin is
| SchI, has virtually no risk of addiction or overdose, Zolpidem is
| SchIV but is notoriously prone to abuse, and tobacco isn't even
| scheduled but is exceptionally addictive, causes easily >$100B in
| costs in USA alone. Yeah, the DEA schedule is kinda useless IMHO,
| but I digress.
|
| AMPH can be abused and sold on the street, but that's true of
| literally any drug that humans find interesting to consume,
| including weak PEAs like bupropion, and OTC drugs like
| diphenhydramine and dextromethorphan.
|
| Bottom line is - amphetamine is safe and effective when used as
| prescribed for improving focus and wakefulness. Lumping it in
| with METH or other street drugs is chemically imprecise, and does
| a disservice to those struggling with executive disorders. Apple
| makes it seem like just the name _Amphetamine_ implies
| inappropriate drug consumption, which adds to the stigma those
| who benefit from amphetamine treatment already experience.
|
| Thanks for coming to my TEDHN talk.
| Angostura wrote:
| I can see how theoretically the app name could cement the idea of
| amphetamines being a useful tool for promoting wakefulness if you
| were a young person.
|
| Sensibilities about naming things do change over time - as
| various sports clubs have found.
|
| I'm sorry for the developer, but I can see why the guidelines
| might have been triggered.
| yarcob wrote:
| The hypocrisy is that Craig Federighi jokes about Marihuana all
| the time in Apple keynotes, but when a 3rd party developer does
| the same thing they ban it...
| teruakohatu wrote:
| They also publish TV shows with violence, bad language etc.
| That is OK but dare an app store developer make a joke....
| codecamper wrote:
| Apple is so freaking random with their complaints. It makes it
| VERY hard to build a business around. 10 years ago I had a police
| scanner app called Scanner911. It sold well.. until a competitor
| innovated around me... by gaming the app store's review system.
| Complaining to Apple yielded nothing.
|
| Not that I wanted to build a career around police scanner apps,
| but it was an independent income.
|
| People here defending Apple are conformist fanboys.. the same
| people that were sitting staring at that video screen in the old
| 1984 ad.
|
| Funny how the world repeats.
| niekverw wrote:
| Caffeinate is a default terminal command in Macos for a few years
| already, what's the purpose of caffeine and amphetamine? ..
| danso wrote:
| In the U.S., caffeine is not a highly regulated substance. You
| can buy it without limits in concentrated pill form, or in
| coffee and cola. By contrast, amphetamine is regulated as a
| Schedule 2 controlled substance [0], i.e approved for medical
| use but considered to have "high potential for abuse". Opioids
| like fentanyl are also in Schedule 2.
|
| [0] https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/
| pvtmert wrote:
| Convenience.
| gayprogrammer wrote:
| Whether the app name will be changed or not, I'm glad that this
| sort of thing doesn't happen in silence or under NDA.
| ur-whale wrote:
| Just give Apple time.
| Grustaf wrote:
| Apple tend to be hysterically puritanical about these things (and
| lately, hysterically PC) but it's their store so why not just
| follow their rules?
| ur-whale wrote:
| It's not Apple that's hysterically puritanical, it's the market
| they operate in.
|
| They don't give two f__ks about being politically correct,
| they're a corporation, their main concern is profit, and if
| you're not being hysterically PC in 2021, you're gonna loose
| money because of the radical minority that's ruining it for
| everyone.
| anewguy9000 wrote:
| WWJD
| nur12121 wrote:
| This is the problem when we jump on the bandwagon to try and ban
| all words that may be offensive to a single person.
| eurasiantiger wrote:
| The post conflates methylphenidate-based stimulant medications
| (Concerta, Focalin, Ritalin, Metadate, Methylin) with true
| amphetamine-based medications (Adderall, Dexedrine).
|
| Related, the former are not amphetamine derivatives, which is a
| common misnomer.
| t-writescode wrote:
| It's so common of a misnomer, in fact, that I know what the app
| does!
| crazygringo wrote:
| I mean, on this point I'm actually inclined to think Apple's
| general policy is reasonable, even if it sucks that Apple is only
| now adding or enforcing this rule.
|
| It doesn't want apps that jokingly call themselves "Crack
| Cocaine", "Crystal Meth", or "Mango Vape". It doesn't have
| anything to do with them _actually_ promoting drug use, but it
| helps _normalize_ illegal drug use in a way, while Apple wants to
| keep a "family friendly" approach to its App Store.
|
| Honestly, if I were the creator I'd just rebrand it.
|
| I remember coming across the app years ago, it wasn't obvious
| from the name what it did, and when I finally understood it, it
| just seemed like the creator was trying a little too hard to be
| "edgy". And if you want the widest possible usage/distribution of
| your app, "edgy" is usually not the way to go.
| Daho0n wrote:
| Apple disagrees with you - or at least they did when it was a
| Mac App Store Story.
| nsajko wrote:
| No. Amphetamine is the name of a chemical with both legal
| medicinal and illegal applications. I might agree with you if
| the app's name was "Meth" or some other slang term for a
| stimulant drug associated with illegal use.
| andai wrote:
| Another comment in this thread said the same thing, and
| someone replied saying "but I take meth to function
| (desoxyn)".
| lb504 wrote:
| macOS ships with a command line program called "caffeinate"
| that disables the sleep function of the laptop. With this
| background knowledge I was immediately able to assume
| Amphetamine is a more powerful program that provides the same
| results. With this background in mind I find the name to be
| clever.
| excerionsforte wrote:
| Might as well call it Poison Pill. What a waste of energy on
| Apple's part and a perfect grounds for a lawsuit. Apple approved
| this app with no problems and all of a sudden there is a problem
| where nothing has changed. Take them to court and dispute it. I
| assure you they will not be able to prove that this app violates
| the contract that was agreed to.
|
| What I see here as complacency on peoples' part here is
| ridiculous. Companies and people never stop until they are
| tested. Apple would have never made a small business contract for
| the app store had it not been for Epic's lawsuit.
|
| There even a comment below where Apple had no issues featuring
| the app: https://apps.apple.com/us/story/id1470456860
|
| This is winnable in court. Settle for Apple paying for the cost
| of re-brand and lawyers if they do not want to continue the
| dispute in court.
| KingMachiavelli wrote:
| It is almost a certainty that the Apple's ToS mandates
| arbitration instead of a real court and definitely allows them
| to remove an app at any time for any reason. There is no reason
| for Apple to _not_ CTA in their ToS since developers have no
| where else to go.
| aftergibson wrote:
| By this logic 1000s of Apps should be removed. Does Fruit Ninja
| glorify violence? It sounds like someone is trying to justify
| their job, can't go after apps that impact Apple's bottom line so
| chase apps like this.
|
| Huge fan of Amphetamine(the app) but its Apple's walled garden.
| This nonsense is a consequence.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| Unrralistic violence to vegetation is generally considered less
| abrasive than realistic violence to animals.
| oblio wrote:
| And then there is realistic violence to humans but ain't
| nobody gonna ban popular FPSes :-)
| wruza wrote:
| You mean fearless bullet sponges that leak red liquid after
| health bar exhaustion and fall without screaming in pain,
| or for their lost friends, or without begging you to spare
| them with horrified eyes? It's less realistic than in
| hollywood movies. [Don't] watch real footage to compare.
| Realistic-enough violence games usually can't even make it
| to the market, except few nsfl/ryona self-publishing
| niches. Would you ever like to promote one to AAA-grade,
| honestly?
| ganstyles wrote:
| Apple banned Fortnite.
| Orou wrote:
| That's true, but it had nothing to do with violence.
| AsyncAwait wrote:
| Not because of violence btw.
| tigen wrote:
| I don't agree with Apple here but I also don't feel too outraged
| either, I can see both sides and it's their store.
|
| I actually think Windows/MacOS should build the most commonly
| used sleep-gating functionality into the OS. (On Windows there's
| Coffee and Milk, where Coffee helps you keep it awake and Milk
| helps you figure out why it doesn't sleep. Seems like basic
| modern OS stuff to me.)
| webmobdev wrote:
| If you are not outraged, you aren't putting yourself in the
| author's shoe - they created an app that has been in the app
| store for 6 years. They marketed it and got a large number of
| users. And now suddenly Apple removes it because it doesn't
| like the name of the app. Do you want Apple to be the
| arbitrator of silly things like the name of the app or even
| your company?
| o_p wrote:
| Its not just their store. Its my device and they are not
| letting me run a program in it by the dumbest reasons. We
| shouldnt normalize manufacturers censoring software
| arbitrarily.
| badwolf wrote:
| does the developer not let you download the app outside of
| the Mac App Store?
| exabrial wrote:
| For fucks sake apple. You build your products with questionable
| labor. Quit lecturing us.
| zepto wrote:
| What are you talking about?
|
| The fact they have factories in china?
| dreamcompiler wrote:
| https://nlpc.org/2020/12/30/report-uighur-slaves-forced-
| to-w...
| bdcravens wrote:
| Apple and many others:
|
| "In all, ASPI's research has identified 82 foreign and
| Chinese companies potentially directly or indirectly
| benefiting from the use of Uyghur workers outside Xinjiang
| through abusive labour transfer programs as recently as
| 2019: Abercrombie & Fitch, Acer, Adidas, Alstom, Amazon,
| Apple, ASUS, BAIC Motor, Bestway, BMW, Bombardier, Bosch,
| BYD, Calvin Klein, Candy, Carter's, Cerruti 1881, Changan
| Automobile, Cisco, CRRC, Dell, Electrolux, Fila, Founder
| Group, GAC Group (automobiles), Gap, Geely Auto, General
| Motors, Google, Goertek, H&M, Haier, Hart Schaffner Marx,
| Hisense, Hitachi, HP, HTC, Huawei, iFlyTek, Jack & Jones,
| Jaguar, Japan Display Inc., L.L.Bean, Lacoste, Land Rover,
| Lenovo, LG, Li-Ning, Mayor, Meizu, Mercedes-Benz, MG,
| Microsoft, Mitsubishi, Mitsumi, Nike, Nintendo, Nokia,
| Oculus, Oppo, Panasonic, Polo Ralph Lauren, Puma, SAIC
| Motor, Samsung, SGMW, Sharp, Siemens, Skechers, Sony, TDK,
| Tommy Hilfiger, Toshiba, Tsinghua Tongfang, Uniqlo,
| Victoria's Secret, Vivo, Volkswagen, Xiaomi, Zara, Zegna,
| ZTE."
|
| https://www.aspi.org.au/report/uyghurs-sale
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| I see there's been (at least some) downvoting of this
| comment, but it's not irrelevant. Pointing out that other
| companies have the same problem doesn't give Apple a "get
| out of criticism free" card, but it's worth keeping in
| mind that Apple gets singled out for this kind of
| criticism in part because they promote their efforts to
| be better than the norm in this regard, which invites a
| more critical eye.
| bdcravens wrote:
| Every time I post that link it gets downvoted. Yet every
| time I post it, it's in response to someone implying
| Apple is uniquely evil. I certainly don't feel they
| deserve a pass, but it's such a ubiquitous problem that
| it's almost pointless to use as a talking point. (It's
| like saying Politician X is inherently bad because they
| accept corporate money)
| AsyncAwait wrote:
| > implying Apple is uniquely evil.
|
| It's not that they're uniquely evil, rather that they
| don't have the moral authority to lecture.
| zepto wrote:
| Who are they lecturing on what?
| zepto wrote:
| I don't see anyone complaining about Occulus, Google or
| Microsoft's labor practices on threads about them.
|
| Perhaps that will change if people read this list.
| ganstyles wrote:
| I am mad at all of them for their labor practices. Even
| if I wasn't, one company doing something nefarious isn't
| vindicated because others are doing same.
| bdcravens wrote:
| I agree; it just seems to me the discussion is framed in
| such a way to paint Apple as being uniquely evil in this
| regard.
| zepto wrote:
| Are they 'doing something nefarious'?
|
| At what point did they become aware that forced labor was
| being used, and what are they trying to do to change the
| situation?
|
| If you don't know the answer to these questions, it seems
| unclear that they are 'doing something nefarious'.
|
| I think doing business in China inevitably creates
| exposure to these problems.
|
| I think people knew China had problems like this when
| they started investing there.
|
| However I don't think anyone anticipated China getting
| _worse_ in this way.
| alanbradley wrote:
| What about GTA lol
| gregdoesit wrote:
| Lawyers will be lawyers. I assume this request from Apple's side
| originates from on of the legal teams, who are paid to pre-
| emotive ensure Apple won't be sued.
|
| I have a story that makes me relate from Microsoft/Skype. A few
| months after Microsoft acquired Skype, a JIRA ticket was opened
| by one of the compliance teams at Microsoft with a simple
| request. Remove the mooning emoji from Skype [1], as it could be
| considered offensive in some countries and thus Microsoft could
| be at risk of being sued.
|
| All of Skype erupted. The mooning icon was a symbol of playful
| cheekiness at Skype and has always been part of the app, and
| Skype never got sued for over 10 years. There were about 1,200
| Skype engineers at the time and that ticket had more than 500
| comments from engineers protesting this change. Some made good
| arguments. Some voiced frustration. Others called that this is a
| step towards censoring.
|
| It didn't matter. The icon was removed, the ticket closed.
|
| In a similar vain, I'll assume that not everyone at Apple will
| agree with this "violation". But it won't matter, as long as the
| legal teams says it's a risk to have apps with such names and
| icons in Apple's store.
|
| [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=mooning+skype
| throwaway09223 wrote:
| This is a failure of management, as is your skype example.
|
| Balancing the risk of litigation against risk to the product is
| management's job. In both of these cases the risk is somewhere
| between minimal and non-existent.
|
| Big companies tend to have bad management. There are entire
| libraries of books analyzing why this is the case but the short
| story is "risk aversion." Employees are incentivized to save
| their own skin and avoid conflict at work over improving the
| product.
|
| Sometimes public outcry can create a new risk and change the
| direction of management.
| LeonB wrote:
| Does Apple promote fruit consumption?
|
| (No, Apple does not promote fruit consumption.)
| taylorlapeyre wrote:
| ... can't you just run `$ caffeinate -d` in terminal?
| hundchenkatze wrote:
| ...some people don't know how or even care to use the command
| line.
| mmaunder wrote:
| You're angry. I've felt this in a trademark lawsuit. You think
| the world should get behind you and change the corrupt system.
|
| My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively
| as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the
| transition.
|
| They kind of have a point which doesn't make them right, but they
| hold all the cards and you will lose this one and regret the
| wasted bandwidth.
| karaterobot wrote:
| They don't have a point based on the wording of their own rule,
| because amphetamines are not a class of controlled substances.
|
| They don't have a point based on basic common sense either,
| because this application isn't telling people to use
| amphetamines. It's a metaphor.
| philwelch wrote:
| > amphetamines are not a class of controlled substances
|
| My pharmacist would disagree with that statement.
| issamehh wrote:
| Amphetamine is very much a controlled substance in the US.
| You can receive it legally with a prescription of course but
| that does not mean it isn't controlled.
|
| Of course it's just a name. There shouldn't be an argument
| that it's encouraging use
| pflats wrote:
| To add a little detail to what others said, amphetamine and
| its salts are explicitly a Schedule II controlled substance
| in the US.
|
| https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1308/1308_12.ht.
| ..
| ardy42 wrote:
| > To add a little detail to what others said, amphetamine
| and its salts are explicitly a Schedule II controlled
| substance in the US.
|
| Though, Schedule II means it has accepted medical uses, _so
| it is not illegal_. For instance, _lots_ of kids are
| prescribed amphetamines for ADHD.
|
| The part of the policy that actually references "controlled
| substances" only forbids apps that _facilitate their sale_
| by non-pharmacies.
|
| I think the GGP has a point if you replace "controlled
| substances" with "illegal drugs." The reviewer obviously
| seems to think the terms are synonymous (which is false),
| and banned the app under the clause that forbids
| "encourag[ing] consumption of ... illegal drugs."
|
| Leaving everything else aside, this reviewer pretty clearly
| failed to understand and reasonably apply the policy as
| written. Reference != promotion and "controlled substance"
| != "illegal drugs" (all illegal drugs are controlled
| substances, but the reverse is not true).
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| > They kind of have a point
|
| They don't (the claim is the app promotes drug use, which it
| doesn't), and it's quite likely that it's a reviewer mistake
| that will be overturned once the stink on social media gets big
| enough to reach the right person.
| antiterra wrote:
| I think the argument, however tenuous, is that naming a
| utility after a drug generates a positive association for
| that drug. It's not even so much that Apple has to believe
| this as much as there's an elevated potential for negative
| PR. This sort of thing is given even more scrutiny with food
| items:
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine_(drink)
|
| https://m.riverfronttimes.com/foodblog/2010/01/20/the-
| beerte...
| anigbrowl wrote:
| _They don 't (the claim is the app promotes drug use, which
| it doesn't)_
|
| It certainly references it. Definitions are fuzzy, and very
| much in the eye of the beholder.
| Angostura wrote:
| > the claim is the app promotes drug use, which it doesn't
|
| You don't think it could reinforce the idea that Amphetamines
| could be a useful tool to preserve wakefulness?
| nyx_ wrote:
| Like the original post says, they are in fact a useful tool
| to promote wakefulness, and if you have a problem with
| wakefulness or attentiveness, you can go to a doctor, get
| diagnosed, and be prescribed with amphetamines perfectly
| legally if you so wish.
| [deleted]
| outspeak wrote:
| If that was the case, health classes would censor the names
| of any recreationally-illegal substance. The fact is that
| Amphetamines _are_ `a useful tool to preserve wakefulness`.
| Knowing that fact isn 't inherently a promotion for the use
| of them.
| eknkc wrote:
| That is not an idea though. It is a fact.
|
| Why try to hide a fact?
| incongruity wrote:
| Well - they do actually do that and under certain
| circumstances, they are used precisely for that. I find the
| puritanical mindset a little bit of an overreach here.
| zamadatix wrote:
| You can refrence a truth without promoting it. E.g. Darik's
| boot and nuke wipes everything but you'd be off your rocker
| to say it's promoting nuclear war as a result.
| dack wrote:
| Not op, but no; the app has nothing to do with drugs.
|
| I don't think we as a society should be this
| sensitive/prone to suggestion. If anything, I believe the
| censorship promotes the idea that people have no
| responsibility to make their own choices, and we must build
| to the lowest common denominator.
|
| Note, I'm not really making a judgement about whether Apple
| should be allowed to do this - I think that is harder
| question.
| Grustaf wrote:
| It's named after a drug that inhibits sleep, and it
| inhibits sleep. The connection is pretty clear...
| dempseye wrote:
| They are. Militaries around the world agree. So do doctors
| who prescribe them for narcolepsy and other disorders. I
| think it is a good name.
|
| The fact remains that in most places amphetamines are an
| illegal drug when acquired without a prescription.
|
| I think he should just rebrand. A name change is not a big
| deal, given the app has low name recognition in the first
| place. News of the rebrand will be the first Google result
| for people who are unaware of it.
|
| Apple holds all the cards here. There is little to be
| gained if he wins, and if he loses he will have to rebrand
| anyway after much wasted effort.
| danaliv wrote:
| I'm told the military has switched to modafinil. No
| amphetamines anymore.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| I hate to agree with you, because I think I know what the
| 'right' thing is from my perspective. Sometimes to make a
| change, you have to fight and, likely, lose. You don't always
| effect change by winning. That said, I am not sure I would be
| willing to make that kind of decision.. and thankfully that is
| not my decision to make here.
|
| I too recommend live to run another day approach ( ala
| Rincewind ).
|
| ..then again, this may be the right time to do stand up to
| Apple. Current upheaval in tech, clear battle lines being drawn
| over everything from section 230 to app store could stack up
| things in your favor..
|
| Still, it is only a chance.
| webmobdev wrote:
| Yes, you should accept things over which you have no control,
| and you should speak up against injustice. Acceptance doesn't
| have to mean you can't advocate for change.
| dstick wrote:
| Unfortunately I concur, if this is your main thing. If you can
| outsource it: let the lawyers duke it out. If this feels
| personal: follow mmaunder's advice. There are no winners in
| that scenario so just take back control.
| endgame wrote:
| "He who is not angry, whereas he has cause to be, sins. For
| unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices, it fosters
| negligence, and incites not only the wicked but the good to do
| wrong."
| valuearb wrote:
| I like "Up All Night" as a new name. Icon image could be people
| partying in their pajamas.
|
| While taking amphetamines.
| flurdy wrote:
| Insomnia might already be another app but seems appropriate
| name.
| Hnrobert42 wrote:
| I wonder if that phrase is still protected by the USA
| network, for those of you old enough to remember when regular
| ol' cable would show topless women. Now you can't name an app
| Amphetamine. It is interesting to watch the pendulum swing.
| type0 wrote:
| > My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and
| effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to
| effect the transition.
|
| They should be brave and rebrand it to Soma, nothing flies in
| the new world of apples and bananas.
| javajosh wrote:
| This is one of those assertions that has the unusual property
| of being true if you believe it, and false if you don't. Like
| "I think this bank is going to fail!"
|
| Apple doesn't "hold all the cards" unless we believe it is so.
| The longer that belief is popular we will lose the option to
| fight when the stakes get higher.
| RedditKon wrote:
| Exactly. I use something identical called "caffeine". Just
| rebrand to Jolt and be done with it.
| glitchc wrote:
| I concur with OP. Rebrand ASAP. Apple is looking for an excuse
| to shut your app down so that they can replace it with an in-
| house version. This is on purpose, they want you to feel
| outraged. If you take the bait and start a legal battle, you'll
| play right into their hands. They will drag it out for years or
| until your money runs out.
|
| Far better to keep the money you have earned, recognizing that
| even the rebrand won't save your app in the long run. It's
| done.
| zackkitzmiller wrote:
| Amphetamine is and has always been free.
|
| You can always just disable the screensaver on your Mac if
| you'd like. Amphetamine really helps when you have MDM
| installed or something that requires your computer to sleep
| every so often.
| permo-w wrote:
| Caffeine would be an easy answer to the rebranding question
| rwc wrote:
| Not so easy: https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/24120/caffeine
| canofbars wrote:
| I just did a search and found multiple apps with that name
| already.
| glerk wrote:
| There is already an app called "Caffeine" that serves the
| same purpose.
| redwall_hp wrote:
| Caffeine was the old application that Amphetamine replaced.
| It was a long-standing utility that went unmaintained after
| Apple switched to the retina displays.
| dempseye wrote:
| Really? I am still using it. It works fine with a Retina
| display, which is the only Apple display I've ever had.
|
| 2014 MBP 15 here.
| factorialboy wrote:
| > but they hold all the cards..
|
| It's a free app. There is not business to sustain. The indie
| dev can walk away, and app can die and Apple users will suffer.
| sschueller wrote:
| No, how will this ever fix a corrupt system if you play by
| their rules?
|
| This is why it keeps getting worse and worse. People just
| comply!
| hshshs2 wrote:
| They're a $2 trillion dollar company, unless you have an
| incredibly strong case (this isn't one) then you will lose a
| war of attrition every time... even sometimes if you do have
| a strong case. Choose your battles wisely, live to fight
| another day, etc...
|
| Pound for pound you'd likely be better off putting your
| energy into policy. The scale is still tilted there, but
| there is some traction behind fairer app marketplaces.
| chrischen wrote:
| Not every fight is a 2-trillion dollar fight. If you say
| decide to commit some fraudulent chargeback against an
| Apple purchase they are unlikely to pursue it, for example,
| even though they are a 2-trillion dollar company that could
| crush you. Spending $5000 of lawyer time to recover $50 may
| not be worth their time and they know it.
| hshshs2 wrote:
| Sure but they could also just ban you completely at near
| 0 cost... and what could you do about it then? It's not
| something an individual can manage.
| Yetanfou wrote:
| You do this by leaving the platform. There are plenty of
| alternatives for Apple's products so those who get tired of
| the ever-increasing censorship inside the walled garden are
| better off outside of its walls. Eventually the Apple world
| will become something akin to Disneyland, nothing but
| "wholesome" infotainment without anything that could give
| offence.
| Hnrobert42 wrote:
| Do you really believe the app developers should close
| their doors and stop making the app rather than change
| their name, all as part of an ideological fight? I just
| want to make sure that is really your good faith
| argument.
| Yetanfou wrote:
| Yes, I really do believe there is no fighting a $2
| billion (and counting) behemoth, other than by shunning
| it. If enough developers and users - in any order - leave
| their platform they will reconsider their stance. That
| is, after all, what it means to have (at least the
| semblance of) a free market where people make choices
| based on things like this. The same goes for the other
| digital empires, whether those be Facebook, Twitter,
| Google or any of the others. Absent regulation - and is
| regulation really where we want to go? - I do not see any
| other way than to "choose with (my) wallet".
|
| This is also why I do not use any of these platforms,
| instead having spent the time to rig up my own
| alternatives: Google-free AOSP-derived Android on mobiles
| and tablets, Linux on laptops and servers, Searx for
| search, Nextcloud for "cloudy things", NC Talk and Jitsi
| Meet for videoconferencing, Exim and Dovecot for mail,
| Peertube for video, Airsonic and MPD for media streaming,
| etc. I've been doing this since the late 90's of the last
| century (minus the mobile stuff since that simply did not
| exist back then...) so I can state with certainty that
| this is not just hollow rhetoric, it is a viable
| alternative to submitting to the whims of companies like
| Apple (et al).
| asddubs wrote:
| you don't fix anything if you don't pick your battles. it has
| to be worth it, otherwise you will expend all your energy on
| doomed causes that ultimately don't even matter all that much
| xiphias2 wrote:
| You change it by going for the weakest point in a peaceful
| way under the radar.
|
| I believe it's Bitcoin, which is a silent, non-violent
| libertarian protest against the whole central banking system
| that produces huge powers, but I know that I am in the
| minority.
| lukifer wrote:
| I'm pro-crypto, but so long as Apple maintains absolute
| hegemony over their ecosystem (backed in part by an
| artificial state monopoly on ideas!), even the rosiest
| scenario for Bitcoin doesn't change the power dynamic.
| Apple could literally add support for buying apps with BTC
| tomorrow, yet still disallow sideloading or competing
| stores, while kicking out apps they don't like on a whim.
| ineedasername wrote:
| This situation would not be solved by a change of payment
| mechanism, currency choice, monetary policy, or anything
| like that. It's not what makes Apple a large powerful
| corporation. The entire world could switch to bitcoin, but
| if millions of people still buy iPhones, Apple will still
| have power over what is done on those phones.
| eecc wrote:
| Well, I can't help questioning the "non-violent" part: it
| takes incredible amounts of energy to maintain that is
| quite literally taken away from other - possibly more
| helpful at social scale - purposes.
| asddubs wrote:
| not to mention the environmental impact
| lukifer wrote:
| Yet another reason to implement a Carbon Tax & Dividend
| [0] ASAP. There's certainly an argument that the
| intentional waste of Proof of Work is more efficient than
| the overhead of existing banks; but I suspect the whole
| crypto world would migrate to Proof of Stake if forced to
| pay for their externalities. As is it, they simply borrow
| against the planetary credit card (probably at a rate of
| ~100x interest), sticking future generations with the
| bill for their "innovation".
|
| [0] https://clcouncil.org/economists-statement/
| xiphias2 wrote:
| I think we use a different definition of violence.
| crusty wrote:
| Yeah, you use the one that fits your narrative, and it
| works wonders until you try to pass it off to people who
| haven't latched onto that narrative, and then you come to
| a crossroads, do you summarily discount their perspective
| and go on your merry way unfazed and unchanged, or do you
| reconcile this new perspective and potentially confront
| issues with your narrative.
|
| I don't know you but based on that facile response, I'm
| guessing you're more down for the former - considering
| the deleterious externalities of bitcoin mining at scale
| are pretty well known.
| [deleted]
| webmobdev wrote:
| > My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and
| effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to
| effect the transition.
|
| Apple will definitely appreciate it if all of us would just
| shut up and let them screw us.
|
| While I appreciate your well-meaning advise to the author -
| pick your battles in life carefully - I'd like to add that
| using your anger constructively at some injustice is a positive
| move too. You do have to accept some things in life are beyond
| your control. But it does not mean you should not be an
| advocate for necessary change. Speaking up is the beginning.
| (And in fact, more positive to your well-being). And you can
| even stop with that. But speak up.
|
| The author has made some good arguments and I urge everyone to
| read it. Irrespective, of what the author ultimately decides to
| do, he should be glad for having the courage to speak up. And
| that many of us appreciate it and support him.
|
| Apple shouldn't forget that while it may have hoodwinked many
| developers to pay them for the "privilege" of creating and
| distributing apps on their platform, it is the developers who
| are the ones adding more VALUE to their platform. And that
| there's a limit to how much you can abuse and gauge them (one
| would have that all the law suits on the app store would have
| made them realised that by now).
| 0xEFF wrote:
| Do you expect to see a box on a shelf of any retail store
| labeled, "Amphetamine" with a colorful picture of drugs?
|
| It's entirely reasonable for the retail store to tell the
| vendor to rename the product or else it will be removed from
| the shelf.
| kortex wrote:
| Tell that to Cocaine Energy Drink.
|
| https://www.caffeineinformer.com/cocaine-energy-drink-is-
| bac...
| alpaca128 wrote:
| You also won't find many products being labeled with things
| like "magic", except maybe for some of Apple's input
| devices, and drugs called magic mushrooms.
|
| Censoring language is a bad idea even for the richest
| corporation, partially because there's practically no way
| to do it without looking like a hypocrite or also doing
| massive collateral damage. Like in this case, where Apple
| argues calling an app "Amphetamine" is bad but calling one
| "Drug Mafia" or "Drink extreme" is supposedly okay.
| gambiting wrote:
| No, because at a retail store the expectation is that if I
| see a box labeled "amphetamine" it better contain actual
| amphetamine. Obviously that's not acceptable, so it's not
| going to happen.
|
| When I buy software, I certainly don't expect to get drugs.
| When I buy a game called "Surgeon Simulator" I don't expect
| to receive actual surgeon training any more than I expect
| to get amphetamine after getting an app called amphetamine.
| MauranKilom wrote:
| > When I buy a game called "Surgeon Simulator" I don't
| expect to receive actual surgeon training
|
| Fun fact: There are serious surgery training apps in the
| app stores. Surgeons, too, like to practice in a
| simulation rather than on real patients.
| factorialboy wrote:
| It is unreasonable when the store is the only store in
| town, and the town (Apple ecosystem) ensures monopoly of
| that single store.
| pfortuny wrote:
| Grand Theft Auto comes to mind...
|
| Plague Inc...
|
| Drink extreme...
|
| Trivia Crack Adventura...
|
| Drug Mafia...
|
| All of those are ios GAMES.
| yoz-y wrote:
| Yes this. The hypocrisy of the gatekeepers is
| infuriating. Let's not forget that almost all popular
| games are mass murder simulators. One of the most popular
| kids games is a dog fighting game.
|
| Now, I'm not advocating to remove those. I like games,
| but let's not pretend that somehow calling an app after a
| molecule is worse.
| pfortuny wrote:
| Can you even call something "Arsenic"?
| technick wrote:
| I'm calling dibs on the dating app named chloroform,
| chloroform-e, and chloroforme.
|
| Rohypnol is another possible name for a social app or
| something you use for late night shopping.
| warent wrote:
| This is really great point I hadn't considered. They're
| applying their rules selectively and inconsistently.
| blackearl wrote:
| You've never seen the energy drink shelf? "Cocaine" gained
| notoriety specifically for this.
| tengbretson wrote:
| My grocery store sells an energy drink called liquid death.
| cmorgan31 wrote:
| The best argument against Apple is the inconsistency in
| application of rules. If what you say is reasonable why
| would they also promote iOS apps whose explicit purpose is
| the simulation of cartel wars or marijuana dispensaries? My
| hot take is one doesn't make much money for Apple while the
| others provide a clear incentive to act willfully ignorant
| given their in app revenue streams.
| ben0x539 wrote:
| I think this is the weakest argument? Selective
| enforcement of rules is a time-honored tradition and
| seems to be explicitly reserved as the right of the
| rules-enforcer everywhere. It might be a good argument in
| a hypothetical debate about the fairness and compassion
| displayed by Apple, but I don't think you'd get far with
| it convincing either Apple itself or even a court if one
| somehow was interested.
| saagarjha wrote:
| It's a weak argument because Tim Cook has personally
| testified in from of Congress that the rules are not
| selectively enforced.
| panta wrote:
| Apple doesn't give a scheise about developers anymore. IMHO
| this is going to devalue the platform in the long term, but
| they seem to think differently.
| andai wrote:
| Consumers don't give a scheise about developers either.
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| Agreed. I've found that there's a meta-skill in life: accepting
| that one can't right every injustice, and to not let that fact
| prevent you from being happy.
| megablast wrote:
| A great way to justify not doing anything.
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| > A great way to justify not doing anything.
|
| People are good at rationalizing. I'm sure my earlier
| comment, and many others, would be sufficient justification
| for someone inclined to do nothing.
| webmobdev wrote:
| Sure, but that also doesn't mean you should stop voicing your
| concerns publicly at injustice. Being angry at some injustice
| doesn't automatically make you unhappy too, if the anger is
| used constructively and positively. You can voice your
| concern and be practical too.
|
| The article is actually quite well written and even
| highlights, with examples, how Apple applies such naming
| rules arbitrarily.
|
| I've said this before - all developers who distribute their
| apps through the macOS / ios app store should feel like a
| JACKASS for not only giving Apple control over distribution,
| but also paying them for the same. YOU DEVELOPERS ARE THE ONE
| WHO CREATE MORE VALUE FOR THESE APPLE PLATFORMS - why in the
| hell do you think it is some kind of "privilege" to PAY them
| for it??
|
| With its exclusive app store, Apple acts like a CORRUPT
| bureaucrat who unnecessarily imposes himself in the middle of
| you and your clients, demanding a bribe from both to connect
| you and them. Thus, increasing costs for your clients, and
| reducing your profits!
|
| Especially on the macOS, which Apple is desperately trying to
| turn into a closed platform like ios, developers are being
| incredibly SHORT-SIGHTED by distributing apps on its app
| store and adding more value to something that will end up
| hurting them when everyone's choice is ultimately limited to
| it.
| DoofusOfDeath wrote:
| > Being angry at some injustice doesn't automatically make
| you unhappy too
|
| I guess I was assuming that anger and happiness are
| somewhat mutually exclusive.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Learning _not_ to be offended is a great skill to learn.
|
| It applies to both sides here: Apple could continue to
| choose not to be offended after 6 years. The developer
| could choose not to be offended at Apple's decision and
| rebrand.
|
| Having said that, this is censorship any way you look at
| it. Whether it's "valid" censorship depends on your point
| of view.
| Spivak wrote:
| Yeah, I'm sure this rule is applied inconsistently but that
| doesn't mean you don't have to pay your speeding ticket just
| because everyone speeds.
|
| This app associates itself with the recreational use of
| amphetamines in much the same vein as candy cigarettes. Is the
| rule kinda stupid? Yep. Is it ultimately a cultural thing? Yep.
| But it's Apple's sandbox and you're playing in it.
|
| There's always going to be issues of where to draw the line.
| "Columbine. A bulk process killer." is obviously over it but
| amphetamines could go either way. Just rebrand to something
| else and get back to actually making useful stuff.
| bserge wrote:
| Yeah, the real lesson here is stop giving Apple et al
| control. You play on their ground, they own you. It's getting
| really hard to do these days, sadly.
|
| Rename it to "AppToKeepMacAwake" heh
| bravoetch wrote:
| MacQuake.
| filetmignon wrote:
| This is absolutely horrid, imagine if Amazon could blacklist
| certain products they compete with
| ffhhj wrote:
| But the controversy is giving them media attention.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| That advice is better for the individual, but these constant
| complaints that reach social platforms do eventually add up and
| cause change. The author doesn't have as much to lose here as
| if he were running a business. Choosing to die on this hill is
| respectable.
| DubiousPusher wrote:
| > They kind of have a point
|
| How is just using the word or a charicature of it encouraging
| drug use? This puritanism is a mind disease.
| icefrakker wrote:
| Yeah and I'm sure you'd have no problem with your kids using
| an app that happens to be called Pedophile. Or maybe you'd
| have no problem with your wife using an app called Slut.
| After all those are just words and you don't suffer mind
| diseases.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| Learning _not_ to be offended by things is a skill that is
| worth learning.
|
| It is also the road the tolerance.
| loceng wrote:
| Literalism - if we follow Apple's logic then they're not
| giving us an apple when buying their products.
| burnthrow wrote:
| Puritanism? These are Macs, this is a classy place, we take
| our drugs to the bathroom thank you very much.
| Amphetamine.app is so gauche!
| jchw wrote:
| I couldn't disagree with this mentality more.
| saagarjha wrote:
| No, they should not do this. They have six years of strong
| brand value, and they have a fairly solid case. And they have
| the world (well, part of the world at least) watching. Apple
| can and does change if you have those things, if you do it
| right. We did it with iSH
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25028252). If anything,
| this is their best opportunity to effect change, and I would
| very much hope they take it while they still have it.
| sangnoir wrote:
| Ah, I remember this infamous Apple ad:
|
| _Here's to the lazy ones, the mundane, the conformers, the
| rule-followers, the square pegs in the square holes... the ones
| who don 't see things differently -- they're fond of rules...
| You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them,
| you can also safely ignore them because they dare not change
| things... they keep the human race stagnant, and while some may
| see them as the lazy ones, we see order, because the ones who
| are lazy enough to know that they can't change the world, are
| the ones who won't try_
| sebmellen wrote:
| This is brilliant. I can't wait until we see an actual Apple
| ad with this script. Maybe 2021 will deliver!
| Bodell wrote:
| Honestly if your name your product stupid things I would think
| that some of us might be choosing not to download your product
| as a result. And if a store decides not to sell your product
| because of this it's really their prerogative. Saying you
| violated their terms with impunity for 6 years doesn't mean
| they lose the right to correct the mistake.
|
| This name is pretty rings rather badly in my ears, though I'm
| not offended by such things. I'd feel similarly if they had
| named it "fuck sleep". I'm not offended by the word "fuck" but
| I don't really want to buy products that are named that. Do
| apps need energy drink names to be successful? I've noticed a
| trend in talking about men's balls in ads, manscaping,
| underwater fart jokes. It's seems so much like idiocracy more
| then something offensive.
|
| On the other hand a rose is still a rose. So I agree they
| should probably just rename it. I doubt there would be any
| major loss from doing so.
| croes wrote:
| Amphetamine is a drug to keep one awake. So the name is
| appropriate.
| hugi wrote:
| Americans being American. "We love freedom of speech but fuck
| you if your product name mentions a chemical compound or a
| word I or someone else might find offending".
| powersnail wrote:
| I don't see how any of these contradict freedom of speech.
| We are talking about 1) people being offended by a name; 2)
| a company banning an app on their own app store.
|
| Whether you find the situation distasteful, it has nothing
| to do with freedom of speech. Neither the offended people
| nor Apple is infringing on the developer's freedom speech.
| GCA10 wrote:
| Freedom of speech isn't the same as freedom of
| distribution. There are lots of edgy things that you can
| say somewhere. You just can't say them everywhere.
|
| We can have lots of lively debate about how to draw the
| boundaries. But we'll get a lot farther if we can move
| beyond the two-state absolutism of "allowable everywhere"
| vs. "outright banned with breath-taking severity."
| jethro_tell wrote:
| This is still not it. He's not facing a government
| warrent.
|
| Freedom of speech means the government won't/can't
| prosecute you for what you say. It doesn't have anything
| to do with how companies or private citizens respond to
| your words.
|
| You're (usually) legally allowed to say you'll fuck my
| mom but I don't have to bring you over for family dinner.
|
| One could contend that apple's refusal to host this app
| on it's store is in itself free speech.
|
| Either way, the government jasent gotten involved so
| nothing here treads on free speech issues.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Freedom of speech means the government won 't/can't
| prosecute you for what you say_
|
| The First Amendment says this. Freedom of speech is "a
| principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a
| community to articulate their opinions and ideas without
| fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction" [1].
| It is broader than the First Amendment, and gave rise to
| it, though the First Amendment is its most successful
| codification in the modern world.
|
| A society that shuns those who say "bad" things, even
| without state action, may not hold true to the values of
| freedom of speech.
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
| jethro_tell wrote:
| No, you have the right to hold and express any view you
| want.
|
| You don't get to choose peoples reaction or the way they
| view you after you say something. That would be
| infringing on their right to hold or express opinions
| about your views.
|
| What's complicated about that?
| raverbashing wrote:
| For purporting themselves as worldwide champions of freedom
| of speech it's kinda funny to see how Americans react when
| that freedom of speech involves sexuality, cursing or
| substance use.
|
| Show as much violence in a movie as you want, but two
| swearwords and the rating is bumped up.
| Grustaf wrote:
| Their puritans. Remember when Janet Jackson showed her
| nipple during superbowl or something? The whole country
| went bananas.
| throwaway201103 wrote:
| > Saying you violated their terms with impunity for 6 years
| doesn't mean they lose the right to correct the mistake.
|
| Well it gives you an argument I think. Along the lines of a
| trademark infringement -- if you have let people use your
| trademark name for years without protest, that can work
| against you if you suddenly start demanding that it be
| enforced.
|
| Not sure it would hold much weight here, since it's a case of
| Apple deciding what they want to allow in their own store.
| webmobdev wrote:
| This just detracts us from the actual discussion - do you
| think Apple should be the ultimate arbitrator to decide what
| you name your app?
| irateswami wrote:
| This whole thing is why I'm so glad someone finally sued
| Apple over their control of the app store, it's just more
| fuel for the fire.
| bambax wrote:
| > _I'm not offended by the word "fuck" but I don't really
| want to buy products that are named that._
|
| Then don't. How is this relevant? They say the app has been
| downloaded 500,000 times, so many people are fine with the
| name.
|
| These stories keep coming; they should remind us that nothing
| is more precious than the open web, and all those stores or
| walled gardens, their "rules" and vague TOS are the ennemy.
| Bodell wrote:
| I agree. Which is why I use a non walled garden operating
| system. Maybe the same should apply to these complaints. I
| don't get mad at wal-mart because of what they choose to
| stock on the shelf and not stock.
| young_unixer wrote:
| > These stories keep coming; they should remind us that
| nothing is more precious than the open web, and all those
| stores or walled gardens, their "rules" and vague TOS are
| the ennemy.
|
| Yes. And the solution is:
|
| 1. Creating a viable alternative.
|
| 2. Promoting it.
|
| Which is the opposite of what TFA is trying to do: They
| just want Apple to make an exception for them. Not to solve
| the root problem.
| rhizome wrote:
| > _Which is the opposite of what TFA is trying to do:
| They just want Apple to make an exception for them. Not
| to solve the root problem_
|
| They name several apps which would seem to violate the
| same guideline, at worst they're asking for the same
| exception Apple has already given to others. An argument
| can be made that they're snitching on the others, but
| it's also an argument for consistency that one could say
| _is_ the root problem.
| [deleted]
| _jal wrote:
| It is less that the rules are vague than that the rules are
| whatever Apple says they are today, for you.
|
| Apple was promoting Amphetamine not that long ago:
|
| https://apps.apple.com/us/story/id1470456860
| timsneath wrote:
| Yeah. Clearly one team at Apple feels (or felt) that the
| name was no impediment to them marketing it. Like all
| corporations, Apple is just a congregation of human
| beings, rather than a synchronized hive mind. But it's
| problematic if app authors can't trust in consistency as
| a result.
|
| FWIW, it's a net downside for me that my professional
| workstation has an app named "Amphetamine", so I'm
| quietly in favor of a rename. But it's obviously the
| author's prerogative to choose its branding, so long as
| it falls within (consistently) applied policies of those
| who they rely on to distribute it.
| Tsiklon wrote:
| This, I think is perhaps the biggest item in the
| developer's favour. That Apple themselves found the name
| palatable enough to promote the app on the front page of
| their App Store with the existing name.
| teej wrote:
| 500k may seem like a lot, but it's not in the context of
| the Mac App Store. Apple has sold over 100M Macs in the
| time this app has been around. Also, Apple's policies are
| distinctly not driven by "if enough people are fine with
| it".
|
| Apple's policies are bullshit, don't get me wrong, but
| let's not act like download numbers give the developer any
| leverage.
| warent wrote:
| In my mind maybe this is something like an HOA. Sure, your
| friends might love your house parties, but your neighbors
| have to deal with the consequences
| drzaiusapelord wrote:
| How could this analogy work? There's no consequences to
| having a app with the word 'fuck' in it. Meanwhile
| throwing big parties obviously does to neighbors. I don't
| feel a lot of meatspace analogies work to things that are
| purely digital and can be filtered or ignored, while a
| houseparty with 100+ people and its noise and drunk
| drivers obviously cant be.
| owenmarshall wrote:
| > There's no consequences to having a app with the word
| 'fuck' in it
|
| I suspect that Apple has done studies and has a projected
| "likely lost sales" figure attributable to having an app
| store overrun with "mature content" apps.
|
| (Edited: tried to clean up a clunky sentence :))
| pixelatedindex wrote:
| Except in this case there are no "neighbors" to speak of.
| Every app is kind of like an island in an archipelago and
| don't have a means of communicating to each other.
|
| It's more like the government of the archipelago decided
| that they don't like the name of the island as people
| interested in such an island are promoting narcotics.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| Aren't HOAs widely hated?
| incongruity wrote:
| As are dentist visits and prostate exams - but even those
| things ultimately add value. HOA's arguably do so as well
| even if they're often hated.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| But do most people consider them as such, i.e. painful
| but necessary/beneficial? My understanding was that they
| are widely regarded as parasitic organizations full of
| busybodies who are there to advance their personal agenda
| and to feel a sense of power over people at the expense
| of all the reasonable people who just want to live their
| lives; they are considered the polar opposite of _live
| and let live_.
|
| I personally have never dealt with an HOA, so my
| understanding of their popularity is shaped solely by
| what I have read online. I must say your comment is the
| only one I have ever seen that has put them in a positive
| light.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| HOA does have what feel like arbitrary busybody
| restrictions, but they are also the authority that makes
| people remove the broken washing machine from their front
| yard and they are the only recourse in my region (when I
| lived briefly in a suburban house) for someone who
| refuses to do anything about their dog that barks 24/7 or
| flings trash into your neighboring yard. HOA fixed it for
| me on both occasions. The police certainly don't care.
|
| So people aren't going to like the HOA. But they also
| offer essential recourse and order.
| pixelatedindex wrote:
| Most people I know who have been pro-HOA are the ones who
| have a say in it and are on the board, or have strong
| opinions on how their neighbors should outfit their own
| house.
|
| The ones that hates the HOA are the ones that have paid a
| ton of money (I'm in the Bay Area) and can't do as they
| please. Who wants to pay close to a million and have
| others chime in and start giving you directions on what
| to do to your own property.
|
| I rent, but the principe of the HOA is a big enough leech
| in my mind that I'd hold out for a single home, whenever
| that is (if at all).
| vel0city wrote:
| I grew up in a large neighborhood with an HOA. There were
| a few times where my family butted heads with the HOA
| (replacing fences with a non-standard style, a play
| swing/slide thing being a bit tall) but for the most part
| the HOA was nice. They managed a park and pool for the
| neighborhood's exclusive use. They decorated the entrance
| signs to the neighborhood for the holidays. They put on
| some holiday events like an easter egg hunt/picnic, a
| fourth of july bike parade, Christmas light
| judging/awards. People didn't have tons of clutter in
| their front yards, the streets weren't super crowded with
| cars.
| gnopgnip wrote:
| The congressional approval rating has been between 10 and
| 30% for the last 8 years, and over this same time the re-
| election rates of incumbent congressional reps is 89% or
| higher. People are largely happy with their own congress
| members, and vote to reelect them and their own HOA, and
| they will choose to purchase homes with an HOA, and not
| disband them.
| berryjerry wrote:
| No, everyone thinks they could do a better job but no one
| actually wants those jobs.
| ufmace wrote:
| No. Certain internet communities have a culture of
| dunking on them, but they do not represent any kind of
| real majority. The housing market continues to show a
| preference towards communities with HOAs.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| > _The housing market continues to show a preference
| towards communities with HOAs._
|
| Is it the housing market as homeowners who favours HOAs,
| or is it the builders who favour them? Are HOAs opted in
| by homeowners in existing communities because of their
| benefits, or do builders create them force them upon new
| communities because it benefits them somehow?
|
| I am asking because while I do not have any knowledge of
| HOAs, I have been following the saga of rental water
| heaters/furnaces/ACs in Ontario for a while. Long story
| short, construction companies sign a long-term contract
| with an appliance company instead of buying and
| installing necessary appliances like furnaces for new
| houses. They get a nice kickback for this. If you want to
| buy a new house, odds are you will be bound by a long-
| term contact. If you want to terminate it early, you end
| up paying 30k for an appliance that is worth 10k new and
| installed. If you keep your contact, you will pay the
| same over many years.
|
| It is a deal that is very much to the benefits of the
| builder and very much against the interest of the
| homeowners. But they have been exploding in _popularity_.
| There are relatively more and more homes with rented
| water heaters and fewer and fewer homes with owned water
| heaters every year. It would still be wrong to conclude
| that _" water heater rental is beneficial. See, the
| market has spoken."_
| sbarre wrote:
| This feels like a case where the market will dictate what
| works and what doesn't.
|
| It sounds shitty/shady to you (or at least that's how
| you're framing it here - apologies if I misunderstood)
| but if people are still buying those homes, then they
| must think it's an acceptable contract to enter into.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| The fact that people grudgingly sign a contract does not
| mean all the terms of the contract are fair. People sign
| away their right to sue or join a class action lawsuit as
| a prerequisite to buying goods or services from companies
| all the time, but I still believe it is _unfair_. People
| grudgingly sign work contracts with strong non-compete,
| non-disclosure, and IP assignment clauses, but I think
| those clauses are unfair.
| owenmarshall wrote:
| I'm assuming that the long term contract _also_ carries
| with it a warranty? So if your furnace fails while in the
| contract it is repaired /replaced free or at a pro rated
| price?
|
| If so, I could see people liking it as it serves the same
| function as an HOA: a hedge against bad things happening.
|
| Water heater died? Plumber comes out, no charge. Neighbor
| starting a junkyard on his front lawn? HOA sends a
| letter, no confrontation.
|
| Some people will decline an HOA for the same reasons they
| decline extended warranties: they'd rather deal with
| situations themselves, as they arise. Others don't want
| to be bothered and let someone else handle it. I think
| there is space for both.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| > _I'm assuming that the long term contract also carries
| with it a warranty?_
|
| I believe so. But the price is so unreasonably high that
| you could replace the furnace literally 3 to 5 times and
| you would still be ahead compared to renting the furnace.
| How many people would purchase an extended warranty that
| is priced at multiples of the price of the object they
| are buying? More than none, but a very small number. New
| rentals are signed overwhelmingly by builders and not
| homeowners.
| throwaway201103 wrote:
| That's the way warranties work. Warranty providers are
| not offering them at a loss.
|
| If you buy a home warranty, or an extended warranty for
| your car, you are (on average) going to be out of pocket
| more than you would be without it. You are buying it for
| the peace of mind that comes from not having to deal with
| an unlikely but major repair expense.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| > _That 's the way warranties work_
|
| Not at this price. Usually the warranty is a percentage
| of the price of the goods. So for example, I expect a
| $1000 gadget to have extended warranty priced at $100 or
| so. I have never seen the warranty of a $1000 gadget to
| be priced at $3000 to $5000 dollars. And that is for
| stuff that break down more frequently, e.g. phones and
| laptops and cars. The odds of a furnace breaking down are
| even lower.
| owenmarshall wrote:
| I think the "party line" response to this would be that
| the warranties you get include preventative maintenance
| as well, making it a different proposition - you're not
| just buying a warranty, but a full service plan after
| all. But I've never been convinced by that argument.
|
| I just went through buying a furnace and had a few
| prospective installers. The first tried to sell the
| extended coverage: twice annual "checks and maintenance"
| and a 30% discount on all parts.
|
| The second said he'd let me source the parts myself if I
| so desired and if I would be responsible for changing the
| air filter on schedule and hosing down the outside fan
| every summer I'd be better off putting the annual fee
| into a sinking fund. Or, I could pay him $200 a year to
| hold a hose, money he'd happily take. He got the job. ;-)
| owenmarshall wrote:
| The question is, are people buying these products for
| that peace of mind, or are they buying it because they
| are not a savvy consumer?
|
| Or worse, because they are over leveraged and unable to
| fund a replacement without an installment plan - so they
| have no better option?
|
| I'm not sure. I can see a consumer protection argument to
| be made.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _The housing market continues to show a preference
| towards communities with HOAs._
|
| I wouldn't read too much from that. The market preferring
| something doesn't mean most people dealing with it like
| it, it means that it makes money for the people with most
| say in the matter.
|
| In this case, I think the sufficient explanation for the
| phenomenon is that HOAs are good at protecting property
| values. In my experience, most of the silly / annoying
| rules can be explained by either protecting property
| value, or by most people being too busy to attend
| meetings, allowing a small group of bored people to take
| control.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| HOA for thee, not for me. That's my take.
|
| If I want to practice drums in my garage the neighbors
| can go pound sand.
|
| But when a neighbor decides to park their truck in their
| yard I'm all for HOAs.
| jkmcf wrote:
| The HOA stereotype definitely is, but all HOAs are not
| the same. My HOA is generally hands off but you do need
| to ask permission for structural or cosmetic changes --
| the neighborhood doesn't want to look like an amusement
| park. But, no one is going around measuring the height of
| your grass or other overly strict things I've read about.
|
| However, I did just get a nasty gram to take down my
| political "Giant Meteor for 2020 - just end it already"
| yard sign.
| pixelatedindex wrote:
| > the neighborhood doesn't want to look like an amusement
| park.
|
| I do think this is where a lot of the HOA problems come
| from - if someone wants to put something up on their
| front yard or lawn, then neighbors can intervene and say
| you can't do that there.
|
| Since you bought the property and it's yours, why do
| others get to have a say in it? I know I don't give two
| hoots about what the neighbor does to their own home.
| sbarre wrote:
| Buying the property came with the HOA strings.
|
| If you didn't want those strings, then go buy a property
| somewhere that doesn't have an HOA.
|
| Same with this case, I sympathize with the author and I
| personally think this is a stupid thing for Apple to do,
| but the author (hopefully) understood the bargain they
| were entering into when they chose to enter the walled
| garden.
| freehunter wrote:
| I download and use the app despite the name. I'm not okay
| with it, but I need the features it offers and there isn't
| a better alternative with a better name. There used to be
| (called Caffeine) but it disappeared from the store and I'm
| not sure why.
|
| Just because people use the app doesn't mean they like the
| name.
| 0xEFF wrote:
| The caffeinate command is built into macos.
|
| Edit: This keeps the computer awake until 6 PM each day.
| caffeinate -u -i -s -t $(($(date -j -f "%a %b %d %T %Z
| %Y" "$(date +"%a %b %d 18:00:00 %Z %Y")" "+%s") - $(date
| +%s)))
| frob wrote:
| You can still get caffeine directly from the developer's
| website: https://intelliscapesolutions.com/apps/caffeine
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Why aren't you okay with Amphetamine?
| tomasf wrote:
| [Caffeine's original developer here]
|
| I removed Caffeine from the App Store when Apple started
| complaining that a click on a menu bar icon for an app
| without a dock icon must always show a menu (offering a
| Quit option). I wanted it to toggle the active state
| instead and show the menu on right-click/cmd-click.
| 67868018 wrote:
| Better app that's open source:
| https://keepingyouawake.app/
| webmobdev wrote:
| But do you believe Apple should be the ultimate
| arbitrator of such silly things like the name of an app
| you create?
| sbarre wrote:
| In their environment that they clearly indicate is their
| environment from the outset? Yes..
|
| They are not telling the author they can't call his app
| whatever they want. They are saying they will not sell it
| in their app store under that name.
|
| And that's the bargain you enter into when you sell in a
| walled garden ecosystem.
| webmobdev wrote:
| > They are saying they will not sell it in their app
| store under that name.
|
| But they were indeed selling it under that name for 6
| years!
|
| How would you like it if you spend a lot of money to
| advertise your company or product and create a brand
| value to it, to one day Apple telling you that they would
| like you to change the name or they will not distribute
| it on their store?
|
| Yes, the app store is a closed environment where they can
| dictate some terms. But don't forget that the developers
| PAY THEM to use it, and as such their terms cannot trump
| the consumer laws that exist to protect against such
| abuse. (By the way, "my shop, my terms" have already
| faced legal scrutiny some of which were found to be
| illegal - popular ones include refusing to serve people
| of colour or gays.)
| mcpherrinm wrote:
| (edited due to inaccuracy)
|
| There is a command line tool called caffeinate that ships
| with Mac OS. Maybe Apple didn't like somebody using
| something so similar their system utility name.
|
| Originally I thought it was the same name, so this seems
| much less likely now that they're merely similar.
| htfu wrote:
| No, that's called caffeinate.
| mcpherrinm wrote:
| Ooops, edited my original comment. Blame tab completion
| for never making me type the end of the name! Thanks for
| the correction.
| bserge wrote:
| [Sorry, I'm a bit hyped up at the moment]
|
| This is all ridiculous and I don't like where we're headed as
| a society.
| shawnz wrote:
| Anything that could have offensive connotations could also
| be trivialized as "just a [noun]". That doesn't make it any
| more or less likely to be taken badly by the intended
| customer base
| Bodell wrote:
| I'm very glad you brought up weed actually. See I have no
| problem with weed and like to smoke a joint every now and
| then. However what I don't want is to have to buy weed
| called dumb things like "bro down", "the obliterator", and
| "brain destroyer". I'd much rather you just named something
| not so click baity.
|
| Sure it's just a chemical. Everything is just chemicals but
| I don't need "meth" for my computer. Same reason our kids
| don't need toys advertised as "crack for your baby".
|
| Agin not offended its just not a good name. Even if let's
| say you build an app that's hooks into some other program
| and you sell said app for two dollars, you may think it's
| hilarious to call it "two dollar hooker", hell I myself
| might even chuckle. But only once, then I'll just get
| annoyed every time I see "two dollar hooker" in startup,
| "two dollar hooker has crashed" etc.
|
| I also would not buy your product if it were called alcohol
| poisoning. I love alcohol. I'm drinking a beer right now
| (happy New Years everyone). But naming a computer program
| after it sounds like an odd thing to do. And more to your
| point would also be a violation of the same rule Apple is
| using in this case.
| AshWolfy wrote:
| Amphetamine sounds clinical to me, I used to take
| prescribed, 24 million people in the US, including me in
| the past, are prescribed amphetamines.
|
| I generally dont like obnoxious marketing either, but
| unless it is inappropriate for the setting i dont think
| it should be banned, and this is far more tame than other
| apps on the app store
| randallsquared wrote:
| The application keeps one's Mac from going to sleep. Its
| name is basically a direct analogy, and doesn't imply any
| wrongdoing or illegality, as far as I can see.
|
| > _I also would not buy your product if it were called
| alcohol poisoning. I love alcohol. I'm drinking a beer
| right now (happy New Years everyone). But naming a
| computer program after it sounds like an odd thing to do.
| And more to your point would also be a violation of the
| same rule Apple is using in this case._
|
| What about an application that assists in force-quitting
| other programs? One might call that "Scotch", since
| that's what it does ("It 'scotches' other processes, you
| see..."), and the application might have a cutesy whiskey
| glass as its icon. Would that run afoul of your
| sensibilities?
| Bodell wrote:
| I don't think it implies wrongdoing, just sounds like a
| silly joke.
|
| Scotch vs scotch whiskey is more of a word play joke as
| well than a direct analogy. But I see your point and your
| totally right that one sounds less bad to me. I'm only
| stating that as a matter of taste I do not like this
| particular apps name.
|
| And since it's apple's store they have the right to not
| like it either. I just don't think this is a profound
| "free speech argument" like some do in these comments.
|
| Personally I think it's really odd that someone would
| need an app to keep their computer from sleeping. This
| says far more about macs than the arbitrary naming
| policy.
| randallsquared wrote:
| Haha. It's just a convenience, not a need. There's
| nothing stopping you from going to screensaver settings
| and energy settings, manually setting it to "never", then
| going back after you've completed the download,
| screenshare, or whatever, and changing your settings
| back. Alternatively, you could use Apple's built-in CLI
| tool, `caffeinate`, as others have mentioned.
| kuroguro wrote:
| Alcohol 120% has entered the chat. /s
|
| I can see why Apple chooses the family friendly route and
| rebranding probably is the best option in this case as
| fighting it would most likely be futile.
|
| I don't think they went overboard with the name in
| general tho. It makes sense for the app as much as the
| other coffee/coca branded ones do.
|
| They explicitly chose "amphetamine" over "meth" which is
| a medical term and has valid uses.
| Kattywumpus wrote:
| > For God's sake, is this where we're headed? Just ban
| anything that sounds offensive?
|
| Headed?
| wruza wrote:
| It doesn't sound offensive, just stupid and provoking.
| Along the lines of Condom Antimalware Suit or Holocosta
| Firewall. Condoms are great for protecting you and
| holocaust just means "burn all" - had nothing to do with
| burning people. It only burns network packets, look at the
| context, it's _fire_ wall! No need to come the raw prawn
| here, simply rename it.
| rualca wrote:
| > Amphetamine is a chemical. What is wrong with that?
|
| This disingenuous take on the term does not help your case
| nor reflects positively on your reputation as a honest
| person. Amphetamines have a long reputation as recreational
| and illicit drugs.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamine
|
| Amphetamines, much like cocaine and heroin, are not a mere
| chemical, nor do they convey a mental image of chemists
| doing science in a lab to the public. And please don't try
| to pass everyone as a bunch of stupid idiots by claiming
| that an app designed to keep a device awake is named after
| a mere chemical, with a long track record of being used as
| an euphoriant, without any popular connotation with drug
| abuse.
| notsureaboutpg wrote:
| You are being ridiculous. No one is saying ban everything
| offensive. But many people, including me, will think twice
| about buying anything called "Amphetamine". I also wouldn't
| buy anything with "Cannabis" in the name. Both may have
| good uses but they are still narcotics which are most well
| known for being recreationally abused. Everything can have
| a good use. But that doesn't mean everything is the same or
| is going to be treated the same by people.
|
| Names matter, they are signals meant for humans to
| understand in specific ways. And names which refer to taboo
| or suggestive topics are going to prick up the ears of some
| customers and turn others away. Names related to drugs,
| sex, etc. are going to turn off many customers (especially
| those with kids), enough for stores to have policies
| against them. There's nothing wrong with that.
| tshaddox wrote:
| I don't buy your claim that there's a double standard here.
| "Beer bong" would be another bad name for this app that I
| wouldn't blame Apple for restricting. This isn't about the
| arguably mixed up public policies that treat certain drugs
| as more dangerous than other drugs.
| drivingmenuts wrote:
| There are lots of software that I won't touch simply
| because if I ever had to explain the name, I would
| immediately be put on the defensive, regardless of how
| useful they may be. It's a conversation that would waste my
| time.
|
| Similarly, I would avoid naming something potentially weird
| or offensively for much the same reason, no matter how
| appropriate or funny it might seem at the time.
|
| While rebranding might be a pain, I suggest just doing it.
| This not a free speech hill worth dying on, in my opinion.
| jethro_tell wrote:
| I'd set up a mastadoon server but I don't want to tell my
| friends to check out my toots.
|
| Hehe your fucking five, but then it just gets annoying.
| user-the-name wrote:
| To most of the world, that word does not mean farts. That
| is only the case where you happen to live.
|
| To most people, it refers in this context to the noise an
| elephant makes.
| huffmsa wrote:
| What if it was "caffeine"?
|
| A stimulant drug, just happens to be legal.
|
| Or Coca? A plant that release a stimulant when chewed.
|
| Now if the app was called "Sweet Meth", you'd have a better
| parallel with "fuck sleep", but it's not.
| larusso wrote:
| Funny you mentioning ,,caffeine" [1]as this is also an app
| for macOS which solves the same purpose as the one posted.
| But this one is not in the App Store. I just had a look and
| next to amphetamine we have taurine, theine and caffeinated
| and a few more that use some form of coffee / a substance
| that keeps one awake. The ,,Prevent Sleep" app is the only
| one which clearly states what it is for :) [1]
| https://intelliscapesolutions.com/apps/caffeine
| renewiltord wrote:
| There's an app called Caffeine that does the same thing.
| It's what I use.
| huffmsa wrote:
| Next on the chopping block.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Doubt it, seeing as how caffeine isn't a controlled
| substance.
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| Apple's own command line tool which does the same is
| called caffeinate.
| wincy wrote:
| I know a very intelligent software engineer who told me he
| had never used Exercism (despite him using other similar
| tools) simply because he's a practicing Catholic and thought
| the name to be in poor taste. You definitely alienate people
| at the fringes by naming things something even slightly
| risque.
| webmobdev wrote:
| And do you really want Apple to be the arbitrator of such
| silly things?
| canjobear wrote:
| For their own app store, of course.
| webmobdev wrote:
| The app store is a closed environment where they can
| dictate some terms. But don't forget that the developers
| PAY THEM to use it, and as such their terms cannot trump
| the consumer laws that exist to protect against abuse.
|
| (By the way, "my shop, my terms" have already faced legal
| scrutiny, some of which were found to be illegal -
| popular judgements include that shops cannot refuse to
| serve people of colour or gays.)
| izacus wrote:
| Even when their AppStore is mandaded to all your hardware
| by DRM with you not having any choice of opting out? You
| want all your possible business speech, products and
| content you consume dictated by a corporate decree with
| no accountability?
| mbreese wrote:
| You could argue that this is also why we now have system
| services instead of daemons.
| tsm_sf wrote:
| There are a surprising number of Christians in CS, but
| they're generally of the more contemplative kind. I
| definitely remember people being uncomfortable with that
| but big enough to not make much of a fuss about it.
|
| I'm guessing it's been slowly changed by people big
| enough to realize the name doesn't matter.
| [deleted]
| xwalltime wrote:
| I disagree. First, I recommend sending this to the following
| people: - Any congressional representatives that target Apple
| for antitrust - Facebook's PR team. - Various tech new outlets
|
| If anyone is willing to make a big case out of this then you
| can use that media attention to grow your application's user
| base. This has potential for easy free advertisement through
| media controversy.
|
| After you have gotten enough free advertisement, go forward
| with this recommendation of changing your branding.
| medium_burrito wrote:
| Epic's PR team too.
| rgovostes wrote:
| Well-written argument for the app reviewers to get bent,
| especially the highlighted examples of other apps that show the
| rule is clearly applied inconsistently.
|
| Apple's App Store moderation is embarrassing. They routinely fail
| to catch harmful junk--I've shut down a few top-grossing bogus
| antivirus apps for Mac, and the publisher of Untitled Goose Game
| routinely posts screenshots of clones that are trying to make
| money off confused users.
|
| They've banned apps like Phone Story and a drone strike tracker
| for being "objectionable and crude," yet they don't apply any
| content moderation to the Book Store or to Music or TV (or to
| Safari for that matter). They've yet to provide a cogent
| justification for why they're inconsistent on this.
| wasdfff wrote:
| It seems like they just act when their PR team feels worried.
| Technically wrote:
| I imagine both the US and Chinese government have immense
| sway as well.
| qppo wrote:
| I don't necessarily agree that TV/Music/books need more
| moderation in terms of censorship (and they do have plenty of
| that), but more curation. Apple TV is a good example of that,
| it's highly curated.
|
| Books are really bad though. Amazon is no better, neither have
| any modicum of curation or taste when it comes to their
| bestsellers lists. The New York Times doesn't put salacious
| romance novels at the top no matter how many copies sell, yet
| Amazon and Apple Books would lead you to believe there's
| nothing else being published.
|
| The same goes for the App Store. It doesn't need moderation by
| way of censorship, it just needs tasteful, manual curation.
| rgovostes wrote:
| I mean the opposite--not that they should censor/moderate
| their other stores, but why are they hypocritical (edit: or
| inconsistent, if you prefer) in saying that certain content
| is harmful when consumed as an app, but not as a book or
| movie that they are happy to sell to you?
| qppo wrote:
| I think the simplest explanation is that they don't have
| automated review processes for media like they do for
| software and Apple isn't a single person making decisions
| about what they sell on every app all the time.
|
| That said, TV and movies are far more controlled than the
| App Store.
| Bud wrote:
| That's not hypocritical; it's surprising you can't see
| that.
|
| An app is software that can be harmful to your device.
| Books and movies are not software and can't affect your
| device in any way.
|
| Therefore, there is a very obvious justification for
| disallowing some apps; that doesn't apply for books or
| movies.
|
| It's also not "hypocritical" for Apple to choose to have a
| curated App Store (which is feasible and realistic) but
| choose not to actively censor books (which isn't really
| feasible).
| rgovostes wrote:
| > An app is software that can be harmful to your device.
|
| I'm only discussing moderation for content, rather than
| moderation for security, privacy, stability, etc.
|
| > actively censor books (which isn't really feasible)
|
| I don't think it's infeasible. I just searched for a
| piece of literature today on Apple's Book Store and
| instead found a book with a pretty raunchy title. Could
| they not at least moderate that?
|
| Keep in mind they make it seem "feasible and realistic"
| that they can analyze apps to determine if they "can be
| harmful to your device," but anyone familiar with static
| analysis would know there are serious limitations to how
| much you can deduce about the behavior of an arbitrary
| binary.
|
| See, for instance: https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-
| security-idUSN1E7A71ZS...
| alisonkisk wrote:
| What's wrong with romance novels?
| qppo wrote:
| Nothing! Just that they're over represented in listings and
| publishers/authors will game their way to the top of search
| and best seller results on book apps. It makes it more
| difficult to find content I would like to read.
| [deleted]
| alisonkisk wrote:
| When apple bans an app, it ceases to exist on ios, effectively.
| Books, Music, and TV can be accessed through non-Apple
| controlled channels.
|
| What are some TV content that's similar to these banned apps?
| rgovostes wrote:
| I think this is helping to make the case that they _could_ be
| consistent in applying the guidelines to books /music/TV.
| "We're trying to be family-friendly, so we're not interested
| in selling any content that references drug use, but you're
| more than welcome to get it elsewhere." But they aren't; they
| only censor such content on the App Store.
|
| Both Drone+ and Phone Story could have been done as web apps
| (which iOS supported before native apps), but of course there
| are many APIs that you cannot access from WebKit.
| philwelch wrote:
| Banning books is widely considered to be a bad thing.
| 013a wrote:
| And it is thus important to recognize that our cultural
| perception of book banning, book burning, etc as a bad thing
| isn't something intrinsic to humans, and its not something we
| got for free. It took years of effort from major authors and
| members of the literary community to shift that perception.
| And we need to fight that fight again for applications, and
| especially for platforms which give their users and
| developers no other recourse, on behalf of the vast majority
| of users who don't have the knowledge or context to
| understand why it matters.
| Shivetya wrote:
| Apple's morality is very hit and miss at times. However it
| really comes down to squeaky wheel advocates get a lot of
| traction and Apple responds by going after the targets. Its a
| worse form of moral enforcement because its a completely moving
| target.
|
| People, especially tech oriented folks, always seem to decry
| the threat of religious persecution by politicians but failed
| to recognize that enforcement of morals by any group can have
| very dangerous side effects. We see statements to that effect
| here all the time, people judged for lifestyle choices that are
| not in favor by one group or another. Morals become weaponized
| as they can be undefinable immeasurable standard applied to
| those who are no longer in favor by action, deed, or thought.
| canofbars wrote:
| When an app that simply describes how a product is made is
| "objectionable and crude" it says a lot about the product.
| [deleted]
| rajacombinator wrote:
| Megacorps suck and are dumb. But snitching on other apps' names
| is not cool either.
| albertgoeswoof wrote:
| I don't understand the rationale to remove the app. Are they
| selling drugs through it or committing a crime with prior
| precedent in a court of law or under legislation passed by an
| elected committee?
|
| If it's just the name, how far does this go? Can I not name a
| band after a drug? Can I no longer write a book about drugs? What
| about a company? What if I'm a pharma company? Who is deciding
| these rules and how do we get rid of them?
| [deleted]
| blunte wrote:
| Perhaps you can inform Apple that amphetamines are not
| necessarily illegal, and are in fact prescribed to treat many
| problems including narcolepsy.
| ineedasername wrote:
| Trademark issues aside, I wonder if this would be a problem if
| the app was named Adderall.
| fitzroy wrote:
| Wait until Apple realizes that "Final Cut Pro" seems to promote
| irreversible self harm for profit.
| [deleted]
| fossuser wrote:
| What a dumb application of this rule in this context. I remember
| a similar app called caffeine (not sure what happened to it).
|
| Amphetamine is great - I use it daily to stop annoying infosec
| rules from locking my computer after 2min since I'm working from
| home. It's my favorite kind of software, focuses on one issue and
| does it well.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| Apple needs to fire the person who made the choice to ban this
| App. They have no purpose in the company, bring no returns, and
| cost a pretty penny. They are a rent seeker (apple policy) on top
| of an otherwise great business.
| judge2020 wrote:
| There's a great talk titled "Lessons Learned from the App Store"
| by Phillip Shoemaker - https://youtu.be/tJeEuxn9mug
|
| One of the main points is that apple has a hierarchy of
| priorities for their App Store: protect Apple's brand, protect
| the customer, then make money (timestamp 5:08 in video). Apple
| probably got some complaints about the name of the program
| (probably 100 or less) and decided it wasn't worth the $0 it was
| making to leave it up.
| webmobdev wrote:
| > and decided it wasn't worth the $0 it was making to leave it
| up.
|
| Then apparently they made a poor decision - the app apparently
| has been downloaded 500,000 times. That means it adds value to
| the users who use it, and that means it creates more value for
| Apple's platform. Apple shouldn't forget that developers add
| value to their platform, and moreover, with Apple charging
| them, they are also clients too!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-01 23:00 UTC)