Slog
News & ArtsThursday, April 23, 2009
Tech Now Only Outlaws Will Have Baby-Shaking iPhone Apps
Posted by Anthony Hecht on Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:55 PM
Wired reports that Apple has removed an iPhone app called Baby Shaker after "widespread outrage from parents."
It's a stupid little app that shows a picture of a baby, makes some gurgling sounds, and if you shake the phone hard enough, little red Xs appear on the babies eyes.
Predictably, people with children who were shaken as babies—babies who suffered horrible and crippling injuries—were furious that such a thing would be allowed in the world and Apple bowed to pressure and removed the app, pointing out yet again that their Application approval process is absurdly capricious and unfair.
What the hell, Apple? Sure, it's a stupid, pointless, generally offensive app. So fucking what? These people who've had horrible things happen to them and then insist that there is never, ever, ever any acceptable way to discuss these things except in somber, hushed, reverent tones need a good shake, if you ask me.
Just kidding! I'm anti-shaking in all cases, I swear! It's not even funny, I know.
4
I totally support the right of anyone to put Baby Shaker on their phone, and also my right to think those people are the biggest assholes in the history of time, assholes, babies, and iPhones. See how a free society works?
6
I think the app makes sense...it's like the technology version of the rice bags with diapers (or the eggs) high schoolers use to learn what it's like to have a baby. How do you get the right level of rocking that gets the baby to sleep without causing brain damage?
I think the app should be banned unless they did the research to find what level of rocking DOES get children to sleep vs. cause brain damage.
I think the app should be banned unless they did the research to find what level of rocking DOES get children to sleep vs. cause brain damage.
7
No, it's funny.
They should have made it harder to get the red X's, though. Baby wouldn't die that fast.
They should have made it harder to get the red X's, though. Baby wouldn't die that fast.
9
@8 That would be all well and good if Apple allowed users to upload their own applications and content.
They don't.
So in essence, they control all content on the iPhone- making them very similar to China and it's stranglehold on dissent. Would you argue that China is a democracy that has the "right" to stifle views counter to the norm?
Apple has made the argument time and time again that the reason they are so restrictive with application approval is the security risk to iPhone firmware... so if this application has no security flaws in it's code, there's absolutely no excuse for removing it.
They don't.
So in essence, they control all content on the iPhone- making them very similar to China and it's stranglehold on dissent. Would you argue that China is a democracy that has the "right" to stifle views counter to the norm?
Apple has made the argument time and time again that the reason they are so restrictive with application approval is the security risk to iPhone firmware... so if this application has no security flaws in it's code, there's absolutely no excuse for removing it.
11
So I don't know shit about iPhones, and I'm just curious... they restrict apps because of "risk to the iPhone firmware"? WTF kind of piece of shit is this? Dell (or Microsoft) doesn't need to approve the apps I run on my laptop to make sure I don't run something that will frickin break my computer - why, in 2009, can't Apple make the iPhone have this VERY BASIC security wrapper?
12
Then don't buy an iPhone. Get one of those other awesome phones that any asshole can add software to if that's what you want.
Everybody thinks they know how Apple ought to do business but for some reason no other company will go and do it themselves. Why is that?
Everybody thinks they know how Apple ought to do business but for some reason no other company will go and do it themselves. Why is that?
13
OK, let's make an ap where you drag the homosexual from the back of a truck. Or, how about one where you hang the black man from the tree. Or, maybe one where you stuff a jew into an oven.
Or, my personal favorite...the one where you put a hood over the journalist and cut his head off with a machete on life TV.
It's all in good FUN! Lighten up!
Or, my personal favorite...the one where you put a hood over the journalist and cut his head off with a machete on life TV.
It's all in good FUN! Lighten up!
14
@13 Yeah that would be pretty sick if anyone chose to put those on their phone. I sure as hell wouldn't, but, guess what? It's ok for other people to be racist/biased/bigoted/stupid because, Dun DUN DUN, we have free speech in America and don't force everyone to disagree with our, let's face it, left-wing PNW viewpoint. If we start forcing people out of their ideology, even the most racist and disgusting ideology, we undermine our own right to freedom of speech.
So, yeah, disgusting apps are disgusting and people who use them are disgusting, BUT that's ok because people are allowed to be as disgusting and stupid as they want, and you are COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE if you want to take away their right to be stupid and racist.
But on the other hand, you are completely entitled to your opinion ;)
So, yeah, disgusting apps are disgusting and people who use them are disgusting, BUT that's ok because people are allowed to be as disgusting and stupid as they want, and you are COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE if you want to take away their right to be stupid and racist.
But on the other hand, you are completely entitled to your opinion ;)
15
@13
Yes, exactly. We live in a free society. If people want to publish those things, and other people want to buy those things, we allow that.
It is why people play Grand Theft Auto. When you allow someone else, be it a corporation, government, or church, to dictate your entertainment you allow them to dictate your thoughts. Ignoring what you find morally repugnant is your responsibility, not Apple's.
Yes, exactly. We live in a free society. If people want to publish those things, and other people want to buy those things, we allow that.
It is why people play Grand Theft Auto. When you allow someone else, be it a corporation, government, or church, to dictate your entertainment you allow them to dictate your thoughts. Ignoring what you find morally repugnant is your responsibility, not Apple's.
16
@9, @11 - It's not a risk to the firmware they're concerned about. iPhones have much better application security than most desktop platforms--apps run in their own space (sandbox) and have no ability to make any changes outside of their space. When an app crashes, it takes itself down and nothing else. What Apple is trying to protect (besides the delicate sensibilities of whiners) is the integrity of the iPhone "experience." They won't allow apps to go through that violate their terms, use private APIs, or are so poorly written as to guarantee a bad experience for the user.
Your laptop has orders of magnitude more resources to work with, so there's a lot more leeway. The iPhone has very limited processing power and memory, so they want to make sure that the apps people install won't make people hate their phones (even if that feeling is misplaced).
Your laptop has orders of magnitude more resources to work with, so there's a lot more leeway. The iPhone has very limited processing power and memory, so they want to make sure that the apps people install won't make people hate their phones (even if that feeling is misplaced).
18
@8 of course apple has the right not to carry it in their store, as I have the same right to laugh at anyone stupid enough to buy one of the worst phones ever created.
19
@14 and 15
Yes. And Apple has the right to remove the app because it offends some of it's users. They are not obligated to keep it simply because people have the right to be stupid.
Yes. And Apple has the right to remove the app because it offends some of it's users. They are not obligated to keep it simply because people have the right to be stupid.
20
So I can go to any Fred Meyer and buy the most horribly violent video games that show unbelievable amounts of murder and killing, which is OK, but if Apple let's a baby shaker app on the iPhone then they advocate child abuse?
That just makes me want to shake my phone!
That just makes me want to shake my phone!
21
be thankful we live in a society where precisely this kind of crap can be debated on the internet
22
" Sure, it's a stupid, pointless, generally offensive app. So fucking what?"
I guess they'll ban my new app next 'Slap a fag'.
I guess they'll ban my new app next 'Slap a fag'.
23
Regardless, NO BABIES ARE HARMED IN THE PLAYING OF THIS GAME.
This offends people who don't think that babies should be shaken. Well guess what? NOBODY thinks that babies should be shaken. But MOST PEOPLE get annoyed by babies (even their own) once in awhile and wish they could shake them.
There is an argument circulating that the app would "promote" the shaking of babies. This is a bullshit argument. Did Resident Evil result in an outbreak of trespassing in spooky houses? Did Mario Bros. promote amateur urban spelunking? Hell naw. I played DOOM for hundreds of hours and I never ONCE attacked another living thing with a chainsaw.
Only idiots shake babies. And the idiots that shake babies PROBABLY CAN'T AFFORD AN IPHONE.
And if you're offended then FINE. If you think it's tasteless THEN FINE. I think Celine Dion is tasteless and promotes the desire to kill her, her fans, and promotes anti-canadian sentiments. BUT I'm not calling for her dumb crap to be taken off the market. I don't get it, but others do and it's their RIGHT AS AMERICANS to enjoy an entertainment product that HARMS NOBODY. Even if it's tasteless.
Some lady whose baby was shaken said the app was "horrifying". Really? The fact that YOUR baby was shaken sure, but a DEPICTION of it? Really?Have you seen any of the SAW movies? THAT shit is horrifying. "Baby Shaker" is just ridiculous, and intentionally so.
Personally, if I don't think a joke is funny, I don't try to get the comedian banned from performing. Fair's fair that the private company wants to protect its image, BUT if it was the government who pulled the game, it would not stand up to legal scrutiny.
This "outrage" is stupid. I want my game back.
I think they should re release it under a pseudonym. I suggest:
Zygote Agitator
Progeny Disruptor
Offspring Joggler
Gamete Interferor
More...
This offends people who don't think that babies should be shaken. Well guess what? NOBODY thinks that babies should be shaken. But MOST PEOPLE get annoyed by babies (even their own) once in awhile and wish they could shake them.
There is an argument circulating that the app would "promote" the shaking of babies. This is a bullshit argument. Did Resident Evil result in an outbreak of trespassing in spooky houses? Did Mario Bros. promote amateur urban spelunking? Hell naw. I played DOOM for hundreds of hours and I never ONCE attacked another living thing with a chainsaw.
Only idiots shake babies. And the idiots that shake babies PROBABLY CAN'T AFFORD AN IPHONE.
And if you're offended then FINE. If you think it's tasteless THEN FINE. I think Celine Dion is tasteless and promotes the desire to kill her, her fans, and promotes anti-canadian sentiments. BUT I'm not calling for her dumb crap to be taken off the market. I don't get it, but others do and it's their RIGHT AS AMERICANS to enjoy an entertainment product that HARMS NOBODY. Even if it's tasteless.
Some lady whose baby was shaken said the app was "horrifying". Really? The fact that YOUR baby was shaken sure, but a DEPICTION of it? Really?Have you seen any of the SAW movies? THAT shit is horrifying. "Baby Shaker" is just ridiculous, and intentionally so.
Personally, if I don't think a joke is funny, I don't try to get the comedian banned from performing. Fair's fair that the private company wants to protect its image, BUT if it was the government who pulled the game, it would not stand up to legal scrutiny.
This "outrage" is stupid. I want my game back.
I think they should re release it under a pseudonym. I suggest:
Zygote Agitator
Progeny Disruptor
Offspring Joggler
Gamete Interferor
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (23) RSS