Apple blocks screenshots, axes sexual content from App Store

Apple is stirring up yet another censorship brouhaha with its latest changes to App Store policy. The company recently began blocking screenshots for apps that are outside the acceptable age range in Parental Controls in iTunes. According to iPhone developer ChiliFresh, it seems that all "overtly sexual" apps might be expunged from the App Store too, which is making some users uneasy about Apple's "power" once again.

Last month, we reported on a glitch in the App Store system that let any user browse apps and their sometimes NSFW screenshots in iTunes, even if Parental Controls indicated that the user was a small child. Shortly after the glitch was reported to Apple as a bug, developers were notified that all screenshots for the App Store had to be free of "objectionable material" and be acceptable for a 4+ rating. This, of course, was a good thing.

Many of the apps in question were essentially collections of racy pictures (some more racy than others), so a screenshot amounted to soft-core porn for some. "If you actually look at what the screenshots for these porn apps were, they were no different from running the app," developer Fraser Speirs, who first noted the problem, told Ars. If they could be made appropriate, they wouldn't show much of the app at all."

Still, Apple recently began blocking access to screenshots for apps that didn't match Parental Controls settings. "You can still see the apps, but the screenshots are hidden," Speirs said. "This is now the same as the on-device version of the App Store." He noted that this is still an improvement, since apps may have a certain age rating. Things like "crude humor," "drug references," and "violence" are just some of the criteria developers have to consider when assigning a rating for the App Store.

Despite these changes, however, it appears Apple intends to purge the App Store of all apps with sexual overtones. Developer ChilliFresh got a notice from Apple that its app "Wobble iBoobs" was being removed from the App Store due to a policy change on apps with "overtly sexual content." An e-mail from the App Store review team explains the change:

The App Store continues to evolve, and as such, we are constantly refining our guidelines. Your application, Wobble iBoobs (Premium Uncensored), contains content that we had originally believed to be suitable for distribution. However, we have recently received numerous complaints from our customers about this type of content, and have changed our guidelines appropriately.

We have decided to remove any overtly sexual content from the App Store, which includes your application. Thank you for your understanding in this matter. If you believe you can make the necessary changes so that Wobble iBoobs (Premium Uncensored) complies with our recent changes, we encourage you to do so and resubmit for review.

For its part, ChilliFresh maintains that Wobble iBoobs is not overtly sexual, since it does not include any photos in the application. Users supply their own photos to make parts "wobble," but its clear from the title of the app what parts of the human anatomy the developers had in mind.

We asked Apple what had prompted the change. "Whenever we receive customer complaints about objectionable content we review them," Apple spokesperson Trudy Muller told Ars. "If we find these apps contain inappropriate material we remove them and request the developer make any necessary changes in order to be distributed by Apple." Apple declined to give further details about the nature or number of complaints it had received.

Reaction has been mixed so far. "I'm relaxed with the porn decision because it was always clear that they were in breach of the hitherto un-enforced rules," Speirs said. "Jobs said the day the iPhone SDK was announced that they wouldn't carry porn," he told Ars.

Developer Justin Williams noted that he was conflicted himself when he learned of the policy change. While getting rid of "AppPorn" clears out what many might call "garbage," it still feels like censorship. "The iPhone has Parental Controls that could restrict access if Apple implemented support," Williams said. "Rather than fix the problem the right way, though, they instead just put people out of business."

Apple could certainly put its Parental Controls to better use. Perhaps the company could create a separate category for such apps, letting users choose to enable or restrict access to the category for themselves or their children. Alternately, Apple could make the App Store a well-curated, "safe" place to buy apps, and allow users the option to load apps of their choosing from third parties.

As it stands, Apple is the sole source of iPhone apps and has made itself the arbiter of taste. However, taste is highly subjective across age groups, religions, even cultures. "Apple shouldn't be in the taste business or iTunes would be all Bob Dylan music," Williams wryly added via Twitter.

Apple has also shifted the line between acceptable and unacceptable several times since the App Store opened in 2008. At first, Apple rejected anything that might even hint of sex, then allowed some soft-core porn when Parental Controls were enabled. Now that policy has changed again, making it difficult for developers to know where the line is or if it will ever stay in one place.

We agree that individuals should have the right to decide what's tasteful for themselves, and we respect the right of parents to make that choice for their children. But instead of giving users the necessary tools to do that, Apple is making the choice for them. That's something the we have long-maintained isn't the right way to go.

UPDATE: Further evidence uncovered by Silicon Alley Insider reveals that adult-oriented apps are disappearing left and right. While some still remain in the App Store, several developers reported that their apps are being systematically removed from the App Store, and have been for the last 12 hours.

A developer of such apps, Grindhouse Mobile, contacted Ars to let us know they have been affected by the purge. Cofounder Mike Hawk told Ars he was especially upset that his company had worked closely with Apple to make sure its apps met Apple's guidelines, yet still were removed by the unannounced policy change. The company plans to limit future iPhone development, but "will continue to aggressively build and market adult oriented apps for Android and other applicable platforms which operate on an open system, giving developers and users much more freedom," Hawk said.

Though Apple refrained from commenting on what particular issue may have sparked this policy change, Ars has discovered a campaign by the Parents Television Council that may be at least partly to blame. The PTC is well know for flooding the FCC with complaints about TV shows, most recently vilifying Fox's The Family Guy. The group has also launched attacks on the portrayal of "adultery and promiscuity" on TV, foul-mouthed YouTube comments, and M-rated video games.

Source: Arstechnica.com

Firm uses typing cadence to finger unauthorized users

Though most users feel anonymous when browsing the Web, their browsers constantly turn over unique information such as a list of installed plugins, screen resolution, and the user agent string. Taken together, such bits of information can uniquely identify many users even without cookies.

But this is now old tech; behavioral analytics firms have already moved on. Cookies, browser signatures, and IP addresses can all help identify particular machines and particular browsers—but how can you tell which human actually sits behind the terminal at a given moment? One way is by measuring the "cadence" of their typing.

Scout Analytics has done just that in order to help its 40 paid content clients detect and stop those "sharing" their accounts without permission. Imagine that you sell access to an expensive database, so expensive that users are routinely tempted to share their "named accounts" with others in the office rather than pay for additional licenses. You would probably want to "encourage" these users to pay up or stop sharing the account, but it's difficult to know which logins are legitimate and which are not.

Cookies, browsers, and biometrics

That's where a company like Scout comes in. I spoke with Matt Shanahan, VP of Strategy for the company, about a research project that Scout just concluded that tried to figure out exactly when more than one person was using a single named account.

At first, Scout of course tried using cookies to track this information, but this produced terrible data; it suggested that six or seven different devices were being used to access each account, a number that seemed far too high to be plausible. So Scout then added browser data, of the kind highlighted by the EFF's recent Panopticlick project, to prevent problems like cleared cookies. When applied to a data set of 20 million actual logins to paid content sites, this refined technique identified nearly 600,000 unique devices being used for access.

This produced a more accurate count of "cookied browsers," but not of "actual users." An expensive subscription service might well be accessed by multiple people using the same central office computer, for instance, all using the same login, same browser, and same cookie.

So Scout used some Javascript timing features to watch how users type when they enter their login credentials for various services. Shanahan says that his algorithms need a minimum of 5 attempts at entering a phrase of at least 12 characters in order to generate a typing "cadence." By watching repeated logins, Scout could soon categorize these cadences into a digital pattern, then assign each pattern a serial number.

"As you're typing, you have a cadence and rhythm," Shanahan says, a rhythm that includes how long one holds down various keys and how long it takes to move between keys. Applying the technology to its data set of 20 million logins, Scout pulled out 175,000 unique patterns—thereby identifying 175,000 distinct users, even when they used the same login credentials on the same machine.

But only 130,000 users had subscribed to the services in question, meaning that 45,000 of the 175,000 people using the services were freeriding. Even if cookie tracking were 100 percent accurate, it would be off by a factor of 2-4x when it comes to tracking individual users of a service.

These typing patterns aren't quite unique—Shanahan estimates that 1 in 20,000 people share the same pattern—but when you combine that with IP addresses and browser information, it's good enough for its intended purpose.

What companies do with this information is up to them. Shanahan says some use the soft sell, calling up clients who are allowing multiple users on a single account and reminding them of the terms of service. The goal isn't to browbeat customers, but to convince them to pay up for the additional licenses they appear to need. Other companies might choose the "irritate them into submission" approach, perhaps by resetting the account password whenever multiple unique users access an account. Scout estimates that such information can boost subscription revenues by 10-15 percent.

"The amount that can be known from the network is pretty amazing," Shanahan notes, and he concedes that few users even know that their machines enable tracking of this kind. But he does point out that the patterns created by Scout's software don't identify people; each cadence pattern identifies someone unique, but the software has no idea who the person is.

That may be cold comfort to groups like the EFF, which have long been wary of online tracking schemes. While Panopticlick showed just how easy it was to uniquely track browsers, analytics companies like Scout can already pick out a browser's unique users.

With a bit more work, a court order, and the cooperation of an ISP, the day might not be far off when the old "Hey, that must have been someone else using my computer!" defense comes to an end. On the flip side, such technology could provide evidence that it really was someone else at your machine.

The RIAA no doubt wishes it had access to this technology back when it was still suing file-swappers and meeting this very objection in court.

Source: Arstechnica.com

Microsoft's EU browser ballot approved, arrives March 1

After protracted legal wrangling with the EU, the Microsoft browser ballot is at last heading towards roll-out. The EU's complaint was that Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer made the browser market less competitive to the detriment of consumers. Wary of substantial fines and endless legal costs, the company eventually worked to settle with the Competition Commission last year. As part of this settlement agreement, it promised to stop prioritizing Internet Explorer. Microsoft's initial plan—to offer a version of Windows without any browser at all—was rejected. The solution agreed upon by both parties was instead to offer end-users a choice of browsers automatically.

The mechanism chosen for this was the so-called browser ballot; a selection of browsers will be shown to users, and the chosen browser will be installed and made the default. Initially using an alphabetic list, the ballot was then changed to show the browsers in a random order. With this decision made, the EU finally agreed that this would be the way forward, allowing the company to put to an end its European legal woes.

The ballot itself will be distributed to EU customers running Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7, via Windows Update. Installing the update will, on Windows 7, unpin the IE icon from the taskbar, and then offer a selection of browsers. The five leading browsers—Safari, Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Internet Explorer—will be visible on the main selection screen, along with a further seven accessible by scrolling to the right.

The ballot will be offered on a limited basis in the UK, Belgium, and France, with full roll-out beginning on March 1. It will be pushed out as an automatic update (for those who have Windows Update set to install updates automatically), so those running Windows Update in its default, recommended, configuration will see the ballot automatically. The list of browsers offered will be updated every six months, to ensure that the five most widely-used browsers continue to be prioritized.

In addition to offering the browser ballot to existing Windows users, OEMs will be able to preinstall a browser of their choosing and also uninstall IE from machines shipping with Windows 7.

Source: Arstechnica.com

Steve Jobs to WSJ: ditch "dying" Flash technology

On a recent trip to New York to woo newspaper publishers with demonstrations of the iPad, Steve Jobs met with staff of the Wall Street Journal. During the demo, editors asked about the iPad's lack of Flash support, to which Jobs replied, "We don't spend a lot of energy on old technology."

According to sources speaking to Valleywag, Jobs repeated the comments he made during a recent town hall meeting among Apple employees shortly after last month's introduction of the iPad. He reportedly told WSJ staff that Flash is buggy and crashes Macs, is a "CPU hog," and a source of "security holes." He also referred to Flash as dying technology, likening not supporting Flash on the iPad to Apple dropping support for floppy drives, ditching legacy data ports, and replacing CCFL backlighting with LEDs.

Adobe has made efforts to address the concerns about performance on Mac OS X, noting that Flash 10.1 should offer significant improvements (an area we are investigating further). That isn't likely to sway Apple, though, as Jobs recommends replacing Flash-based content with H.264 video, JavaScript, and other techniques. Such a move is doable, if not entirely "trivial" as Jobs suggested.

Source: Arstechnica.com

A Comprehensive Video Guide to Google Voice

Google Voice hasn't been in the spotlight much since the iPhone debacle, but Google continues to pack on the features. If you're still not sure what Google Voice has to offer, here's Google's comprehensive Voice guide in video form.

All the videos below come courtesy of Google Voice's just-launched YouTube channel. If you've followed previous Voice coverage—like our roundup of reasons you may or may not want Google Voice — you may not see a lot new here. On the other hand, if you still aren't quite sure if Voice is a good fit for you, the feature-by-feature videos below can't hurt.

If you are interested in Voice but don't have an invite yet, be sure to check out our new Google Voice Invitation Donation Thread — and once you secure an account, make sure you make the transition as pain-free as possible.

Voicemail Transcriptions

Personalized Voicemail Greetings for Different Contacts

Source: Lifehacker.Com

EU, US approve, Microsoft + Yahoo! search partnership is go

After announcing the search deal in July 2009, Yahoo! and Microsoft have finally received regulatory clearance from both the US Department of Justice and the EU. Under the agreement between the two companies, Yahoo! will use Microsoft's search platform to power its search results and paid search listings. Yahoo! will handle customer relations with high-volume advertisers for both companies. Self-service advertisers will continue to deal with Microsoft directly. A similar deal between Yahoo! and Google was abandoned after the Department of Justice threatened an antitrust lawsuit.

For Yahoo! users, the visible difference will be that Yahoo! search results will be identical to those of Microsoft's Bing. Yahoo! will continue to offer its own content to web users to provide more than just search results. The companies believe that this partnership will enable them to better compete with the dominant Google.

Google's dominance is indeed the reason that this deal was permitted where the Yahoo!-Google deal was not; with Yahoo! having only 7.4 percent of the search market and Microsoft's Bing only 3.2 percent, the tie-up will not make the search market substantially less competitive. Bing's market share has been increasing, especially in the US, but much of this growth has occurred at Yahoo!'s expense. The ten-year deal will provide Microsoft with considerably more access to the search market, and the company will also take on some 400 Yahoo! employees.

For its part, Yahoo! will receieve the lion's share of the advertising revenue—88 percent for the first five years—as well as cash payments totaling $150 million from Microsoft to help pay for the transition to the Bing technology. Yahoo! predicts annual operating profit growth of up to $500 million as a result of the partnership.

The technical aspects of the integration are likely to start within days. Yahoo! US should be using Bing by the end of the year; a full global transition will take longer, and is not expected to be complete until early 2012.

Source: Arstechnica.com

iSimulate pipes gestures and more into iPad simulator

Although Apple has yet to announce the exact date when the iPad will ship, or when it will even begin taking iPad application submissions, this lack of information hasn't stopped developers from working on apps specifically made for the device. Unlike when the iPhone SDK was released, however, developers don't have devices in hand to test their code on.

A company named vimov is attempting to address this problem with an update to its product for the iPhone and iPod touch, called iSimulate, that now allows developers to pipe accelerometer, multitouch, compass, and GPS data from the iPhone into the iPad simulator. Until now, developers had to make educated guesses based on past iPhone development experience, but iSimulate aims to help make the experience a little more painless.

Setup is pretty simple, according to one developer we spoke to: you only need to add a library into an existing iPad project and then connect to the simulator from the iSimulate client on your iPhone or iPod touch. The same developer, however, informed us that the system was far from perfect. Apparently, it's virtually impossible to know where you are touching in the simulator until you touch the screen on the iPhone; this is because the application isn't running on the phone, and instead, only a diagnostic screen is visible. Additionally, the response speed of the simulator leaves something to be desired.

Still, he said the GPS and accelerometer support could be very useful in development, especially since there's no other way to test this except with an iPhone or iPod touch. If Apple starts taking application submissions prior to the availability of iPad, devs are going to have to rely on applications like this to ensure their applications work properly at launch.

Source: Arstechnica.com

iBookstore won't mean the disappearance of $9.99 e-books

Publishers happily signed on to distribute e-books for the iPad via Apple's iBookstore, in part because it allowed more flexibility in pricing books above Amazon's $9.99 ceiling on new and bestselling titles. Though prices are expected to be in the range of $12.99 to $14.99 for new titles in hardcover, that won't mean titles as low as $9.99 will disappear.

According to anonymous sources speaking to the New York Times, the agreements with publishers include provisions to discount book prices on bestsellers, similar to the practice used in brick and mortar stores such as Borders. Furthermore, prices for e-book editions of titles that retail below the typical $26 price for a hardcover would be sold below $14.99 as well.

We likely won't know more details until the iPad ships and the iBookstore is open for business, but it seems like the agreements between publishers and Apple offer something for both groups. Publishers get more flexibility in pricing, and Apple gets to offer some titles at comparably discounted prices.

Source: Arstechnica.com

Warner succeeds in bullying Redbox into 28-day release delay

Only a month after Netflix announced it was giving into Warner Bros. and delaying new releases, DVD rental kiosk company Redbox has decided to do the same. Warner announced Tuesday that it had entered into a "multi-year distribution agreement" with Redbox that will allow Redbox to officially carry Warner's DVD and Blu-ray offerings—28 days after they are released to the retail market. The agreement will be the end of the lawsuit between the two companies—and marks a short-term victory in Warner's attempts to prop up the dying DVD market. The numbers don't lie: the market for new DVDs has been falling for years now, with the latest data showing that disc sales dropped by a full 13 percent in the US between 2008 and 2009 alone.

Warner made no secret of the reason for the move. "The 28-day window enables us to get the most from the sales potential of our titles and maximize VOD usage," Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group president Kevin Tsujihara said in a statement.

Redbox started out by acquiring its major DVD releases from wholesalers that sell to all manner of retail outlets (Target, Walmart, etc.). To them, Redbox was just another buyer looking to acquire product, and Redbox did not have direct relationships with any of the studios (save Sony).

The studios came to despise Redbox for its business model, however. The company's kiosks, which house more than 600 DVDs at a time, rent out movies for $1 per day and sell used movies for $7. Redbox's Web-based inventory system makes it possible for consumers to select their movies over the Internet and reserve them in advance at a specified Redbox kiosk.

Ultimately, some of the studios were able to persuade wholesalers to stop selling movies to Redbox. The DVD-rental outlet got around that limitation by sending staffers out to Target, Walmart, and other retailers armed with corporate credit cards. The staffers would snap up new releases to be loaded into the ubiquitous kiosks.

Redbox's determination to stock and rent new releases, according to the major studios, was both an insult and the equivalent of stealing money straight out of their children's mouths. "Having our [movies] rented at $1 in the rental window is grossly undervaluing our products," News Corp. said when it decided to sue Redbox over its rental kiosks. Universal also sued Redbox, and Redbox sued everyone back, including Warner Bros.

The latest deal, however, means that the lawsuit against Warner is over and Redbox will have easier access to the studio's offerings. "This agreement enables redbox to fulfill our commitment to providing consumers affordable and convenient home entertainment," Redbox president Mitch Lowe said in a statement, probably while nursing his wounds. "By agreeing to a delayed release date, Redbox can now acquire Warner Home Video titles at a reduced product cost, preserving value for our consumers and increasing customer access to Warner titles at redbox locations nationwide."

This deal, at least from a consumer perspective, is nearly identical to one that Warner entered into with DVD rental and streaming house Netflix in January. Again, the companies cheerfully claimed that the agreement would mean easier access to Warner Bros. movies, as long as Netflix wouldn't let a single one out of its grasp until 28 days had passed from the time the DVDs hit the market.

Warner's deals with both Netflix and Redbox show the industry's commitment to doing everything it can to keep a slowly-dying media form alive as long as possible. A large part of that fight has been to cripple rental availability, whether through Netflix, Redbox, or others. It's a victory for the studios—and a loss for consumers. The only way this will pay off is if sufficient numbers of movie fans decide they absolutely can't wait an additional four weeks to rent the Hollywood blockbusters they missed in the theater and snap up the new DVDs.

Source: Arstechnica.com