Grand Café de Michelle: HO APERTO UN PORTALE ALL' INFERNO CERCANDO DI RESUSCITARE PINO DANIELE DEVO CHIUDERLO
E' SPLENDIDA
Fra ma sta cit diretta al visual della opening di Kai verso la fine?
Assurdo
Assurdo
Bello che si intraveda già Hanyuu nella opening della question phase, da quel poco visibile sembra pure bella
Amo l'ed di Higurashi Onidamashi
Grand Café de Michelle: HO APERTO UN PORTALE ALL' INFERNO CERCANDO DI RESUSCITARE PINO DANIELE DEVO CHIUDERLO
Photo
Dio cane Teppei muori porco il dio
lo odio già
Forwarded from Pavel Durov
Apple released a statement saying they didn't want us to take down the 3 channels run by the Belarusian protestors, but just specific posts "disclosing personal information."
This sly wording ignores the fact that channels, @karatelibelarusi and @belarusassholes, consist entirely of personal information of the oppressors and those who'd helped rig the elections – because that is why those channels exist.
By hiding their demands with vague wordings, Apple is trying to avoid the responsibility of enforcing their own rules. It is understandable: according to this poll, over 94% of Belarusian users think the channels that made Apple worry should be left alone.
Previously, when removing posts at Apple’s requests, Telegram replaced those posts with a notice that cited the exact rule limiting such content for iOS users. However, Apple reached out to us a while ago and said our app is not allowed to show users such notices because they were “irrelevant”.
Similarly, when Facebook wanted to inform its users that 30% of the fees users were paying for online events went to Apple, Apple didn’t let Facebook do it saying this information was (once more) “irrelevant”.
I strongly disagree with Apple’s definition of “irrelevant”. I think the reason certain content was censored or where your money goes is the opposite of irrelevant.
Apple has the right to be greedy and formalistic (or maybe not – that’s something for the courts and regulators to decide). But it’s time Apple learned to assume responsibility for their policy instead of trying to hide it from users – they deserve to know.
This sly wording ignores the fact that channels, @karatelibelarusi and @belarusassholes, consist entirely of personal information of the oppressors and those who'd helped rig the elections – because that is why those channels exist.
By hiding their demands with vague wordings, Apple is trying to avoid the responsibility of enforcing their own rules. It is understandable: according to this poll, over 94% of Belarusian users think the channels that made Apple worry should be left alone.
Previously, when removing posts at Apple’s requests, Telegram replaced those posts with a notice that cited the exact rule limiting such content for iOS users. However, Apple reached out to us a while ago and said our app is not allowed to show users such notices because they were “irrelevant”.
Similarly, when Facebook wanted to inform its users that 30% of the fees users were paying for online events went to Apple, Apple didn’t let Facebook do it saying this information was (once more) “irrelevant”.
I strongly disagree with Apple’s definition of “irrelevant”. I think the reason certain content was censored or where your money goes is the opposite of irrelevant.
Apple has the right to be greedy and formalistic (or maybe not – that’s something for the courts and regulators to decide). But it’s time Apple learned to assume responsibility for their policy instead of trying to hide it from users – they deserve to know.
Inb4 ammazzano telegram su clementoni
addio musone