Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"One of the many silly rejections we had was due to the images on our influencers profiles being too sexy despite being linked through the Instagram API."

So outside Apples wall garden or the great firewall of Apple as you could liken it. I can understand that aspect as it would allow somebody to change the pic on Instagram and that would then come across upon their platform so the potential for something lewd and some media outlet would have the headline "Apple has dildo's showing on an their site accessible to children". So proactive PR management in some way but certainly a scenario that could play out and can appreciate that aspect. Equally, as a developer using public API's, I can totally appreciete the perspective that Instagrams T&C's wouldn't allow anything bad in this instances, and feel that censoring was already done and having to censor an API content when if that was needed then Instagram would alreay have that in place would make any dev grown in angst.

However, does appear that a censoring API setup for some public API's is a market that could be tapped. So whilst it may of seen bad on the face of it, it shows an opportunity awaiting to be tapped and with that - how did that all pan out (how did you solve that issue)?



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: