121–129 of 129 posts
If everybody had perfect transparency, it'd happily give up my privacy, because it would benefit society (you, me, us all) tremendously!
Can someone explain to me how Snapchat photos are considered ephemeral? Anyone can capture data at the endpoint and persist it. E.g. I can take a screenshot of a photo sent to me, and it will be in my iPhoto archive forever. I can share it from there to my entire contact list. What am I missing? Please educate me.
It tells the sender if you screenshot. It's not enough to prevent it from happening, but it adds a pretty big social incentive not to do so.
At the most basic level you can use one phone to take a photo of another phone. If the object is to expose an embarassing photo, that may be enough resolution to accomplish the end. I really think it is impossible to secure the data once it is on a client.
Can someone explain to me how Snapchat photos are considered ephemeral? Anyone can capture data at the endpoint and persist it. E.g. I can take a screenshot of a photo sent to me, and it will be in my iPhoto archive forever. I can share it from there to my entire contact list. What am I missing? Please educate me.
It tells the sender if you screenshot. It's not enough to prevent it from happening, but it adds a pretty big social incentive not to do so.
At the most basic level you can use one phone to take a photo of another phone. If the object is to expose an embarassing photo, that may be enough resolution to accomplish the end. I really think it is impossible to secure the data once it is on a client.
Can someone explain to me how Snapchat photos are considered ephemeral? Anyone can capture data at the endpoint and persist it. E.g. I can take a screenshot of a photo sent to me, and it will be in my iPhoto archive forever. I can share it from there to my entire contact list. What am I missing? Please educate me.
It tells the sender if you screenshot. It's not enough to prevent it from happening, but it adds a pretty big social incentive not to do so.
At the most basic level you can use one phone to take a photo of another phone. If the object is to expose an embarassing photo, that may be enough resolution to accomplish the end. I really think it is impossible to secure the data once it is on a client.
Can someone explain to me how Snapchat photos are considered ephemeral? Anyone can capture data at the endpoint and persist it. E.g. I can take a screenshot of a photo sent to me, and it will be in my iPhoto archive forever. I can share it from there to my entire contact list. What am I missing? Please educate me.
It tells the sender if you screenshot. It's not enough to prevent it from happening, but it adds a pretty big social incentive not to do so.
At the most basic level you can use one phone to take a photo of another phone. If the object is to expose an embarassing photo, that may be enough resolution to accomplish the end. I really think it is impossible to secure the data once it is on a client.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the majority of SnapChat users are using it to have extra-marital affairs, there may be something to it. SnapChat wasn't created because we as a society were lacking in communication tools.
Alright, I'll go there: What is wrong with developing an app that is used for extra-marital affairs, even if that is its explicit purpose? For the sake of argument, lets just say that extra-marital affairs being immoral is axiomatic (I don't agree, but that is not going to be a productive discussion) . The two people who made vows are the ones with the moral obligation, not the rest of society. Every individual third…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. I'm not making any moral judgements or conclusions. Just stating an observation. I definitely don't think Snapchat in and of itself is immoral. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't consider the net effects of the app. It could be that Snapchat is terribly useful.
Just because you are cheating on your wife doesn't mean that everyone else is too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting points. I agree that "fun" is a valuable thing, or can be anyways. Twitter isn't perfect but one thing if does is to give a voice to those who didn't have one before. I'm thinking specifically of oppressive governments and the affected citizens or folks being harassed by law enforcement. I hope that benefit outweighs the media's misuse of it.
>Twitter isn't perfect but one thing if does is to give a voice to those who didn't have one before. I'm thinking specifically of oppressive governments and the affected citizens or folks being harassed by law enforcement. Does it really help with that? I'd think for anything important you'd want to spend more than 160 characters explaining it; long-form blogs and tumblr seem like a more effective way to spread such…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Subjective, I guess. But many movements in countries with oppressive regimes use Twitter heavily to spread information.
That's very nice, but also very localized. In most other countries I'd value Twitter's contribution to society about as much as McDonalds commercials...
I'm not saying this makes up a majority of tweets. Most tweets are pretty meaningless, IMO.