[HN Gopher] iOS 17 Is a Prude
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       iOS 17 Is a Prude
        
       Author : grupthink
       Score  : 58 points
       Date   : 2023-09-22 21:12 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
        
       | brucethemoose2 wrote:
       | If its local scanning, this is fine. Dare I say, its a pretty
       | good use of machine vision.
        
         | madrox wrote:
         | The caption underneath this setting when you turn it on makes
         | clear that scanning is on-device
        
         | diego_sandoval wrote:
         | Even if done locally, it's still creepy.
        
           | lucb1e wrote:
           | I'd also be creeped out, but honestly it's not bad to be a
           | bit paranoid about who can see what you're currently sending
           | onto the internet and double checking that things are as they
           | should
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | There is a problem out there of unsolicited nudes; I can see
           | this being welcome capability for a lot of people [0]. It
           | doesn't nudge up against any privacy issues. Seems like a
           | good idea overall.
           | 
           | Of course, there is also a real issue with the fact that, as
           | closed source software on a locked down platform, we can't
           | know what happens next. But that is just part of the deal
           | with iPhones; there is already a lot of data like that (eg,
           | I'd expect the US uses iPhone GPS data froom targets to hunt
           | them down).
           | 
           | [0] Not sure what the feature actually does because nobody
           | has posted details here, so there is some guesswork here.
        
           | reanimus wrote:
           | There are two main use cases here, afaik: 1) Minors, who may
           | send/receive these sorts of photos when chatting with their
           | significant others (and should know the consequences) or
           | worse, an adult (and should know the dangers. It offers
           | information, the ability to message a parent/guardian, or
           | view it anyway.
           | 
           | 2) People who don't want to deal with unsolicited dick pics
           | (or other nudes, I guess, but let's be honest)
        
       | ehPReth wrote:
       | So, I can't make stickers with penises in them for whatever
       | reason (you'd think they'd lump creating/receiving them in the
       | same setting), but the 'are you sure you want to send or receive
       | something that looks naughty' was, in fact, turned off by default
       | for me. Anyone else?
        
         | jdlshore wrote:
         | It's meant for kids.
        
           | TheNewsIsHere wrote:
           | The new major OS releases include a version of this feature
           | that you can enable without the parental control
           | context/overhead. So for example if you don't want to see
           | random penises that might get messaged to you, you can avoid
           | seeing that.
           | 
           | It is optional and disabled by default, just like the child-
           | oriented Communication Safety feature set. They call the
           | adult-oriented version "Sensitive Content Warnings".
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | brucethemoose2 wrote:
         | Perhaps the default is related to age?
        
         | majormajor wrote:
         | This was a "welcome to the new version, let's get started"
         | walkthrough optional setting for me. So the user here turned it
         | on and acts surprised it does what it says?
        
       | estevaoam wrote:
       | Not hotdog
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | atarian wrote:
       | I think most people would prefer this over CSAM.
        
         | lucb1e wrote:
         | I don't think this screen would prevent anyone doing CSA from
         | sending that M, and a C independently wishing to send SM is not
         | necessarily being A, so I'm not sure what you mean
        
         | Karellen wrote:
         | Does that sort of content show up often for people who would
         | not prefer it and don't go looking for it?
         | 
         | As someone who's used earlier versions of iOS for some years
         | now, and who knows a bunch more people who also have, that's
         | not a problem I'm aware any of us ever experiencing. I realise
         | that anecdotes are not data, but it doesn't seem like it should
         | be a common issue at all...
        
           | CharlesW wrote:
           | > _Does that sort of content show up often for people who
           | would not prefer it and don 't go looking for it?_
           | 
           | Oh yes.
           | 
           | https://www.psypost.org/2020/08/new-research-uncovers-
           | womens....
        
             | johnmaguire wrote:
             | Unsolicited dick picks is not the same thing as CSAM...
        
               | CharlesW wrote:
               | Because no underage person has ever sent or received a
               | dick pic?
        
               | lucb1e wrote:
               | That's not what your article is about though, or even so
               | much as mentions in passing, so I find the critique that
               | the provided data is not about CSAM legitimate
        
               | CharlesW wrote:
               | > _That 's not what your article is about though..._
               | 
               |  _Teen Girls' Experiences Negotiating the Ubiquitous Dick
               | Pic: Sexual Double Standards and the Normalization of
               | Image Based Sexual Harassment_ : https://link.springer.co
               | m/article/10.1007/s11199-021-01236-3
               | 
               | "The YouGov poll also highlighted that, of all of the
               | women questioned, 46% received an unsolicited dick pic
               | before the age of 18..."
               | 
               | Hope that helps.
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | zeratax wrote:
       | optional things like this are fine. preventing me from joining
       | e.g. NSFW discord servers wholesale is not imo. As an adult I
       | should be able to use my phone however I want
        
         | EA-3167 wrote:
         | 100%. It's the difference between empowering users and
         | patronizing them.
        
         | squeaky-clean wrote:
         | > preventing me from joining e.g. NSFW discord servers
         | wholesale
         | 
         | Is this something that iOS (or some other client) does? Or just
         | hypothetical. I don't keep up with these things aside from when
         | they reach HN
        
           | mirashii wrote:
           | https://www.theverge.com/tech/2021/4/19/22391675/discord-
           | ios...
        
             | cmsj wrote:
             | (to be clear, this is not an iOS restriction per-se, this
             | is the App Store guidelines not wanting to have a store
             | full of porn)
        
         | mfer wrote:
         | > as an adult
         | 
         | You touch on an interesting element. A lot of iPhone users are
         | kids. Even young kids. Logged in with their parents account.
         | 
         | Not trying to justify what's going on. Just add context
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | Mmm.
           | 
           | Given the internet as it is, and as it has been even back
           | when FOSS discussions included hating GIF because of patent
           | enforcement, kids shouldn't be on the (general) internet _at
           | all_.
           | 
           | Smartphones are even worse, given the deliberate attempts to
           | make content more addictive.
           | 
           | I'm not sure how to square that particular circle with the
           | likelihood of social exclusion from not being online -- it's
           | not like me putting (general) in brackets in the first
           | paragraph will convince the right people that there's money
           | to be made in a genuinely safe subset, despite the existence
           | of YouTube Kids and whatever Netflix' thing is called.
        
       | december456 wrote:
       | I will break the HN spirit, but im fucking horrified of this
       | thread. _So_ many people being happy that a company is protecting
       | them from themselves, or their family members. Where is my
       | controversial personal websites? Did i take a wrong left turn
       | somewhere?
        
         | vore wrote:
         | I mean, you can just click the button to send the nudes. It's a
         | sign, not a cop.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | This is a feature for kid's devices, not the default setting.
        
         | thefourthchime wrote:
         | This, on machine and totally appropriate.
        
       | asddubs wrote:
       | whatever happened to sideloading in this update anyway
        
         | cmsj wrote:
         | They have until March 2024 to comply.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-22 23:02 UTC)