SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It’s time to face the naked truth. According to the New York Daily News the latest celebrity phone hacking scandal hasn't stopped or even slowed people down from taking naked selfies. In fact the McAfee security company’s 2014 Love, Relationships & Technology survey reveals that 54% of their respondents regularly send or receive intimate photos, videos, texts and emails, and that number spikes to 70% when it comes to those aged 18 to 24. "I can only think of two people my age who haven't done it. It becomes like a sort of weird correspondence. If I snapchat someone a pic, they would send one back," says Julia, a 22-year-old English student, "It's sort of like a flirty thing, you meet a boy on a night out, you'd snapchat him a picture instead of texting him."
“If you’re taking selfies on a regular basis, that is going to get boring,” says John Suler, a member of the editorial board for the journal, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. “So it becomes more risque, and that eventually leads to nude photos.” The desire to capture the naked body and share it with others is nothing new. “Every new medium that comes along, from cave paintings onward, no sooner does the medium get invented then people start using it for nudes,” says Robert Thompson, a pop-culture historian at Syracuse University. “We’ve found very explicit nude paintings on the walls of Pompeii.” While abstaining from taking nudies altogether is the only way to guarantee they won’t leak, it’s not a realistic approach for many. It’s more practical to password protect your phone and photo storage, doublecheck the recipient before hitting “send,” and to only sext someone you trust completely. “We have decided that the things we like to do online are things we like so much that we’re willing to take the risk,” says Thompson. “I know my credit card is not totally secure anywhere online... but I am willing to take that chance because I want to be able to order things online.”
(Score: 1, Insightful) by DNied on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:47AM
Those nude paintings of yore weren't self-portraits. Such a nonsensical comparison.
Give smartphones to a bunch of apes, and this stuff is exactly what is bound to happen.
(Score: 5, Funny) by clone141166 on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:09PM
Don't you mean bananas and melons?
(Score: 4, Funny) by c0lo on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:43PM
There is a specific difference: the ape selfies won't be protected by a copyright [theguardian.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Interesting) by VLM on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:51AM
"we’re willing to take the risk"
Its not a risk its just a really really big worldwide nude beach and nobody cares except old media journalists looking for any way to demonize new media or get attention. Its not like contemporary fashion hides very much, anyway.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:54PM
I posit that the goal is to have something that they can just get insufferably worked up about on the internet. It's the only logical conclusion when you act in a way that has been proven to run counterintuitive to what are seemingly your motives.
Self-righteous outrage; the (new) opiate of the masses.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:04PM
I agree with and extend your remarks that I just thought of it as iteration number 213501501 of "teenagers are screwing everything up" which has been a constant slow news filler piece for old people for several thousand years.
In the long run, its probably about as harmful as playing DnD or listening to Elvis plus or minus meaningless anecdotes.
(Score: 5, Funny) by hoochiecoochieman on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:57AM
Just legalise nudity everywhere. Problem solved.
I hope the vision of some naked hot chicks on the street can clean my eyes from the inevitable legions of walruses.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AnonTechie on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:01PM
Even if they legalized nudity ... will somebody please think of the children !
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:17PM
I think children are already legal, so you don't need to legalize them.
(Score: 4, Informative) by VLM on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:45PM
Not just the kids, someone please think of the "people of walmart" website. Not thinking that would be improved much by lack of clothing.
A lot of this is stereotypical journalist pablum where the only people that matter culturally are young hot white blond women, selfies are just like abductions or missing persons or crime victims in that way. Other cultural groups don't exist per mass media.
Have to be realistic that no one wants to see most nude selfies, or most nude beaches, although the journalist fixation will be solely on the hotties.
Nude soylent news. Yeah, Obi Wan waves his hand and says "we're not the sausage fest you're looking for".
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:58AM
There's nekkid pics of me as a kid floating around in some old Nudist mags... is that 'think of the children' enough for you? :)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by kaszz on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:16PM
The problem is people enforcing negative behaviour against individuals or groups that happens to be or do something that some people doesn't fancy. After all if someone is found to be naked on photo.. what is the problem really?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Sir Garlon on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:59PM
Agreed. Being found naked in a photo should be about as embarrassing as being found naked in the shower. Yeah I only want my wife to see me naked, but if a nude photo of me were to exist and to get circulated around the office, it's more shame on my co-workers for peeping than on me for being seen.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:05PM
> more shame on my co-workers
It's not the shame so much as the PTSD.
(Score: 2) by Sir Garlon on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:26PM
I guess there is a nude photo of me that has been circulated around!
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday September 30 2014, @10:23PM
What is the connection with PTSD?
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday September 30 2014, @10:46PM
Wait ... you say, he's the Goatse guy? ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Sir Garlon on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:02PM
I forget where I read this but it rings true. "The female body is a thing of beauty that has been a focus of the arts since the dawn of civilization. The male body is lumpy and hairy and should never be seen by the light of day."
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Tuesday September 30 2014, @05:57PM
lumpy and hairy and should never be seen by the light of day
I work hard at this and I think at this point I could take of shirt off and the glare would could be seen from outer space.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 2) by umafuckitt on Tuesday September 30 2014, @10:47PM
"The male body is lumpy and hairy and should never be seen by the light of day."
The ancient Greeks would likely have disagreed with you there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:00AM
Male gaze [wikipedia.org], anyone? There's approximately an equal proportion of women that heterosexual men would want to see nude as men that heterosexual women would want to see nude. Actually, the latter category is likely significantly larger because men tend to only be attracted to young (early 20s) women while women tend to be attracted to men near their age according to data recently released by OKCupid [fivethirtyeight.com]. The proportion of "attractive men" gets even larger when you consider that statistics tend to show that men being attracted to men is more common than women being attracted to women. I'll accept that both proportions are low, but if anything, there's more people who would like to see nude men than nude women.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:22PM
The thought of middle age sysadmins and software developers sending out nude selfies is alarming.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:52PM
"But it's never happened where somebody's screen-shot a nude. It's one of the unspoken rules, you just don't do it."
I've $20 that says she's already been posted to 4chan. Are people really that clueless to think it never happens?
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 2) by morgauxo on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:03PM
Back in the old days if we were single we went out and met people. When we found one we liked that also liked us back we might eventually get to see these things in person. You kids these days just sit around by your lonely selves surfing dating websites and texting pictures. Instead of a live real person you get a 2 dimensional image the size of your cellphone screen. And it's probably an image of a fat person because the thumbs are the only part getting any excercise. How pathetic!
Now get off my lawn!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:12PM
it’s not a realistic approach for many. It’s more practical to password protect your phone and photo storage, doublecheck the recipient before hitting “send,”
How naive. I have seen naked all my friends ex girl friends. Every. last. one. This was *BEFORE* the internet and everyone walking around with a camera in their phones. I bet working at the photo hut was a boring but 'interesting' job. They would get mad when I 'wouldnt share'. I didnt take them because I am not a scumbag.
If you take a picture then share it. You no longer control it. Others may or may not see it. It depends on the whims of the person you gave the picture to.
This is not a new thing.
(Score: 2) by morgauxo on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:42PM
I think you replied to the wrong comment.
I did know someone who worked in a pre-digital photo department. Yes, he had a collection of 'extra' copies that he had made. Yes, he showed people. Some photos were probably seen by 6 or 7 people that weren't meant to see them. For comparison how many people see something that ends up posted on the internet?
Still can't see the difference?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:47PM
I think you replied to the wrong comment.
assumption... and wrong...
Some photos were probably seen by 6 or 7 people
Still can't see the difference?
That if you dont control it you probably shouldnt give it away? No not really.
The *only* difference is scope now. Instead of a few dozen seeing it whole websites can be dedicated to seeing them. My point is *if* we could have done it back then. We would have. To make this like its something 'new' and 'get off my lawn' is looking at your youth thru rose colored glasses.
My other point you glossed over was most people are scumbags. People who use emotional blackmail to take pictures like this. Then 2 share them. They have little moral compass saying 'dont do that you are being a scumbag'. And your buddy who had a collection is a scumbag too. People trusted him to be private and he broke that trust.
and YES I am in a bad mood today :)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:54PM
> The *only* difference is scope now.
And scope is a HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.
Scope is the problem with all of the internet. We live in a society that evolved when large-scale privacy invasions where made impossible by physical limits. Those limits are mostly gone now but we as a society are still trying to figure out how to cope with that.
(Score: 2) by morgauxo on Monday October 06 2014, @06:59PM
>> People trusted him to be private and he broke that trust.
That kind of makes it sound a lot more personal than it was. They didn't trust him. They trusted a well known large chain of mainly grocery stores which also happened to have photo developing.
If they actually thought about who was developing the photos they would have realized they were handing their nudie pics to a college boy being paid minimum wage to work part time between classes. And they expected what exactly??
Most likely I don't think the customers were thinking about things at all. They were probably just thinking, drop film plus money here, get photos an hour later... like they were using a machine. Then again, maybe some did think it through and they also realized that they didn't know the kid and most likely didn' t know any of his friends. Whatever he might have done with the pics.. it would never get back to them, never really affect them so whatever, who cares? Let him build up his own personal spank collection.
There was a way to control your photos in the bast btw... develop your own pictures. That may not have been a hugely popular thing to do but it was never unheard of, especially whan it involved nudes. Actually, I suppose you still can. Or get a good printer and non-internet enabled camera to print them. It's only if you need the convenience of having your nude selfies on a networked machine where you can share them at any time from anywhere that you HAVE to set yourself up for exposure. But put like that it kind of sounds like you are getting what you ask for doesn't it...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by deimios on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:13PM
Or you could, you know, leave your face off the picture! That would prevent a LOT of problems down the line, even if your phone is hacked...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JNCF on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:24PM
Meh, this is only a short term solution. It will protect you if the photo is realeased today, but some smart fuckers will make algorithms to identify other parts of the human body from photos with incredible degrees of accuracy. It's only a matter of time, I have no idea how much. Moreover, if you send the pic with your phone it's still tied to your identity.
I heard an interview with Dan Savage on the Joe Rogan podcast where Savage proposed that we invent a new holiday, Spartacus [youtube.com] Day, where everybody puts naked pictures of themselves online. That way the photos lose their novelty, and people will (theoretically) stop giving a shit about them. I think this is a better route to take.
Obviously, asking apes not to send naked pictures to other apes just isn't realistic.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:36PM
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Friday October 03 2014, @10:49PM
Yeah, this is only a temporary problem. We've already seen algorithms from Google that will take a photo with a bit missing and fill it in with something that fits from some other picture from the internet. Just take someone's head from a photo and tell it to only look for matches on porn sites. The technology basically already exists, and people do it manually in Photoshop all the time, just needs to get more automated and then nobody will be able to tell if that nude is real or fake...and probably won't care.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:03PM
Or you could, you know, leave your face off the picture! That would prevent a LOT of problems down the line, even if your phone is hacked..
That negates much of the value of taking a nude selfie. Nude selfies are about expressing trust in the recipient. If you send them pictures without your face it tells them you don't trust them very much.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:08PM
Oh right, because it isn't about "expressing trust" and more about expressing sexual feelings.
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:44PM
> In that case why not give them your CC numbers (with expiration and ccv) and bank account info.
How emotionally void do you have to be to think that sharing banking information conveys the same level of intimacy as being naked with someone? I am just stunned by your utter disconnect from humanity.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Tuesday September 30 2014, @04:15PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @05:11PM
I figured you would hide behind literalism.
Good for you - pedancy over meaning, the best way to understand the world!
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by strattitarius on Tuesday September 30 2014, @05:19PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @06:06PM
I saw the tone and thought it was the tone of the smug asshole who thinks he knows better when in fact he knows less.
Are you trying to say that you were actually confirming rather than disputing the original point?
Because if you were agreeing with my post then you did a piss-poor job of showing it.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Tuesday September 30 2014, @06:32PM
You (assuming you ACs are all the same) only quoted the part about "send a CC number", not the part where I said it was not about "trust" but about "sexual emotions". Which some could consider very similar to your first response to me that stated there was a difference between trust and intimacy, but you failed to realize that I was not actually suggesting that someone would do such a thing (send CC info) instead of sending a nudie, only that it is a pretty stupid way to try to convey trust in a person. So actually, it was you that did a pretty piss poor job of communicating.
And now that you have gone into full troll mode, we're done.
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @07:15PM
> not the part where I said it was not about "trust" but about "sexual emotions".
You denied it was about trust and then said it was about "sexual feelings" not emotions.
If you were actually agreeing that it was about about an emotional connection then why even bother to post?
> only that it is a pretty stupid way to try to convey trust in a person.
Revealing yourself to a lover is the most fundamental way of expressing trust that humans have and we've been doing it ever since in the invention of clothing. That you think it is stupid just reinforces my point about you being completely ignorant of humanity.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:54PM
I started laughing, because a 2014 Nude Photo Survey from McAfee of all companies (how did they get into the nude photo survey business!?) was the stupidest thing I've seen all day. Maybe stupider than the things I saw yesterday, but the bleach I drank erased them from my brain memory capacity. I don't see how the Onion ever creates satire when real life is like this.
But then I started to cry, because in my life there has been so much technological progress. We have desktop computers more powerful than all the computers at my college when I was there put together. We have small touch-screen, portable tablet computers that would have been science-fiction props when I was growing up. And ... all we can think to do with them ... is take nude photos? No one can come up with anything better?
Our information is locked up in walled gardens at a time when all of human knowledge could be accessed by a tablet computer.
Our almost-perpetual copyright system has closed off human knowledge by all but destroying the public domain since 1930.
Our Internet connections are designed for content consumption at a time when everyone could create new content.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @06:59PM
Surely, it's obvious that the vast majority of humans lack either the drive or ability to create content. I mean, everyone's got a blog or a facebook page, but what goes there except "What I ordered for dinner yesterday" or "Thing I found in front of my face today"? For most people, "creating" amounts to paraphrasing or summarizing something they saw on TV and that most of their friends have already seen. An awful lot of communication seems to be more about reinforcing shared memories - and sending nudies to your partner certainly fills that role - than about provoking any kind of novel thought or idea. I mean: how many TV networks are out there dedicated to re-running shows that have ben off the air for years? There will never be anything new there, but that doesn't keep them from being very popular channels.
(Score: 2) by nitehawk214 on Tuesday September 30 2014, @07:45PM
Who the hell is stupid enough to tell McAfee that they do this?
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 1) by dwmoody on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:17PM
Think about it. If McAfee polled me, I would do everything I could to pollute their results in retribution for years of putting up with awful antivirus software.
Sure McAfee, I regularly exchange nude selfies of my tanned, super fit body with my beautiful GF! I'm certainly not an overweight, mayonnaise-white, single nerd!