6 ms·

....Because that's not possible today with current technology? edit: I seriously don't understand how you immediately jump to that being the new functionality

....Because that's not possible today with current technology? edit: I seriously don't understand how you immediately jump to that being the new functionality when sending payments today is as simple as logging into paypal or any numerous other payments sites.... Not to mention the age requirement of 18? This comment is just fear mongering.

enneff 12y ago
I really can't see teenagers setting up a PayPal account in order to receive money for nudes. I can, however, see someone asking for cash through the very same app that they're using to send nude pictures. I agree with the GP, this is gonna get interesting.
- crazypyro 12y ago
  Setting up a PayPal account and setting up an age-locked account that requires an associated bank account (in the form of a debit card) appears to be more effort on the SnapChat payments side, at least to me. The only reason for this fear (which really should be associated with any social media micro-payments system) being touted here is because of the reputation of SnapChat as an app for sending nude pictures. The same exact concerns exist in other places and have been dealt with by a large number of companies at this point.
  - otterley 12y ago
    > The same exact concerns exist in other places and have been dealt with by a large number of companies at this point Can you identify a similar set of circumstances where this has been successful for more than a brief period?
    - crazypyro 12y ago
      My point was any company that deals with a large amount of user submitted media will eventually end up having to have an abuse team that monitors user submissions for illegal activity. I don't see how the Snapchat's situation is unique from the problem of identifying illegal material, other than the fact that there is now a monetary way of receiving payment (which has existed and still exists today). In fact, Snapchat could even attempt to claim less liability if the material is never stored on their servers, compared to a file sharing or image hosting site that actually contains the illegal material. In this sense, they would only be liable if they knowingly allowed this trade to take place on their network, similar to an ISP, in my view.
- dmix 12y ago
  ...Not that anything is wrong with exchanging nudes for money. But I do expect some scrutiny due to the oh-so-popular puritanism Americans hold in public life towards sex (both democrats and republicans) yet largely ignore in private.
  - enneff 12y ago
    Snapchat has come under fire because a significant portion of those nudes are technically child porn.
    - crazypyro 12y ago
      Yeah, except there is no proof that there is any exchange of goods taking place in the overwhelming majority of these. Do you think teenage girls and boys are really going to start selling their nudes? Just on a shallow examination of this possibility, it seems exceedingly unlikely to ever be a problem on a scale larger than a handful of cases. The social aspects of trying to sell "nude" pictures of yourself would be utterly taboo. The only market would be for people that you don't know, yet then the risk increases dramatically. There are already 100s of sites where they can do exactly this (pretending to be 18), yet its not happening, at least on the scale that the fear represents.
      - otterley 12y ago
        > it seems exceedingly unlikely to ever be a problem on a scale larger than a handful of cases. All it takes is a "handful" (or less) when child porn is the subject. I wouldn't go anywhere near money transactions given the risks.
      - xorcist 12y ago
        This happens already today not only with Snapchat, as well as on the multitude of cam services out there. (The taboo you mention makes the problem worse, as it can quickly escalate to blackmail.) Is it likely to get worse with integrated payments? I would guess yes.
      - enneff 12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
otterley 12y ago
If you think the age requirement is even remotely effective, you're fooling yourself. I'm not suggesting that it will be frequently misused -- but even one mishap could seriously harm their business. Law enforcement takes child pornography more seriously than just about any other offense, and money on the table makes it even more serious.
- crazypyro 12y ago
  Its age requirement + debit card. I think that is a fairly effective blocker. At the very least, it'll almost completely stop any chance of children under 15-16 from joining the program and sending/receiving money. There will always be chances of abuse with any platform that allows sharing. I just don't understand how this announcement is anymore scary than other social media adding into social payments, except for the typical stereotype of Snapchat only being used for nude pictures. If you are speaking about adults selling pictures of abused children back and forth, this'll be no different (even less secure) than current technologies that pedophiles use to avoid detection.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
    > Its age requirement + debit card. I think that is a fairly effective blocker. At the very least, it'll almost completely stop any chance of children under 15-16 from joining the program and sending/receiving money. Can under-16s not get debit cards in the US? I know they can get them here in the UK, I got one when I was 14, IIRC.
    - kibibyte 12y ago
      An anecdote: at least when I was growing up, I didn't notice anyone under 18 with a debit card; most people used cash for purchases or borrowed credit cards from their parents when they wanted to go shopping on the weekend. That said, I don't know if there are regulations here in the US concerning debit card age requirements, but from a cursory glance of a few US banks, it looks like children under 18 are allowed to get a checking account (and hence, a debit card) provided that they get a joint account with their parents. Perhaps the policy is different for teenagers who wish to separate finances from their parents for whatever reasons, but those are edge cases.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

enneff 12y ago

I really can't see teenagers setting up a PayPal account in order to receive money for nudes. I can, however, see someone asking for cash through the very same app that they're using to send nude pictures. I agree with the GP, this is gonna get interesting.

crazypyro 12y ago
Setting up a PayPal account and setting up an age-locked account that requires an associated bank account (in the form of a debit card) appears to be more effort on the SnapChat payments side, at least to me. The only reason for this fear (which really should be associated with any social media micro-payments system) being touted here is because of the reputation of SnapChat as an app for sending nude pictures. The same exact concerns exist in other places and have been dealt with by a large number of companies at this point.
- otterley 12y ago
  > The same exact concerns exist in other places and have been dealt with by a large number of companies at this point Can you identify a similar set of circumstances where this has been successful for more than a brief period?
  - crazypyro 12y ago
    My point was any company that deals with a large amount of user submitted media will eventually end up having to have an abuse team that monitors user submissions for illegal activity. I don't see how the Snapchat's situation is unique from the problem of identifying illegal material, other than the fact that there is now a monetary way of receiving payment (which has existed and still exists today). In fact, Snapchat could even attempt to claim less liability if the material is never stored on their servers, compared to a file sharing or image hosting site that actually contains the illegal material. In this sense, they would only be liable if they knowingly allowed this trade to take place on their network, similar to an ISP, in my view.
dmix 12y ago
...Not that anything is wrong with exchanging nudes for money. But I do expect some scrutiny due to the oh-so-popular puritanism Americans hold in public life towards sex (both democrats and republicans) yet largely ignore in private.
- enneff 12y ago
  Snapchat has come under fire because a significant portion of those nudes are technically child porn.
  - crazypyro 12y ago
    Yeah, except there is no proof that there is any exchange of goods taking place in the overwhelming majority of these. Do you think teenage girls and boys are really going to start selling their nudes? Just on a shallow examination of this possibility, it seems exceedingly unlikely to ever be a problem on a scale larger than a handful of cases. The social aspects of trying to sell "nude" pictures of yourself would be utterly taboo. The only market would be for people that you don't know, yet then the risk increases dramatically. There are already 100s of sites where they can do exactly this (pretending to be 18), yet its not happening, at least on the scale that the fear represents.
    - otterley 12y ago
      > it seems exceedingly unlikely to ever be a problem on a scale larger than a handful of cases. All it takes is a "handful" (or less) when child porn is the subject. I wouldn't go anywhere near money transactions given the risks.
    - xorcist 12y ago
      This happens already today not only with Snapchat, as well as on the multitude of cam services out there. (The taboo you mention makes the problem worse, as it can quickly escalate to blackmail.) Is it likely to get worse with integrated payments? I would guess yes.
    - enneff 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

otterley 12y ago

If you think the age requirement is even remotely effective, you're fooling yourself. I'm not suggesting that it will be frequently misused -- but even one mishap could seriously harm their business. Law enforcement takes child pornography more seriously than just about any other offense, and money on the table makes it even more serious.

crazypyro 12y ago
Its age requirement + debit card. I think that is a fairly effective blocker. At the very least, it'll almost completely stop any chance of children under 15-16 from joining the program and sending/receiving money. There will always be chances of abuse with any platform that allows sharing. I just don't understand how this announcement is anymore scary than other social media adding into social payments, except for the typical stereotype of Snapchat only being used for nude pictures. If you are speaking about adults selling pictures of abused children back and forth, this'll be no different (even less secure) than current technologies that pedophiles use to avoid detection.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  > Its age requirement + debit card. I think that is a fairly effective blocker. At the very least, it'll almost completely stop any chance of children under 15-16 from joining the program and sending/receiving money. Can under-16s not get debit cards in the US? I know they can get them here in the UK, I got one when I was 14, IIRC.
  - kibibyte 12y ago
    An anecdote: at least when I was growing up, I didn't notice anyone under 18 with a debit card; most people used cash for purchases or borrowed credit cards from their parents when they wanted to go shopping on the weekend. That said, I don't know if there are regulations here in the US concerning debit card age requirements, but from a cursory glance of a few US banks, it looks like children under 18 are allowed to get a checking account (and hence, a debit card) provided that they get a joint account with their parents. Perhaps the policy is different for teenagers who wish to separate finances from their parents for whatever reasons, but those are edge cases.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]