They claim to protect against screenshotting- is that possible? I was under the impression that it was not something app developers were able to prevent.
I actually tried that for a contract project about 10 years ago. It didn't work. If you blink slower than 20 times per second it's really annoying to the user. And if you blink faster than 10 times per second it's pretty easy to take a picture with a long exposure and get the whole image. So there is no blink speed that offers even marginal protection without making the image useless.
I think the implication is that the 1st phone is the sender and the 2nd phone was the receiver, to parallel how you generally label 1st/2nd/3rd-person or -party.
But I definitely had a laugh about someone holding a crazy 5-phone contraption just to copy images.
IIRC Snapchat detects when a screenshot has been made by spotting that the touch event for a finger held down is suddenly cancelled. Maybe they're doing this, then deleting the screenshot?
Though, is it even possible to delete camera roll items for 3rd-party apps?
Edit: Ah, they just notify, not prevent, much like Snapchat:
> They cannot save it to their camera roll; and you will be notified if they ever take screenshots.
Edit 2: The old trick Snapchat used doesn't work since iOS 7. Instead, it hooks a newly-added notification that a screenshot was taken.
I think it's a neat concept that could be flushed out a bit. Maybe instead of pitching it as a way to take control of potentially embarrassing media, pitch as an excuse to get the group back together again. I'd love to see more social apps that encourage, well people being social.
To be clear, the culture that's producing this app is people trying every permutation possible for app ideas, throwing them out with cliche landing pages, and marketing them on channels like this or Reddit or Product Hunt.
I think there is a 0% chance that the creator is actually a partier who needed this and so he built it.
The cultures that try and experiment with different ideas?
Rather than spending 18 months building and 'perfecting' and idea in private then releasing it to real people, doesn't it seem more efficient to Throw 10 ideas/'micro mvps' at the wall and see what sticks? Seems fairly solid to me.
They're satisfied with creating apps for problems no one is really experiencing en masse. I mean it's neat that they're building these things, but I'm driven by problems I encounter that can be solved by software or education. We're just very different yet similar people.
Ugh. "Throw feces at the wall and see if it sticks" is the culture that gave us post-a-day blog spam instead of sporadic thoughtful writing, and github spammers pushing out whatever half-done garbage they typed in on a manic Saturday to be abandoned by Monday.
As the saying goes, "there's a reason you have two ears but only one mouth."
I still need to determine whether it's worth reading. Private diaries/libraries are still useful, both for the writing and for the lack of publication.
That's why there should be a way for people to voluntarily designate that what they are writing is not worth reading!
I know sometimes I want to respond to something, but know that my response does not contribute anything useful, and so I wish I could respond in a way that would only be shown if someone opted in to seeing messages self-described as useless.
Or you could identify an activity or perceived problem space and spend a week or two doing real user research and be able to come up with 3 ideas that would kick the crap out of each of those 'micro mvps' because you'd be starting from real user needs. Also, if you were solving a real problem for yourself, that'd be halfway to it as well but never under-estimate the value of a little bit of user research.
I can see where you're coming from, but I don't know if that's a fair reduction.
In the app world we initially thought more everything was better. When apps that took things away (twitter took away characters, snap chat took away permanence) showed up, we realized that sometimes less creates a better social situation.
I love the sentimental value of photography but dislike it's massively redistributable nature. Consider for example this app for... sexual pictures taken with a lover.
The idea is that you can only access the pictures if everyone of the group is physically present. Sort of how multiple people need to turn a key at the same time to launch a nuclear missile.
Does installing this app somehow disable the regular camera app? Not sure how it ensures anything.
Joe takes a picture. I want to see it. But, oops, Billy isn't here to complete the nuclear launch procedure. So I turn to Joe and say "hey, text me that funny picture of Billy." What happens next?
Well, probably the photo is supposed to be taken with the Hangover app in the first place. I don't know app development, but does an app that accesses the camera _have_ to store the photo alongside photos taken with the normal camera app?
My impression was: group of friends are in vegas having a "Hangover (the movie)" style night and agree to only take photos with this app. That way, come the morning they can all review them, but only when they're all together.
Obviously, if they take photos with their normal camera, or if all apps have to save photos to the filesystem and can be seen by the built in photogallery app, this doesn't work. Maybe the app uploads them to the Hangover site and then automatically deletes them from the phone?
Everyone has to be in the same place? I can just hand my phone to someone else and let them see something, no data exchange or app required.
Alternatively, the discussion below seems to point out that screenshot blocking is ineffective. If all devices are in the same room, a swift punch to the mouth and taking someone else's device could remove that possibility.
But why would I want to take a photo that needs to be "unlocked"? My phone already has a camera on it, and I can already not share photos. I genuinely don't understand what this app is doing.
In what world do these people have phones but no access to the Internet? Like why is that the first piece of information about the app? No one uses their devices like that!
but, what happens if one of the devices are lost? how about if all the users are present via authentication and are close to each other via bluetooth or geolocation?
“If your startup failed, it’s because it didn’t solve a tier 1 problem for a large enough audience" - Mitchell Harper. I'm having trouble understanding what problem this solves.
I'd also love to know what the triggers are for people to use this app.
Also hangover... the name entails a totally different kind of application.
Good luck! If i were you I would take time to talk with your target market to validate your idea.
It's like a security mechanism for spicy material. What stays in Vegas (defined as a group of individuals) does a better job of staying in Vegas if collocation is a requirement.
Another angle is a groupon type service. Do something fun together, get a coupon for food/drink/another fun activity that unlocks when all members on the group reunite in a month. Create mechanism for 'chaining' to encourage stickiness. People get slight push to maintain friendships they might let otherwise let slip away.
Sure, I see what you're saying ionforce, and thanks for the clarification.
I still don't see the point...Hangover only works when you
1. go to the same place with
2. the same people, and
3.you want to lock content with those people
I'm pretty sure the "Hangover" reference is to the series of (NSFW) still photos that played over the credits at the end of the first Hangover movie. Where they state "we're just going to look through these one time."
75 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] thread(Emphasis mine)
lolwut?
Good thing there's no way for someone to trace my phone number back to me.
Guerilla Mail for one.
But I definitely had a laugh about someone holding a crazy 5-phone contraption just to copy images.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole
Though, is it even possible to delete camera roll items for 3rd-party apps?
Edit: Ah, they just notify, not prevent, much like Snapchat:
> They cannot save it to their camera roll; and you will be notified if they ever take screenshots.
Edit 2: The old trick Snapchat used doesn't work since iOS 7. Instead, it hooks a newly-added notification that a screenshot was taken.
I think there is a 0% chance that the creator is actually a partier who needed this and so he built it.
Rather than spending 18 months building and 'perfecting' and idea in private then releasing it to real people, doesn't it seem more efficient to Throw 10 ideas/'micro mvps' at the wall and see what sticks? Seems fairly solid to me.
As the saying goes, "there's a reason you have two ears but only one mouth."
I know sometimes I want to respond to something, but know that my response does not contribute anything useful, and so I wish I could respond in a way that would only be shown if someone opted in to seeing messages self-described as useless.
In the app world we initially thought more everything was better. When apps that took things away (twitter took away characters, snap chat took away permanence) showed up, we realized that sometimes less creates a better social situation.
I love the sentimental value of photography but dislike it's massively redistributable nature. Consider for example this app for... sexual pictures taken with a lover.
Joe takes a picture. I want to see it. But, oops, Billy isn't here to complete the nuclear launch procedure. So I turn to Joe and say "hey, text me that funny picture of Billy." What happens next?
My impression was: group of friends are in vegas having a "Hangover (the movie)" style night and agree to only take photos with this app. That way, come the morning they can all review them, but only when they're all together.
Obviously, if they take photos with their normal camera, or if all apps have to save photos to the filesystem and can be seen by the built in photogallery app, this doesn't work. Maybe the app uploads them to the Hangover site and then automatically deletes them from the phone?
Alternatively, the discussion below seems to point out that screenshot blocking is ineffective. If all devices are in the same room, a swift punch to the mouth and taking someone else's device could remove that possibility.
It cuts both ways.
This assumes that you are aware that the screenshot was taken.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!
Just wondering about the setup.
I'd also love to know what the triggers are for people to use this app.
Also hangover... the name entails a totally different kind of application.
Good luck! If i were you I would take time to talk with your target market to validate your idea.
I still don't see the point...Hangover only works when you 1. go to the same place with 2. the same people, and 3.you want to lock content with those people
I ask how often does this use case occur?
What do you think ionforce?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBuwZEMMAOM (NSFW)