I get why this would be incredibly annoying to a nudist, but I can’t really see a path forward that works for nudists and non nudists in this context.

Of corse I’m aware that I’m representing a minority concern and I’m well aware that as matters and principles currently stand we’re in a mutually irreconcilable situation. I’m not saying every effort should be abandoned.

I’m just saying that it would be mightily nice if those in decision making positions with regard to these issues and initiatives took the existence of this small and derided demographic into account occasionally.

That’s fair!

When the goal is to create a service with 100% uptake, one can't optimize for the minority position, especially if the majority finds it objectionable.

So what you're looking for if you want something like that is a developer that is not optimizing to get 100% uptake. That's tricky to find, because the people with money always want 100% uptake.

It can’t have a target of “100% uptake” if it’s deliberately excluding some tiny but nonzero proportion of those who might otherwise subscribe.

That’s the bombastic reply anyway.

The more subtle and nuanced response is this is not a comparable situation because it’s not that developers are ignoring a small demographic, it’s that they’re deliberately working to make the environment actively hostile for that mini-demographic.

> It can’t have a target of “100% uptake” if it’s deliberately excluding some tiny but nonzero proportion of those who might otherwise subscribe.

Targets are always aspirational. "100% uptake" just means "As many users as possible."

> they’re deliberately working to make the environment actively hostile for that mini-demographic.

Yes. This is because the larger demographic has made clear that they don't want to share the room with the other demographic and they will leave if forced to.

At one point, a promise of the internet was to optimize for the long tail of niche interests and viewpoints.

I think the internet, as a whole, still does.

Individual pages and sites (even the mega-sized ones, like Facebook and Twitter) don't.

> but I can’t really see a path forward that works for nudists and non nudists in this context

The very comment thread your comment is in describes a method that would work for both.

> on the sender's side, show a warning before sending that the image appears to be in bad taste and asking for confirmation, then on the receiver's side, hiding the image behind a warning that it may be unwanted and showing two buttons, "show image" and "unmatch".

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33326990

That method certainly doesn’t work because it is absolutely predicated upon discrimination not respect.

Easy. Have a setting where someone can consent to (or not) receiving images that may potentially have nudity in them.

What about nudists who want unsolicited nude pictures of their friends enjoying dinner together, but not unsolicited dick pics?

I come from a fairly reserved culture, and the way I see it is it is not to appease folks like me, it is to prevent kids from encountering it in ways that are harmful. Nudity is not wrong, but I think that in some contexts the manner in which it is conveyed can be harmful even on a dating app, and so long as our main mechanism of discriminating between what is and what isn't 'an adult human' is a checkbox asking "are you of age?" then we're going to have to keep it a little clean to make things easy and profitable. It's tough that as an app owner-operator you have to punish the whole to protect the few, there's just no easier solution.

They cared a lot less before the lawsuits started hitting.

Their appreciation for nudity is offset by their aversion to standing around in courtrooms or paying money for an expensive representative to do it for them.

Bumble is a dating app. For private communication, you would use an end-to-end encrypted messenger such as Signal or WhatsApp, where no one has any access to your pictures.