[smelendez]

That was my first thought too. My next thoughts were:

- it protects the platform, to some extent, by reducing the number of unwanted screenshots

- it sets a social norm that taking screenshots is unwanted and makes the screenshot taker look extra creepy if they share the image with anyone

- if a platform provides screenshot blocking, and users (who have all seen pictures of one screen taken from another device) value that protection and make decisions about what to post based on it, the company should think long and hard before deploying a version that breaks that assumption

[arch-choot]

I think it just leads to a false sense of security for most "normie" users. E.g. Snapchat, people think it must give a screenshot notification or whatever, so it is "safe" for nudes.

Well it is quite trivial to save the photos, either by network interception or patching the app etc. , which ordinary users may not even consider.

Not quite related, but I think "deleting messages" falls into a similar problem. It makes end users think they are "safe" or whatever, but the reality is that if a message was delivered to the other parties phone, they could easily have the original text despite any deletions, e.g. a cached notification or similar.

[smelendez]

I wonder about this, versus culturally giving users permission to send nudes, even though they know there's always the possibility they'll be saved.

[csixty4]

This is basically it. Yes, there are a million ways around the best protection (even on mobile!) but it's all about user trust and setting norms.