Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Messenger Platform

messenger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 248 posts

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#121

Post by miguelrochefort »

sssparkkk wrote: post #72

Everyone seems to be jumping on the bots bandwagon - Microsoft, Facebook, Slack etc. Do we really think this kind of text-based interaction is the future? Granted, it's an interface practically everyone knows how to use, but I believe it could result in rather long conversations (what are the available commands/questions?) to actually get something a little more complex done. Our messaging startup is heading in the o…

Natural languages are terrible interfaces. They're linear, verbose, inexpressive, ambiguous. Clearly, we need a computer-assisted language to elevate humanity's ability to communicate.

Such a platform could be as important as Gutenberg's printing press.

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#122

Post by Zikes »

Jtsummers wrote: post #109
theseatoms wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a way of siphoning users from FB to other platforms, then yes, you can win. Otherwise, when the gate shuts, your users are locked out.

Ok, I must be missing something. How is FB Messenger here anything other than a means of connecting to customers? If the concern is that FB will ape your app, then your app isn't sufficiently differentiated from their offerings. I want to write a game server, say for Go (the game, not the language). I want to make one (or the sole) method of connecting to it FB Messenger (hypothetical, not actually doing this, and th…

Google Reader was one of many means of connecting to RSS. It became the de facto means for a lot of people, and it was a serious blow to RSS when it shut down despite the existence of alternatives.

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#123

Post by cpach »

outside1234 wrote: post #120
cpach wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what’s needed is an open chat protocol that also works well in mobile settings, since that’s where a huge chunk of the potential user base is these days.

You think Facebook would use it? You are an optimist. (Not singling Facebook out -- there have been lots of open standards and every chat platform has moved away from them.)

No, I’m afraid they wouldn’t. That’s also a big part of the problem. What’s the incentive for a large player like FB to use an open chat protocol? Not much, it seems :-/

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#124

Post by 0xdeafcafe »

X-Istence wrote: post #105

Am I the only one that keeps some separation between different platforms? For example, there are people I follow on Snapchat, but I have absolutely no interest doing the same on Facebook Messenger. My Facebook is still mostly people I have met in real life and care about, that and groups I am a part of because social life. I don't want to adulterate that with chat bots, and ordering pizza and any other integrations.…

Clearly this isn't for you then. I, however, use messenger frequently - too frequently. And I welcome all these changes, as they are really maturing the platform and making it a delight to use.

I have a group chat on messenger of all my friends, and when they added the simple options to change the group colours, add nicknames, and even change the default emoji to something other than a thumbs up, messenger became a whole lot more fun to use.

I can't wait to see how it develops with these changes.

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#125

Post by gedrap »

For a while, Messenger supports some partners-only kind of program for bots. For example, if someone posts @dailycute then a random image from imgur aww is posted [0].

I am quite interested whether they have plans to extend this and make it more open (some kind of chat apps so that you can't just reserve a bunch of good keywords with non functioning bots?).

[0] http://techcrunch.com/2016/01/05/facebook-messenger-bots/

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#126

Post by herval »

cpach wrote: post #118
ethanpil wrote: post #92

I'm crying. Remember when messaging was built on open platforms and standards like XMPP and IRC? The golden year(s?) when Google Talk worked with AIM and anyone could choose whatever client they preferred? Welcome to the future friends when we must pay to battle the keymasters and gatekeepers on their terms to do what we used to do ourselves, for free. First they took my RSS, then they took my XMPP... Who can guess w…

I think what’s needed is an open chat protocol that also works well in mobile settings, since that’s where a huge chunk of the potential user base is these days.

Telegram's protocol is built with mobile in mind: https://core.telegram.org/mtproto - I believe their implementation of server-side is closed-source, but remember seeing an open-source version somewhere on GitHub...?

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#127

Post by equalsnil »

0xdeafcafe wrote: post #124
X-Istence wrote: post #105

Am I the only one that keeps some separation between different platforms? For example, there are people I follow on Snapchat, but I have absolutely no interest doing the same on Facebook Messenger. My Facebook is still mostly people I have met in real life and care about, that and groups I am a part of because social life. I don't want to adulterate that with chat bots, and ordering pizza and any other integrations.…

Clearly this isn't for you then. I, however, use messenger frequently - too frequently. And I welcome all these changes, as they are really maturing the platform and making it a delight to use. I have a group chat on messenger of all my friends, and when they added the simple options to change the group colours, add nicknames, and even change the default emoji to something other than a thumbs up, messenger became a w…

Honestly curious: Why is this your first and only comment on HN?

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#128

Post by [deleted] »

gue5t wrote: post #94
hayksaakian wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real question is can you get in, win, and get out before any of that matters. If you 'rode the facebook apps' wave you probably made decent money unless you stayed in too long. Another strategy is to build an integration to messenger to get exposure for your totally independant app. For example If i made some pizza ordering ai, i could hook it up to messenger as an additional channel.

There's a word for people who only care about their own quality of life, and not that of those around them: "assholes". Don't be an asshole, and don't advocate "fuck you got mine" practices like these. Let's work to dismantle abusive systems like Facebook.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#129

Post by Johnie »

pionar wrote: post #87
Johnie wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at some of the successful startups that started on a platform, this is what they did. Example: Instagram - used Facebook for viral distribution and eventually eclipsed Facebook Imgur - built image hosting for Reddit and now has eclipsed Reddit.

> Instagram - used Facebook for viral distribution and eventually eclipsed Facebook Imgur - built image hosting for Reddit and now has eclipsed Reddit. Uh, not quite. Imgur would still die if Reddit went away. Same for Instagram. If Twitter and FB went away, it'd die.

Imgur has more traffic than Reddit: http://venturebeat.com/2013/09/26/imgur-traffic-milestone-10...

Re: Facebook Messenger Platform

#130

Post by jexe »

miguelrochefort wrote: post #121
sssparkkk wrote: post #72

Everyone seems to be jumping on the bots bandwagon - Microsoft, Facebook, Slack etc. Do we really think this kind of text-based interaction is the future? Granted, it's an interface practically everyone knows how to use, but I believe it could result in rather long conversations (what are the available commands/questions?) to actually get something a little more complex done. Our messaging startup is heading in the o…

Natural languages are terrible interfaces. They're linear, verbose, inexpressive, ambiguous. Clearly, we need a computer-assisted language to elevate humanity's ability to communicate. Such a platform could be as important as Gutenberg's printing press.

I don't know what that means, but you've got my attention. Could you elaborate on what you have in mind?
Post reply on HN