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

WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

independent.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#41

Post by Adverblessly »

espadrine wrote: post #39
tszming wrote: post #9

Why we don't sell ads (2012) https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads ?

I think the story blew out of proportion. As far as I can tell, WhatsApp never said they would show ads in their app, and they never said they would sell ads. On the contrary, they said that they would make it even harder for them to have any data to work with, as messages will be end-to-end encrypted, and so, undecipherable for them. What they said would happen was telephone and metadata (ie, telephone contacts) cro…

> As far as I can tell, WhatsApp never said they would show ads in their app, and they never said they would sell ads.

From their update ( https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#key-updates )

"New ways to use WhatsApp. We will explore ways for you and businesses to communicate with each other using WhatsApp, such as through order, transaction, and appointment information, delivery and shipping notifications, product and service updates,

>>and marketing.For example, you may receive flight status information for upcoming travel, a receipt for something you purchased, or a notification when a delivery will be made.

>>Messages you may receive containing marketing could include an offer for something that might interest you.We do not want you to have a spammy experience; as with all of your messages, you can manage these communications, and we will honor the choices you make."

I interpret the highlighted parts to mean they intend to show ads in the application in some format. It could be ad overlays, it could be adbots sending messages and it could be ad notifications.

Edits: figuring out how to highlight text :X

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#42

Post by whamlastxmas »

bad_user wrote: post #25

The irony is that I started to use WhatsApp only 2-3 months ago after learning they are doing end to end encryption. Oh well, guess it's time to uninstall it.

I made the move from Telegram to WhatsApp specifically because WhatsApp made end-to-end encryption the default. With Telegram you have to specify a conversation to be encrypted, and there's also controversy over the closed nature of the encryption used. I guess I'll try Signal this time? Don't know anything about it.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#43

Post by bogomipz »

tambourine_man wrote: post #13
ffggvv wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't use neither facebook nor whatsapp and I live perfectly fine. It's not like you stop breathing. In my experience telling people that you prefer a different medium from whatsapp is not a big deal.

I also have neither, but it's extremely hard. Some people will understand why you don't have Facebook, but not having WhatsApp is downright mad. Specially if you work with technology. The only people I know that don't have it are luddites or very old people, and even they are far and few between.

"Specially if you work with technology."

I think you mean especially. And no its not uncommon to not have or use Whatsapp. Nobody on my current team uses it and nobody on my last one did either. We use IRC and Slack and that is enough. And none of us are Luddites or old people.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#44

Post by tao_oat »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #42
bad_user wrote: post #25

The irony is that I started to use WhatsApp only 2-3 months ago after learning they are doing end to end encryption. Oh well, guess it's time to uninstall it.

I made the move from Telegram to WhatsApp specifically because WhatsApp made end-to-end encryption the default. With Telegram you have to specify a conversation to be encrypted, and there's also controversy over the closed nature of the encryption used. I guess I'll try Signal this time? Don't know anything about it.

Signal is solid, though a few privacy advocates criticize the dependence on Google Play Services on Android phones. I also get the impression that development has slowed, with the developers (Open Whisper Systems) focusing on implementing the Signal Protocol in other clients (but correct me if I'm wrong).

There's also the newly open-sourced Wire - it has the same dependence on Google, but it supports video calling and some might prefer their UI.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#45

Post by Qantourisc »

nly wrote: post #17
tszming wrote: post #9

Why we don't sell ads (2012) https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads ?

What did we really expect? That they were going to support a 1 billion user app as a public good? The writing was on the wall when they dropped the 79 pence per year fee

I'd love to see come companies offer both. Question then of course: how can we trust them with the infrastructure in place ?

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#46

Post by espadrine »

Adverblessly wrote: post #41
espadrine wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the story blew out of proportion. As far as I can tell, WhatsApp never said they would show ads in their app, and they never said they would sell ads. On the contrary, they said that they would make it even harder for them to have any data to work with, as messages will be end-to-end encrypted, and so, undecipherable for them. What they said would happen was telephone and metadata (ie, telephone contacts) cro…

> As far as I can tell, WhatsApp never said they would show ads in their app, and they never said they would sell ads. From their update ( https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#key-updates ) "New ways to use WhatsApp. We will explore ways for you and businesses to communicate with each other using WhatsApp, such as through order, transaction, and appointment information, delivery and shipping notifications, product and ser…

I'm not sure in which dictionary unsolicited electronic messages sent for commercial purposes are not spam…

That formulation is pretty damning. There's the chance that marketing material will only be delivered to users that used a commercial bot, but that would still be unsolicited in my opinion.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#47

Post by bikamonki »

It's too late! Have you seen another search engine make a dent in Google's market share? How about another OS challenging Windows on a PC? Another social network?

It is rather obvious that: if the main purpose of a business is to grow revenue/market share, if successful, it will eventually grow to close to 100% market share.

This situation, commonly known as a monopoly, cannot be reversed by free market competition and government needs to step in, like the US government did by splitting the telcos.

I can only guess (I am no expert) the challenge here is that government faces a legal void since these services are free as in no money was paid to use them. Owners of these services are on the ad business and there is plenty of competition there.

Government has no interest in protecting our privacy either, on the contrary, they want in!

We're left with two options: be a hermit and stop using FB and Whatsapp, or hack the system: install ad blockers + develop unofficial APIs to interact with these services on your own terms.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#48

Post by shmel »

I don't get why everybody is pissed off. Did anybody really believe FB bought that company as a sort of charity? Surely they are interested in the exploitation of users metadata.

If you don't like it, use _anything_ else. You can even use damn SMS, I guess in 2016 they are unlimited everywhere in the world.

Re: WhatsApp – Opting out of new terms doesn’t stop Facebook taking information

#49

Post by proactivesvcs »

madeofpalk wrote: post #27

Sidetone, but I find it a bit rich that The Independent is going all high and mighty about privacy and sharing data, when they have the most atrocious ad and tracking experience I've seen on a media site in a long time. Ghostly found 40 trackers http://imgur.com/a/miilB , the ads are extremely obnoxious. There's literally ads on top of ads sliding down my screen, pushing the content around. https://gfycat.com/Insecur…

Goodness gracious, I hadn't realised adverts had gotten that bad again. You'd think with the ever-increasing backlash against web site advertisement they'd balk at such behaviour on their web site.
Post reply on HN