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

Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 372 posts

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#31

Post by JustSomeNobody »

Djvacto wrote: post #9

So, I use WhatsApp as my primary source of communication. Knowing facebook owned it always made me a little nervous, but given that it was end-to-end encrypted, I figured Facebook wasn't getting any more from me then they would from all my facebook-using-friends who would send me SMS's before. But I'm worried about how long I can continue to use the service moving forward, which is sad as this is my main way to commu…

> but given that it was end-to-end encrypted, ...

FB, via the WhatsApp app, have access to your unencrypted messages before the app encrypts them and sends them on. So, there's reason to worry now that FB is in full control. I have no doubt they'll extract data from your conversations and inject targeted ads.

Edit: Am I wrong? Do they not have access to the plain text?

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#32

Post by brisance »

Djvacto wrote: post #9

So, I use WhatsApp as my primary source of communication. Knowing facebook owned it always made me a little nervous, but given that it was end-to-end encrypted, I figured Facebook wasn't getting any more from me then they would from all my facebook-using-friends who would send me SMS's before. But I'm worried about how long I can continue to use the service moving forward, which is sad as this is my main way to commu…

According to this article, somehow prosecutors were able to retrieve deleted WhatsApp messages.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/five-ind...

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#33

Post by cookiecaper »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I kind of have to wonder what Jan Koum and Brian Acton were thinking (OK, I don't really wonder - they got paid billions of dollars, who wouldn't do it). But, of course, if you sell a company for billions of dollars, there is the obvious expectation that within some time frame your company will earn revenue and profit to support that valuation. You can't complain "they're adding ads!" unless you have a credible solut…

The ultimate goal of software companies is to control as much "platform space" as possible. This is mainly due to the way we treat virtual properties legally, and it only becomes truer as e.g. APIs are ruled copyrightable.

It's not implausible to believe that a big tech co would be interested in acquiring a platform defensively and/or for control over the platform ecosystem.

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#34

Post by aroman »

nottorp wrote: post #26
1123581321 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever called to cancel the WSJ? I have stopped the WSJ three times and the FT twice (same phone service.) It’s easy to do. They will make a retention offer but will not do things like hang up on you, require you to have moved out of your area, make you wait, etc. Of course I prefer self-service cancellation to be an option, but if the personal service route is handled well, it’s a small negative in my book, n…

Oh wait. >They will make a retention offer but will not do things like hang up on you, REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE MOVED OUT OF YOUR AREA You're stating this like it's a normal requirement for canceling subscriptions. I understand you're praising WSJ for not doing that but... Do you accept treatment like this in the US? Are press subscriptions a lifetime commitment over there? Do I need to indenture my firstborn to any magaz…

I live in the US and have never had any of the experiences you're mentioning. The conditions the person you replied to mentioned are not typical here.

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#36

Post by glenneroo »

1123581321 wrote: post #8
nottorp wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the WSJ subscription FAQ: When can I cancel? You may change or cancel your subscription at any time. To change or cancel your subscription, please contact Customer Service at 1-(800)-JOURNAL (568-7625) or 609-514-0870. We do not accept cancellations by mail, email, or by any other means. With those terms, they can all starve for all I care.

Have you ever called to cancel the WSJ? I have stopped the WSJ three times and the FT twice (same phone service.) It’s easy to do. They will make a retention offer but will not do things like hang up on you, require you to have moved out of your area, make you wait, etc. Of course I prefer self-service cancellation to be an option, but if the personal service route is handled well, it’s a small negative in my book, n…

If you are from outside the USA, those phone numbers are not free. So it actually costs money to cancel, if they even accept payment options outside the USA?

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#37

Post by Djvacto »

pm90 wrote: post #12
Djvacto wrote: post #9

So, I use WhatsApp as my primary source of communication. Knowing facebook owned it always made me a little nervous, but given that it was end-to-end encrypted, I figured Facebook wasn't getting any more from me then they would from all my facebook-using-friends who would send me SMS's before. But I'm worried about how long I can continue to use the service moving forward, which is sad as this is my main way to commu…

Hmm once you teach someone to use WhatsApp, another messaging app shouldn't be that hard to learn. I believe FB have been very careful to prevent misusing WhatsApp platform (or have been very good at keeping the misuse secret lol); if word got out that they were it would certainly lead to a huge exodus.

The problem is what they've learned is mostly to do with what icons (which they have no context for, never having used a computer or smartphone prior to this) they press to get certain results. And we teach them this over an audio call, so trying to learn a new one would definitely be a challenge.

But overall I would swap back to different apps were WhatsApp to be 'compromised' or misused. Discord text chat for my gaming group, Signal for some tech chats, etc.

Overall it's a shame, since I was very appreciative of the approach the Whats-App founders took. But if we're lucky, WhatsApp will remain mostly the same for a while.

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#38

Post by jcfrei »

rmsaksida wrote: post #19
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I kind of have to wonder what Jan Koum and Brian Acton were thinking (OK, I don't really wonder - they got paid billions of dollars, who wouldn't do it). But, of course, if you sell a company for billions of dollars, there is the obvious expectation that within some time frame your company will earn revenue and profit to support that valuation. You can't complain "they're adding ads!" unless you have a credible solut…

> You can't complain "they're adding ads!" unless you have a credible solution for somehow bringing in billions of dollars otherwise, and the WhatsApp founders didn't What about business features? Pretty much every business in my country advertises a Whatsapp number, from large companies to mom-and-pops. People contact them over Whatsapp to ask questions, make complaints, order stuff, everything. I can't believe Face…

They mention it in the article:

> None of the proposals were as lucrative as Facebook’s ad-based model. “Well, that doesn’t scale,” Ms. Sandberg told the WhatsApp executives of their proposals, according to a person familiar with the matter.

I think it's partly a self-selection problem, where the companies which use the service don't have enough revenue to contact their customers through dedicated channels. If you try to monetize this, then most companies just leave because those who could pay already have such channels to customers.

It's the same problem with offering users to pay for an ad and tracking free facebook. Those users who would pay for facebook are exactly the ones you want to show ads to, whereas the others are uninteresting revenue wise either way.

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#39

Post by Djvacto »

k_vi wrote: post #18
Djvacto wrote: post #9

So, I use WhatsApp as my primary source of communication. Knowing facebook owned it always made me a little nervous, but given that it was end-to-end encrypted, I figured Facebook wasn't getting any more from me then they would from all my facebook-using-friends who would send me SMS's before. But I'm worried about how long I can continue to use the service moving forward, which is sad as this is my main way to commu…

Facebook having access to your contacts and maybe location too is still scary.

That's true as well. I recently deactivated my (unused for years) facebook account, but this is definitely something else to think about.

Re: Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and WhatsApp’s Founders

#40

Post by jiveturkey »

bhaile wrote: post #4

Full article at https://outline.com/He5ktW

Is this a mirror, or some kind of summary. If this is a mirror, wow the article is very poorly edited. Seems like this isn't something so breaking they couldn't spend an extra couple of hours on it.

It's a bit stilted as well, which doesn't seem like it would be fixed in editing. I didn't realize WSJ articles were of such low quality. I guess because I have never gotten through the paywall. ;)

Post reply on HN