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

131–140 of 372 posts

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

#131

Post by mathinpens »

newscracker wrote: post #79
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…

For all the rap it gets for its own crypto, I would still recommend Telegram as an alternative because of its superior UX. It shouldn’t be very difficult to move from WhatsApp to Telegram (of course, I do understand that people who are not used to technology much may have difficulties). I wouldn’t recommend Signal to anyone who’s not paranoid about privacy and security. It still needs to improve a lot on UX, reliabil…

signal UX is great!

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

#132

Post by bawana »

mycorrhizal wrote: post #72
rm999 wrote: post #57

I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…

Maybe I'm just not creative enough, but what is a better alternative? Let's say you have a subscriber model, but than what kind of world will it be where only the wealthy have access to these communication technologies and access to social information. Or you have a hybrid ad model with the ability to opt out by paying some fee. Than what kind of world will that be when privacy is a luxury item limited to how much yo…

How about crowdsourcing a social network? Look at synology NAS boxes-they have a ton of apps. They have even developed a stupid-proof way of connecting NAS boxes securely over the net without opening router ports. If i choose to install the synology 'chat' app, i could designate a fraction of the NAS space as a se[arate volume to be used soley by the app and sandboxed from my LAN. And just as synology boxen can sync with each other silently, securely and in the background- this 'chat' app can interact with the millions of other synology boxen. Of course to be a member of this ad-free, toll free network - you need a synology box in this model. But after all, it's just a linux box - however the tech for connecting them securely requires a handshake mediated by a server at SYNOLOGY. And they provide all this FREE. It is similar to the iMessage network that apple runs. And again you need an iPhone to be on that network.

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

#133

Post by alvar0 »

VectorLock wrote: post #63
dingo_bat wrote: post #25

> When Mr. Acton departed Facebook, he forfeited about $900 million in potential stock awards, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Koum is expected to officially depart in mid-August, in which case he would leave behind more than two million unvested shares worth about $400 million at Facebook’s current stock price. Both men would have received all their remaining shares had they stayed until this Novem…

Giving up $400 mil for 3 months? I mean I know they're loaded either way but come on...

I would guess there was some negotiation we don't know about, and that's why they're giving up some money.

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

#134

Post by alvar0 »

jnwatson wrote: post #130
nicpottier wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point don't you think you just have enough? What's another $400 million in the bank at that point? I mean maybe you could put that towards causes you believe in, but that's kind of the only argument I see for staying. The definition of being rich in my mind is the very concept of being able to walk away from that kind of money for your own sanity.

$400 million could help a lot of sick and hungry people. I'd dig ditches by hand for 3 months to be able to give that money to Doctors Without Borders.

Exactly. Even if you don't want it for yourself you could at least milk Facebook for some good purpose. But as I said in an earlier comment, there must have been some negotiation between them and FB

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

#135

Post by nafey »

FigmentEngine wrote: post #42
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…

This is why I moved to Signal after the whole brexit/us election saga. open source and not run by an advertising company

I have been hearing a lot of good things about signal... How are their servers paid for though if it's a free service?

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

#136

Post by sonnyblarney »

mrlatinos wrote: post #21
valeg wrote: post #10

The clash of cultures... I prefer WhatsApp's one though.

Yup, peace and quiet with privacy in mind. Not sure what Facebook employees don't understand.

" Not sure what Facebook employees don't understand"

It's the part where What's App doesn't actually make any money and as a standalone business isn't worth a whole lot.

The issue boils down to business model.

It's really easy for WhatsApp founders to take the moral high road when he doesn't have to bother with trying to make a dime.

The WhatsApp founder is in somewhat of a hypocritical position given that his $17 Billion dollars comes from FB practices that he is ostensibly uncomfortable with.

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

#137

Post by arwineap »

Angostura wrote: post #62
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…

Surely they’re getting a lot more info. Whatsapp demand complete access to your Contacts to work properly. So they know your full name and address, your bank, the names addresses and perhaps jobs of your friends and colleagues etc.

Only to send messages to your contacts; if you deny whatsapp access you can still respond to anyone that contacts you

You just can't be the first person to start the conversation

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

#138

Post by nicpottier »

jnwatson wrote: post #130
nicpottier wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point don't you think you just have enough? What's another $400 million in the bank at that point? I mean maybe you could put that towards causes you believe in, but that's kind of the only argument I see for staying. The definition of being rich in my mind is the very concept of being able to walk away from that kind of money for your own sanity.

$400 million could help a lot of sick and hungry people. I'd dig ditches by hand for 3 months to be able to give that money to Doctors Without Borders.

Dig ditches sure. Do work that you fundamentally disagree with though? I mean where do your principles come in to the work you are doing? You choose not to rob banks to support DWB, so you have a line you yourself aren't willing to cross.

I don't begrudge him one bit for his decision.

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

#139

Post by amelius »

rm999 wrote: post #57

I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…

> Imagine a future where every time you want to electronically communicate with someone you have to spend mental energy filtering out ads.

There should be a law that says that ads should be clearly identifiable as such. Like: they should be placed in a frame with the word "advertisement" on top of them. (Coincidentally, this would also make it easy for ad-blockers to remove them).

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

#140

Post by [deleted] »

jshen wrote: post #127
ChuckMcM wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the past the function of the "phone company" was a paid for service which provided for your communication needs. You didn't have to listen to ads before you could talk to your friends but you did occasionally get unwanted calls. This medium reached people rich and poor, all around the world. The challenge here is greed. One of the interesting topics in economics is the ability to subvert the supply-demand curve by…

I don’t know how old you are, but phone calls were really expensive in the decades before 2000. It’s not something low income people could afford to do very often.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN