Live data from Hacker News

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

wsj.com

321–330 of 372 posts

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

#322
post #319
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…

I read the article based on your comment, but I disagree overall. I do agree that it was---in retrospect---unfortunate and optimistic of MZ to promise too much freedom and independence from FB. But it seems FB _did_ give WhatsApp a long runway, it's been 3-4 years since the acquisition. If their ideas don't work (wrt bringing in revenue in line with the acq. price), at some point you have to go back to square one and…

> but come on, you have to be more rational when you're playing in the $10B league.

Or, being able to choose between $10B and your values shows your character.

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

#323
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…

I believe the Facebook business model can be safely stripped down to the humane kind while still keeping viable. The revenue it can generate by displaying organic ads without excessive user surveillance (analyzing a user's likes and the kinds of ads they tend to click is ok, spying on every website they visit is not), without messing with politics and without selling data about the users to 3rd parties can still be enough to cover all the relevant expenses and generate profits (probably a way more humble than now yet positive) for the investors.

Facebook can also employ the experience of it's Russian clone vk.com and let users share music (sharing the music that you like and that expresses the mood you'd like to share is a great way to communicate and many people love it!) while requiring those users who'd like to play long playlists in background pay a subscription fee.

A number of other premium features that can add value to a subscription comes on to my mind as well: invisible mode (I'd pay for it immediately - I really hate when others can see if I'm online or if I've read their message, I have been actively hating this for years, this is infuriating yet I don't mind if solving this problem would cost a dollar or two per month), posts promotion, additional typesetting features, profile promotion (top-suggest everybody to add me as a friend), verified status for whoever wants it (not just celebrities), voluntary additional surveillance/curation (for parents willing to protect their underage kids) etc. Introducing a cryptocurrency dedicated to replace old-fashioned likes (e.g. every time somebody likes your post/comment you get a coin) yet traded at a cryptocurrency exchange and accepted as a way of paying for the premium features can be another opportunity. Organic possibilities are limitless.

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

#324
post #322
post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article based on your comment, but I disagree overall. I do agree that it was---in retrospect---unfortunate and optimistic of MZ to promise too much freedom and independence from FB. But it seems FB _did_ give WhatsApp a long runway, it's been 3-4 years since the acquisition. If their ideas don't work (wrt bringing in revenue in line with the acq. price), at some point you have to go back to square one and…

> but come on, you have to be more rational when you're playing in the $10B league. Or, being able to choose between $10B and your values shows your character.

I think 99.99% of people would go with the $10B. It's not like you have to kill babies for it... It'd be dumb to hold this against the WhatsApp cofounders. I just think the parent comment saying MZ is somehow evil for this is not right. MZ believes in the ad supported model, and there isn't a whole lot of evidence against it so far. I prefer getting targeted ads over generic weightloss ads. I prefer a professional product over some shitty federated/opensource thing. A lot of people are upset, but then a lot of people don't have a clue how it works (also see the senate hearings, or the device manufacturer thing).

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

#325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The times I have visited the US I have always been disturbed by how little privacy I feel like I have in a stall. I am sure I have made eye contact with dozens of people in US airports at a time that is not appropriate for either of us.

Europeans just need to stop being so terrified of the human body and being such prudes. /s It's funny how Americans get endlessly bashed for being prudes about the human body, and then somehow on this topic they get bashed for not being big enough prudes about the human body. Here's why that is: Americans simply get bashed no matter what direction they go on any subject. It's done solely to make the person doing the…

Chill out, I also hate the squat stalls in remote train stations in Italy that are three times the size they need to be leaving you feeling super exposed while trying to balance but that wasn’t the question the original commenter asked.

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

#326
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine how useful it would be if when there is a notification about a friend on Facebook, you could peek it by swiping on the notification in the android drawer like you can with texts, without entering the Facebook app. Nope. Engineers are dedicated there to increasing other things than the utility of the app. Interests aren't aligned with the users. Same with removing chronological feeds. Turn things more and more…

The most frustrating change for me was FB (or Messenger later) used to send me an email when I received a message, with the message content inside the email. A few years ago they removed the content from the email and forced me to log into FB or Messenger to see the message. It's extremely user hostile.

FB frequently sends notifications that is not directly related to me. e.g. "A friend has commented on a post in a group that you're a member of." Why would Facebook think this is of interest to me, is beyond my understanding.

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

#327

That whole sentence where the WhatsApp guys have bigger desks and toilets than the Facebook guys. Really feels like it is coming straight from a dystopian future, where the workers are kept happy with little candies, and the promise to work for a better world, while also policing each others to see who got it better next door, while the big bosses are in their towers planning their next move. If you don't feel like a…

That part of the article stood out for me too. These are all status issues and status is very important for human beings whether they like it or not. It seems that (despite being very well-compensated) engineers at facebook are pretty low-status - they are forced to sit all day at shitty desks in giant loud open spaces. So when whatsapp employees who were used to better working conditions arrived, it caused a good amount of culture conflict.

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

#328

Whatsapp is kind of a competitive failure. Successful social media platforms launched after Facebook: - Successful video platforms after YouTube: - Successful Mobile chat platforms after Whatsapp: - Viber - Line - Wechat - Telegram - Snapchat

Whatsapp's key to sucess was its most simple, and most multi platform design among all competitors. It worked on all phones ranging from S40 to the most modern OS, and it was the one who invented the concept of no username/account/manually adding contacts/password login..., but just a phone number and you're ready to go. Whatsapp has a very clean interface, ad free, also very efficient messaging delivery. You don't only compete on who's first, but who does it better. Apple hasn't been first in anything since the invention of the iPhone, but they are still successful in this domain.

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

#329
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free version for those with verified low income? (I've been toying with models like this for awhile, and not to say its an easy or simple solution to implement, especially when considering bad actors, but it seems the best chance at getting something "fair") Alternatively could steal from games and add "cosmetics". Charge extra for things like themes that personalize but don't necessarily improve the experience. Item…

Proof of work from non-paying customers? Something that benefits the company (retweet to pay), or better yet, something that makes the world better? (eg pick up trash, socialize with an invalid, etc.)

Whilst creepy, I love the idea of a proof of work system like this, something that anyone can participate in. I just don't see how it could be achieved in a way that couldn't be gamed.

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

#330
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…

Sure it's end-to-end encrypted.. But Facebook doesn't have to get in the middle to look at your messages. Facebook is sitting at both ends, reading the messages after they are decrypted. It is already monetizing these messages and the ads are shown in Facebook instead of Whatsapp. Whether the opt-out functionality for this feature is honored properly by Facebook I'm not sure.

It's not end-to-end if Facebook can read them after they are delivered.

Facebook only have access to the metadata.

Post reply on HN