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

“Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

threader.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#91

Post by giancarlostoro »

opportune wrote: post #70
eitland wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Facebook outrage mob reminds me of my slashdot days when everyone referred to Microsoft as Micro$oft. The fight against old Microsoft is a win-win success story (for now, I'm keeping an eye on all big players and so should everyone else.) Microsoft is nicer and I think more profitable than ever. They don't call our code or favourite OS cancer anymore but actively support us. My understanding is even a lot of MS…

It took Microsoft a top-level executive change (Satya) to fix itself. Facebook shows no signs of an executive change until Mark retires and devotes himself to full time philanthropy so the world doesn’t remember him as evil (who else does that remind you of...)

I feel like this does a disservice to the prior open source efforts that Microsoft slowly went through during the Ballmer era. Sure they were not as impressive but they were the start of it all imho.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#92

Post by giancarlostoro »

FuckOffNeemo wrote: post #66
bassman9000 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1- Charge for the service (whatsapp will lose 90% of its userbase in a month) Why? Whatsapp used to charge a yearly fee for the app.

For $1 I'd agree most of the user base would commit to paying it too.

I wonder how much that covers how much they spend on the infrastructure to run WhatsApps backend services. If its even profitable.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#93

Post by wahern »

bassman9000 wrote: post #54
doublepg23 wrote: post #49

Can someone fill me in on why people are upset Facbook will be consolidating DMs/PMs accross services - using E2E ? I've went other the past news releases, it seems to be a good thing to me.

Metadata + Countries where Rule Of Law doesn't apply + "Law" Enforcement requests E.g. Middle East countries

Rule of law doesn't imply strong privacy. In fact, I'd argue that privacy and rule of law are fundamentally in tension. Privacy favors scofflaws, particularly those trying to corrupt the law, so in any social system with privacy there's going to be a tendency toward asymmetry of privacy in favor of the corrupt.

The ideal scenario for rule of law is no privacy. However, privacy has intrinsic value of its own so we're stuck trying to maximize privacy while minimizing the corruption. It's an ongoing balancing act; every society will do it differently and it will change over time.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#94

Post by qmr »

eitland wrote: post #25
mondo9000 wrote: post #19

The Facebook outrage mob reminds me of my slashdot days when everyone referred to Microsoft as Micro$oft. Doesn't it feel weird that there used to be positive facebook stories, but now its all negative 24/7?

> The Facebook outrage mob reminds me of my slashdot days when everyone referred to Microsoft as Micro$oft. The fight against old Microsoft is a win-win success story (for now, I'm keeping an eye on all big players and so should everyone else.) Microsoft is nicer and I think more profitable than ever. They don't call our code or favourite OS cancer anymore but actively support us. My understanding is even a lot of MS…

... the hell?

Forced updates rebooting critical systems, bricking devices, rampant spying that is difficult to impossible to disable.

How do you fit that with "win-win success story" and "Microsoft is nicer [...] than ever"?

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#95

Post by bartread »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #91
opportune wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took Microsoft a top-level executive change (Satya) to fix itself. Facebook shows no signs of an executive change until Mark retires and devotes himself to full time philanthropy so the world doesn’t remember him as evil (who else does that remind you of...)

I feel like this does a disservice to the prior open source efforts that Microsoft slowly went through during the Ballmer era. Sure they were not as impressive but they were the start of it all imho.

Agree. That ball had started rolling before Ballmer's departure. You could see it in efforts like PyTools and NTVS, just for openers.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#96

Post by bartread »

emanuensis wrote: post #75
eitland wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Facebook outrage mob reminds me of my slashdot days when everyone referred to Microsoft as Micro$oft. The fight against old Microsoft is a win-win success story (for now, I'm keeping an eye on all big players and so should everyone else.) Microsoft is nicer and I think more profitable than ever. They don't call our code or favourite OS cancer anymore but actively support us. My understanding is even a lot of MS…

>...come up with a similar stupid name for them... Farcebook? Been guilty of that one for 8 years. Never had an account, so the label is all hearsay ... but what i kept hearing made me afraid to become a Farce of myself ... so i said to myself "stay away". Hard enough to be self-effacing. i do still hope we will find a way to communicate easily with relevant others without doing violence to our communication methods…

Facebork is the other one I've heard, and occasionally use. Problem is that neither really captures a sense of the rapacious amorality of which facebook is, I believe, being accused.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#97

Post by bartread »

eitland wrote: post #27
ams6110 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of that is just what happens when you go from small start-up to entrenched big player. I remember when PayPal started. It was so cool and everyone who understood what it was was very enthused about it. Now it's all gripes and complaints.

> I remember when PayPal started. It was so cool and everyone who understood what it was was very enthused about it. Now it's all gripes and complaints. Not what I see here on HN: I see complaints from merchants (mostly with legitimate issues it seems) and praise from end users.

I actually used to hate PayPal as an end user because, used relatively infrequently, they'd often block or delay transactions, causing me headaches and wasting my time. They felt like they were actively trying to hinder rather than help commerce. They do seem to have improved in the last couple of years though.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#98

Post by chronid »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #83
chronid wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 2008 and 2012 FB got praised for being the platform that Obama used to win the elections - I remember multiple articles about it (and someone from the Obama campaign later admitted that they did the same thing that got the CA scandal started). In that period of time there were also multiple newspapers writing that "privacy is dead, and it's a good thing". There was not a lot of discussion about privacy when they b…

I think it’s less to due with the direct choices FB has made or even their impact on the election, but that FB’s complete and total lack of awareness of how their actions have impacted the world. It wasn’t Trump winning that did it, it was that Trump won with the assistance of data that Facebook was unable to properly protect. Facebook has lost the trust of the public in ways that other major tech firms haven’t.

> It wasn’t Trump winning that did it, it was that Trump won with the assistance of data that Facebook was unable to properly protect.

I agree that Facebook is certainly a convenient scapegoat to hide all the other issues that plagued the Clinton campaign (from the DNC scandal, to the unlikeable candidate, through some controversial phrases she said during the campaign itself, and so on). Also it helps newspapers since they have to take no blame for what happened (and do no real analysis on why democrats lost).

I'm pretty convinced that if Clinton had won - even if Clinton had used CA data to do so - there would be far (far) less media coverage about the "evil of Facebook", regardless of the impact of their incompetence in the election. That was the case with Obama already after all.

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#99

Post by [deleted] »

riazrizvi wrote: post #4

Surveillance on the general public is bought by employers/businesses not security services. Yet all these articles keep mentioning law enforcement. 90% of people don’t care if the NSA/FBI are mining their communication for criminal activity. They would care if they realized it affected their job offers, they would care if they realized it means lower wages, less competition, less political freedom. The USA has long a…

[deleted]

Re: “Facebook are going to monetize encrypted messaging by consolidating metadata”

#100

Post by julienreszka »

riazrizvi wrote: post #4

Surveillance on the general public is bought by employers/businesses not security services. Yet all these articles keep mentioning law enforcement. 90% of people don’t care if the NSA/FBI are mining their communication for criminal activity. They would care if they realized it affected their job offers, they would care if they realized it means lower wages, less competition, less political freedom. The USA has long a…

If they can access mafia, politicians, competiton can access it too.
Post reply on HN