Live data from Hacker News

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

threader.app

101–105 of 105 posts

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

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...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.

Heh! Ifn i had it to do over i would prolly say FarceBorg. Not only do they encourage their users to make a Farce of themselves but they actively try to assimilate the web, and indeed the internet (the Basics).

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

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

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

#103
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure thing, we've taken a stab at it.

It’s not an article. It’s a “roll up” of a thread by Sarah Jamie Lewis as you can see here https://twitter.com/sarahjamielewis/status/10889141928479170...

That makes more sense. I was wondering why the article was so "all over the place", it's just because every sentence was actually a separate tweet.

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

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on the logic of why saving encrypted text to an image file is more user-friendly than saving it to a text file? Why would that make people more comfortable?

Because people are more comfortable dealing with image files than .enc files or whatever extension one might use. Plus you dont just have to encode text. You can encode any file type. Look, I don't know what this is to the various participants in this thread but to me it's been really sad. I feel like I'm arguing politics. I don't think I've said anything unduly disrespectful or even incorrect yet I've been arguing a…

I’m discussing ideas. Sorry you’re not prepared to do that.

Typically, files on a phone don’t have an extension that is presented to the user.

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

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The infrastructure wouldn't be much more than Signals, surely?
Post reply on HN