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

WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 303 posts

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#121

Post by Chris2048 »

egwor wrote: post #14

I'm so disappointed in this. Whatsapp is a functional tool. It was successful since it worked. Facebook has entirely failed to utilise it - to allow external systems to connect in so that businesses can do business on there. The voice calls are also a disaster. They've now come along to start messing with the privacy to start selling ads. It is insane that they're able to make such a mess of this. Is there a word for…

Does Telegram not work?

I disagree that WA is mainly popular due to functionality. Yes, it works, but it was mainly network effect (much like FB).

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#122

Post by phone8675309 »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #101
pmlnr wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm so disappointed in this. Whatsapp is a functional tool. It was successful since it worked. One decade ago: s/Whatapp/Skype/g s/Facebook/Microsoft/g

The niche that Whatsapp filled and which brought it to massive adoption was not the same as Skype's. In South America (and Asia, too, if I understand correctly), Whatsapp was a way to avoid SMS charges on your mobile phone. Because now it is the only way many acquaintances and businesses can be contacted, it will remain entrenched even with this hostile new privacy policy. Skype, on the other hand, was about audio- o…

Skype's niche in my cohort (poor college student in North America the early 2000s) was calling home to relatives without having to use an expensive telephone calling card or burning cell phone minutes. It was an important part of my life for keeping in touch without feeding the extraordinarily expensive university telephone system.

I moved all of my AT&T calling card spending to Skype once it had the ability to call telephone numbers because it was much less expensive to do so.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#123

Post by ethbr0 »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #101
pmlnr wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm so disappointed in this. Whatsapp is a functional tool. It was successful since it worked. One decade ago: s/Whatapp/Skype/g s/Facebook/Microsoft/g

The niche that Whatsapp filled and which brought it to massive adoption was not the same as Skype's. In South America (and Asia, too, if I understand correctly), Whatsapp was a way to avoid SMS charges on your mobile phone. Because now it is the only way many acquaintances and businesses can be contacted, it will remain entrenched even with this hostile new privacy policy. Skype, on the other hand, was about audio- o…

> In [country] (and [other country], too, if I understand correctly), [Skype] was a way to avoid [international call] charges

^ That's why GP was saying they're similar

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#124

Post by Boulth6 »

pmlnr wrote: post #90

A group of my friends asked to set up a groupchat recently, our requirements varied. Among them: - needs to be simple (not all of them are techies) - need to be possible to run on desktop without any mobile need - not Facebook (my requirement) So I went and set an XMPP server up on the same machine I have my email and webserver, and wrote a quick guide on how to install blabber.im (a Conversations fork), and register…

You may want to check out Dino.im. For easy XMPP there is also Quicksy.im that's a fork of Conversations (from the author of Conversations) but using contact book for people discovery.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#125

Post by minikites »

ulzeraj wrote: post #93
minikites wrote: post #36

The free market continues to reward Facebook, so this move must be good. I can't wait to see what the free market has in store next!

Please refrain to use cheap politic slogans. You are not forced to use Facebook stuff. Use Signal, Threema, Telegram, Discord, Slack, Snapchat, Matrix. Create your own. As much as I don't like Facebook's wechat its not like you are forced to use their application out of obligation or lack of options.

>its not like you are forced to use their application out of obligation

Can I have my aging father call you when he needs help with Signal? I don't think you understand the network effects of messaging programs.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#126

Post by kevincox »

sneak wrote: post #85
bennyp101 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they are shared in the same sense that it is shared with WhatsApp/Facebook etc. "Signal periodically sends truncated cryptographically hashed phone numbers for contact discovery. Names are never transmitted, and the information is not stored on the servers. The server responds with the contacts that are Signal users and then immediately discards this information. Your phone now knows which of your conta…

The problem is that phone numbers are a small space for brute force, and depending on how much they truncate, this could be very close to uploading one's address book.

Yup. Hashing phone numbers is basically useless. If they truncate enough there might be plausible deniability due to possible collisions but I suspect the chance of collision is still quite low as they don't want to annoy people with false positives.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#127

Post by dleslie »

pmlnr wrote: post #112
staz wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or Google Talk and Hangout

Sort of. Google Talk, yes, but only the post-2006, federation enabled version, which was XMPP - read http://googletalk.blogspot.com/2006/01/xmpp-federation.html Hangouts - no. It never was as smooth as skype or google talk.

XMPP gtalk was awesome, and killing it was foolish; my _entire_ gtalk contact list suddenly stopped appearing, and that didn't just include people in IT. Dancers, musicians, teachers, et al were using Adium/Pidgin to chat, and suddenly it didn't work.

The web chat they provided was incredibly slow on mid and low end PCs, but most of my friends didn't even get as far as trying it. Google talk stopped working in Adium and _they didn't notice_ because they were able to talk via other connected services.

Probably for the best, Google didn't end up the benevolent technocratic force for good that we hoped for at the time.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#128

Post by gogopuppygogo »

phone8675309 wrote: post #122
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The niche that Whatsapp filled and which brought it to massive adoption was not the same as Skype's. In South America (and Asia, too, if I understand correctly), Whatsapp was a way to avoid SMS charges on your mobile phone. Because now it is the only way many acquaintances and businesses can be contacted, it will remain entrenched even with this hostile new privacy policy. Skype, on the other hand, was about audio- o…

Skype's niche in my cohort (poor college student in North America the early 2000s) was calling home to relatives without having to use an expensive telephone calling card or burning cell phone minutes. It was an important part of my life for keeping in touch without feeding the extraordinarily expensive university telephone system. I moved all of my AT&T calling card spending to Skype once it had the ability to call…

I still have about $3 in legacy Skype spend available. Microsoft sends me nasty emails that they don’t let you make prepaid deposits anymore that never expire. At some point I’ll finally use these credits and I’ll probably never use Skype again.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#129

Post by kevincox »

ulzeraj wrote: post #105

I would be interested in non creepy or elitist ways to convince your colleagues to migrate to another platform. People who do not care about privacy and all. I thought I was free from Whatsuck but then I've changed jobs and the only way that I can keep in touch with my remote team outside of the corporate communicators which are separated by a 2FA Citrix Workspace login is through WhatsApp. So WhatsApp is like a life…

I asked a small number of people close to me to switch to Matrix. For everyone else I am briding to other services. This means that I may not have access to every feature on the remote service (depends on the completeness of the bridge mostly) but now I only really need to check one service for all of my day-to-day chats.

So now anyone that joins Matrix can find me, I can do most of my communication in the same environment and if people ask I can explain the benefits of switching to Matrix.

It is by no means perfect, but I find it much more convenient than using 5 different apps and I didn't have to convince everyone that I regularly communicate to switch to get major benefits.

TL;DR Matrix allows a slow-and-steady migration which seems like the best option available.

Re: WhatsApp to move ahead with privacy update despite backlash

#130

Post by pmlnr »

Boulth6 wrote: post #124
pmlnr wrote: post #90

A group of my friends asked to set up a groupchat recently, our requirements varied. Among them: - needs to be simple (not all of them are techies) - need to be possible to run on desktop without any mobile need - not Facebook (my requirement) So I went and set an XMPP server up on the same machine I have my email and webserver, and wrote a quick guide on how to install blabber.im (a Conversations fork), and register…

You may want to check out Dino.im. For easy XMPP there is also Quicksy.im that's a fork of Conversations (from the author of Conversations) but using contact book for people discovery.

I tried Dino, Gajim, Psi, Psi+, Empathy, but I still prefer the UI/UX of Pidgin. It knows all I need at the moment, with the exception of Transport commands.
Post reply on HN