291–300 of 303 posts
So what does Facebook have to gain by backing down now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's barely tolerable for power users, unacceptable for casual users. In particular, calling doesn't work reliably on Android, no search in encrypted rooms, ... Signal, on the other hand, is basically a drop-in replacement for WhatsApp. Extremely similar UX, basically the same concepts, phone numbers as identifiers allow you to keep your social network if other contacts migrate.
Calling works fine for me. And you can't search any E2E encrypted rooms on any platform. But at least Matrix can store history, that you can then search on your client. Or if you really want search, you can just not encrypt your room, which isn't an option at all with Signal. But I do agree that Signal is easier, a better WhatsApp replacement for most people, and a wonderful service in general. The more people use it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling works fine for me. And you can't search any E2E encrypted rooms on any platform. But at least Matrix can store history, that you can then search on your client. Or if you really want search, you can just not encrypt your room, which isn't an option at all with Signal. But I do agree that Signal is easier, a better WhatsApp replacement for most people, and a wonderful service in general. The more people use it…
I can search my E2E encrypted rooms on Signal (Android) just fine.
Element actually does encrypted search a bit better than Signal. Signal stores every message it receives, in its entirety, forever (unless you tell it not to, or course, but then you can't search). That makes search dead simple, but it also fills up my phone with hundreds of megs a month. Element stores messages on the server, so old ones don't need to stay on your phone (only your keys). But you can still search the entire history because the client indexes every message that comes in and stores that index forever, which is much smaller than a bunch of media files, and even the plain text.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Over here (in Belgium and The Netherlands at least) so many neighborhoods have signs promoting local WhatsApp groups, complete with the logo [0]. Often to 'prevent crime'. Local municipalities install and pay for them. It is so awkward to see. [0] https://cdn.nieuws.nl/media/sites/305/2016/05/14195316/Borde...
I was a bit "shocked" by that when I moved to the Netherlands, everyone there uses it and the government seems to have a responsibility in that. Between the signs like you said and the possibility to contact town hall to take an appointment and other government related services via Whatsapp (I can certainly get why people use it, because it's much more convenient that having to make a phone call).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Facebook has entirely failed to utilise it - to allow external systems to connect in so that businesses can do business on there. They weren’t allowed to do that under old TOS, and the whole point of this update is to allow data sharing when contacting businesses, that will allow building business tools. https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/answer...
I understand the objective on making (more) money. Why have 1bn users and make $1 per user? Isn't it better if then have 200mn users and make $20 per user? For me this 'shedding freeloaders and privacy-oriented-users' helps them more than not. We have discussed pricing and volumes of customers before in this forum, multiple times, and for multiple products/services. Is it better to have 1000 users and make $1 from ea…
The lesson is then that it is in the best interest of users to steer clear of any shareholder-owned network in as wide arc as possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. “Will we ever end the MySpace monopoly?” https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/feb/08/business....
Not comparable. MySpace was never adopted by physical retail businesses and the hospitality industry. Those didn't join social media until the Facebook era and, indeed, many people are complaining that while fewer ordinary adults are using FB, for a lot of businesses their FB page remains their sole internet presence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to make many assumptions that are, AFAIK, false. The data is there and gets stored indefinitely. It is not only monetized for ADs, but for surveillance as well. Companies and state contact the company and buy that data about you.
Do you have a source for that? Because your claims don’t match the proposed WhatsApp privacy policy changes this refers to. You can read a summary of the proposed changes here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202... Contrary to the public perception, Facebook isn’t in the business of selling data to other companies. The proposed changes don’t change that situation. A privacy policy isn’t goin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to make many assumptions that are, AFAIK, false. The data is there and gets stored indefinitely. It is not only monetized for ADs, but for surveillance as well. Companies and state contact the company and buy that data about you.
Do you have a source for that? Because your claims don’t match the proposed WhatsApp privacy policy changes this refers to. You can read a summary of the proposed changes here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202... Contrary to the public perception, Facebook isn’t in the business of selling data to other companies. The proposed changes don’t change that situation. A privacy policy isn’t goin…
It's really hard for me to understand why and how something fails or succeeds to grab the public's attention. I've been complaining and refusing to use WhatsApp for years, mostly because it's centralized at the worst possible company. But a boycott of one is not a powerful move and no one cared. Now, for whatever reason, nothing has effectively changed and millions suddenly care. I mean, I'm glad they finally do, do…
Can't it be due to coronavirus lockdowns? People have more time to read such news and discuss with others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp users who in 2016 opted out of sharing data with third parties are now being asked by Facebook to either accept a privacy policy that states their metadata can be shared with third parties or stop chatting with friends and family through their app. A poster bellow in this thread quoted a Wired article where some FB representative says they will "honor" the opt-out, yet this is not stated anywhere in the priv…
I believe the sharing only applies when talking to those third parties. E.g., if you only ever talk to friends and family, there is effectively no change.