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

WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

faq.whatsapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 178 posts

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#51

Post by polyomino »

0xy wrote: post #48
Bran_son wrote: post #18

According to archive.org, it was removed sometime between Apr 20th and May 5th, 2018. Last snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20180420190834/https://faq.whats... Even when the option was there, it was hidden behind the 'read terms and conditions' link. If you missed that, there was an opt-out in Settings > Account > Share my account info. But the site implies that option is only available for the first 30 days. An…

Even then, they're likely lying. Facebook collected phone numbers ostensibly for 2FA security purposes only, then immediately used them for ad purposes. Those terms are written by engineers with good intentions, but you have to remember your data is subject to the whims of unscrupulous PMs with targets to hit ;)

I think they would have legal write those terms not engineers. Or perhaps some copywriter and then reviewed by legal.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#52

Post by toast0 »

duskwuff wrote: post #42
toast0 wrote: post #17

I worked at WhatsApp between 2011 and 2019. This FAQ had very specific instructions for how to opt out of sharing that were only available for a limited amount of time. The FAQ serves as documentation of the product and there's no need to keep online specific instructions that can no longer be followed. In order to opt out, you needed to have an existing account and take specific actions around the time you agreed to…

> I don't recall specific deadlines for accepting the 2016 TOS Based on what I see in the archived article, it looks like accepting the TOS was a "roadblock" popup in the app -- you couldn't continue using the app without accepting the terms. Any accounts which hadn't accepted the terms after two years could have simply been closed for inactivity.

There was a process, you had to have a new enough client to get prompted, and once prompted there was a later option available for some amount of time before you were roadblocked. So if you were running an older version, the question becomes when did that version expire, forcing an upgrade to a version with the prompt, and then how long did you have from there to accept the terms. And, if you had an eligible account, you had 30 days after accepting the terms to opt out of the sharing.

You could probably look at the many news articles that were written back then to get some idea of the timelines. Although, most news articles weren't written with the perspective of delaying terms acceptance as much as possible.

(Also, I had meant to say I didn't recall the specific deadlines... There certainly were deadlines given specific circustances of each account)

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#55

Post by Djejdbdbsjs123 »

barbazoo wrote: post #40
Djejdbdbsjs123 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why I frequently hear that Matrix/Element are more difficult to use than Signal, Telegram, Whatsapp, etc. I set it up for my elderly parents who just got their first smartphone a few months ago, and it's been going very smoothly. What are the complications that others seem to be having?

The more technical people in our group tried to register accounts but we were never able to "find" or message each other. It was orders of magnitude more difficult than getting started with telegram or signal. Don't get me wrong, I do want to use Matrix, it was just not feasible at the time. I do know that it's technically the more sustainable choice.

I see. I've only added contacts in person via QR code. I guess it would be more difficult without that.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#58

Post by zaik »

barbazoo wrote: post #35
johnisgood wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are much better alternatives. XMPP, Matrix (Element), Wire, Briar, Ricochet, whatever.

Good luck onboarding one's grandma to any of those.

https://quicksy.im/ or just help her setup an account and install a client.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#59

Post by perl4ever »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #25
1cvmask wrote: post #2

Old habits and mindsets never seem to change despite corporate pronouncements and PR puff pieces written by stenographers. The regulators (and legislators) are either the biggest dupes, or much more likely in on it. Let’s not forget the FTC hookup for Netflix by Obama and the eventual payout when he left office. Or Ajit Pai who came from Verizon to run the FTC and undid the Obama era changes favorable to Netflix and…

I sometimes wonder whether there is any purpose to it in the long term. If/when Signal becomes big enough to be used by a lot of people, they will want to monetize too and the governments will become interested in monitoring messages there too. It just feels futile. As long as companies need to turn a profit and governments can surreptitiously surveil their citizens there's no long-term solution. We can move to the n…

>If/when Signal becomes big enough to be used by a lot of people

I think people (including the government) noticed it a long time ago.

From 2015:

'According to CNN, "[t]he same technology that keeps a conversation private between you and a family member also gives a safe haven to a terrorist in Syria and the person in the United States he's trying to recruit to commit an act of mass murder."'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software)

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#60

Post by SequoiaHope »

mukundesh wrote: post #31
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes wonder whether there is any purpose to it in the long term. If/when Signal becomes big enough to be used by a lot of people, they will want to monetize too and the governments will become interested in monitoring messages there too. It just feels futile. As long as companies need to turn a profit and governments can surreptitiously surveil their citizens there's no long-term solution. We can move to the n…

Signal is developed by a non-profit and is open source, they have a higher chance of staying independent. With the cost of cloud services dropping hopefully there is less of the back-pressure to monetise

I’ve always assumed signal was a honeypot. They publish some source code but obviously we can’t verify the actual code running on iOS or (I assume) Android devices am I right? It seems like publishing open source could be a smoke screen. When they push code to devices they could link in alternate libraries that do whatever they want. They may even be able to push special code to targeted phones, avoiding detection by security researchers.
Post reply on HN