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

Telegram Web Apps for Bots

core.telegram.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 122 posts

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#11

Post by echelon »

Barrin92 wrote: post #10
illiarian wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’d put money on others launching similar things. WeChat has had this for years (and other messengers in South Wast Asia). I have no idea why in-chat apps were never successfully implemented in the "West". There were minimal attempts by bot Apple and Facebook to add apps to their chats, but at best it's "let's add stickers"

because Asia leap-frogged over old internet protocols in favor of platforms, whereas a lot of Western systems are tied into email, websites and the crawlable/open web. Same reason SMS is still popular in the US compared to ip-based chatting everywhere else.

Leap-frogged has the connotation of "progress".

Walled gardens and controlled ecosystems are horrible and concentrate power in the gatekeepers.

I hope the experience is kludgy and user unfriendly to the point that startups not contained in the straightjackets of other systems continue to win out.

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#12

Post by vachina »

illiarian wrote: post #9
andrewcamel wrote: post #4

Incredibly well positioned vs WhatsApp, iMessage, etc in the new world of LLM-enabled agents / chat bots… I’d put money on others launching similar things. Hard to see the current web UI remain the long-term format on mobile, maybe web too if the Telegram / other messaging apps well support this.

> I’d put money on others launching similar things. WeChat has had this for years (and other messengers in South Wast Asia). I have no idea why in-chat apps were never successfully implemented in the "West". There were minimal attempts by bot Apple and Facebook to add apps to their chats, but at best it's "let's add stickers"

WeChat is garbage. The only reason it gained prominence is because (better) alternatives are banned or blocked, causing spillover network effect to Chinese outside of China.

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#13

Post by skrowl »

Moldoteck wrote: post #8
aww_dang wrote: post #3

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile number as a login/username is a deal breaker for me. Horrible experience trying to explain why this isn't a sane security model to users.

And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead

> it's not syncing between devices

> Signal is cooler

Clearly you haven't tried using Signal on multiple devices. It's terrible currently. Telegram / WhatsApp / etc work great on multiple devices.

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#14

Post by meowtimemania »

vachina wrote: post #12
illiarian wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’d put money on others launching similar things. WeChat has had this for years (and other messengers in South Wast Asia). I have no idea why in-chat apps were never successfully implemented in the "West". There were minimal attempts by bot Apple and Facebook to add apps to their chats, but at best it's "let's add stickers"

WeChat is garbage. The only reason it gained prominence is because (better) alternatives are banned or blocked, causing spillover network effect to Chinese outside of China.

Why do you say it’s garbage?

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#15

Post by 0xy »

Moldoteck wrote: post #8
aww_dang wrote: post #3

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile number as a login/username is a deal breaker for me. Horrible experience trying to explain why this isn't a sane security model to users.

And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead

WhatsApp backs up your encryption key to Google Drive by default, meaning it's far from end-to-end encryption.

It's more like end-to-Google-to-end. If you choose to decline this default, your conversation partners probably haven't.

Signal had a catastrophic bug that would send random images in your camera roll to random contacts. If you want your private photos sent to your family members, use Signal I guess.

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#17

Post by skinkestek »

Moldoteck wrote: post #8
aww_dang wrote: post #3

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile number as a login/username is a deal breaker for me. Horrible experience trying to explain why this isn't a sane security model to users.

And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead

Let me upvote this even if I personally don't care as much about e2e in large group chats.

Why? First time I can remember top critical comment has gotten encrypted/e2e-encrypted correct :-)

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#18

Post by skinkestek »

0xy wrote: post #15
Moldoteck wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead

WhatsApp backs up your encryption key to Google Drive by default, meaning it's far from end-to-end encryption. It's more like end-to-Google-to-end. If you choose to decline this default, your conversation partners probably haven't. Signal had a catastrophic bug that would send random images in your camera roll to random contacts. If you want your private photos sent to your family members, use Signal I guess.

> WhatsApp backs up your encryption key to Google Drive by default,

Does it? I have criticized WhatsApp a lot, but this was new to me.

(I don't follow WhatsApp development any more but back in the day they used to do things like sending data actually unencrypted - not just not e2e-encrypted - over port 443, and storing unencrypted backups on Google Drive, but encryption keys was/is new to me if it is correct.)

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#19

Post by skinkestek »

konart wrote: post #7
aww_dang wrote: post #3

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile number as a login/username is a deal breaker for me. Horrible experience trying to explain why this isn't a sane security model to users.

>mobile number as a login/username Well, you can buy a number (+888) on fragment and use one instead of your own.

Let me also add that this is a bigger problem than it needs to be.

Why?

Because countries insist on linking phone numbers to individuals.

Why do I think this is borderline ridiculous?

Because the phone system is still so open that any scammer can appear to call from any number, or even temporarily hijack reception of messages and calls.

Re: Telegram Web Apps for Bots

#20

Post by solarkraft »

kevingadd wrote: post #6
meowtimemania wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 30% rule only applies if you are paying to unlock software features. If you’re paying to purchase real world things it doesn’t apply. E.g. 30% rule doesn’t apply to amazon

It's not restricted to software features, though. Things like ebooks and (???) event tickets also have a 30% cut (Facebook had an angry dispute over this).

Bandcamp's iOS app doesn't have purchases, presumably because of this.
Post reply on HN