Live data from Hacker News

Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

neowin.net

151–160 of 343 posts

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#151
post #122
post #73

People have been clowning on Apple for being behind on the AI stuff and -- while I'd never defend how they promised a bunch of features in 2024, showed them in ads, and sold iPhones based on vaporware, but still haven't shipped most of the features -- I will say, I imagine a lot of the hold-up is because they realized how dangerous it is to start trusting AI with the sensitive data on your phone. It's probably not to…

No. It's well documented and reported that Apple's hold-up is because of technical incompetency.

I know right?

They have always been behind. Why would this time be any different?

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#154
How does it work technically?

Does Whatsapp expose these messages via an API? If yes, then it seems like this is not only on Google.

If no: Are they reading data from raw UI widgets? Are they intercepting input controls? Are they intercepting network traffic? That seems unlikely, given its probably end to end encrypted and the decryption happens within the scope of the Whatsapp process.

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#155
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people didn't vote for shit, if they could vote they'd vote for no ads and no cost. companies like google destroyed this option on purpose. there is no reason why the vast majority of apps and services online can't be both free and ad free. if i look for tetris on the app store it's literally impossible to find a version that's both ad free and free of purchases despite the fact that i know there's at minimum 100 opt…

>there is no reason why the vast majority of apps and services online can't be both free and ad free You can give away software, but running a service costs money. P2p messaging can be free (and signal exists), but nothing like free and adless YouTube or Facebook is going to happen regardless whether google or meta do anything to prevent it.

The Saudis would love to have a platform as popular as YouTube for their image washing purposes, no matter if it costs them a cool $billion or two per year to keep it ad-free. They don't do it because they'd rather not antagonize Google, a company wielding global power, otherwise they'd love to.

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#157

Google has been working on this since November last year going by the wayback archive of the support page for this feature. I'm not seeing any indication that Gemini can read your messages, though. You can compose messages and start calls, but I can't get it to read me any of my messages. In fact, I can't even get it to send messages to group chats, only to individual contacts. The feature makes a lot of sense, of co…

It can't read your messages just as tech giants can't pirate every book in the world to train their models.

Crooked billionaires shouldn't enjoy the benefit of the doubt.

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#158
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not great for a chat app, which needs ongoing active servers and someone to fix stuff that breaks, even if you feature-freeze it.

Pretty great for a chat app used by a few billion people, a few $billion is enough to keep things running for many decades. e.g. banks do exactly this, with much more critical and complicated infra.

How do banks do this?

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#159

This is concerning but I am telling my Whatsapp user friends about the access to their immense data that Meta has and they should be concerned. But even the friends in tech, who lead massive product development, feel there is nothing concerning.

What do you tell them the risk is?

Re: Google can now read your WhatsApp messages

#160
post #7

These big tech companies are so frustrating. Why does every single aspect of our digital lives need to be monitored? It’s like whack a mole trying to get the most basic of privacy.

Because people collectively vote for the ad model over the subscription model.

As we have all learned, ad and subscription models aren't mutually exclusive. You can still get ads while paying for a subscription.

In fact, I don't believe the ad model would have gone away if everyone started paying for a subscription. The bottom tier would still be filled with ads.

Ideally, the market would solve this. The companies that are pushing annoying would lose customers to the companies that don't. But since we don't live in a ideal world, I honestly think regulations would be the only way. Something like "If a customer pays for subscription in any way, you can't show ads" - and then let the companies put a realistic price to their subscription tiers, which makes it worthwhile for them.

Post reply on HN