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

Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

restofworld.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 78 posts

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#11

Post by namibj »

genocidicbunny wrote: post #8
kartoshechka wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't want to bother your surroundings all apps with voice messages I happened to use support playback through voice speaker, if you put the phone to the ear as if you were just speaking with someone but I don't really remember how I discovered that and it seems that majority of users don't even know about this feature

Depending on how loud that speaker is, people around you would still be able to hear it, even if its up to your ear. Years ago when I used public transport more, it was almost daily that I'd be able to listen in on peoples phone conversations because of how loud their speaker was even when not using the speakerphone setting.

On my Android (not even particularly recent) the phone earpiece speaker responds to the volume buttons when I'm in a phone call or use it to join a discord (group) voice chat. The latter works very well with voice activation, unless I'm in a loud place, in which case the incompletely filtered background noise causes intelligibility problems when talking over another.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#12

Post by metafunctor »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #2

I understand why people use it but as a recipient I really hate voice messages. Here in Spain they are becoming more common too. The problem is as the article mentions. Difficulty searching back, not being able to use Google translate (I'm still learning Spanish), and the time it takes to listen to them. Sending a voice message is faster than typing for the sender but much slower than reading for the recipient which…

I feel the same about consuming any kind of information. Most of the time, a well written article trumps a podcast or video 6:1. It's the same for a text message vs. voice message.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#13

Post by yorwba »

miyuru wrote: post #10

I am Sri Lankan and we have our own language, but most of the the people type the phonetic Sinhala word in English characters and it works really well. Wonder why that did not happened in Cambodia.

It did happen, as you can see in the second screenshot in the article.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#14

Post by huachimingo »

johnchristopher wrote: post #6
GekkePrutser wrote: post #2

I understand why people use it but as a recipient I really hate voice messages. Here in Spain they are becoming more common too. The problem is as the article mentions. Difficulty searching back, not being able to use Google translate (I'm still learning Spanish), and the time it takes to listen to them. Sending a voice message is faster than typing for the sender but much slower than reading for the recipient which…

> In most languages swipe typing is not a lot slower than talking anyway. And if people really want to talk they can use speech recognition. Not really, I disagree with "not a lot slower". It is much slower and much more frustrating than talking when you have to redraw a word for the fifth time and the keyboard insists on "Chegamiknit" when you want to write "Champagne". Anyway, it's not an all or nothing thing. Some…

>is much slower and much more frustrating than talking when you have to redraw a word for the fifth time and the keyboard insists on "Chegamiknit" when you want to write "Champagne".

Dont use autocompletion then. You can abreviate or shorten some words too. Champgn and so on.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#15

Post by johnchristopher »

huachimingo wrote: post #14
johnchristopher wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In most languages swipe typing is not a lot slower than talking anyway. And if people really want to talk they can use speech recognition. Not really, I disagree with "not a lot slower". It is much slower and much more frustrating than talking when you have to redraw a word for the fifth time and the keyboard insists on "Chegamiknit" when you want to write "Champagne". Anyway, it's not an all or nothing thing. Some…

>is much slower and much more frustrating than talking when you have to redraw a word for the fifth time and the keyboard insists on "Chegamiknit" when you want to write "Champagne". Dont use autocompletion then. You can abreviate or shorten some words too. Champgn and so on.

> Dont use autocompletion then.

That just negates the swipe typing argument from parent for text not being much slower than talking.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#16

Post by miyuru »

yorwba wrote: post #13
miyuru wrote: post #10

I am Sri Lankan and we have our own language, but most of the the people type the phonetic Sinhala word in English characters and it works really well. Wonder why that did not happened in Cambodia.

It did happen, as you can see in the second screenshot in the article.

It seems like I missed the last part of the article. Thanks for pointing it out.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#17

Post by OneTimePetes »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #2

I understand why people use it but as a recipient I really hate voice messages. Here in Spain they are becoming more common too. The problem is as the article mentions. Difficulty searching back, not being able to use Google translate (I'm still learning Spanish), and the time it takes to listen to them. Sending a voice message is faster than typing for the sender but much slower than reading for the recipient which…

Yes, i know, no market, no interest in it, but there is this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy

It correlates with the wealth in a country. An-alphabets will prefer voice chat.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#18

Post by notreallyserio »

metafunctor wrote: post #12
GekkePrutser wrote: post #2

I understand why people use it but as a recipient I really hate voice messages. Here in Spain they are becoming more common too. The problem is as the article mentions. Difficulty searching back, not being able to use Google translate (I'm still learning Spanish), and the time it takes to listen to them. Sending a voice message is faster than typing for the sender but much slower than reading for the recipient which…

I feel the same about consuming any kind of information. Most of the time, a well written article trumps a podcast or video 6:1. It's the same for a text message vs. voice message.

I explicitly avoid video tutorials and explanations unless there is literally (lol) no other option. It's almost never the appropriate medium -- not searchable, not indexed, and rewinding to repeat earlier information is a terrible experience.

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#19

Post by mangamadaiyan »

OneTimePetes wrote: post #17
GekkePrutser wrote: post #2

I understand why people use it but as a recipient I really hate voice messages. Here in Spain they are becoming more common too. The problem is as the article mentions. Difficulty searching back, not being able to use Google translate (I'm still learning Spanish), and the time it takes to listen to them. Sending a voice message is faster than typing for the sender but much slower than reading for the recipient which…

Yes, i know, no market, no interest in it, but there is this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy It correlates with the wealth in a country. An-alphabets will prefer voice chat.

Nitpick: Perhaps you meant "illiterate"? I guess you were thinking "analfabeta" :)

Re: Fifty percent of Facebook Messenger’s total voice traffic comes from Cambodia

#20

Post by CryptoPunk »

notreallyserio wrote: post #18
metafunctor wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel the same about consuming any kind of information. Most of the time, a well written article trumps a podcast or video 6:1. It's the same for a text message vs. voice message.

I explicitly avoid video tutorials and explanations unless there is literally (lol) no other option. It's almost never the appropriate medium -- not searchable, not indexed, and rewinding to repeat earlier information is a terrible experience.

I have exactly the opposite preference. I find I learn much faster from video tutorials and actively seek them out.
Post reply on HN