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

What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

faq.whatsapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 120 posts

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#111

Post by GekkePrutser »

edgyquant wrote: post #91
Koenvh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for that? Coming from a country where there are 16 different parties in parliament (the Netherlands), neighboured by two countries which each have at least five parties in parliament (Belgium and Germany), I find that statement difficult to believe.

To be fair the Netherlands is a unique republic dating back so far that even Louis XIV complained that any opinion held is represented in The Hague. https://www.jstor.org/stable/439669?seq=1

I think that's the whole point of democracy though. That our chosen representatives actually represent us. Rather than their corporate donors.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#112

Post by GekkePrutser »

MomoXenosaga wrote: post #100
Koenvh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for that? Most of Western Europe has more than two parties in parliament, thus I find that hard to believe.

Yes this is more a "British Empire" thing. See Australia, Canada, India etc. They copied the English political system.

Yeah new Zealand dropped first past the post in the 70s and has a decidedly better political climate for it

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#113

Post by GekkePrutser »

carlob wrote: post #81
choeger wrote: post #22

Companies like Facebook have a very simple way to protest the current crypto laws. They could publicly announce they are going to disable any crypto for each and every politician and their family members when they vote or act against it.

I don't think any politician worth their salt uses whatsapp, not even for private communication.

You'd be surprised... I know most higher-up people, even the ones in tech who should really know better, still make very questionable decisions around digital security. Often totally in breach of policy they themselves introduced. And get away with it due to their leverage. I worked in IT a long time and it's been so many times that I saw the 'please turn off the annoying security restrictions for us, we're the bosses so we know better' coming around. They often have a huge security awareness gap: themselves.

Though to be fair: Most of us have that gap. I know I do. But they have the clout to override policy.

Don't expect someone to be sensible just because they're at the top somewhere.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#114

Post by nicoburns »

ProAm wrote: post #108
pegasus wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, it's simple: he says it should have been stopped, not that it could have been stopped. Or you could read it as "in a better system, this purchase would have been seen as anticompetitive and stopped". I happen to agree with the sentiment.

> he says it should have been stopped, Again, I ask why. It wasn't anti-competitve because the service still exists as a standalone service just with a different owner. I see what you are saying it just does not make any sense in terms of antitrust or anti-competitiveness

It's not really standalone. The privacy implications are case in point. Facebook is a vehemently anti-privacy company, and it's not going to allow WhatsApp to undermine on this point. If WhatsApp (or indeed Instagram) were truly independent then we may well see competition on this front.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#115

Post by londons_explore »

paxys wrote: post #45
nicoburns wrote: post #11

It's such a shame that Facebook was allowed to buy WhatsApp (and Instagram). WhatsApp itself seems truly pro-privacy, but that counts for diddly-squat when it's owned by Facebook.

WhatsApp wouldn't exist today (at least not at the current scale) had Facebook not bought it. They have operated for over a decade now, serve 2 billion users, and have made close to zero revenue the entire time.

They also had very low costs before the facebook acquisition. They had a very small development team and very low server costs.

Sure, things like adding group video calling massively increased their costs, and they probably couldn't have done it without facebooks help, but without that they probably could have survived on 1 ad message per year, or on $0.50 per year (which they actually charged for a while).

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#116

Post by jean_tta »

Zababa wrote: post #82
jean_tta wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it "most" or is it UKUSA? France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. Germany is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing.

> France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. France was for a long time until recently though, the current situation is the exception.

When?

In 2012, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%?

In 2007, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10% (note: note the same parties)?

In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~35% of the votes and the loss of the leading left wing candidate was blamed on too many different left wing parties fielding candidates and getting votes?

In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~45% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%?

Same thing for 1995, 1988, 1981.

In the last US presidential election, the top two candidates got a combined 98.17% of votes. The next candidate got 1.18%. This is a completely different situation.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#117

Post by rm445 »

Havoc wrote: post #83

WTF is going on with their cookie dialog? Surely that's not even remotely legal? There is just agree and a second dialog with guidance on how to clear cookies per browser (???) and a second agree button. That's not even an attempt at a dark pattern nudging you towards one option...it's just do you agree or do you agree. Hard to trust companies that think that's how consent works... https://imgur.com/a/Ya1XBvG

Is 'you can either consent or leave' GDPR-compliant?

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#118

Post by Zababa »

jean_tta wrote: post #116
Zababa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. France was for a long time until recently though, the current situation is the exception.

When? In 2012, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%? In 2007, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10% (note: note the same parties)? In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~35% of the votes and the loss of the leading left wing candidate was blamed on too many different left wing parties fielding candidates and get…

Apart from 2002 and 2017, all the elections have been the incarnation at that time of the PS vs the incarnation at that time of the UMP.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#119

Post by jangid »

WhatsApp should give an option to upload my public-key. I want to generate public key on my computer using some other free software. For non-tech users, they may keep generating keys however they want. But there should be an option.

That is the only way to guarantee that it really supports privacy.

Re: What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it?

#120

Post by Havoc »

feross wrote: post #107
Havoc wrote: post #83

WTF is going on with their cookie dialog? Surely that's not even remotely legal? There is just agree and a second dialog with guidance on how to clear cookies per browser (???) and a second agree button. That's not even an attempt at a dark pattern nudging you towards one option...it's just do you agree or do you agree. Hard to trust companies that think that's how consent works... https://imgur.com/a/Ya1XBvG

This comment is a huge distraction from the actual substance in the link.

>actual substance in the link.

And I'd be discussing said substance...if I could get to it without a gun-to-your-head consent

Post reply on HN