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

WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

orat.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 240 posts

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#141

Post by plusquamperfekt »

superuser2 wrote: post #134
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe for a synching feature it would be necessary to compromise on security of the data. The data is asymmetrically encrypted - so you'd have to synch it yourself by sending the data encrypted with you second phones key or you'd have to copy the private key itself. But I guess it would be possible. Though I don't miss this feature anyway.

iMessage already does this without leaking private keys by associating users with many public keys (per-device) instead of just one.

I don't trust Apple ...

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#142

Post by toyg »

JosephRedfern wrote: post #83
toyg wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I follow -- this is what comes up from a random commercial project (I don't believe it's a debug build): http://i.imgur.com/OhdNC5A.png What part would you refer to as "method variable name"?

That's weird. By "method variable names" I mean local variables, i.e. those declared inside a method. I'm not getting the same results as you with a little sample program I wrote - see: https://gist.github.com/JosephRedfern/662131ceb2119abf3e83 . Field names and method names are preserved (which make sense), but local variable names are lost (which also makes sense to me!) Are you sure that your example code doesn't…

You're looking at the bytecode. If you want full decompilation, use one of the tools mentioned here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/272535/how-do-i-decompile...

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#143

Post by JosephRedfern »

toyg wrote: post #142
JosephRedfern wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's weird. By "method variable names" I mean local variables, i.e. those declared inside a method. I'm not getting the same results as you with a little sample program I wrote - see: https://gist.github.com/JosephRedfern/662131ceb2119abf3e83 . Field names and method names are preserved (which make sense), but local variable names are lost (which also makes sense to me!) Are you sure that your example code doesn't…

You're looking at the bytecode. If you want full decompilation, use one of the tools mentioned here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/272535/how-do-i-decompile...

I decompiled the dex file, but not the Java Class file.

I suppose this is diverging a little from the original comment (which was in the context of an Android application), but surely if running `strings` on the class file found the method, class and field names then it would also find the local variable name too, if it was there.

If I specifically compile the java file with `javac -g:vars DecompilationTest.java` then the local variable name IS included in the file. It is not by default.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#144

Post by izacus »

roymurdock wrote: post #88
venning wrote: post #75

Playing devil's advocate: WhatsApp is a $22B investment. It makes sense to try to prevent it from being canabalized from the inside. We've seen something like this before, when AIM allowed MSN Messenger to interoperate. I know this is a little different, but that was still how AIM lost. Here is a fantastic war story from one of the MSN engineers on the battle to subvert AIM [1]. [1] https://nplusonemag.com/issue-19/e…

From my experience, AIM lost because it was the cool thing to do in high school before everyone had cell phones. Once texting/BBM was a thing, AIM became completely obsolete. I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger.

MSN Messenger was one of those "regional" services simillar to WhatsApp - it was very popular in Europe, pretty much everyone used it around here, while as far as I heard it was very rare in US.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#146

Post by giancarlostoro »

izacus wrote: post #144
roymurdock wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience, AIM lost because it was the cool thing to do in high school before everyone had cell phones. Once texting/BBM was a thing, AIM became completely obsolete. I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger.

MSN Messenger was one of those "regional" services simillar to WhatsApp - it was very popular in Europe, pretty much everyone used it around here, while as far as I heard it was very rare in US.

Odd you say that, everyone I ever met here in the US and even in Puerto Rico had MSN. Probably because it came with a free email, and was maintained by Microsoft.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#147

Post by giancarlostoro »

fluxquanta wrote: post #93
roymurdock wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience, AIM lost because it was the cool thing to do in high school before everyone had cell phones. Once texting/BBM was a thing, AIM became completely obsolete. I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger.

>I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger I did because it had the best quality video chat at the time, before Skype became a thing, but that was probably 15 years ago. My current company used to use it for in-office communication as recently as five years ago when I was first hired. It was an abysmal mess of sending out group chats as individual windows every time someone had a question. For a softwar…

But MSN had group conversations (as far as I remember), why not simply use those?

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#148

Post by abc_lisper »

mikek wrote: post #109

WhatsApp is not linkifying Telegram URLs, but Telegram is not even sending messages that are shared from WhatsApp. Telegram is open source, so you can see for yourself here. https://github.com/DrKLO/Telegram/blob/74def22213846b1f90a26... On line 666: if (sendingText.contains("WhatsApp")) { //who needs this sent from ...? sendingText = null; }

Damn, those functions are longgggg. While the code seems to be organized well, it is a hell to keep track of variables, and all the flow changes.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#149

Post by rchaud »

izacus wrote: post #144
roymurdock wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience, AIM lost because it was the cool thing to do in high school before everyone had cell phones. Once texting/BBM was a thing, AIM became completely obsolete. I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger.

MSN Messenger was one of those "regional" services simillar to WhatsApp - it was very popular in Europe, pretty much everyone used it around here, while as far as I heard it was very rare in US.

It was very popular all across Asia too, except maybe China where Internet restrictions probably led to local competitors,sprouting up. It likely wasn't popular in the US as AOL captured the market first, and the impact of network effects is huge when it comes to chat apps.

Interestingly, MSN Messenger's capabilities in the late 90s/early 2000s were quite impressive. I remember being able to make long-distance audio VOIP calls using Messenger back in 2000, even on an awful 33.6kbps modem. The feature was removed pretty soon after, probably because it was abused (there was no charge for calls).

You could also send decently sized files (~10MB) using Messenger until about 2005, and that too was discontinued as people used it to send MP3s to one another.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#150

Post by seagreen »

pjc50 wrote: post #140
seagreen wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great comment, because it leads in right to the heart of the problem. Why is running a server so hard? This is actually really weird -- the cloud should mean that you can set up a server with a single click. Of course, a Linux VPS needs a fair amount of love (fiddling with settings, updating, and so on). But there are other ways: https://sandstorm.io/

Sandstorm is interesting, but fundamentally the dichotomy is "leave the running to someone else" vs. "spend significant time and effort acquiring the skills to make your own administrative decisions". If you're running on someone else's platform and automatically accepting updates, are you really "administering" it yourself?

Nope! But that's OK:)

A majority of people will never develop any real skill level at administering servers. We still need them to be able to use reasonably humane software though, because the consumer software industry revolves around them. If they continue to be easy pickings for predatory software (lock-in, etc.) the incentive for industry will be to continue improving at making predatory software . . . not ideal.

So empowering normal users (even partially, Sandstorm certainly doesn't give as much freedom as becoming a unix guru or whatever) is good for expert users too.

Post reply on HN