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

WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#181

Post by Xenoamorphous »

bsoles wrote: post #173
Xenoamorphous wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when Whatsapp became a paid app, I can’t remember the details as I believe they varied by platform (iOS vs Android) but it was either €0.79 or €0.99, I’m not sure if one off or yearly payment, but it doesn’t matter. I, as the “computer guy”, had friends and family asking how to pirate it. This is coming from SMS costing €0.25 per message (text only!) and also coming from people who would gladly pay €3 for…

The problem with paying a small fee for a service is not the fee itself. It is the friction for paying for the service and the hassle that comes after the payment. Now the credit card company knows what service I am buying; I would get endless marketing emails from the service for buying additional things; my info as a person willing to pay for such a service would get sold to other companies; my credit card info wou…

I can guarantee none of your concerns apply to the people I was talking about, particularly the privacy ones. These people would pay for their meal at a restaurant using their debit/credit card without hesitation, and they still do, and that’s arguably more likely to get your card details stolen, and the issuer knowing about your life. Those worries you’re citing never crossed their minds. They just didn’t want to pay a tiny amount of money for an “abstract” thing.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#182

Post by xnorswap »

dakial1 wrote: post #115
AlecSchueler wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal seems to be booming right now in the Netherlands. I've been using it for years and never managed to grow my contact list beyond single digits, being a few friends in tech and a few who were very privacy conscious. All of those people were also available on WhatsApp and we'd often forget and message one another there. But since January the trust in Meta has not only plummeted but it's become a mainstream enough…

Something seems to have happened in NL in March that generated some demand for it, but it seems to have vanished now: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=NL&q=%2Fm%2F012...

That "something" is just people searching for this news story, rather than interest in signal for the sake of using it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_group...

NL clearly has some background interest in signal however, unlike the UK, which spikes on this story alone:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=%2Fm%2F012...

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#183

Post by nsagent »

andrepd wrote: post #3

Would be nice if these kinds of articles would at least take a paragraph to plug some alternatives, such as Signal.

I used to use Signal exclusively rather than Whatsapp, but I've had lots of issues sending media. This has not been a problem with Whatsapp, so I've recently begun to use Whatsapp more. There are also issues with message history that I've encountered on Signal that don't exist on Whatsapp.

If Signal could address these concerns I'd be happy to move away from Whatsapp.

With this news I'll likely need to reassess my use of Whatsapp again.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#184

Post by openplatypus »

Hoasi wrote: post #159
yapyap wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify I get because the Spotify free experience is HORRID. Youtube is also moving into that direction.

It's unclear to me how the paid Spotify experience compares with free, but you still get ads with the paid one. Also, you need to curate heavily because Spotify's algorithm will push certain types of content. If you listen to a podcast once, it is hard to get rid of it, as it will keep popping into your feed, or whatever they call their interface.

Omg I literally puke with Shopify ads in podcasts.

Whats the point of paid, premium service like Spotify if I keep being served those stupid, dishonest and bordeline illegally deceiving Shopify ads every 15 minutes.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#185

Post by sigotirandolas »

wvh wrote: post #143
filoleg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have the actual stats, but, sadly, it seems like a gigantic chunk of the “i would rather pay a small fee to use a service rather than paying for it with exposure to ads” crowd is mostly all-talk. And I am saying this as someone who genuinely believes in the “small fee instead of paying with ad exposure” approach. The one specific example of this that made me think so is the Youtube Premium situation. So many…

I am conflicted because to some extent, paying for some of these services feels like paying a blackmailer, spying on you, holding a whole ecosystem hostage and even jeopardising mental health and the public discourse. I pay for email and some other services. Some other services, not so much. I find it hard to support some companies financially because I don't agree with their basic modus operandi. It's not the money;…

To be devil's advocate, this is the kind of all-talk argument the parent was referring to. Once the paid option is available, people will demand it to be [cheaper / better / someone else] and still not pay.

While I don't love my money going to Google, I find YouTube's overall quality astronomically higher than Instagram/Twitter/TikTok/etc. and the amount of censorship/"moderation"/controversy has been relatively limited. When I find something I really want to keep I have always been able to download it without much trouble.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#186

Post by gruez »

selfhoster11 wrote: post #172
gruez wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal also claims the same: > We can't read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either. Should we be suspicious of Signal as well?

Signal isn't backed by a global data gathering conglomerate, so no.

You're right, they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government.

More to the point, I thought the principle was "Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king."? That seems to leave no room for hedging, like only distrusting "global data gathering conglomerate" or whatever. If you're have to do a holistic assessment of an organization's governance structure and incentives, you're basically admitting that witty one-liners like the above are pointless, which was my point.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#188

Post by sdeframond »

yibg wrote: post #170
Xenoamorphous wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when Whatsapp became a paid app, I can’t remember the details as I believe they varied by platform (iOS vs Android) but it was either €0.79 or €0.99, I’m not sure if one off or yearly payment, but it doesn’t matter. I, as the “computer guy”, had friends and family asking how to pirate it. This is coming from SMS costing €0.25 per message (text only!) and also coming from people who would gladly pay €3 for…

Similar situation as flights. People complain about lack of space, misc fees etc. But when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. I think the other factor is a bit of anchoring. I know this impacts me anyways. If there is a "free" alternative, then that's where I'm anchored at. I can watch youtube for free so paying for it seems like a bad deal. Where as there is no free altern…

> when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight.

Flight comparators don't show "avaliable legroom" in their metrics.

As far as I know some companies charge more for seats near entrances where there's more space, so people are willing to pay more.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#189

Post by nand_gate »

jonplackett wrote: post #150
leokennis wrote: post #7

At least in The Netherlands, WhatsApp could show a 60 second unskippable modal ad video on every launch, and still get away with it due to network effects. If you’re not on WhatsApp, no updates or news from your kids school, your sports team, your family, your car dealership etc. for you.

It’s not like there’s no alternatives. But tbh if they keep the ads out of messages I don’t see it an affecting people much.

Been tempting to spin up a competitor but the business/compliance side seems nightmarish whilst the actual tech aspects are trivial on modern hardware.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#190

Post by 6LLvveMx2koXfwn »

yibg wrote: post #170
Xenoamorphous wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when Whatsapp became a paid app, I can’t remember the details as I believe they varied by platform (iOS vs Android) but it was either €0.79 or €0.99, I’m not sure if one off or yearly payment, but it doesn’t matter. I, as the “computer guy”, had friends and family asking how to pirate it. This is coming from SMS costing €0.25 per message (text only!) and also coming from people who would gladly pay €3 for…

Similar situation as flights. People complain about lack of space, misc fees etc. But when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. I think the other factor is a bit of anchoring. I know this impacts me anyways. If there is a "free" alternative, then that's where I'm anchored at. I can watch youtube for free so paying for it seems like a bad deal. Where as there is no free altern…

I guess the point being Youtube versus Youtube without ads is as different as Coke versus water. But you're point holds in that people think they are the same service, as the ads bit, no matter how integral, is seen as 'other' than the service. This is a big win for the service provider. I remember when RyanAir charged £5 per flight plus £50 unavoidable add-ons, you ask anyone how much they paid, they said £5. Seems like the same thing here - we give the service provider too much kudos, it's as though consuming a service makes it part of us, so we big it up no matter if it's taking us for a ride.
Post reply on HN