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

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#291

Post by carlosjobim »

tumsfestival wrote: post #224
carlosjobim wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people go absolutely mentally deranged by a simple magical incantation. The powerful incantation or spell consists of only one word: "Free". That word will make people loose their mind and their soul. It will make people accept anything and everything that they would never otherwise accept. They will line up for hours, they will accept hostile and toxic messages being screamed into their faces, they will humilia…

Well, that is what happens when everything costs money and most people are just trying to get by on a daily basis, making cuts everywhere just to pay their bills, not everyone has a nice disposable income to throw away at apps. That people prefer ads over paying yet another subscription is a symptom of unchecked capitalism and the inequality that comes with it.

But how is it "unchecked capitalism" to pay for something that you use and enjoy? Unchecked is when people who work full time cannot afford even a simple home – which is 90% of young workers practically world wide. Unchecked is endless debt slavery.

But paying a fair price for a service which has actual value for you is not "unchecked". That's sieving flies and swallowing camels.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#292

Post by ajsnigrutin »

mrtksn wrote: post #8

Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…

Me? Never again.

I used to... like some app, paid for a "PRO" version to get additonal features. Everything was ok.

Then 6 months went by, and they added a cloud feature, to upload some stuff and configs and sync between devices, and it turned from one time payment to a subscription plan. Then built-in features got moved into the cloud, and previously working stuff didn't work without subscriptions anymore. Then they added ads. PRO has maybe 2 more features than a free version and no nag screen at the start, and that's it.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#293

Post by browningstreet »

mrtksn wrote: post #8

Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…

I think every business model on the planet is subject to “and ads” consideration. I wish it wasn’t true, but it’s the business equivalent of “every app becomes a social graph”.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#294

Post by bsoles »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #181
bsoles wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 pa…

I don't disagree. I am mostly talking about my hesitations for not willing to pay small amounts of fees for bunch of internet services. I am afraid that the "cost" of paying for these services would end up being a lot more than the actual amount of money.

Incidentally, this is also the reason, as much as I would like to, for not donating to public/non-profit organizations. Anybody who has donated to a political party or an organization like ACLU would know what I am talking about...

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#295

Post by ElijahLynn »

LtWorf wrote: post #219
ElijahLynn wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paying for YT Premium is a no brainer. Especially for someone like myself with ADHD. I love paying for ad-removal. Take. My. Money.

Everyone else just uses newpipe, mpv, and so on

I value good content, or maybe it's not even that good, but it's valuable. I appreciate paying people for their time to make things that teach me new things.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#296

Post by tonyhart7 »

mrtksn wrote: post #8

Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…

problem is google and meta prefer you not to buy

Ads money is larger than user buying subscription they don't want you to buy software lol

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#297

Post by AndrewDavis »

makeitdouble wrote: post #202
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…

> people would never pay for software. I mostly share your conclusion, but I think there is a specific twist: most people will pay for on the spot transactions. We see it in spades for games: in-app purchases and season passes have a lower barrier of acceptance. I assume buying stones to unlock a character must be thought at the same level as buying coffee, as just a one-time purchase that doesn't require further cal…

It'd be interesting to see open data about this.

My understanding is games with microtransactions optimise for "whales", people who spend inordinate amounts of money. While the majority of users don't pay anything, or at most very little.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#298

Post by emseetech »

socalgal2 wrote: post #286
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…

> people would never pay for software. I see this and not see this. See this = friend wants to check out app but it costs $1-$3. I'm like, that's less than a coffee or a candy bar that you consume disposably. Why not just try it and if it's sucks throw it away, the same way you might with a new food item? That argument doesn't work on them for some reason. not see = Steam

Also, do people not pay for it because there are still so many free competing services?

If everything goes the way of ads and (for lack of a better term) enshittification, could consumer attitudes change?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#299

Post by mc3301 »

rootnod3 wrote: post #28

I think that kind of business model will screw them. Line has a more sensible one. For example if a business wants to message all its followers, they can only do so twice a month unless they start paying. So customers get an ad-free experience and can only receive ad messages from companies or accounts they follow.

There are most certainly ad banners in Line. At least in Japan. And they used to have some strange invasive bluetooth auto-connect when near a convenience store.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#300

Post by kalleboo »

mac-mc wrote: post #221
scrivanodev wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you replace YouTube with? To my its educational value is unmatched. I owe so much of my learning to it.

IMO if youtube was an actual paid service, I would also expect a lot of the advertiser driven demonitization actions to go away when your in paid mode, but it isn't so I still miss out on a lot of potentially interesting topics or things that could be talked about, but are not, due to the chilling effects of the demonitization & deboosting police.

> it isn't

It is though. Videos with "limited ads" (as it's technically called in YouTube Studio) applied to them still get paid out of Premium views.

Post reply on HN