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

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#31

Post by mrtksn »

blitzar wrote: post #21
mrtksn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I expect it to be at least %3 as this is the general conversion rate for "free" users AFAIK. There must be some some number that makes it viable to have free users and paid users. For games, the free users are usually those who provide the "content". People usually demonize freemium games but IMHO its much more benign than extracting huge sums by artificially making it worse and sell attention.

Most of those are tricked into it by manipulative UI or nearly impossible to cancel trials or forgotten monthly subscriptions.

How is it possible to have impossible to cancel trails? On AppStore it's in your account and takes 2 taps to cancel regardless of what the developer does.

Are you talking for direct, by credit card payments that somehow you can't cancel? Can you explain a bit?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#32

Post by blitzar »

AlexandrB wrote: post #20
laurent123456 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As always network effect will be the problem. I know plenty of people on WhatsApp and almost nobody on Signal

It's a problem but not insurmountable. Otherwise we'd all still be using ICQ/AIM/MSN Messenger/Skype/etc.

We are off those because of multi messanger platforms made switching to the "hot new thing" very low friction. It was only once mobile came along that the playing field narrowed so much.

Current networks have way more lock in than back in the day.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#33

Post by tiluha »

stevage wrote: post #10
laurent123456 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As always network effect will be the problem. I know plenty of people on WhatsApp and almost nobody on Signal

I don't find there is much network effect for one on one messaging. I have to use a few different apps to talk to all my friends, it's not a big deal to switch to/from Signal or Whatsapp. With groups it's more effort.

This does not match my experience in Germany. If somebody gives you their phone number it is just expected that you can reach them on WhatsApp and i have yet to meet anyone that doesn't use WhatsApp.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#34

Post by filoleg »

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 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 people in the “a fee instead of ads” crowd consumes YT for hours a day, but so far I’ve only met one person (not counting myself) who actually pays for YT Premium.

And yes, a major chunk of the people I talked about this with were FAANG engineers, so it isn’t like they cannot afford it. But it felt like they were more interested in complaining about the ad-funded-services landscape and muse on their stances around it, as opposed to actually putting their money where their mouth is.

All I can say is, I am not paying for YT Premium out of some ideological standpoint or love for Google (not even close). It has genuinely been just worth it for me many times over in the exact practical ways I was expecting it to.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#35

Post by perks_12 »

WhatsApp has S-tier status here in Germany. If I had access to a proper API I would pay them per message, without them needing to make their UX worse. If anything, if I had to pay per message, I'd be incentivized not to send too many messages, keeping the distractions for the user at a minimum.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#36

Post by jahnu »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #25
jahnu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal have a few things that make it a hard sell. It's really hard to clean up media. You have to go into every single chat and from there go about deleting stuff. At least they finally added a "select all" option in there recently. So the size of it just grows and grows and grows until it's using all the space on your phone. Not a good fit for non-technical types. Secondly, no web view. There is the desktop app yes…

> So the size of it just grows and grows and grows until it's using all the space on your phone. Not a good fit for non-technical types. To be fair I've met plenty of non-techie types whose phones were "full" of stuff from WhatsApp or photos that had already been backed up, because the idea they could clear their local storage would never cross their minds. I've seen people buy new phones instead of clearing their ca…

Yes it's also a problem there but WhatsApp gives you the tools to fix the problem in minutes if not seconds, or ask your tech literate relative or friend to help and it only takes them the couple of minutes to clear it and maybe show you how. With Signal it can take hours of work so what happens is the non-techy person understands "oh this app filled my phone up I shouldn't use it".

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#38

Post by gear54rus »

Does anyone know what's the state of the art way for cutting crap out of android apps? In the same way adblock cuts crap out of web pages?

I assume one would need a Java disassembler at least. On desktop, something like recaf works and allows changing things in classes without the full recompilation.

Is there something like this for android?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#39

Post by gloxkiqcza »

angry_octet wrote: post #13
jraby3 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp has long promoted itself as a safe alternative to apps like Telegram and Google’s Android messaging. Users flocked to the app globally, finding it a cheap and secure alternative to texting, particularly people in unstable political climates and authoritarian countries, since its messages cannot be easily intercepted without access to personal devices.

This reply screams LLM. Not really responding to the parent comment, nauseatingly anodyne in content. Not wrong, but not right. Will HN be overwhelmed with LLM trash?

It’s a quote from the linked article.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#40

Post by A_Duck »

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…

The trouble with charging people is you have to charge everybody the same[1], so you're leaving money on the table with wealthy users, and pricing out poorer users

Ads mean each user 'pays' you according to their spending power

Kinda socialist when you think about it! From each according from his ability...

[1] Obviously companies try to get around this with price discrimination, but it's hard especially for a network effect platform

Post reply on HN