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

Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 356 posts

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#41

Post by fragmede »

perl4ever wrote: post #37
igetspam wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which also were not a utility... Rotary phones are an interface to a utility. But let's be realistic, the copper required to connect homes to each other required a massive public works effort. Facebook turned on a server and ran some PHP to stalk college women. Big difference.

>Rotary phones are an interface to a utility. I'm not old enough to remember firsthand, but I believe rotary phones (in the US) are generally from the era when the phone company was a monopoly and strictly controlled what was plugged into their lines. So I think it may be technically correct to call them a (part of a) utility and not just an interface.

Yes. The telephone in your house belonged to AT&T, and you had to rent it from them. It took a lawsuit for them to allow other devices to connect to the phone network. Today's vendor lock-in is no different.

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#42

Post by dvtrn »

Denvercoder9 wrote: post #38
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Shouldn’t we focus on making those services accessible and affordable? " This. If calls and international calls were acessible, whatsapp wouldnt exist

> This. If calls and international calls were acessible, whatsapp wouldnt exist Whatsapp offers a whole lot more: read receipts, group chats, images and video, voice notes, location sharing, a web client (albeit a quite limited one), and it has a generally pretty good UX/UI (much better than Androids stock messaging app). Regardless of the economics, on a technical level calling/texting isn't competitive with Whatsap…

What ever became of RCS? Wasn’t that supposed to support a good number of these features?

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#43

Post by Johnny555 »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33
darth_avocado wrote: post #24

I know it’s hard for a lot of people but why do we automatically blame everything on Facebook? The inaccessibility to WhatsApp completely brings life to a standstill for a lot of people across the world. Isn’t that more of a failure on the part of the governments, people and companies that exist there? How is a app that needs access to internet somehow a bigger necessity than the basic function of the device the app…

"Shouldn’t we focus on making those services accessible and affordable? " This. If calls and international calls were acessible, whatsapp wouldnt exist

What is "accessible"? I can call anywhere in the USA for free, and its $0.01/minute to call an overseas relative, yet I almost never call.

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#44

Post by throw0101a »

dvtrn wrote: post #42
Denvercoder9 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This. If calls and international calls were acessible, whatsapp wouldnt exist Whatsapp offers a whole lot more: read receipts, group chats, images and video, voice notes, location sharing, a web client (albeit a quite limited one), and it has a generally pretty good UX/UI (much better than Androids stock messaging app). Regardless of the economics, on a technical level calling/texting isn't competitive with Whatsap…

What ever became of RCS? Wasn’t that supposed to support a good number of these features?

It requires news infrastructure on the telco side as well as client-side support:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services

There seems to be only lukewarm support for it from all parties involved. (Apple isn't even bothering to do much/anything, so that's a huge installed base where nothing is happening.)

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#45

Post by GoodJokes »

darth_avocado wrote: post #24

I know it’s hard for a lot of people but why do we automatically blame everything on Facebook? The inaccessibility to WhatsApp completely brings life to a standstill for a lot of people across the world. Isn’t that more of a failure on the part of the governments, people and companies that exist there? How is a app that needs access to internet somehow a bigger necessity than the basic function of the device the app…

Who do you think lobbies against public services like this? Facebook. Yes we should demand governments regulate Facebook as the bad actor it is.

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#47

Post by DantesKite »

darth_avocado wrote: post #24

I know it’s hard for a lot of people but why do we automatically blame everything on Facebook? The inaccessibility to WhatsApp completely brings life to a standstill for a lot of people across the world. Isn’t that more of a failure on the part of the governments, people and companies that exist there? How is a app that needs access to internet somehow a bigger necessity than the basic function of the device the app…

The demand is to not make Facebook responsible for everything. They shouldn't be in charge in what's ostensibly a public utility for most of the planet.

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#48

Post by DantesKite »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #27
azangru wrote: post #16

Why is the conclusion in that tweet "the billionth reason to break down and regulate Facebook" rather than "the billionth reason not to use whatsapp as the de facto phone and text messaging platform"?

The problem here is "other people". I'd like to use irc as a messaging platform, but almost noone uses it anymore. If all your friends and family use only whatsapp, you have no choice.

What are the benefits of using irc as a messaging platform?

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#49

Post by kitkat_new »

zwieback wrote: post #6
kitkat_new wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why instant messaging needs open standards like Matrix, which make switching apps and provider a nobrainer, because it almost wouldn't matter which one you would loose. Additionally, only one of many service proviers would be seriously affected if a service goes down. matrix.org

SMS is sort of that, right, at least a crude form?

yes, but I don't think SMS is sophisticated enough. After all, instant messengers replaced it ...

Re: Facebook going down meant more than just a social network being unavailable

#50

Post by lotsofpulp »

Johnny555 wrote: post #43
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Shouldn’t we focus on making those services accessible and affordable? " This. If calls and international calls were acessible, whatsapp wouldnt exist

What is "accessible"? I can call anywhere in the USA for free, and its $0.01/minute to call an overseas relative, yet I almost never call.

Accessible would be the mobile networks allowing people to call overseas for $0.01 per minute.

I would not dare try to call an international number via ATT/Verizon/T-Mobile outside of Canada/Mexico, because I would expect to pay at least $10 for the call if not more.

I do not know where one would get $0.01 per minute international calls from the US, but it is most likely not as easy as an app on your smartphone.

Post reply on HN