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

Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 533 posts

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#481

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #224
sensanaty wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You paying just signals that you're someone to push more ads to and to harvest more data on, since it means you have disposable income to spend on something as useless as instagram or facebook. Meta isn't going to stop harvesting all your information just because you pay for a subscription, they'll harvest and sell your data AND take your money.

"Meta isn't going to stop harvesting all your information just because you pay for a subscription, they'll harvest [and sell] your data AND take your money." (Meta sells access not data) Google has been doing this for a while with YouTube The data collection and surveillance will of course be used to support online advertising services. The ads can be delivered outside YouTube by other Alphabet business units or part…

Intermediary (middleman) creates nuisance then charges subscription fees to temporarily "remove" it for those few who pay

But no amount of payment will remove the nuisance. The intermediary has made it their "business model"

Remove the middleman to remove the nuisance

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#483

Post by abenga »

pyrale wrote: post #472
fragmede wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that get money to the people making the videos I like watching?

I'd suggest getting them money through patreon, kofi or whatever patrons system they use instead. That's much safer for them than YT ad money and helps them feel less pressure when they get demonetized or whatnot.

I probably watch too many channels to pay them each outside youtube, it will become quickly logistically unmanageable, if not unaffordable. The maximum I can do is probably 5 channels or so.

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#484

Post by the_af »

jjulius wrote: post #479
the_af wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, yes, "truly value". The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle. Needless to say, I disagree. I value my (various groups of) friends more than I value moving out of WhatsApp, and for what anyway? WhatsApp is perfect for our needs. If it becomes paid-only, we'll move out of it, but not before. I don't need dealing with this kind o…

>The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle. Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility? But at the end of the day, yeah, it's not all that off-base. The m…

> Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility?

No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle. WhatsApp works. And I do want to talk to them, it's not an "either way, who cares" deal for me.

And there's no hostility, I was merely pointing out how much HN can be out of touch with reality sometimes. "Nerdy" is only a hostile adjective if you want it to be. Do you?

> What is "the real world"? Is there a standard definition that is applicable to everyone everywhere? I live in "the real world", too, and have no issue conversing with all of my family, parents from my kid's school, and official notifications from school without WhatsApp or social media.

I already explained this in my first comment to which you replied: the only people who see no trouble in replacing all these apps are those who don't use them for anything interesting. Like you. Meanwhile, other people exist in the rest of the world, and it's not so easy...

> The thing that a lot of people in the comments in these types of threads seem to miss [...]

Exactly. We just disagree on what is missed.

> "Here's how to reach me," one time is all that needs to be done. If they want to reach you, they'll reach you.

No, this is not how it works. This is, like I said, a very HN micro-bubble thing to say.

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#485

Post by jjulius »

the_af wrote: post #484
jjulius wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle. Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility? But at the end of the day, yeah, it's not all that off-base. The m…

> Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility? No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle. WhatsApp works. And I do want to talk to them, it's not an "either way, who cares" deal for…

>No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle.

Nobody's asking you to force them. :)

>I already explained this in my first comment to which you replied: the only people who see no trouble in replacing all these apps are those who don't use them for anything interesting. Like you. Meanwhile, other people exist in the rest of the world, and it's not so easy...

Yes, your comment said that it "will only work for people who are not really users of WhatsApp or Instagram". My point is that I have plenty of friends and family who regularly use both of those platforms, and they also regularly communicate with me outside of those platforms. It took no haranguing on my part, I just let them know how to say hey if they wanted to.

>No, this is not how it works.

It is! I genuinely think you'd be surprised at how many people would go along with it.

>This is, like I said, a very HN micro-bubble thing to say.

Except that it's not. What is "HN" about walking away from tech? That's a growing trend in our contemporary society. You argue that it's a "very HN" thing to do, yet I'm the only person in my friends and family group that would be considered a "techie", and everyone who I communicate with seems to have had no problem getting in touch with me outside of those tech apps.

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#486

Post by renegade-otter »

bko wrote: post #418
renegade-otter wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you want to signal that? It relates in no way as to what kind of person you are. In fact, the richer you are, the more questions I have about how you got it and who got shafted along the way.

> In fact, the richer you are, the more questions I have about how you got it and who got shafted along the way. What a sad way to live life. Not only because it's untrue (assuming you don't live in North Korea), but it's incredibly dark and destructive.

The fact that you think it's "sad" is a dead giveaway in terms of what you value in life and what you consider a virtue.

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#487

Post by Danox »

qqtt wrote: post #98

I'm going to go against the grain here and say this is probably a positive thing for Meta products, and honestly every other "free" service to provide these kinds of revenue avenues. How many times do we hear things like "if the product is free, you are the product" - well, the consequence of that is development resources tend to be pulled into directions that benefit advertisers. By having material subscription reve…

You’re right you’re going against the the grain it isn’t positive for the end user.

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#488

Post by the_af »

jjulius wrote: post #485
the_af wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility? No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle. WhatsApp works. And I do want to talk to them, it's not an "either way, who cares" deal for…

>No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle. Nobody's asking you to force them. :) >I already explained this in my first comment to which you replied: the only people who see no trouble in replacing all these apps are those who don't use them for anything interesting. Like you. Meanwhile, other people exist in the rest of the world, and it's not so easy... Ye…

> Nobody's asking you to force them

If you're not forcing them, and you want to keep in touch with them, aren't we back where we started? "It's not so easy".

> It took no haranguing on my part, I just let them know how to say hey if they wanted to.

Perfect, it worked for you. It doesn't work for others. Let's say it with me: "it's not so easy".

> It is! I genuinely think you'd be surprised at how many people would go along with it.

It's not! There are many groups out there for which your experience doesn't apply. It's a bubble. And it's a bit presumptuous to assume your interlocutor has no experience trying to change things. At one point, some things are not worth the effort and one has to pick their battles.

> Except that it's not. What is "HN" about walking away from tech?

The HN bubble I refer to is the one where they (we actually, of course I'm not immune) think their microcosm of experiences, very principled and nerd- or tech-focused, and often for specific cultures or nations, applies to the rest of the world. It's typical of some HN'ers to announce to the world that they have LEFT FACEBOOK FOR GOOD and that they aren't missing anything important. Great for them!

It's helpful to always remember: not everyone is like you/me/us, and... wait for it... "it's not that easy".

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#489

Post by jjulius »

the_af wrote: post #488
jjulius wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, I'm not going to force them to communicate differently with me just out of some sort of principle. Nobody's asking you to force them. :) >I already explained this in my first comment to which you replied: the only people who see no trouble in replacing all these apps are those who don't use them for anything interesting. Like you. Meanwhile, other people exist in the rest of the world, and it's not so easy... Ye…

> Nobody's asking you to force them If you're not forcing them, and you want to keep in touch with them, aren't we back where we started? "It's not so easy". > It took no haranguing on my part, I just let them know how to say hey if they wanted to. Perfect, it worked for you. It doesn't work for others. Let's say it with me: "it's not so easy". > It is! I genuinely think you'd be surprised at how many people would go…

Alrighty. :)

Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

#490

Post by dgellow »

venzaspa wrote: post #422
dgellow wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a standard chat application, people are also using Facebook, WhatsApp, etc for illegal/immoral discussions. I've been using it as my main chat client for more than 10y and have never used or felt the need to use the community channels, it's just a great messenger. Doing illegal stuff in public Telegram channels is extremely stupid, they aren't encrypted, you're pretty much giving your information to law enforcem…

Why not settle on a chat which actually uses e2e encryption by default though? There's truth to the Russophile comment though, Telegram is regularly used by GRU and the FSB to recruit people to commit acts of vandalism and terror and is pretty well documented. It's also commonly used to spread disinformation and conspiracy theories. My mum has fallen for several of these via Telegram.

Sorry for your mum. FWIW you have the same content on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit.

Telegram has a larger Russian speaking audience because of the founder, who created VK in Russia. But that doesn’t make it Russophile. Ukraine is organizing pretty much all their resistance on Telegram…

The public channels are where the trash content is, I’ve never used them myself, you have to explicitly look for that feature, it’s not like they are shown in the chat interface directly.

> Why not settle on a chat which actually uses e2e encryption by default though?

Because I care more about the quality of user experience, and Telegram has been awesome to use since I first tried it

Post reply on HN