WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs • Hacker News Board

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#51

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:43 PM UTC

qeternity wrote: post #38

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plenty of other communications networks are open, so any network effect of "walled gardens" ought to be attributed to the superiority of the product. So, when people evidently complain that they feel the social pressure to use the walled garden even though they rather wouldn't ... then that ought to be attributed to the superiority of the product? Could you explain your reasoning behind that?

What explanation is necessary? You've laid it out already. It's like saying you feel pressure to drive a gasoline powered car instead of a coal powered one because gasoline is much more convenient. The network effect arises out of superiority over competition. The social pressure is a result of everyone using the same platform, which itself is a testament to the product.

So, you are essentially saying that network effects don't exist, then, right?

The idea of network effects is that they create a cost simply for individually choosing an uncommon option, after all other costs and benefits have been accounted for. Which would obviously imply that they create an incentive to choose a common option even if it were an inferior choice without the network effect, as long as the benefits of the uncommon option don't exceed the cost caused by the network effect. Which would thus imply that a situation could arise where everyone individually chooses an inferior product. So, if you say that that can't happen, then network effects don't exist, right?

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#52

Post by qeternity » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:45 PM UTC

vageli wrote: post #43

qeternity wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What explanation is necessary? You've laid it out already. It's like saying you feel pressure to drive a gasoline powered car instead of a coal powered one because gasoline is much more convenient. The network effect arises out of superiority over competition. The social pressure is a result of everyone using the same platform, which itself is a testament to the product.

In what way does ubiquity equate to superiority? Popularity does not confer superiority.

Haha of course it does, though perhaps not to you. If there were a superior alternative, people would use it. You're just defining this problem so narrowly has only the app itself or something. It's the network, the integrations, the history, etc.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#53

Post by balladeer » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:46 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #23

devit wrote: post #21

The real problem here is that after this stunt I'd like to completely stop using Whatsapp and switch to something else instead, but I can't because other people use Whatsapp and communicating with other people is essential to me. The problem is there no laws to stop whoever becomes the lucky recipient of such a network effect from doing whatever they want. Instead antitrust law needs to be expanded to consider networ…

It sucks. Here in the Netherlands, WhatsApp is used by the vast majority of people. The holdouts (like me) consist of people who don't want to deal with smartphones (some elderly, some who deliberately avoid them because of addictive behaviour), or who own a smartphone, but don't agree with WhatsApp's terms of use (essentially paying for access with your data). Not using WhatsApp has consequences. We sometimes miss o…

Sometimes the consequences are are quite difficult to deal with.

These days I am looking to rent a flat in India. It's a tough task for a bachelor here - add to that the fact that builders rarely build 1 bedroom flats.

So any broker I call simply tells me "WhatsApp me your requirement, budget, and details". When (sometimes) say "I'll SMS" the prompt response is "no no, WhatsApp". Most of them/us here don't check SMS - it's reserved for either spam or bank txn notifications and OTPs.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#54

Post by qeternity » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:51 PM UTC

bkor wrote: post #50

qeternity wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then the product stops being superior, but it still has everyone's contacts, so most users stay You're just twisting words here. The fact that switching costs are too high means it's superior. You're defining superiority to be some very strict UX that you've decided. > then the product keeps getting worse until it's unbearable and everyone switches to the most popular superior alternative Exactly. Once it stops bei…

> You're just twisting words here. The fact that switching costs are too high means it's superior. I don't see how high switching costs implies superior, nor how that's part of a definition for superior. For superior app I'd consider that to mean if it's better. It's also weird your usage of superior has shifted. You've stated it became bigger because it was superior; meaning superior is not about how much used it is…

What? I never said they were mutually exclusive? Far from a conflict, what you're describing is exactly the network effect: it both became large because it was superior, and it's size/growth contributed to it's superiority. This is the flywheel that is the network effect.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#55

Post by danaris » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:52 PM UTC

qeternity wrote: post #39

yorwba wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They start out by building a superior product; then that product gets big; then they realize they need to monetize; then the product stops being superior, but it still has everyone's contacts, so most users stay; then the product keeps getting worse until it's unbearable and everyone switches to the most popular superior alternative... WhatsApp is currently in the "no longer superior" phase.

> then the product stops being superior, but it still has everyone's contacts, so most users stay You're just twisting words here. The fact that switching costs are too high means it's superior. You're defining superiority to be some very strict UX that you've decided. > then the product keeps getting worse until it's unbearable and everyone switches to the most popular superior alternative Exactly. Once it stops bei…

Except that the superiority, at this point, has nothing to do with the product itself. It is primarily—possibly solely—due to who else uses it.

That is not something that WhatsApp chose, or designed, except in that they hoped that everyone would be using it.

This is not a free market, where the product in question is something that one simply purchases and continues to purchase, and can switch to any other product freely. The products in this space are, to some extent, non-interchangeable (Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp may all offer online communication with other users, but if the users you want to contact are only on one of them, that is the only one that is useful to you), and there is a significant barrier to exit.

So a product that no one would have willingly chosen to start using may still end up being used long after it is, objectively, inferior to every other offering in that product category—so long as the people using it still need to communicate with each other, and cannot easily coordinate a mass exodus to a different product.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#56

Post by oliwarner » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:53 PM UTC

bkor wrote: post #40

oliwarner wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying ~"We need more laws!" isn't enough. What do you specifically want here? We could demand that all network protocols are fair game for reverse-engineering to enable interoperability. Or mandate public specs and save everybody a bit of effort. But if it's my app —not the protocol or the service itself— that's generating revenue to pay for the whole thing (eg adverts), why is it fair to let people and other provid…

> why is it fair to let people and other providers usurp that? If you have a monopoly then there are various restrictions on what you can do. Whatsapp is pretty much the way to communicate within The Netherlands. Other companies which have a monopoly and/or huge market share (e.g. 2 companies which each have 40% of the market). This e.g. resulted in KPN (ADSL/VDSL) being forced to open up their infrastructure. I don'…

Telecoms monopolies are usually required to provide fair access to competitors. BT in the UK provides a number of services to resellers and limited site access to exchanges to and cabinets. But that open access only has to be fair by law, not free. BT gets showered in cash, both to maintain the infrastructure and also provide physical access. KPN will too.

Running Whatsapp isn't free. Their servers hold messages, handle authentication, developers need salaries. Third parties should have to contribute to this too. WhatsApp should get to charge for access to their infrastructure, Just like BT/KPN/etc.

But now you're in a situation where competitors either pony up and swallow the cost themselves —as WhatsApp does— or we also force WhatsApp to not undercut its wholesale price, to make it less tempting. Price restrictions are common in attempts to overturn physical monopolies.

Open access is a lofty goal but it also cements that protocol, those phone lines, that water pipe as the provider for that type service. It can also arrest the development of the base infrastructure, as well as putting people off developing their own alternatives.

Or... We get a bit more revolutionary about things like this. If somebody makes something that becomes fundamental to society, society buys it outright. [Inter]nationalise services (and drugs, and patents, etc). In this case, buy WhatsApp, federate the service (allow people to run their own nodes) and fix the addressing so it's like email. I'm sure somebody can make cases for and against that.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#57

Post by furyg3 » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 12:56 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #23

devit wrote: post #21

The real problem here is that after this stunt I'd like to completely stop using Whatsapp and switch to something else instead, but I can't because other people use Whatsapp and communicating with other people is essential to me. The problem is there no laws to stop whoever becomes the lucky recipient of such a network effect from doing whatever they want. Instead antitrust law needs to be expanded to consider networ…

It sucks. Here in the Netherlands, WhatsApp is used by the vast majority of people. The holdouts (like me) consist of people who don't want to deal with smartphones (some elderly, some who deliberately avoid them because of addictive behaviour), or who own a smartphone, but don't agree with WhatsApp's terms of use (essentially paying for access with your data). Not using WhatsApp has consequences. We sometimes miss o…

To be fair, my Signal list of contacts keeps growing here in NL. I do some light proselytizing, but it seems to be moving along on it's own. Hopefully Arjan Lubach (Holland's Jon Oliver) will do a hit-peice on WhatsApp like he did on Facebook at some point in the future.

I'd like to delete WhatsApp, but any conversation I have in Signal vs WhatsApp is a small victory that I'll take. If at some point more than 50% of my messages are outside WA, I'll nuke it.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#58

Post by lucb1e » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 1:01 PM UTC

Rjevski wrote: post #18

The affected developers should “cease and desist” by stopping further development and releasing the code as open-source. WhatsApp/Facebook will then have to send C&Ds to hundreds of potentially anonymous contributors if they want any chance of taking the open-sourced app down.

Or just removing WhatsApp support and supporting some other platforms instead. If they don't want people to find their platform convenient, no problem.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#59

Post by realusername » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 1:04 PM UTC

qeternity wrote: post #38

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plenty of other communications networks are open, so any network effect of "walled gardens" ought to be attributed to the superiority of the product. So, when people evidently complain that they feel the social pressure to use the walled garden even though they rather wouldn't ... then that ought to be attributed to the superiority of the product? Could you explain your reasoning behind that?

What explanation is necessary? You've laid it out already. It's like saying you feel pressure to drive a gasoline powered car instead of a coal powered one because gasoline is much more convenient. The network effect arises out of superiority over competition. The social pressure is a result of everyone using the same platform, which itself is a testament to the product.

Cars don't have much network effects, the best car is bought regardless of the dominant brand of the year (I agree with your point on the car). However, social network have a network effect which makes it very hard to switch, if all your friends use app A, it's difficult to make them use app B.

Re: WhatsApp sends Cease and Desists for apps that use native Android APIs

#60

Post by einarfd » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 1:04 PM UTC

I wonder what Google thinks about this. If these companies only use standard Android API's, and they get sued over that, that isn't good for Googles platform at all. A reasonable response from Google would be to change their terms for publishing to the Play store, if they don't say it already, that you aren't allowed to sue other app makers, if they only use standard API to interop with your app.