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

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#691

Post by k_bx »

ale42 wrote: post #454
k_bx wrote: post #447

I really hope it helps them build a decent app, but I doubt it. In Ukraine, there's a huge problem of Telegram being so feature-rich compared to WhatsApp that it's impossible to convince people to do the switch, even under the national security threat.

If one should switch, why should they switch to WhatsApp instead of something more privacy-friendly as Signal?

I'm a much heavier Signal user than WhatsApp but for broader audience it not even serious to consider. Too slow/laggish, lacks features (at some point it ate 40GB of my phone space -- with no good UI to clean it up), crashes etc. Not ready for this kind of scenario, unfortunately.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#692

Post by [deleted] »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #638
_Algernon_ wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translation: After going through a far too large number of focus groups that didn't want it we finally found one that phrased a reply in such a way, that after removing context and playing Chinese whispers up the management chain, can be interpreted as them wanting ads.

Nah, it's even simpler than that: after shoving enough surveys in users' faces (as they seem to semi-regularly do across all Meta products; I've had at least 2 in WhatsApp alone over the past few months), they've collected enough misclicks and drunk responses to be able to interpret them as lots of people wanting ads.

[deleted]

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#693

Post by k_bx »

jaoane wrote: post #455
k_bx wrote: post #447

I really hope it helps them build a decent app, but I doubt it. In Ukraine, there's a huge problem of Telegram being so feature-rich compared to WhatsApp that it's impossible to convince people to do the switch, even under the national security threat.

Really WhatsApp is not a national security threat? Ukraine is basically a vassal state of the US at this point, I would think it would be best to depend less of them.

It is to an extent, but not as much to call it a "national security threat".

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#694

Post by JCharante »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #48
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 can say from experience and from others who have been in this position (not email, but general services); its around 1-2% of people. Nebula, the answer to the tyranny of Youtube (who works for advertisers), has a I could write pages about this, but I wish I could violently shake all the children (many who are now in their 40's) that so deeply feel entitled to free content on the internet, and scream "If you are not…

re: rebula

I'm someone willing to shell out for SaaS and I don't see nebula being significantly better than just paying for youtube premium (which I do). They have some exclusive content but paying to watch a subset of content ad-free is just not going to work out (on a large scale, I know they're worth like $200m but that's much less than $1t)

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#695

Post by jen20 »

HenryBemis wrote: post #597
sebastiennight wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. The trick is to never mention "privacy", "no ads", or anything similar (which has negative perceived value). If you talk about that stuff, people will dilly-dally with the usual "well I already have too many apps, I'm not sure I want to install one more" I tell people that the video calls are better (which was true in my experience, back when I still used WA). Instant install

The fun fact is that those people have 100+ apps on their phones, which run in the background, draining their batteries, tracking the sh*t out of them, never actually use them (get value out of them) and they think zero about their privacy (probably use gmail or the sorts). Someone asked me to install Viber and it had 30 pages of advertisers/data brokers. I won't share a bowl of poop with them (WhatsApp, Viber, etc.)…

> The fun fact is that those people have 100+ apps on their phones, which run in the background, draining their batteries, tracking the sh*t out of them,

This is wildly untrue on iOS. Perhaps people have 100+ apps. But the rest, not so much.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#696

Post by owebmaster »

phyrex wrote: post #658
b0a04gl wrote: post #427

everyone saw this coming the day facebook bought it, but the real issue isn't ads in status . it's that the platform is now locked into meta's attention monetization engine. the founders explicitly said no ads. now not only ads, but paid channels, algorithmic exposure, and user segmentation creeping in. most people won't switch because of network effects, so meta can keep tightening the screws. this isn't about reven…

It's been 11 years. If they hadn't been bought they'd have found a different monetization model long ago

WhatsApp make billions of dollars but Meta wants it to make hundreds of billions. There's no way to appease the dragon.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#697

Post by sunaookami »

whilenot-dev wrote: post #413
DecentShoes wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but they did it because Australia forced them to.

I doubt that, EU consumer rights already stated that "the consumer shall have a period of 14 days to withdraw from a distance or off-premises contract". Steam purchases count as "digital content" in that case. [0]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/83/oj#art_9.tit_1

This is not true for digital purchases when you waive your rights to withdraw which you have to accept for digital storefronts. See under point 19).

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#698

Post by dwedge »

mort96 wrote: post #434
cocoto wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criticizing Signal for its crypto payment system is ridiculous. The option is totally optional and completely buried as it is literally the last option when messaging. It’s better to criticize the rule against third-party clients.

Both things are worthy of criticism. I'd ideally not use a messaging client that's embroidered in an ecosystem of cryptocurrency scams. Same reason I really don't like Brave even though its cryptocurrency BS is also "optional". It's erosive. But yeah, I might agree that the third party clients thing is a bigger issue. Especially when the official client insists on not officially supporting Linux on ARM64 and not play…

> Same reason I really don't like Brave even though its cryptocurrency BS is also "optional".

It isn't, or wasn't, optional. They used to MITM crypto into your Twitter feed after decrypting the SSL. There's also the famous Tom Scott controversy where they were pretending to be him and collecting donations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18736888

I uninstalled it in 2017 or 2018 when they started this crap and haven't looked back.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#699

Post by owebmaster »

high_na_euv wrote: post #648
overfeed wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can use WhatsApp to talk to people across the world, you bet your ass that nobody would be using it in Indonesia and Brazil if it costed one dollar, vastly diminishing its value. WhatsApp had payments (or a pilot) pre-acquisiton. At $1/year, it was an amazing value proposition even for those earning $1/day. IIRC, this was when WhatsApp had 3-500M users globally. Interestingly, they allowed people to pay the sub…

1 day salary for chat app? Are you nuts?

People pay months of salary for a phone, what's one dollar for the most used app?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#700

Post by jen20 »

leokennis wrote: post #607
alias_neo wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved my family over to Signal years ago. Anyone new who wants to message me, I simply say "I'm on Signal" and if it's important enough, they go and install it; it's been fairly frictionless, after all how hard is it to download an app and go through the fairly minimal registration process; and for someone already using WhatsApp, "one more account" probably isn't a major concern. I tried various steps in the past t…

> I simply say "I'm on Signal" and if it's important enough, they go and install it; it's been fairly frictionless, after all how hard is it to download an app and go through the fairly minimal registration process Genuinely curious. I am in WhatsApp groups for my kids soccer teams (who will be there at the game, can my kid drive together with you to the match), my kids school classes (Johnny lost his headphones did…

I've managed to go a very long time - living in both the UK and the US - using only iMessage and (as of around 2017) Signal.

I finally had to install WhatsApp on a trip recently for group coordination, but ensured it didn't get things like contact access, and removed it afterwards.

Kids school may well be an outlier (US), but they send formal communication by email (with an SMS notification or call for emergencies), and the parent group is all on iMessage.

Post reply on HN