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

WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

orat.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 240 posts

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#81

Post by privong »

Khao wrote: post #71
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the credibility attributed to Signal - f.x. by Bruce Schneier and Edward Snowden - I don't understand why it's not more popular than Telegram.

I want something to replace Hangouts, WhatsApp and Messenger and Telegram fits the bill while it looks to me like Signal doesn't. My Telegram account can be synced on multiple PCs and devices, while Signal seems to be phone only.

> My Telegram account can be synced on multiple PCs and devices, while Signal seems to be phone only.

I believe that is only temporary. The latest version of Signal hints at multi-device synchronization, though it appears to not be fully implemented. One example of this is the Chrome browser extension[0].

[0] https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Browser

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#82

Post by username223 »

rms_returns wrote: post #76
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need a competitor to FB ... sadly options like Diaspora are very problematic b/c you need to either run a server or trust a private person with it.

We have many like Google plus, twitter, linkedin, reddit and even hacker news (catering to a specific niche). Problem here is that too many people whom we may call "less tech savvy" won't leave FB. So, in order to stay "compatible" with them, we need to keep our FB accounts active!

Do actual humans still use G+ and linkedin? I thought they were mostly just playgrounds for bot-wars.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#83

Post by JosephRedfern »

toyg wrote: post #53
JosephRedfern wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the "code" is - it has to be in order for it to be executed. My point is that method variable names are not normally visible.

I'm not sure I follow -- this is what comes up from a random commercial project (I don't believe it's a debug build): http://i.imgur.com/OhdNC5A.png What part would you refer to as "method variable name"?

That's weird. By "method variable names" I mean local variables, i.e. those declared inside a method.

I'm not getting the same results as you with a little sample program I wrote - see: https://gist.github.com/JosephRedfern/662131ceb2119abf3e83. Field names and method names are preserved (which make sense), but local variable names are lost (which also makes sense to me!)

Are you sure that your example code doesn't include debug information?

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#84

Post by sk5t »

JosephRedfern wrote: post #14
tshtf wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Android APKs have been decompiled which confirmed this was completely intentional: http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/12/01/whatsapp-is-blocking... > The smoking gun is a pattern match performed on any URL string that begins with the word 'telegram.' In the most recent version of the app, these strings are classified as a "bad host," so that no hyperlink is generated and it becomes impossible to copy or forward an…

Maybe times have changed and these things are now included in the dex file, but that doesn't seem to be a verbatim decompiler output to me. Local variable names aren't normally stored in an APK, they're just refereed to by register numbers. For instance, I wouldn't expect to see "for(Pattern badHost : BAD_HOSTS)" (specifically the badHost) - last time I checked, this information would be lost during compilation. I'm…

Local variables no, but a method name like isBadHost, and the field BAD_HOSTS, would be preserved in the absence of an obfuscator (and then, its job would not be trivial as isBadHost is scoped public).

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#85

Post by rms_returns »

an4rchy wrote: post #2

Wow, didn't expect this from WhatsApp. I wonder if we can hear it from their side to see if they have a specific reason. Also, are they blocking any other messenger links i.e WeChat, Line etc or just Telegram.

FB is too large an organization to survive long when competition is eating a huge chunk of their services. And especially so, if the competition is someone like telegram who is both free and open source.

Their decision to purchase WhatsApp turned out to be very ill-timed. WhatsApp was at the peak of their popularity when they did, but that peak was only because of ignorance of the masses - ignorance about glaring holes in WhatsApp security, and ignorance about significantly better alternatives like Telegram. But in the age of Internet, ignorance hardly lasts long among the masses, of all people, Zuckerburg should have known this!

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#86

Post by [deleted] »

plusquamperfekt wrote: post #62
gkfasdfasdf wrote: post #35

According to the Telegram FAQ [1] the Telegram Facebook page [2] has been taken down as well. [1] https://telegram.org/faq#facebook [2] https://www.facebook.com/tlgrm

We need a competitor to FB ... sadly options like Diaspora are very problematic b/c you need to either run a server or trust a private person with it.

[deleted]

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#87

Post by amyjess »

venning wrote: post #75

Playing devil's advocate: WhatsApp is a $22B investment. It makes sense to try to prevent it from being canabalized from the inside. We've seen something like this before, when AIM allowed MSN Messenger to interoperate. I know this is a little different, but that was still how AIM lost. Here is a fantastic war story from one of the MSN engineers on the battle to subvert AIM [1]. [1] https://nplusonemag.com/issue-19/e…

> We've seen something like this before, when AIM allowed MSN Messenger to interoperate. I know this is a little different, but that was still how AIM lost.

Lost? AIM was the dominant IM platform in the US until the late 00s/early 10s when mobile and cloud-based services took over. First SMS/MMS and then platforms like Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts, and Skype.

The only place MSN was dominant was third-world countries like Brazil.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#88

Post by roymurdock »

venning wrote: post #75

Playing devil's advocate: WhatsApp is a $22B investment. It makes sense to try to prevent it from being canabalized from the inside. We've seen something like this before, when AIM allowed MSN Messenger to interoperate. I know this is a little different, but that was still how AIM lost. Here is a fantastic war story from one of the MSN engineers on the battle to subvert AIM [1]. [1] https://nplusonemag.com/issue-19/e…

From my experience, AIM lost because it was the cool thing to do in high school before everyone had cell phones. Once texting/BBM was a thing, AIM became completely obsolete. I don't think I know anyone who ever used MSN Messenger.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#89

Post by mitm2mitm »

plusquamperfekt wrote: post #56

I'm opportunistically supporting more secure messengers by "digital osmosis". Next to WhatsApp I also have installed: 1. Signal 2. Threema 3. Telegram And I will use those (in described order) if possible. Threema seems to be comparatively popular in Germany, while Telegram is at least not among my peers and Signal (the one recommended by Schneier and Snowden) is only used by my gf (b/c I installed it for her).

FB released a product called Signal http://media.fb.com/2015/09/17/introducing-signal/

If you do a Google search that's the first result. Would be funny if they were afraid enough to do a SEO 'attack'. Yeah, tinfoil.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#90

Post by amyjess »

username223 wrote: post #82
rms_returns wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have many like Google plus, twitter, linkedin, reddit and even hacker news (catering to a specific niche). Problem here is that too many people whom we may call "less tech savvy" won't leave FB. So, in order to stay "compatible" with them, we need to keep our FB accounts active!

Do actual humans still use G+ and linkedin? I thought they were mostly just playgrounds for bot-wars.

Back when I played Ingress, most city-level activity was coordinated through private G+ communities (with neighborhood-level activity being done in Hangouts group chats), and the more social stuff (i.e., the stuff you don't care about keeping secret from the Smurfs) tended to happen in public G+ communities.

LinkedIn is a good tool for viewing someone's public resume, though I don't regularly log into it. Every once in a while, I'll log in to check out how a previous employer is doing (e.g. see which of my ex-coworkers are still at the company, what new positions have been created, etc.). I still have dozens of unanswered connection requests from recruiters, though (I don't accept people I don't know), and the site has gotten progressively spammier over the years.

Post reply on HN