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

New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 145 posts

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#91

Post by spacexsucks »

lovingCranberry wrote: post #89
tluyben2 wrote: post #19

Just force monopolistic/abusive/anti-competitive companies to expose API's ; it's not a stretch; they did it for banks (psd2) and it's great for consumers and companies alike. Do it for everything; open systems make the world better. And they can still be monetized; it's not like forcing everyone to open source everything. Edit: more subtle choice of words to indicate what I meant

I believe forcing to expose APIs would kill messengers which are built around a single feature (like snapchat). The idea behind snapchat is that it's hard for users to save images without notifying the opposite party. You wouldn't be able to enforce this with third party clients.

Which is the dumbest excuse to keep walled gardens

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#93

Post by wintermutestwin »

teekert wrote: post #77
tluyben2 wrote: post #19

Just force monopolistic/abusive/anti-competitive companies to expose API's ; it's not a stretch; they did it for banks (psd2) and it's great for consumers and companies alike. Do it for everything; open systems make the world better. And they can still be monetized; it's not like forcing everyone to open source everything. Edit: more subtle choice of words to indicate what I meant

Wow, "just force everyone". This is not freedom. I mean it doesn't feel that wrong because we ware talking about a big corporation, and sure I hate that WhatsApp replaced SMS here here claiming "privacy first, never any ads" but then gets bought by a big anti-privacy, ads-everywhere company. But still, imagine WhatsApp was written and maintained by an individual? Would we be so keen to use terms like "force"? This is…

The more freedom monopolistic entities have the less freedom the rest of the world has because these overpowered companies have turned freedom into a zero sum game.

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#94

Post by username190 »

teekert wrote: post #77
tluyben2 wrote: post #19

Just force monopolistic/abusive/anti-competitive companies to expose API's ; it's not a stretch; they did it for banks (psd2) and it's great for consumers and companies alike. Do it for everything; open systems make the world better. And they can still be monetized; it's not like forcing everyone to open source everything. Edit: more subtle choice of words to indicate what I meant

Wow, "just force everyone". This is not freedom. I mean it doesn't feel that wrong because we ware talking about a big corporation, and sure I hate that WhatsApp replaced SMS here here claiming "privacy first, never any ads" but then gets bought by a big anti-privacy, ads-everywhere company. But still, imagine WhatsApp was written and maintained by an individual? Would we be so keen to use terms like "force"? This is…

> imagine WhatsApp was written and maintained by an individual? Would we be so keen to use terms like "force"? This is all negative in the freedom dimension.

These rules only apply to platforms with a market cap of over €75 billion or European Economic Area turnover of over €7.5 billion.[0] No one is proposing that we require single developers work with Apple and Facebook to make their apps interoperable.

[0] https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-digital-markets-act-adop...

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#95

Post by naoqj »

rewq4321 wrote: post #38
Retric wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beyond privacy concerns, it’s also going to open these and many other services up to an unending wave of SPAM. So, I wouldn’t assume it’s great for end users without digging into the details. Don’t forget the last time they did privacy regulations they created an unending wave of click yes to accept cookies. PS: Looking at rapid downvotes I see people disagree, but mandatory interoperability would presumably force th…

Why? If your messaging app doesn't have the ability to block stranger requests, why are you still using it? And even if you for some reason don't want to restrict your requests, you'll probably still be fine - Gmail handles protects me from spam pretty well.

That's like saying that you don't need a spam filter for email because you can press the "mark as spam" button a hundred times a day.

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#96

Post by devoutsalsa »

Sakos wrote: post #14

I miss the days when I could fire up Pidgin (or Gaim when I started using it) and instantly connect to every IM service I ever needed. Hopefully this is a step back towards that.

I still remember my ICQ number… 1057955. Been a long time since I tried accessing that account.

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#97

Post by RenThraysk »

zahllos wrote: post #88
RenThraysk wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er, WhatsApp is based on Noise for client server protocol, and Signal protocol for peer to peer encryption. Both were open standards before WhatsApp implemented them.

I dunno how to say this but Noise is really a set of possible handshakes with various security guarantees (or, more like, aims, which we are reasonably sure are met), which kinda followed on from X3DH/Signal Protocol. I'm unsure how you got that Noise is a client-server protocol and Signal is peer to peer. When you send a whatsapp message you still send it to WhatsApp servers and the client-server protocol here is pr…

Being a developer and implemented both, I know. Maybe I just mispoke.

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#98

Post by Someone »

Diggsey wrote: post #43
tluyben2 wrote: post #19

Just force monopolistic/abusive/anti-competitive companies to expose API's ; it's not a stretch; they did it for banks (psd2) and it's great for consumers and companies alike. Do it for everything; open systems make the world better. And they can still be monetized; it's not like forcing everyone to open source everything. Edit: more subtle choice of words to indicate what I meant

As someone who works on a SaaS product, one of our biggest costs is our stable API surface. Internal APIs are essentially free, but for a public API we have to: - Implement a conversion layer from our internal representation so we can keep it stable. - Complicate all further feature work because we have to consider how it will affect existing customers of the API. - Write and maintain documentation for the API. - Kee…

> A requirement that everyone expose a public API is pointless if it doesn't include a stability guarantee, and overly burdensome if it does.

This isn’t a requirement that everyone expose a public API . https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/24/22994234/eu-antitrust-leg...:

“The DMA will force new obligations on companies deemed to be “gatekeepers” — a category defined by the legislation as firms with a market capitalization of at least €75 billion ($82 billion); at least 45 million monthly users; and a “platform” like an app or social network. Companies covered by this classification include well-known tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, and Apple, but also smaller entities like Booking.com.”

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#99

Post by antris »

teekert wrote: post #77
tluyben2 wrote: post #19

Just force monopolistic/abusive/anti-competitive companies to expose API's ; it's not a stretch; they did it for banks (psd2) and it's great for consumers and companies alike. Do it for everything; open systems make the world better. And they can still be monetized; it's not like forcing everyone to open source everything. Edit: more subtle choice of words to indicate what I meant

Wow, "just force everyone". This is not freedom. I mean it doesn't feel that wrong because we ware talking about a big corporation, and sure I hate that WhatsApp replaced SMS here here claiming "privacy first, never any ads" but then gets bought by a big anti-privacy, ads-everywhere company. But still, imagine WhatsApp was written and maintained by an individual? Would we be so keen to use terms like "force"? This is…

Limiting freedoms of megacorporations is a good thing.

Re: New EU law could require iMessage and WhatsApp to work with other platforms

#100

Post by username190 »

est31 wrote: post #83
Diggsey wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who works on a SaaS product, one of our biggest costs is our stable API surface. Internal APIs are essentially free, but for a public API we have to: - Implement a conversion layer from our internal representation so we can keep it stable. - Complicate all further feature work because we have to consider how it will affect existing customers of the API. - Write and maintain documentation for the API. - Kee…

It should be easy to make exceptions for smaller companies/services, and put the rule into force for larger services. Also, the API doesn't need to be stabilized. If Whatsapp wouldn't send DCMA notices to developers of third party clients, and ban users of such, it would be a good start already.

It’s worth noting that this (proposed) law already only applies to large companies, as I noted upthread. This is something that a lot of folks in this thread are missing, but which I think is pretty crucial.

> Included in the rules' scope will be platforms with a market capitalization of €75 billion or turnover in the European Economic Area equal to or above €7.5 billion. [0]

[0] https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-digital-markets-act-adop...

Post reply on HN