5 ms·
In my book this is more or less another proof that you should be vary of vendor lockin and that under no circumstances whatsoever use any such system for commun
by tjoff 9y ago
In my book this is more or less another proof that you should be vary of vendor lockin and that under no circumstances whatsoever use any such system for communication. It is bad enough to change phone number but you simply can't change facebook to something else and continue as usual.
I guess this leaves email, SMS and IRC as the main remaining options.
Somehow this needs to be communicated to the general public, but I don't have the slightest hope that this can be solved.
The future sucks.
- spraak 9y ago> I guess this leaves email, SMS and IRC as the main remaining options. But how are those not also vendor lock-ins?
- tehlike 9y agoYou can text anyone on any network.
- brewdad 9y agoAnyone in your home country. For me, and I don't think I am unusual in the US at least, texts to anywhere outside of the US, Canada, and Mexico aren't allowed without paying extra. Texts to many countries aren't allowed at any price.
- tscs37 9y agoSucks to be at your Mobile Provider. I can text literally any phone number, given I have enough money booked on the account. SMS is by nature not centralized, the data is exchanged between mobile providers. If you were to start your own mobile provider, you could text anyone everywhere given you manage to get peering.
- larkeith 9y agoEmail and IRC are completely vendor-agnostic protocols. I'm not as familiar with SMS, but it's much less centralized than Facebook - any user on any SMS provider may contact any other user, not only ones with the same provider.
- icebraining 9y agoAnd in many countries, you can port your number to other providers, much like with email (if you have your domain).
- tmnvix 9y agoEmail, SMS, and actual phone calls satisfy almost all of my communication needs. The only problem I have is about once every few weeks someone wants me to Skype/Hangout/Facetime/whatever-the-other-video-chat-options-are. I really wish video chat was handled by telecoms in the same way phone calls are. Standard and ubiquitous.
- rectang 9y agoFor small video calls (especially just 2 people), a WebRTC system like https://appear.in https://appear.in is good enough and avoids lockin.
- rypskar 9y agoOn appear.in I get a message telling me I don't have access after allowing access to camera when I use Firefox, so seems to be another site who is Chrome only
- Feniks 9y agoYep. As as a European WhatsApp has become as essential as breathing. Just the thought of coordinating all my contacts to switch over to another app is scary. Unless WhatsApp ever charges money. That would get people to move.
- tylersmith 9y agoIf you genuinely consider a phone app as essential as breathing you should reevaluate your situation before it goes away or causes you issues. If your life and communications ever become hampered due to WA there's no one to blame but yourself. It's a large point of failure for people that rely on others so heavily.
- 4ad 9y ago> Yep. As as a European WhatsApp has become as essential as breathing. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I am an European, and I have never used WhatsApp.
- arethuza 9y agoI don't use WhatsApp myself but I was surprised to find that members of my extended family (mostly in their 50s) had started using it to stay in touch rather than Facebook. Also, from what I have read, WhatsApp is very popular in UK political circles (MPs, SPADs etc.).
- tremon 9y agoI don't use WhatsApp myself but I was surprised to find that members of my extended family (mostly in their 50s) had started using it to stay in touch rather than Facebook. They're still using Facebook, just one of its other shapes.
- arethuza 9y agoI think when people refer to Facebook they mean the social networking site, not a product of Facebook Inc.
- sandov 9y agoI've been thinking about making an easy-to-use RSS client, so non-technical people can use it and post the stuff that they would otherwise put on facebook (before it got invaded by videos and ads) or twitter. Have you tried mastodon?. Imagine Mastodon, but with a bloggy/(2008's facebook) vibe instead of a twitter clone. There would be no ads, because it's decentralized, just like mastodon. The feed would be chronological, and the interface would desincentivize spamming (links wouldn't have thumbnails or previews). The idea is to make a clean and simple blog interface with a profile section added, where you could put some contact information and a profile pic. In fact I made a little preview of what I would like it to look like. What do you guys think? https://i.imgur.com/DSD1wE0.png https://i.imgur.com/DSD1wE0.png
- ttepasse 9y agoAlso in that vision: * Manton Reece's Microblog, also build on feeds * Indieweb. No feeds, just webpages with Microformats.