5 ms·

The founder has an amazing history, and the description of Hello is enticing but vague of what differentiates it. None of that matters for me though, because w

The founder has an amazing history, and the description of Hello is enticing but vague of what differentiates it. None of that matters for me though, because when I attempted to sign up from my laptop I got the message 'Sorry, we're mobile only'. I see no compelling reason to be mobile-only at full launch. Mobile-first for your MVP with early adopters, yes that makes a great deal of sense. But when a company does a full launch I think they should support as many of the major platforms as they can (Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS). Also, I am not convinced that we need yet another social media company (YASMC, "Yazz-em-see"?) that is centralized and will by necessity make money by monetizing attention. Cal Newport thinks social protocols are the answer, as he discusses in http://calnewport.com/blog/2018/03/20/on-social-media-and-its-discontents/ http://calnewport.com/blog/2018/03/20/on-social-media-and-it.... I agree. I worked on this as the OASIS XDI technical committee co-chair for a while, and am working on something new now.

goshx 9y ago
It was launched in 2016. I guess it didn’t get much traction at the time to justify further development.
ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Yeah, as someone who carries neither iOS or Android devices, app only social networks won't ever pick me up.
- dorfsmay 9y ago
  It's worse... Once you've signed up through mobile, you can use it from any browser. Makes you wonder why it wants you to sign up on mobile... Wants your phone number? Wants access to you contacts?
  - radicalbyte 9y ago
    What else? I assume that the whole reddit thing is the same. Install our app so we can suck your phone dry of your personal data.
    - dorfsmay 9y ago
      You do not need to install the reddit apps ever. You can sign up, and use it, through their web interface. In fact when I use reddit from my phone (through Firefox) I force it to use the non-mobile version as I find it much faster (as long as you open every link in a new tab).
    - d6de964 9y ago
      So websites now no longer simply want new users, they want unique,verified users. I understand the need for such verification when a webmaster wants to prevent easy re-registrations of trolls and/or banned members, and it's still better than Google's invite only system for when they release something big like gmail or g+, but it's a dark pattern all the way.
  - puzzle 9y ago
    A perfectly good explanation is deterring spammers.
    - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
      Easy enough to fake your user agent. Or is it a native app with extra security / checks?
      - puzzle 9y ago
        I thought we were talking about phone numbers. They're not impossible to obtain in bulk, but that's much harder than faking user agents.
        ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        If they wanted to verify my phone number, text me a code. That isn't a problem. It's the app install requirement we're talking about. Which both gives them access to some data on your phone, and also means only Android and iOS users can sign up. (On Android, Hello gets access to your contacts, your rough location, the ability to read and modify your storage, use your camera, and view your Wi-Fi connections)
        s73v3r_ 9y ago
        Read and Modify Storage and Camera permissions are needed so that it can take pictures, presumably to post (Why so many Android apps think they need to be their own camera instead of just dumping out to the user's preferred camera app I'll never understand). Everything else seems pretty sketchy.
        ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        Well, and as you point out, the camera permission is arguably completely specious. Android should, if I recall, also have a photo picker so you can select a single photo to give to the app, rather than giving it global access to your stuff. I understand why it wants contacts, to make it easy to add people, but again, it can be done in a "let the OS offer the contact picker" way, if we're making a privacy-respecting app. If Google is expected to be the steward of protecting users, they should not allow apps on the Play Store which don't use the most privacy-respecting method possible to implement the needed functionality.
- beenBoutIT 9y ago
  They pick you up because at least some, if not most of your friends are using app-only social networks that have access to their contacts and phone books. A few matching entries with your phone number and they have you pegged with a very high degree of certainty and connected to more than just your phone number and text messages. Everything your friends have in their contact info for you (birthday, email, home address, work address, family members, etc.). Obviously the same thing is true for your SMS/MMS messages that are sent to friends with app-only social networks which have access to their messages and call info. In the end you're giving away most of the same data, the difference is that you're just unable to benefit from it in the same way that you could with an Android or iOS device.
lokufda 9y ago
It's been around for a bit less than 2 years
erikb 9y ago
I agree as well that protocols would be the answer. I don't believe in it though. There are two very large groups of people who make every attempt in this direction fail. Yes, even things that apparently succeeded already (like email) are always fighting an uphill battle against these two groups. Group one are the Trumps and Putins. The guys who want to control everything. They always want to centralize everything with themselves standing at the top. Sadly a lot of people with power/money are like that. Group two are the dont-care folks. The ones that sign up to every next facebook because they don't care if their data is misused. The ones that make jokes about Zuckerberg today, but still use FB. They won't put up with the slightest bit of uncoolness or usability discomfort no matter what harm it does to their freedoms. Sadly both these groups work very well together. Basically I gave up hope that anything reasonable can be achieved as long as both these exist. There's only the option to join either group and live with what these groups bring with them.
- dwighttk 9y ago
  to be fair, usually it's not just the "slightest bit of... usability discomfort" but an enormous chunk. (e.g. Mastodon is hilariously complicated and difficult to understand for me and I can't even imagine trying to get my friends to use it.)
mxuribe 9y ago
My hope is that killer apps will be used [1] more and more for decentralized platforms. Much like email became so popular - and still in use - I hope we eventually get to a state where centralized silos/platforms are thought of as silly; sort of what the AOL walled garden was. [1] I stated "used" because there are plenty of apps (and underlying networks) related to decentralized social platforms that are already developed and in existence...more people simply have to make use of them.
bryanlarsen 9y ago
Being mobile-only ensures that the network will only consist of pictures and low-effort posts. That's fine, there's a bigger market for Instagram competitors than for social networks with substance. But between that and the video that consisted almost solely of liking cat pictures makes it obvious that it's not for me.
- ahtu123 9y ago
  It seems quite a bit like reddit. Just subscribe to outdoorsy and cat subreddits and you've got it
pcnix 9y ago
Native app support might be too much to ask, but at least a webapp should be a major part of the launch time product. It's fairly trivial to build a webapp around APIs that they've probably already developed for android/ios apps, so it's hard to forgive them for not having it ready by now.
- beenBoutIT 9y ago
  Accessing Facebook through a Chrome/Chromium browser on an Android device allows you to make an app on your homescreen that's not nearly as invasive as the mobile app. That being said, the main difference will be improved battery life and less background processes running, as they'll gather most of your data from your friends on the receiving end of texts/calls/etc who are using the mobile app.
kodablah 9y ago
> social protocols are the answer While true, they probably won't be the first answer. You need a some of these networks with real traction (or at least one huge one) so they can derive a protocol from the greatest common factors between them. To preemtively make a protocol sans popular implementation has little value and often ends in low adoption. As we've learned, the success of a protocol is more about its popularity than its presence or quality. So I say let these networks gestate and once the market (of people, not money) starts picking winners, then begin your abstraction. And for those (of us) working on solutions to this problem space now, keep going. You don't need a committee or standards doc or whatever. You just need an awesome impl.

goshx 9y ago

It was launched in 2016. I guess it didn’t get much traction at the time to justify further development.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago

Yeah, as someone who carries neither iOS or Android devices, app only social networks won't ever pick me up.

dorfsmay 9y ago
It's worse... Once you've signed up through mobile, you can use it from any browser. Makes you wonder why it wants you to sign up on mobile... Wants your phone number? Wants access to you contacts?
- radicalbyte 9y ago
  What else? I assume that the whole reddit thing is the same. Install our app so we can suck your phone dry of your personal data.
  - dorfsmay 9y ago
    You do not need to install the reddit apps ever. You can sign up, and use it, through their web interface. In fact when I use reddit from my phone (through Firefox) I force it to use the non-mobile version as I find it much faster (as long as you open every link in a new tab).
  - d6de964 9y ago
    So websites now no longer simply want new users, they want unique,verified users. I understand the need for such verification when a webmaster wants to prevent easy re-registrations of trolls and/or banned members, and it's still better than Google's invite only system for when they release something big like gmail or g+, but it's a dark pattern all the way.
- puzzle 9y ago
  A perfectly good explanation is deterring spammers.
  - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
    Easy enough to fake your user agent. Or is it a native app with extra security / checks?
    - puzzle 9y ago
      I thought we were talking about phone numbers. They're not impossible to obtain in bulk, but that's much harder than faking user agents.
      - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        If they wanted to verify my phone number, text me a code. That isn't a problem. It's the app install requirement we're talking about. Which both gives them access to some data on your phone, and also means only Android and iOS users can sign up. (On Android, Hello gets access to your contacts, your rough location, the ability to read and modify your storage, use your camera, and view your Wi-Fi connections)
        s73v3r_ 9y ago
        Read and Modify Storage and Camera permissions are needed so that it can take pictures, presumably to post (Why so many Android apps think they need to be their own camera instead of just dumping out to the user's preferred camera app I'll never understand). Everything else seems pretty sketchy.
        ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        Well, and as you point out, the camera permission is arguably completely specious. Android should, if I recall, also have a photo picker so you can select a single photo to give to the app, rather than giving it global access to your stuff. I understand why it wants contacts, to make it easy to add people, but again, it can be done in a "let the OS offer the contact picker" way, if we're making a privacy-respecting app. If Google is expected to be the steward of protecting users, they should not allow apps on the Play Store which don't use the most privacy-respecting method possible to implement the needed functionality.
beenBoutIT 9y ago
They pick you up because at least some, if not most of your friends are using app-only social networks that have access to their contacts and phone books. A few matching entries with your phone number and they have you pegged with a very high degree of certainty and connected to more than just your phone number and text messages. Everything your friends have in their contact info for you (birthday, email, home address, work address, family members, etc.). Obviously the same thing is true for your SMS/MMS messages that are sent to friends with app-only social networks which have access to their messages and call info. In the end you're giving away most of the same data, the difference is that you're just unable to benefit from it in the same way that you could with an Android or iOS device.

lokufda 9y ago

It's been around for a bit less than 2 years

erikb 9y ago

I agree as well that protocols would be the answer. I don't believe in it though. There are two very large groups of people who make every attempt in this direction fail. Yes, even things that apparently succeeded already (like email) are always fighting an uphill battle against these two groups. Group one are the Trumps and Putins. The guys who want to control everything. They always want to centralize everything with themselves standing at the top. Sadly a lot of people with power/money are like that. Group two are the dont-care folks. The ones that sign up to every next facebook because they don't care if their data is misused. The ones that make jokes about Zuckerberg today, but still use FB. They won't put up with the slightest bit of uncoolness or usability discomfort no matter what harm it does to their freedoms. Sadly both these groups work very well together. Basically I gave up hope that anything reasonable can be achieved as long as both these exist. There's only the option to join either group and live with what these groups bring with them.

dwighttk 9y ago
to be fair, usually it's not just the "slightest bit of... usability discomfort" but an enormous chunk. (e.g. Mastodon is hilariously complicated and difficult to understand for me and I can't even imagine trying to get my friends to use it.)

mxuribe 9y ago

My hope is that killer apps will be used [1] more and more for decentralized platforms. Much like email became so popular - and still in use - I hope we eventually get to a state where centralized silos/platforms are thought of as silly; sort of what the AOL walled garden was. [1] I stated "used" because there are plenty of apps (and underlying networks) related to decentralized social platforms that are already developed and in existence...more people simply have to make use of them.

bryanlarsen 9y ago

Being mobile-only ensures that the network will only consist of pictures and low-effort posts. That's fine, there's a bigger market for Instagram competitors than for social networks with substance. But between that and the video that consisted almost solely of liking cat pictures makes it obvious that it's not for me.

ahtu123 9y ago
It seems quite a bit like reddit. Just subscribe to outdoorsy and cat subreddits and you've got it

pcnix 9y ago

Native app support might be too much to ask, but at least a webapp should be a major part of the launch time product. It's fairly trivial to build a webapp around APIs that they've probably already developed for android/ios apps, so it's hard to forgive them for not having it ready by now.

beenBoutIT 9y ago
Accessing Facebook through a Chrome/Chromium browser on an Android device allows you to make an app on your homescreen that's not nearly as invasive as the mobile app. That being said, the main difference will be improved battery life and less background processes running, as they'll gather most of your data from your friends on the receiving end of texts/calls/etc who are using the mobile app.

kodablah 9y ago

> social protocols are the answer While true, they probably won't be the first answer. You need a some of these networks with real traction (or at least one huge one) so they can derive a protocol from the greatest common factors between them. To preemtively make a protocol sans popular implementation has little value and often ends in low adoption. As we've learned, the success of a protocol is more about its popularity than its presence or quality. So I say let these networks gestate and once the market (of people, not money) starts picking winners, then begin your abstraction. And for those (of us) working on solutions to this problem space now, keep going. You don't need a committee or standards doc or whatever. You just need an awesome impl.