5 ms·

This shows the downside of network-effects so succinctly. It's almost hopeless to think people will realistically move to a technically superior alternative wit

This shows the downside of network-effects so succinctly. It's almost hopeless to think people will realistically move to a technically superior alternative without this privacy hole.

lone_haxx0r 7y ago
I will.
- penagwin 7y ago
  My friends and family won't :\ This will be true for a lot of people, and it's a huge annoyance. The only things that break this kind of network affect is a market changer - Discord is a good example here.
_bxg1 7y ago
The nice thing about direct-chat apps is that the network effect isn't nearly as strong as for traditional social networks. If you want to use X to talk with someone, you can just download it and then talk with that person. You don't have to get everyone to switch at once. You'll have more little app icons on your phone but that's about the extent of the cost.
- asark 7y ago
  Probably 95+% of all my sent or received Whatsapp messages are for groups. If I don't get most of the people I communicate with to switch to another (the same!) messenger, it's pretty inconvenient. It doesn't help that, last I checked, the good (open) alternatives were all much jankier or missing one or more major features we use. Makes them hard to sell. :-/
  - skyyler 7y ago
    Curious, what features is Telegram missing for you?
    - hermanradtke 7y ago
      Default end to end encryption.
      - tripzilch 7y ago
        They were talking about group chats.
  - MFLoon 7y ago
    I mean, though it's a variation on the "if you don't have anything to hide..." apology, you really shouldn't be having security sensitive group chats anyway.
- anilgulecha 7y ago
  Groups are the sticking point, and in the circles I know the more popular unit of chat. These are high friction to switch.
  - _bxg1 7y ago
    Still, presumably they aren't usually more than 3-5 people. Much easier to get that group to switch than your 400 Facebook friends.
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    Yes but we have groups on multiple platforms, just because the group is stuck there doesn't mean that I am.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  Exactly, they'll nag a little, but almost all people I know have several ways of DM contacting them. It's better to cultivate that flexibility, than to convert people to flock to the next latest one true DM app.
root_axis 7y ago
The network-effect doesn't have much to do with it. As has been demonstrated many times in the history of technology, the masses do not care about "technical superiority". When it comes to messaging apps specifically, even most software engineers I know don't care. If people don't care then there is no substrate on which to build a network.
bryan_w 7y ago
Yup, that's why we're all still using AIM. The network effects are literally impossible to overcome. /s
hiq 7y ago
It's true that WhatsApp is currently the leader, but I'm wondering how it will work out for them when they start adding ads, as it has been reported they will some time next year. When there are free alternatives that don't (and assuming e.g. Signal catches up in terms of features and reliability -- big assumption I admit), it's not hard to imagine that at least a few will install these alternatives, and use them in parallel.

This shows the downside of network-effects so succinctly. It's almost hopeless to think people will realistically move to a technically superior alternative without this privacy hole.

lone_haxx0r 7y ago

I will.

penagwin 7y ago
My friends and family won't :\ This will be true for a lot of people, and it's a huge annoyance. The only things that break this kind of network affect is a market changer - Discord is a good example here.

_bxg1 7y ago

The nice thing about direct-chat apps is that the network effect isn't nearly as strong as for traditional social networks. If you want to use X to talk with someone, you can just download it and then talk with that person. You don't have to get everyone to switch at once. You'll have more little app icons on your phone but that's about the extent of the cost.

asark 7y ago
Probably 95+% of all my sent or received Whatsapp messages are for groups. If I don't get most of the people I communicate with to switch to another (the same!) messenger, it's pretty inconvenient. It doesn't help that, last I checked, the good (open) alternatives were all much jankier or missing one or more major features we use. Makes them hard to sell. :-/
- skyyler 7y ago
  Curious, what features is Telegram missing for you?
  - hermanradtke 7y ago
    Default end to end encryption.
    - tripzilch 7y ago
      They were talking about group chats.
- MFLoon 7y ago
  I mean, though it's a variation on the "if you don't have anything to hide..." apology, you really shouldn't be having security sensitive group chats anyway.
anilgulecha 7y ago
Groups are the sticking point, and in the circles I know the more popular unit of chat. These are high friction to switch.
- _bxg1 7y ago
  Still, presumably they aren't usually more than 3-5 people. Much easier to get that group to switch than your 400 Facebook friends.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  Yes but we have groups on multiple platforms, just because the group is stuck there doesn't mean that I am.
tripzilch 7y ago
Exactly, they'll nag a little, but almost all people I know have several ways of DM contacting them. It's better to cultivate that flexibility, than to convert people to flock to the next latest one true DM app.

root_axis 7y ago

The network-effect doesn't have much to do with it. As has been demonstrated many times in the history of technology, the masses do not care about "technical superiority". When it comes to messaging apps specifically, even most software engineers I know don't care. If people don't care then there is no substrate on which to build a network.

bryan_w 7y ago

Yup, that's why we're all still using AIM. The network effects are literally impossible to overcome. /s

hiq 7y ago

It's true that WhatsApp is currently the leader, but I'm wondering how it will work out for them when they start adding ads, as it has been reported they will some time next year. When there are free alternatives that don't (and assuming e.g. Signal catches up in terms of features and reliability -- big assumption I admit), it's not hard to imagine that at least a few will install these alternatives, and use them in parallel.