41 ms·
WhatsApp delays privacy changes following backlash
- rex_lupi 6y agodon't worry, they're collecting your data for years actually. /s
- rootsudo 6y agoBasically means it's better for them to not be so transparent.
- danimatic 6y agoI think most people know about the collecting data thing. But WhatsApp/Facebook made a big mistake by forcing longtime users to accept the new rules or otherwise to get excluded from the community. This creates a very bad feeling because it’s like someone puts a gun on your chest. Take this or die! Ashole move...
- badwolf 6y ago"oops, we didn't think anyone would notice"
- Fogest 6y ago"Ooops, we are sorry you noticed but not sorry about the changes, here we will delay it a little bit for you". Gotta give the people some time to get over the hype and then they will push forward anyway.
- stunt 6y ago"Nothing has changed! We already have your data."
- suyash 6y agodelay tactic, hoping people will forget
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoSome execs realized they weren't gonna get their bonuses anymore and, since they started bleeding users, went in full damage control mode to save their own asses.
- mnd999 6y agoI think it’s probably already a fuck-up of bonus limiting proportions.
- gkoberger 6y agoHmm, I hate this concept of "bonuses" because in my experience this isn't really how things work. However, I do think the incentives internally probably were structured in a way to encourage this change, and I doubt anyone is being seen as being "more successful" due to a rollback.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mnd999 6y agoYou put that much more eloquently than I did.
- 411111111111111 6y ago> Hmm, I hate this concept of "bonuses" because in my experience this isn't really how things work. You're right. They're going to pay themselves the bonus regardless of this debacle.
- kortilla 6y agoPlease explain to me the process by which executives decide their own bonus.
- kingaillas 6y agoThere are directors/executives that sit on compensation committees that also wind up deciding their own pay. And if you decide your own pay it isn't much of a leap to also decide bonus amounts and criteria. Here's an article from Harvard Law Review about a lawsuit over this - you might be interested in the paragraphs in the "Shareholder Waivers" section: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/09/18/setting-directors-pay-under-delaware-law/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/09/18/setting-directors... Some quotes: waive a shareholder’s right to sue the directors for violating their duty of loyalty regarding setting their own pay and For directors setting their own pay, the ruling suggested that a blanket waiver etc.
- secfirstmd 6y agoToo little too late. Use Signal (and donate/make a PR every once in awhile). Been following Whisper Systems since Redphone and TextSecure, so glad to see them shine.
- the-dude 6y agoAnd Zuckerberg supposedly played around with the idea of running for president.
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoSo did Trump at one point. I won't rule out anything anymore.
- the-dude 6y agoTo be fair to Trump, he played with the idea for decades and his timing was impeccable.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- hinkley 6y agoSomeone (or several someones) predicted this a long time ago and I adopted it as my own. * To elect a female president, there would first have to be a male POC president * The president immediately after the first POC president would be the whitest, loudest man they could find. The only thing wrong about the second prediction is that we got the orangest, loudest man they could find.
- nowherebeen 6y agoTrump has a huge base that shares his beliefs. I am not convinced that Zuck has any other then those he pays at his company. Everyone that has ever worked with him in his early years and those he acquired (Instagram/ Whatsapp) have distance themselves the moment they vested their equity.
- wozer 6y agoHuh? It seems pretty obvious that he does not have the necessary charisma.
- 6y ago
- jgalt212 6y agoIt's gonna eventually come. Billion user services just don't pay for themselves. I don't say this to defend Facebook, because if even they sell it, the next person down the line will still be faced with the same monetization issues.
- schmorptron 6y agoWeren't they profitable when they were charging 1€ a year per user before? I wouldn't mind going back to that.
- ascar 6y agoYea. I also find it hard to believe that WhatsApp wouldn't be profitable with $1 per user per year. There is a lot you can do with $2bil a year. I think I read that Brian Acton called out Sandberg on that once. That it wasn't just about profitability, but greed.
- eznzt 6y agoThey were supposedly charging that, but the first year was free, and then every time you were close to running out of free time you would get x more free months. I chained those free months for years until it became completely free. So it was actually free to use.
- mnd999 6y agoSo go back to charging a small fee. People used to pay it and with the network effect they still would.
- tmerse 6y agoWhatsApp used to have paying customers.
- Nextgrid 6y agoFacebook and Whatsapp can absolutely exist and sustain itself if accounts were paid and cost a couple dollars per month.
- 6y ago
- yumraj 6y agodelays not cancels.. Either ways, my WhatsApp was deleted yesterday, FB early last year... Now I just need to wean off of Google...
- liquidify 6y ago>>wean off of Google That sounds tough. Too bad google can't just change back to how they were in the beginning. At least just actually hold their old motto above greed and money every now and then.
- sky_rw 6y agoI was presently surprised at how easy the transition from Chrome onto Brave was. Multiple profile support with a great import tool. Switched to from GMail to ProtonMail as well. The only thing I can't figure out is how to get off google calendar.
- mxuribe 6y agoFunny enough, as i've been looking to move away from G, i thought calendar element would be easy...but its not. (Well, its not s tough, just not a direct nor free transition.) The default android claendar app doesn't connect to a calendar via, say, nextcloud (calDav if i recall correctly)...One has to actually get/use a different app. I think the one that most folks recommmend for nextcloud is not free. (It is not expensive, so that is not the challenge.) Its fine for me since i am moving away from G apps...but my partner, she is meh-ok with some of their default apps...like the default android calendar app, though she would like to connect that app to our nextcloud cal...Again, nothing major, but just all these little annoyances that exhibit the super tight integration that was built into android with G services. Anyway, yeah calendar is annoying to ween off from G. Yuck!
- jonwest 6y agoIf you install fDroid via the APK on their site you can install DAVx for free, which is likely the for-pay app you talked about for bringing your calendars in from a CalDAV server. Still not as easy or native as installing a Google Calendar account, but it does work and generally works quite well.
- wzy 6y agoIf only this was the response also for Oculus and its new need for a Facebook account to work.
- TheChaplain 6y agoJust a matter of time until WhatsApp have ads or somehow used to datamine the conversations. Because it would not make sense otherwise, considering how much it must cost them to run something like WhatsApp with millions of users and not get anything in return.
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoBruh, I wouldn't even mind these companies datamining me if their ads were even close to being relevant for my needs. It would spare me loads of time I waste online looking for that exact product that fits my needs. I mean, what's the point of all the data they have from me plus the armies of well paid ML engineers they have on their payroll, when if I order a laptop from Amazon, I'll get bombarded with ads for laptops for the next month. Do advertisers imagine I go through laptops like toilet rolls or something? If this is peak ML, then those who fear an AI uprising can sleep soundly.
- croes 6y agoYou are not FB customer. It's not about your needs but the needs of the ad buyers.
- mikestew 6y agoI swear there are bots running around on HN just waiting for the opportunity to tell us that we're not the customer. Bot or not, I'll ask: thanks for the insight, how does that tie into parent's point? That advertisers "need" to show you ads for things already purchased? Advertisers are playing the long game, setting up for my next laptop purchase?
- KineticLensman 6y agoThe advertisers can tell from cookies etc that you are interested in a product and were looking. They cannot always tell that you clicked 'buy' at some point.
- 6y ago
- pesenti 6y agoThe communication around this change was very poorly handled. This policy update does not affect the privacy of messages with friends or family in any way: https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/answering-your-questions-about-whatsapps-privacy-policy?lang=en https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/answer.... I don't believe that was well understood. Disclosure: I work at FB but unrelated to WhatsApp
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bennyp101 6y agoIt seemed to imply that from Feb, metadata would now be shared with Facebook (I know, probably was anyway), and a lot of people took a dim view of that. (esp. those that paid for it originally) I think a lot of horses have bolted, but I'm sure there will be plently left once the gate is shut.
- annadane 6y agoAsk your bosses why they're ok with forcing through changes that nobody wants and repeatedly lying to users
- dastx 6y agoNo one wants? But the customer wants them. It just so happens to be that you're not the customer.
- exoque 6y agoYou know, I don't care about the changes to the privacy policy at all. I tried to move to an alternative messenger for years but I was never able to convince enough people. Now that there's enough momentum I tried again and every person I care about was willing to move. Let's see if we can use the network effect for our own good for once.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- user00012-ab 6y agoHow Cancel Culture works: Day 1) Users are outraged and company says there will be changes! (Twitter bans Trump) Day 2) Users are angry and company shows changes they will be making (yup Trumps account is gone.) Day 3) Users move on to something else and company goes back to whatever they want to do (Trump posts video on twitter, but this one is ok, we'll let this one slide.) Give it a few days and WhatsApp will be back to business as usual.
- cybert00th 6y agoA sticking plaster on a haemorrhaging wound - and I'm hopeful the bleeding will continue. Matt Stoller from BIG is right, only jail time for executives guilty of breaking the Sherman Act will stop these monopolies now.
- helmholtz 6y agoMy fear is that people will say "Oh, I can now keep Whatsapp around for just a bit longer" and the furore will die down. Luckily, my colleagues, not just friends, have moved over so I can at least delete it after asking them if they mind connecting on Signal.
- colordrops 6y agoA lot of people are migrating to Signal. I'm wondering what Signal's monetization model is, as they certainly won't be able to maintain the level of usage forever as a free app.
- LockAndLol 6y agoIt's a non profit. It runs on donations. There is no "monetization model"
- rovr138 6y agoDonations are a monetization model. Servers and infrastructure cost money. People's time costs money. You need enough donations for it. If you don't, you have to strategize to get more.
- MikeKusold 6y agoDonations, or an interest free $100 million 50 year loan from the founder of WhatsApp.
- randall 6y agoBrian action established the signal foundation with an initial $50mm grant.
- chillacy 6y ago* $50MM loan The key distinction being that loan will need to be repaid. > The initial $50M in funding was a loan, not a donation, from Brian Acton to the new nonprofit Signal Technology Foundation. By the end of 2018, the loan had increased to $105,000,400, which is due to be repaid on February 28, 2068. The loan is unsecured and at 0% interest.[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation
- randall 6y ago
- polote 6y agoI'm not then, but if I were them, I would do the opposite. I will immediately do the next shady step (whatever it is ) that Zuck always wanted to do. Because yeah, there is a lot of bad press around the privacy changes. But you better get all the backlash at the same time, than several time a backlash. And that would be so good because I could be convinced to really uninstall whatsaap
- TeMPOraL 6y agoThat, and do it now now now. The backlash is already semi-drowned with the whole world looking at the sociopolitical issues in the US. A perfect crisis that no self-respecting evil megacorp would let go to waste.
- senux 6y ago> And that would be so good because I could be convinced to really uninstall whatsaap Did you just provide the counterargument to your own argument? If they backpaddled is likely because there was enough of a negative reaction to raise concern. I believe it's more likely they are trying to figure out how to announce the next deadline more quietly without breaking too many laws.
- polote 6y agoNo, because I dont think I act like most people. Most people don't even understand the privacy changes, they just see that 'something' happened on Whatsaap this week
- young_unixer 6y agoIf I was them, I would do exactly what they're doing. A partial exodus doesn't work. With this delay, maybe half of the people who were going to switch won't end up switching. By boiling the frog slowly, they make sure that a mass exodus never happens, only partial exoduses that end up dying and tiring people out.
- superbcarrot 6y ago> But you better get all the backlash at the same time, than several time a backlash. I'm not sure. Bad publicity has a critical point after which people leave and move to other services. When people who weren't concerned about privacy before began to have conversations about whether Telegram or Signal is a better replacement to WhatsApp, Facebook realized that they have pushed it too far this time. They're much better served if people think "Oh WhatsApp is owned by a shady company but everyone I know uses it so I need to use it to".
- liquidify 6y agoI'm surprised they cared enough to delay the changes. I guess they will probably just restructure the changes enough that they can get away with the same stuff in a slightly different way in the future.
- mindfulplay 6y agoWell, they will probably continue ramming this through in other countries where they have a lot more users without having to worry about any privacy implications.
- phonebucket 6y agoI have to say that this renews my faith in something. I don't know what that something is, but I think it's important. Users have been going to Signal en masse, in their millions upon millions, to the point that Facebook had to back down. It's a sort of democratic consumerism. I don't want to call it capitalism, but is that what it is? Either way, it's nice to know that people can make big corporations change their minds sometimes.
- alex_young 6y agoAnyone surprised by the move towards monetization wasn’t paying much attention when they were acquired for $19 billion a few years ago.
- mkl95 6y agoI have wanted to leave Whatsapp for years, but I can't realistically do it since most people assume it's your messaging app of choice here (including coworkers / bosses). I would actually prefer it these changes weren't delayed since it will also delay the eventual user exodus to Signal / Telegram.
- Hamuko 6y agoJust leave. If your coworkers and bosses want to text you, they'll do it via Signal.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Debug_Overload 6y agoThis is just not realistic, and not how the world works. "Oh, you expect me to be available on the app we used to communicate regularly and most people in our circle use? Too bad, I just dumped it and got on this new app, so you guys better install it just to have the privilege to communicate with me." Umm, no. I use both WhatsApp and Signal (way before this hysteria began) but the "just leave" mentality isn't realistic. Most people don't care about this stuff enough to install a new app and start using it. Even for people who will join it, it takes time. The network effect is still there. Being on HN too much and/or having social circles full of people who think like you misleads people.
- pmlnr 6y ago> but the "just leave" mentality isn't realistic Oh, but it is. You just need to accept a drop in your social circle.
- bsaul 6y agoi actually think this time is different. I've never seen that much non-tech friend leave whatsapp and appear on signal at the same time. Saying "i'm on signal" could be totally considered normal in just a few weeks from now.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- submeta 6y agoI am thankful they pushed hard because that gave me reason enough to leave Whatsapp, an otherwise wonderful product, but I despised using a product that is associated with Facebook. Left FB and Instagram years ago, only Whatsapp was left. Edit: Bought a piece of software [1] that perfectly exported five years of messages out of my cellphone, then I didn’t hesitate one day to delete my WhatsApp accout. I felt an incredible relief abandoning the last service I used from Facebook. [1]: „Backuptrans iPhone WhatsApp Transfer for Mac“
- Hamuko 6y agoI mean, it's not that wonderful. Like, I don't understand what was the point of Statuses. Never used it. Much prefer the cleanliness of Signal. The most wonderful thing about WhatsApp was that everyone you knew was there.
- rolleiflex 6y agoIt's historical. IIRC WhatsApp started out as an app for people to post those statuses as they travel, to let know their family and friends their whereabouts. To that effect, the founder of Whatsapp was first talking about it in online frequent flyer forums such as FlyerTalk that he was already a member of. Chat came later.
- Hamuko 6y agoQuick Google search would suggest that the current status feature was only added in 2017.
- rahul003 6y agorolleiflex is referring to the text status along with profile picture. The other new Status feature was added in 2017 when Facebook went crazy adding Snapchat Story like features to all their apps (Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, Whatsapp)
- nowherebeen 6y ago
- uncledave 6y agoDelay and use the word misinformation. -1 more trust point.
- parliament32 6y agoI'm surprised they didn't flat-out call it "fake news".
- guidingtunnel 6y agotoo little, too late
- el_duderino 6y agoThe URL should probably be updated to: https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-update https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-up...
- myarr 6y agoKinda surprised that Signal doesn't support bitcoin/crypto donations
- KMag 6y agoTranslation: "Oops, sorry we turned up the flame under the pot of frogs too quickly. We will boil them more slowly in the future." (I've also heard it claimed that it's an urban legend that frogs won't jump if you cook them slowly. But, maybe it's an urban legend that it's an urban legend.)
- mkl 6y agoIt's a myth, probably, though it was thought to be true for a long time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
- true_religion 6y agoThe wikipedia article doesn't really make it clear why it is a myth. Working experiment. Frogs stay in water. > Heinzmann heated the frogs over the course of 90 minutes from about 21 °C to 37.5 °C, a rate of less than 0.2 °C per minute. Failed experiment. Frog jumps. > as the water is heated by about 2 °F (about 1 °C), per minute, the frog becomes increasingly active as it tries to escape, and eventually jumps out if it can. There's a bunch of anecdotes from biologists and veterinarians saying 'ofcourse the frog will try to leave', but no modern experiments to see if a frog will escape if the water is boiled sufficiently slow.
- Judgmentality 6y ago> (I've also heard it claimed that it's an urban legend that frogs won't jump if you cook them slowly. But, maybe it's an urban legend that it's an urban legend.) Come on, it only takes a moment of critical thinking to realize no animal would allow itself to be boiled alive, be it slowly or quickly. If you're in a bath and you increase the heat until you're hot, do you keep increasing the heat or do you jump out when it's too hot?
- blackearl 6y agoI've jumped into a hot tub before.
- 6y ago
- balozi 6y agoSome mainstream media outlets seem to be going out of their way to spin a softer narrative on-behalf of Whatsapp/FB. They seem to believe that users may be too stupid to understand Facebook's moves and subsequent public relations. Looking at you New York Times.
- Ericson2314 6y agoI mean the people's reaction is out of scale with the people's prior reaction to these things, but that's fine with me: it's an overdue correction. - WhatsApp: Oh wait, SMS etc. is completely insecure - Signal: Oh wait, WhatsApp is structurally unable to be a force for privacy - Matrix: Oh wait, even benevolent centralization is an unnecessary risk I look forward to the public's increasing wisdom with these matter.
- Merman_Mike 6y agoReally weird tone in their blog post [1]. It's mostly "sorry that you don't understand how things work". I've seen this before with these privacy-invading megacorps. They're tone deaf and defensive. Maybe they're worried that people are catching on and the tides are shifting. [1] https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-update https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-up...
- oconnor663 6y agoI dunno, I've personally heard from friends who thought that WhatsApp was turning off encryption. Tons of people have misunderstood what the policy change meant. I agree that it's partly self-serving to focus on those people (as opposed to the people who did understand the policy and still felt angry about it), but it's not unreasonable.
- grenoire 6y agoAgreed, I had to explain to my friends (some even lawyers, who felt very strongly about this) what this change actually entailed regarding message encryption.
- pure_simplicity 6y agoCare to share your explanation. What does it mean? Genuinely curious.
- saddlerustle 6y agoIt's true though? The actualy privacy policy changes were just about enabling business messaging and didn't functionally change anything wrt what user data is collected or shared with Facebook.
- Macha 6y agoWasn't this just the case in the EU? My understanding is in the US they did explicitly have another section about data sharing in the US giving a three point update compared to the two point update we got.
- 458aperta 6y agoFacebook-owned WhatsApp said they would work to "clear up misinformation" around its privacy policy. Censorship and ban hammer has now become "clearing up misinformation". Facebook and others have become the Ministry of Truth, just like the novel 1984 predicted.
- NetOpWibby 6y ago"Delays" So, they're gonna keep going.
- oli5679 6y agoThe founder of Whatsapp (1) claims that Facebook promised Whatsapp would not be monetised, and that Facebook and and Whatsapp's data would not be combined. This information was also provided to European antitrust regulators (2) missed out on $850 stock option grants vesting by quitting early over disputes with Facebook about monetisation strategy involving advertising (3) promoted #deletefacebook on Whatsapp following the Cambridge Anlalytica scandal (4) Donated $50m to the non-for-profit alternative, Signal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Acton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Acton
- suyash 6y agoAt this point Facebook's best interest is to sell WhatsApp or make it a separate entity, completely out of Facebook's reach and control if they want to win users trust again.
- Kadin 6y agoI can't really see why Facebook would care; even if they drive off 50% of WhatsApp's userbase, that's 50% they get to keep, analyze, and monetize. If they made WhatsApp a separate entity, they lose 100% of its users. Half of something is better than all of nothing. The acquisition cost of WhatsApp is sunk at this point—the only thing left is to wring as much money out of it as possible.
- jonny_eh 6y agoIt's putting them at risk with regulators.
- fastball 6y agoTechnically it's not a donation, it's a 0% interest loan that doesn't need to be repaid until 2068. And $50M was the initial amount, but it's up to ~$100M now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation
- 6y ago
- mekoka 6y agoToo bad. I was really looking forward to the great exodus of Feb 8th.
- DeathMetal3000 6y agoThe exodus is well underway. This sleazy delay won’t stop it.
- 29athrowaway 6y agoWhy do you think Facebook bought Whatsapp for billions of dollars? because they like serving users for free?
- eecc 6y agoI dunno, but this time I managed to flip 3 of my most active chat groups to Signal. I’m not letting this one go to waste... it’s the chance of a lifetime.
- tinyhouse 6y agoI already accepted the new terms. I hope it means it doesn't matter if someone accepted it or not. I'm amazed how FB keeps falling for such things. From my understanding this story has blown out out of proportion and the main reason is the way FB handled those privacy changes.
- skzv 6y agoNow, it's not concrete evidence, but I find it truly curious that Telegram has been banned in many authoritarian countries, but WhatsApp wasn't. It does suggest the authorities do have access to WhatsApp chats in some manner, at least. Durov has publicly stated that the FBI offered bribes multiple times to insert a backdoor into Telegram.
- tuxeh 6y agoWhatsapp has been banned in China for a few years now unless roaming on a foreign sim card or connected to a vpn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_mainland_China https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_...
- nerbert 6y agoI wonder how many users they’ve lost for this shift to happen. On what metric is it based?
- enachtry 6y agoPhew. I hope this means Signal gets back to normal soon. Also, Signal should introduce some kind of paid subscription with a few critically important qualities: 1. Anonymous payment that binds subscriptions to users without retaining anything about who paid. Like a prepaid GSM SIM. All Signal needs to know is that the current terminal uses a paid subscription. 2. Ability to buy a cheaper bulk/family bundle. I use Signal to talk to family and close friends and would like to pay for myself and my parents, at the very least. 3. Price it differently in different countries. $1 in India is as heavy as $10 in US. This is super mega important. 4. Setup dedicated servers for subscription users with a much better service level. The service collapse that happened today should not happen again. There should also be an option for a fully encrypted backup that Signal cannot decrypt just on the server side to store personal conversation logs.
- syntaxing 6y agoHmm not trying to flame the fire, but it's kind of coincidental that the day Whatsapp delays the privacy change is the same day Signal servers are down.
- pmlnr 6y ago"This means we will always protect your personal conversations with end-to-end encryption" / https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-update https://blog.whatsapp.com/giving-more-time-for-our-recent-up... / Why is "personal" present in that sentence? EDIT Finally, here's the real reason for the changes: > "While not everyone shops with a business on WhatsApp today, we think that more people will choose to do so in the future and it’s important people are aware of these services." My wife recently started to complain about the new instagram UI and that there are shops _everywhere_, and that the UI has reorganised buttons so people will find themselves at shops if they follow muscle memory. Apparently that's the future of WhatsApp.
- deanstag 6y agoSpecifically to distinguish it from "business" conversations. A lot of my peer group missed that distinction in the whatsapp policy update.
- pmlnr 6y agoIs a group conversation personal? Who decides what is personal?
- deanstag 6y agoBusiness conversations are conversations between you and Whatsapp Business accounts. Everything else would be personal.
- pmlnr 6y ago> Everything else would be personal Is that written down anywhere?
- deanstag 6y agoNot specifically. I assumed the distinction from the two below. "We offer end-to-end encryption for our Services. End-to-end encryption means that your messages are encrypted to protect against us and third parties from reading them. Learn more about end-to-end encryption and how businesses communicate with you on WhatsApp." And the following link https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/end-to-end-encryption-for-business-messages https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/end-to...
- electriclove 6y agoWash, rinse, repeat.. the FB MO
- stunt 6y agoThe amount of commercial time on cable TV keeps increasing as networks try to make up for shrinking audiences by stuffing more ads. That may happen to Facebook in a few years.
- radoslawc 6y agoDuring last week at least dozen more of my contacts appeared on my Signal roaster. And those were not security or privacy oriented people. Still in many countries Whatsapp is basically way of communicating with customers or just communicating (it's more cost effective iirc than SMS) - so these people are not going anywhere I presume.
- archsurface 6y agoI switched to signal, and was surprised at people following without question.
- saos 6y ago> We’ve heard from so many people how much confusion there is around our recent update. There's been a lot of misinformation causing concern and we want to help everyone understand our principles and the facts. Nonsense. They've been impacted by uninstalls/deletions and trying to salvage things.
- tobib 6y agoAt least in our social circle, the move from WhatsApp is already underway and won't be reversed. Even if they cancelled their plan, Facebook is a platform that must be avoided and this "incident" finally helped getting that message across.
- theshrike79 6y agoMight be a bit late. Telegram got 25 million new unique users. Signal got 50 million, so much that it melted their servers for a while. The masses now know that there are options to Whatsapp, maybe that'll trigger a move to more options, maybe not. We'll see.
- atorodius 6y agoAbsolutely speaking, a large number. Relative to the number of WhatsApp users worldwide? Maybe 1-3%?
- DeathMetal3000 6y agoYour math is based on net new users. But a lot of people are moving to Signal and dumping WhatsApp. So they impact is bigger.
- strogonoff 6y agoDo you think the recent privacy changes in WhatsApp is Facebook preparing in case antitrust started in December forces them to separate WhatsApp into its own entity? As it is now, with WhatsApp being part of it, FB has access to any (non-e2e) data by default. The new agreement might have been them hedging to keep it that way, which backfired spectacularly.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y agoWhile they're "clearing up misinformation", we probably also need to "clear up misinformation" - because according to [1] the actual problematic changes happened a while ago, you could opt out, but anyone who created their account afterwards (or didn't opt out back them) can't. While back then, there was not enough outcry and momentum to switch people over to Signal, now, with Facebook being seen more negatively even by laypeople, there seems to be enough momentum and I've gotten most people switched over. Hopefully, this will make it easier for their friends to switch too. So if you were unable to switch a few years ago, try again! People may be easier to convince than you thought. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/whatsapp-facebook-data-share-notification/ https://www.wired.com/story/whatsapp-facebook-data-share-not...
- yosito 6y agoI don't think the backlash was just about the privacy changes. I think the changes were just the straw that broke the camel's back. People have been itching for a catalyst to get their friends and family to migrate away from Facebook's manipulative software to an app that actually respects users and their privacy. It seems like it finally happened. Finally most of the friends I chat with have Signal or Telegram and I can justify deleting WhatsApp and Facebook. I'm hanging on by a thin thread to Instagram because it's the easiest way for me to quickly edit and post my daily photos, but that could very easily be replaced because now it's more about the image editing than the network effects.
- pmontra 6y agoI guess that somebody in Marketing eventually took notice. I wonder if they participated to the talks about how to show the new Terms of Service or if they didn't foresee how people would react.
- AHappyCamper 6y agoDo NOT trust Facebook. They have consistently been bad actors. Move to MeWe, Signal, Telegram, or any other platform. The market MUST punish Facebook for their awful behavior.