3 ms·

I'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 ye

by polote 6y ago

I'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 ago
That, 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 ago
  No, 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 ago
If 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".

by polote 6y ago

TeMPOraL 6y ago

That, 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 ago
No, 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 ago

If 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".