5 ms·
This should especially be true for communication services. If you reach a large enough threshold of users, you should be required to offer interoperability with
by elric 4y ago
This should especially be true for communication services. If you reach a large enough threshold of users, you should be required to offer interoperability with competitors, and have 24/7 support humans available to help out with things like this.
- happyopossum 4y agoFor an essentially free service? Those sound like a pretty high bar.
- layer8 4y agoThey are a business, not a charity, so it seems appropriate. Nobody forces them to provide the service for free. The other argument is that the major messaging platforms have collectively become an essential basic utility, and accordingly carry some responsibility.
- frostwarrior 4y agoIt's not free. We pay with our data.
- runjake 4y agoThat’s free in the way grass is “free” for beef cattle.
- gerdesj 4y agoIf it was "free" then the company would have gone out of business long ago. So it is not free and she is a revenue generator for them. In return she might want some sort of basic support. Given the market value of the company, then it should be able to comply with basic standards of say decency, honesty and perhaps ... transparency.
- ssss11 4y agoIf it were truly free it would have died many years ago.
- Sakos 4y agoA "free" service run by one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world. There should be a high bar.
- Fnoord 4y agoIts 'free', and you are the product (Congratulations!). You pay with your metadata (address book). Metadata is invaluable. Facebook knows everyone's connections. I'm even included in someone's address book, even though I don't use WhatsApp or any other Facebook service. I'm not benefiting from Facebook's free services, yet I am the product. It is disgusting, I hate this company, but I can't blame them. They get away with their nefarious crap for fun & profit.
- Scarblac 4y agoSo ask for some money if you need to. Taking on so many users means you get responsibilities to society that smaller companies don't get.
- dTal 4y agoAnd of course, WhatsApp used to cost a dollar. A dollar a year, even! So "people wouldn't pay" just isn't true. I for one would gladly pay that just to have it not run by Facebook.
- muzani 4y agoIt was actually free in some parts of the world when it was charging a dollar to some others. It became dominant in many places where it was totally free.
- nunez 4y agoA free service that is now a backbone of communication across the world is more of a utility than a service to me
- muzani 4y agoYes, especially for a free service. I've been asking friends to get off WhatsApp forever, and everyone wants to get off it. But family members and clients are on it, so now everyone downloads multiple messaging apps, ones they want to use and the ones they're forced go use. At this point even if WhatsApp explicitly says they'll sell your information to Satan, people will still use it because it's free.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoIt's not free, it requires handing over something of unknowable scope worth much more than money, and it's not a service if they've forcefully inserted themselves into the social graph as the only way of communication for many including being the only way to access community and government services in many places. Crowing 'private company' doesn't absolve you of providing the functions of the town square when you've bulldozed and replaced it and repeatedly stated that you are the town square.
- emacsen 4y agoCommunication, and financial services. I made a new LLC recently and signed up for PayPal to pay an invoice. I gave them my info, my tax ID, my bank account, etc. And within five minutes, they told me that my account was permanently blocked and that I wouldn't be able to use PayPal with my business. No reason was given other than I must have violated their TOU. I had to go onto Twitter and talk publicly about it, then talked to three different Twitter representatives over a three weeks period, and they finally unlocked my account. I commend them for unlocking it, but it's certainly given me pause over using them for even sending funds. :(
- Evidlo 4y agoYou mean PayPal representatives?
- emacsen 4y agoYes, it was a typo I'll see if I can fix.
- astrange 4y agohttps://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/ https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/
- bloody-crow 4y agoI work in fintech and there's a ton of internal policies for KYC (know your customer) compliance, where we immediately terminate customer's contract and are forbidden from revealing any information about why and what's triggered it. I can see both sides of this process, and unfortunately, in case of an error, it's almost impossible to resolve the situation without an inside advocate who could influence the outcome and possibly correct the mistake.
- emacsen 4y agoThe important part in what you said is "internal policies", not laws or regulations. This is why we need regulation that protects people/businesses.
- 3836293648 4y ago> Interoperability The EU is working on it
- stazz1 4y agothe lawmakers know they don't actually have to code it up, right?
- accountofme 4y agoFunnily enough we do have those laws for the old.telephone service we used to all use (in aus). Sadly the internet was classed differently and avoids all that regulation...
- ymolodtsov 4y agoHow would that interoperability look between Telegram, Messenger and WhatsApp? They all have radically different paradigms as soon you get deep. How should a group chat work and be administered? God, just install that other app or pay for Texts or Beeper if you really need it.
- hypertele-Xii 4y agoPublish an API. That's all that's needed for interop.