4 ms·

For an essentially free service? Those sound like a pretty high bar.

layer8 4y ago
They 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 ago
It's not free. We pay with our data.
- runjake 4y ago
  That’s free in the way grass is “free” for beef cattle.
gerdesj 4y ago
If 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.
- jjeaff 4y ago
  And I'd bet a hefty sum that even after they ban you, they continue collecting and selling any data they can still collect from the app installed on your device.
  - gerdesj 4y ago
    Of course: you gave it willingly if unwittingly.
ssss11 4y ago
If it were truly free it would have died many years ago.
Sakos 4y ago
A "free" service run by one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world. There should be a high bar.
Fnoord 4y ago
Its '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 ago
So 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 ago
  And 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 ago
    It 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 ago
A free service that is now a backbone of communication across the world is more of a utility than a service to me
muzani 4y ago
Yes, 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 ago
It'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.

They 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 ago

It's not free. We pay with our data.

runjake 4y ago
That’s free in the way grass is “free” for beef cattle.

gerdesj 4y ago

If 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.

jjeaff 4y ago
And I'd bet a hefty sum that even after they ban you, they continue collecting and selling any data they can still collect from the app installed on your device.
- gerdesj 4y ago
  Of course: you gave it willingly if unwittingly.

ssss11 4y ago

If it were truly free it would have died many years ago.

Sakos 4y ago

A "free" service run by one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world. There should be a high bar.

Fnoord 4y ago

Its '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 ago

So 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 ago
And 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 ago
  It 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 ago

A free service that is now a backbone of communication across the world is more of a utility than a service to me

muzani 4y ago

Yes, 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 ago

It'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.