41 ms·

Practically it's impossible to quit WhatsApp, more so in certain countries. However if you still have that old account, you can choose not to accept any of Meta

Practically it's impossible to quit WhatsApp, more so in certain countries. However if you still have that old account, you can choose not to accept any of Meta'a new terms and agreements, and surprisingly they still let you use it! The last time I accepted the terms was probably around 2013.

3pt14159 3y ago
Eh—not really. I just say "can we use Signal? It's super secure." And people generally are fine to use Signal. They don't use SMS because it's expensive and many that own an iPhone in countries where Android dominate don't use iMessage because, well, few around them use iPhone and the interface (i.e., the phone number) doesn't really tell them that they won't get charged for a text message. I've posted up in many countries, and it's rarely a show stopper.
- Closi 3y ago
  That's fine but you aren't on the group chat, so won't know about the hike next Sunday.
  - latexr 3y ago
    Anecdotally, all of my friends who are part of group chats are annoyed by them. Too much noise for too little signal. On a personal level, if there’s anything in a group chat that would be relevant to me I’ll know about it from one of the participants through another medium, like an SMS or phone call or when we see each other.
    - Closi 3y ago
      You can be both annoyed and find value in them. Mine are annoying too, but I keep them because they also keep me in the loop.
  - counterbead 3y ago
    if they are people worth your while, they'll make sure to let you know about it using other means...
    - blizarre 3y ago
      They might not be your friend by the local hiking/diving/parent/whatever group. They don't owe you anything.
      - smaudet 3y ago
        And you don't owe them anything either. If they are really your only option, you can use whatever insane platform they are on long enough to forge a couple friendships, explain your stance and then quit. If they are your friends they will understand, if not it wasn't worth the effort to begin with.
        adql 3y ago
        Well if you valued them as a friend you wouldn't make their life more annoying and just install a communicator app
        smaudet 3y ago
        "If you valued me as a friend, you wouldn't force me to use a communicator app. My life is so annoying as a result of you, now I have to buy and maintain another phone, and then remember to check it, for your app. Maybe, you could use something we agree on, like <insert plethora of choices>".
        breuleux 3y ago
        Someone does not have to understand your idiosyncrasies to be your friend. Most people will not, in fact, understand why you are so picky about the chat platforms you are willing to use, and they will think (correctly, I would say) that you care more about your social media stances than you care about their friendship. So you will think they were not worth the effort to begin with, and they will think the same in return, but ultimately they are not restricting their potential friend pool nearly as much as you are. If it works out well for you, great, otherwise you have to be a bit more pragmatic.
  - boondoggle16 3y ago
    sounds like your friends really love you
  - bmacho 3y ago
    If you want to know what they talk about, then you have to use the same platform. This is trivial, and doesn't have much to do with being able to quit WhatsApp.
    - Closi 3y ago
      It does have a lot to do with quitting WhatsApp - because WhatsApp is the platform that is the de-facto application for this in some parts of the world. Absolutely increases it's stickiness.
  - asah 3y ago
    For this use case, I use a burner Google voice number, give that to Whatsapp and don't give it access to my contacts or anything on my phone. Late model phones don't give apps IMEI or real MAC. It's not perfect: when you connect with people they can easily associate your WhatsApp account with your identity (add contact) and also share info/pics/etc about you that you wouldn't want shared. They can do this even if you're not on WhatsApp, and Meta can use face recognition and other techniques to create a profile for you, then associate that profile with the other days and profile they have for you. It's trivial to narrow the down to a few million users then match on photo etc. Unclear if they bother, given that 99% of users just give away their privacy. Also, Whatsapp verification uses SMS. If they'd used a verification URL, they could've (bounced through) Facebook.com, Instagram.com, etc and associated the account via (first party) cookies. I'm guessing they don't because 99% of users happily give the app all the permissions it needs and SMS is more universal.
- hhh 3y ago
  When you type a number into the Messages app it will tell you if it’s a text message or iMessage in the message bar on iOS.
- jcul 3y ago
  It's not that simple. In countries where WhatsApp is ubiquitous, it is used for more than just messaging friends. For example, many childcare places will send updates through WhatsApp groups. So you have to convince the business and all their clients to switch to signal or do without notifications for your child's childcare.
fcatalan 3y ago
True, here in Spain WhatsApp is practically a basic utility. Nobody is not on WhatsApp.
- magic_hamster 3y ago
  Aside from people, a significant number of companies, and even government services, offer service through WhatsApp as well. In some parts of the world it's really impossible not to use it.
  - geysersam 3y ago
    Why have they been so successful? Why didn't MMS 6.0 implement everything that exists in modern chat applications. Why is Meta anything more than the anonymous humble entities producing sms and "phone" apps?
    - blizarre 3y ago
      I guess because Whatsapp provides a unified and standard way to communicate between people on different provider networks / countries for free? You get groups, text/images/location sharing, video/audio calls, cross-countries, that works very reliably, and you only need internet (which can be found almost anywhere even if that's just wifi). MMS still don't work reliably for me (lost a message just last week that someone swear to have sent). And for a long time they were not free as well.
      - smaudet 3y ago
        This is still where normal phones work better (no internet).
      - geysersam 3y ago
        I'm not actually suggesting using MMS. I just wanted to illustrate that we've had instant communication technology (even "rich" multi-media) long before Whatsapp etc. Why didn't the providers of that technology (telecom companies) become Meta? The difference is that MMS/SMS is standardized and agnostic to the client interface. While WhatsApp is proprietary and monopolizes the client. We could easily have had a "internet direct message" standard implementing most of WhatsApps features. (Wait... Isn't that SMTP?) Maybe I'm just ignorant, but what does WhatsApp bring that let's say email++ does not have?

3pt14159 3y ago

Eh—not really. I just say "can we use Signal? It's super secure." And people generally are fine to use Signal. They don't use SMS because it's expensive and many that own an iPhone in countries where Android dominate don't use iMessage because, well, few around them use iPhone and the interface (i.e., the phone number) doesn't really tell them that they won't get charged for a text message. I've posted up in many countries, and it's rarely a show stopper.

Closi 3y ago
That's fine but you aren't on the group chat, so won't know about the hike next Sunday.
- latexr 3y ago
  Anecdotally, all of my friends who are part of group chats are annoyed by them. Too much noise for too little signal. On a personal level, if there’s anything in a group chat that would be relevant to me I’ll know about it from one of the participants through another medium, like an SMS or phone call or when we see each other.
  - Closi 3y ago
    You can be both annoyed and find value in them. Mine are annoying too, but I keep them because they also keep me in the loop.
- counterbead 3y ago
  if they are people worth your while, they'll make sure to let you know about it using other means...
  - blizarre 3y ago
    They might not be your friend by the local hiking/diving/parent/whatever group. They don't owe you anything.
    - smaudet 3y ago
      And you don't owe them anything either. If they are really your only option, you can use whatever insane platform they are on long enough to forge a couple friendships, explain your stance and then quit. If they are your friends they will understand, if not it wasn't worth the effort to begin with.
      - adql 3y ago
        Well if you valued them as a friend you wouldn't make their life more annoying and just install a communicator app
        smaudet 3y ago
        "If you valued me as a friend, you wouldn't force me to use a communicator app. My life is so annoying as a result of you, now I have to buy and maintain another phone, and then remember to check it, for your app. Maybe, you could use something we agree on, like <insert plethora of choices>".
      - breuleux 3y ago
        Someone does not have to understand your idiosyncrasies to be your friend. Most people will not, in fact, understand why you are so picky about the chat platforms you are willing to use, and they will think (correctly, I would say) that you care more about your social media stances than you care about their friendship. So you will think they were not worth the effort to begin with, and they will think the same in return, but ultimately they are not restricting their potential friend pool nearly as much as you are. If it works out well for you, great, otherwise you have to be a bit more pragmatic.
- boondoggle16 3y ago
  sounds like your friends really love you
- bmacho 3y ago
  If you want to know what they talk about, then you have to use the same platform. This is trivial, and doesn't have much to do with being able to quit WhatsApp.
  - Closi 3y ago
    It does have a lot to do with quitting WhatsApp - because WhatsApp is the platform that is the de-facto application for this in some parts of the world. Absolutely increases it's stickiness.
- asah 3y ago
  For this use case, I use a burner Google voice number, give that to Whatsapp and don't give it access to my contacts or anything on my phone. Late model phones don't give apps IMEI or real MAC. It's not perfect: when you connect with people they can easily associate your WhatsApp account with your identity (add contact) and also share info/pics/etc about you that you wouldn't want shared. They can do this even if you're not on WhatsApp, and Meta can use face recognition and other techniques to create a profile for you, then associate that profile with the other days and profile they have for you. It's trivial to narrow the down to a few million users then match on photo etc. Unclear if they bother, given that 99% of users just give away their privacy. Also, Whatsapp verification uses SMS. If they'd used a verification URL, they could've (bounced through) Facebook.com, Instagram.com, etc and associated the account via (first party) cookies. I'm guessing they don't because 99% of users happily give the app all the permissions it needs and SMS is more universal.
hhh 3y ago
When you type a number into the Messages app it will tell you if it’s a text message or iMessage in the message bar on iOS.
jcul 3y ago
It's not that simple. In countries where WhatsApp is ubiquitous, it is used for more than just messaging friends. For example, many childcare places will send updates through WhatsApp groups. So you have to convince the business and all their clients to switch to signal or do without notifications for your child's childcare.

fcatalan 3y ago

True, here in Spain WhatsApp is practically a basic utility. Nobody is not on WhatsApp.

magic_hamster 3y ago
Aside from people, a significant number of companies, and even government services, offer service through WhatsApp as well. In some parts of the world it's really impossible not to use it.
- geysersam 3y ago
  Why have they been so successful? Why didn't MMS 6.0 implement everything that exists in modern chat applications. Why is Meta anything more than the anonymous humble entities producing sms and "phone" apps?
  - blizarre 3y ago
    I guess because Whatsapp provides a unified and standard way to communicate between people on different provider networks / countries for free? You get groups, text/images/location sharing, video/audio calls, cross-countries, that works very reliably, and you only need internet (which can be found almost anywhere even if that's just wifi). MMS still don't work reliably for me (lost a message just last week that someone swear to have sent). And for a long time they were not free as well.
    - smaudet 3y ago
      This is still where normal phones work better (no internet).
    - geysersam 3y ago
      I'm not actually suggesting using MMS. I just wanted to illustrate that we've had instant communication technology (even "rich" multi-media) long before Whatsapp etc. Why didn't the providers of that technology (telecom companies) become Meta? The difference is that MMS/SMS is standardized and agnostic to the client interface. While WhatsApp is proprietary and monopolizes the client. We could easily have had a "internet direct message" standard implementing most of WhatsApps features. (Wait... Isn't that SMTP?) Maybe I'm just ignorant, but what does WhatsApp bring that let's say email++ does not have?