3 ms·

WhatsApp has replaced the PSTN in many countries. Without it, you cannot contact businesses; they simply do not answer normal phone calls. Also, booking accommo

• graemep 4mo ago
  Even where its not required, it can be a lot cheaper (e.g. for international calls) and has features (conference calls) not offered by consumer phones. Whatsapp's success has partly been driven by telecoms companies over-charging.
  • thisislife2 4mo ago
    Telecoms financed and built the communication infrastructure which made the internet (and thus, WhatsApp) possible. WhatsApp is also further subsidised because you also pay for the internet to use it.
    • graemep 4mo ago
      I pay for an internet connection anyway. Even if I use a pay as you go mobile connection (on which the telco makes a profit) its still a lot cheaper to use Whatsapp than either SMS or voice calls. There is no subsidy, its telecoms companies making a ridiculously high margin (aimed by regulators in some countries) on some services.
    • g8oz 4mo ago
      Telecoms received excessive returns on their investment. Effectively acting as rentiers for long distance calls.
      • thisislife2 4mo ago
        Ok. And do you think Meta / WhatsApp is any different from any of those Telecoms? Just because WhatsApp is "free" doesn't mean it's a non-profit service from Meta!
    • Copernicron 4mo ago
      This might be true in your country but it's absolutely incorrect in mine. Most of the telecoms here started as crown corporations, making them an arm of the government. Some of them have been privatized since then but they all received billions in subsidies to build out the networks to cover everyone and not just the most populated areas. An awful lot of Canadian taxpayer dollars have gone to build the internet in this country and we still get gouged like crazy.
      • thisislife2 4mo ago
        The point still stands - Telecoms have been subsidised by public money. And we further subsidise WhatsApp by paying for an internet connection to use it.
  • kgwxd 4mo ago
    There are thousands, maybe millions, of alternatives to Whatsapp for that purpose.
    • Rygian 4mo ago
      It's way too late for alternatives now, unless regulation is created to break the monopoly.
    • Copernicron 4mo ago
      How many of those can my elderly mother use to talk to her sisters? By my estimation the answer is, "zero," and the alternatives will get even scarcer thanks to Bill C-22.
      • akimbostrawman 4mo ago
        Signal is almost a 1:1 UI clone. If they can manage whatsapp they can manage signal...
        • Copernicron 4mo ago
          Except my aunts are already on WhatsApp and I would have to get all of them on Signal. And then they would still need WhatsApp because of everyone else they talk to who isn't on Signal. The network effect is very real. On top of that we still don't know if Bill C-22 is going to require Signal to pull out of Canada entirely because of the metadata retention requirements. They don't keep metadata and that's something Canadian law enforcement has been pushing for for a long time.
          • akimbostrawman 4mo ago
            >And then they would still need WhatsApp because of everyone else they talk to who isn't on Signal. I don't see the issue. I do the exact same. Want to talk to me? Use this app or we can't. There never can be any network effect if nobody start doing this.
  • jmpman 4mo ago
    I recently made a phone call from the US to UK. I was horrified to find that my unlimited calling didn't apply to that international route. Really?!? Countries should be fighting to remove those fees. I can call Mexico or Canada without any additional cost, so it can be done. I'd originally proposed starting a business with the UK gentleman, but this is likely the first of many regulations which will tax me.
    • graemep 4mo ago
      This is a case of inaction by regulators, rather than action. They do it because they can and its not important to most people.