←back to thread

WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

(www.nytimes.com)
713 points greenburger | 7 comments | 16 Jun 25 13:38 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
elric ◴[17 Jun 25 09:16 UTC] No.44297158[source]▶
Can we get a federated messenger already?

Sure, we have email, but the MS/Google duopoloy has effectively unfederated that, with their inscrutable block lists and nonexistent appeals processes, allegedly in order to protect you from spam.

Sure, XMPP is a thing, which has been mostly dead for well over a decade.

Sure, Matrix is a thing, but every time I look at it, all I see is criticism of its specifications and poor interoperability between implementations?

What would it take to sort out this mess? More money for Matrix or XMPP? Someone with enough clout to promote them? I'm sure organizations like the UN or the EU would, in theory, be in favour of an effective global communicator. But those same organizations would like rail against encryption and decentralisation.

replies(15): >>44297189 #>>44297257 #>>44297370 #>>44297456 #>>44297512 #>>44297638 #>>44297663 #>>44297773 #>>44298202 #>>44298229 #>>44298399 #>>44301100 #>>44301256 #>>44301264 #>>44349726 #
evrimoztamur ◴[17 Jun 25 09:56 UTC] No.44297370[source]▶
We do not need federated messaging at the consumer app level, we need a replacement that's available at the cellular network level (just like SMS). RCS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services) is trying to do this, but it might be too little too late.
replies(5): >>44297485 #>>44297495 #>>44297535 #>>44298046 #>>44302765 #
1. ndriscoll ◴[17 Jun 25 10:22 UTC] No.44297495[source]▶
Except RCS doesn't work on anything except phones, while XMPP works perfectly fine everywhere. IM was vastly better on computers back when you could use applications like pidgin or kopete.
replies(2): >>44297566 #>>44301455 #
2. dgellow ◴[17 Jun 25 10:39 UTC] No.44297566[source]▶
The time when XMPP was supported by google (and Facebook IIRC?). Running jabber for small groups was pretty simple, and you had Adium and pidgin, both were simple to use and just neat software
replies(1): >>44297874 #
3. MiddleEndian ◴[17 Jun 25 11:34 UTC] No.44297874[source]▶
Adium was by far the best messaging experience I've ever had. It was good looking, fast, customizable, and super well-intgrated into OS X.
replies(1): >>44303164 #
4. int_19h ◴[17 Jun 25 17:21 UTC] No.44301455[source]▶
The problem is mobile, and specifically the need for push notifications to have reasonable battery life. The traditional model that desktop IM clients use, where they have a permanent connection to the server, is not viable on mobile. But push notifications require you to design your protocol around them and lock you into the corresponding provider (i.e. Google or Apple, depending on the platform).
replies(1): >>44303513 #
5. dgellow ◴[17 Jun 25 19:49 UTC] No.44303164{3}[source]▶
Interesting, you’re right, I forgot how customizable Adium was! That’s something that has been completely lost in modern chat software :(
6. ndriscoll ◴[17 Jun 25 20:22 UTC] No.44303513[source]▶
I'm not familiar with real world home firewall behavior, but shouldn't you be able to leave a TCP connection open/idle with no keepalive for minutes if not hours? I'm skeptical of the battery life argument around notification lockin, particularly when I see how much Android devices light up a pihole.
replies(1): >>44316352 #
7. int_19h ◴[19 Jun 25 07:29 UTC] No.44316352{3}[source]▶
I don't claim to understand the specifics, but I was a heavy user of custom XMPP clients on early Android phones, and they did require a persistent notification to keep the app (and thus the connection) alive, which did translate to measurable battery impact. My understanding is that the built-in notification manager helps with this by multiplexing and batching everything.