←back to thread

WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

(www.nytimes.com)
713 points greenburger | 9 comments | 16 Jun 25 13:38 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
b0a04gl ◴[17 Jun 25 06:18 UTC] No.44296183[source]▶
everyone saw this coming the day facebook bought it, but the real issue isn't ads in status . it's that the platform is now locked into meta's attention monetization engine. the founders explicitly said no ads. now not only ads, but paid channels, algorithmic exposure, and user segmentation creeping in. most people won't switch because of network effects, so meta can keep tightening the screws. this isn't about revenue, it's about control. they’re reshaping a private messaging tool into a broadcast platform with tracking hooks. and most users won’t even notice until it’s too embedded to undo
replies(5): >>44296420 #>>44296685 #>>44296698 #>>44296875 #>>44297519 #
fouronnes3 ◴[17 Jun 25 07:06 UTC] No.44296420[source]▶
It is becoming painfully apparent that the cycle of enshittification is truly inevitable, right up there next to the second law of thermodynamics.
replies(3): >>44296456 #>>44297644 #>>44299307 #
1. fsflover ◴[17 Jun 25 10:54 UTC] No.44297644[source]▶
Unless it's an open, federated system.
replies(2): >>44298217 #>>44298645 #
2. upcoming-sesame ◴[17 Jun 25 12:18 UTC] No.44298217[source]▶
Right. Instant messaging should be considered basic / core utility like ISPs. I can pay a cheap or even a free one and they'll probably sell my data or I can pay more for an ISP that preserve my privacy
replies(1): >>44308991 #
3. klabb3 ◴[17 Jun 25 13:02 UTC] No.44298645[source]▶
No system can credibly claim to sustain massive consumer scale until proven in real life.

Even if your technical architecture supports scale and federation, these are just some threats off the top of my head:

- spam, fraud and Sybil attacks, deteriorating the experience for everyone

- infighting, forking among maintainers of core libs and protocols

- maintainers get poached by mega corps

- hostile takeovers of foundations, trademarks and auxiliary institutions

- a single entity within federation gets too large and imposes their own changes that can’t be rejected without losing majority of users or forking (see infighting)

- VC/deep-pocket subsidized competition offering free service (say eg video calls) and unlimited marketing, OEM pre-installs etc, to poach critical mass of users

I love the idea of federated systems. But I think some of us nerds think too much about tech and too little about the social and economic dynamics of the real world.

replies(1): >>44300406 #
4. EuAndreh ◴[17 Jun 25 15:33 UTC] No.44300406[source]▶
Despite its flaws and issues, email is federated and has been working at scale for decades.
replies(1): >>44306144 #
5. klabb3 ◴[18 Jun 25 02:30 UTC] No.44306144{3}[source]▶
I agree. That’s an interesting model for chat. But remember, modern email is quite complex when you add all the standards for authenticity and security together, as well as informal requirements like spam filtering. But even if self-hosting were a pain, it’d still be an improvement over today’s fragmentation-by-app status quo.
replies(1): >>44307462 #
6. fsflover ◴[18 Jun 25 07:29 UTC] No.44307462{4}[source]▶
> But even if self-hosting were a pain, it’d still be an improvement

Why hypothetical? Matrix already works sufficiently well.

replies(1): >>44308988 #
7. account42 ◴[18 Jun 25 11:40 UTC] No.44308988{5}[source]▶
Not at global scale it doesn't.
replies(1): >>44309055 #
8. account42 ◴[18 Jun 25 11:41 UTC] No.44308991[source]▶
> or I can pay more for an ISP that preserve my privacy

In what alternate universe?

9. fsflover ◴[18 Jun 25 11:51 UTC] No.44309055{6}[source]▶
Are you aware of any particular bottleneck?