• wahming@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can’t do anything about it.

    I don’t get this sentiment. If anything happens to WhatsApp, they’ll just switch to another IM. WhatsApp wasn’t the first to come along, and won’t be the last. How exactly does Meta have them by the balls?

    • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      In some of those countries, it’s not really a choice. Like, WhatsApp is the only way of contacting a company’s customer care (via chat bots that run on it), colleges and universities may have study groups on it and teachers may hand out notes etc in those groups, also apparently it’s also the only way to contact even some government agencies.

      • wahming@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I know, I’m from those countries. Like I said, we used other IM apps before WhatsApp came along, and if something changes we can use a new app. WhatsApp currently leads the market due to the network effect, but it doesn’t have us ‘by the balls’.

        (Though the most likely successor would be WeChat, which is arguably much much worse in many ways)

        • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Do you require WhatsApp to contact certain government agencies? Do you require WhatsApp to get access to customer support? Do you require WhatsApp to get access to lecture notes? No? Then you’re not from one of those countries.

            • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Which means you can’t really switch to other apps then, which means Meta has you by the balls.

              • wahming@monyet.cc
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I suppose that depends on your definition of by the balls. Like I said, it’s not difficult for everybody to switch if they piss everyone off. On average people here have 2-3 IMs installed.

                • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s the thing though, they have been pissing everyone off for over a decade now, going back to the days when Facebook introduced the algorithmic feed/timeline thing, and then with the promoted posts, and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, the data harvesting and ads and blatant privacy violations. They’re one of the scummiest organisations out there and yet you all keep using it’s products and happily whoring yourselves out to Meta. Sure you can switch in theory, so what are y’all waiting for? There’s plenty of reasons to switch, plenty of decent alternatives too. The truth is, you can’t really switch. You don’t have a choice.

                  If you think you’ve got a choice, I dare you to uninstall WhatsApp for a month or two, and see if you’re able to get by without any issues. Then you’ll know why I said they they have you by the balls - basically, you’re a hostage, a slave. You really have no choice, no freedom, even if you’ve got other apps installed. You may convince your friends and family to switch, but do you really think the thousands of companies, government agencies etc will just switch for no good reason? Will they make new chat bots for the alternative apps? Will they develop new SoPs/documentation for their internal staff, spend time and money on marketing and advertising the new way of contacting them? Waiting for Meta to do something major to piss everyone off may never happen - Meta isn’t that foolish, and as people get more and more used to Meta’s products and their way of doing things, they get more and more entwined into the ecosystem and they’ll find it even more harder to leave. If everyone’s going to wait for everyone else to switch, then no one will switch.

    • DJDarren@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I remember listening to a podcast that talked of how in the Philippines (I think it was), Facebook is the internet, because Meta/FB effectively subsidised the carriers into allowing FB access to not use up any data allowance. As a result, if all you do is go on FB, you don’t pay a penny. If WhatsApp is included in this, then yeah, you’re locked in with no real alternative.

      • wahming@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh right. Not quite nowadays, they get subsidised from multiple companies, including Google (YouTube) and such. I hate to say this, but WeChat would probably be happy to jump in and grab some market share if Meta does something egregiously dumb

    • PlexSheep@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      So many people use it, that the barrier to change to another application is high. They would need to fuck up on very large scale.

      • wahming@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, they currently have the market share, and network effect keeps them there. Nevertheless, my point was it’s not a monopoly, so how does Meta have everybody 'by the balls"?

        • tehmics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Network effect might as well be a monopoly until the network kills itself.

          I take issue with the concept of one company owning an entire communications network in the first place. Federation is a step in the right direction but it’s not enough yet.

    • tehmics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s an issue of userbase.

      WhatsApp can and will get away with a lot before it drives users to a mass exodus, when messaging should have just been an open protocol from the start.