Discussion:
whatsapp interoperability
(too old to reply)
Andy Burns
2024-09-06 20:22:19 UTC
Permalink
Meta have given a update on how they will allow other messaging apps to
communicate with whatsapp/messenger users ...

<https://about.fb.com/news/2024/09/an-update-on-how-were-building-safe-and-secure-third-party-chats-for-users-in-europe/>
Andrew
2024-09-06 20:59:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Meta have given a update on how they will allow other messaging apps to
communicate with whatsapp/messenger users ...
<https://about.fb.com/news/2024/09/an-update-on-how-were-building-safe-and-secure-third-party-chats-for-users-in-europe/>
I use WhatsApp to communicate with the kids in Germany, while I have to use
Google Voice to communicate with their respective German adults.

Given your helpful information above, that means the kids & I will get...
1. Notifications when people try to communicate with me
2. Combined or separate inboxes being my choice
3. Rich-messaging features such as reactions, direct replies,
typing indicators, and read receipts
4. With later inclusion of rich-messaging features such as
the option to create groups and voice & video calling

Is that a good summary of the article's content?

If so, anyone know if that applies to both Android & to iOS?
(it probably does, but Apple has a habit of including useful
things only when and particularly only where they are mandated).

With the above caveat in place that Apple allows interoperability only
after kicking and screaming, and even then, only to the letter of the law
and no more... how does what WhatsApp is doing compare with basic RCS?
Andy Burns
2024-09-08 16:02:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Given your helpful information above, that means the kids & I will get...
1. Notifications when people try to communicate with me
2. Combined or separate inboxes being my choice
3. Rich-messaging features such as reactions, direct replies,
typing indicators, and read receipts
4. With later inclusion of rich-messaging features such as
the option to create groups and voice & video calling
Is that a good summary of the article's content?
Seems to be, plus there's a choice on the WhatsApp end to enable 3rd
party messengers per service ... not exactly what s|b wants, but might
get it in reciprocal fashion?
Post by Andrew
If so, anyone know if that applies to both Android & to iOS?
(it probably does, but Apple has a habit of including useful
things only when and particularly only where they are mandated).
Does it apply outside the EU?
s|b
2024-09-07 20:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Meta have given a update on how they will allow other messaging apps to
communicate with whatsapp/messenger users ...
I sure hope there will be a choice in Signal so I can block third party
messengers.
--
s|b
Andy Burns
2024-09-07 20:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Andy Burns
Meta have given a update on how they will allow other messaging apps to
communicate with whatsapp/messenger users ...
I sure hope there will be a choice in Signal so I can block third party
messengers.
I'm not sure Signal or Telegram want to play, didn't they say they'd
rather GTFO the EU if they were forced to?
s|b
2024-09-09 18:37:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
I'm not sure Signal or Telegram want to play, didn't they say they'd
rather GTFO the EU if they were forced to?
I did some searching and Signal indeed stated they won't do it. It seems
the DMA was only meant for Meta (WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger). At
least that's how it seems to me. Signal has a problem with it since Meta
won't let Signal have a look at their encryption while Signal's is open
source.

I also remember the UK wanting to implement something and Signal's
reaction was that they would leave the UK.

But the EU is pushing to create some law, so they can scan messenger
apps, supposedly for "kiddie pr0n", but that's just BS.
--
s|b
Steve Hayes
2024-09-10 12:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Andy Burns
I'm not sure Signal or Telegram want to play, didn't they say they'd
rather GTFO the EU if they were forced to?
I did some searching and Signal indeed stated they won't do it. It seems
the DMA was only meant for Meta (WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger). At
least that's how it seems to me. Signal has a problem with it since Meta
won't let Signal have a look at their encryption while Signal's is open
source.
I've been using Signal, but it seems everyone else I know, except my
immediate family, uses WhatsApp.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
s|b
2024-09-10 15:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
I've been using Signal, but it seems everyone else I know, except my
immediate family, uses WhatsApp.
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care. My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
--
s|b
Andrew
2024-09-10 15:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Steve Hayes
I've been using Signal, but it seems everyone else I know, except my
immediate family, uses WhatsApp.
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care. My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
I tried Signal, but nobody else did, whereas everyone is on MMS/SMS here.

Since I'm in the USA where unlimited everything is ubiquitous for a single
price per month, I use "normal" messaging apps (e.g., PulsSMS) for SMS/MMS.

However, I have to keep WhatsApp around, even as I use the separate
non-META WhatsApp dialer to keep my contact list out of META's grubby paws.

As with others, I too would love to drop WhatsApp but everyone I
communicate with in Germany uses it who is young (their elders use POTS).

When/if the major messaging players have interoperability, things will be
better in that anyone should be able to communicate with anyone else with
the basic features of secure communications & large message size.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-10 16:36:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by s|b
Post by Steve Hayes
I've been using Signal, but it seems everyone else I know, except my
immediate family, uses WhatsApp.
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care. My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
I tried Signal, but nobody else did, whereas everyone is on MMS/SMS here.
Since I'm in the USA where unlimited everything is ubiquitous for a single
price per month, I use "normal" messaging apps (e.g., PulsSMS) for SMS/MMS.
No one outside of the USA is using such primitive stuff for private
communication.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-10 16:21:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Steve Hayes
I've been using Signal, but it seems everyone else I know, except my
immediate family, uses WhatsApp.
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care.
That is why nobody switched.
Post by s|b
My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
Did ever someone do up to now? And who cares?

WhatsApp is for housewives and adolescents.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
s|b
2024-09-11 16:07:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care.
That is why nobody switched.
They didn't switch because they don't know Signal and they don't want 2
messengers.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
Did ever someone do up to now? And who cares?
Yes, they did. Some of my contacts have been using SMS since they can't
reach me on WA anymore.
--
s|b
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-11 16:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care.
That is why nobody switched.
They didn't switch because they don't know Signal and they don't want 2
messengers.
Aren't you important enough for them? Or they not important enough for
you to use WA?
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
Did ever someone do up to now? And who cares?
Yes, they did. Some of my contacts have been using SMS since they can't
reach me on WA anymore.
As a consequence they use 2 messengers.

What a pile of contradictions!

BTW: I dropped WA years ago as well. I told everybody important to me
and gave them the channels to reach me. In total I operate 5 messengers.
It is so easy. No one should ever have an excuse not to be able to reach me.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
s|b
2024-09-14 15:43:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Aren't you important enough for them? Or they not important enough for
you to use WA?
Wat de boer niet kent, dat eet hij niet.

(What the uneducated person doesn't know, he won't eat.)

They're just afraid of the unknown... and lazy. My mother is alsmost 74.
She's got an iPhone with WA /and/ Signal.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
As a consequence they use 2 messengers.
What a pile of contradictions!
True. But SMS is something they know, it comes with their phone.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
BTW: I dropped WA years ago as well. I told everybody important to me
and gave them the channels to reach me. In total I operate 5 messengers.
It is so easy. No one should ever have an excuse not to be able to reach me.
Adding Signal next to WA isn't difficult at all. I send them the URL,
but still they won't install it.
--
s|b
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-14 18:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
BTW: I dropped WA years ago as well. I told everybody important to me
and gave them the channels to reach me. In total I operate 5 messengers.
It is so easy. No one should ever have an excuse not to be able to reach me.
Adding Signal next to WA isn't difficult at all. I send them the URL,
but still they won't install it.
I have them all installed (except Threema), but nobody in my circle uses
anything except whatsapp. And some SMS from businesses.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-19 09:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
BTW: I dropped WA years ago as well. I told everybody important to me
and gave them the channels to reach me. In total I operate 5 messengers.
It is so easy. No one should ever have an excuse not to be able to reach me.
Adding Signal next to WA isn't difficult at all. I send them the URL,
but still they won't install it.
I have them all installed (except Threema), but nobody in my circle uses
anything except whatsapp. And some SMS from businesses.
I gave up WA many years ago on my iPhone and I'm not missing anything
and I can easily communicate with everybody having a smartphone.

And it has a reason why someone is using Signal and not WA.

For Signal and other providers like Telegram, Threema and even iMsg
interoperability would mean instant suicide. Why should anyone use them
instead of the "original"?

In this case the authorities are undermining competition instead of
promoting it.

WA is rather for housewives and adolescent people.

*SCNR*
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-19 19:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
BTW: I dropped WA years ago as well. I told everybody important to me
and gave them the channels to reach me. In total I operate 5 messengers.
It is so easy. No one should ever have an excuse not to be able to reach me.
Adding Signal next to WA isn't difficult at all. I send them the URL,
but still they won't install it.
I have them all installed (except Threema), but nobody in my circle uses
anything except whatsapp. And some SMS from businesses.
I gave up WA many years ago on my iPhone and I'm not missing anything
and I can easily communicate with everybody having a smartphone.
And it has a reason why someone is using Signal and not WA.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Andy Burns
2024-09-19 19:47:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-20 11:07:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It is not obligatory here either, it is just the de-facto standard
because it is so popular.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-20 12:30:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-20 18:25:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-20 19:42:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.

I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.

Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.

EOD.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-20 20:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
EOD.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-21 07:39:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)
Frank Slootweg
2024-09-21 12:24:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true. Quite the contrary.

The banks were NOT fined because the employees used WhatsApp. They
were fined because the employees *didn't keep proper archival records*.
Clue-by-four: See the "records" bit in *your* URL.

That's the problem with giving references, you run the risk that
people actually *read* them and, by doing so, debunk your bollocks

But, by all means, keep digging! Sooner or later you'll come out at
the other end. Hope the swiss surface isn't too hard.
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-21 13:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Slootweg
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true. Quite the contrary.
The banks were NOT fined because the employees used WhatsApp. They
were fined because the employees *didn't keep proper archival records*.
Clue-by-four: See the "records" bit in *your* URL.
Ah, good point. I knew there would be some trick, because my bank, which
is one of the big ones in Europe is using wasap, and they would not risk
an illegality.
Post by Frank Slootweg
That's the problem with giving references, you run the risk that
people actually *read* them and, by doing so, debunk your bollocks
But, by all means, keep digging! Sooner or later you'll come out at
the other end. Hope the swiss surface isn't too hard.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Chris
2024-09-21 13:27:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Frank Slootweg
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true. Quite the contrary.
The banks were NOT fined because the employees used WhatsApp. They
were fined because the employees *didn't keep proper archival records*.
Clue-by-four: See the "records" bit in *your* URL.
Ah, good point.
It's also not specific to whatsapp. They also using imessage and signal.
The NYT is paywalled for me. This site you can read more details.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/banks-hit-549-million-fines-use-signal-whatsapp-evade-regulators-rcna98790
Post by Carlos E.R.
I knew there would be some trick, because my bank, which
is one of the big ones in Europe is using wasap, and they would not risk
an illegality.
Not disagreeing with you, but big banks are often caught doing illegal
acts.
Frank Slootweg
2024-09-21 18:03:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Frank Slootweg
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
That is your perception which has no connection to reality. Even in
Spain. Your claim is ridiculous.
LOL!
Post by Jörg Lorenz
I told you already that banks were fined by the billions globally
because their employees used WA for business. WA is not accepted as best
practice because of the lack of traceability and accountability.
Perhaps housewives manage their allowances and adolescents their pocket
money with WhatsApp.
LOL! You have no connection to reality. Ignorant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true. Quite the contrary.
The banks were NOT fined because the employees used WhatsApp. They
were fined because the employees *didn't keep proper archival records*.
Clue-by-four: See the "records" bit in *your* URL.
Ah, good point. I knew there would be some trick, because my bank, which
is one of the big ones in Europe is using wasap, and they would not risk
an illegality.
Jörg has been repeatedly spreading these lies and they have been
debunked many times, but he just continues. Boggles the mind.

And - as others have mentioned and Jörg now also admits - other IM
systems - such as Signal, iMessage et al - (and any other non-certified
means of electronic communication for that matter) have the same
problems, so singleling out WhatsApp says everything about Jörg's agenda
and nothing about WhatsApp.
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Frank Slootweg
That's the problem with giving references, you run the risk that
people actually *read* them and, by doing so, debunk your bollocks
But, by all means, keep digging! Sooner or later you'll come out at
the other end. Hope the swiss surface isn't too hard.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-21 07:39:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-21 11:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
That's there, not here.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-21 13:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
That's there, not here.
There is here:

https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2023/edpb-publishes-binding-decision-concerning-whatsapp_en

In Europe the same rules apply.
BTW: I work in this industry. The use of consumer messengers for
business purposes is strictly forbidden everywhere for very serious
reasons. Messengers and in particular WA make it impossible for the
banks and other financial institutions to have an uninterrupted and
accepted documentation of client communication.

You do not understand much of the regulatory requirements of modern
business at all.
--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)
Frank Slootweg
2024-09-21 18:04:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
That's there, not here.
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2023/edpb-publishes-binding-decision-concerning-whatsapp_en
In Europe the same rules apply.
BTW: I work in this industry. The use of consumer messengers for
business purposes is strictly forbidden everywhere for very serious
reasons.
You keep claiming that. You keep failing to provide proof of such a
prohibition and we keep giving counter examples of WhatsApp *being* used
for "business purposes".
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Messengers and in particular WA make it impossible for the
banks and other financial institutions to have an uninterrupted and
accepted documentation of client communication.
Nope, it's not impossible. It may be that some institutions have
chosen not to *implement* such archival of client communication, but
that's their *choice*, not a technical - or other - impossibility.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
You do not understand much of the regulatory requirements of modern
business at all.
Please choose which logical fallacy best fits your 'argument': Straw
man? Red herring? Other?
Chris
2024-09-21 22:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
That's there, not here.
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2023/edpb-publishes-binding-decision-concerning-whatsapp_en
In Europe the same rules apply.
BTW: I work in this industry. The use of consumer messengers for
business purposes is strictly forbidden everywhere for very serious
reasons. Messengers and in particular WA make it impossible for the
banks and other financial institutions to have an uninterrupted and
accepted documentation of client communication.
How come the UK Covid enquiry has been able to access the WA messages of
the cabinet and civil service then?
Post by Jörg Lorenz
You do not understand much of the regulatory requirements of modern
business at all.
Chris
2024-09-21 13:21:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Carlos E.R.
You live in a different country than me. Here, if I need to call a
plumber to fix a broken tap, he asks me to send a photo via wasap. You
can not live without having and using wasap. My bank manager this
morning sent me her profesional contact info, on wasap.
Thankfully, it's not yet become "semi-obligatory" here ...
It isn't anywhere.
LOL! Here it is. Not obligatory, just the de facto standard. Everybody
has it. Even banks assume you have it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html
This is internal bank use of WhatsApp as well as iMessage and Signal for
business discussions. Which is against SEC regulations.

Nothing to do with customer interactions which businesses can choose
whatever form suits their customers. In Spain, it's commonly whatsapp.
Italy also has a strong culture of whatsapp.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-19 08:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Aren't you important enough for them? Or they not important enough for
you to use WA?
Wat de boer niet kent, dat eet hij niet.
Das ist ein deutsches Sprichwort.
Post by s|b
(What the uneducated person doesn't know, he won't eat.)
I do not need a translation.
Post by s|b
They're just afraid of the unknown... and lazy. My mother is alsmost 74.
She's got an iPhone with WA /and/ Signal.
And iMsg. Already three.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Richmond
2024-09-12 12:11:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care.
That is why nobody switched.
They didn't switch because they don't know Signal and they don't want 2
messengers.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
Did ever someone do up to now? And who cares?
Yes, they did. Some of my contacts have been using SMS since they can't
reach me on WA anymore.
Given that you are communicating via SMS, would it be any worse to
communicate through an interoperability bridge without E2EE?
s|b
2024-09-14 15:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
Given that you are communicating via SMS, would it be any worse to
communicate through an interoperability bridge without E2EE?
Come again? I would have to set that up on my end (how?), but also at
their end, right?
--
s|b
Richmond
2024-09-15 14:56:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
Given that you are communicating via SMS, would it be any worse to
communicate through an interoperability bridge without E2EE?
Come again? I would have to set that up on my end (how?), but also at
their end, right?
We're talking about the future. I expect Whatsapp will provide some kind
of API. If Signal decides to interoperate, which is a big if, then I
imagine it would be possible to send a message from signal to
<phonenumber>@whatsapp or something like that. I don't know why this
would be worse than sending an SMS, as SMS is typically received by
Google Messages, and then who knows what happens to the meta data, or
the message.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-19 09:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
If Signal decides to interoperate,
What I really doubt.
They had to break the E2EE. And it has a reason why someone is using
Signal and not WA.

For Signal and other providers like Telegram, Threema and even iMsg it
would mean instant suicide. Why should anyone use them instead of the
"original"?

In this case the authorities are undermining competition instead of
promoting it.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Carlos E.R.
2024-09-19 19:35:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Richmond
If Signal decides to interoperate,
What I really doubt.
They had to break the E2EE. And it has a reason why someone is using
Signal and not WA.
For Signal and other providers like Telegram, Threema and even iMsg it
would mean instant suicide. Why should anyone use them instead of the
"original"?
In this case the authorities are undermining competition instead of
promoting it.
Good!

They are also going to mandate Apple to open up their software to other
hardware competitors, under fine of 10% world earnings.

I love this government! :-P
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-19 21:05:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carlos E.R.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by Richmond
If Signal decides to interoperate,
What I really doubt.
They had to break the E2EE. And it has a reason why someone is using
Signal and not WA.
For Signal and other providers like Telegram, Threema and even iMsg it
would mean instant suicide. Why should anyone use them instead of the
"original"?
In this case the authorities are undermining competition instead of
promoting it.
Good!
They are also going to mandate Apple to open up their software to other
hardware competitors, under fine of 10% world earnings.
How trollish you are all the time! Can be seen how brainless you defend
this proprietary non standardised private crap called WhatsApp. *LOL*
Post by Carlos E.R.
I love this government! :-P
It is yours not mine.
--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-12 14:24:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
Post by s|b
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
I was using both, but finally decided to drop WhatsApp. I sent a message
to several people... nobody switched. I don't care.
That is why nobody switched.
They didn't switch because they don't know Signal and they don't want 2
messengers.
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
My most important
contacts (mother, sister, a couple of friends) were already using
Signal. Non Signal users can text me through old school SMS.
Did ever someone do up to now? And who cares?
Yes, they did. Some of my contacts have been using SMS since they can't
reach me on WA anymore.
Given that you are communicating via SMS, would it be any worse to
communicate through an interoperability bridge without E2EE?
+1
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Richmond
2024-09-11 10:15:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Andy Burns
I'm not sure Signal or Telegram want to play, didn't they say they'd
rather GTFO the EU if they were forced to?
I did some searching and Signal indeed stated they won't do it. It seems
the DMA was only meant for Meta (WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger). At
least that's how it seems to me. Signal has a problem with it since Meta
won't let Signal have a look at their encryption while Signal's is open
source.
I think this is a shame. I am on signal and not on whatsapp. But I know
the vast majority won't shift just because of a small minority. And that
is their choice. If they interoperate then there won't be so much
pressure on people to join or stay on whatsapp. As whatsapp users
already have my telephone number in their contacts, and whatsapp has
access to that, it wouldn't matter much. Or they could use an arbitrary
identifier.

Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source into
closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU Affero
General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that the complete
source code of the licensed work and any modifications be made available
under the same license."
s|b
2024-09-11 16:13:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source into
closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU Affero
General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that the complete
source code of the licensed work and any modifications be made available
under the same license."
I don't know the details, but someone explained it like this:

A Signal user sends a message to a WA user. The encryption is:

aZ*2

When it reaches the servers at WA something gets added:

aZ*2[Vy*3]

This way data could be gathered by Meta. Meta doesn't give access to
Signal to check if something like this doesn't happen.

I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but if Signal doesn't want to
cooperate they must have a damn good reason.
--
s|b
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-11 16:55:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source into
closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU Affero
General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that the complete
source code of the licensed work and any modifications be made available
under the same license."
aZ*2
aZ*2[Vy*3]
This way data could be gathered by Meta. Meta doesn't give access to
Signal to check if something like this doesn't happen.
I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but if Signal doesn't want to
cooperate they must have a damn good reason.
No: Signal has absolutely no intention to break their encryption which
is a condition for interoperability. Would Signal do that I would drop
it immediately. Signal uses an end-to-end-encryption which WA does not
really. Alternative suppliers like Signal, Threema, iMsg or Telegram
would commit immediate suicide if they would follow that route.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Richmond
2024-09-11 19:41:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source
into closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU
Affero General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that
the complete source code of the licensed work and any modifications
be made available under the same license."
aZ*2
aZ*2[Vy*3]
This way data could be gathered by Meta. Meta doesn't give access to
Signal to check if something like this doesn't happen.
I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but if Signal doesn't want
to cooperate they must have a damn good reason.
No: Signal has absolutely no intention to break their encryption which
is a condition for interoperability. Would Signal do that I would drop
it immediately. Signal uses an end-to-end-encryption which WA does not
really. Alternative suppliers like Signal, Threema, iMsg or Telegram
would commit immediate suicide if they would follow that route.
How do you know android isn't stealing your data?
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-12 04:43:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
Post by Jörg Lorenz
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source
into closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU
Affero General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that
the complete source code of the licensed work and any modifications
be made available under the same license."
aZ*2
aZ*2[Vy*3]
This way data could be gathered by Meta. Meta doesn't give access to
Signal to check if something like this doesn't happen.
I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but if Signal doesn't want
to cooperate they must have a damn good reason.
No: Signal has absolutely no intention to break their encryption which
is a condition for interoperability. Would Signal do that I would drop
it immediately. Signal uses an end-to-end-encryption which WA does not
really. Alternative suppliers like Signal, Threema, iMsg or Telegram
would commit immediate suicide if they would follow that route.
How do you know android isn't stealing your data?
OT.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Richmond
2024-09-11 19:26:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
Whatsapp uses the Signal protocol. How did they make open source into
closed source? "The Signal Protocol is licensed under the GNU Affero
General Public License (AGPLv3). This license requires that the complete
source code of the licensed work and any modifications be made available
under the same license."
aZ*2
aZ*2[Vy*3]
This way data could be gathered by Meta. Meta doesn't give access to
Signal to check if something like this doesn't happen.
I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but if Signal doesn't want to
cooperate they must have a damn good reason.
What data do they collect? The FAQ says they use E2EE.

https://faq.whatsapp.com/820124435853543

"Privacy and security is in our DNA, which is why we built end-to-end
encryption into our app. When end-to-end encrypted, your messages,
photos, videos, voice messages, documents, status updates, and calls are
secured from falling into the wrong hands."

Signal used to be able to send SMS messages. I think as long as you know
that a message is not going to be E2EE and you can choose to go ahead it
is OK.

In order to display a message it has to be decrypted, and that's true
for all apps, so at that point an app could collect data.
s|b
2024-09-14 15:48:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richmond
What data do they collect? The FAQ says they use E2EE.
Sure they do. <eyes to the ceiling>
--
s|b
Jörg Lorenz
2024-09-19 09:38:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by s|b
Post by Richmond
What data do they collect? The FAQ says they use E2EE.
Sure they do. <eyes to the ceiling>
They do. Nobody said you have to use them if you do not trust them.
Besides Threema and Apple it is the only service I trust.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
Richmond
2024-09-21 13:28:48 UTC
Permalink
If Signal doesn't want to interoperate, I bet someone else will. If
Delta Chat decided to do it for example, then there would be an
interface between Whatsapp and email. And there is no overhead of having
to set up a chat server.

And if Delta Chat doesn't want to do it, as it is open source, someone
could fork it.
Loading...