Signal’s secure messaging app gets a $50 million lifeline from WhatsApp co-founder

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by ronjor, Feb 24, 2018.

  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    84,081
    Location:
    Texas
    by Abhimanyu Ghoshal
     
  2. mekelek

    mekelek Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    Posts:
    514
    Location:
    Hungary
    whatsapp owned by facebook. this is terrible news.....
     
  3. Beyonder

    Beyonder Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Posts:
    545
    This is great, now maybe they will be able to hire more developers so that we can finally get an alternative to the phone-only account system. Larger attachments, more testing, etc.
     
  4. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    I dont know if I would want the guy who sold out millions of whatsapp users to FB, on my team.
     
  5. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,176
    Yep. Lookout here comes FB again to swallow up yet another company. Other than money I wonder what the real poison was in that shot in the arm.
     
  6. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Do you understand what a donation is?
     
  7. JoWazzoo

    JoWazzoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    241
    Location:
    Ether
    Wonder how much Brian Acton made in the sell out to FB? I don't use smart phone apps - cannot stand all that crap. :) I use my (Unsmart) phone to place calls. I personally have only sent one Text message.:thumb:
     
  8. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    A bribe?

    Donations aside, there are two reasons for getting involved in that kind of project.

    1) Because you strongly support peoples right to privacy and wish to contribute to the cause.
    2) To build up a large user base of people who do care about their privacy, and then sell them out for a buck.

    Which of those you think Mr. Fiftymill is?
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2018
  9. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    https://www.linuxfoundation.org/membership/members/

    I wish you privacy freaks would stop talking out your rear end.
     
  10. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    Really? So you think FaceBook paid 22 billion dollars for a messaging app? Like Zuckerberg couldnt develop one of his own if he wanted to?
    No, what was sold by the Whatsapp founders for those billions was their hundreds of millions of users and all their information.
    Of course none of them admitted to that at the time.
    https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/19/f...pp-for-16b-in-cash-and-stock-plus-3b-in-rsus/
    Jan Koum, Whatsapp's co founder even said,
    "Here's what will change for our users, nothing."
    "WhatsApp will remain autonomous and operate independently."
    "And you can still count on absolutely no ads interrupting your communication."


    Of course it wasnt long before...
    https://www.theguardian.com/technol...-users-phone-number-facebook-for-targeted-ads
    "WhatsApp will give its parent company Facebook personal information including users’ phone numbers, as part of plans to allow businesses to send messages to users."
    and
    https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/25/w...cebook-for-ad-targeting-heres-how-to-opt-out/
    and then...
    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...ng-eu-on-whatsapp-merger-20170518-gw8bst.html
    "Facebook will pay 110 million euros, or around $165 million, in fines to the European Union, over charges that it misled regulators during its 2014 acquisition of WhatsApp.
    European regulators said that Facebook was not honest about its ability to identify users that had both Facebook and WhatsApp accounts, and link those accounts."
    "...in August 2016, WhatsApp announced updates to its terms of service and privacy policy, including the possibility of linking WhatsApp users' phone numbers with Facebook users' identities."

    So, if anyone is talking out of their rear end in this thread, it's not me, or us "privacy freaks". We say it how it REALLY is, minus all the corporate BS and lies.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2018
  11. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Hahahahahaha. I'm shocked how much effort you put into a reply that isn't even a retort to the point I made. Maybe try reading the entire article in the OP and learn something.
     
  12. JoWazzoo

    JoWazzoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    241
    Location:
    Ether
    +10 :thumb:
     
  13. Beyonder

    Beyonder Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Posts:
    545
    If he's got the dough, I don't see the problem. The apps + the server will stay open source.
     
  14. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Don't bring facts and logic into this discussion. The big evil Facebook will destroy Signal like they destroyed Linux and every other open source project they donate to.

    Oh wait... Maybe logic dictates that they are contributing money to Signal because they are using Signal's code and thus want to ensure the project never dies like with Linux? Hmm, nah. It's clearly a conspiracy.
     
  15. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    There is no conspiracy involving FB relevent to this discussion except the one between FB and Whatsapp for which FB was fined 120 million dollars by the EU and that one of the people who was involved in that (Mr. 50mill) is now executive chairman at Signal.
    Other than that, FB and their ilk are quite open about the fact their business is to gather and monetize their users personal information for profit, regardless of how doing that might adversely affect those users.
    Attempting to belittle the arguments against that by name calling and insinuating stupidity, paranoia, conspiracy theory etc are futile and pointless, and just go to demonstrate there is no credible standpoint from which to make a valid argument in favor of the business model that uses people as a commodity to be bought and sold.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2018
  16. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,176
    Yes - and as soon as people do that you know they've lowered themselves. It seems to be common in the PRIVACY forum. Makes me wonder why people even post here that couldn't care less about it.
     
  17. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    Probably because they do care, from the standpoint of those who gain from the monetization of everyones personal info.
     
  18. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    8,470
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Follow the money-Discover new results.

    YOU DECIDE
     
  19. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    The business model
    • Develop an application that would be expected to be socially popular, or buy one that already is.
    • Gather as much personal info from the users as possible, during account signup and their use of the application.
    • Sell that info or wait for the userbase to peak and then sell the entire application with all those user's info together as a package.
     
  20. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    8,470
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Sounds like a business proposition
     
  21. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    The perfect example that you see conspiracies where there are none. A company buying another company for profit, what a shocker, should be banned!!

    From Reuters:

    They weren't fined for "a conspiracy".

    That's correct. Whilst I'm no fan of Facebook and would rather it go away, that's the business model you sign up for, and it's valid. No one is forcing you to. Everything that Facebook provides has an alternative.

    Playing the victim won't work here. I don't need to insinuate anything, I point out the obvious.

    I stated the Linux foundation which you so keenly dodged twice. There are literally hundreds of foundations that provide a lifeline to open source software. You seem to think it matters who contributes to those foundations, it doesn't, as long as the goal of those foundations is simply "keep the project alive", which it is for basically every single open source project.

    I told you to read the article in the OP, you didn't, or you'd have noticed key elements:

     
  22. Beyonder

    Beyonder Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Posts:
    545
    I really don't give a stone about WhatsApp. My point is this: It doesn't really matter if Signal is funded by WhatsApp('s co-creator) or not. WhatsApp is closed source, and it has always been closed source. Signal on the other hand is GPL which means it would be a crime to close the source on it. Signal currently has ONE (1) thing over the competition: It's secure and it doesn't eavesdrop on you, ever. Changing that would doom the platform.

    Even so, I don't think the purpose of the Signal Foundation is to **** Signal over. It's just to make sure it can still stay alive. Previously they've had to rely on money from different open source funds, that's not exactly a secure income. I have no idea how they are going to end up funding the Signal Foundation in the long run but I imagine it won't be from the core Signal app. They will likely try to earn their dough from a cryptocurrency or something similar. Remember Flock? That was clearly supposed to be a way for OWS to earn some money, but it didn't work out.

    I'm starting to think that the best thing the NSA could do to get people to stop using encryption would be to fund the research of it. Imagine if they funded Firefox? People would jump ship in mere moments.
     
  23. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    ROFL. That is so true! Half the privacy forum would be up in arms "CONSPIRACY!!!!".

    I think the problem these people have is they look at real life "charitable groups" or "political donations" i.e. bribes, where powerful "players" attempt to influence politicians or "charities" with money. Then after seeing that, they try to apply that mentality to open source foundations, it simply doesn't apply, it's not the same thing. Whether the NSA or North Korea help fund the Linux foundation, it doesn't matter.
     
  24. mood

    mood Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Posts:
    23,961
    Signal Is Finally Bringing Its Secure Messaging to the Masses
    The encryption app is putting a $50 million infusion from WhatsApp cofounder Brian Acton to good use
    February 14, 2020

    https://www.wired.com/story/signal-encrypted-messaging-features-mainstream/
     
  25. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    725
    It doesn't really matter what the WhatsApp former founder motives are or that he got greedy and sold their users privacy to FB.
    Same can't happen to Signal because unlike WhatsApp it's open source project. So there is absolute zero that FB can do to it.

    Also, Moxie Marlinspike is clearly talented fellow (the same guy who cooked sslstrip way back in 2009!) so I am happy for him and his team
     
Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.