We Don't Sell Ads (2012)

Since Facebook bought Whatsapp I have been upset exactly because of this. I remember having read this post at the time and considered that that was exactly the right way to go. I started using Whatsapp and paying for it in that moment. I convinced many family members and friends to start using it because of this. Then, when they got enough users, they just decided that none of what they promised was important.<p>Since then, I have actively trying to convince my contacts to move away from WhatsApp, but it is really hard now. This clearly shows that no matter how much trust a company might inspire at a given time, nothing prevents that ten years from now, when everyone is dependent on their technology, they will not change the rules. And nobody will be able to do anything. (Next: Apple, maybe?)

<p><pre><code> Your data isn&#x27;t even in the picture. We are simply not interested in any of it. </code></pre> My gosh, how the tide can turn.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;write.privacytools.io&#x2F;right-to-privacy&#x2F;getting-whatsapps-privacy-policy-prompts-heres-why" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;write.privacytools.io&#x2F;right-to-privacy&#x2F;getting-whats...</a><p>WhatsApp now collects:<p><pre><code> WhatsApp: Device ID, User ID, Advertising Data, Purchase History, Coarse Location, Phone Number, Email, Contacts, Product Interaction, Crash, Data, Performance Data, Other Diagnostics Data, Payment Info, Customer Support, Product Interaction, Other User, Content.</code></pre>

Brian Acton, the co-founder mentioned at the beginning of the blog post, resigned from Facebook in 2017 over early steps toward this and forfeited $850 million as a result [0].<p>[0]:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;parmyolson&#x2F;2018&#x2F;09&#x2F;26&#x2F;exclusive-whatsapp-cofounder-brian-acton-gives-the-inside-story-on-deletefacebook-and-why-he-left-850-million-behind&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;parmyolson&#x2F;2018&#x2F;09&#x2F;26&#x2F;exclusive...</a>

I was talking with a friend about moving off whatsapp due to the TOS update. I was reminiscing that I had originally bought the app because I had read a blog post from the CEO where he explained that charging for the app was the way they ensured they would never run ads on it.<p>I was surprised to find out that the blog post is still accessible from whatsapp.com given how things have changed...

I mean it&#x27;s basically the classic SV way. Build a unsustainable business promising the world. Get traction based on that. Get bought by FAANG. Ride off into sunset &amp; don&#x27;t look back. Cool guys don&#x27;t look at explosions&#x2F;broken promises

Whatsapp’s story is also unique because their acquisition by Facebook was so large. At $19 billion, the founders probably could have attached pretty much any terms to the deal (as formal terms in the purchase agreement) - and still had a $10+ billion offer that made them multi-billionaires.<p>Permanently enjoin the acquirer from showing ads or sharing data. Heck, require operating independence. Just like any other transaction, terms like these are negotiable. Maybe those reduce the purchase price by $3 billion, or even $5 or $10 billion, but the founders would still be multi-billionaires and they’d also see Whatsapp survive the way they envisioned it. Best of both worlds.<p>(And if the buyer totally walked rather than reducing the price, at least you’d know their true intention.)

We don&#x27;t sell ads but we are selling ourselves so you can sell ads in the future.

Similarly hilarious to read today is Google&#x27;s &quot;The Meaning of Open&quot; (2009): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;publicpolicy.googleblog.com&#x2F;2009&#x2F;12&#x2F;meaning-of-open.html?m=1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;publicpolicy.googleblog.com&#x2F;2009&#x2F;12&#x2F;meaning-of-open....</a><p>And of course, Appendix A of &quot;Anatomy of a Search Engine&quot;: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;infolab.stanford.edu&#x2F;~backrub&#x2F;google.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;infolab.stanford.edu&#x2F;~backrub&#x2F;google.html</a><p>Everyone has their price, and corporations selling out their values for more money is basically a universal truth.

Brian Acton selling to FB is in a way a tragic story.<p>I understand why he did it, at some point it becomes irresponsible not to take the money given the opportunity cost (and he did give $50M to signal). Steven Levy has a funny bit about it in his excellent book Facebook: The Inside Story. When someone offers you 19 billion to violate your principles, you have to wonder what you can do with that money and maybe you can do more good than you could with whatsapp.<p>Plus housing in Palo Alto is expensive: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dirt.com&#x2F;moguls&#x2F;tech&#x2F;brian-acton-house-palo-alto-1203229747&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dirt.com&#x2F;moguls&#x2F;tech&#x2F;brian-acton-house-palo-alto...</a><p>I wrote an overly long feudal allegory about this based on pillars of the earth (I know, but it was fun to write): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zalberico.com&#x2F;essay&#x2F;2020&#x2F;07&#x2F;14&#x2F;the-serfs-of-facebook.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zalberico.com&#x2F;essay&#x2F;2020&#x2F;07&#x2F;14&#x2F;the-serfs-of-facebook...</a><p>His last tweet still stands: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;brianacton&#x2F;status&#x2F;976231995846963201?s=20" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;brianacton&#x2F;status&#x2F;976231995846963201?s=2...</a><p>###<p>“Do no knights strike out on their own?”<p>Philip was quiet for a moment. He pointed across a vast vista to a large castle in the distance adjacent to that of their own Earl Zuckerberg’s. “That is the castle of Sir Brian Acton of the former Earldom of WhatsApp. Sir Acton was an idealistic farmer who rejected the ways of our earl. He promised the serfs he would take no part of their data harvest they produced from the land he provided them, and instead the serfs even paid him a small cash fee for his protection. He had no knights to watch and report on his people and no heralds spreading pronouncements.”<p>“What happened?”<p>“He was too successful. Earl Zuckerberg saw many of his serfs begin to leave his lands to work the lands of Sir Acton (at the time he was known as Farmer Acton). This was a risk to the power of Zuckerberg’s earldom, since an earl without serfs to tend to the data fields has no harvest to interest others. In the end he offered Sir Acton a knightship and such enormous wealth that he could not refuse. It’s said he now lives in that vast castle alone, is rarely seen, and rarely speaks. The serfs that were in agreement with him now belong to Earl Zuckerberg as they had before, their deal was broken, and once again they tend to our earl’s data harvest.”<p>“Are there no others?”<p>“Sir Acton was just the most noble, and his fall the most tragic. Others like Sir Chris Coyne of the former Earldom of Keybase promised their serfs protection and then cruelly sold them to the Earldom of Zoom, which is closely tied to the Eastern Kingdom, a hostile land ruled by a tyrant king where the earls are weak and only serve to do the king’s bidding. There the serfs are forced to grow only what the king has allowed and serfs that refuse are dealt with swiftly and harshly. While in our kingdom farmers can choose to try to strike out on their own (though most choose not to), in the Earldoms of Zoom or TikTok, nothing can happen without the blessing of their king.”

There’s continuous discussion about how WhatsApp sold off its ideals but i think that in the reality that we live in that citizens are not informed about the services they consume the law should protect them as much as possible. A good data law is feasible in many of the continents WhatsApp operates in and with it companies won’t abuse user data because they would simply could not

Almost all people their principles have a price. With an amount of money thrown at you, you cannot spend in a lifetime, most people bend. The stance they were defending or the problems they were fighting are all of a sudden no longer an issue they will ever face. Why would they bother?<p>Think about your biggest stance. Be it climate change, political affiliation or controversial issues like abortion. How much money do you need to receive to never talk or be bothered about it again? With a few billion dollars in your pocket, most issues are no longer a concern or anything you will care about reasonably.

June 18, 2012

20 months later they sold to Facebook for $19 billion. How can this statement be taken seriously? Obviously Facebook was paying for advertising potential here.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;facebook-to-buy-whatsapp-for-16-billion-1392847766" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;facebook-to-buy-whatsapp-for-16...</a>

Are we Matrix yet?

People should be aware that Brian Action is also the founder and chairman of Signal Foundation.

Imagine you wrote a post like this, and then you get an offer for $19B. I really wonder how many here would sincerely FU that (anyone who saw FB doing the move knew what they were going for)

I&#x27;d try to guess that the next move will be facebookification of whatsapp, i.e. whatsapp will slowly morph into a FB client, will all the buzz and whistles.

This page says they &quot;charge&quot; for WhatsApp, at least in 2012. I didn&#x27;t know that. What were they charging for? To buy the app or something else?

Just convinced my family to delete WhatsApp.. that was not easy but I dont want such a large unethical company continue to dictate our lifes in future.

FB seems to have a too-good ability to swindle entrepreneurs into believing they will keep their independence. Oculus suffered the same fate.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;deletewhatsapp.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;deletewhatsapp.com&#x2F;</a>

19 billion dollars for WhatsApp. I cant think of a better deal than that on entire human history.

Why are you all surprised by this -- didn&#x27;t you see the Tyler Durden quote? It was right there at the top of the page!<p>I guess everyone&#x27;s an edgy-movie-quote-quoting-internet-hacker-bro until the man from Silicon Valley offers your $19Billion.<p>I wonder how many of those billions can we equate to Tyler Durden? Must of been worth at least 8 IMO.

WebRTC could be used for a messaging app?

Removed whatsapp today, hello Signal.

that was long time ago ;-)

This article itself is marginally different from an ad. What&#x27;s the point of this article? To inform, or to sway?