Build a WhatsApp Chatbot with Python, Flask and Twilio
twilio.com
twilio.com
Other apps like telegram allows anyone to directly interact with them
It seems that independent developers will never get legal access to integrate automation or build CRM type apps using WhatsApp, which sucks considering how prevalent WhatsApp usage is.
The issue is the 3rd party. I don't understand why it needs to go through another service.
Even with Verizon's proposed A2P charge per SMS, it is half the cost to use SMS for conversing with customers compared to WhatsApp. Said surcharge has been postponed repeatedly, meaning SMS is an order of magnitude cheaper to use than WhatsApp
I think the idea here is that if you're building a Whatsapp bot, you probably want the other types of bots that Twilio offers anyway and it's easier if the services are bundled together under a single vendor.
Why using res-sellers, like carriers use re-sellers to sell SMS integration? Distribution and fair-use control. First, companies like Twilio are the natural partners to sell one more channel to customers that already integrate to SMS. Second, partners will help enforce and control anti-spam efforts. If opening Whatsapp API turns it into a spam jungle like email or sms, it will certainly lose its appeal and users will start switching to the next new spam-free chat app.
They already paid over 100 million for just making false promises when they bought WhatsApp, now that the EU has sharpened their blades to take on big data farms like Google and Facebook, doing something like that would be suicide for FB. Any additional data farming would probably attract auditors and lawsuits that Facebook can't get out of so easily anymore.
Facebook would need to put a lot of work into following the GDPR (because someone using an Asian VPN is still protected, so IP based geoblocking won't work) to prevent a fine. It would be a very risky move.
I don't think Facebook is going to sell private WhatsApp information any time soon.
(Also speculating) if that's more or less how it works, and an ads conglomerate like Google or Facebook is worth hundreds of billions, then even a fine of a billion dollars wouldn't be enough to deter them from this activity.
None of this is meant to stir up controversy or be negative or anything, I just think its an interesting mental exercise to consider this scenario and these motivations.
I assume you don't mean this literally? 1bn in $100 notes weighs over 1 ton.
I assume they just meant "money"?
Other advantage of WhatsApp over social media is you don't know is something is viral because you can't count the likes.
WhatsApp's founders were inclined to go with #1. Mark Zuckerberg appears to prefer #2 and #3.
Pricing for Template messages
Outbound template messages to WhatsApp destinations have two different components:
Edit: Here's the price breakdown. [0] > Twilio charges a flat fee of $0.005 per message for all WhatsApp messaging. This applies to all incoming messages, outbound Template and Session messages. > WhatsApp also charges a per-message fee to send outbound Template messages. This fee may vary, depending on the destination country or region.
The second fee varies wildly up to 0.09$ in Germany! [1]
[0] https://support.twilio.com/hc/en-us/articles/360037672734-Ho... [1] https://developers.facebook.com/docs/whatsapp/pricing/
Does that discard the creation of remittance apps? That's not selling, that's just sending money between parties. I was thinking on sending money around the world using WhatsApp, is that allowed?
The user experience of SMS-first products is novel and fun. There's something magical about snapping a photo and just texting it to a unique NanaGram number powered by Twilio. It takes just a couple seconds. I'm excited to deliver the same experience through Whatsapp to customers around the globe and people on wifi.
Building NanaGram SMS-first has been a challenge. There have been all kinds of gotchas:
1) AT&T started blocking any number permanently across its network last January if it contains a hyperlink or email address, even if the customer interacts with the number. I had to create separate messages just for the 12.5% AT&T users.
2) Twilio only works when you have cell service. If you're indoors with wifi only, the text won't go through.
3) Images are downsized in an unpredictable way by the carriers. If you're sending 1 or a couple images, they're pretty good quality. If you send ~5+ photos, they get downsized pretty far and luckily they're still good enough for 4x6 photo printing. Certain carriers like cricket are super aggressive with downsizing.
4) When Apple users with iCloud enabled share more than 1 image, it generates a sharing album which has been a beast to support. Then there's the added challenge of Apple's recent move to HEIC/HEIF images.
5) Twilio doesn't support group threads (WhatsApp doesn't yet, either)
... I could go on and on.
Getting approval from Whatsapp took a while. I first applied about a year ago and didn't hear anything, then applied again and was approved a few weeks ago. I'm guessing the approval layer is to ensure only high-quality bots make the cut. They also have an approval layer for all of your messages sent outside a 24-hour window of the last user interaction. The approval for that took a few days.
Integration with WhatsApp has been surprisingly easy. I basically just had to change "+1{number}" to "whatsapp+1{number}"
I don't follow - they blocked any number which replied with a hyperlink or email?
Can users of AT&T not send them to each other?
I have been using Google Voice as my secondary phone number for the past 5 years, and some services manage to detect that it isn't a real phone number and refuse to work with it. More specifically, it usually happens when I try to use 2FA over SMS (note: i know that 2FA over SMS is not considered secure, but some of the services I use only offer this as their 2FA, and it is better than me not using 2FA at all). It doesn't just fail to deliver the message, the service straight up tells me to enter a "real" phone number.
Edit: Oh, I think you may mean a support response. Twilio helped me dig into the issue to great lengths. Ultimately, it was out of their hands. I think it's a lazy decision on AT&T's choice. Seems like a very rudimentary spam filter. You'd think they'd at least whitelist numbers customers are actively texting, especially if they don't contain keywords like "stop" or "spam."
I nearly wrote an article for Twilio but didn't complete the process. But have written similar posts e.g. [0] and work with other writers who also do this form of instructional technical writing. Would love to chat sometime if you have time - contact info in my profile
[0] https://www.codementor.io/garethdwyer/building-a-telegram-bo...
I am divided because I like WhatsApp as it is right now. But we are not paying for it and the money has to come from somewhere. Using third party providers like Twilio is probably one way to pay for it. I am divided because having to use Twilio is likely to freeze out developers from my home country. C'est la vie.
"With location sharing data, 60 billion messages sent per day and access to users' entire contact lists, Facebook has access to a ton of personal information – all uploaded and saved on its servers."
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/04091...
I managed to bang out a few when I had a day off a few months back. Very satisfying.
The people at https://t.me/BotDevelopment (unofficial) are your best chance for support because Telegram (bot) support is a joke.
Template Message: $0.0085 WhatsApp fee + $0.005 Twilio fee = $0.0135 [1].
WhatsApp Session Message, sent or received: $0.005. A session ends 24h after last user message [1].
Compared to just $0.0075 for sending/receiving SMS [2].