Hacker News Reader

Comment by 1241rtfasfasf | Hacker News Reader

Why should it be at its peak? Look at WeChat. If WhatsApp successfully transitions to a platform with payments, business interactions, possibly in-app-ecosystem, then the network effects become even crazier.

Signal on the other hand doesn't even attempt any of that: it solves messaging with no perspective on third-party service integration.

View on HN

One of the biggest reasons I use and like Signal is because it doesn't have a bunch of extra stupid crap like payments, in-app ecosystem, business interactions and all the other junk pushed by corporations in a quest to "expand the userbase".

I just want a solid texting platform, that's it. So far I've been happy, even with a few unnecessary updates like stickers (?!) and disappearing messages (ugh).

This is exactly the argument the GP made: your view is extremely niche.

Most people want features, convenience,… real stuff that feels like feature, instead of abstract concepts.

I disagree, most people just want to be on the same network/platform as their contacts and most people don't care about extra bells and whistles but a small niche is out there that actually does.

Most people don't imagine they want those features until they see someone else in their social group using them – fancy status in the form of stories is a great example of this.

People have a strong desire to imitate and one-up others in their social group.

If you build a feature that even 1% of users self-start to use, then the social network can snow ball that with the right mechanics. And these feature need only be used by 20-30% of users for it to be considered a success. Every user is not expected to use all features.

My sense for WhatsApp's dominance is peripheral contacts. I can convince close friends and family to move to Signal, but not distant friends, especially the large groups I'm in.

I'm pretty bearish on Signal for this reason. (even though I use it personally)

The playbook for unlocking adoption would be via a 'minority rule' where Signal users refuse to talk to people on WA, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I actually did just that. Changed my status to “only reachable by signal app” also same message on my profile pic. Just got around 5 people who talk to me on whatsapp already writing me on signal without problem. And funny thing 3/5 have also done same to their whatsapp now

Let's assume somebody said that for some other platform: "only reachable through Telegram" or Facebook Messenger.

What would you think?

That somebody certainly values the choice of platform higher than your convenience to chat with him or her.

Why do you need to convince them to move to Signal at all? Why does Signal need to unlock more adoption?

Constant growth and expansion isn't always a good thing and IMO it applies here.

> Why do you need to convince them to move to Signal at all?

Because ideally one doesn't want to be forced to donate data to Facebook because of WhatsApps network effect?

I require none of those things for being able to chat with my sister, mother, or random friends. Facebook wanting a piece of the action that is skimming off transactions I conduct with shops or online is not something I need or want in my life. And make no mistake, that's the only reason they are eager to get into that business. They'll fail because they add no obvious value here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com