this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
779 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

71530 readers
5926 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

WhatsApp is rolling out ads. In an update on Monday, Meta announced that it will now show ads from businesses through its Stories-like status feature.

Meta says it will tailor the ads to your interests by using “limited” information, including your country or city, language, the channels you follow, and how you interact with ads on the platform. You can also change your ad preferences from Meta’s Accounts Center.

This isn’t the only change Meta is making to WhatsApp. The company will also start showing promoted channels when you click on the Explore button to find new ones to follow. It’s also rolling out the ability to subscribe to channels to “receive exclusive updates” as well.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SheenSquelcher@lemm.ee 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I'd probably still use it if I had to pay for it

[–] Redex68@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

I mean, there are some who will be willing to do that, but the vast majority of average people won't pay for something if a free version exists (like WhatsApp)

Edit: Ok I just Googled it and apparently their operational costs are less than 1$ per user per year which is far less than I expected. That's way more sustainable in that case, possibly even through just donations.

[–] SheenSquelcher@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Even if they charged 1.99 they'd be making a decent cut for future investment (they are a nonprofit).

GrapheneOS lives on donations too. Its definately possible.

[–] Redex68@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I mean comparing it to GrapheneOS doesn't make much sense, they don't have recurring costs.

[–] SheenSquelcher@lemm.ee 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Redex68@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

No, they don't have recurring costs that scale with their size. The whole original point of my argument was that Signal is fine now because its userbase is above averagely passionate about it and willing to donate, but if it were to become mainstream that would mean the percent of its users donating would go down whilst its cost would go up, in other words its costs would outscale its revenue. This doesn't apply to GaprheneOS as their costs don't scale with the number of users.

[–] SheenSquelcher@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago

I think you're missing the point. All I was saying is that both Signal and Graphene are both nonprofits and both seem to be doing okay with their donations business model.

And donations aren't just a euro here and there from users. Proton is rumoured to be one of Graphene's supporters.