this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2026
65 points (95.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

49762 readers
633 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BladeFederation@piefed.social 1 points 29 minutes ago* (last edited 3 minutes ago)

It's not such a mystery. WhatsApp came out in 2009. RCS would not be rolled out widely on Android until 2019. RCS was not implemented properly on iOS until literally a month or so ago. Then there are stickers & video chat.

Therefore its competition has been SMS mainly, which it is directly better than in every way. SMS is not encrypted. WhatsApp is. SMS (technically MMS) heavily compresses pictures & video. SMS splits up long blocks of text into multiple texts, which may or may not come in the correct order. SMS used to be limited in cell phone plans around the time of WhatsApp's release, and STILL is in some parts of the world. SMS requires a consistent cell signal which requires a paid monthly subscription, WhatsApp only requires internet. Sometimes it is easier to find public Wi-Fi than a good cell signal in some places, and it was a popular thing for some teenagers to get an iPod touch or parent's old phone and only be able to use it with Wi-Fi.

People got used to it being the best for at least a decade, and don't want to switch. Even nowadays, RCS is nearly as closed a standard as WhatsApp bring limited to an app. You have to use Google Messages or I message specifically. In Apple's case, your messages aren't encrypted on their servers unless you specifically request it, and they hold the keys. I suspect Google is the same. And RCS still is routed through your carrier and the receiver's carrier, who have varying policies.

Of course, WhatsApp doesn't have zero access encryption for their servers either, and they're ran by Meta, so it's a lateral move at this point. The real solution is a better WhatsApp replacement like Signal.

[–] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

SMS is insecure as hell, RCS suffered from issues between Apple and Google, both were limited for a long time by Telecoms and priced too high after reaching your allowance (i remember my first mobile contract having a whooping 10 SMS/month included). The amount of data messenger apps use is negligible even with pretty low data limits as long as you are not attaching whole movies.

I personally only use Signal - i have removed all Meta products from my life. If someone without Signal wants to contact me, they can use snail mail, i really don't care - i won't sacrifice my privacy for the convenience of others.

[–] notgold@aussie.zone 3 points 1 hour ago

I've got through to some mates but some cunts just don't care about their privacy and ruining yours. Signal is great but sadly United states of shitsville owned so I'm moving away

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 45 minutes ago

Why does most of the world feel the need to broadcast their communications? (he said while typing into the internet).

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

And the reverse of that is true in the us. I don’t know anyone who uses that app, so I won’t. Actually it’s true in a general sense as well: there’s never been sufficient people on any specific app to make me want to use it

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 hours ago

The question is historical but posed as a tech choice. Convenience is the answer now.

[–] mangobanana@discuss.online 15 points 6 hours ago

I hate WhatsApp for no other reason than it's a Facebook product.

[–] AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@piefed.social 36 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Because when Whatsapp was born, SMS were paid (and not cheaply). In my country, sending one SMS cost 0.19€ at the time and didn't allow pics to be send. Meanwhile, with 10€ I could have 1-2GB of data that allowed for tens of thousands of messages to be sent while on mobile data and unlimited messages while I was on a wifi connection.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 11 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

WhatsApp was also an independent company and worked really well compared with other apps. I remember checking alternatives like... 5 years ago and no other app was able to do video calls reliably. Since then Signal caught up and works great now but everyone is already on WhatsApp. EU was working interoperability requirements. That's pretty much the only way to escape WhatsApp now.

[–] Nighed@feddit.uk 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Signal still doesn't do live location sharing I don't think?

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Signal requires Google Play Services to share location so it doesn't work for me on Graphene OS at all.

[–] Nighed@feddit.uk 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Oh. That's the kind of annoying thing that makes people not want to switch OS.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 2 hours ago

I've been dealing with issues like that for around 30 years now, even since I started using Linux, so I'm used to it. You will never get 100% of features working on a alternative, open source, privacy respecting OS. If I want to share location I can copy coordinates from CoMaps or something. For live sharing there are self-hosted options.

[–] JeSuisUnHombre@lemmy.zip 99 points 9 hours ago (5 children)

SMS uses cellular, WhatsApp uses internet. Internet connects you anywhere with one flat rate, cellular may charge extra per message or for international communication.

Signal is better, but everyone's grandmother is already on WhatsApp and good luck getting them to switch

[–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 3 points 4 hours ago

SMS uses cellular, WhatsApp uses internet.

I think that's why OP asked about RCS as well, which is also internet but built into SMS apps.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 28 points 8 hours ago

Back at the turn of the century text messages were exorbitantly priced

[–] TheMadCodger@piefed.social 8 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I keep hoping with this anti-American Big Tech push that Europe and other places are doing they'll get off Meta products. But I'm also not holding my breath.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 5 points 6 hours ago

I work at a company that I strongly suspect had a very serious security breach because of Whatsapp.

During the outage, we were back to SMS and direct phone calling only. After the system was restored, back to how everything was before, caution be damned, lessons not learned.

It's not bad enough to have that invasive application as the default means of passing information around (messages, photos, video and even audio, of all things!) on work phones, office personel has it paired to their computers, where highly sensitive programs and data is stored.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I've had SMS messages read to me by a third party, not a cop. I've had transcripts of 'private' cell calls read back to me by a third party, not a cop.

I survived the entire lifetime of skype without having the same, and I guess I hope the same happens with whatsapp.

[–] RecursiveParadox@piefed.social 3 points 2 hours ago

Could you share more about this, safely?

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 10 hours ago

Others are mentioning price per message, but also important to remember that in the 2000-2010s outside of the United States, when traveling from country to country, you usually had to get a local SIM card for a provider in that country, During your vacation, you'd have a new number for a month when no one could contact you over normal text messages which was a problem. WhatsApp became popular so you could keep chatting with friends abroad even if your phone's SIM card changed during your vacation.

Since most people from the United States don't travel outside the country, and vacation time is rather limited, this wasn't a problem for them, but for the rest of the world, a solution was needed that removed the cell carrier from the equation.

[–] Steve@communick.news 23 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Wile SMS in the US went free relatively early on, much of the rest of the world continued to charge for every individual SMS message. So data based instant messaging apps became very popular everywhere in the world that's not the US.

[–] jaygray91@piefed.zip 8 points 9 hours ago

Basically this. tl;dr: being free and being first exposure to mobile instant messenger.

in my south east Asian country, back then we did have bundle sms pricing, buy when the mobile internet infrastructure was getting big money from governments, WhatsApp came in at the right moment. advertising them being free (with a minimal $1 or something lifetime fee nobody bothered to pay for) and can do texting and sending images for free. compared to paying bundled prices for sms and MMS, it's just a no-brainer.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 9 points 8 hours ago

RCS is not yet working on my carrier here in Sweden.

And since most people are already using alternative messaging apps, no one really cares.

[–] remon@ani.social 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

SMS costs money, no idea what RCS is. Other than that it's probably just inertia. I prefer to use Signal but only about 30% of my whatsapp contacts have that.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Still? SMS used to cost me money as the cell vendors tried to maximize their profit on new technology. But I don’t think that’s been true here since smartphones

[–] remon@ani.social 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yes, they still cost money in most of Europe, which is why nobody uses them.

The only sms I've received in the last few years were roaming-infos, voice mail reminders and 2FA codes.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

That’s crazy. Even pre-smartphone, there was always the argument that sms costs less than the effort to meter and bill for them …. And maybe that’s the entire difference between the us using sms/rcs, and Europe using WhatsApp

[–] gezero@sopuli.xyz 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] TAG@lemmy.world 1 points 30 minutes ago

I use SMS specifically because of the network effect. Almost everyone I want to communicate with has a cellphone, so all of them are capable of sending and receiving text messages. There is no need to list my installed messaging apps and compare it to theirs, we just need to exchange phone numbers.

My longest and most active conversations (chatting with my wife or my closest friends) are going to be over a more feature rich app, but if I need to set up a quick chat with 3 or 4 people, I am not going to think what messaging app we all have in common, I will just start an SMS group chat.

[–] the_q@piefed.social 10 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 14 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

WhatsApp has been around for a few minutes more than Signal.

[–] scrion@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Not really, no. Signal was released more or less exactly a year later than WhatsApp (May 2010 vs May 2009), which, if you look at the 17 years since then, doesn't really matter that much.

However, broad adoption rates in messaging apps are typically achieved by e. g. funny emoji sets vs. encryption, and the early versions of Signal were pretty barebone.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe I should have said “what’s app gained popularity earlier”

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

Also “WhatsApp’s business model made it marginally easier to use because they don’t care about privacy”

[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 1 points 6 hours ago
[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 2 points 6 hours ago (2 children)
[–] scholar@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago

It was never 'Google locked', its an open standard developed by the GSM Association that IOS has supported since 2024.

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 points 6 hours ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)

"It gives me the complexion of a Disney princess and lets me send weird pictures of my forhead or the ceiling to my friends." --Teenagers gleefully giving Snapchat all their personal data

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 6 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

WhatsApp is free (or was it a low-cost one-time purchase? haven't used Google Play in a long time), SMS tends to cost money.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

This is my understanding. WhatsApp took off at a time and in places where SMS was expensive. Because WhatsApp used data, they could keep data usage low and allow people to message almost for free.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Nevermind past tense, my current phone plan still has me pay for SMS separately (IIRC I get 100 free SMS, after that it's 9 cent/SMS).

load more comments
view more: next ›