I hate that there's always 'that guy' who thinks he knows how to read legalese better than other layman, so he quickly and assuredly spouts to your audience that you are for sure in deep legal doo-doo; casting doubt into potential users and customers.
Yeah, but look at the design - I mean I don't have a position on this, but in my opinion it LOOKS like a Facebook button... I'm sure they didn't intend opengraph to be a landgrab of sorts.
They didn't publish any button guidelines so it's a modified Subscribe button. I would think they'd be more for it as they're getting more eCommerce data. The post states this: Just to be clear, we were approved by Facebook to use these Open Graph actions but this is not a “partnership” with Facebook.
Unfortunately it's a bit difficult to get in contact with FB.
Yeah, look, best of luck to you and we're in a similar space. I'm all for social commerce, I just think possibly the boundaries of whats within their intended scope are being pushed here.
I don't want to get into it too much because we'll ultimately see, but I'm sure if I made a "Don't like" button - they'd kick my ass. I get the feeling OpenGraph was intended for a service based business, i.e. Geoff just watched [x] on Netflix.
I think it's a little different because "Own" is an actual approved action while "Don't like" isn't. Can you shoot me an email (just use our contact form)? Would love to learn more.
The huge problem I see here is their buttons looks exactly like the "Like" button and could be confusing to Facebook users into thinking their official Facebook buttons/features.
What do you mean by still? It wasn't profitable, it made changes, and now we have to see what happens. It's a bit early to say it's still not profitable.
It is far harder to get traction to reach their scale than to make money from your users when you have so many. They explicitly are focusing on growth.
Yes, focusing on growth to firmly establish their brand as the go-to phone-to-phone sharing app. Network effects will help them keep that position once they attain it.
Also focusing on user engagement, as they are narrowing down on solving needs that are a) painful and b) frequent. They want users they've already attracted to be firing up the app daily, not weekly or monthly.
It's the valley. People learn and move on. Same for Hsu and same for the people working there. Most importantly at what price? In this case it's 1.5M and a whole lot of reflecting.
There's a few ways that they can patch this. I'm assuming that there's some sort of auth process in place for their http calls and this could simply be a case where this particular endpoint missed the auth.
Or they're simply blocking the whatsappstatus's ip and a fix would actually require both client side and server side changes.
But honestly its just a messaging app and how many people really cares if "let's go grab a beer" is encrypted or not.
