[inapis]

I get that it's trendy to shit on India especially by Indians itself but I absolutely can't wrap my head around your argument.

India has its problems but asking a company to do something to remedy the problem a little is too much? Lynchings happened before and they will probably continue to happen but now they are happening much more frequently and the common messaging medium is WhatsApp but somehow your argument is that the culture and government should get its shit together? In other news, water is wet.

It hasn't gotten its shit together for the past 70 years but please don't save the lives of a couple dozen or hundred people because instantaneous group chats are super precious. Let's not build a bicycle because we are busy getting to the moon! Let's pursue the utopia and not pluck the low hanging fruit!

[srean]

> I get that it's trendy to shit on India especially by Indians itself

Patriotism is much more than vapid flag waving and silencing criticism. I know your heart is in a good place but I ask a little more good faith from you.

A close analogue asking WhatsApp to self censor is that of the Govt asking women to cover up more to avoid sexual assault. Going by your comment history I am sure that's not a solution you would like.

Its the years and years of band-aid that has gotten us here. Temporary fixes will continue to perpetuate the problem just as it has in the past. Things will get a little better and then we will forget about fixing the problem.

Regarding trigger happy lynch mobs -- The more we yield to problem children throwing tantrums worse they become.

WhatsApp has done noting wrong here, I don't think the burden of the fix should be on them. Detecting fake news would be a burden. Rate limiting as you suggested would be less of a burden, unless that is what gives them competitive advantage

[inapis]

I am neither attempting to silence your criticism nor questioning your patriotism. I am actually not even interested in your or anyone else's patriotism. I called that out specifically because I find a lot of fellow citizens making wishy-washy claims, trying to state the obvious, completely loose the context and history of India and consequently miss the forest for the trees. There are a lot of cases where I can get behind utopian and long-term solutions such as in education or health but I digress when people's lives are at stake and certain situations, such as these lynchings, require short-term hard interventions.

I am not asking WhatsApp to censor itself nor will I back a government which makes such demands but there are certain situations where immediate pressing needs requires drastic interventions and asking WhatsApp to assist in this is not unreasonable. I get where you are coming from and this is no doubt a band-aid but in certain situations you can't really help it. Temporary fixes are necessary to abate the violence and the Indian police has demonstrated the value of these fixes in riot hit areas by cutting off the internet access and the situation is brought rapidly under control. In an ideal world, none of this would be necessary but neither would there be poverty nor social strife.

> WhatsApp has done noting wrong here, I don't think the burden of the fix should be on them.

WhatsApp has done nothing wrong but at the very least it has exacerbated the problem. WhatsApp is a victim of its own success in India. If not WhatsApp, there would be someone else. But whoever is in such a unique and powerful position can and should shoulder some of this responsibility. You can't be oblivious to a society's needs and continue to reap all profits.

>Detecting fake news would be a burden.

Facebook already does this for the news feed so it is not something they have to set up from scratch. Plenty of organisations in India would assist in dealing with the data. Of course the end-to-end encryption would be an issue.

>Rate limiting as you suggested would be less of a burden, unless that is what gives them competitive advantage.

WhatsApp is pretty much a monopoly in India. All other apps are pretty much non-existent for a vast chunk of the population. Even if people move to other platforms, there would only be a short period of time before those platforms are forced to make the same decisions as WhatsApp.

WhatsApp could do so much more to help out but the only thing they did was to mark the "forwarded" messages. And even that was a half-hearted attempt. Small grey text on a white background which is very easy to miss. Pffftt...

And are they not aware about the "Forwarded as received" trope?

[mcny]

> WhatsApp could do so much more to help out but the only thing they did was to mark the "forwarded" messages. And even that was a half-hearted attempt. Small grey text on a white background which is very easy to miss. Pffftt...

See now that we see concrete demands now we can say whether we can agree. I can absolutely get behind UI hints to help navigate users. I am not an expert on this topic. I can see how things I think of being logical or even "obvious" are anything but. I've been wrong more times

> Temporary fixes are necessary to abate the violence and the Indian police has demonstrated the value of these fixes in riot hit areas by cutting off the internet access and the situation is brought rapidly under control.

Sorry, this is a hard no for me. BART did it. You don't want to go down this road.

> Of course the end-to-end encryption would be an issue.

You don't want to go down this road either. Once again, this "solves" the wrong problem. Be very wary of anyone who claims that weakening encryption is essential to security, short-term or long-term.