You can get rid of Whatsapp by bridging it with other secure messaging apps (like Signal, Telegram, iMessage, Mattermost) using Android VM and Matrix bridges: https://matrix.org/bridges/
No, because you'll be using a disposable SIM card only for WhatsApp installed in the Android Virtual Machine. Facebook won't have access to your own smartphone and your activity.
Every single one of your friends will add a contact to their phone, with 1: The new phone number, 2: Your real life name. They'll then go and share that contact list with a dozen different apps, including Facebook and Whatsapp. Some of them will add your email address, birthday, and home address to that contact as well.
Facebook cannot know it, since it is another phone no. not used anywhere else. The point of using another SIM card in Android VM is that Whatsapp doesn't have access to your Facebook profile, your web activity, your real phone no., real location, MAC address of your primary smartphone etc. Meanwhile you can use Signal/Telegram/iMessage to chat with your Whatsapp contacts.
They use a probability factor to identify similarity with other users. If the similarities match high, they internally identify it as a probable identical profile.
But for this to happen successfully, they would have to use the first profile that didn’t agree to new terms and compare it to new profile that did agree to new terms.
Btw, somewhere in Facebook land they are trying to workaround this hack. Which means FTC should be all over this.
I think the point is that the burner number only gives you a weak pseudonymity. Your contacts and your communication profile (how often are you talking with whom) is still visible and it seems not unlikely that it can be matched to the one in Facebook purely by that.
Every time I hear people on HN talk about Matrix as a potential alternative to WhatsApp I always think “I’ll try that” then I look at it for about 20 seconds before deciding it’s just not worth it.
Matrix itself works great. But the bridges leave a lot to be desired. Mind you, most of them are only in alpha or beta status.
But it requires a lot of fiddling around to keep them running. Some bridges just stop working without telling you and this makes it hard too rely on them. Always second guessing whether it's just quiet or the bridge went down again. The signal one in particular is bad for this.
I try it every year and it gets better but progress is slow.
Also, be aware that your fully bridged matrix server is a prime hacker target, it captures all you private Comms and can impersonate you. Much harder to do with all individual apps. This is another thing I worry about.
So for these reasons I just test it every year but never found it production ready.
Matrix itself works pretty well. This is specifically a guide on bridging WhatsApp with Matrix, and since WhatsApp really does not want you using its service without using its app, its bound to be a bit complicated.
Take that page for example - I’ve got no idea what on earth it is after reading the first few pages (I mean I do, but with a consumer hat on I don’t).
I mean it says it’s supposed to be simple, but then moves on to a load of command line arguments and something about an API and then suggests I build it from source.
I mean clearly they have a different idea on what simple means! This isn’t consumer level software yet.
Perhaps not the Mattermost bridge, but https://matrix.org is pretty straightforward in my eyes. The "Try Now" button is clearly visible, and takes you right to multiple different clients and a clear option to open it in your browser. From there it's the login / sign-up flow.
Is there something I'm just too familiar with? I really like the project, so I've been through the site (and set up my own server) enough that maybe I'm glossing over a rough point.
“It looks like I have to create a server and then join a federation? How do I do that? I need to register a domain? Where’s the common server? How do I get a user? How do I get other servers to federate with me?”
My experience with Matrix has been a lot of confusion about it. I feel like I need to know about too much to even start in a meaningful way.
There is no common server. Each matrix address has the name of the server in it. Though matrix.org acts as a central point because there's so many users on it. It's not needed however.
IMO they really need to think through their branding and communication strategy.
I've downloaded element now and it's simple, but there are lots of things they need to sort from a customer journey perspective:
1. Why is the Matrix homepage so technical? API's? HTTP Calls? What about staying in touch with my family? Contrast the two different opening statements (Matrix vs WhatsApp vs Messenger):
> An open network for secure, decentralized communication [...] Matrix is an open source project that publishes the Matrix open standard for secure, decentralised, real-time communication, and its Apache licensed reference implementations.
> Simple. Secure. Reliable messaging. With WhatsApp, you'll get fast, simple, secure messaging and calling for free, available on phones all over the world.
> Hang out whenever, wherever. Messenger makes it easy and fun to stay close to your favourite people.
2. It's not clear to me (a consumer) that in order to chat on Matrix I need Element, or that if I'm on Element I'm on Matrix. Or if I'm on Element my friends can have any matrix client, that might be called something else. So if I have Element and they have Nio that's fine. But Kik and Nio isn't.
These are just small details, but they would help a huge amount.
Matrix is so technical because it's the website that explains the protocol behind it. Matrix is a protocol, more similar to IRC, you can access it with the client of your choice. This is our course how all of the internet used to work until companies started making their own walled gardens :)
But because of this the usage itself is better described by the various client websites like element.
A point to note for anyone intending on switching: the whatsapp bridge does not (yet) support voice or video calls. It's understandable, as it can't be done through the Whatsapp Web interface, but it's still a deal-breaker for me.
As long as the underlying Go-Whatsapp (https://github.com/Rhymen/go-whatsapp) protocol implementation is byte-for-byte identical to the original Whatsapp Web client protocol, it should be indistinguishable.
Alternatively, you can use Matterbridge: https://ibcomputing.com/setting-up-whatsapp-telegram-bridge-...