There are two types of people on this planet. Some absolutely relish getting a WhatsApp notification letting them know they've been added to a new group chat -- it's time for gossip! Others, however, would gladly fling their phone into the sun rather than contend with the continual onslaught of new and often pointless messages. Now, finally, WhatsApp is adding controls to help mitigate this trauma.
The Facebook-owned service said that users will now have an option to control who adds them to groups. You can choose "nobody," "my contacts," or "everyone." It's not as granular as some people would like -- you can't choose between contacts, for example -- but it will at least put pay to spam-adds from randoms.
If someone tries to add you to a group and your settings prevent it, that person will be asked to send you a private message with an invite link, which will be active for 72 hours. So if you select "nobody" and your aunt wants to get you on board with a group chat for Sandra's baby shower, you've got three days to decide if you can handle it (and you could always feign ignorance if you can't -- "Oh, I didn't see any link. Ah well.")
On a more serious note, though, this new option is an important step in addressing privacy concerns around the app, particularly in countries affected by political turmoil, where organizations have been known to add as many numbers as possible to groups in a bid to champion their cause. It also marks the latest in a number of moves by WhatsApp to increase security. The platform is currently testing an image search tool to combat fake news, has limited message forwarding and recently announced a fact-checking service in India.
The new feature will roll out globally in the next few weeks, and will require the most up-to-date version of WhatsApp. Access it in Settings > Account > Privacy > Groups.
Groups are a vital part of WhatsApp, although as the Facebook-owned messaging platform has grown in popularity so has the number of unwanted group chats. But today, after testing them for a while on iOS, WhatsApp is rolling out new privacy settings which should help control this.
Until now, group admins could add any WhatsApp user to a group without needing their consent – the only requirement being that the user is a contact in the admin’s phone. As part of this latest rollout, though, WhatsApp users will now be able to choose which people can add them to groups.
In order to access the new feature, users need to simply head over to the Settings menu within WhatsApp and tap Accounts. Then a quick tap on Privacy and later Groups will present users with the choice of three options: ‘Everyone,’ ‘My Contacts,’ or ‘Nobody.’ Each one is pretty self-explanatory with ‘Nobody’ meaning users will have to approve every single group with ‘Everyone’ allows users to leave their group invitations completely open, as they are today.
WhatsApp’s latest privacy feature will begin rollout out today to a select number of users before expanding globally across the coming weeks.
There are two types of people on this planet. Some absolutely relish getting a WhatsApp notification letting them know they've been added to a new group chat -- it's time for gossip! Others, however, would gladly fling their phone into the sun rather than contend with the continual onslaught of new and often pointless messages. Now, finally, WhatsApp is adding controls to help mitigate this trauma.
The Facebook-owned service said that users will now have an option to control who adds them to groups. You can choose "nobody," "my contacts," or "everyone." It's not as granular as some people would like -- you can't choose between contacts, for example -- but it will at least put pay to spam-adds from randoms.
If someone tries to add you to a group and your settings prevent it, that person will be asked to send you a private message with an invite link, which will be active for 72 hours. So if you select "nobody" and your aunt wants to get you on board with a group chat for Sandra's baby shower, you've got three days to decide if you can handle it (and you could always feign ignorance if you can't -- "Oh, I didn't see any link. Ah well.")
On a more serious note, though, this new option is an important step in addressing privacy concerns around the app, particularly in countries affected by political turmoil, where organizations have been known to add as many numbers as possible to groups in a bid to champion their cause. It also marks the latest in a number of moves by WhatsApp to increase security. The platform is currently testing an image search tool to combat fake news, has limited message forwarding and recently announced a fact-checking service in India.
The new feature will roll out globally in the next few weeks, and will require the most up-to-date version of WhatsApp. Access it in Settings > Account > Privacy > Groups.
As much as technology has advanced in the last couple of decades, the ability to automatically skip commercials has remained mostly in the past. Now Zatz Not Funny says -- based on a Facebook post by an employee and confirmation with a source -- that TiVo's DVRs will get an upgraded version of their SkipMode feature that bypasses commercials automatically.
Because of the way SkipMode works, it will still only apply to recordings of primetime shows on channels that have their commercials marked, unlike the fully automated systems that the Channels app and Tablo boxes are testing. It's also apparently only going to work on boxes upgraded with the latest "Hydra" interface when it rolls out later in the spring.
ReplayTV pushed automatic commercial skipping years ago and fights over the feature with broadcasters and cable companies helped hasten its demise. When Windows Media Center was still supported, the DIY-minded could use ShowAnalyzer, but a fully-supported version of the feature from TiVo would make using it easier than ever, plus it makes watching network TV more like Netflix, Amazon Prime or ad-free Hulu. Our question is whether or not the TV networks will let it go this time around -- even if, or perhaps especially because statistics show DVR owners don't manually skip ads as much as you might think.
Japan Display will supply the OLED screens for this year's new Apple Watch model, according to a new Reuters report out today.
Japan Display Inc will begin to supply organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screens for the Apple Watch later this year, two sources said, a breakthrough for the cash-strapped company whose late shift to OLED has cost it orders from Apple.
The supply deal would mark Japan Display’s foray into the OLED display market, the two sources familiar with the matter said, declining to be identified because they are not authorized to speak to the media.
The development comes as particularly good news for the liquid crystal display panel supplier, which relied on Apple for more than half of its revenue in the year ended March 2018, and whose mainstay LCD business has been hit heavily by Apple's recent shift away from LCD.
Reuters reported on Monday that Japan Display aims to raise as much as $990 million in new financing as early as this week.
Apple has been working to bolster its OLED display supply chain cut down its reliance on Samsung, which supplies displays for the iPhone X, iPhone XS, and iPhone XS Max. It has reportedly pushed LG Display to build out its OLED display production facilities, and has even purchased equipment to build an OLED panel research and development site in Taiwan.
Today's report offers little clue as to what the switch to Japan Display OLED screens could mean for the next Apple Watch, save for a note that newer OLED technology is generally thinner and allows more flexibility than LCD screens. For the Apple Watch Series 4, Apple upgraded the display panel to a larger LTPO (Low Temperature Polycrystalline Oxide) OLED Retina Display, which means it is more efficient and consumes less power for better battery life.
According to reliable Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, the Apple Watch Series 5, coming in September 2019, will feature a new ceramic casing design, suggesting a possible return of the Apple Watch Edition.
Other rumors suggest a future version of the Apple Watch will adopt solid state buttons that don't physically click but instead provide haptic feedback to users when the buttons are touched. Apple introduced haptic feedback for the Digital Crown in the Series 4, and haptic feedback could potentially extend to the side button.
At TNW, we’ve talked a lot about the absolute lack ofcompact phones. While I’m using the ‘compact’ iPhone Xs as my daily driver, there are plenty of people who want smaller screen size. According to a report from DigiTimes, Apple’s taken notice and is planning to release a 5.4-inch phone in 2020.
The report notes that Apple will opt for three OLED display sizes – 5.42-inch, 6.06-inch, and 6.67-inch – supplied by either Samsung or LG. This marks a change from the current iPhone line up’s sizes of 5.8-inch (the iPhone Xs), 6.1-inch (the iPhone Xr), and 6.5-inch (the iPhone Xs Max) screens. If the report is accurate, Apple will reduce the size of the smallest model while increasing the size of the biggest model.
The last true small phone from Apple was the iPhone SE, launched in 2016. A year later, reports suggested that the company’s working on a sequel, but that dream never came to fruition.
I hope this is different, and I know I’m not alone in that. A lot of people find the current generation of iPhones too big to comfortably hold and type with. Bigger isn’t always better, and it’d be nice if Cupertino finally realized that
TNW Conference 2019 is coming! Check out our glorious new location, an inspiring line-up of speakers and activities, and how to be a part of this annual tech bonanza by clicking here.
For more gear, gadget, and hardware news and reviews, follow Plugged on
Twitter and
Flipboard.
After nearly 8 years in service, Google has called time on its social network effort, Google+. By now, any user that might have had some worthwhile memories on the platform should have downloaded their data — yesterday was the last day to do so. But from the last day to the first, the site was mired with challenges through and through.
The network was the latest link in a chain of half-baked efforts in social media. They included interconnect mediums such as Google Wave that were supposed to bring together email, social networks, instant messages, and other sources. Just prior to G+, the company put together a mess of instant messaging features and shoehorned them into Gmail, calling it Google Buzz. It was felled after two years on major privacy failures. Any one of these services served at best as a bridge for people who had to be across many existing social media in their lives, but they were never strong enough to stand as a sole alternative to Facebook and Twitter.
Beginnings
Born on June 28, 2011, the "Google+ project" brought a simple premise to the fore: users could interact with their "Circles" of friends the way they want to, sharing as much or as little information with each as they'd like. People could follow topics or "Sparks" to learn and contribute interesting links, pictures, and experiences. A rudimentary instant messaging system was rolled in, intended for people to "Huddle."
The advent of Google+ also brought about a video-calling medium that later turned into a chat app of its own right, the moribund Hangouts. Before it became a cancerous Frankenstein of SMS, phone calls, and live streaming, Hangouts was meant for impromptu gatherings or catching up with friends and co-workers.
Android Police played a role in bringing more than 7,800 people onto Google+ in the first few days of early access. The masses jumped in to experience another take on digital society which, even in 2011, had already matured into a pig's trough of commercial content, political trolling, and unvarnished angst. Many who joined hoped things would be better over the fence and that they could share their lives on the internet with the focus and attention that every disparate part of them so deserved.
Struggle
The tech behemoth had the ammunition to do damage with more than 500 million users by its third birthday. One way it could boast that number was through aggressive integrations with sister services. It made G+ registration compulsory when signing up for Gmail or Google Play Games.
Most notably in 2013, Google started requiring G+ accounts for those who wanted to post comments on videos uploaded to Google-owned YouTube, meaning real names had to be used. The anonymous legions of YouTube commenters complained about losing their right to post whatever they wanted — with or without vitriol — in the snug privacy of an alias.
YouTube comments became more of a joke to deal with than ever. There was less discrimination and verbal assault against video creators, sure, but many G+ opponents were simply copying and pasting ASCII art of some stick figure named "Bob," telling Google to bring back screennames.
If this subject reeks of overtures from all the stories we've seen about online harassment and extremist radicalization, it may have been a shame that Google killed off this would-be salve in 2015. Then again, Google+ had killed off all of its goodwill, too.
Faded hopes didn't change Google+ as much as Google's own data gathering and profit calculations did. Ultimately, more people ended up falling back into the vortices of mainstream social media or sought more reclusive alternatives like Instagram and Snapchat.
Downfall
Eventually, it was this sandwich of spam, ads and overreach that took its toll on Google+. The platform had ended its use of invasive recruiting tactics while doing little else to retain its base. Those who have most recently been using the site spent 5 seconds or less at a time before drifting away.
Google actually admitted that tidbit last October in a leaked internal memo about a vulnerability that allowed third parties access to private information from users' friends and relatives without their consent. Although it was patched quickly, it was not disclosed in short order for fear of regulator scrutiny. In December, Google revealed that another vulnerability, with similar implications affecting more than 52 million accounts, had to be patched in the previous month. The incident sped up the company's clock for Google+'s shutdown. It announced its final timeline on January 30.
The company had arguably kept Google+ alive for much longer than it should've cared to. Much of that care should have gone instead to Hangouts: for all its faults, it became a convenient direct communications app that people with Gmail accounts came to rely on. It has gained second lives with spur-off apps for enterprise users and is expected to carry on a meaningful legacy long after its initial run.
Google+ will have to be remembered for what it used to be, the content it used to hold, the posts and comments that people might dig up in their Google Takeout archives one day — if they chose to keep them — and in at least one way, it will be fondly regarded. Account for all the other ways in which the network sought to stay afloat through different modes of attrition, though, and we are left with one overlong footnote in Google's biographic annuls.
Around 10AM PST today, Google+ for consumers officially went offline. The below screenshot is all any Google+ page now redirects to.
