 "WhatsApp 'Delete for everyone' feature update may have rules that beat the purpose")
**WhatsApp** is reportedly updating the ‘Delete for everyone’ feature which allows users to users to delete a message for both the sender and the receiver. You might no longer be able to delete a message without the permission of the receiver. According to a tweet by WABetaInfo, the update is apparently supposed to prevent any kind of ‘manipulation.’ Don’t you think it almost beats the purpose of the option to delete a message for both parties in the first place? Why would someone approve a message delete request?
LIMITS UPDATED!
— WABetaInfo (@WABetaInfo) October 11, 2018
WhatsApp has updated the "Recipient limit".
What does it mean? If you delete a message for everyone, but the recipient won't receive the revoke request within 13h, 8m, 16s (maybe because the phone was off), the message will **not** be revoked.
..(1/2)
When the feature was first released, it offered users a window of seven minutes to delete the message. Later, the duration
**increased** to 1 hour 8 minutes and 16 seconds. However, with the update, if a user deletes a message for everyone, the recipient will get a ‘revoke request.’ If they don’t approve this request within the time frame of 13 hours 8 minutes and 16 seconds, the message will not be deleted. The update sounds just as odd, and the time frames that WhatsApp has chosen. Why ‘1 hour 8 minutes and 16 seconds’ or ‘13 hours 8 minutes and 16 seconds’? We suspect this precise number has something to do with convenience, though. One hr 8 min 16 seconds is 4,096 seconds or 2^12. But we’re just speculating here. [caption id=“attachment_5380621” align=“alignnone” width=“1280”] Representational Image[/caption] When the ‘Delete for everyone’ feature was released in November 2017, it was designed in a way that it raised “
unnecessary questions .” It’s not like the message disappears without a trace. The receiver and sender both see a message confirming that a message was deleted. This would, inevitably, lead to some uncomfortable conversations, because, well, human nature: we’re all super curious about what people are hiding from us; even if it was a ’typo’ sent by mistake, and then deleted. Asking for permission to delete still feels like too much of a regression, though.
 "US ready to ‘impose costs’ on Russia if war in Ukraine drags on, says Hegseth")
 "US tells Hamas to stop violence against Gaza civilians and disarm 'without delay'")
 "China seizes 60,000 maps mislabelling Taiwan, omitting South China Sea islands")
 "Syria’s Sharaa pledges to honor Russia ties, seeks economic and military support in Kremlin visit")
 "US ready to ‘impose costs’ on Russia if war in Ukraine drags on, says Hegseth")
 "US tells Hamas to stop violence against Gaza civilians and disarm 'without delay'")
 "China seizes 60,000 maps mislabelling Taiwan, omitting South China Sea islands")
 "Syria’s Sharaa pledges to honor Russia ties, seeks economic and military support in Kremlin visit")
