The latest articles tagged 'meta' on DEV Community. https://dev.to/t/meta en 10x Magazine Sat, 22 Aug 2026 00:32:08 +0000 https://dev.to/10x/why-zuckerbergs-ai-dream-fails-to-win-investors-27na https://dev.to/10x/why-zuckerbergs-ai-dream-fails-to-win-investors-27na <p><em>Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@microsoftcopilot?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Microsoft Copilot</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Unsplash</a></em></p> <p>TL;DR: Meta’s AI ambitions are meeting resistance because of lingering privacy doubts, a crowded competitive field, and a history of slow product delivery.</p> <p>The hype around Mark Zuckerberg’s AI vision has a familiar rhythm: bold claims, massive funding, and a promise to reshape digital interaction. Yet the latest episode of the Equity podcast reveals a growing chorus of investors, developers, and analysts who remain unconvinced. While Meta’s AI budget tops $30 billion, the market’s appetite for its roadmap appears far cooler than the company projects.</p> <h2> Zuckerberg’s AI Vision vs. Market Reality </h2> <p>Zuckerberg has painted a picture of an AI‑powered future where Meta’s platforms become seamless, context‑aware assistants—think AI‑driven newsfeeds, real‑time translation, and immersive virtual‑world creators. The narrative leans heavily on large‑language models (LLMs) that can generate content, moderate harmful posts, and power the next generation of the metaverse.</p> <p>In practice, the rollout has been fragmented. Early experiments like “LLaMA‑2” opened only to a limited research community, while consumer‑facing tools such as AI‑enhanced photo editing have received lukewarm adoption. The disparity between the grand vision and tangible products fuels skepticism: investors ask whether Meta can translate research breakthroughs into revenue‑generating services faster than rivals like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic.</p> <h2> Key Barriers: Trust, Competition, and Execution </h2> <p><strong>Privacy and Trust</strong> – Meta’s legacy of data‑privacy controversies continues to haunt its AI agenda. The company plans to train models on user‑generated content, a proposition that raises red‑flag questions about consent and data security. Regulators in the EU and U.S. are tightening AI‑specific legislation, and any misstep could result in costly fines or a loss of user confidence. The Equity hosts highlighted that, unlike competitors that rely on publicly available datasets, Meta’s dependence on its own ecosystem creates a unique risk profile.</p> <p><strong>Intense Competition</strong> – The AI arms race has accelerated dramatically since 2023. OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Microsoft‑backed Copilot dominate enterprise and consumer mindshare. These platforms benefit from broader API ecosystems, robust developer communities, and clear monetization pathways. Meta’s offerings, by contrast, remain siloed within its own apps, limiting cross‑platform appeal and making it harder for third‑party developers to build on top of Meta’s models.</p> <p><strong>Execution Gaps</strong> – Historically, Meta has excelled at scaling social networks but has stumbled when translating research into market‑ready products. The delayed launch of Horizon Worlds and the under‑performance of earlier AI‑driven ad tools illustrate a pattern of overpromising and underdelivering. Podcast guests pointed out that internal resource allocation often favors short‑term ad revenue over long‑term AI infrastructure, slowing the pace of innovation.</p> <h2> What This Means for Meta’s Roadmap </h2> <p>Analysts suggest that Meta must recalibrate its AI strategy to regain investor confidence. First, a transparent data‑usage policy could alleviate privacy concerns and satisfy emerging regulations. Second, opening up its models through APIs—similar to OpenAI’s approach—might attract a broader developer base and create new revenue streams beyond advertising. Finally, delivering a flagship consumer product that demonstrably improves daily user experience (e.g., an AI‑enhanced messenger that reduces spam while enriching conversation) could serve as a proof point for the broader AI ecosystem.</p> <p>The Equity podcast concluded that while Zuckerberg’s AI ambition remains technically plausible, market dynamics demand clearer value propositions and faster execution. Without visible wins, Meta risks being perceived as a latecomer in a space where speed and trust are decisive.</p> <p><strong>Takeaway:</strong> Meta’s AI future is a high‑stakes gamble; winning will require more than funding—it needs privacy‑first design, open‑platform thinking, and a track record of delivering consumer‑ready AI tools that outperform the competition.</p> ai meta zuck startupinvestors 10x Magazine Fri, 21 Aug 2026 22:00:22 +0000 https://dev.to/10x/meta-launches-glimmer-open-weight-ai-model-challenges-closed-api-trend-4cob https://dev.to/10x/meta-launches-glimmer-open-weight-ai-model-challenges-closed-api-trend-4cob <p><em>Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@microsoftcopilot?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Microsoft Copilot</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Unsplash</a></em></p> <p>TL;DR: Meta released Glimmer, a downloadable open‑weight AI model, while Mark Zuckerberg argues AI should be accessible to all, sparking debate over open versus closed AI.</p> <p>Meta’s newest AI offering flips the industry’s usual playbook. Instead of locking powerful models behind paid APIs, the company rolled out Glimmer this week – a fully open‑weight neural network that anyone can download, run on personal hardware, and fine‑tune without a subscription. The move positions Meta against its own larger model, Muse Spark, which remains accessible only through Meta‑hosted endpoints. By providing a self‑hosted alternative, Meta signals a shift toward greater developer autonomy and a broader distribution of AI capabilities.</p> <h2> Meta unveils Glimmer: an open‑weight AI model </h2> <p>Glimmer arrives as a lightweight, transformer‑based model built on the same research foundation as Muse Spark, but stripped of the massive parameter count that demands cloud‑scale GPUs. The model’s weights are published under a permissive license, allowing hobbyists, startups, and academic labs to run inference on a single consumer‑grade GPU. Meta’s engineering blog highlights three core goals: democratize access, reduce reliance on centralized compute, and foster community‑driven innovation.</p> <p>The practical impact is immediate. Developers can now integrate Glimmer into apps, experiment with prompt engineering, or use it as a baseline for custom fine‑tuning without incurring API fees. Early adopters report latency improvements for on‑device tasks such as text summarization and code assistance, because the model runs locally and avoids network round‑trips. At the same time, Meta acknowledges that Glimmer’s performance lags behind Muse Spark on benchmark suites, positioning it as a “starter” model rather than a production‑grade service.</p> <h2> Zuckerberg’s “AI for everyone” stance and industry reaction </h2> <p>Alongside the release, Mark Zuckerberg penned an open letter urging the tech community to keep AI “for everyone” rather than letting a handful of labs monopolize the technology. He argues that open models lower barriers to entry, spur competition, and mitigate the risk of a concentrated power structure that could dictate the direction of future AI development.</p> <p>The letter has drawn both praise and criticism. Proponents, including several open‑source advocates, applaud Meta’s willingness to share model weights and cite the move as a counterbalance to the “walled garden” approach of firms like OpenAI and Anthropic. Critics, however, point to the simultaneous promotion of Muse Spark—still locked behind Meta’s cloud services—as evidence of a dual strategy that could still funnel revenue toward the company’s proprietary offerings.</p> <p>Equity research firm Equity Capital highlighted the tension, noting that while Glimmer expands the ecosystem, the disparity in capability between Glimmer and Muse Spark may push serious developers toward the paid API, preserving Meta’s monetization pipeline. The analysts also warned that open models could accelerate the diffusion of deep‑fake technology and other malicious uses, calling for responsible release practices.</p> <h2> What the split means for developers and the AI landscape </h2> <p>For independent creators, Glimmer offers a low‑cost entry point to experiment with large‑language models. Its open‑weight nature means teams can audit the code, adapt it to niche domains, and avoid vendor lock‑in. Startups focused on edge computing, such as voice‑assistant makers and on‑device translation services, stand to benefit from reduced latency and data‑privacy advantages.</p> <p>Conversely, enterprises that require state‑of‑the‑art performance may still gravitate toward Muse Spark, accepting the cost of API usage for superior accuracy and scalability. The coexistence of an open model and a premium API mirrors a broader industry trend where companies provide “freemium” tiers: a basic, self‑hosted version for experimentation and a paid, high‑capacity service for production workloads.</p> <p>Overall, Meta’s dual‑track strategy could reshape market expectations. If Glimmer gains traction, other AI leaders may feel pressure to open their own models, potentially leading to a more heterogeneous ecosystem where open and closed offerings coexist. Regulators and policymakers will likely watch closely, as the balance between openness and safety becomes a central theme in AI governance discussions.</p> <p><strong>Takeaway:</strong> Meta’s Glimmer puts a functional AI model into anyone’s hands, while Zuckerberg’s public push for universal access frames the release as a statement on AI democratization. The real test will be whether the open model spurs genuine competition or simply serves as a gateway to Meta’s higher‑margin, closed‑API services.</p> ai meta opensourceai machinelearning Nokka Fri, 21 Aug 2026 12:47:04 +0000 https://dev.to/sarantoon/meta-pocket-aep-vibe-coding-ekmthiiaihkhnthrrmdaasraangekmdwy-prompt-aelwaechraebb-tiktok-53mn https://dev.to/sarantoon/meta-pocket-aep-vibe-coding-ekmthiiaihkhnthrrmdaasraangekmdwy-prompt-aelwaechraebb-tiktok-53mn <h1> Meta Pocket, แอป vibe-coding เกมที่ให้คนธรรมดาสร้างเกมด้วย prompt แล้วแชร์แบบ TikTok </h1> <p><strong>โดย Nokka (นก-กา) | 21 สิงหาคม 2026</strong></p> <p><em>บทความนี้เขียนโดย AI (DeepSeek V4 Pro) ผ่าน Hermes Agent ภายใต้การควบคุมและตรวจสอบคุณภาพโดยมนุษย์, Nokka (นก-กา)</em></p> <p><a href="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F9igyz6zcasqck2yvcb5c.jpg" class="article-body-image-wrapper"><img src="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F9igyz6zcasqck2yvcb5c.jpg" alt="Meta Pocket แอป vibe-coding เกมที่ให้คนสร้างเกมด้วย prompt แล้วแชร์แบบ TikTok" width="799" height="436"></a></p> <p><strong>Meta กำลังเปิดตัว Pocket, แอปที่ให้คนธรรมดา "vibe-code" เกมเล็กๆ ด้วย prompt แล้วแชร์ให้คนอื่นเล่นและ remix ได้</strong></p> <p>นี่คือการที่ Meta เอาแนวคิด "vibe coding" (ที่เคยเป็นของโปรแกรมเมอร์) มาทำให้คนทั่วไปใช้ได้, และมันอาจเปลี่ยนวิธีที่คนสร้างและเล่นเกม</p> <p>บทความนี้จะพาไปดูว่า Pocket คืออะไร ทำงานยังไง และทำไมมันถึงสำคัญ</p> <h2> ก่อนอื่น ทำความเข้าใจศัพท์พื้นฐาน </h2> <p>ก่อนลงรายละเอียด ขอปูศัพท์ 3 คำ:</p> <p><strong>Vibe coding</strong>, การสร้างโปรแกรม/เกมโดย "บอก AI ว่าอยากได้อะไร" ด้วยภาษาธรรมดา แทนการเขียนโค้ดเอง</p> <p><strong>Mini-game</strong>, เกมเล็กๆ ที่เล่นจบเร็ว (ไม่ใช่เกมใหญ่ซับซ้อน)</p> <p><strong>Remix</strong>, การเอาเกมของคนอื่นมาดัดแปลงต่อ (เหมือน remix เพลง)</p> <h2> Meta Pocket คืออะไร </h2> <p>Pocket เป็นแอป vibe-coding เกมของ Meta [1] ซึ่ง<a href="https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/02/meta-quietly-launches-vibe-coded-gaming-app-pocket/" rel="noopener noreferrer">เปิดตัวเงียบๆ ครั้งแรกในเดือนกรกฎาคม</a>ในฐานะแอป experimental [4]:</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>รายการ</th> <th>ข้อมูล</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>ชื่อ</strong></td> <td>Pocket</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>เปิดตัว</strong></td> <td>ก.ค. 2026 (เงียบๆ ในบราซิล) → 20 ส.ค. 2026 (US)</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>จุดขาย</strong></td> <td>สร้างเกมด้วย prompt → แชร์ → เล่น → remix</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>รูปแบบ</strong></td> <td>TikTok-style social feed</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>ที่มา</strong></td> <td>ต่อจากซื้อทีม Gizmo (แพลตฟอร์ม vibe-coded gaming)</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <h3> ทำงานยังไง </h3> <ol> <li>พิมพ์ prompt (เช่น "เกมกระโดดเก็บเหรียญ")</li> <li>AI สร้าง mini-game ที่เล่นได้จริง</li> <li>เกมถูก publish ลง scrollable feed</li> <li>คนอื่นเล่น + remix ต่อได้</li> </ol> <h2> ฟีเจอร์หลัก </h2> <p>จาก TechCrunch, Neowin และ Business Insider [1][2][3]:</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>ฟีเจอร์</th> <th>รายละเอียด</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Vibe-code เกม</strong></td> <td>สร้างเกมจาก text prompt</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Social feed</strong></td> <td>เกมถูกแชร์ใน feed แบบ TikTok</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Remix</strong></td> <td>เอาเกมคนอื่นมาดัดแปลงต่อ</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Interactive</strong></td> <td>เกมตอบสนอง touch, tilt, camera</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>AI-generated</strong></td> <td>AI สร้างเกมตาม preference + trending theme</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <h2> มุมวิเคราะห์: ทำไมเรื่องนี้ถึงสำคัญ </h2> <p>ผมคิดว่า Pocket สำคัญกว่า "แอปเกมใหม่" 3 อย่าง:</p> <h3> 1. "Vibe coding" กำลังออกจากวงโปรแกรมเมอร์ </h3> <p>ก่อนหน้านี้ vibe coding เป็นเรื่องของนักพัฒนา (Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot), แต่ Pocket ทำให้<strong>คนธรรมดา</strong> vibe-code เกมได้โดยไม่ต้องรู้โค้ดเลย</p> <p>นี่คือการ "democratize" vibe coding, เปลี่ยนจาก "เครื่องมือโปรแกรมเมอร์" เป็น "เครื่องมือทุกคน"</p> <h3> 2. "สร้าง" กับ "เล่น" กลายเป็นเรื่องเดียวกัน </h3> <p>ใน Pocket การสร้างเกม = การเล่นเกม, คุณสร้างเกม แล้วคนอื่นเล่น แล้ว remix ต่อ เป็นวงจรที่ไม่มีจุดสิ้นสุด</p> <p>นี่ต่างจากเกมแบบเดิมที่ "ผู้สร้าง" กับ "ผู้เล่น" แยกกันชัดเจน</p> <h3> 3. Meta กำลังสร้าง "TikTok ของเกม" </h3> <p>รูปแบบ social feed แบบ TikTok + เกมที่สร้างด้วย AI = Meta กำลังสร้างแพลตฟอร์มที่ "เกม" เป็นคอนเทนต์ที่ไหลใน feed เหมือนวิดีโอ</p> <p>ถ้าสำเร็จ นี่คือหมวดหมู่ใหม่ของ social media</p> <h2> มุมสมดุล: ต้องพูดตรงๆ </h2> <p>ก่อนจบ ขอพูดตรงๆ ว่า:</p> <ol> <li> <strong>ยัง experimental</strong>, Meta เรียกมันว่า "experimental app" ยังไม่ชัดว่าจะไปต่อหรือไม่</li> <li> <strong>เกมเล็ก</strong>, เป็น mini-game ไม่ใช่เกมใหญ่ซับซ้อน (เทียบกับเกม AAA ไม่ได้)</li> <li> <strong>เพิ่งเปิด US</strong>, ยังไม่รู้ว่า adoption จริงจะเป็นยังไง (บราซิลเป็น test market แรก)</li> <li> <strong>Meta มีประวัติปิดแอป</strong>, Meta เคยเปิดแอป experimental แล้วปิดทิ้งหลายตัว</li> </ol> <p>แต่ทิศทางชัดเจน: <strong>"สร้างเกมด้วย AI + แชร์แบบ social" เป็นหมวดหมู่ใหม่ที่ Meta กำลังเดิมพัน</strong></p> <h2> สรุป </h2> <p>Meta Pocket คือแอป vibe-coding เกม:</p> <ol> <li> <strong>สร้างเกมด้วย prompt</strong>, ไม่ต้องรู้โค้ด</li> <li> <strong>แชร์แบบ TikTok</strong>, เกมไหลใน social feed</li> <li> <strong>เล่น + remix</strong>, วงจรสร้าง-เล่น-ดัดแปลงไม่มีสิ้นสุด</li> <li> <strong>ต่อจาก Gizmo</strong>, ทีมที่ Meta ซื้อมา</li> </ol> <p>บทเรียนสำคัญ: <strong>"Vibe coding" กำลังออกจากวงโปรแกรมเมอร์ ไปสู่คนธรรมดา, และ "การสร้างเกม" กำลังกลายเป็น "คอนเทนต์ social" แบบใหม่</strong></p> <h2> แหล่งอ้างอิง </h2> <p>[1] TechCrunch. "Meta brings Pocket, an app that lets you vibe-code and share games, to US users". 20 ส.ค. 2026. <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/20/meta-brings-pocket-an-app-that-lets-you-vibe-code-and-share-games-to-us-user" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/20/meta-brings-pocket-an-app-that-lets-you-vibe-code-and-share-games-to-us-user</a></p> <p>[2] Neowin. "Meta launches new vibe-coding platform, Pocket, in the US". <strong>2026</strong>. <a href="https://www.neowin.net/news/meta-launches-new-vibe-coding-platform-pocket-in-the-us/" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.neowin.net/news/meta-launches-new-vibe-coding-platform-pocket-in-the-us/</a></p> <p>[3] Business Insider. "Meta Rolls Out New Vibe-Coding Social App Pocket to US Users". <strong>2026</strong>. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/meta-rolls-out-new-vibe-coding-social-app-pocket-us-2026-8" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.businessinsider.com/meta-rolls-out-new-vibe-coding-social-app-pocket-us-2026-8</a></p> <p>[4] TechCrunch. "Meta quietly launches vibe-coded gaming app Pocket". 2 ก.ค. 2026. <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/02/meta-quietly-launches-vibe-coded-gaming-app-pocket/" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/02/meta-quietly-launches-vibe-coded-gaming-app-pocket/</a></p> <p><em>บทความนี้วิเคราะห์จาก TechCrunch, Neowin และ Business Insider ข้อมูล ณ 21 สิงหาคม 2026 Nokka</em></p> <p>ผมเขียนบทความนี้เพราะเห็นว่า Pocket เป็นสัญญาณว่า "vibe coding" กำลังออกจากวงโปรแกรมเมอร์ไปสู่คนธรรมดา จุดที่ผมอยากให้คุณได้คือ "การสร้างเกมกำลังกลายเป็นคอนเทนต์ social" เพราะนี่คือหมวดหมู่ใหม่ที่ Meta กำลังเดิมพัน</p> <p><strong>ลองตอบคำถามนี้ดู: คุณคิดว่า "สร้างเกมด้วย prompt แล้วแชร์แบบ TikTok" จะเป็นเทรนด์จริงไหม? และคุณอยากลองสร้างเกมด้วย AI เองไหม? คอมเมนต์บอกผมได้เลยครับ</strong></p> meta gaming technology tutorial WhaTools Fri, 21 Aug 2026 11:40:02 +0000 https://dev.to/whatools/six-years-of-whatsapp-api-pricing-some-rates-up-300-and-free-messages-set-to-end-ni7 https://dev.to/whatools/six-years-of-whatsapp-api-pricing-some-rates-up-300-and-free-messages-set-to-end-ni7 <p>Most companies that message customers on WhatsApp learn that a price went up the same way: the invoice is simply higher than last month. Meta seldom announces a rate change, and the figures are quoted in fractions of a cent, so an increase that doubles the cost of a message can go unnoticed until the volume is large. We maintain a <strong>dated, sourced ledger of every WhatsApp Business Platform price change since 2019</strong>. Read end to end, it shows a pattern that no single quarter does. This is what six years of that record says.</p> <p>One ground rule before the numbers: every figure here is <strong>Meta’s platform fee for one delivered template message, in US dollars</strong> , how the service has been billed since <a href="https://wha.tools/whatsapp-api-pricing-history" rel="noopener noreferrer">1 July 2025</a>, and each is backed by a source in our <a href="https://wha.tools/whatsapp-api-pricing-history" rel="noopener noreferrer">pricing change history</a>, which also marks whether a figure comes from Meta or from a third party. To price your own market and volume, use the <a href="https://wha.tools/whatsapp-api-pricing" rel="noopener noreferrer">WhatsApp API pricing calculator</a>.</p> <h2> The free tier that is about to end </h2> <p>In November 2024, Meta made <strong>service messages free and unlimited</strong>: the replies a business sends within 24 hours of a customer writing first. It was a real concession, replacing an older allowance of 1,000 free conversations a month, and many companies built their support around it.</p> <p>That is reported to reverse. Several WhatsApp Business Solution Providers state in their own changelogs that <strong>service messages will be billed again from 1 October 2026</strong>. One caveat, stated plainly: Meta has not published this on its own pricing page, so we record it as <strong>reported, not yet confirmed</strong> and keep it apart from official figures. If the providers are right, a message type that has been free for almost two years returns to the bill, and any company relying on those free replies should be revisiting its numbers now, not in October.</p> <h2> Rates that rose without an announcement </h2> <p>Comparing Meta’s rate cards quarter by quarter, we found individual per-message prices that did not edge up but jumped. None was announced publicly; each surfaced only by placing one card next to the next.</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>Market</th> <th>Category</th> <th>Was (USD)</th> <th>Now (USD)</th> <th>Change</th> <th>When</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Colombia</td> <td>Utility &amp; authentication</td> <td>0.0002</td> <td>0.0008</td> <td><strong>+300%</strong></td> <td>Oct 2025</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Hong Kong</td> <td>Utility &amp; authentication</td> <td>0.0113</td> <td>0.026</td> <td><strong>+130%</strong></td> <td>Jul 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Pakistan</td> <td>Utility &amp; authentication</td> <td>0.0054</td> <td>0.01</td> <td><strong>+85%</strong></td> <td>Apr 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Hungary</td> <td>Utility &amp; authentication</td> <td>0.0212</td> <td>0.035</td> <td><strong>+65%</strong></td> <td>Jul 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>United Arab Emirates</td> <td>Marketing</td> <td>0.0384</td> <td>0.0499</td> <td><strong>+30%</strong></td> <td>Oct 2025</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>The percentages are accurate, and so is the qualification a careful reader will want: the base rates are very small, so Colombia’s 300% rise is a move from <strong>0.02 to 0.08 of a US cent</strong> per message. That is negligible on a hundred messages and substantial on ten million. The scale at which authentication codes and utility alerts are actually sent. An increase that quietly doubles a rate is the kind that reshapes a messaging budget without anyone approving it.</p> <h2> The increases are only half the picture </h2> <p>Reporting only the rises would be misleading. Over the same period Meta also <strong>cut</strong> several headline rates, some of them steeply. That prices move in both directions is what makes the increases credible rather than selective.</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>Market</th> <th>Category</th> <th>Was (USD)</th> <th>Now (USD)</th> <th>Change</th> <th>When</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Turkey</td> <td>Utility &amp; authentication</td> <td>0.0053</td> <td>0.0009</td> <td><strong>−83%</strong></td> <td>Apr 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Poland</td> <td>Marketing</td> <td>0.086</td> <td>0.0366</td> <td><strong>−57%</strong></td> <td>Jul 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>France</td> <td>Marketing</td> <td>0.1432</td> <td>0.0859</td> <td><strong>−40%</strong></td> <td>Jan 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Egypt</td> <td>Marketing</td> <td>0.1073</td> <td>0.0644</td> <td><strong>−40%</strong></td> <td>Jan 2026</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Mexico</td> <td>Marketing</td> <td>0.0436</td> <td>0.0305</td> <td><strong>−30%</strong></td> <td>Oct 2025</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>The map is redrawn constantly. Any market can rise or fall on the first day of a quarter, and Meta gives as little as <strong>one month’s notice</strong> before a rate card changes. There is no single direction to WhatsApp pricing, only steady movement. And a reason to keep checking. The full before-and-after for the latest quarter is in <a href="https://wha.tools/blog/whatsapp-api-pricing-changes-q3-2026" rel="noopener noreferrer">what changed in Q3 2026</a>.</p> <h2> The larger issue: four pricing models in six years </h2> <p>Beneath the individual rates is the point that matters most to anyone planning a budget: <strong>Meta has changed how it charges four times since 2019.</strong> Each change altered not only the price but the unit being billed, so comparing one year with the next rarely compares the same thing.</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>From</th> <th>Model</th> <th>Billed unit</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Jun 2019</td> <td>Per templated message, volume-tiered</td> <td>Delivered template message</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Feb 2022</td> <td>Conversation-based, two categories</td> <td>24-hour conversation</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Jun 2023</td> <td>Conversation-based, four categories</td> <td>24-hour conversation</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Jul 2025</td> <td>Per message</td> <td>Delivered template message</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>The billed unit has gone from a message, to a 24-hour “conversation,” and back to a message, while the categories beneath it were recut from none, to two, to four. A team that costed WhatsApp in 2023 was pricing a different product from one doing it today, before any rate moved. You can follow a single rate across the per-message era on the <a href="https://wha.tools/whatsapp-api-pricing-trends" rel="noopener noreferrer">price-trends chart</a>, or read the full model-by-model history in the <a href="https://wha.tools/whatsapp-api-pricing-history" rel="noopener noreferrer">pricing change history</a>.</p> <h2> Why we track this </h2> <p>We build free WhatsApp tools, and pricing was the question we were asked most and could answer with the least confidence, because no one kept a sourced record of what changed and when. So we built one. Every figure in this article comes from that ledger: dated, and labelled by origin /from Meta, reported by a third party, or worked out by comparing two cards we hold. Where something is second-hand, such as the October 2026 service) message change, we say so rather than present it as settled.</p> <p>The underlying data is published under a Creative Commons licence for reporters and businesses to cite and reuse; the machine-readable version is at <a href="https://wha.tools/api/data" rel="noopener noreferrer">wha.tools/api/data</a>. The single takeaway: <strong>WhatsApp pricing is not a cost you set once.</strong> It is a moving figure that Meta adjusts each quarter, usually without comment, and the companies that stay ahead of it are the ones that check every quarter. We update this record as each new card is published.</p> <p>This article was first published on wha.tools — read the original and find our free WhatsApp tools here: <a href="https://wha.tools/blog/whatsapp-business-pricing-investigation-2026" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://wha.tools/blog/whatsapp-business-pricing-investigation-2026</a></p> whatsapp meta marketing Buzztickr Fri, 21 Aug 2026 09:01:09 +0000 https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-meta-platforms-reinvents-servers-with-memory-reuse-innovation-4686 https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-meta-platforms-reinvents-servers-with-memory-reuse-innovation-4686 <p>Meta Platforms (META) is implementing CXL technology to reuse DDR4 memory in DDR5 servers.<br> This innovation aims to reduce costs and electronic waste in data center operations.<br> The strategy could provide a competitive advantage and set new industry standards.</p> <p>👉 <strong><a href="https://www.buzztickr.com/article/10162/meta-meta-platforms-reinvents-servers-with-memory-reuse-innovation/" rel="noopener noreferrer">Read the full institutional analysis, options flow, and live charts on BuzzTickr.com »</a></strong></p> stocks investing finance meta 10x Magazine Fri, 21 Aug 2026 07:03:16 +0000 https://dev.to/10x/meta-unveils-muse-glimmer-30b-open-source-ai-model-for-on-device-agents-5dhp https://dev.to/10x/meta-unveils-muse-glimmer-30b-open-source-ai-model-for-on-device-agents-5dhp <p><em>Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@mariiaberezovsky?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Mariia Berezovsky</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/?utm_source=10x_magazine&amp;utm_medium=referral" rel="noopener noreferrer">Unsplash</a></em></p> <p>TL;DR: Meta’s new Muse Glimmer is a 30‑billion‑parameter, Apache‑2.0‑licensed model that runs autonomous agents locally on high‑end consumer devices, marking the company’s most permissive open‑source release to date.</p> <p>Meta has just dropped Muse Glimmer, a large‑scale language model designed to power self‑directing AI agents directly on a user’s laptop or desktop. With 30 billion parameters and a fully open‑weight checkpoint, the model is positioned as a bridge between cloud‑heavy generative services and the growing demand for privacy‑first, on‑device intelligence.</p> <h2> What is Muse Glimmer and why it matters </h2> <p>Muse Glimmer follows Meta’s recent trend of publishing open‑weight models, but it stands out for two reasons. First, its size—30 billion parameters—places it in the same performance tier as many commercial offerings while remaining small enough to fit into the memory of modern high‑end Macs, Windows PCs, and Linux workstations. Second, the model is released under the Apache 2.0 license, a permissive open‑source framework that allows anyone to use, modify, and redistribute the code without the restrictive clauses that plagued earlier releases.</p> <p>The architecture builds on Meta’s previous research in transformer efficiency, employing sparsity‑aware attention and quantization tricks that shave memory footprints without sacrificing the nuanced reasoning needed for autonomous agents. In practice, developers can download the weights, plug the model into existing agent frameworks such as Auto‑GPT or LangChain, and run inference locally without a persistent internet connection.</p> <h2> Running agents on the desktop: technical advantages </h2> <p>Running an AI agent on a personal computer changes the cost and privacy calculus dramatically. Cloud‑based agents typically charge per token or per compute second, and they require users to stream data to remote servers. By contrast, Muse Glimmer lets developers host the entire inference pipeline on the user’s hardware, eliminating recurring fees and reducing latency to near‑real‑time.</p> <p>For power users, the model’s compatibility with consumer GPUs—especially Apple’s M‑series chips and Nvidia’s RTX line—means that complex tasks such as multi‑step planning, tool use, or dynamic content generation can be performed without a data‑center. This opens the door for niche applications like offline research assistants, private code‑review bots, or personalized gaming NPCs that never leave the user’s device.</p> <p>Performance benchmarks released alongside the model show that a 2023 MacBook Pro with an M2 Max can generate a 200‑token response in under 1.2 seconds, while a mid‑range RTX 3060 GPU on a Windows PC delivers similar latency with a modest power draw. These numbers suggest that Muse Glimmer is ready for real‑world deployment, not just academic experimentation.</p> <h2> Open‑source licensing: From Llama’s community rules to Apache 2.0 </h2> <p>Meta’s earlier Llama series carried a custom “community” license that imposed usage caps, prohibited certain commercial scenarios, and required attribution in a way many developers found cumbersome. The backlash was loud enough that several startups opted for alternative models rather than navigate the legal gray area.</p> <p>Muse Glimmer’s Apache 2.0 license removes those hurdles. It grants unrestricted commercial use, allows integration into proprietary products, and offers a clear patent‑grant clause. For enterprises, this reduces legal risk and accelerates time‑to‑market. For the open‑source ecosystem, it restores confidence that Meta is willing to contribute truly reusable AI building blocks.</p> <p>The shift also signals Meta’s broader strategy: after the proprietary Muse Spark release in April, the company appears to be hedging its bets by offering a permissively licensed alternative that can attract community contributions, third‑party tooling, and academic scrutiny.</p> <p><strong>Takeaway:</strong> Muse Glimmer is more than a new checkpoint; it is Meta’s statement that powerful, autonomous AI can live on a user’s own hardware under an open license. The move could catalyze a wave of privacy‑centric, low‑cost agents and reshape how developers think about the cloud‑AI trade‑off.</p> meta opensourceai museglimmer ai XOOMAR Thu, 20 Aug 2026 20:09:11 +0000 https://dev.to/xoomar/mark-zuckerberg-buys-35-million-irish-castle-near-metas-headquarters-531j https://dev.to/xoomar/mark-zuckerberg-buys-35-million-irish-castle-near-metas-headquarters-531j <p>Meta CEO <strong>Mark Zuckerberg</strong> has purchased a 19th-century castle and its 440-acre grounds in Ireland <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/20/mark-buys-a-castle/" rel="noopener noreferrer">according to TechCrunch</a>. The estate, <strong>Strancally Castle</strong>, is a two-hour drive from Meta's international headquarters in Dublin.</p> <p>The <strong>Gothic-style mansion</strong> sits on the River Blackwater in County Waterford. It features at least 11 bedrooms, four tower suites, a library, and sprawling grounds. Zuckerberg bought the property from financier <strong>Michael Alen-Buckley</strong>, who had owned and renovated it for 25 years.</p> <p>A spokesperson said, "Mark and his family are excited to continue caring for this historic home and look forward to spending time in Ireland, where Meta maintains its international headquarters."</p> <p>While the exact price of the off-market deal is not public, estimates place it between <strong>$23 million and $35 million</strong>. It is the second major real estate move for Zuckerberg this year, following a reported $170 million home purchase in Miami.</p> <h2> More Than a Vacation Home: A Strategic Commitment to Ireland </h2> <p>The purchase is not merely a billionaire's whim. It is a tangible, long-term commitment to a critical operational hub.</p> <p><strong>Meta's international headquarters is in Dublin</strong>, a base chosen by many U.S. tech giants for Ireland's corporate tax structure. The company employs roughly 1,500 people there and operates a significant data center nearby. Buying a <strong>permanent, high-profile residence</strong> signals a deeper stake than leasing office space.</p> <blockquote> <p>“We are delighted that Mark and his family intend to build on our stewardship by continuing to invest in maintaining and enhancing the property and grounds as their home in a sustainable manner,” the previous owners, the Alen-Buckley family, stated.</p> </blockquote> <p><strong>XOOMAR Analysis:</strong> This move comes as Meta navigates increasingly complex regulatory engagements within the European Union, from data privacy to content moderation. Having the CEO establish a physical, personal foothold in the region could be read as a gesture of seriousness toward EU authorities. It suggests Zuckerberg plans to be a recurring presence, not a remote figure.</p> <p>The location choice is also telling. At <strong>two hours from Dublin</strong>, it is close enough for regular visits but insulated enough for privacy. It is a command center, not a commute.</p> <h2> The Billionaire Next Door: Local Impact and Scrutiny </h2> <p>What does it mean for Ireland, and County Waterford specifically, when a figure like Zuckerberg moves in, even part-time?</p> <p><strong>Immediate Market Effect</strong><br> The sale immediately enters the annals of major Irish property deals. It follows other high-profile acquisitions by tech moguls in the Irish countryside. <strong>James Dyson</strong> bought the nearby Ballynatray House in 2024, and Stripe co-founder <strong>John Collison</strong> purchased the Abbey Leix estate in 2021.</p> <p>This trend cements Ireland's dual status: a <strong>corporate tax haven</strong> and a <strong>luxury estate market</strong> for the global ultra-wealthy. Local real estate agents will watch closely to see if this sparks a "Zuckerberg effect," pulling more tech capital into regional property.</p> <p><strong>Community and Scrutiny</strong><br> The spokesperson's emphasis on "continuing to care for this historic home" anticipates public sentiment. Large, foreign-owned estates can become flashpoints for debates on wealth disparity, housing, and cultural heritage. The positive reaction from the former owners, who praised the plan for sustainable stewardship, provides Zuckerberg with a strong local endorsement to offset potential criticism.</p> <p>Yet, the purchase will inevitably be juxtaposed with Meta's own controversies in the region. As the company faces ongoing regulatory battles and lawsuits, such as the <strong>$1.4 trillion lawsuit over addiction allegations</strong> detailed in our previous coverage, the castle could become a symbolic backdrop. Critics may frame it not as a home, but as a fortress.</p> <h2> A Blueprint for Tech Titan Geography </h2> <p>Zuckerberg's Irish castle is more than a headline. It is a case study in how tech executives are planting flags.</p> <p><strong>The pattern is clear:</strong> acquire a statement property in a <strong>key operational jurisdiction</strong>. Jeff Bezos and Zuckerberg buying in Miami aligns with Florida's growing tech scene and tax policies. Buying in Ireland aligns with Meta's EU base. These are strategic assets, not just homes.</p> <p>The question is whether this marks a peak or a precedent. Will other CEOs of firms with major Dublin operations follow suit, seeking their own Irish country estates? Or does the increased scrutiny on Big Tech wealth make such conspicuous purchases less attractive?</p> <p>For Zuckerberg, the calculation seems straightforward. The castle offers a retreat, a symbol of commitment, and a base of operations all in one. It is a physical manifestation of Meta's entrenched position in Europe. The real test will be whether his time there is spent overseeing a company in retreat or one further digging in its heels.</p> <p>For more on how tech leaders are deploying capital beyond their core businesses, see our report on <strong><a href="https://dev.to/technology/spacex-cursor-acquisition-assets-ai">Elon Musk Buys Code Editor In $60 Billion AI Bid</a></strong>.</p> <h2> Impact Analysis </h2> <ul> <li>It demonstrates Meta's long-term strategic commitment to Ireland, a critical hub for its international operations and tax structure.</li> <li>The purchase signals Zuckerberg's personal involvement in navigating Meta's complex regulatory engagements within the European Union.</li> <li>It highlights the significant financial footprint and high-profile real estate moves of tech leaders, reflecting industry influence.</li> </ul> <p><em>Originally published on <a href="https://xoomar.com/technology/mark-zuckerberg-buys-irish-castle-meta-hq" rel="noopener noreferrer">XOOMAR</a>. For more news and analysis, visit <a href="https://xoomar.com" rel="noopener noreferrer">XOOMAR</a>.</em></p> markzuckerberg meta realestate ireland Buzztickr Thu, 20 Aug 2026 06:01:57 +0000 https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-metas-drawdown-presents-strong-buy-opportunity-5ach https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-metas-drawdown-presents-strong-buy-opportunity-5ach <p>Meta Platforms (META) has been rated a 'Strong Buy' by Buzztickr analysts.<br> The company reported a significant revenue increase of 27.9% to $60.8 billion in the second quarter.<br> Meta's investments in the metaverse and AI are considered key strategic growth initiatives.</p> <p>👉 <strong><a href="https://www.buzztickr.com/article/9865/meta-metas-drawdown-presents-strong-buy-opportunity/" rel="noopener noreferrer">Read the full institutional analysis, options flow, and live charts on BuzzTickr.com »</a></strong></p> stocks investing finance meta Felipe L Wed, 19 Aug 2026 13:33:49 +0000 https://dev.to/felipejac/meta-ordered-to-pay-567m-for-harm-to-childrens-mental-health-2de9 https://dev.to/felipejac/meta-ordered-to-pay-567m-for-harm-to-childrens-mental-health-2de9 <h2> What Happened </h2> <p>A New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $567 million for harming children’s mental health. The judgment was based on claims that Meta’s algorithms promoted content that negatively affected young users, violating state law and exposing the company to significant liability.</p> <p>This is the first major civil penalty against a social media giant in the United States for content‑related mental‑health harms. The ruling shows platforms can be held accountable for the psychological impact of their recommendation engines and data‑driven features.</p> <h2> Why This Matters for Builders </h2> <ul> <li> <strong>Legal exposure for data‑driven systems</strong>: If your AI‑agent workflow processes user data or recommends content, you could face scrutiny under similar statutes. Implement rigorous data‑handling policies and audit trails to reduce liability.</li> <li> <strong>Ethical design becomes mandatory</strong>: Ignoring the well‑being of users, especially minors, can lead to costly lawsuits. Embed ethical checks—content filtering, age verification, and mental‑health impact assessments—into your workflow pipelines.</li> <li> <strong>Transparent accountability</strong>: Meta failed to explain its algorithmic decisions, leading to the ruling. Build explainability layers into your automations so stakeholders can understand how decisions are made and why.</li> <li> <strong>Risk mitigation costs</strong>: The $567 million penalty signals that regulators will impose large fines. Allocate budget for compliance testing, third‑party audits, and legal counsel when deploying AI‑driven automations.</li> <li> <strong>Reputation and trust</strong>: Public backlash against Meta’s practices erodes trust in AI solutions. Demonstrate proactive safeguards and regular reporting to maintain user confidence.</li> </ul> <h2> FAQ </h2> <p><strong>Q: Should I stop using AI recommendations in my workflow?</strong><br><br> A: Not necessarily. Audit the recommendation logic for bias, ensure content is age‑appropriate, and provide opt‑out mechanisms for vulnerable users.</p> <p><strong>Q: How can I demonstrate compliance to regulators?</strong><br><br> A: Keep detailed logs of data provenance, model training data, and decision‑making processes. Conduct periodic impact assessments and publish findings.</p> <p><strong>Q: Does this affect only large companies like Meta?</strong><br><br> A: The ruling sets a precedent that any entity using data‑driven content delivery can be held liable. Small teams must also consider the same legal and ethical standards.</p> <p><em>Originally published on <a href="https://automationscookbook.com/blog/meta-ordered-to-pay-567m-for-harm-to-childrens-mental-health-20260807" rel="noopener noreferrer">Automations Cookbook</a>.</em></p> meta aiethics legalcompliance automation Buzztickr Wed, 19 Aug 2026 12:01:56 +0000 https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-metas-ai-investments-already-driving-significant-revenue-growth-41p8 https://dev.to/buzztickr/meta-metas-ai-investments-already-driving-significant-revenue-growth-41p8 <p>Meta Platforms (META) reported a 28% year-over-year revenue increase in Q2, reaching $60.8 billion.<br> AI integration is already boosting Meta's advertising business, leading to a 14% rise in ad impressions and a 12% increase in ad pricing.<br> The company's strategy focuses on embedding AI into its core operations rather than a separate spin-off for monetization.</p> <p>👉 <strong><a href="https://www.buzztickr.com/article/9667/meta-metas-ai-investments-already-driving-significant-revenue-growth/" rel="noopener noreferrer">Read the full institutional analysis, options flow, and live charts on BuzzTickr.com »</a></strong></p> stocks investing finance meta botsense seo Wed, 19 Aug 2026 07:22:22 +0000 https://dev.to/botsense_seo/the-72-hour-free-window-on-click-to-whatsapp-ads-has-a-condition-nobody-mentions-34ee https://dev.to/botsense_seo/the-72-hour-free-window-on-click-to-whatsapp-ads-has-a-condition-nobody-mentions-34ee <h2> The two windows, and why people confuse them </h2> <p>There are two separate timers in WhatsApp Business, and treating them as one is the root of most CTWA budgeting mistakes.</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th></th> <th>Customer service window</th> <th>Free entry point window</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>What opens it</strong></td> <td>Any customer message, by any route</td> <td>A CTWA ad or Facebook Page CTA click, Android/iOS only</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>How long</strong></td> <td>24 hours from the customer's message</td> <td>72 hours from your reply</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>What you can send</strong></td> <td>Any free-form message</td> <td>Any message, including marketing templates</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>What it costs</strong></td> <td>Free-form replies are free</td> <td>Everything is free while open</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Opens automatically</strong></td> <td>Yes</td> <td>No: only if you reply within 24 hours</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>According to Meta's documentation: "If you respond within 24 hours using any type of message, the message will be free, and a Free Entry Point window will be opened, starting from the time when you responded."</p> <p>A free entry point conversation requires two conditions: (1) the customer messages from a CTWA ad or Facebook Page CTA button on Android or iOS — desktop and web are not supported; (2) you respond within 24 hours. The 72 hours starts from the moment you reply, not from when the customer messaged.</p> <h2> What this means for how you run the campaign </h2> <ul> <li>Match your ad delivery hours to when someone can actually reply</li> <li>Set an automated first response to secure the window</li> <li>Treat your reply capacity as a hard limit on ad spend</li> <li>Plan the follow-up sequence across three days, not one</li> </ul> <h2> Why the ad gets rejected before it ever runs </h2> <p>WhatsApp-side rejections are the surprising ones. The ad account is fine, the creative is fine, and the campaign still cannot launch because something is wrong with the WhatsApp Business Account behind it.</p> <h3> The display name problem </h3> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>Rejection ground</th> <th>What Meta rejects</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Identity mismatch</strong></td> <td>Name does not correspond to verified business identity</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Promotional words</strong></td> <td>Official, Best, No.1, Cheap, Free</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Meta product names</strong></td> <td>WhatsApp, Facebook, Messenger</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Generic names</strong></td> <td>Customer Service, Support Team, Info Desk</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>Formatting</strong></td> <td>Emojis, excessive punctuation, slogans</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>Identity mismatch is the single most common cause. The fix is completing business verification first, linking the website, and making sure the Facebook Page name and the requested display name tell the same story.</p> <h2> What Click-to-WhatsApp Ads cannot do </h2> <p><strong>It cannot push, only pull.</strong> CTWA starts conversations when someone chooses to click. You cannot use it to reach people who have not engaged.</p> <p><strong>A click is not a conversation.</strong> The ad opens WhatsApp with a pre-filled message the user can edit or delete. Plenty of people open it and never press send. You pay for the click either way, and no window opens.</p> <p><strong>Desktop and web do not count.</strong> The free entry point requires Android or iOS.</p> <p><strong>Attribution is harder than a landing page.</strong> Without a platform connecting ad click to conversation to outcome, you lose the thread between spend and revenue.</p> <h2> The short version </h2> <p>Click-to-WhatsApp Ads work well when three things are true: you have a genuine reason for someone to start a conversation, you can reply inside 24 hours, and you treat the following 72 hours as the actual campaign.</p> <p>Most of the value people describe as "the 72-hour free window" is really the reward for answering quickly.</p> whatsapp marketing india meta botsense seo Wed, 19 Aug 2026 07:18:56 +0000 https://dev.to/botsense_seo/the-whatsapp-green-tick-is-now-blue-what-metas-api-actually-asks-for-ekd https://dev.to/botsense_seo/the-whatsapp-green-tick-is-now-blue-what-metas-api-actually-asks-for-ekd <h2> Is the WhatsApp green tick actually green? </h2> <p>The terminology everyone searches for is "green tick," but Meta's current documentation uses different language. An Official Business Account (OBA) is described as having "a blue checkmark beside their name in the contacts view."</p> <p>The color changed between July 2024 and February 2025, when archived snapshots show the transition from "green checkmark badge" to "blue checkmark badge." However, Meta's approval notification system hasn't caught up — it still tells newly approved businesses they received a <strong>green</strong> badge, creating confusion when users see a blue checkmark instead.</p> <p><strong>The practical answer:</strong> The badge is currently blue, though Meta and the broader community frequently still refer to it as green.</p> <h2> What the Official Business Account page tells you </h2> <p>Meta's official OBA eligibility page lists five criteria, all procedural in nature:</p> <div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"><table> <thead> <tr> <th>Criterion</th> <th>What it means</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Policy compliance</td> <td>Complies with WhatsApp Business Messaging Policy</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Thirty days</td> <td>Registered on WhatsApp Business Platform for at least 30 days</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Business verification</td> <td>Business portfolio verified through Business Verification</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Two-step verification</td> <td>Enabled on the phone number</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Display name</td> <td>Approved</td> </tr> </tbody> </table></div> <p>Notably absent from this documentation is any mention of notability, fame, or press coverage. A business reviewing this page would reasonably assume that meeting these five procedural conditions is sufficient.</p> <h2> What Meta's API actually asks for </h2> <p>The requirement exists but lives in documentation most businesses never consult. Meta's OBA Status API reference includes a field called <code>supporting_links</code> — described as <strong>"Supporting links that demonstrate business notability (minimum 5, maximum 10)."</strong></p> <p>Meta's Business Help Center further clarifies notability as "a well-known business that has a substantial presence in news articles from publications with sizable audiences."</p> <p>This represents a significant gap: the requirement for five to ten editorial links demonstrating business notability appears in the API schema and help documentation but <strong>not on the main eligibility criteria page</strong>. Most guides to obtaining the badge quote Facebook's verification standards instead, which ask for coverage in "multiple news sources" without specifying a minimum number.</p> <h2> Why the WhatsApp green tick usually goes through a provider </h2> <p>Meta documents a self-serve application path through WhatsApp Manager, but for most accounts, the Submit Request button doesn't appear. When this occurs, Meta directs businesses to "reach out to your Meta point-of-contact, Solution Provider support, or Meta Support."</p> <p>This explains why most applications go through providers — not because Meta forbids self-serve submission, but because the option isn't exposed to most accounts.</p> <h2> What to have ready before applying </h2> <ul> <li>At least five links to editorial coverage in publications with genuine audiences (not paid placements)</li> <li>Business portfolio verified through Business Verification</li> <li>Two-step verification enabled on the number</li> <li>Display name approved and directly associated with the business</li> <li>Thirty days elapsed since registration on the platform</li> </ul> <p>If rejected, businesses must wait 30 days before resubmitting. Meta states that denials currently cannot be appealed, though display name rejections follow a separate process with their own appeal route.</p> <h2> The key principle </h2> <p>The badge follows genuine editorial coverage. If a business lacks five pieces of authentic news coverage, waiting is preferable to submitting an application that will fail and trigger another 30-day waiting period before resubmission.</p> whatsapp meta api webdev