Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chat App Kik Beats Facebook To Launching a Bot Store (thenextweb.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the beat-to-the-punch dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Next Web: "Messengers are the new browsers and bots are the new websites," Kik's Mike Roberts told The Next Web. The messaging app that's big with America's youth has launched a bot store and developer platform to support it. The Kik Bot Shop offers mini-apps that you can add to your account and either chat to directly or use in your chats with others. For example, at launch, there's a bot that inserts relevant Vine videos into your chats at your request, similar to Giphy's insanely popular Slack integration, and if you do prefer GIFs, Riffsy (which also powers Twitter's GIFs) has a bot for Kik. A Weather Channel bot can tell you the forecast on demand or send you a regular update, and if you're looking for beauty tips, Sephora's bot has you covered. There are 18 bots in the store at launch, but Kik is keen for developers to build more.

69 comments

  1. Kik, bringer of chaos by zdzichu · · Score: 3

    Don't forget, Kik is the company that indirectly started last shitstorm in JavaScript hipsternet: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    --
    :wq
    1. Re: Kik, bringer of chaos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Kik has gotten me laid. I don't care what they do as long as it keeps getting me naive teenage ass.

    2. Re: Kik, bringer of chaos by cyborg_monkey · · Score: -1

      how do you sneak them into the nursing home?

    3. Re: Kik, bringer of chaos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now they market chlorophorm under the Kik brand?

    4. Re: Kik, bringer of chaos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bot store? Last year they were called plugins.

  2. But Americas youth has no money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why waste time and money advertising to the teen market?

    1. Re: But Americas youth has no money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because kids are an easily impressionable market that will one, beg their parents for money to buy the latest fashionable thing (without even realizing how foolish of a purchase it is) and two, will grow up to become consumers of their own, guided somewhat by memories of their childhood and brand loyalty (there's a risk to trying a new brand when your current one just works).

      So that's why marketing to kids is popular, and that's why it should be illegal or at least highly regulated. If kids can't consent to sex or sign valid contracts etc., it should also be illegal to manipulate them via advertising.

    2. Re:But Americas youth has no money by tom229 · · Score: 1

      Kids have lots of money. Many work and even more have parents eager to but their affection. Kids also have very few other life obligations so they are the most eager to waste it on frivolous things. I'm not a marketing person, but I would bet on teenage kids being the most profitable demographic, by a lot. No other demographic is going to work scooping ice cream for a month just to blow every penny on a pair of designer jeans to impress their friends.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    3. Re:But Americas youth has no money by N1AK · · Score: 1

      It depends on the kind of product your selling. "Kids" might make the odd expensive vanity purchase, but even if I hadn't been quite so tight in my younger days there's no way I could match the amount I spend now overall; our current sofas probably cost more than we spent on household furniture in the first 8 years of living in our own place. As a kid I'd jump through considerable hoops to get stuff free, now I'd happily pay to avoid that hassle.

    4. Re:But Americas youth has no money by tom229 · · Score: 1

      The mark up on sofas is small and so is the purchase cycle. To use my example of designer jeans you're literally looking at markups in the thousands of percent, and they're only "cool" for a season. One of the most interesting things I learned when working in a warehouse for a hardware chain was that their bread and butter was screws, nails, bolts, etc. Why? Because they bought them by the pound for a few cents and sold them individually for more than the pound cost. The markup was insane. So all the lumber, tools, compressors, and tractors they sold we're just ancillary purchases for people who were also, probably, interested in buying nails and screws.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  3. The Trend Begins Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I said that chat bots where the next big thing when i had them loaded into my ICQ 98.

  4. Hold on by Barny · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wait a second, I am having trouble following. So there are bots that can be used to trigger messages and insert information, in chat... what is this, IRC?

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
    1. Re:Hold on by Thanshin · · Score: 4, Funny

      The short answer is: Yes.

      The long answer is: [bot insert]

    2. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      under 30s don't know what irc is (hell, most over 30 don't either). but yea, society has gotten so fucking lazy that people don't even want to chat or talk anymore, but have a computer do it for them.

    3. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make that under 20s. I'm under 30 and been using IRC since I was 8.

    4. Re: Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hurr durr special snowflake

    5. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IRC was doomed to failure because it was not controlled by a marketing company.

      Anyone could run an IRC server. Anyone could use any client they wanted. Anyone could write a new client or server if they wanted.

      Not sufficiently monitized, and too much control in the hands of users. Thus, people moved to services that give them less control and monitize them more.

    6. Re:Hold on by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1


      Sorry to tell you this but you can make bots for practically anything with API access.

      Plenty of chat programs have bots. Telegram had them for a while now of course not as long as IRC...

      IRC is just the ruined wasteland that was left behind before the so called "progress" that is social networking. ("Social" like Facebook or what I like to call mass emailing alerts with pictures for dummies as a service. It forms a catchy acronym; MEAPDaaS)

      --
      A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    7. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm under 30 and been using IRC since I was 8.

      Its eaten, not 8.

    8. Re: Hold on by Trinn · · Score: 1

      I still run an irc server you insensitive clod :-P

    9. Re: Hold on by cyborg_monkey · · Score: -1

      w00t!

    10. Re:Hold on by tom229 · · Score: 2

      When did IRC fail? I literally use it every day. It's still one of the best tools available for group chatting. And, as you mentioned, it's not centrally monetized or controlled so it will likely continue to exist way past kik or whatsapp fizzling out to whatever the next trendy chat software is.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    11. Re:Hold on by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      It's not like half the accounts that follow me on twitter aren't Russian Hooker Bots

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    12. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might use it, and I do too.... but try to meet someone new (random, non-techie person) and ask them to IM you on IRC. You'll get a blank look from 99.99% of the population... If you try to point them to an IRC client to install? Most of them can't do it. (I've tried!) Most of the population is (with exceptions, obviously) now too technically illiterate to install that and point it to a server you give them.

      So sure, there are still a few old-timers around on IRC networks, but generally - and sadly - it's dead among the general population. It's like usenet: technically it still exists, but in practice it's now just the domain of spammers and some people exchanging warez. As a means for people to communicate socially, having big group discussions like it used to be? Not so much - that's all on web forums now.

      Not saying you don't talk to people on IRC or anything, just that the VAST majority of the population has moved to things like Kik or whatever has never even heard of IRC.

    13. Re: Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God you are a retard. It's the exact opposite. There's hardly some predominant age group on IRC. It's equally irrelevant amongst all ages except for the hipsters that adopted the internet too much too early.

    14. Re:Hold on by trawg · · Score: 2

      Wait until you hear about Slack.

    15. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best. comment. ever!

    16. Re:Hold on by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      The bubble investors of silicon valley need a new hype to put their money into, so that they can sell more overvalued stocks of companies that did nothing more than register an "on the internet" (or "on the smartphone") patent and re-invent the wheel, but with added monetisation.

      In their eyes, IRC has failed.

      You see the death of IRC even on one of its strongholds: FLOSS projects. Many of the newer ones are moving to gitter.

    17. Re:Hold on by tom229 · · Score: 1

      I don't recall a time where the general population ever knew what irc was. Furthermore, it's just a standard protocol, it's not hard to use. Find a server, give yourself a nickname and a channel and you're in. I would be thoroughly impressed if someone couldn't figure out how to use webchat.freenode.net. Your friends are just having problems with the design of the programs they are using to access the servers.

      A better question might be why nobody has tried to monetize the irc protocol. I don't know that they haven't, or what license it uses so I can hardly comment. But generally if you're trying to make "the next big thing" you're trying to do so exclusively. No business type I've ever met regularly practices enough foresight and critical thought to see the benefits to themselves, and everyone else, of using pre-existing standards. Business operates on short term profits, and the best way to make short term profits (so they think) is to make something that's fresh, cool, and exclusive.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    18. Re:Hold on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30 is a bit too high.

      I'm 30 and Facebook didn't exist/was .edu domain only until I was in college. People nerdy enough to have "Internet friends" in middle school or high school my age had to do it via IRC, AIM, Yahoo et. al. Not to mention the plethora of privately run chat rooms that used a custom Java Applet.

      It's probably uncommon for anyone under 20 to know about IRC, but anyone in the 20-30 range would have been on the edge of the transition and could go either way.

  5. Bots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't these just plugins?

  6. Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Even though bots are idiots, stupid bots can still pass the Turing test, as long as the user is incredibly stupid.

    Now personally I don't talk to anything that isn't at least as intelligent as I am.

    1. Re:Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello, self!

    2. Re:Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Even though bots are idiots, stupid bots can still pass the Turing test, as long as the user is incredibly stupid.

      Now personally I don't talk to anything that isn't at least as intelligent as I am.

      So be careful never to talk to a nigger.

    3. Re:Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      All of them are smarter than you bud. Literally all/any of them. Enjoy.

    4. Re: Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Statistically unlikely, but stay offended darkie.

    5. Re:Bots are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is basically admitting that you're the dumbest on /. .

  7. Am I the only one by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    ... wondering what the heck a Kik is?

    1. Re:Am I the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, because the rest read the title

      Chat App Kik

    2. Re:Am I the only one by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      okay, smartypants but I've never heard of it. Maybe I need to get out more but my circle of old farts (with not an American teen in sight) is content with skype, facebook messenger, google hangouts or whatsapp, or an xmpp server on the lan.

  8. Rebranding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, they've rebranded apps as bots...and tried to tell us its something new...

    Fuck off.

  9. and this is new? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

    So the bot that inserts chat messages like "I am a horny teen, wanna watch me on my cam", those are available on their store too, right?

  10. Bots Bots Bots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't use LUDDITE apps. Apps say moo.

    Botters know it's all about BOTS.

  11. wat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they invented IRC again... turbulent times...

    1. Re:wat by dysmal · · Score: 1

      It's like IRC meets AOL!

  12. Greatest app ever by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    One that lets Kik be connected to from a standards compliant chat application? The whole here is our closed ecosystem is so 80's.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  13. Welcome to 1998 by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    We were writing AOL/MSN bots back in 98. No one used them.

    1. Re:Welcome to 1998 by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1


      Have you also noticed that no one uses AOL/MSN anymore?

      I think it was down to marketing and user treatment...AOL abused and MSN failed to market the "value".

      Now the question is this, why would anyone use Kik over WhatsApp or Telegram in order for these bots to be worth a damn...assuming the implementation of the bots will not degrade perceived user value or abuse them.

      --
      A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    2. Re:Welcome to 1998 by rmdingler · · Score: 1
      The current internet is vastly different from 1998. 1998 was still more nerd world than 2016's vapid commentary of the aimless.

      Write a bot now that acts like the user's sycophant and your retirement is secure.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    3. Re:Welcome to 1998 by dysmal · · Score: 2

      Microsoft did that recently but didn't have the outcome you expected

    4. Re:Welcome to 1998 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSN servers have been shutdown 2 years ago.

    5. Re:Welcome to 1998 by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Actually AOL/MSN messengers have more users now then they did in 1998, simply because there are a lot more people on the Internet. No one is going to use a chat bot. We already have things like Siri, etc that hardly anyone uses regularly.

    6. Re:Welcome to 1998 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 1998 internet was no longer in any practical sense a "nerd world". That "nerd centric" internet ended circa early 1990s - classically given as 1993, when the mass influx of non-technical AOL people happened. By 1998, it was entirely over: the '98 internet had been dumbed down, controlled, and made safe for the masses.

      No... the classic internet died in the early 1990's.

  14. Next up by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    The next generation will revive telnet, then demand encryption

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:Next up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm looking forward to FTP and Archie.

    2. Re:Next up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gopher for the win

    3. Re:Next up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      telnet over SSL already exists so they can have it.

  15. On the plus side... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    "Messengers are the new browsers and bots are the new websites." Truly a chilling sentiment. On the plus side, until he and his ilk gain enough leverage that dealing with them is no longer optional, at least he is only building his own technological dystopia, not ours.

  16. When did I get old? by mlw4428 · · Score: 1

    I didn't use to be this way, but now I struggle with some of today's new technology. Why do I want to send stuff through bots as opposed to "uploading" through an application?

    1. Re:When did I get old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take heart: it wasn't you who got stupid, it was the technology that got stupid, while you remained sane.

    2. Re:When did I get old? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      That's how I felt reading it... so it pulls Vines or whatever into a chat feed, so it would be like automatically posting things to your Facebook wall. So this is to maintain visibility on whatever platform the teens use with minimal effort. I think, anyway.... I don't even use Twitter so I may have it wrong. At least with the latter it seems it is only used these days to give people the opportunity to say something that will get them publicly shamed.

    3. Re:When did I get old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I *am* big. It's the *pictures* that got small. - Norma Desmond

  17. This spring... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This spring, from the guys that broke the javascript ecosystem, a new discovery, bots for chat systems!

  18. It is perfectly retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to base the livelihood of anything on the mercurial whims of teens or preteens. Then again, they don't care - once they've milked them for all they are worth and filed their ipo who gives a shit? We'll just retool it for the next generation of suckers. Really: when they say 'internet', what they really mean is 'marketing', and 'profit'. Are millennials not tired of being exploited snd reduced to the lowest common denominator? Do you think any company would give you the time of day if they didn't think they could use you you to line their pockets (not your pockets)? Somewhere, a single tear falls from Tim Berner Lee's eye.

  19. Bots vs Website by fuzzyf · · Score: 1

    If I get an errormessage or an empty search on a website it's ok. If I get dumb answers from a bot, I'm getting annoyed really fast.

    People have very different expectancy of intelligent communication when "talking" to someone (even a bot), than browsing a website.

    I tried the chatbot on ikea's website a few times, but only because I knew what I had to do to get a real live person on the line. It's so f..ing anoying to talk to that bot.

  20. Chat bots are the best thing since push technology by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    Oh wait...

  21. 2016: The Internet: by kheldan · · Score: 1

    Trolls trolling trolls
    'Bots chatting with other 'bots

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  22. SLASHDOT APPLYING CENSORSHIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    This has been the front page story, until lately:

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/04/06/1529210/nest-reminds-customers-that-ownership-isnt-what-it-used-to-be

    Is slashdot applying censorship? Who are really the new overlords? Has Alphabet paid SlashdotMedia to silence its criticism?

    The article's text:

    Alphabet-owned Nest recently announced that it will be turning off Revolv Hub next month. An anonymous reader shares an article on EFF, a privacy rights group:
    Nest Labs, a home automation company acquired by Google in 2014, will disable some of its customers' home automation control devices in May. This move is causing quite a stir among people who purchased the $300 Revolv Hub devices -- customers who reasonably expected that the promised "lifetime" of updates would enable the hardware they paid for to actually work, only to discover the manufacturer can turn their device into a useless brick when it so chooses. This is far from the first time that customers' software and electronics have been downgraded by manufacturers. Updates can disable features the customer paid for that have fallen out of favor with the vendor, as when Google disabled privacy settings on Android or Sony took away the ability to run GNU/Linux on a Playstation 3. Manufacturers can even render a device unusable until the customer "agrees" to new terms of use, as Nintendo did with the Wii U. Other software and devices, including some video games, are designed so they simply stop working when they can no longer dial home to a server run by the vendor.

    TFA: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/nest-reminds-customers-ownership-isnt-what-it-used-be

  23. SmarterChild? by danielsfca2 · · Score: 1

    Somehow I think this will become The Future the same way SmarterChild and its kin did.