It was the ability to send text messages that sent cell phones ahead of landlines.

Then internet connectivity sent us soaring ahead into smartphones. Soon after, the concept of instant messaging (IM) was brought to phones and that increased our dependence on the likes of Whatsapp, Viber, Line and so many others.

Now, we are heavily addicted, if not completely dependent, to these services. On the one hand, it makes perfect sense that you can communicate with others over the internet. On the other hand, there is that thing we used to call 'privacy'.

Also read: Is online privacy dead in a post-Snowden world?

The thing with services like Google Talk, Yahoo Messenger, Skype, Facebook Messenger, etc. is that you are essentially trusting a company to forward your messages for you.

This is the same underlying principle as that of electrical telegraph systems in the 1800s — you give someone a message to deliver to someone else. In this arrangement, you are bound by the rules imposed by the facilitator. In the strictest of definitions, they can make your entire chat history public and you wouldn’t have any say in the matter.

The same is true of Google Talk, Skype, Viber, Tango, and well, just about any messenger service you can think of.

These services provide us with a solution that saves us money. If you spring for a data plan, you can communicate with almost everyone all the time without using your carrier for text and calls. This is why these services thrive. Even in days when MSN, Yahoo!, AOL and ICQ were the go-to messengers, phones with active internet connections could use these services.

See: Facebook $22bn WhatsApp deal yields $10m in sales

Their evolution is very logical, especially Viber, Whatsapp and Tango. These are dormant services that notify you of incoming communications like regular text messages.

However, Whatsapp was not a company that openly invaded your privacy. Since Whatsapp’s acquisition by Facebook, that situation has changed.

Be reminded that Facebook Messenger is actively tracking and freely accessing your private content, albums, messages, call history, camera, GPS information and contacts. This means that even your phone is no longer private and that is a genuine problem.

For such an organisation, something as tiny as a “read” receipt does not count for anything on their moral compass.

Take a look: China tightens grip on instant messaging services

But for us, these two minuscule blue ticks force people to come to grips with a very personal and not at all public lifestyle choice: They will either have to stop ignoring people or they will have to be okay with people knowing that they are being ignored.

The question then becomes: Should it be up to a piece of software to make such an important decision for us?

If history is any indicator, we have already been allowing tools to dictate our lives. There was a time when we could share images on social media and keep it limited to a handful of people. However, with every update, Facebook automatically relaxes policies for you, Instagram keeps your images public, Twitter forces you to read paid content, games force you to pay for upgrades despite having purchased a working game.

We are now living in a world where we either have to diligently monitor our progress or simply give in. The latter seems to be a more popular option these days.

Corporations breach these privacies so they learn more about you and sell your information as currency. This is nothing new, it has been in practice for decades now. This is how you find targeted ads in your feeds, this is how a free service makes billions.

There are two options available to the public: discontinue using these messaging services and risk being left out of many a discussion, or submit to the whims of these organisations and go with the flow. Keep in mind that there are still billions who do not use these services and are quite okay with their lives without them.

Know more: Smartphone market to double next year

Now, let us look at it from a human perspective.

The tech savvy — a minority compared to the global population — have grown accustomed to a certain way of life, one informed by a sense of entitlement, impatience and fading sense of personal boundaries. There are entire doctorates based on how people interact with each other on the internet.

People have concerns that because of these messaging/messenger services, they might strain relationships, or risk exposing their privacy. But we can’t really hide on the internet anymore. If you do not want to send "read" receipts, you also have to avoid going on social media, because that sends the exact sentiment. There are even those who use social media as a messaging service, putting entire conversations out for the world to read.

Corporations work only to push their bottom line. These technologies serve one solitary purpose; quoting Nokia, to connect people.

Whatever price they ask in lieu of payment is their prerogative.

Whether or not you choose to pay it is on you.