@leoncowle good grief - even if they don't know *why* it's significant you'd expect someone writing about computery topics to at least have a feel that the number is special and ask a colleague if it's meaningful, even if just because it comes up so often.

@kimvanwyk @leoncowle Oh, I remember this. They "fixed" it after people complained, and somehow made it about ten^H^H^Height times worse: https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/whatsapp-group-chats-bigger-maximum-size-256-people-users-a6856491.html

@confluency @kimvanwyk Oh. My. Gawd!!! You're not kidding. Mwahahahahahaha!

@realn2s The *indices* may go from 0 to 255, but it's still 256 *integers* in total (in this case representing people).

@confluency
Yes, that's my point.
This would mean that the maximum group size is 255 (assuming you need to represent an empty group as well).
WhatsApp increasing the group size to 256 requires 9 bits (and then they could have gone for 511 😜)