41–50 of 165 posts
The real anti-Facebook is Sublevel. But I can forgive Wired for not knowing about it.
Just read their About page, can't see how it's significantly different to Facebook or Twitter. It's still a proprietary network with all the Balkanization and opportunities for abuse that implies, isn't it?
The problem with this statement is that there is a vast difference in number of users between Ello and Google+. The latter is far from "forgotten" or "near dead." Every time I hit G+, it's teeming with activity. I can't say that about Ello, which seems to be populated by mustachioed German font designers who love custom bicycles and the music of Kraftwerk.
Now, Google+ has had its issues. It might even be going away or abandonware. And it's a blip on the radar compared to Facebook. But that's different from comparing it to Ello! The "Google+ is dead" meme is just lazy tech reportage.
Facebook is flexible enough to provide this. You can post updates visible only to a group of people. Problem with Facebook is how people use it. Users tend to have > 500 friends on an average including ones to whom you have never spoken or never want to speak. This would make your timeline pretty irrelevant and uninteresting to you. Why would I care if a colleague in your first job (10 yr ago) went on a trip with his…
I didn't know that Facebook can send status updates via email to people who are not on Facebook.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not both? I would prefer to have my emails and feeds in one place, just no status updates.
What's stopping you? No reason a mail client can't do RSS as well, is there? (I'm pretty sure some do, or at least did.)
Pretty much every update since the beginning has steadily raised that overhead, and now it's no more efficient than email was at solving the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just read their About page, can't see how it's significantly different to Facebook or Twitter. It's still a proprietary network with all the Balkanization and opportunities for abuse that implies, isn't it?
[deleted]
Eventually I stopped checking it at all and forgot about it.
I think the people on it appreciate the qualities that you mention, but unfortunately those features don't add up to a burgeoning and intriguing social network.
Perhaps Facebook and Twitter are the last massive timeline-oriented social networks and there just isn't anything else innovative to do.
The real anti-Facebook is Sublevel. But I can forgive Wired for not knowing about it.
Facebook is flexible enough to provide this. You can post updates visible only to a group of people. Problem with Facebook is how people use it. Users tend to have > 500 friends on an average including ones to whom you have never spoken or never want to speak. This would make your timeline pretty irrelevant and uninteresting to you. Why would I care if a colleague in your first job (10 yr ago) went on a trip with his…
This is a great advert for TinyLetter, would love to know if they approached Wired to get this published and how that process went down.
That's got to be a "sponsored story". At the bottom of the page, there are links to more "Sponsored Stories - Powered by Outbrain". What is happening, and happened years ago, is that many people stopped using Facebook messaging and went back to email. It's easier to get messages via email on smartphones than to run Facebook's app.