41–50 of 99 posts
Zuck should have read Sun Tzu instead of Cato - "If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by." I'm not sure how much of the G+ failure can really be attributed to any particular activity of FB as a company.
You know, back when I riffed on the great poem "Ozymandias" in the context of Zuckerberg and Facebook[1] I thought maybe, just maybe I was over-reaching on the whole ego-drive thing with Zuckerberg, but after reading this, not so much. [1] https://medium.com/@6StringMerc/zuckermandias-d1fa241c4d56#....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point, nothing will. I still see people come up with arguments that myspace was in a similar situation,but FB is nothing like MySpace. Users have spent more than 10 years sharing things, sticking to them and there's no way to step them from it. But what other companies can do is to try create services which helps certain kinds of people. Like people typically use FB for news, friend's know how, photos, random…
The way to unseat an established network is to build a network no one controls, which makes it the obvious alternative for anyone dissatisfied with the monopolist. Decentralization yields powerful network effects, and we're all about to watch it unfold. If you want to be a part of it, dive into the decentralized application communities that are forming around Ethereum and IPFS.
All twelve of you?
I mean, I respect the effort, but people by and large aren't dissatisfied, while those who are dissatisfied aren't dissatisfied in such a way that makes them receptive to "nobody else is here, but you should be" services.
This is cargo-culting. Do you really think FB's success is due to frequent lockdowns? They are successful because they've got network effects, people are used to using their site/app and there is no incentive for people to switch - it's already free, you can't go lower than that.
You could give the users ownership of the multibillion dollar platform whose monetary value only exists because of its users.
Omg, link to Vanity Fair on HN...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Eh, they probably can't legally make you stay I mean, they absolutely cannot. We have a term for that; it's called 'kidnapping'.
Actually, its "false imprisonment". "Kidnapping" is different.
"That unfortunate first impression, plus the mischaracterization in the film The Social Network, was probably responsible for half of the ever present suspicion and paranoia surrounding Facebook’s motives. But occasionally Zuck would have a charismatic moment of lucid greatness, and it would be stunning." The lockdown thing is interesting, but you have to wade through this blathering, fawning, puff-piece nonsense. Th…