Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 141 posts

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#131

Post by GCA10 »

fastball wrote: post #113
GCA10 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's a senior editor at Super Evil Megacorp, the mobile-games site, according to his LinkedIn profile. To my astonishment, http://womenwhowanttosleepwithchrisholt.com/ is an unclaimed domain name. At least that's true as of 4:14 p.m. Pacific time.

Not true anymore...

This domain could be the current-day equivalent of the famous Red Paperclip of a decade ago. The opportunities for "value creation" are the stuff of movies. I'll watch with interest what happens to it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_red_paperclip

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#132

Post by Jerrysource »

i am very suspicious of my fiance of two years now that she's cheating on me, she has changed passwords to every account that she has, plus put a pin lock on her phone, i have been searching for ways to retrieve her text messages without installing any software on her phone or having access to it, so far i am not having any luck. we have a 19 year history together, plus a beautiful 18 year old daughter & this is eating me up inside. But i finally burst on this page from Google and found the God eye who changed my whole story for good! He help me hack her FB, her emails and her phone number and i got to see all his messages and apps from her phone. only for me to found out she's cheating and have a son out there without my consent but i thank the God eye for letting me know all this and am moving on fine with my life and my daughter. He's also involved in any sort of hacking issues. Hurray!! Get to him on (Godeyeviewhacker@hotmail.com)

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#133

Post by baby »

thesagan wrote: post #129
baby wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in a flight yesterday and thought about that. Our generation is crazy, but then I've always taken flying for granted, I've flew airplanes all my life. I can't imagine how it must have been for people before me to discover these huge things that could transport you km away.

I wonder if community was more central to life back then. With the world being so large I'd speculate/imagine that "place" and the people in that place were more unique. Maybe more intimate at times.

I see what you mean, communication must have been so hard back then.

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#134

Post by contravariant »

bencollier49 wrote: post #105
bluecmd wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite interesting that super-sonic flight was achieved 1946. I don't know if Orville was informed, but imagine that - from barely flying to supersonic in 40 years.

There is an often-quoted truthoid that says that any technology takes 50 years from inception to maturity.

Seems to work for big scientific theories as well, more or less. Although an alternative explanation is that after 50 or so most of the original group of people driving the development will be gone, and as a result you end up with several loosely connected but separate developments. Which isn't really a sign of maturity, but merely a lack of coherence.

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#135

Post by noway421 »

pjc50 wrote: post #114
saghm wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> less usable on mobile To be fair, there really wasn't any "mobile" to speak of back then, so the developers couldn't even try to make it look good on mobile.

There was WAP, which was kind of the ancestor of AMP. It wasn't terribly popular then either.

> WAP, which was kind of the ancestor of AMP

I feel like while they were inspired by some concepts from there, the biggest contributor to the idea (apart from the need of locking in people in one 'easily acessible' platform) was opera's OBML format/protocol which was really decent at the time and provided a lot of benefits AML is marketed for. Probably the only problem with it was the lack of any interactive javascript, and that where it failed to meet adoption. Oh, but well, it was really niche as well, that did nothing good too.

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#136

Post by seattle_spring »

72deluxe wrote: post #95
kowdermeister wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, no one in their right mind REALLY believed that Facebook needs all that server farms, right? :)

They did when they ran PHP. Now they compile their PHP to C++ so it'll run faster and with less CPU and cooling requirements. Also, writing PHP is easier than C++ so it's beneficial in that they get a wider pool of developers to use, and they can pay less. Genius really. So, now their server farms must be a cover-up, or they're using an old version of MySQL that kept a lot of its clustering data in RAM and are afraid…

So they can pay less? Do you have any idea how much FB pays?

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#137

Post by Khaine »

stillsut wrote: post #123
Khaine wrote: post #98

I remember being able to look up who was in your class. Facebook was so much more enjoyable when it was just university students, it was more fun, playful, and I guess innocent. Since facebook expanded outside of universities its become more generic, and corporate and lost its "joie de vivre"

Here's a trick that used to work in 2005: You could search for people with a favorite movie, then filter by dorm. You'd write on their wall, invariably the person who listed the movie would own it on DVD, you'd walk over and borrow it. It was such a tight-knit community you could go "I saw you on facebook, can I have your stuff? Don't worry I'm on facebook too and will give it back"

I also remember not wanting to join facebook because it used your real name. I was so use to using nicknames/handles/avatars etc that the thought of using your real name was uncomfortable to me.

I must have been one of the last people on campus to sign up

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#138

Post by samplatt »

coldtea wrote: post #112
tritosomal wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was cheesey. The focus of the conspiracy was the political assassination of a musician, except whenever movies try to fictionalize a wildly popular artist, it usually deflates the premise because you're forced into imagining why the artist is so popular. The music is contrived and laughably bad, so while you might really want to imagine the profound tragedy of losing the artist while being a fan of the music, your…

> The music is contrived and laughably bad That never stopped chart-topping artists...

Seriously.

I actually thought the 'rapper' had some decent-power beat poetry going on, and measured up favourably against real-world artists (talk about backhanded compliments...)

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#139

Post by 72deluxe »

seattle_spring wrote: post #136
72deluxe wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did when they ran PHP. Now they compile their PHP to C++ so it'll run faster and with less CPU and cooling requirements. Also, writing PHP is easier than C++ so it's beneficial in that they get a wider pool of developers to use, and they can pay less. Genius really. So, now their server farms must be a cover-up, or they're using an old version of MySQL that kept a lot of its clustering data in RAM and are afraid…

So they can pay less? Do you have any idea how much FB pays?

No but I know that PHP developers get paid less than C++, typically. That's particularly the case here in the UK.

I would wager than employing an army of C++ devs would be costlier than employing an army of PHP devs.

Re: TheFacebook.com’s darker side (2004)

#140

Post by andrewksl »

nommm-nommm wrote: post #64
andrewksl wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The original Facebook didn't have a status to update; that didn't come until around late 2007 or early 2008 It wasn't that late. At early as 2005, there was a form with the prompt "John Doe is:" and you had to squeeze whatever thoughts you needed your friends to know into that format.

2005? Nope and no and no way in hell. First of all, mini-feed launched in Sep, 2006, according to a TechCrunch post from that time. That was the real time Facebook started to be anything near what it is today, and certainly well before status updates. I first noticed people using status updates in March 2008, how do I know month and year, you ask? because there was serious shit going on on my life at the time. And I…

Went back to check, and you're totally right. Not sure how I remembered that so wrong.
Post reply on HN