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

After Facebook fails

blogs.law.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 214 posts

Re: After Facebook fails

#81

Post by pyoung »

BiWinning wrote: post #8

And what about when all TV is served over the internet? Or when all billboards are controlled over the internet? Or all magazines are displayed on epaper via the internet? 95% of advertising will be done over the internet, and if the author is too short-sighted to see that well then that speaks poorly on him. Of course if he had any insight maybe he'd be building something and not whining about it. He just sounds bit…

Did you make it to the end of the post? He is working on a VRM system that supposedly puts the power in the hands of the customer, rather than the vendor.

Re: After Facebook fails

#82

Post by revorad »

cletus wrote: post #44

Here's my take on Facebook (disclaimer: I work for Google, these opinions are purely my own and not representative of the company, yadda yadda yadda). Display advertising works best when you have sufficient, quality inventory (publishers whose sites serve ads) such that you attract advertisers in sufficient quantity and quality. Targeting in display ads works because from the publishers, the intermediary has informat…

1. Your social games argument is really weak. People may play some social games with random people, but they mostly like, comment, have common friends, appear in photos together, go to weddings with real friends.

2. Your second argument is contradictory to your observation that Like buttons across the web are mainly cookie carriers.

And as far as lying is concerned, people don't just lie virtually with Like buttons and comments. They also lie by spending real dollars. Even if you know squat about F1 racing, buying that red Ferrari jacket is a pretty good social signal to send to your equally clueless peers.

I'd be really surprised if Facebook is not working on a mobile OS or browser. They will probably also make a big direct play in ecommerce (see Karma purchase).

Predicting failure for Facebook purely based on its desktop web app ads seems shortsighted and naive.

Re: After Facebook fails

#83

Post by akavel »

cletus wrote: post #44

Here's my take on Facebook (disclaimer: I work for Google, these opinions are purely my own and not representative of the company, yadda yadda yadda). Display advertising works best when you have sufficient, quality inventory (publishers whose sites serve ads) such that you attract advertisers in sufficient quantity and quality. Targeting in display ads works because from the publishers, the intermediary has informat…

> The main purpose of that "Like" button is (IMHO) as a tracking cookie. Visit any Like-enabled site and you see a small piece of content from Facebook that tells Facebook all the sites you visit. It's a tracking cookie like any other and personally I have no problem with that. Just make no mistake why the Like button exists.

Yeah, probably; still, please remember that it would be the same what ("IMHO") Google Analytics (since ~2005?) + Google AdWords (since ~2000? ah, yes, and this actually makes money as well) do for Google. (Plus a few others, like Customized Search and the "recent Google +1 widget".) Personally, I'm amazed every time I look at my NoScript list and see that on ~99% of the Web google-analytics.com is watching your every click.

Re: After Facebook fails

#84

Post by revorad »

I'm amused when intelligent people like Doc don't even show enough curiosity to hack Facebook ads to their own advantage. I hate ads with a vengeance, but I like using Facebook. And just like Doc, I kept seeing stupid irrelevant ads.

So I decided to fix it. I started liking Facebook pages of things I really like - Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Ubuntu, Sphero, Android. And lo and behold, I've started seeing ads which I actually like and even click on.

Facebook critics offer a strange bipolar argument - on the one hand, they say Facebook ads are so badly targeted even with the wealth of personal info they have. On the other hand, they question the valuation. Where's so much growth going to come from? Better ad targeting is definitely part of the answer, but more importantly, I think Facebook will come out with some killer new products in mobile and ecommerce.

Re: After Facebook fails

#85

Post by pyoung »

aresant wrote: post #52

This essay reads like an advanced lifeform encountering, and misunderstanding, the average human consumer. Two quotes stick out: (1) That he goes "on Facebook. . . as infrequently as I possibly can." This statement disqualifies his entire experience. Hundreds of millions of average-consumers use Facebook DAILY. These users update their content, they integrate more of their life. They click the like buttons. They shar…

I would argue that VRM already exists to some extent. When I want to buy something, I Google it. You can instantly comparison shop and add items to a shopping list to keep an eye on the price over time. You might not directly negotiate with vendor's, but I am not sure most people really want to or need to, including HN'ers.

Re: After Facebook fails

#86

Post by Tsagadai »

polemic wrote: post #16

I have no idea if Facebook is valued correctly or not, however I think this misses a vital point. Facebook is not nearly the same as other web ventures. It's ability to target ads seems secondary to this: From http://www.kenburbary.com/2011/03/facebook-demographics-revi... , slightly out of date, but still useful: - Average user visits the site 40 times per month - Average user spends an 23 minutes (23:20 to be preci…

In my opinion, the present valuation is probably too high. That said, Facebook could still do incredibly well.

Facebook now has lots of money, plenty of bright people and a recognisable brand. You need money to make money in many fields and Facebook has a lot of money. They could swing out of being just about advertising and into other markets. It isn't far-fetched, Google are already making driverless cars and power stations.

Re: After Facebook fails

#87

Post by taejo »

ryanmerket wrote: post #50
lotharbot wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the major problems with FB ad targeting is that a lot of it is keyword-driven without regard for context. If I'm on Google searching for a product or service, the context is very likely "I want one of these" or "I'm curious about this", so displaying ads strictly by keyword works fairly well. But if I mention something on Facebook, it's as likely to be negative as positive. If I've just said something critical…

Facebook advertising isn't keyword driven, it's interest driven. AFAIK Facebook doesn't parse your status updates to find keywords -- they look at what you have Liked.

They certainly do look for keywords in statuses (though I don't know if they use them for advertising). At one point they grouped statuses by subject ("Alice and Bob both mentioned Christmas"), and it suggests groups/pages based on your statuses (I mentioned reading something in French in a status, and it suggested I liked "French language").

Re: After Facebook fails

#88

Post by brandnewlow »

stdgy wrote: post #72
ajessup wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested to hear any insights as to why Facebook hasn't yet pushed to build a display advertising network for third party publishers (a la DoubleClick). That way it could leverage the assets that it does have (behavioral profiles) against an asset it doesn't (users with direct purchase intent). On a side note - I'd take issue with your suggestion that the information on Facebook is largely useless to an adve…

I expected Facebook to announce plans for an ad network to coincide with their IPO. I'm a little flummoxed that we haven't heard anything yet. It seems like an obvious outgrowth. I wonder if concerns over a privacy backlash would push them to keep this project on the back burner? (Though I don't personally see any privacy issues with such a project)

Honest question: Would it REALLY generate that much new revenue for them? Their problem isn't owning the web. They do already. It's mobile.

Re: After Facebook fails

#89

Post by redwood »

raintrees wrote: post #17

Interesting... I was just going through the phase of unsubscribing from all of the legitimate info/news sources I had subscribed to over the years to try to reduce my daily Inbox levels, and it got me to thinking about reversing the tables so I could announce when I _wanted_ to partake and for what reason, and THEN get appropriate emails, links, ads, etc.

Right on, is there a platform for this yet?

Perhaps fbook can pivot to this... since it'd be tough without a big user base first.

This only works for non demand-creating advertising of course.

Re: After Facebook fails

#90

Post by Aramgutang »

a3d6g2f7 wrote: post #54
cletus wrote: post #44

Here's my take on Facebook (disclaimer: I work for Google, these opinions are purely my own and not representative of the company, yadda yadda yadda). Display advertising works best when you have sufficient, quality inventory (publishers whose sites serve ads) such that you attract advertisers in sufficient quantity and quality. Targeting in display ads works because from the publishers, the intermediary has informat…

Imagine an apartment. Google is like the copy of the yellow pages by the telephone. FB is like the photo-album in the closet. People generally do not open these two books for similar reasons. They have very different usage. One is recreational, the other is not[1]. But FB believers do not want to accept this difference. And it's this difference that makes FB a dud compared to Google. The question I have is what is go…

While I agree with your point, a part of me can't help but wonder about the possibilities that would open up if we had the capacity to extract enough semantic information from a photo:

If I'm looking at my old holiday snaps and reliving the good times I had, I might be tempted by an ad for cheap flights to a similar destination.

If I'm looking at recent photos of my relatives' adorable children, I might be tempted by an ad for children's toys to send them.

If I'm looking at a friend's photos from an event they attended and enjoyed, I might be tempted by an ad selling tickets to that or similar event.

If I'm looking at a photo of myself from a time when I was in better physical shape, I might be tempted by an ad for a gym membership.

etc...

I doubt Facebook will ever be able to get to a point where they can make predictions as accurate at that, but given the trove of personal data and image analysis algorithms they have, if anyone could do it, it'd be them.

Post reply on HN