I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook • Hacker News Board

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#121

Post by sofifonfek » Sat, Feb 18, 2012, 11:55 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #78

joering2 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no need to -- I will answer you. Its not feasible in FB current situation. IF they make $100 per year per user already on showing ads/tracking/selling/analyzing/whatever they do to make a buck, then going down to $5/month/user and shifting from paying advertiser to paying user would make it a ghost town. Bottom line: I think most people enjoy what they get out of FB even if they data is being used/sold and they are,…

1) They don't make $100/user/year, not even close. They have 800M users and made 4.27B$ last year. That's $5.33 per user per year . Even considering their number of active users is bunk, there's no way they've reach anything close to $100/user/year - that would mean they only had 42M users. 2) I don't think the suggestion was for them to shift to another revenue model, I think it was to give the option of subscribing…

1) you're missing a few figures and the whole picture, by the conservative estimation Zuckerberg will make 16 billions with the ipo so he personally made ~20 bucks per registered user. Selling ads is pocket money, at the end of the day the wealth is in the mega database of the user data. See, paying users can choose to take their dollars elsewhere so you have to give them what they want, if it's gratis people flock on the service and lack the incentive to go away if the service is somewhat unsatisfying so you can impose whatever you want to them.

2) they can't offer such an option, facebook is a machine designed to collect, store, hold and aggregate user data and they built a business model out of it. Putting the user in control of its data is the opposite of what facebook wants. You can't really compare the subscription of news aggregator websites and an hypothetical subscription on facebook. Facebook is unique in the fact that it holds user personal data and has a strong grasp on it through heavy vendor lock-in, you can easily leave slashdot or reddit and get your news elsewhere from an alternative but you can't leave facebook easily because they have your data, data you need in your daily use and there's nowhere to go to to find an equivalent.

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#122

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 12:38 AM UTC

smokinn wrote: post #17

ithought wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would prefer to see a grown man die on TV? Your comment is wrong and false. He doesn't spend every night in a hotel, the shoots are between 5 to 7 days. Some he stays outside all night, the other supporting shots he stays in a hotel. He risks his life in significant (and foolish) ways every episode. Climbing and swinging on rope vines over 1,000 foot drops are not faked. Hunting by hand, cleaning and cooking anim…

Just because you don't have a massive support crew doesn't mean you're going to die. I'd recommend you check out a series called Survivorman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman It's a guy who goes out into the wilderness to survive with nothing but some basic gear and a couple of cameras and tripods. Less flashy but way more realistic.

Two different shows, one is about showcasing techniques in extreme situation and feature an ex british special forces with a heavy background in adventuring while the other is about putting one guy alone in a survival situation for a few days featuring a regular guy who has personal interest in survival.

Though they're not with him, Les stroud also has a support crew and a way to contact them in case of life-threatening emergency.

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#123

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 12:57 AM UTC

melissamiranda wrote: post #16

jsavimbi wrote: post #13

> nurture a community of real, authentic users. This is utter BS and the author knows it. The last people you want to fill the role of early adopter are the people of Facebook. Nurture, foster, incubate. That's lazy business people speak for not actually doing any work of note and spending more time networking and that all-consuming fundraising so they can actually hire someone to do the work for them and pay them sq…

Off base. Facebook login was implement to prevent a Chatroulette problem (nudity and profanity). The Internet Fuckwad theory: normal person + anonymity + audience = total fuckwad ( http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Greater-Internet-Fuckwad-Th... ) explains why anonymity allows bad behavior. The decision had nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with encouraging real identity on the app.

John Gabriel's greater internet fuckwad theory is a joke about people playing video games online, it's not really relevant to the general internet. While chatroulette arguably offers anonymity but the very instant a website requires registration it's not anonymity anymore, it's pseudonymity, a totally different thing. Not using your real world identity but an online identity which according to context holds a certain value to users preventing them to behave as total fuckwad.

If you look at the famous example of the month of eternal september [1], the problem at hand showed a totally different picture, an artificially high number of newcomers overcharging the capacity of the community to properly teach them how to behave [2]. In short when your user base grows organically you have minimal bad behaviour.

Then again if you look at facebook itself you'll find more than the regular share of inane bs and bad behaviour.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September [2]: http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book/index.html

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#124

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 1:02 AM UTC

GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #113

I'd be happy to log in with Facebook, but every single time I've tried to do it, Facebook informs me that the application wants to help itself to my contacts, my wall etc etc etc. Now I don't bother.

The funny part is that for a long time they just did it without informing you and no one complained. cough zynga cough

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#125

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 1:05 AM UTC

adrian201 wrote: post #118

1. I think the on-boarding process to an app is probably more crucial the app itself. This is purely anecdotal, but as an early adopter whenever I go through the trouble of downloading an app which greets me with “Create An Account”, I'm almost always immediately turned off. In some cases I've just excited the app and hit un-install. The last thing I need is another account, with a service I may not use for more than…

>2. I think the Facebook hate is miss-placed. Do you really hate Facebook (provider of a tool) or those who spam you via Facebook (users of the tool)? If you're so worried about Facebook tracking you offsite, why have an account at all?

I think it is right on. Both because the tool shapes the usage (if your only tool is hammer, all problems look like nails). I don't have one.

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#126

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 1:13 AM UTC

scott_to_s wrote: post #101

There are no doubt a lot of users like me: I don't have a Facebook account, and I will _never_ have a Facebook account. The result of my personal policy and utter dislike of Facebook is that as soon as I see a Facebook login popup on a new app, I immediately close the tab. Then again, perhaps you don't want customers like me!

Same here and sometimes I wonder if those who provide facebook only login would consider answering the phone 1 out of 10 times by saying "fuck off" and hanging up a good business practice, because that's basically what they are doing.

"hey we have this fantastic service offering this and that, but we don't want you to use it (unless you register to a third party whose sole purpose is to collect as much personal data on you as possible and has a long history of privacy issues)". Best sales pitch ever.

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#127

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 1:19 AM UTC

ben0x539 wrote: post #53

daimyoyo wrote: post #34

I have found a compromise that works well for me when I'm asked to login with facebook. I have created an account that exists solely for situations like this. That way I can use whatever site or app I want and its not connected to me.

It might not be connected to your other personas, but there's still someone at facebook who can piece together what apps and sites you use that require facebook logins, and potentially abuse that data.

Chances are it is connected to the other personas and facebook has a more complete than you think profile, heck they don't even need you to be registered to have a profile on you, from being in registered people's addressbook to going to web page featuring a facebook button they can piece together a profile.

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#128

Post by sofifonfek » Sun, Feb 19, 2012, 1:40 AM UTC

jseims wrote: post #33

What gets me is it's 2012 and we still have to keep solving account management over and over. It's a big bucket of word dealing with multiple signup methods, resetting passwords, profile pictures, etc. I wish there were an open source project that unified best practices (in various tech stacks).

Having to deal with registration and account management is a choice, not a necessity. From bugmenot to mytrashmail, examples of websites not having to solve account management are numerous.

The registration is often a barrier preventing people from using your service, and it's not even mandatory to have user management [1].

[1]: https://jobpoacher.com/blog/blog/2012/02/13/what-craigslist-...

Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

#129

Post by smokinn » Mon, Feb 20, 2012, 2:20 AM UTC

sofifonfek wrote: post #122

smokinn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you don't have a massive support crew doesn't mean you're going to die. I'd recommend you check out a series called Survivorman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman It's a guy who goes out into the wilderness to survive with nothing but some basic gear and a couple of cameras and tripods. Less flashy but way more realistic.

Two different shows, one is about showcasing techniques in extreme situation and feature an ex british special forces with a heavy background in adventuring while the other is about putting one guy alone in a survival situation for a few days featuring a regular guy who has personal interest in survival. Though they're not with him, Les stroud also has a support crew and a way to contact them in case of life-threaten…

No he doesn't. Most episodes he says that he has to get out on his own. If he missed his rendez-vous search and rescue teams kick into action to go out and find him.

There was one particular episode where he had to find some natives to get him out because he was dying of dehydration. He got sick and had diaharrea and no one was there to help him.