21–30 of 252 posts
If that's their only set of data, then I'm guessing this is equally likely to indicate that Google is losing users, or at least losing users trying to access common sites, at a pretty steep rate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words - the Internet. You don't need to do all those things in a single place, or even in multiple places, but all owned by the same company. The fact that people want to use Instagram, Vine, Snapchat and Whatsapp is proof many people don't want a single service for everything. It's just unfortunate that Facebook happens to have acquired many of those.
> In other words - the Internet. Can you explain a bit more, because it sounds really strange.
I think that those other interest groups will probably come to break off into custom sub-sites with their own message boards and chat.
I think clubs are well suited to discovery by FB, meetup and the like, but a bit too restricted in practice.
The corporate attempts to gather "likes" is B.S. mostly.
What you want potential coworkers to see isn't the same as friends/family...
In the end it's all muddled currently, and I think things may break apart a bit in the near future.
What does FB provide that you don't get with a combination of email/USENET/blogs/chat? Branding, janitors, and indexing.
Branding is useful because these things are so scale-driven that you want to be on the one that everyone else is using. It's easier for the uninvolved to figure this out if it's the one with huge advertising billboards.
Janitors are a necessity. Some are human, some automatic. People want spam to be fought, and they want abuse to be removed.
Between those two is the "nudging" of people into how to use Facebook. Why should you post life updates? Because it's the "done thing".
Indexing is useful because it enables you to find people you want to get in contact with using their human-recognisable name. (Facebook occasionally undermines this by refusing to accept names that people are known by)
Both of these are ongoing effort that has to be paid for if it is to scale and be done properly. Hence all the underhand cash-extraction processes.
I hate Facebook, but I don't plan to stop using it anytime soon. Well - I don't hate everything about it, but I hate everything they're trying to do, so I agree with this article. But "hate"ing a company is odd, so I guess I really mean "I want to have nothing to do with". I'll switch when there's a dominating replacement. All I want, for the rest of my life, is: - a way to see updates from friends and acquaintances…
For me the dichotomy becomes which groups really see what... you have: - family & close friends - acquaintances & loose friends - school alum - social groups / clubs - those who you might work with/for - linked in, you failed this audience - interests beyond clubs, outside acquantances No social network does a good job at allowing a person to share with those groups as desired. What I share on twitter is far more tec…
Doesn't g+ solve this with the whole "circles" idea? You control which groups you share with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words - the Internet. You don't need to do all those things in a single place, or even in multiple places, but all owned by the same company. The fact that people want to use Instagram, Vine, Snapchat and Whatsapp is proof many people don't want a single service for everything. It's just unfortunate that Facebook happens to have acquired many of those.
> In other words - the Internet. Can you explain a bit more, because it sounds really strange.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words - the Internet. You don't need to do all those things in a single place, or even in multiple places, but all owned by the same company. The fact that people want to use Instagram, Vine, Snapchat and Whatsapp is proof many people don't want a single service for everything. It's just unfortunate that Facebook happens to have acquired many of those.
Yes, Facebook is realizing this and that's why they're doing these rounds of purchases rather than trying to build something own and extend Facebook.com. Ironically enough, I don't think they always prefer to strengthen their own brand because they understand the psychology behind end user decisions. Thinking of it, it's interesting how long ago Facebook last changed functionality-wise. I don't like them that much, b…
That's a common tipping point that lead to unfavorable side effects.
What will be the next big thing in social networks? What are your thoughts? Local neighbors network? No-interface social networks? Peer-to-peer? Anonymous social networks? Video based (YouTube/Twitch)? Messanger-only? No central news-feed?
I think that WebRTC will deliver a lot of opportunities in that arena.
I don't think news feeds are going away, and I think that Twitter (if they can clean out the bot accounts) is one of the better resources in that gateway.
As to messenger systems... no idea... right now it kind of sucks... it was bad enough with yahoo, icq, aol, and msn messenger... now it's even more networks with even more disconnect outside facebook, and fb's app is about as invasive as it gets in terms of device privacy.
What if people google facebook less than a while ago because they already know what it is and have remembered the domain name?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32902170
(Interesting that mobile is declining, suggests the distinction is lost in a world of tablet, laptop and phone use where desktops are a thing of the past domestically)