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

The end of the Facebook era

takeaswig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 139 posts

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#41

Post by wehadfun »

the_watcher wrote: post #17

>> Teens likely see Facebook the same way the Facebook generation sees LinkedIn – like a utilitarian place to manage connections. This is why the "millennials are leaving Facebook" worry isn't actually real. Yes, middle schoolers and high schoolers aren't using Facebook. They are at a stage in their life where the idea of their parents being able to see into their life is scary. Their social circle is also disproport…

>Their social circle is also disproportionately made up of people they can easily see every day

Great point

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#42

Post by triptychs »

selmnoo wrote: post #34
melling wrote: post #20

Here are some titles for the next story. "The end of the Apple era" "The end of the Microsoft era" "The end of the Netflix era" "The end of the Yahoo era" Seriously, why do people waste time writing these types of stories? My guess is that it's because it's so much easier than actually trying to build something of value. The real problem is there is no penalty for being wrong. Everyone simply forgets. Write a thousan…

Why. Why must you do this. Why must you dismiss articles on hackneyed grounds and kill the chance for an interesting discussion about the nature and direction of social technologies. I thought this article was very interesting, it brought to light several factual points, and several not-heard-before insights -- e.g., I thought this in particular was very true and interesting: This is why social networks, like Google+…

It is rumored and further "confirmed"[0][1] that Google did offer to buy Snapchat for $4bn, in an effort to outbid Facebooks $3bn.

0. http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/15/5106950/google-snapchat-4...

1. "Confirmed" in quotes because Valleywag cites an unnamed source, and I typically find Valleywag, and Gawker Media on a whole, dubious and not entirely worthy of trust. However, this may have been more solidly confirmed elsewhere as well.

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#43

Post by technotony »

chaz wrote: post #9

An alternate opinion: Facebook is heading toward the Trough of Disillusionment of the Hype Cycle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle Facebook was so ridiculously hot a few years ago that it couldn't possibly have met all of its expectations for changing how we all communicate, replacing all other messaging mediums, dominating how we shop and buy, the portal for all things entertainment, etc. > Teens likely see F…

Yeah, plateau of productivity is when 20-30% of people have adopted. Globally Facebook is probably at that point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hype-Cycle-General.png

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#45

Post by bentcorner »

coldtea wrote: post #29
leokun wrote: post #7

A big counter point to the Facebook is a fad is Pepsi. Pepsi was considered a fad in the 60's when it was already 40 years old. It's still around. It buys coolness with a massive marketing budget. Pepsi is water + corn syrup + some flavor. And it's been around for many, many decades. Pepsi, and Cola, show that being old does not mean you can't still be cool.

> Pepsi was considered a fad in the 60's when it was already 40 years old. It's still around. Tons of things have been considered fads through the decades, some rightly (hula-hoops) and some not (rock music). The question, when making an analogy, is how they relate to Facebook. Unless you connect Pepsi and Facebook with something more besides (both have been considered a fad), we cannot draw any conclusions from Peps…

Maybe it'll be that the concept of social networks is here to stay forevermore, but Facebook is just a brand. Social networks are becoming a dime a dozen, so using Facebook is a brand choice.

There's a social cost to be seen doing the things that everyone else is doing (the equivalent, say, of wearing a mainstream band t-shirt), so having a presence on Facebook is just meeting the bar. To be "cool" you need to find the social networks nobody else knows about, and hang out with your friends there. Bonus points for alluding, on Facebook, to conversations you had on the not-Facebook social network.

It may be amusing to find in 10 years that using Facebook becomes a new fad again and is seen as "retro". Certainly a possibility if Facebook does not innovate itself to non-recognizability.

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#48

Post by ek »

I found this article really interesting. I started using Facebook in high school, back when high schoolers were to use hs.facebook.com to access Facebook and networks were heavily emphasized. I left Facebook about one year ago today.

One particular observation that the article makes that I want to flesh out a bit is the following: Facebook has grown and grown in terms of the size of the application itself, and it is clear that they have pushed very heavily for the 'platform' model. It seems like this is getting replaced by a series of more specialized, more mobile-centric social applications, like Snapchat and Tumblr. Of course FB owns Instagram so they have that going for them, but this does seem to hint at a bit of a growing trend in social networking.

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#49

Post by TrevorJ »

Social networking needs to be a specification. Imagine if email worked the same way social networks worked, it would be ridiculous. You could only communicate with other gmail users, or whatever users were on the platform you adopted. I understand from a business standpoint why social networks have evolved the way they have, but from a utility standpoint it is a lose/lose to have these walled gardens.

What would be much better, is to let users use whatever platform they wish and implement some common protocol for following, status updates and private messaging.

Re: The end of the Facebook era

#50

Post by tannerc »

While much of the debate here on HN is around why authors continue to write pieces about "the end of X" or "the demise of Y", I couldn't help but ask the question: "Why do we continue to read them/link to them?

Possible answers:

1. Many of us (or our employers) rely on these audiences for revenue, so knowing where they are and what they're interested in enables us to have success

2. We're interested in what drives success/failure, despite logic indicating that -- in both scenarios -- random chance plays one of the largest parts

3. It's like good old-fashioned gossip, where everyone who doesn't actually have anything to say can still speak up

4. We hope to learn from history as it happens to us; if we can accurately predict why people are leaving Facebook and where they're going, we can be part of -- or the driver of -- the next wave.

Post reply on HN