So now Mark Zuckerberg has even more money to take over the world. I can't say I care for Facebook at all - I don't like the way it commercializes human interaction, and for some individuals it can be addictive or expose their lack of judgment for the entire world to see! And while Facebook does a lot of things, every purpose for using it can be better filled by another service (e-mail, photo-sharing sites, IM clients, standard forums like this one, or plain old in-person conversations like the cavemen used to do). For those reasons, and growing privacy concerns, I'm uncertain about Facebook's long-time prospects for success.

Anyway, discuss.

I think most people believe Facebook is just another internet trend, like MySpace. They might be right, but it seems like a lot of the internet is now getting more and more grounded in Facebook so it's entirely possible Facebook is here to stay as well.

It's pretty boring honestly. Facebook didn't really bring anything particularly new to the internet, just streamlined and centralized it at all. It's a one stop for instant messaging, emails, blogging, interest sharing, games, and potentially anything with the way Facebook apps work.

and I don't think that's really particularly bad on its own, but the way Facebook goes about it, trying to contain the entire internet behind its own closed doors, is incredibly problematic for the rest of the internet. The internet is already a pretty different place from say 5 years ago thanks to Facebook- I can only imagine it changing a lot more if it grows and attracts more users and uses rather than people moving on to some new social internet fad.

It seems like there are alternatives building up, but I really don't think a site is going to beat Facebook at its own game like Facebook did with MySpace. Google+ is a nice piece of technology, but on its face value, it really doesn't seem to offer much that Facebook doesn't- and Facebook does the typical Facebook-things that Google+ can do better anyway. The real charm behind Google+ is that the philosophy behind it is to keep the internet open (because without an Internet to search, there isn't much room for Google), but philosophy alone isn't going to stop Facebook.

Like Google+, I would like Diaspora, which is an open-source social networking platform that is designed with the way Email or the XMPP messenger protocol (used by Google Talk and technically Facebook's IM tho Facebook's is pretty watered down in usefulness) is- people host their own individual hubs (think different @email.com addresses) and they all interconnect and interact, BUT unfortunately it doesn't seem to be handled too well and there's not much incentive to use it as it is because it seems like a genuine step backwards from Facebook aside from the philosophy behind it.

I really hope people start to care a bit more about privacy and the growing monopolization of the Internet that Facebook is doing, but there's not much we can do about it.


I love seeing different, non Facebook-like, kinds of social networking sites though. Twitter is a pretty cool idea, but I can't figure out any good use for it for anyone who's not a celebrity of some kind lol. Tumblr is a great way to integrate different types of media and blogging and make it all appealing to pretty much anyone, but using it as a social platform can be pretty silly at times- for example they outsource their comment system to Disqus for whatever reason. I don't know if you remember Ning, but it was this neat service that offered people the ability to run their own little social network type sites, unfortunately it went from a free service to a paid-only service and it's really not worth the money- recently I found an alternative that pulls off pretty much the same kind of thing, and I think it's a pretty cool piece of software but could definitely use a bit of work.

My biggest issue is the privacy aspect. I like the quote "if the product is free, then you're the product being sold."

That's what advertising is all about! Of course it's not always a terrible thing, but the type of information that Facebook collects is a lot more personal than what you'd normally post on a site. That's part of Facebook's appeal too- people use their "real" names, you can find people easier, things like that. But I'd much rather have a system like tumblr or twitter that collects next to no info

Exactly! Most sites know only a little about you, and what personal information you do dispense is limited in scope and is difficult to connect to your real identity. In contrast, Facebook knows a lot about anyone who uses the site regularly - in fact, Facebook's cache of personal data is far larger and deeper than that of any corporation or government body in human history. Facebook has already had numerous privacy-related bungles, both large and small, and I worry about what's going to happen now that it's a publicly-traded company. I'm not saying "ALL CORPORATIONS ARE EVIL," but this form of corporate governance does increase the "diffusion of responsibility," and with more shareholders to appease, I think Facebook is going to be pressured into cashing in on their wealth of personal data - especially since that data is Facebook's biggest financial asset. Sure, making profit is the American way, but I don't think this drive to grow bigger and bigger is going to serve its users - or the world - well. In fact, as Facebook continues acquiring promising startups, I wouldn't be surprised if we start hearing that "A"-word (antitrust!) getting thrown around within the next couple of years.