On 4 March 2013 00:45, Melvin Carvalho <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 4 March 2013 00:24, hellekin (GNU Consensus) <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 03/03/2013 05:22 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> > Read a summary of findings at: >> > >> > >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/mar/03/google-facebook-nothing-lasts-for-ever >> > >> *** Thank you for posting that Melvin. I've read that article from [1] >> and it mentions cascading defections from the network: if many users >> have few friends, say one or two, a friend quitting the network gives an >> incentive to her friend left with only one friend to quit as well, >> triggering a chain reaction. When the cost of leaving the network >> becomes less than the benefit of staying, people will rather quit. >> >> Recently, Douglas Rushkoff wrote "Why I'm quitting Facebook" [2], >> explaining that the new "related contents" that Facebook rolled out, >> that are actually sponsored links, impersonate users at their own >> detriment as regard to their reputation vis a vis their friends. He >> finds that unacceptable, and resigned for that reason. >> >> A friend of mine, who is using Facebook, translated the article into her >> language and distributed it to her 400 contacts on Facebook. As she >> knows having it on her wall will not reach out to her 400 contacts (they >> will probably miss it), she started sending messages to all of them in >> bulk. It seems that Facebook makes it easy to share what they want you >> to share to all your contacts, but doesn't provide a feature to >> broadcast messages to all of them at once. So she proceeded to message >> them by chunks of about 30 people. Soon enough, she started receiving >> messages from the system telling her that it was considered a spamming >> behavior and that her account would be suspended if she persisted. All >> that she wanted to do is tell her contacts that she's closing her >> Facebook account, and that they can keep contacting her by email. >> > > Yes, it's unfortunate that facebook will resort to these tactics. They > have probably have the best adoption and interoperable technology in the > world, but they dont always use it for good. This is a common symptom when > you have shareholders looking for a quick profit. However tech-wise > facebook is the state of the art, imho... > > What facebook did well was to master the LAMP stack (which is FOSS). In > theory, it would be quite easy to make an open source clone, but no one did > it (well elgg had a good try imho, but 2 devs can only do so much), and > LAMP has become quite unfashionable these days, so the gap has got wider. > Sorry, I meant to write Free and Open Source clone :) > > Given that there are no alternatives people sort of feel trapped in > facebook, but because all their friends are there, it's hard to leave... > > >> >> == >> hk >> >> [1] >> >> http://www.technologyreview.com/view/511846/an-autopsy-of-a-dead-social-network/ >> [2] >> >> http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/25/opinion/rushkoff-why-im-quitting-facebook/index.html >> >> >
