Baba_Chaghaloo

I think because Facebook does something very smart: they keep it jumpin'. They change things on an almost weekly basis, which everyone complains about, but it keeps them coming back even though the overall experience became sour for them years ago.

They can't keep that up forever though, people will move on. But I disagree with the idea of another site in the same mold (Friendster, MySpace, Facebook) that will move in and conveniently replace it. I think people are starting to realize those things are just a pain in the ass and will move to semi-anonymous networks like Twitter or Reddit for more stress-free entertainment.

I'm fully willing to say that to their face though. If I made a dumb website that accidentally caused even one divorce I'd shutter it, Facebook must cause hundreds every year. It created, intentionally or not, a culture of bragging and narcissism. They're stockpiling facial recognition data. It's a terrible company. If you work there, Fuck You. You're a bad person. I don't know how else to say it.

Who voted this advertisement up, I wonder? Fuck you Facebook. I'm never signing back up, your site is harmful to people, everyone who works there can go to hell.

A faster, more terminal cancer. Oh happy day.

They asked for $500,000 to make a Twitter clone and they got it. Who's laughing at whom?

Because people who use Facebook post such great content? Srs?

Yeah it was based on an anonymous blog comment and I think it's still ongoing. I asked a couple guys at Grooveshark about it and they didn't seem concerned at all, they described it as a last, desperate move by the record companies.

>I've always had a lot of respect for what they've done for the world

Did I miss something? What has Craigslist done for the world besides put newspapers out of business?

They nearly killed newspapers in this country, which has nearly killed investigative journalism, which for whatever noble reasons they had is reeeealy bad karma. If anybody wants to put a dent in these fuckers, I'm on board.

You could pirate Angry Birds too if you really wanted to but they found a price point that defeats that and made $100 million.

25 cents might be a bit low but 99 cents is very reasonable when you're competing with free. It's not that I'm complaining about feeling ripped off when buying music(although I do) it's more about taking a look at what works, ie the low-price or in store app model, and emulating it.

Angry Birds made over a hundred million in profits so far, I'm saying maybe the music business should examine it's pricing structure. Don't get me started on Ebooks or TV shows.

They can sell Mp3s but not for 99 cents a song... especially when Angry Birds costs $1.99. An entire album should be 99 cents or less. 25 cents sounds good to me.

EDIT: my point is don't complain that people aren't buying your product if you're charging them a price that's waaay above market value

That piano player in the video is hardly what I'd call a savant, more like he hit his head and woke up as a douchebag but music is one of those things that gets stored way back in your brain somewhere, I think. I have songs stuck in my head all the time and I'll sleep for 12 hours and the damn thing will still be there. Maybe after a head injury some people can recall tunes they've heard throughout their lives more clearly which would make them easier to play.

The Facebook login. Come on now.

Diaspora is actually looking pretty good, I'm pleasantly surprised but am I the only one a little disappointed that they made it with Ruby? Probably. But looking through that jungle of code I wonder how far along they'd be if they had used Drupal and let that army of developers contribute with separate modules.

I'd love to tinker with it but I know whatever I do will probably break it when they update their code.

It might be around in 20 years but I doubt it will ever be any more popular than it is now. It already seems pretty uncool (my grandma's on there but neither I nor any of my friends are) and it's gotten a pretty bad reputation, not many people are going to be too sad to see it replaced.

Shouldn't discourage anyone from doing a web startup though, people are always going to want those sorts of social sharing sites, just maybe not that one.

This cheered me up a little, I confess.

Whew! What a relief!

Now that's just messed up.

You actually need a Facebook account to use Spotify. Not very exciting at all.

Call me paranoid but for them to spend $1 billion on this silly thing tells me they think there are big profits to be made with facial recognition data.

Yeah Zuckerberg understood social ties the same way Karl Rove understood politics but that doesn't make it good. Exclusivity, ostracization and social cliques are part of our nature but are definitely on the dark side. I'd like to somehow know how many people made friends on facebook compared to how many have lost friends, husbands, wives, etc.

Maybe he wants to be nice? Facebook fails at nice, that's mostly why I quit. Seems the guy who made it is probably a bit of a sociopath, your only two options are "Friend!" or "Fuck off!" and I think that contributes a lot to the general loathing of the site.

I love lamp.

I can't believe anybody actually uses those Facebook connect things.

It is addictive but the little arrows are a pain on the iPhone.