3 ms·
Well, stating that the "value to a user increases as more users use it" seems incorrect for Skype and Facebook at least (not familiar with WhatsApp). In fact
by hazeii 10y ago
Well, stating that the "value to a user increases as more users use it" seems incorrect for Skype and Facebook at least (not familiar with WhatsApp).
In fact, I'd say the more people around that you don't know or relate to is actually detrimental to community spirit.
- wtracy 10y agoThat statement might lack nuance, but it's not wrong. Skype and Facebook only have value to me because my friends and family use them. The value to me increases as more friends use those platforms, and would decrease if my friends left.
- TulliusCicero 10y agoYes, but you can also get reverse network effects, e.g. young people not being active on Facebook because their parents are there (and denying a friend request would be awkward).
- mattkrause 10y agoSkype seems like odd-one-out in these lists. Is there actually any sort of community? I do use it, but we tend to arrange Skype "calls" ahead of time and out-of-band (e.g., by email). Unlike "real" social networks, I don't log in to Skype just to see what's going on in the world or with my friends.
- wodenokoto 10y agoIt depends on what the social network is for. Facebook is slowly becoming peoples new rolodex/contact list. For this, it needs everybody to be on. Phones are only good if there are somebody to call. However, as a discussion forum / news site, it can be uncool to have to listen to all those people who aren't your real friends.