3 ms·
The sad thing is that full-time individual adoption of a social network requires mass adoption the social network. That is to say, not having everybody and thei
by orblivion 16y ago
The sad thing is that full-time individual adoption of a social network requires mass adoption the social network. That is to say, not having everybody and their grandma on Diaspora will be a fairly big downside compared to Facebook.
As for having both, personally, I'm looking for a way to not use Facebook at all and still get the benefits. Right now I just don't use my Facebook account. Having Diaspora would be a small improvement, but if it's a lukewarm thing, my friends will be more active on Facebook, and won't be that active on Diaspora.
Maybe there'll be a Diaspora app for Facebook, ha. I'm not familiar with Facebook, is there a way to do this without giving Facebook all the data you were trying to hide from it in the first place?
Actually, another thing I just thought of. If we could get people to just create the Diaspora accounts, and just connect it to their Twitter, Flickr, and so on, it may be enough. The updates will happen automatically. I'll still be able to browse my friends' pages, which will be updated without them thinking about it.
- Pistos2 16y agoThere are already aggregation sites, such as FriendFeed.