4 ms·
Yes but remember how important the "seed users" are, which is why Facebook started where it did. If they truly deliver on the non-corporate, privacy aspects and
by drats 16y ago
Yes but remember how important the "seed users" are, which is why Facebook started where it did. If they truly deliver on the non-corporate, privacy aspects and keep a slim interface then many "alpha geeks" will swap over. Do you really care about the 100 or 200 friends you have on Facebook or the core 10-40? Or if all your tech buddies and most of your clued-in friends are on Diaspora and posting content there they don't post on Facebook, which account will you log into first? What will your Facebook become then other than a viewer, rather than a place that you put content? Would you have much trouble shutting down your Facebook at that point?
I don't see any unfunded startup being able to do anything new in this space, Facebook offered interface over Myspace. Diaspora offers control over Facebook - and from this demo they seem to be dispelling the vapour accusations, although we will have to see how it progresses. Google and Twitter currently are offering things and will be offering more in this space also. What real other avenues or general areas do you see a newcomer playing to? Games? Dating? Work collaboration? An even better interface? I don't see many areas for traction. Yes there is probably something I haven't thought of, but I don't think you can place your "bet" on a hypothetical vs these guys with an interesting demo and plenty of money to keep developing, who have hype and who are attacking the most vulnerable privacy/information vector in this market without some reasoning to back it up.
Edit/addendum:
I also think these guys rubbed a lot of HN people the wrong way - although I am not accusing you of this necessarily - because they got decent crowd-sourced funding in a seemingly haphazard way. Yes they are young, but if you go back to their pitch it was very slick, and as I said above, this tech demo goes a fair way to dispel the concerns about their youth/inexperience.
- axod 16y agoPersonally, I use facebook to communicate with friends and family - neither of which are universally geeks or techy. So I'd still use facebook. Just because a few privacy freakouts and geeks flock to this I don't see any reason anyone else will yet.
- josh33 16y agoYou sound like the slow-adopters of facebook. In the world we live in with security becoming more of a general concern, they could be on the front-edge of the revolution they think they are on. Plus, if they deliver on the UX/UI, people will use it.
- axod 16y ago"In the world we live in with security becoming more of a general concern" Which world is that? The one where people post minute details of their life on twitter? The one where they send naked pics of themselves around, expose themselves on chatroulette? It's going the other way - people are exposing more and more of themselves making more of their life public than ever before. Some geeks are always concerned about privacy/security. How many "normal people" use PGP to sign their emails?
- johngunderman 16y agoToday's concerns for security are not concerns for keeping our information private. Rather, they are concerns that we will maintain control over our private information, to be able to share it at our own discretion. Facebook removes much of this control from the user.
- axod 16y agono evidence to show that facebook users see it that way, or care. Also FWIW, I think the name "diaspora" is terrible I cannot see it working at all.
- seancron 16y agoThe name can be changed, what I want is the technology. Show me the code and let me develop on it. Let me change the interface, add features, and do analysis on my social graph. Depending on the license they release the code under, there could potentially be other services that use the technology and have a nicer name than Diaspora. Facebook users might even take notice if Diaspora has a "dislike" button and access to their Facebook data via Diaspora.