4 ms·

You 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 r

• 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 ago
    Today'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 ago
      no 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 ago
        The 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.
        • axod 16y ago
          The issue is, you'll get complete fragmentation and confusion. It won't get widespread adoption. It's a fun thing for geeks to play with, but I don't think there is any way in hell this can succeed with the current setup.
          • alexro 16y ago
            Would you see a way to succeed for Google in 1999? Only geeks used it in the beginning
            • axod 16y ago
              That's slightly different. Other search engines were poor. They focused on the wrong things, and didn't actually give good search results in the way users wanted. Facebook actually solves most peoples needs very well for a social network / casual gaming platform. Any competitor will have to work for a few years just to get the features that people will assume it has. Then comes the massive job of moving people from facebook. Consider ebay. Ebay actually really sucks. It's terrible. Yet everyone still uses it for auctions. Why aren't there any auction startups? Because it's impossible to get people to move.
          • zaphar 16y ago
            It doesn't have to get widespread adoption. It just has to be suitable for me to use. I don't use facebook hardly at all for posting content. I almost never log into it. If this can pull from facebook eventually and perhaps even push to it then I'll be happy. It's open source and open protocols. Because of that it's definition of success is not the same as a startups. Even if the project fails miserably but in the process causes Facebook to change a little then that will be a success IMO.
            • axod 16y ago
              What is the point of a social network if only you use it? ;)
          • seancron 16y ago