3 ms·

I'd never seen beyond the login screen of Facebook until a site I run started getting sporadic bursts of traffic from there, so I ventured in to try and find th

by hanoz 8y ago

I'd never seen beyond the login screen of Facebook until a site I run started getting sporadic bursts of traffic from there, so I ventured in to try and find the links. I was stunned and devastated to discover how many thriving little communities there were in this niche area (local archeology), it's everything the open web was supposed to be but it has been walled off, completely invisible to outsiders, all for the benefit of one corporation and its advertising customers.

tomrod 8y ago
Economies of scale, I guess? Easier to host there than to have dedicated hobbyists support the technology needs.
- adventured 8y ago
  Ning showed some promise in being able to provide that. It took off like a rocket initially. Maybe they benefited from launching in 2005, prior to Facebook reaching any meaningful saturation (consuming all the oxygen in the segment). When they figured out the financial side of it wasn't going to work (having raised $119m in VC), they essentially destroyed the old service in 2010, suspended the free offering, and fired half the company. I've always wondered if the original concept of Ning could have in fact succeeded, if they hadn't built the company using the typical boom or die, drive the venture capital into the wall model. I think there's still something big there, if someone can figure out how to do it very, very inexpensively and keep it open. Minimalize the commercial abuse, build in strong spam and trust controls.
kerrsclyde 8y ago
This is exactly how I feel. The same thing happened in my area of interest (historic transport). Facebook provided an easier interface for user adding content and an easier admin system over old school forums. Everybody drank the kool-aid but we now have islands of content which are impossible to search and keep track of (unless you dutifully tune in each day). The whole things has made me disillusioned to contribute to any sort of online discussion, I certainly have no interest in becoming one of Facebooks unpaid income generators.

by hanoz 8y ago

tomrod 8y ago

Economies of scale, I guess? Easier to host there than to have dedicated hobbyists support the technology needs.

adventured 8y ago
Ning showed some promise in being able to provide that. It took off like a rocket initially. Maybe they benefited from launching in 2005, prior to Facebook reaching any meaningful saturation (consuming all the oxygen in the segment). When they figured out the financial side of it wasn't going to work (having raised $119m in VC), they essentially destroyed the old service in 2010, suspended the free offering, and fired half the company. I've always wondered if the original concept of Ning could have in fact succeeded, if they hadn't built the company using the typical boom or die, drive the venture capital into the wall model. I think there's still something big there, if someone can figure out how to do it very, very inexpensively and keep it open. Minimalize the commercial abuse, build in strong spam and trust controls.

kerrsclyde 8y ago

This is exactly how I feel. The same thing happened in my area of interest (historic transport). Facebook provided an easier interface for user adding content and an easier admin system over old school forums. Everybody drank the kool-aid but we now have islands of content which are impossible to search and keep track of (unless you dutifully tune in each day). The whole things has made me disillusioned to contribute to any sort of online discussion, I certainly have no interest in becoming one of Facebooks unpaid income generators.