4 ms·

My take on it is this: As someone else noted thoughtfully in this thread, Norvig once said "Go where the data is." [extreme paraphrase] Google's data isn't la

My take on it is this: As someone else noted thoughtfully in this thread, Norvig once said "Go where the data is." [extreme paraphrase] Google's data isn't largely proprietary. The web is accessible for any to crawl. Google Maps is based on essentially public data, or easily obtained data. A savvy and well funded enough competitor could enter these markets. Facebook's data is proprietary and user-created. The users have built-in inertia for Facebook 'cause they sure as hell don't want to abandon the three years of content they've built on a whim. Add to that Google's recent missteps like net neutrality, and their insane and technocratic hiring policies, and I don't think I know a single truly bright person who would want to go to Google right now. Facebook, however, is looking pretty damn sexy... all that data that the users forked over... hmmm... Not to mention the fact that if you're a social person, Facebook is FUN.

richardw 16y ago
Interesting point, but Google has much, much more of my data than Facebook has. FB has a few likes of mine and around 200 friends, with a relatively small number of messages. Google has my multi-year mail history (content plus a pretty big social graph that means far more than a few old school friends), my searches (and therefore interests), what adverts I've clicked on, which pages get the most traffic on my websites. It has documents I've worked on with friends and associates. It has my calendar. I've got a bunch of sites sitting on Google servers. When I use my iPhone, Google provides the maps and knows where I'm going.
- digitailor 16y ago
  This is a really good point, and highlights a major difference between information derived from users based on them asking for services and explicit data users have "declared". The derived information may actually be more valuable, as you say, but because the declared data is more direct and voluntary, it has higher PERCEIVED value (at least it did to me). This may be one of the reasons FB is more attractive then Google right now- and perception is everything when it comes to valuation. Great post, thanks.

richardw 16y ago

Interesting point, but Google has much, much more of my data than Facebook has. FB has a few likes of mine and around 200 friends, with a relatively small number of messages. Google has my multi-year mail history (content plus a pretty big social graph that means far more than a few old school friends), my searches (and therefore interests), what adverts I've clicked on, which pages get the most traffic on my websites. It has documents I've worked on with friends and associates. It has my calendar. I've got a bunch of sites sitting on Google servers. When I use my iPhone, Google provides the maps and knows where I'm going.

digitailor 16y ago
This is a really good point, and highlights a major difference between information derived from users based on them asking for services and explicit data users have "declared". The derived information may actually be more valuable, as you say, but because the declared data is more direct and voluntary, it has higher PERCEIVED value (at least it did to me). This may be one of the reasons FB is more attractive then Google right now- and perception is everything when it comes to valuation. Great post, thanks.