3 ms·

I think Dave is dreaming up too complex a proposition. If a social network has all these complexities, how will it grow? If FB had all these complexities, it w

by revorad 16y ago

I think Dave is dreaming up too complex a proposition. If a social network has all these complexities, how will it grow? If FB had all these complexities, it would never grow so big. Now that it is big, it can experiment with groups, although even that is a second attempt because lists didn't work. People hate settings. FB is like an online version of a bar. People just want to hang out. The intimate alternative he is imagining is email. People already use it and it works fine. Before Facebook came along, was anyone writing blog posts about how nice it will be if a website let me share photos of my last holiday with my random old school buddies who I haven't spoken to in 20 years? These things are quite random. So, in as far as something will take down Facebook, it will simply be something which is equally or more viral and fun. It does not matter what its specific form or function will be. Intimacy is not essential.

dfield 16y ago
Dave isn't giving you a solution. He's pointing out a number of problems that need to be solved. Just because technology works fine doesn't mean it's the optimal solution. Tech develops incrementally. Stack Overflow has a search feature and it works fine. But wouldn't it be cool if someone aggregated results from different programming websites? (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1854731 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1854731) Check out Union Square Venture's blogpost from May: http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2010/05/stackoverflow.php http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2010/05/stackoverflow.php. In addition to describing their investment, the post describes problems in the space. If you had never heard of Stack Overflow and you only read about the problems in that post, would you say the solution was too complex?
- revorad 16y ago
  The headline suggests he is proposing a solution: a social network which beats FB by prioritising intimacy. I think it's pretty much like dating sites. Before you solve the chicken-and-egg problem, it's meaningless to talk about how you add value. And the proposed value-add here (intimacy) makes the chicken-and-egg problem even more difficult (a dating site only for Mac lovers, anyone?). Edited for clarity

by revorad 16y ago

dfield 16y ago

Dave isn't giving you a solution. He's pointing out a number of problems that need to be solved. Just because technology works fine doesn't mean it's the optimal solution. Tech develops incrementally. Stack Overflow has a search feature and it works fine. But wouldn't it be cool if someone aggregated results from different programming websites? (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1854731 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1854731) Check out Union Square Venture's blogpost from May: http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2010/05/stackoverflow.php http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2010/05/stackoverflow.php. In addition to describing their investment, the post describes problems in the space. If you had never heard of Stack Overflow and you only read about the problems in that post, would you say the solution was too complex?

revorad 16y ago
The headline suggests he is proposing a solution: a social network which beats FB by prioritising intimacy. I think it's pretty much like dating sites. Before you solve the chicken-and-egg problem, it's meaningless to talk about how you add value. And the proposed value-add here (intimacy) makes the chicken-and-egg problem even more difficult (a dating site only for Mac lovers, anyone?). Edited for clarity