5 ms·

How Facebook Could Beat Google

37 points by svag 16y ago

jdp23 16y ago
quick summary: after winning the identity war, launch a third-party ad service. if it happens, Ryan projects FB could be worth $100B
- rsingel 16y ago
  jdp23, you are hereby given the tl;dr Wired.com badge. Submit your Facebook UID and we'll let you prominently place it on your page.
  - jdp23 16y ago
    thanks! do you want my SSN and bank account numbers too?
- pak 16y ago
  This is actually a tremendous idea. One of the main arguments against FB monetizing their ads is because "FB users don't go on FB to click on ads". This is anecdotally true. But when FB Connect and Like buttons have you logged in everywhere, there's nothing stopping them from showing you targeted ads when you are shopping, or searching or doing things where ad CTR would be much higher.
kingkawn 16y ago
The mainstream trajectory of web experience from AOL to Google to Facebook is ironic. If it happens.
brown9-2 16y ago
Some tech pundits foresee a Facebook future where friend recommendations replace search I don't even understand how anyone can think this would be useful. Would it be helpful when shopping for a new phone to know if my "friends" have had better experience with Android or an iPhone? Sure. But will a friend's recommendations help me find driving directions to a location, or help me search for the answer to an elusive error message from a piece of software I'm using, or help me find out more information on a historic event or disease I want to learn more about? How often are these "tech pundits" correct in their prognostications anyway?
- kunjaan 16y ago
  I think my friends recommendation to rank the serp if done intelligently would be great.
- drats 16y ago
  The confusion of all these journalists lies in the fact that Google and Facebook are direct competitors because they both are advertising companies based on data. But they both have fairly different usage scenarios so you'd say that they are in partial competition like fast food being sold in a theme park and a fast food company that does deliveries to homes and offices. But maybe it's not that distinct; I suppose the product recommendation engine could go beyond your local graph into friends of friends so that you can see what SLR camera your "greater tribe" has been most satisfied with, see what they said about it and see some of their photos they've taken with it. But am I going to really be swayed by this vs. an Anandtech style SSD review or a camcorderinfo.com one[1]? I think not. Maybe for something I don't care much about and wish I could care less about, like clothes, I could be swayed. But as soon as Amazon has a system where I can send in all my measurements and then browse appropriate stuff from home and set up "manpacks" style periodic deliveries I doubt I will step foot in another clothes store again. As I understand it, that's pretty much in development right now. And as you say, Google is organising the world's information well beyond products. I share your disappointment in these tech pundits, but even HN returns to them constantly like moths to a flame. [1] some of these reviews are seriously impressive in their depth vs CNET "senior" editors (btw has anyone ever actually seen a non-"senior" CNET editor?) http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HF-S100-Camcorder-Review-36389/Color-amp-Noise-Performance.htm http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HF-S100-Camcorder...
  - joe_the_user 16y ago
    I think cameras are a great example. I don't care what my "greater tribe" thinks of a camera. Why should I? What difference could it possibly make - unless I'm a moron who needs to be seen carrying the same camera as Bob-the-cool-guy? Even more, only a dull minority of modern people have only one "tribe". I might share a friendship with one group of people based on a single interest and another group based on another and the two groups only marginally intersect. I was impressed that a member of my martial arts group brought a camera to video our practice group. But I have no reason to think he actually knows more about cameras than the average camera using person and I didn't ask his advice in buying a camera when I did buy one (I bought my camera used off craiglist after Googling up some reviews - basically finding the cheapest item that satisfied my needs).
lhnn 16y ago
The baiting headline about "winning the net" is really annoying. I really, truly doubt any one company will own the Internet. Google has tons of fiber, a cache of a ton of the Internet already, maps of the entire planet, algorithms that can predict the stock market... I think Google still has more muscle than Facebook. Also, unless we get into some seriously Orwellian stuff, identity will not be required for EVERY site on the net. Therefore, no one owns the net.
- malloreon 16y ago
  Think about how fast the "like" button was adopted all over the internet. All these sites did so for two reasons: the possibility of getting additional free traffic from facebook, and access to their fans' feed and potentially friends' feeds. If FB can make the case that requiring people to FB connect on a 3rd party site will drive traffic, raise revenues, and whatever, many/most sites will make the change. They won't shut out non-connected users, but they may degrade the experience to encourage connectedness. It sounds Orwellian, but it's not difficult for it to make business sense for large swaths of the internet.
  - chopsueyar 16y ago
    I bet most websites have no idea why the hell they have a 'Like' button on their site. Everbody else is doing it, why shouldn't I?
  - joe_the_user 16y ago
    Lots of sites have a bar with five+ ways of sharing every article but that's hardly a sign that delicious, digg, redit and so-forth are winning (a lot of those bars are broken too, btw). Web real estate for link-images seems easy to get once you reach a certain level of mind-share but I can't see getting image everywhere as being the same as becoming a necessary part of the web. If taking credit cost little, every remaining store in the US would do it tomorrow. Does that mean many stores would be willing to stop accepting cash? No way. (well not 'till "the beast" slouches a little closer to ba-by-lon but I'm not hold my breath).
skbohra123 16y ago
why suddenly everyone is talking about Google vs Facebook , instead of Google vs Microsoft? Though I hate MS but still it's a good rival to fight with. Facebook? Uh oh.
S_A_P 16y ago
Why does any one company have to "win" the internet? Why do people need to have a "best" web company? Pitting companies as enemies? I cannot understand the line of thinking- does this person want there to be some sorta web monopoly big brother type figure that strikes down all who oppose? This is tabloid writing...
gnaritas 16y ago
They can't, Facebook is a gnat, Google is an elephant, they aren't even in the same league. When their profit is 10 times what it is now, then maybe they can be in that conversation, but just barely as it'll still only be half of what Google makes.

37 points by svag 16y ago

jdp23 16y ago

quick summary: after winning the identity war, launch a third-party ad service. if it happens, Ryan projects FB could be worth $100B

rsingel 16y ago
jdp23, you are hereby given the tl;dr Wired.com badge. Submit your Facebook UID and we'll let you prominently place it on your page.
- jdp23 16y ago
  thanks! do you want my SSN and bank account numbers too?
pak 16y ago
This is actually a tremendous idea. One of the main arguments against FB monetizing their ads is because "FB users don't go on FB to click on ads". This is anecdotally true. But when FB Connect and Like buttons have you logged in everywhere, there's nothing stopping them from showing you targeted ads when you are shopping, or searching or doing things where ad CTR would be much higher.

kingkawn 16y ago

The mainstream trajectory of web experience from AOL to Google to Facebook is ironic. If it happens.

brown9-2 16y ago

Some tech pundits foresee a Facebook future where friend recommendations replace search I don't even understand how anyone can think this would be useful. Would it be helpful when shopping for a new phone to know if my "friends" have had better experience with Android or an iPhone? Sure. But will a friend's recommendations help me find driving directions to a location, or help me search for the answer to an elusive error message from a piece of software I'm using, or help me find out more information on a historic event or disease I want to learn more about? How often are these "tech pundits" correct in their prognostications anyway?

kunjaan 16y ago
I think my friends recommendation to rank the serp if done intelligently would be great.
drats 16y ago
The confusion of all these journalists lies in the fact that Google and Facebook are direct competitors because they both are advertising companies based on data. But they both have fairly different usage scenarios so you'd say that they are in partial competition like fast food being sold in a theme park and a fast food company that does deliveries to homes and offices. But maybe it's not that distinct; I suppose the product recommendation engine could go beyond your local graph into friends of friends so that you can see what SLR camera your "greater tribe" has been most satisfied with, see what they said about it and see some of their photos they've taken with it. But am I going to really be swayed by this vs. an Anandtech style SSD review or a camcorderinfo.com one[1]? I think not. Maybe for something I don't care much about and wish I could care less about, like clothes, I could be swayed. But as soon as Amazon has a system where I can send in all my measurements and then browse appropriate stuff from home and set up "manpacks" style periodic deliveries I doubt I will step foot in another clothes store again. As I understand it, that's pretty much in development right now. And as you say, Google is organising the world's information well beyond products. I share your disappointment in these tech pundits, but even HN returns to them constantly like moths to a flame. [1] some of these reviews are seriously impressive in their depth vs CNET "senior" editors (btw has anyone ever actually seen a non-"senior" CNET editor?) http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HF-S100-Camcorder-Review-36389/Color-amp-Noise-Performance.htm http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HF-S100-Camcorder...
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  I think cameras are a great example. I don't care what my "greater tribe" thinks of a camera. Why should I? What difference could it possibly make - unless I'm a moron who needs to be seen carrying the same camera as Bob-the-cool-guy? Even more, only a dull minority of modern people have only one "tribe". I might share a friendship with one group of people based on a single interest and another group based on another and the two groups only marginally intersect. I was impressed that a member of my martial arts group brought a camera to video our practice group. But I have no reason to think he actually knows more about cameras than the average camera using person and I didn't ask his advice in buying a camera when I did buy one (I bought my camera used off craiglist after Googling up some reviews - basically finding the cheapest item that satisfied my needs).

lhnn 16y ago

The baiting headline about "winning the net" is really annoying. I really, truly doubt any one company will own the Internet. Google has tons of fiber, a cache of a ton of the Internet already, maps of the entire planet, algorithms that can predict the stock market... I think Google still has more muscle than Facebook. Also, unless we get into some seriously Orwellian stuff, identity will not be required for EVERY site on the net. Therefore, no one owns the net.

malloreon 16y ago
Think about how fast the "like" button was adopted all over the internet. All these sites did so for two reasons: the possibility of getting additional free traffic from facebook, and access to their fans' feed and potentially friends' feeds. If FB can make the case that requiring people to FB connect on a 3rd party site will drive traffic, raise revenues, and whatever, many/most sites will make the change. They won't shut out non-connected users, but they may degrade the experience to encourage connectedness. It sounds Orwellian, but it's not difficult for it to make business sense for large swaths of the internet.
- chopsueyar 16y ago
  I bet most websites have no idea why the hell they have a 'Like' button on their site. Everbody else is doing it, why shouldn't I?
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  Lots of sites have a bar with five+ ways of sharing every article but that's hardly a sign that delicious, digg, redit and so-forth are winning (a lot of those bars are broken too, btw). Web real estate for link-images seems easy to get once you reach a certain level of mind-share but I can't see getting image everywhere as being the same as becoming a necessary part of the web. If taking credit cost little, every remaining store in the US would do it tomorrow. Does that mean many stores would be willing to stop accepting cash? No way. (well not 'till "the beast" slouches a little closer to ba-by-lon but I'm not hold my breath).

skbohra123 16y ago

why suddenly everyone is talking about Google vs Facebook , instead of Google vs Microsoft? Though I hate MS but still it's a good rival to fight with. Facebook? Uh oh.

S_A_P 16y ago

Why does any one company have to "win" the internet? Why do people need to have a "best" web company? Pitting companies as enemies? I cannot understand the line of thinking- does this person want there to be some sorta web monopoly big brother type figure that strikes down all who oppose? This is tabloid writing...

gnaritas 16y ago

They can't, Facebook is a gnat, Google is an elephant, they aren't even in the same league. When their profit is 10 times what it is now, then maybe they can be in that conversation, but just barely as it'll still only be half of what Google makes.