3 ms·
I assume they're thinking the groups of people that read security disclosure articles and those that would use FB dating are disjoint. They're probably not wron
by deminature 7y ago
I assume they're thinking the groups of people that read security disclosure articles and those that would use FB dating are disjoint. They're probably not wrong.
- jerf 7y agoWe overestimate change in the short-term but underestimate it in the long term. Any individual news story isn't going to be the reason Facebook loses 75% of their users over night, but the steady march of these stories isn't going to have no effect. I find it easy to imagine a world where in 5-10 years, Facebook is a complete non-entity, and for all the articles written that claim to understand why, nobody will actually be able to point at any small set of events as an explanation. It could be the very small contributions of a lot of events. I (physically) don't live in SV or its bubble, and I can assure you, the news that Facebook isn't necessarily trustworthy is getting out there to "the masses". It isn't necessarily changing people habits yet, but the process is certainly started. By the time it causes noticeable problems for Facebook, it may be too far progressed for them to do anything about it.
- deminature 7y agoI agree with you, but Facebook seems be aware and is mitigating using brands like Instagram and Whatsapp which average people don't associate with Facebook. If they keep acquiring undervalued social companies and downplaying their ownership, I could see them sticking around for quite a while unfortunately.