15 ms·
I was once a Facebook fool
- kevingadd 15y agoSobering to see a story in which the record labels are, in comparison, the good guys.
- onosendai 15y agoWhy the "good guys"? At best they were a neutral party who just wanted to flog their wares.
- mnutt 15y agoDefinitely not the good guys. While I totally sympathize with Numair's story, I can actually see scenarios where both Numair and Chamath would be telling the truth. We were sitting in the record label's offices with the biz dev guys (and even the CEO!) telling us how great this partnership was going to be, and somewhere else in the building the general counsel was issuing threatening statements. The business side had very little control over the legal side.
- bravura 15y ago'Chamath had been previously known to me from my friends at Winamp as "the guy who fucked Winamp," (after Winamp had been sold to AOL) and seemed like a pretty lame dude.' Does anyone know more about this back story?
- wccrawford 15y agoAren't there laws against things like this?
- eyko 15y agoAgainst bad-mouthing big, powerful, businesses? Yeah, I think so.
- praptak 15y agoI believe that "bad-mouthing" does not imply "lying". There are no laws against vilifying, criticizing severely, speaking unfavorably of big, powerful businesses as long as you have some backup in facts. Edit: Supreme courts (or equivalents) in most countries make it very clear in their verdicts that protecting the right to expose scoundrels is very high on their priority list. Especially if the scoundrels are big and powerful. Public interest and all that.
- dos1 15y agoBig powerful businesses maybe, but apparently you can tell the truth and still have to pay damages to individuals: http://www.startribune.com/local/117805398.html http://www.startribune.com/local/117805398.html
- tokenadult 15y agoThat trial court verdict is extremely anomalous (I say as a lawyer from the same state) and is being appealed. http://www.minnpost.com/braublog/2011/03/14/26584/johnny_northside_damn_right_were_appealing_60000_judgment http://www.minnpost.com/braublog/2011/03/14/26584/johnny_nor... http://minnlawyer.com/jdr/2011/03/21/is-the-special-verdict-form-to-blame-for-the-johnny-northside-verdict/ http://minnlawyer.com/jdr/2011/03/21/is-the-special-verdict-... http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2011/06/06/johnny-northside-60000-judgment-upheld-northside-blog-suit http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2011/06/06/johnny-northsid... http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=12002 http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=12002 http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2011/60000-ruling-against-truthful-blogger-tests-limits-first-amendment http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2011/60000-ruling-against-tr...
- itswindy 15y agoNasty business so watch your back
- elliottcarlson 15y ago"If you are entrusting your life data to Facebook, or if you are depending on Facebook and its platform for your livelihood, beware." I think you should always be careful when you are entrusting any third party with your livelihood. You can only plan so much, but when your business plan requires that one crucial system and you have no way to even have a contingency plan, then you have to realize that it could easily be a make or break deal at any point in time.
- zerostar07 15y agoOn the other hand that doesn't mean you can avoid them altogether. In the ideal case, you have the option to choose among competing platforms. The problem with facebook is that since the end of myspace, it's still the largest web app platform.
- pingswept 15y ago> In the ideal case, you have the option to choose among competing platforms. My ideal is not to entrust my livelihood to any third party. Obviously, it depends on what I want to build, but so far I'm happy not using any social platform beyond, say, email. The free, open platform of the Internet, LAMP stack, a web framework, and search engines is fine for me. I almost, but not quite, regret the time I've put into using Facebook at all, never mind basing my livelihood on it.
- gyardley 15y agoSpoken like someone whose business was never impacted by a search engine update, or whose email was never filtered by a major email provider. While some platforms are more free and open than others, our livelihoods are all somewhat dependent on third parties. Hope for the best and plan for the worse.
- pingswept 15y agoTotally agreed about search engine updates. I also agree that we all have some dependence on others as part of living in society, but that's at a different level-- I don't need to worry about Safeway returning "access denied" next time I try to buy a box of cereal. I disagree about email filtering. A friend sending another friend an email that says, "Check out this cool thing I saw" does not get filtered by anyone. Email that borders on spam gets filtered, sure, but overall, email serves as one of the most open communication platforms we've ever had. It's a drastic difference from Facebook or Myspace.
- snorkel 15y agotl;dr: Facebook offerings are skewed by corporate politics and whoever can score a better partner deal. No surprises here. Large companies are heavily staffed by biz dev people whose job it is to make partnership deals. The key essential ingredient in all partnership deals, the brass ring, is "exclusivity" without which there often is no deal to speak of. This particular individual unfortunately was not awarded exclusivity.
- kanwisher 15y agoSeems strange that Chamath was 'evil' wanting to get his friend's business in as the music app for facebook, but it was totally fine when the author was getting his friend in? Seems like a double standard
- gnaffle 15y agoI missed the part where the author asked his friend to have other music apps pulled on order to promote his own app? Apparently this is what Chamath did, and what Morin tried to keep from happening.
- brown9-2 15y agoWhile Dave Morin worked quietly and bravely to defend me against the moves of iLike and Facebook executives to shut down Audio, he eventually found himself as a casualty in a greater power play quietly orchestrated by Sean Parker and Mark Zuckerberg, in which he was demoted and replaced by Chamath Palihapitiya. Do the two guys that run the company really need to "orchestrate" a "power play" to promote one person over another? I think this sounds far more Machiavellian than it likely was.
- hello_moto 15y agoGrowth company, big money over the horizon, you don't want to see another lawsuit coming from your employees.
- zerostar07 15y agoAs a facebook app developer i am aware of what shaky ground it is. I must attest the best days of the platform was when Morin was in charge, people were actually flocking to make apps and the platform was adding features. Ever since he left, feature pruning started, policies were not enforced, facebook changed their designs every month and the platform team inexplicably started reinventing the wheel. Then at some point facebook banned our AdSense revenue stream, and soon after they required 30% cut of our virtual goods. We have now switched to an external website using facebook connect and are happy with it. I am thrilled that Google+ is building a competing platform.
- danmaz74 15y agoThis could be an important differentiator for Google. Let's hope that the competition will heat up on this.
- csarva 15y agoIf you're looking to Google for a solution then I think you're looking in the wrong direction. Just look at the latest crop of anti-competitive complaints against them -- like Yelp for one.
- danmaz74 15y agoWell, at least for now they are the underdog, so it would be in their interest to be more open in the "social" space. The Yelp case, whatever you may think about it, is in a completely different realm.
- mattdeboard 15y agoYelp complaining about anticompetitive practices by Google is about as hypocritical as you can get.
- AJ007 15y agoThere are very strong parallels with the Facebook platform and companies building their business model around free traffic from Google. Small guys get walked all over while bigger ones that reciprocate dollars back to the traffic source (such as Demand Media in Google's case, or Zynga in Facebook's) suspiciously get the red carpet. As a business owner you should absolutely exploit every opportunity you can to get those users from wherever the traffic is flowing from. However, if you don't hedge your bets, you may find that in 3 years instead of having a nice business you have absolutely nothing.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- brain5ide 15y agoCould have happened at any other big company. No biggie. "Facebook" here is just headline making. I don't deny it being u-g-l-y and bad, just that it's not a Facebook issue.
- mosburger 15y agoI once worked for a startup that got screwed trying to build a Facebook music platform - promised the world, then the rug was pulled out from under us (by both the labels and FB, and our two major investors were the labels themselves... it was quite ridiculous). I think we were probably just a pawn used as leverage for their negotiations with other players. Anyway, yeah, I have little doubt that this story is legit.
- properez 15y agoHeres a link that may help to debate your doubts: http://www.allfacebook.com/talking-with-facebooks-music-master-2007-07 http://www.allfacebook.com/talking-with-facebooks-music-mast...
- sid6376 15y agoA google search about numair faraz turned up this article http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/motorola-insider-tells-all-about-the-fall-of-a-technology-icon/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/motorola-insider-tells-al... . An interesting read mainly because it was brave.
- pge 15y agoor one could conclude that he has a history of publicly blaming higher-ups and corporate management for failures in which he was involved. what's brave about embarrassing your boss and your company publicly? or making unsubstantiated claims about conspiracies against you?
- alecco 15y agoHe sounds like someone who cares about the company instead of a soulless drone who keeps quiet and counts his chips while looking for the next job.
- raganwald 15y agowhat's brave about embarrassing your boss and your company publicly Without saying anything about his character or motives, it is a given that public criticism of your current or former boss and/or company will have negative consequences for your career. Knowingly doing so is brave and/or foolhardy regardless of whether your motives are noble or crass.
- jakemcgraw 15y agoSee Gruber[1] on being a middle man. If your business is reselling someone else's content on someone else's platform, you're going to get fucked right quick. [1]: http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/dirty_percent http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/dirty_percent
- rmc 15y agoIt seems like doing any sort of business around the Music Industry is a massive pain in the head, and liable to get you sued/shut down easily.
- properez 15y agoThis is true.Being originally from the Bronx NY i have been in connection with a few people who know how FAT JOE does business. Allegedly Puerto Rican and African American rappers from the Bronx were getting signed to FAT JOES label and then being kept on the back burner for publication. Turns out the plan was to make sure to not have any new rap icons come from the Bronx so that he can get all the notoriety of being the Bronx icon. The music business is no joke. This is a true story.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- aridiculous 15y agoI kind of get the strategy, but it seems risky and expensive to try and "catch" all (or at least enough to be effective) bronx rappers before they got famous. To be honest, if it was a foolish plan, that sort of makes it more scummy in my mind: to care so little about others that you execute a crappy plan just because you can.
- TomOfTTB 15y agoI’m not saying the author is wrong here but I think he’s unfair in attacking just Facebook. The one thing I learned from my time in the valley is that EVERYONE is looking out for themselves. That isn’t meant as negatively as it sounds. People go there to prove themselves. Either by making money or making their mark on the world (which is why people like Sean Parker stick around even after they’ve made money). But whatever the case they’re in it to win at all costs. That’s why people work 18 hours a day and pour every cent they have into their startup. But that’s the relevant point. If people are going to give up everything in their lives to win you can’t assume they’ll then hinder their chances by looking out for your needs. In this story the author is upset because Facebook decided they had a better chance of winning by partnering with iLike. But could you really expect any company in the valley to act differently? There are plenty of places in the world where the environment isn’t as competitive and if that appeals to you then you should go there. But if you decide to start a company in the heart of the startup world you should expect everyone to be working towards their own goals and plan accordingly. That means NEVER relying on ANYBODY more than you have to and ALWAYS having a backup plan.
- witten 15y agoAll the more reason not to be a sharecropper and build your application on an open platform. If you know you're working in an environment in which everyone is looking out solely for their own interests, you might as well start out on even footing rather than with a Facebook or Microsoft holding the keys to your project's success.
- dendory 15y agoThis is not new, there are tons of tales online of Facebook cutting off apps because they were working on a competitive product. Just this summer a ton of photo apps got their access removed with no explanation, only to find out that Facebook was revamping their galleries.
- raganwald 15y agoSharecropper woes: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla... http://raganwald.posterous.com/the-freedom-to-eat-pizza http://raganwald.posterous.com/the-freedom-to-eat-pizza http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-in-orchard.html http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-in-orchard...
- mark_l_watson 15y agoGreat links, Reg! That said, here is good opportunity to prosper on other peoples' platforms, but diversify.
- jerf 15y agoAnd when Facebook says to either remove your widget from Google+, or it will be removed from Facebook? Diversification is at their pleasure too.
- randomdata 15y agoSharecropping is kind of a weird analogy to use here. In farming, sharecropping is the low risk way to grow your business. It is the landlord that takes on much of the burden if the crop fails. But with small risk comes small reward. In technology, "sharecropping" is the high risk venture. The landlord here assumes no risk at all if your application fails. The burden falls squarely on you. However, with the high risk, if you hit it big, the payoff potential is huge. So while there are some parallels, from a business point of view, working with someone else's platform is nothing at all like sharecropping.
- ryandawidjan 15y agoNumair also has a very interesting read of a homepage. http://numair.com/ http://numair.com/ "Live your life as though it is the world's best-kept secret, as though you are living in an amazing TV show with an audience of one."
- vvpan 15y agoToo much DRAMA.
- tresjuh 15y agoWhy is Facebook special? Twitter supported bit.ly and Google supports Google Reader. They all act the same.
- roopeshv 15y agogoogle reader is google's own product. what is your point with that?
- tresjuh 15y agoAnd that is why it is first result for keyword reader? or feed? They use search to support RSS. Not to mention Checkout. And those messages in Gmail about Firefox being not optimal? It's is the same thing: using one product to support another one. I dont give a damn if Chrome is google's or not. I want to say that they all do that. I don't support it, but it's not unique for Facebook.
- yakto 15y agoNot the first interesting tell-all by Numair: http://public.numair.com/2006_parker.html http://public.numair.com/2006_parker.html
- sunchild 15y ago"I was sitting in Jimmy Iovine's office; Jimmy personally called the GC of Universal" That's worth the price of admission alone. Sounds like fun!
- maratd 15y agoThis is not endemic to Facebook. It applies to any platform. Apple, eBay, Amazon, etc. When you build a business on their platform, you don't have a business. You have a product on their platform and it is their product. They are simply taking a hands-off approach and reaping the benefits. They can shut you down at any time and they will, when it suits their interests. That is the key here. That conflict of interest. Most of the time, it isn't an issue ... but when it comes to the surface, you will be thrown under the bus. Also, the customers you think you have ... they're not your customers. If you went to a different platform, those customers would not come along. The customers, they are their customers, not yours.
- tsunamifury 15y agoIf you were big enough to be a threat, then you have a pretty good problem on your hands. Yes your platform host might throw you under the bus, but I'm betting you could turn it around.
- jseliger 15y agoThis is not endemic to Facebook. It applies to any platform. Apple, eBay, Amazon, etc. I'm not sure this is really true. If you build a regular application for Windows, Linux, or OS X, Microsoft, Red Hat, or Apple can't control whether I install your application. No one "approves" Firefox for OS X. Curated, for lack of a better term, applications only appear on particular platforms -- cell phones, sub-sections of websites, and so forth.
- bstrand 15y agoThe desktop is moving in this direction as well. Your example of OS X is shaky in particular, given the App Store. Even if it's still _possible_ in the future, acquiring apps outside the official channel will be exceptional, done only by enthusiasts.
- dhimes 15y agoI was going to say the same- I bet it would have been done long ago if, for example, MS thought they could get away with it. I'm curious as to how the law is going to interpret this in the future. The closed ecosystem of ios may be a bad (in my mind) precedent.
- gavanwoolery 15y agoI definitely sympathize with the story - that just flat out sucks... but... Making a "feature" product is always a bad idea, IMHO, for reasons even beyond the ones the author points out. You should never build a feature for a product, if history is not a lesson on its own - very few of them make a successful exit. At any point, the company might decide they can do it better than you or it would be cheaper to build the feature than acquire you - or, most importantly, your hacks and external servers might not mesh well with their vision of an integrated platform.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- spinchange 15y agoI recall Chamath Palihapitiya also figured somewhat prominently in the Beacon saga. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Beacon#Privacy_concerns http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Beacon#Privacy_concern... Edit: I see the FA has been edited, now referring to him as "AOL Guy"
- mmaro 15y agoHe also replaced 'iLike' with 'the "competitor"' and 'Sean Parker and Mark Zuckerberg' with 'senior Facebook executives'
- veyron 15y agoEvery time i read something like this, I think about the fred wilson quote about being someone's bitch. Anyone have that direct link?
- joejohnson 15y agoI had no idea what you were talking about. But Googling "Fred Wilson bitch" gives this: http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/23/fred-wilson-be-your-own-bitch/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/23/fred-wilson-be-your-own-bit...
- properez 15y agoI agree with, But it also means that in this industry you have to have a backup plan of some sort. He knew the character of Sean Parker and his antics. The man is a player and always will be.The industry is a relentless field of battle. Doesn't excuse leading someone on though. i know to well of having a business partner lead me on while he worked other projects. But i dont think Facebook as a company should take all the blame for that one person.
- timr 15y agoIt's not especially interesting that Facebook made a deal for a music app (and subsequently supported that deal over a competitor). This is business, not charity. What's interesting to me is that iLike -- the success story of early platform days -- was being promoted heavily from within Facebook itself. If you read the press at that time, you'd have been excused for thinking that the Partovi brothers were the victims of a random lightning strike -- just two guys who got lucky with a tiny little app. I know that in Seattle, everyone was buzzing about how iLike was caught so "unaware" by their traction that they were borrowing servers from local companies just to keep up. Now it turns out that the "overnight success" was at least somewhat pre-ordained. It's just another bit of practical evidence about the origins of business success in the Valley. Your rolodex matters a lot.
- fauigerzigerk 15y agoIf everyone had known from the start that Facebook would make that kind of deal and kick all other apps of the same kind out, it would have been OK. But running a platform that is supposedly governed by rules and then using underhand tactics like these to kill apps arbitrarily is not OK. It puts a big question mark on Facebook as a platform and I think the author of the article is right that everyone should think very carefully before building on top of that sort of "platform".
- nickswan 15y agoYou run this risk when you build on or using any type of platform. If you build something that is hugely successful you might get acquired by the platform provider, or if it's cheaper they might build it themselves.
- chrischen 15y agoYon't run this risk when building for Windows or OS X.
- DougBTX 15y agoYou can generalise even further: when going into a business partnership, weight up the risks that the other party will become competitors in the future. That seems to be what is happening between Apple and Samsung at the moment.
- numair 15y agoWow, well, this got way more attention than I wanted. First, to be clear -- I have nothing against the guy who took Dave Morin's job (who wasn't supposed to be named -- Amazon CloudFront didn't bother to invalidate its cache when I uploaded the final edit of that paper). He played his cards right, came out hundreds of millions of dollars ahead, and then he got out. He's not in this to control your social life or anything, he just played the Silicon Valley game and got his. The issue is really about the people who are trying to control your social life, and who are trying to convince the sort of people who read Hacker News to use them as a stable, reliable piece of infrastructure for your projects and businesses. My story is just one datapoint of so many -- most of which are private, but easily discoverable by quietly asking around the Valley -- that should help you realize that Facebook is definitely not the company you want operating the world's social infrastructure. The code might work, the pages might render, but on a deep social and ethical level, Facebook and its platform are not web-scale. Also, the "sharecropper" and "beware of your platform" arguments don't apply here. Social infrastructure isn't like being a developer for the Playstation -- this is very basic and very global stuff, similar to water or power, and you shouldn't have to question its integrity. I shouldn't get dirty water, or my power shut off, because the CEO of the utility company allows his/her VPs to play God. There's a reason these guys don't call themselves a "social utility" anymore... But anyway, that's a whole 'nother subject, and I'd rather be coding (or socializing!) than writing. And to all of the people who question why I would even publish something like this -- chill out bro, I'm just obeying Zuckerberg's Law! /disconnect
- ChuckMcM 15y agoWasn't it Cardinal Richelieu who said "Never write a letter and never destroy one." ? :-)
- res0nat0r 15y agoI think comparing Facebook to having access to water or power is a bit of a reach.
- joebadmo 15y agoI don't think he's comparing FB to water, he's comparing social networking/communication/connection to water. Facebook would then be the utility company, with a de facto monopoly, but no check on its power. (Personally I think competition is the check, and I'm on team Google.)
- paulballen 15y agoMy own Facebook developer story...going from 21MM MAU to less than 500k. In our case, we were booted off of key pages (profile pages) and replaced by Facebook's own functionality. http://www.paulallen.net/advice-to-facebook-time-to-launch-operation-baby-come-back/ http://www.paulallen.net/advice-to-facebook-time-to-launch-o... I do think Platforms, in the long run, if they want to win, need to treat developers fairly and honestly, as much as possible. Like other developers, I'm glad to see other social and mobile platforms to build for.
- swah 15y agohttp://magazine.lankahelp.com/2011/01/21/chamath-palihapitiya-a-proud-sri-lankan-in-higher-post-in-facebook-company/ http://magazine.lankahelp.com/2011/01/21/chamath-palihapitiy...
- One_adm12 15y agoThis is a great insight, thanks for sharing!
- stmartin 15y agoI've said this many a times, over and over again, but it bears repeating - again. If a one cheats on a spouse and marries the guy or girl she cheated with, that new marriage is doomed to failure. Sooner or later, the situation becomes unbearable and you either have an explosive divorce, separation, repeat infidelity, violence, the 'silent treatment', or some other unhealthy and dysfunctional dynamic. There is no difference between lacking integrity in a marriage and lacking integrity in business. Facebook is a bubble. The founder, Mark, is unrepentant and left people feeling screwed over. He can deny it all he wants, the reality of the situation is different. He can even try to cover it over by his commitment to the Giving Pledge, but the lack of integrity and the anger some of his former partners rightly feel has not altered one bit to this day. Sure, they may have made money and have gotten appeased somehow, or even 'beaten' in court, but this still does not change people's feelings about what happened. Facebook is rotten in its foundation. Everything else that was built upon that foundation is bound to collapse. The only thing it is useful for is stalking on other people's "Relationship" status and giving the wolves an opportunity to go after its prey when that changes or a sincere thought or feeling is shared on it. That's what Mark wanted it for anyway, since he never quite outgrew his adolescence, nor did he ever found God.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- kwamenum86 15y agoInteresting article and definitely a good read. But I find it interesting that it has broken the top 20 most upvoted articles of all time on HN and is threatening the top 10. This probably has to do with f8 and whatever amount of "upvote inflation" that may be taking place as a result of more users being on HN (6 of the top 10 all-time most upvoted links are from this year. Only one in the top 20 comes before 2010). Timing is everything I guess. 1 1638 Steve Jobs Resigns as CEO of Apple [2011-08-24] 2 1324 Boot a linux kernel right inside your browser. [2011-05-17] 3 1262 Introducing Word Lens [2010-12-17] 4 1232 Today you, tomorrow me [2010-12-14] 5 1196 Google Buys Motorola For $12.5 Billion [2011-08-15] 6 1129 A new approach to China [2010-01-12] 7 1100 Ooops. [2011-06-16] 8 1083 So A Blogger Walks Into A Bar… [2010-09-21] 9 1004 Airbnb Nightmare: No End In Sight [2011-07-29] 10 994 Twitter Bootstrap [2011-08-19] 11 940 Thoughts on Flash [2010-04-29] 12 929 Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned [2011-07-27] 13 906 Chosen: A javascript plug-in that makes long select boxes user-friendly. [2011-07-22] 14 859 I was once a Facebook fool [2011-09-23] 15 856 Osama bin Laden Is Dead [2011-05-02] 16 850 I don't learn anything on HN anymore, bring back the upvote count [2011-04-28] 17 832 How I Hacked Hacker News (with arc security advisory) [2009-06-03] 18 827 Bored People Quit [2011-07-12] 19 822 33GB of public domain JSTOR articles, and a manifesto [2011-07-21] 20 808 A lesson on the importance of encouraging your children with their projects [2011-07-13]
- Empedocles99 15y agoA more interesting metric is: # of votes up / (# of times viewed or # of users viewed) (to normalize against changing userbase size)
- davidhollander 15y ago> the top 20 most upvoted articles of all time I don't think that's an accurate list, as it excludes [dead]ed articles. Zed Shaw's "Programming, Motherfucker" received 870 upvotes: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2355427 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2355427
- freemarketteddy 15y agowhat is the link to the deaded article
- blrs 15y agoHere's a prediction: Since facebook "senior executives" are so fond of central planning, i.e., personally picking winners and losers for kickbacks, instead of creating a level playing field and letting the users pick the best services, its very likely that facebook will suffer the same fate as other centrally planned entities...viz., run into the calculation problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem). They'll make one big miscalculation that will be the end of it. The most obvious miscalculation is mismanaging security, letting in a potent virus that takes down all or enough of facebook's servers.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- shasta 15y agoI've never seen or heard Sean Parker speak, so this really just reinforces to me that Justin Timberlake is a douchebag.
- briandear 15y agoSo, is getting "Zuckerberged" now a legitimate synonym for getting screwed?
- GrahmWellington 15y agoHow about just shortening it to getting "Zucked"?
- tuhin 15y agoI did not realize until this point that it was this very Numair who wrote this brilliant answer on Quora http://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-so-difficult-to-build-a-music-startup/answer/Numair-Faraz http://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-so-difficult-to-build-a-music...
- carnivore 15y agoI was once a Facebook fool, now I'm just a Facebook tool.
- grey666 15y agoFacebook was designed to provide corporate America with your email addresses. There are over 400 known hacks. Every-time you click on a link to Facebook - it's moron+1.
- grey666 15y agoFacebook, the world's easiest site to hack, is on the front page 3 times yet again today. But the links are not about hacking, they are about how great Facebook is. I submit to you that this is not hacker news, but rather victim news.com. Good luck fuckers.
- rblion 15y ago"If you are entrusting your life data to Facebook, or if you are depending on Facebook and its platform for your livelihood, beware. In the real Facebook world, there is no trust, and there is no friendship -- there is only money and power. Think really hard -- really, think -- before trusting Facebook or its employees with anything. Don't be a Facebook fool." You have perfectly worded what I have felt. I've watched Facebook evolve into Big Brother over the past few years. People seem to have no idea that they don't see us as beings but as bytes.
- jprobert 15y agoCongratulations I think you are now the all time #2 behind the announcement that Steve Jobs is leaving!