4 ms·

ugh. As if. Check out this list: http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0001/msg00085.html http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0001/msg0008

ugh. As if. Check out this list: http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0001/msg00085.html http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0001/msg0008.... These are the results from Nielsen research listing the 25 most-visited websites in 2000. Remember Looksmart? Excite (which, BTW, hasn't seemed to have changed it's website since 2000)? These websites were relics of the time when web portals were a big deal, much like how social networking is today. Most of them have gone the way of the dinosaurs. The crowd always seem to believe that somehow "this time is different". This is a naive behavior that is ubiquitous in finance, business, work, friendships, etc. The fact of the matter is that human nature doesn't change. People get bored of things and move on. The same will happen with Facebook, Twitter, etc. Better things will be made because of it, too.

natrius 17y ago
Network effects make this time around substantially different. Note that some of the leading products from that era that benefited from network effects, such as AIM, are still around today.
- theli0nheart 17y ago
  There we go again with "this time is different". Yes, AIM is still around today, but it's clearly nearing the end of its days: http://google.com/trends?q=aol+instant+messenger%2C+facebook+chat&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 http://google.com/trends?q=aol+instant+messenger%2C+facebook.... This is a prime example of one technology replacing another. It's extremely naive to think that it'll stop with Facebook and friends.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - natrius 17y ago
    By the time AIM is irrelevant, AIM and its AOL subscriber-only predecessor will have been important for at least two decades. That is not a short period of time, and its demise could have easily been avoided with a tiny bit of foresight, not that I would've done any better. Facebook won't be around forever, but it's hard to see how it would be dethroned within the next decade.
ryanwaggoner 17y ago
Actually, quite a few of the things on that list are still pretty damn popular. It's easy to pick out one category from the list and say "see, that category died, so social networking will too!" We still have IM, search, browsers, email, content networks, etc, etc, etc. Some things are here to stay...deal with it.
ericflo 17y ago
Please fully read my blog post next time. The last paragraph states that I wouldn't bet much on Facebook being around in 10 years.
- graywh 17y ago
  Do I think that Facebook will be relevant in 10 years? Probably.
  - ericflo 17y ago
    "Do I think that Facebook will be relevant in 10 years? Probably. I'm not willing to bet much on it."
- theli0nheart 17y ago
  In all fairness, the last paragraph read as if you didn't want to be in a position of having to eat your words, as the entire blog post was about how Facebook is super-duper important and no one can ever ignore it.
whatusername 17y ago
The switching costs for facebook are much higher than the switching costs for looksmart or excite. (I had/have an excite email - switching sucked) Also - all your list of sites really shows is that some sites were able to grow and adapt with their audience (see Yahoo) while some didn't. Going on past performance - facebook is in that category.

natrius 17y ago

Network effects make this time around substantially different. Note that some of the leading products from that era that benefited from network effects, such as AIM, are still around today.

theli0nheart 17y ago
There we go again with "this time is different". Yes, AIM is still around today, but it's clearly nearing the end of its days: http://google.com/trends?q=aol+instant+messenger%2C+facebook+chat&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 http://google.com/trends?q=aol+instant+messenger%2C+facebook.... This is a prime example of one technology replacing another. It's extremely naive to think that it'll stop with Facebook and friends.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- natrius 17y ago
  By the time AIM is irrelevant, AIM and its AOL subscriber-only predecessor will have been important for at least two decades. That is not a short period of time, and its demise could have easily been avoided with a tiny bit of foresight, not that I would've done any better. Facebook won't be around forever, but it's hard to see how it would be dethroned within the next decade.

ryanwaggoner 17y ago

Actually, quite a few of the things on that list are still pretty damn popular. It's easy to pick out one category from the list and say "see, that category died, so social networking will too!" We still have IM, search, browsers, email, content networks, etc, etc, etc. Some things are here to stay...deal with it.

ericflo 17y ago

Please fully read my blog post next time. The last paragraph states that I wouldn't bet much on Facebook being around in 10 years.

graywh 17y ago
Do I think that Facebook will be relevant in 10 years? Probably.
- ericflo 17y ago
  "Do I think that Facebook will be relevant in 10 years? Probably. I'm not willing to bet much on it."
theli0nheart 17y ago
In all fairness, the last paragraph read as if you didn't want to be in a position of having to eat your words, as the entire blog post was about how Facebook is super-duper important and no one can ever ignore it.

whatusername 17y ago

The switching costs for facebook are much higher than the switching costs for looksmart or excite. (I had/have an excite email - switching sucked) Also - all your list of sites really shows is that some sites were able to grow and adapt with their audience (see Yahoo) while some didn't. Going on past performance - facebook is in that category.