Is it time to move past Facebook? If so, what's next?
No one is arguing that social networks like Facebook aren't useful, but according to Alexis Madrigal of "The Atlantic", it's time to start moving past the Facebook-Twitter-Linkedin paradigm, and create something truly innovative. We have the infrastructure, and we also have the talent, although unfortunately it is currently being diverted to the aforementioned social network paradigm, where the number of users is more important than creating truly innovative concepts:
"The only metric that seems to matter with startups is the number of users it has been able to skim from the masses. . .technology used to feel like it was really going to change so many things about our lives. Now it has and we're all too stunned to figure out what's next."
I greatly sympathize with Alexis and I think that his article is extremely perceptive, but I also think he fails to see things from the other side of the table, from that of the investor. Social is hot right now. Valuations of any stock, bond, or investment, and demand for it, depends to a large degree on human perception of what is hot, what is going to be hot, and what is going to rise in value because of its hotness. I'll refrain from digressing into the tired "tulip mania" anecdote, but it's worth mentioning.
Therefore, If VC's or larger tech companies perceive social to be hot, that's where the big money will more likely go. They want a return on their investment as much as they want to change the world. If that's where the money is flowing, entrepreneurs have more of an incentive to head in the direction of the social paradigm. There's a push as well as a pull, that pull being the hot money. How many of you haven't thought about creating the next Instagram after hearing of Facebook's mind-boggling acquisition of the photo-sharing social network? Creation of a new paradigm is easier said than done, especially when funding for seemingly outlandish concepts is more difficult to come across than funding for proven ones.
Perhaps Alexis is also somewhat blinded by the short-sightedness of his own profession of journalism. New paradigms are in fact being conceived of with great frequency, but fail to receive adequate coverage, as most are destined to fail. The fact that TechCrunch, VentureBeat or any other major media news source fails to cover these flashes of inspiration does not mean they don't exist. When one does succeed or begins to, we'll surely hear about it from TC or VB.
To be fair, Alexis does recognize the innovation taking place in education, yet he argues that these education start-ups don't ". . .allow regular people to do new stuff in their daily lives. . ." How is a free course from schools like MIT, Penn and Stanford, not going to allow me to do new stuff in my daily life? The last time I checked, I don't attend all of these institutions, nor do the millions of other people who would like some sort of access to these institutions.
All of this being said, I think Alexis is definitely onto something, (hence why I posted this). I myself am tired of reading countless articles on Facebook, Twitter and the next big social network for...(fill in the blank). It is time for something new. I personally believe that within the education revolution exists the new paradigm that Alexis is searching for--what do you all think?
I'll read the article later, but I deactivated my Facebook account about 6 months ago. If you think your privacy is being invaded and all your social media actions are being exploited by advertisers now, just wait until the company is public and has to answer to investors every quarter. I think people are slowly becoming more aware of what's going on behind the scenes when you give FB loads of personal information.
I'm gonna go ahead and call this "social bubble 1.0". It is complete non-sense. People try to act like creeping on pictures of bitches is a basic component of the human condition. Ummmm, A) then how the fuk did ppl get by b4 it and B) remember Myspace (something newer and cooler will come along- always has, always does, always will). Im all for shorting the shit out of FB. Its inevitable that ppl will eventually value privacy over the ability to creep, and this realization will cause it to implode
Facebook is so widely used and so integrated into technology that I think it's hear to stay for at least the foreseeable future (as Microsoft was in the mid-1990s). Talk is that Facebook could potentially be creating its own browser in the next few years and even its own smartphone. With nearly 1 billion users and total integration into the marketplace and technology (smartphones, laptops, etc.) I just don't see Facebook as a bubble. Maybe social networking is a bubble, but Facebook is here to stay.
adding to that, FB is coming up with a search engine
i fully agree with this, facebook is definitely here to stay--that's hard to argue with.. the more relevant question is what is next, beyond social? and what will it take to get us there?
Just some food for thought, even though they are different and do not honestly know the difference, but 8 years ago, MySpace was the next thing. in early 2000s pre tech bubble, webcrawler and ask jeeves were the cool new kids on the block. Now who uses them? I don't think FB will go away, but it is a possibility to consider.
Wooow. I haven't thought about Ask Jeeves for, like, 10 years but that used to be my search engine prior to Google. I also remember using excite.com, particularly for my adolescent porn searches. And I remember my email addresses were @juno.com and @aol.com and my internet was AOL dial-up. Napster and Kazaa were my music downloading sources. I also remember my web browser of choice was Netscape Navigator because I used the internet mostly at school where we used Macs and stuff. Holy sh*t have things ever changed!
Thinking of "Demolition Man", maybe mental sex? In all seriousness, it's hard to think outside the box. I mean, Facebook is thinking inside the box--browser and search engine, smartphone, etc.--but outside the box? Hmm. The sky's the limit. Ebooks, music, movies, proprietary television shows, live sports streaming, business video conferencing, improved marketplace for selling items, census bureau statisical assistance/gathering, epayments and electronic money, and so on.
With 1 billion users and full technological intergration it's kind of scary to think what they could do. I think this sky's the limit scenario is why it's got such outrageous valuation.
facebook should build a online retail trading platform with real time data feed, algo-ready, $0.1/trade, and nice charting tool
Facebook cannot compete with Google Chrome. Facebook cannot compete with Apple's iPhone. Facebook doesn't have the money or resources to come up with a new device of any kind. Facebook is fucked.
Google once looked like this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b7/Google1998.png
and Apple just made computers that hipsters would buy.
They slowly evolved into different companies altogether. I wouldn't say Facebook is fucked at all.
Non et accusantium quam perferendis sed et voluptatem. Id nemo odit non omnis autem quae tenetur amet.
Harum voluptates beatae id ea temporibus aut pariatur illum. Adipisci ab est sed odio eligendi corrupti. Voluptatem et hic et aut qui. Natus nostrum nam est. Aut et perspiciatis sed dicta. Autem nisi sapiente iste qui autem.
Pariatur velit autem autem provident. Nihil totam dolores illo suscipit officiis autem. Dignissimos dolorem saepe nihil sequi.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...