Topic: Is Facebook About to Get ‘Myspaced’ by Next-Gen Social Media? (Read 1301 times)

And I highly doubt Mark Zuckerberg will allow his creation become Myspace 2.0.

Facebook still has its place for the older generation.

All my family members still love to use it to keep in touch with each other. I see Facebook surviving for a long time.

Inb4, Zuckerberg buys all the AMPs, thus driving the price to over $1000 USD.

in the future maybe, the whole crypto market is growing. FCT and XRP have just made good partnerships so eventually a big social media might be blockchain basead(maybe steemit or synereo reach this someday).
but who knows, i agree that if facebook feels threatened they will probably just buy it.

Right... hmm, that's an interesting way to put that.

I like the idea of having social media being mingled in with one another, but it's just kind of hard to see social media being that way since different platforms are so different in general.  Take twitter and reddit, twitter is composed of a bunch of posts with 160 or so characters max and reddit you can post as long as you like with a voting system... I really can't see how you could merge those two things together like that, but hopefully something of the sort would come out.

I like your ideas, it's just that generally (and it's a sad fact) people don't care if their privacy is being violated.  I know a lot people who keep saying: "If I don't have anything to hide, what should I worry about?"

... I mean that's like if you came home to your house to find someone snooping in your mailbox and looking in your windows, are you saying that you wouldn't be angry or somewhat defensive of your belongings/home? I don't really understand people sometimes, just don't.

Zuckerberg will remember this well because he is the one that "Myspaced" the competition. In my opinion he is not to be underestimated because he might already be doing his research about cryptocurrencies. It was the Winklevoss twins that gave him the idea to create facebook and with them having interest and speculating in bitcoin, there is the possibility he knows what it is all about and how it will affect the whole world.

They will use a protocol rather than a proprietary service, much as is the case with email today. Some will connect to a provider such as is the case with many email services today, others will run their own social media client, while other will also run their own social media server. Using Gmail is technically no different form using Facebook. The critical difference is that the person on the other end does not have to use the same provider, or even use a provider at all.

Social media today is where email was for the most part in the 1980s and early 1990's. One can only communicate within a proprietary walled garden with others who were in the same walled garden.  

Email circa 1990
AOL members can send email to AOL members
Prodigy members can only send email to Prodigy members
CompuServe members can only send email to CompuServe members
...

Email circa 2016
Person A can send an email using their own server running Trisquel GNU/Linux (100% Free Software and totally open hardware) to person B using a Microsoft Windows RT tablet and Microsoft Live email. (The most extreme case proprietary software and locked down hardware). Persons A and B likely have extremely different points of view on privacy and freedom for example; however they can still communicate by email.

Social Media circa 2016
One can reply to a Reddit post only on Reddit
One can reply to a Bitcointalk post only on Bitcointalk
One can reply to a Facebook post only on Facebook
...

Edit: Breaking down the walled gardens and forcing competitors to cooperate with each other through an open protocol will drive down both costs to the user and profits to the former walled garden providers. Costs in social media are largely paid for via privacy and profits in social media are in many cases generated by spying and surveillance.

No way. Maybe Facebook could be replaced by something else/better, but it will be again under control by the authorities. I created a thread called "Decentralisation is a dream" were I said that even the air is centralized. I'd like to think I am a anarchist, but we also must be realistic.

They will simply throw money at and buyout any tech or competition that starts to look like a serious rival, they have deep pockets and serious backing.

Good point, but I'm still confused about what you were trying to say above.  YouTube "Red" now does this, but it's not necessarily taking off by any means (at least I don't think?). There are tons of other social media sites (reddit, tumblr, pinterest, twitter, etc. etc.), are you saying that you think some time in the future there will be people who would rather run software for their social media needs rather than quickly just connecting to the internet?  

edit: referring to this

Simpleness and ease of use by tech n00bs were also the big selling points of AOL in its day.

Idk, people sort of like the simpleness of Facebook and have no care in the world if it violates some of their privacy on the internet.

I really don't know if steem will really work that great either becuase 1) There aren't very many people who are really "up for" dealing with cryptocurrencies at this time; and 2) There have been other social networks that pay based on posts/views/likes that kind of failed even though you have a very small amount of people who do use it, but get paid very little over time (example tsu.co)

Yes but the ineptness and incompetence of AOL made 33.6k over AOL actually slower than 300 baud. I found this out in the late 1990's when AOL bought out CompuServe and I had my one AOL experience. After that I immediately cancelled my account. CompuServe was somewhat pricey but provided excellent dial up service in its day. What eventually killed AOL was of course the Internet. People do not want to concern themselves with their contacts' choice of Internet provider or email / browser software when sending an email or viewing content online. Later we saw a similar situation with text messaging. Proprietary messaging networks such as MSN have been replaced SMS, for the same reason. Do people really want to concern themselves with who is proving cellular network service to their contacts when sending a text message?

My take is that Facebook will suffer the same fate as AOL This will not be from another proprietary social networking provider, or from a crypto currency specific network such a Steem. It will be from an open protocol that will allow users to choose their own social networking provider and software much as is the case today with email, web browsing, SMS etc. Such questions as payment for content by whom and to whom, and with what form of money will be addressed by the individual providers, their contributors, and their viewers much as is the case for example with web hosting today.

Thanks bro you just made me feel old

I was modern. Started with a 33.6k US Robotics modem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnAAJ1FGudE

And some of crusty, old geeks the 300 BAUD modems and BBSes that preceded AOL. Raise your hand if you are old enough to have memorized the handshaking tones of the initial modem connection.

yeah. give or take a zero why not? find someone to escrow my 450 billion and let's do this.

Are you sure? That's about 16500 people, which is not a big figure.

I am willing to bet facebook's market cap that no more than 0.001% of facebook's user base will ever give any type of fuck about a crypto social network.

I think in this case, facebook will simply ban steemit related all url as they have done for similar revenue sharing social sites before. I doubt facebook will ever implement bitcoin for deposits/withdraw or even implement rewarding systems to their users, as with this big number of userbase it will be just mess up for facebook management to manage payouts and checking fraudulent activity for earning.