Saturday, November 06, 2010

I am no web expert, but now it looks really obvious :
If you have the web site traffic, you are literally the superman. Content can gradually evolve.

Bring in the people :Then applications can evolve

"If people do search within Facebook, if they do email within Facebook, if they do instant messaging within Facebook, all of these will chip away at Google's properties."

Google bars Facebook from accessing contacts and other data. Good move, from a rivalry point of view. But Social Network comes with an expiry tag unless you try to bring in some really useful applications apart from sharing photos, videos.

Social Networking websites are a necessary evil. Anyway let us see what happens. Seriously, people can invest time on something more valuable - I know it sounds cliched , but that truly is the case.

5 comments:

richie said...

Tit-for-tat strategy has had good success in game theory. The timing of when to apply the strategy is also important :).

Regarding the usefulness of social networks, it seems like the HITS algorithm. Here the social network is the Hub and your friend's content on it can be Authoritative. Eg:- The content uploaded by your friend can be videos, which in general will allow you to discover videos easier then trawling through the web.

sudeep said...

Correct I agree that FB and other sites will help you share videos, photos and emails. But then going by statistics, we had Orkut, MySpace, then we had friendster, minglebox and so many other stuff like that.

The basic web1.0 i.e. "homepage based web" with news and other general authoritative content will always remain.

Social Web is a fad. It will be there. New ones will come and go. But Search, news, videos, email will remain. So that's why FB is trying to go beyond the social network tag.

But still, the guys who have the "email and chat" applications are still the ones who attract people. Initially it was Yahoo mail and messenger. Now it is Gchat and Gmail.Let's see how it gies from here .... The only bad thing is that anonymity will be lost going fwd in a few years.

richie said...

We should be given the ability to reply inline :). It would make it so much easier.

I think the plus for them is:
Good technology company, with good infra backing them. Hence their time to market has been fast. The apps market that they came up with basically killed myspace. But maybe the apps usage has reflected a fad! ( I don't see any apps posts in my feed, or that could because I have blocked most apps :) )

I agree about the home page based web remaining. But the idea is of discovering content. Social graph is a way of discovering content. Search was earlier the primary way of discovering content. Before search it was directories. I can think of certain searches where it would be better to search the web, and for some where it would be useful to get i/ps from your social graph. Eg:- If I wanted to visit a great chat/bhel puri place, I would trust your recommendation (if you had provided it on the n/w), v/s searching on the web!

sudeep said...

"But the idea is of discovering content. Social graph is a way of discovering content."

For whom are you discovering content ? For every individual ? You mean to say you want to "personalize search queries"

Sounds new to me...Anyway let's see how FB reacts....

richie said...

Yup. I meant to say personalize search results :).
(The other way of discovering content is your i/p feed. Based on your like button history and your friend's circle, different posts/content can occur in your i/p feed.)