If you're not familiar with Ploomy check it out the other articles on there, they are very interesting and worth taking a gander at! I've also added a snippet of the Nerds article to wet your whistle.

Gary Gygax

What he does: Nothing (deceased)
What made him famous: Dungeons and Dragons

Gary Gygax invented Dungeons and Dragons, a staple game for nerds growing up. He and his friends had a simple desire to create characters and explore Tolkein’s world of the Lord of the Rings. Of course the game would evolve over the years, and Gygax changed and added things that made it different from the original game. But ultimately the core of the game stayed the same, allowing people to play in a fantasy world slinging spells and fighting monstrous beings...

Ploomy

I got notice from Thomas who commented on my previous Marc Zomberg post that the Marc Zomberg group is now close to a million members. What is really interesting to me though is the fact that the group's creator Jakob Peterson is now part of the San Francisco network instead of the London network. Could it be? He moved to Silicon Valley and is now working for Facebook? I still say no.

So I was wondering if Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook will ever revert back to the old layout. With how things are going, I'm pretty sure they won't go back. Let's go back in time and see why:

1. Remember the time when they permanently switched to the new Facebook?
That was around the beginning of September. I did not really care as I was already used to the new Facebook. I have to ask again, so has anyone else joined that Marc Zomberg group yet?

Has anyone ever heard of the saying, 'Change is good' or any sort of variation of it? I'm pretty sure we all have. What I really hate about people complaining about the new Facebook is the fact that they complain and they don't do anything, they do not even send feedback to the people at Facebook. So from that, there is less of a chance they will change back to the old layout.

There is also the fact that if Zuckerberg actually looks at the groups that want him to change back to the old Facebook, I'm pretty sure that 10 million won't do the job. There are OVER 100 million ACTIVE users on Facebook. If Mark were ever to consider changing back to the old layout how many people would be needed to get him to change his mind? I'm pretty sure over 50 million people would have to sign a petition or join a group or something. So I'm sorry Zomberg, I know you have probably the most group members on this subject but even if you do reach 10 million, you only represent a tenth of Facebook's users. Do you actually think Zuckerberg will go back to the old layout to please a tenth of his users? What about the other 90%?

There are also the hacks that are being spread around letting users go back to the old Facebook. The company has patched a couple of them up, but now a lot of people still have the old layout. I don't know if Facebook keeps stats on who managed to get back to the old layout or not but this really sucks for those who have tried and can not go back to the old layout (like me). With the people changing back to the old layout, they don't have to complain anymore. As a result, probably about 20% (I just made up a random figure) of Facebook's users have the old layout back. Probably over half of these people will stop complaining about the new Facebook thus probably over ten percent of Facebook's users will be unaccounted for in trying to go back to the old Facebook. As a result, these hacks can be counter-productive and will give skewed statistics on who really wants to go back to the old Facebook or who still wants to keep the new layout.

2. Do you remember the time when Facebook introduced the news-feed feature?

There was so much outrage and controversy over this new feature Facebook introduced in September of 2006. Many people felt like that their privacy was being invaded. It would be easier for 'creepers' to lurk around their friends' pages and see what they wrote and their new pictures they posted up. Obviously attached with the new feature was the privacy options which not a lot of people actually have used to an extent that kept their personal life private. Sure there are people that have chosen a couple of privacy options like choosing to not have any of their wall posts or pictures they posted up presented on the news-feed but that is pretty much it. After two years now, there are still people who have not chosen to set their news-feed options to not present any of their posts.
I remember all the controversy and the heated debates and how users hated the news-feed invading their privacy. If it was a real danger to anyone or a real annoyance then Facebook would have taken the news-feed off the website. Sure there have been modifications to make it safer to be on the website and make it easier to modify the feed, but its still there.
It has been two years now and everyone who uses Facebook is alright with the news-feed, many don't even mind it. All that controversy and revolt from its users has just died away with time and now its a norm to have the news-feed with you.
Plus, everyone in general through human nature are attention whores and some can be narcissistic. If you turn all the options for the feed off, then everyone will forget you and no one will talk to you and post up on your wall. You will have a lonely existence and be an outcast, is that what you want? Its pretty embarrassing to have Facebook and not have anyone post on your wall don't you think? So yes, the news-feed is an invasion of your privacy but then again, we all are attention whores and if we turn everything off on the news-feed, well we don't get any attention at all and there goes our sorry miserable lives.

3. Do you remember the time when Facebook changed their layout?

I remember back in late 2006 or early 2007 maybe January of 2007 but Facebook actually modified their layout. Does anyone remember this? I remember with the older layout that you can access your pictures, your events, your posts, and your updates all at top of the user interface and then all of a sudden Facebook changed this layout to what we now call the 'old' Facebook. I was not used to this new layout, all the photos, applications, posts, and etc can only be accessed on this little box on the left side while all your settings and advanced features were put on top of the GUI (I really can't remember what the old Facebook looked like, so this description might be inaccurate.)
Just like now, so many groups popped up asking/demanding/threatening Facebook to change back to the old layout. What is really funny is that over time, I saw a lot of my friends leave these groups and soon no one really cared about the older layout anymore. Everyone became used to the old Facebook over time and Zuckerberg never had to revert back to the older layout.

4. Do you remember the time when everyone just forgot about it?

I bet you by the end of this year 2008, those who still have the new layout will be fine with it and have finally adapted to the user interface. By the middle of 2009 these 'go back to the old Facebook' groups will be no more because people don't care about the layout as they have now become accustomed to it. It is just like the news-feed and it is just like when they changed the older layout to the 'old' layout. Everyone will forget about this by then and not care.

When They introduce a completely new layout in a couple of years (I'm thinking 2010/2011), another user revolt will occur and all these groups will pop up asking Facebook to go back to the this current layout. Ironic. Don't you think?

5. Do you remember the time where everyone said that Facebook is so addictive?

A lot of people are addicted to Facebook. If they don't like Facebook anymore, then they should move to another social networking site. But who really wants to make a new account on a strange new social networking site and rebuild their profile to the status that its Facebook counterpart had? Facebook is just too good to let go. The layout is phenomenal well the old one, the interface is nice to use. People don't have to click all these random links to get to where they want, and the colour scheme is amazing(ly safe). There are so many other social networking sites like Facebook, but Facebook has set the bar and it will be really hard for any other site to remotely even compare to it. Well there is Twitter but I'm pretty sure most high school/college students won't have a use for that site...yet. So the idea of leaving Facebook all together will be really hard as one will be left out of the loop while they make a new account on a different social website and not have anyone to talk to on that site.

So these are my five reasons why they won't go back to the old Facebook. So what I suggest for you to do, is to find a new social website you like and become a wolf, and not a sheep. Or you could actually do something and give some feed back to Mr. Zuckerberg on what you really think about the new layout.

Over time, students would "friend" me which was fine also. And as students became more savvy to FB they started to realize they did not want me to have access to their information or pictures or anything else. All of this is also fine and also the reason why I do not actively seek student friends on FB because

1. it's creepy  2. it's intrusive 3. it's unnecessary.

Students also thought it might be a smart idea to block me from their accounts which meant I could not find them on Facebook or see their info - again something that I think is a good idea because if I am a student I do not want administrators looking at my info, or pics of me having a good time with my friends.

All around, I found Facebook to be a peaceful coexistence with students. I would happily use it to promote "student" events to them, and put up some tidbits about myself so they could reach me if they had questions.

and then it all changed....

Yes, if I were Mark Zuckerberg, I'd have done the same thing- make Facebook an open site for all to use, make joining easy, create a bunch of crap add ons or better yet, let other companies do so, and let the world in. In actuality, a great idea from a business perspective.

When Facebook became a much more open site, I saw a merging for myself of the professional self and personal self, because all of a sudden, lo and behold, it was like old home week...

Friends from high school who I had not heard from in years would find me, or I would find them, or they would mistake me for a friend ( this did happen where an old high school colleague drunkenly mistook me for someone else, I drunkenly responded I was not they guy, we are now facebook friends and we both thought it was funny, not uncomfortable.. but funny). So a neat way to say hi to people you have not seen in 10-20 years. I have been able to reconnect with pals from high school that I never would have found and that is, to me, a very cool thing.

Also, I found that college friends came out of the woodwork too. It became a great way to get back in touch with people I had not heard from in years and for them to do the same. It's really quite cool to get a message from some guy you used to spend 2 nights a week with stumbling down the streets of Amherst, or find out about how the lives of many have changed or not over time. It's also great because when 200 people who all were part of Greek life want to plan a little get together...good ol facebook is there to help them start a group to do so, and if you don't like the group that is planning it, you can even create private groups where you control the membership and only let certain people in, or even make the group private so it won't show up on your "groups' site at all...it's like being at rush all over again...

Of course with this comes some new "funny..ha ha" moments. Such as when people you went to college with post pics of you from many a year ago. I always look at them and then detag myself from them, and I'd recommend the same to you. Why...because you never know who is looking at them, and, you never know who will. So while I think it's funny to find pics of myself doing...I am not sure everyone would. Which reminds me, if people take the time to scan old photos of you and then upload them, just think  of how useful the old camera phone is today...think before you blink my friends....

Also, for all of you Facebook rookies...don't poke anyone, the Superwall is lame, and having too many games, quizzes, and gifts is just too much clutter...but it does give me an many an idea of just how busy or not busy you are at work...make sure you look at those old date and time stamps...they tell a hell of a story.

Also for rookies...Facebook is a nice place to visit, but not so nice a place also, so avoid the stalkers and get rid of your birthdate, home address, and the 20 identifying pictures of your children. Take some time to look through the security settings and make sure you are only showing people what you want to show them.

Consider who should be able to look at your full profile, your pictures, your wall, and anything else that you might enjoy sharing with friends, but not necessarily the world. You can creatively set up groups to create access points for your friends...and your "facebook only" friends.

If you send me a beer, a lily patch, or a video don't be upset that I didn't respond. Similarly, I intro'd the blog to pals on Facebook so they'd know I wrote one, but then I stopped because, hey, if they want to find it, all they really have to do is ask...they don't need me to self promote it.

I didn't write this for the undergrads who might stumble upon it. I wrote it for you...Tim, Dave, Tommy, Cindy, Janet, Sally, and Rex. Yup, all of you have way too much info out there, and the nude beach pics seemed like a cute thing to post for the newlyweds but c'mon...

it's a digital world...you never know who is looking.

"Today I received a message from Marc Zomberg the founder of the greatest company and he told me to make this group he wants to know how many people really want the old facebook back, so he could bring it back.

Hurry up and invite we have only 20 days to do this."

REALLY?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!?! Are you cereal?!?

A man named Jakob Peterson from London has created this group. Who is this guy in the first place? I don't know, is he actually part of Facebook's staff? Probably not, so why on earth would this 'Marc Zomberg' tell him about this revolutionary idea? It pisses me off when I see someone join this group. Either for lawls or for being serious. I have a feeling that A LOT of people do actually think that 'Marc Zomberg' created Facebook and not this random computer programmer that attended Harvard named Mark Zuckerberg.

The name in the group probably is a play on of Mr. Zuckerberg's name but I surely do not think that he will take it seriously or even think about changing the layout if someone purposely offends him and his name or 'accidentally' spells his first and last name wrong. In fact, he may even be mad about it and will keep the new layout as it is without any option of letting anyone change back to the old one. If that is the case, then this group is actually counter-productive and will actually do more harm than good. All this group has done is given attention to its creator.

If you hate the new layout so much then deactivate your account (don't try to delete it, 'cause it is nearly impossible) and stop using Facebook then that will show this Zomberg fellow who's boss. If you're too addicted to Facebook, well substitute your addiction with Orkut and make Google much more happier. I mean we all use its search engine, we all click on its ads, and a lot of us have tried out its new internet browser, Chrome . So please, if you hate the new Facebook so much, just leave and this will force the company to revert back to its old ways.

Tonight at 11 o'clock, we visit the company's Palo Alto HQ itself, to talk with founder Mark Zuckerberg about where the company goes from here.  Because if you're one of those 100 million users, you also know that the site is changing.  Some have already written us to say they like the change, some to say they don't like it. 

Zuckerberg, to be fair, addresses both those groups, and says he respects that people who spend a lot of time and energy on the website are bound to feel connected and passionate about it.

For someone surrounded by so much hype and speculation (and, let's be honest, for someone so young to be sourrounded by those things...), Zuckerberg seems to be very thoughtful, and understanding about what's going on around him and the company he started.

We even got him to tell us, in a one-word answer, if he plans to stay in the top spot for awhile.  Tune in to hear for yourself.

But anyway, Facebook unveiled its new design not too long ago, and it's, well, it's interesting. It's not particularly new in any way, it just puts the same stuff in new places. Status updates were once shown by the few most recent updates on the side of your screen, and a link click would show you all of them. Now, it's part of a sort of tab system that's rocking up the homepage, wherein you click the link and you see everything, but not anything else. Technically the design has gone from the jack of all trades, master of none to the singular mastery of one thing at a time, though you still do the same amount of clicking so I guess it's down to what you prefer.

At which point I conveniently arrive at the main point of my post, which is that more or less, the Facebook designs are different only in regards to what you actually like. If it were an improvement, like Myspace's homepage redesign was, then there'd be much less uproar about it (and there is quite a bit of uproar about it). But since it's, as I said, more or less the same, it all comes down upon what you prefer. A lot of people are fond of the old Facebook design for its simplicity and familiarity, a familiarity that metamorphosises into a sort of fanatic love when you're switched over to the new Facebook and everything's in a different, non-newbie friendly place (which it is, I'll give it that as a legitimate criticism). So not everyone will want to use this new variation.

This is where it gets upsetting, because there is no choice in the matter. There was; there used to be a little link that allowed surveyors of the new Facebook to return to the old, should they desire, which a lot of people did, and which a lot of people used as a reason to mock those who were setting up groups and petitions against the new design, which was great until a dirty little announcement appeared, letting us in on a secret, that soon enough the new design would be the only design. Or to put it as it was put, 'New Facebook will soon be the only Facebook.' And then something like, try it now! Get a sneak peak! Bargains!

And then, when the switch was made, there came hither another message saying 'New Facebook is now the only Facebook.' Followed by something that equated to 'deal with it'. That's harsh. No more old Facebook, version is gone. Never mind the million-strong groups that had sprung up against it, never mind probably the piles of negative feedback, just throw it over. Critics will point out that a few million is a tiny minority of Facebook, but they have to account for the fact that not every person of the 100 million or whatever that uses Facebook is a) active, b) regular enough to care c) actually caring at all, or d) not even aware this is happening. Some people weren't even aware there was a new Facebook until it popped up before them recently and stuck its tongue out. So no, there won't be a thousand million people shouting out against it, because a lot of people like the new Facebook and a lot of people don't care. Technically there should be about 33 million people in each group, but no-one ever joins groups anyway, and that was an attempt at an injoke that probably just confused any readers I actually have..

In order to keep my hand in with the ensuing drama I joined a group called 'Petition Against the New Facebook' at the bequest of one of my friends, and took something of a casual interest. Sadly I found that quite a few people in the group were just anti-change, anti-Facebook fanatics, even though it said in the group description bit that it was more of a protest against the forced change than against the design itself - that's why I joined that group, not one of the other ones which were pretty much 'Kill teh new Facecrap!' Not only did I agree with the idea, this had a chance of succeeding, because no matter how much negative feedback they get, the Facebook dudes aren't going to do a 180 and ditch the new design.

Speaking of feedback, it's nice that they've left us an option to send some, (something else critics will point out,) but it means fuck all in reality; they want positive feedback or constructive criticism so they can improve their design, they don't want to hear general negative feedback like, why oh why have you done this??

Anyway, the story continues. The switchover is now being enforced by the mighty powers of Facebook. But the rebellion continues on; the group is at the 1.3 million mark now (though some of its members may have resigned in protest, like it's going to help, their stance still makes the numbers mean something), and, though initial attempts to return to the old Facebook using platforms based inside Facebook have been disabled by, of all, people, Facebook, some brave souls have delved into the darkness of scripts and come up with a nifty one that slips you back into the old glove - I tried it for a bit, and it works, but I don't care about the designs itself that much and the old one was going really slowly, so I just accepted the new Facebook (does that make me a disgrace to the revolution? I still love choice!).

I wonder, what can Facebook themselves do about the scripts? It seems it's a personal thing on your own browser, changing how you view a page, so they can't stop it, but can they remove the Old Facebook source stuff so it can't be redone? Or is that in the script itself? I have probably just demonstrated my own ignorance of such matters, so I don't know what to think. I suppose we'll find out in Episode V: Zuckerberg Strikes Back, in which the bad guys will seemingly win. But a scantily clad princess will strangle the giant slug, and the galazy will eventually be saved by teddy bears.

Don't forget the dancing! A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth having!

Either one of them should work. I myself am not going to change the layout as I'm used to the new one already so have fun.

Everyone hates the new facebook layout. It seems as if no one wants change and with all the complaining, I find it really hard to comprehend why not that many people have sent feedback to the company to get back to the old layout.

I for one actually like the new facebook layout. I actually do not have to scroll down to get to my posts anymore and all the information for my friends and others is just a click away. I was never a fan of the applications, thus I liked the fact that my account page was clean. Many times I would always go to someone's page and all I would see are all these new applications they have and I could never find their information or their wall more importantly.

It is a shame though how Mr. Zuckerberg and company have not given his people the option to switch back to the old Facebook layout after they took the new one out of beta.

I for one am used to the new layout now as I've been using it for about two months, ever since they announced it and the URL manipulation you had to do in order to get to the new layout. I do not really care about it, but everyone I know, all my friends and their friends all hate it. They all want to get back to the old Facebook. Guess what? Thankfully, there is a way.

Edit:

OK so, after a few tries and some research I have realized that Facebook has not migrated all of its users to the new facebook and some accounts will have the option to get back to the old Facebook once the URL is replaced with the one above. Unfortunately, I can't get back to the old Facebook layout, I just tried. Many people are in luck though as they have successfully done it.
Then there is also the fact that the company found out about this little hack and now has patched it.

Cuando la red social cambió su apariencia hace ya un tiempo, muchos usuarios no se sintieron del todo cómodos, y justamente por eso eligieron la vista clásica. Como se sabía que el cambio podía llegar a ser brusco para algunos, al incorporar un nuevo diseño se les permitió (y se les permite) a los usuarios volver a la vista clásica.

Para finales de esta semana, todos los usuarios tendrán que usar el nuevo diseño de Facebook.

Mientras que a algunos les encantan los cambios, otros no quieren saber nada con ellos. Zuckerberg, el creador de la red social, sabe de ésto, y dijo que “cualquier cambio puede ser un gran asunto para nuestros usuarios porque de ésta manera ellos se conectan con sus amigos y familiares”.

Zuckerberg también comentó que 40 millones de personas probaron el nuevo diseño, y que 30 nunca volvieron al anterior.

Para mí no habrá problema porque ya me acostumbré hace mucho tiempo al nuevo diseño. Pero.. ¿a ti qué te parece? ¿te molesta tener que usar el nuevo diseño? En Bitelia nos interesa conocer tu opinión.

Tonight I'm browsing my own pictures on Facebook and I realize just how brilliant/amazing it is, and just how Mr. Zuckerberg became a millionaire. While some websites are lucky to get 3, 4, 5, at best 10 page views on which to show ads for which they earn revenue, facebook shows me 2 DIFFERENT ads for EACH picture I look at - on my page, on my friends page, on any page! So if I go through all 414 of my facebook pages, I see 828 advertisements, and facebook gets coin for each of 'em. Brilliant. 

If only I was born in California, or it wasn't so damn far from Canada....that's where the action is, and that's where I wanna be!

The reason MySpace might slowly be tapering off is because it fails to innovate enough. The jumps in the amount of users always comes after Facebook makes a huge change. First, after the initial dismay over the news feed then the acceptance of it, the users grew. Then, after it was opened to everyone rather than just college students, the users grew. Finally the users grew when all of these applications, which are still expanding, started to show up.

While this new design that is being talked about is widely disapproved of, it may be the next step of Facebook growth. People's initial reaction to change in anything is that they "hate it," then, if the program is designed properly, people get used to it and begin to like its features.

Moral of the story is that Zuckerberg always seems to know the proper time of when to freshen things up. If he can keep Facebook "hip" then the users will continue to join.

introduced to Facebook by a friend in late 2004 when very few people had heard of Facebook, let alone considered it a legitimate contender to topple the MySpace-giant that already ruled the internet. In my opinion, the vast majority of Facebook's success is due to the fact that they got in on the ground floor of what was soon to become known as the "web 2.0" phenmenon long before it was a trendy buzzword.

The article discussed Zuckerberg's attempt at streamlining the process of keeping up to date with friends and family. Although his news feed feature was massively controversial, it has arguably been the single most used feature on Facebook since the day it was added. I would venture to guess that most avid Facebook users have long since come to terms with the feeling of their privacy being invaded by the feature, and instead they see the news feed as an indespensible part of why they continue to return to Facebook.

But honestly, did you expect a Harvard student to keep his flash of brilliance within the four walls of his campus? Of course not. Travel a few weeks ahead and voila!, Facebook has appeared on 45 other American college campuses. Travel many months ahead, and a Facebook account has come within the reach of all high-schoolers (who were secretly jealous of their elder collegiate siblings...sshh, don't tell anyone!).

But enough with the history lesson (albeit one which is slightly more interesting than what's in the corny textbook). What IS Facebook? To cut a long story short, Facebook is still what it was originally intended to be, an online networking portal - with a few extra (and fun!!!) frills. What can you do with Facebook? (is it just me, or do you think this is beginning to sound like Facebook's non-existant FAQ section) The more appropriate question would be - what CAN'T you do with Facebook?

You can unleash the inner graffiti-spraying vandal in you by writing anything and everything on your friends' 'walls'. You can discover the stalker in you which you were totally unaware of by following your friends' conversations (wall-to-walls, in FB speak) to a point where you know more about their lives than their parents. You can rediscover the kid in you by adding, and subsequently playing, the game applications (if you have a FB account and haven't yet discovered the awesomeness that is the Crazy Taxi Game, you deserve to die). You could also take all those pointless, brainless, time-consuming but extremely interesting quizzes which you find on the 'Quizzes' application (Which European Country Are You?, anyone?).

Sounds boring? I'm not surprised. Unless you've been bitten by the FB bug yourself, it always sounds boring when you listen to someone else gush on and on and on (and on and on and on...) about the merits of FB. Oh my god, what the hell do they see in this? is a common first reaction. Then, curiosity gets the better of you. You type out www.facebook.com in a rather unwilling yet morbidly curious manner into your Firefox address bar (does anyone even use IE any more?). You create an account. You add friends. You add applications. You talk to your friends. You use your applications. It's so pointless, rather drab and repetitive, and extremely...unoriginal. But at the same time, it's so. damn. addicting. Everytime you get on your computer, you find yourself unconciously typing out f-a-c-e into your browser and before you realize the heinous crime you've committed, you're on FB (and will probably remain there for the next hour, at the very least).

Anyway, got to go now. I've just been Superpoked.

Dernière trouvaille en date pour le receleur de datas utilisateur le plus cool Facebook, la possibilité de noter les publicités. Ah, c'est vraiment merveilleux le devoir de corriger la beacon-bourde la transparence, la communauté, le 2.0, tout ça...

Est-ce un début de suicide ? Doté d'un business model entièrement basé sur la publicité - via un ciblage marketing optimisé - Facebook va encore plus loin en demandant l'argent du beurre à ses utilisateurs d'évaluer ce qu'une large majorité du commun des mortels qualifie habituellement d'agression.

Cette idée révèle en filigrane une connivence vraisemblablement énorme entre le site et ses membres puisque qu'il s'enquiert de la qualité des branches avec lesquelles il les fouette. Facebook serait-il sadique ? Pas si sûr.

La première réflexion qui me vient à l'esprit concerne le manque de professionnalisme étalé par cette démarche de transparence naïveté. Les annonceurs doutaient de l'efficacité - pertinence, réactivité... - du modèle AdSense, les voilà servis. Si Facebook a besoin des opinions de ses utilisateurs pour attester de l'ingérence de son modèle publicitaire, il ne pouvait faire mieux.

Secundo, question que tout le monde se pose : les gens vont-ils jouer le jeu ? Comment Facebook va-t-il justifier sa stratégie de développement si l'étude montre que 95% des utilisateurs trouvent les publicités contextuelles impertinentes ? Si demain des petits malins créent un groupe suffisamment intelligemment pour réclamer la disparition de la pub sur Facebook, que se passera-t-il ?

Tertio : Google ne risque-t-il pas de râler si Zuckerberg apporte la caution de millions d'users au discrédit d'AdSense ?

En définitive, Facebook est peut-être la tête brûlée qui ose dire NON, qui va obliger Google à faire évoluer AdSense, partant du principe un peu fou qui consiste à remettre à plat son business model grâce au plébiscite des utilisateurs. Beau mais complètement impossible.

Les petit tekos ont préparé leur grille sur Excel Google Tabs en vue de revendre les cases vides aux annonceurs pas encore tombés dans l'escarcelle trendy du web pour les jeûnes. Rdv à la rentrée pour l'ouverture de la foire à la niche.

+ d'infos : L'avis d'Ouriel sur la question

That's how many users are currently on social networks worldwide. (Source: WikiAnswers, 2007. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_use_social_networking_sites_worldwide)

The number is staggering. 

There are more users in the Webosphere than there are in some major metropolitan cities -- even entire countries.  So, it's no wonder that a new social networking site seems to pop up daily, all vying for a piece of this kajillion* dollar pie.

*may not be an actual numeric value.

But as I ponder the sheer volume of social networks out there, the thought of joining yet another one seems unthinkable.  Stressful even.  So much so that even if the social network equivalent of nirvana launched, I'm not sure I'd sign up. 

And I don't think I'm alone.

For most of us -- especially people like me who are heavily entrenched in the space -- it's more than just being 'social networked out.'  It's time-consuming -- and taxing -- to undergo the process of sign up through daily use.

There are at least 10 steps involved to get started on a whole new site:

1. Sign up/complete registration form
2. Confirm e-mail address
3. Upload avatar
4. Set up profile
5. Import contacts (where available)
6. Find friends
7. Rebuild community
8. 'Re-learn' an entire new platform
9. Add and/or change socnet URL on signatures, websites, etc.
10. Begin using regularly

Some users may skip some of those steps, opting to check out the application more thoroughly before uploading a pic or inviting friends, for example, but the point is that it's not as simple as 1-2-3 to integrate another social network into your online routine.

I think the fact that people are still using Twitter, henceforth referred to as the 'Twitter Epidemic,' is proof positive that quality is not the overarching factor when choosing a social network.  MySpace (pre-face lift) is yet another shining example that an error-free, well designed site is not a pre-requisite for mass consumption.

So, why is it that we continue to nurture the dysfunctional relationships with our current socnets, opting to settle for shoddy service, incessant glitches, poorly architected platforms and overall medicority?

There are many contributing factors, but the top three that keep bubbling to the surface are:

The grass may be greener on the other side but I already landscaped over here. 

This is the biggest deterrant to adopting a new socnet.  All of us have spent significant amounts of time carefully cultivating our community and nurturing our network.  We've invested countless hours, energy and pieces of ourselves building relationships, uploading pics and making our profiles a unique representation of who we are.  What's more, our connections have done the same thing, resulting in a living, breathing online universe that, to many of us, is a second home.  And with that, comes an affinity for the product despite any failings it may have.  That's tough to walk away from -- even for a slick new interface or totally bug-free experience (but we've all become so jaded we don't believe it anyway).

I really loved the General Tso's Chicken at the Chinese restaurant next door and they closed down.

This is a huge issue right now with the volatile web 2.0 world and start ups launching with a big media splash only to disappear as quickly as they came.  The recent coup with PodTech doesn't help instill confidence either.  Users are skeptical of social 'saviors' spouting salvation.  And no one wants to spend the time setting up -- and acclimating to -- a new network to find it yanked from cyberspace shortly thereafter.  So many bide their time, waiting to see if it 'catches on,' which ironically creates a self-fulfilling prophesy.  If everyone is waiting for 'the other person' to try it out, it's doomed to a dismal fate.  Even the die-hard beta junkies aren't as fervent about snagging invites or testing out the latest (and probably not the greatest) service.  And it's not that we've become lazy so much as disenchanted.  The new car smell has worn off, and it would take something as outrageous as George Jetson's flying-automobile-turned-briefcase to get our attention.

I need another social network like the iPhone needs more apps.

 The other factor in all of this is simply the overwhelming amount of social networks out there.  The market is completely oversaturated, and most of the new players are merely clones of existing sites with no real key points of differentiation.  Or if they do happen to have an unrivaled proposition, the above two barriers to adoption will make it difficult for them to gain any kind of penetration, which brings us to the million dollar question of the day: is it too late to innovate?

Being first to market is always a desirable position, and companies race to launch to achieve this highly coveted status.  It certainly worked for Twitter.  Even with the advent of other sites like Pownce, FriendFeed and Plurk that have all garnered some substantial share of voice, Twitter is by far still the microblogging leader.  And again the 'Twitter Epidemic' defies all logic as the strength of the community offsets the myriad of mistakes, mayhem and overall melee they create on an almost hourly basis.

It didn't, however, work for Friendster as MySpace swept in and cornered the market, demonstrating that there is such a thing as being too soon to market.  Friendster may have garnered more success if they'd launched a little later, when the audience was more 'wired,' ready -- and able -- to embrace the social networking movement fully.  Most were still on dial up when Friendster launched, making a robust experience difficult, and diminishing the overall value of the concept.  Social networks need to function in real time, mirroring the fast pace of their users, so a high speed connection is a must.

But then you have Facebook, who after expanding out of the college arena, took the market by storm, now leading the social networking revolution and giving MySpace more than just a run for their money.  They have secured a leadership position, and after Zuckerberg's announcements at F8 around the future of Facebook Connect, it doesn't look like they can -- or will -- be usurped by a newcomer anytime soon.  In fact, it seems impossible that another social network will be able to break into this space at all with any sort of notable magnitude.

What actually appears to be happening here is that, as with any product, there's only room for a few market leaders.  And we've already got them. 

MySpace and Facebook.

Twitter and FriendFeed.

Last.fm and Pandora.

Microsoft and Apple.

Google and Yahoo. (Looks like Cuil won't be taking a bite out of the search market. Ouch.)

Think about it.  This is true across any vertical.

We've got Pepsi and Coke.  RC Cola never even made a memorable blip on the refreshment industry's radar screen (though I love the stuff and have been known to shriek with excitement whenever I come across it!).

McDonald's and Burger King.

Kleenex and Puff's.

Nike and Adidas.

Kellogg and Post.

Sure, there are others with varying degrees of brand equity within those categories, but for the most part, the market -- and we, the consumers -- can only handle a few powerhouse products.  Everyone can't be a winner.  As a culture built on popularity, someone will always rise to the top.  And with the leading social networks off to a seemingly insurmountable head start, I contend that it may, in fact, be too late to innovate.  On a grand scale anyway. 

Plus, even if the most incredible, original, amazing, ingenious, fantabulous, grounbreaking, awe-inspiring new site came along, it would just probably be gobbled up by Google anyway!

I should be more interested in f8 than I am considering we're about to launch a FB app. Yes I read the predictable Valleywag post saying how terrible Zuckerberg was. Then I watched the video and realised he was perfectly competent if slightly dull. The main news seemed to be about what didn't happen namely FB connect and a payments system.

The real earth-shattering development will be FB connect. It's great news for users who will be able to link up cross platform without creating a new account - this is how I understand FB connect anyway, correct me in the comments if not. It will promote competition between platforms and allow users to pick the SN which suits them best. I guess FB are doing it because they think they will disproportionately benefit as the best platform. I don't think there's much doubt about that right now but it won't necessarily stay that way forever.

The lack of a payments system exercised some app developers, including the illustrious Max Levchin, who seem to think if there is a payment system people will start paying for apps. Fellow widgetmakers - I tell you now - nobody will ever pay money for a FB app. Look at Causes - people only donate on average 21c per year on things they actually support. They will not pay anything for your apps. Accept it. People pay for iPhone apps because people pay for iPhones. If they won't pay for FB they won't pay for FB apps.

Advertising is the game. We think we have cracked the way of getting advertisers to pay far higher rates on our FB app and we should be ready for release in the Autumn (Fall) so you can install it and judge for yourselves then.

Read more:
On friend bankruptcy
On useful advertising
On the future of social networks

Pic: phil-it

Related articles by Zemanta

• Facebook Connect for iPhone Will Links Apps to Your Facebook Account [Facebook]
• AdMob Makes Mobile Ads Suck Less. Will Give Away One Million Dollars Worth of Ads To iPhone App Developers.

Pisteando en internet me encontre con esta lista de los "GEEKS" con mas plata del mundo, sus proyectos terminaron siendo mas que exitosos, fruto de sus webs lograron ganar mucha plata al mas puro estilo de Bill Gates, asi que aguante bloggeros y programadores que algun dia sus webs o softwares pueden valer mas que sus propias vidas.... la lista si continuan leyendo

1. Mark Zuckerberg [ Facebook ] 23 años | $700M

2. Andrew Gower [ Runescape ] 28 años | $650M

3. Blake Ross and David Hyatt [ Mozilla ] 22 años | $120M

4. Chad Hurley [ Youtube ] 30 años | $85M

5. Angelo Sotira [ Deviant ART ] 26 años | $75M

6. John Vechey [ PopCap Games ] 28 años | $60M

7. Alexander Levin [ WordPress ] 23 años | $57M

8. Jake Nickell [ Threadless ] 28 años | $50M

9. Sean Belnick [ Biz Chair ] 20 años | $42M

10. Kevin Rose [ Digg ] 30 años | $31M

11. Ryan Block [ Engadget ] 25 años | $20M

12. Aodhan Cullen [ Stat Counter ] 24 años | $18M

13. Tom Fulp [ Newgrounds ] 29 años | $15M

14. Rishi Kacker and Matt Pauker [ Voltage ] 24 años | $12M

15. Markus Frind [ Plenty of Fish ] 29 años | $10M

16. Catherine and David Cook [ My Year Book ] 17 y 19 años | $10M

17. Fredrik Neij [ The Pirate Bay ] 28 años | $10M

18. David Hauser & Siamak Taghaddos [ GotvMail ] 24 años | $8M

19. Jermaine Griggs [ Hear and Play ] 23 años | $5M

20. Jay Westerdal [ Domain Tools ] 29 años | $5M

Facebook liderando por miles de dolares, y pensar que al comienzo era solo una red para estudiantes, y ahora hay cerca del millon de usuarios en Chile y en el mundo cada dia se registran cerca de 200 mil usuarios diarios.

via: memoplus.net

I came across this CNBC video today: an interview with Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, talking about the recent redesign of Facebook and introduction of Facebook Connect. I started out wanting to post simply about the growth in FB, which now stands at 90  million users, surpassing MySpace for the first time, and up from 24 million users just a year ago.

But after watching the video my curiousity switched rapidly to gathering some intelligence on Zuckerman, like finding out just how young this guy is and what his story is about. So I WP'd him (wikipedia-ed) him to learn that he is 24 years old and was named by Forbes Magazine, "the youngest billionaire on earth and possibly the youngest self-made billionaire ever, with a theoretical net worth of $1.5 billion USD."

Hard to swallow, in a week when even my most fail-safe investment strategy for the moment (bonds) is tanking profusely and there is nowhere to hide. Well, live and let live, and bless this guy on his journey along with the likes of Jobs, Wozniak, Gates, Brin and Page, and Woods (ok, I'm switching venues just to see if you are paying attention). In the meantime, I'll keep following social technologies on my public servant salary, driving my modest Chevy, with no chauffeur.