Turn on thread page Beta

Facebook OWNS you watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Facebook is bubbling at a value of $60 billion.

    Zuckerberg who I think most people will agree is a douche, owns 25% of the company.

    Facebook has no competitive advantage other than users don't see a reason to move to any other network.


    Goldman Sachs, some seedy russian investment house and plenty of other nefarious characters have stakes in facebook.

    YOUR input, their reward.

    When they have pumped the share price high enough, they will offload the shares on to average joe, mostly through mutal funds/pension trusts. We can stop them.

    Create a community owned social network. No ads, no sale of private information.
    Yes, this part has been attempted before, infact some people attempted to pay people to use their social network.


    But I have one extra ingredient that may allow this venture to succeed when others haven't. Financing from an internet giant.

    Google is very wary of Facebook's ambitions, and it's share of user attention while they are online. When people are using FB, they aren't searching. And who knows when FB decide to enter the search arena.

    Google tried to compete with Orkut but failed and trying again with Google.me or Google circles.
    What they fail to understand is that they do not have to win, all they need is for FB to lose.

    Financing and cheap ads should be donated to a third party coop. They can then take the FB monsters down.

    Each user will get a share in the network. If the users ever commercialise the network, they can receive dividends.

    They can vote on features and policy. A true democracy. And best thing of all is they own their data and nobody elses profits from their efforts.

    I had this thought a month or so back and thought it would be best to somehow get financing from Google secretly and acheive this. But I'm involved with other things, so working my way into Google and presenting it to them is not feasible. Also believe it's best to keep things pure and transparent from the outset.

    Google remember, FB only has to lose for you to keep your position as top dog. In return for your financing, I'm sure the users will agree not to encroach on your territory.


    again guys, this has just been a thought, but there's no reason why this flame cannot grow into a raging fire.

    TSR, get this thread going, how amazing would it be if TSR were responsible for the next big thing on the web and the destruction of $60,000,000,000 of undeserved and/or illgotten paper wealth. Karma is a bittch so 'don't be evil' as Google used to say.
    peace
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Can't see FB moving into a search function. It would be to difficult to compete with Google. Seems more and more we are getting into the days of most Internet functions owned by 10 or so companies.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by justlol)
    Facebook is bubbling at a value of $60 billion.

    Zuckerberg who I think most people will agree is a douche, owns 25% of the company.

    Facebook has no competitive advantage other than users don't see a reason to move to any other network.


    Goldman Sachs, some seedy russian investment house and plenty of other nefarious characters have stakes in facebook.

    YOUR input, their reward.

    When they have pumped the share price high enough, they will offload the shares on to average joe, mostly through mutal funds/pension trusts. We can stop them.

    Create a community owned social network. No ads, no sale of private information.
    Yes, this part has been attempted before, infact some people attempted to pay people to use their social network.


    But I have one extra ingredient that may allow this venture to succeed when others haven't. Financing from an internet giant.

    Google is very wary of Facebook's ambitions, and it's share of user attention while they are online. When people are using FB, they aren't searching. And who knows when FB decide to enter the search arena.

    Google tried to compete with Orkut but failed and trying again with Google.me or Google circles.
    What they fail to understand is that they do not have to win, all they need is for FB to lose.

    Financing and cheap ads should be donated to a third party coop. They can then take the FB monsters down.

    Each user will get a share in the network. If the users ever commercialise the network, they can receive dividends.

    They can vote on features and policy. A true democracy. And best thing of all is they own their data and nobody elses profits from their efforts.

    I had this thought a month or so back and thought it would be best to somehow get financing from Google secretly and acheive this. But I'm involved with other things, so working my way into Google and presenting it to them is not feasible. Also believe it's best to keep things pure and transparent from the outset.

    Google remember, FB only has to lose for you to keep your position as top dog. In return for your financing, I'm sure the users will agree not to encroach on your territory.


    again guys, this has just been a thought, but there's no reason why this flame cannot grow into a raging fire.

    TSR, get this thread going, how amazing would it be if TSR were responsible for the next big thing on the web and the destruction of $60,000,000,000 of undeserved and/or illgotten paper wealth. Karma is a bittch so 'don't be evil' as Google used to say.
    peace
    Jealous much?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by justlol)
    Facebook is bubbling at a value of $60 billion.

    Zuckerberg who I think most people will agree is a douche, owns 25% of the company.
    I don't think he's a douche. Are you one of those people who wacthed 'The Social Network' and claim to know everything about Zuckerberg, facebook and it's beginings?

    And you need to leave coo coo land, try get over your paranoia and start your revolution elsewhere.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bektas)
    I don't think he's a douche. Are you one of those people who wacthed 'The Social Network' and claim to know everything about Zuckerberg, facebook and it's beginings?

    And you need to leave coo coo land, try get over your paranoia and start your revolution elsewhere.
    lol, that's exactly it, I claim to know everything.

    jesus ppl, some of you have no imagination whatsoever.

    so you're perfectly happy with the status quo?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Or, you could just not use facebook. Instead of grand conspiracy theories, simply depleting its user base by a substantial percent would be enough to break it, if you really believe that it needs to be taken down. Look at what happened to myspace.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hmm, I can't see this realistically working. FB is useful, it has helped me find a lot of old friends and communicate with my friendship group when I moved house, and what's more we don't have to pay for it. Why would people put effort into this, in the real world?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I think you're on to a loser if you are trying to stir up the TSR demographic against facebook.

    Facebook is the only thing which gets people away from wasting their life on TSR
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bektas)
    I don't think he's a douche. Are you one of those people who wacthed 'The Social Network' and claim to know everything about Zuckerberg, facebook and it's beginings?

    And you need to leave coo coo land, try get over your paranoia and start your revolution elsewhere.



    He could have been the most genuine, nice, amazing person ever, but if the facts of The Social Network ring true, then he is in fact, a massive (rich) douche.


    OP, I don't really care. I like facebook, does all I want it to. Not too paranoid about corporations seeing my drunk pictures or whatever. Its an ambitious plan you've got going, but I think a democratic website would be very hard to establish and maintain.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    You forgot to factor in that most people here use Facebook and probably would not want it taken down.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    In soviet Russia, you don't social network, social network does you
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    I think you're on to a loser if you are trying to stir up the TSR demographic against facebook.

    Facebook is the only thing which gets people away from wasting their life on TSR
    Me thinks there is an oxymoron somewhere here...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nah nah. I OWN facebook not the other way around. I hardly use it. TSR owns me though. :yes:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by justlol)
    Facebook is bubbling at a value of $60 billion.

    Zuckerberg who I think most people will agree is a douche, owns 25% of the company.

    Facebook has no competitive advantage other than users don't see a reason to move to any other network.


    Goldman Sachs, some seedy russian investment house and plenty of other nefarious characters have stakes in facebook.

    YOUR input, their reward.

    When they have pumped the share price high enough, they will offload the shares on to average joe, mostly through mutal funds/pension trusts. We can stop them.

    Create a community owned social network. No ads, no sale of private information.
    Yes, this part has been attempted before, infact some people attempted to pay people to use their social network.


    But I have one extra ingredient that may allow this venture to succeed when others haven't. Financing from an internet giant.

    Google is very wary of Facebook's ambitions, and it's share of user attention while they are online. When people are using FB, they aren't searching. And who knows when FB decide to enter the search arena.

    Google tried to compete with Orkut but failed and trying again with Google.me or Google circles.
    What they fail to understand is that they do not have to win, all they need is for FB to lose.

    Financing and cheap ads should be donated to a third party coop. They can then take the FB monsters down.

    Each user will get a share in the network. If the users ever commercialise the network, they can receive dividends.

    They can vote on features and policy. A true democracy. And best thing of all is they own their data and nobody elses profits from their efforts.

    I had this thought a month or so back and thought it would be best to somehow get financing from Google secretly and acheive this. But I'm involved with other things, so working my way into Google and presenting it to them is not feasible. Also believe it's best to keep things pure and transparent from the outset.

    Google remember, FB only has to lose for you to keep your position as top dog. In return for your financing, I'm sure the users will agree not to encroach on your territory.


    again guys, this has just been a thought, but there's no reason why this flame cannot grow into a raging fire.

    TSR, get this thread going, how amazing would it be if TSR were responsible for the next big thing on the web and the destruction of $60,000,000,000 of undeserved and/or illgotten paper wealth. Karma is a bittch so 'don't be evil' as Google used to say.
    peace
    What's your issue with Facebook?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Seems more and more we are getting into the days of most Internet functions owned by 10 or so companies.
    The internet is, oddly, one of the few industries where there is virtually no government control on monopolies (competition law). It's unfortunately quite hard to regulate at the moment, as there are no strong intergovernmental bodies for this.

    I see it changing in the next decade, with a higher level of intergovernmental control of the internet.

    The Google enterprise can be compared to - in the automotive industry - to a situation where one company would own the largest car maker, the largest oil company, a major road-building company, a major car servicing chain and a major tire company.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The Social Network is in fact inaccurate as ****. I seem to remember around 3-4 years ago there was a lot of information floating about saying he didnt just steal the idea, he stole the code, didnt pay his own programmer and was actual a bigger douche than the movie made him out to be.

    Also yes facebook does sell data. Old news.
    So does every other big social network...

    Social networking is the big thing atm, definately where the internet is heading, take a look at "Google +1", google are going the social work, which is going to completely change SEO btw.

    And obviously you know very little about Google, they make barely any money out of the search function, it all comes from Adwords and believe me when I say, no other CPC (costperclick) advertising network is even 1/10th as powerful or userfriendly as Adwords.

    Your an idealist which is great. But these are businesses. No matter what they say the number 1 aim is to make money.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wactm)
    The Social Network is in fact inaccurate as ****. I seem to remember around 3-4 years ago there was a lot of information floating about saying he didnt just steal the idea, he stole the code, didnt pay his own programmer and was actual a bigger douche than the movie made him out to be.

    Also yes facebook does sell data. Old news.
    So does every other big social network...

    Social networking is the big thing atm, definately where the internet is heading, take a look at "Google +1", google are going the social work, which is going to completely change SEO btw.

    And obviously you know very little about Google, they make barely any money out of the search function, it all comes from Adwords and believe me when I say, no other CPC (costperclick) advertising network is even 1/10th as powerful or userfriendly as Adwords.

    Your an idealist which is great. But these are businesses. No matter what they say the number 1 aim is to make money.
    Yes, but lower number of searches will mean less opportunity to click on adwords. Yahoo owns the adword patent via a company they bought in early 2000, overture or something idk.

    Google gave Yahoo billions in stock to be able to use the adwords system.

    Google doesn't own adwords! Do some research, the business arrangement may have changed but I'm pretty sure this was and still is the case.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    tl;dr


    I'm going to hang out on Facebook for a while. See ya.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The government ownnnnnnns facebook maaaannnnn. :hippie:
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.