Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How To Be Popular On Facebook, Quantified

Posted by timothy on from the logically-the-yankees-suck dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Network World reports that Facebook has just released an analysis of the word usage for about one million status updates from its US English speakers with the words in updates organized into 68 different word categories based on the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC)--a text analysis software program that calculates the degree to which people use different categories of words across a wide array of texts. The results? To be popular on Facebook all you have to do is write longer status updates, talk about music and sports, don't be overly emotional, don't talk about your family, don't refer to time and use the word 'you' a lot. Facebook's study also confirms something that bloggers and Fox News have known for years: negative comments produce more online activity. Sure, Facebook users might click the like button more often on updates expressing positive emotion. But Facebook found you can't beat negativity for user engagement, as dismal status updates garnered more comments than positive ones."

97 comments

  1. You can't win by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    I think I'll die now.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    1. Re:You can't win by Dabido · · Score: 1

      You can't win, you can't break even and you're not allowed to quit the game.

      Every major -ism believes you can break one of these rules.

      Capitalism believes you can win, communism believes you can break even and religion believes you can quit the game. :-)

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
    2. Re:You can't win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can win as long as someone else loses.

  2. Face mook by jack2000 · · Score: 1

    Sneer sneer, jeer.

  3. Look out... by sdnoob · · Score: 4, Funny

    Here come the "Facebook optimization" services ("FBO") charging $999 for more friends, guaranteed !!

    1. Re:Look out... by sakdoctor · · Score: 2

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyXcqu8AhDY

  4. Yes, absolutely by CoccoBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doing those things will make you popular. The fact that people who are open, not selfish and overly dramatic may have more friends probably has nothing to do with this.

    1. Re:Yes, absolutely by FuckingNickName · · Score: 2

      If you have any evidence of a positive correlation between friends and "Facebook friends", now is the time to present your paper.

    2. Re:Yes, absolutely by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Thats a good point. My sister has 400 facebook friends. I don't know how she keeps up with them all.

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
    3. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you have any evidence of a positive correlation between friends and "Facebook friends", now is the time to present your paper.

      I know it is popular to sneer at Facebook on Slashdot (which is kind of ironic given the similarities between two community internet sites people spend time posting stuff on hoping it is of interest to others, but mostly not), but this "they are not real friends" argument really baffles me. As there can be only one kind of relationships, that was defined face to face in a cave at the dawn of time and can never change. Social structures change, the way people relate and communicate change. People I have on Facebook are there because I know them (they are still in the hundreds), they sometime share and/or discuss something interesting or funny, and it is sometimes ok to catch up this way, quite a few live in other countries. If they spam with uninteresting stuff I'll just remove their updates from the news feed, done.

    4. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you have any evidence of a negative correlation between friends and "Facebook friends", now is the time to present your paper.

    5. Re:Yes, absolutely by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      Damn, already posted on this thread. +1 Insightful.
      I admit I never looked at things this way. I always sneered at all those "so-called" facebook friends. I still don't think I will jump on the FB bandwagon anytime soon, but at least I will understand/accept it a bit more.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    6. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, she doesn't...

    7. Re:Yes, absolutely by devxo · · Score: 1

      I moved to live in Thailand around 6 months ago. This was the first time I noticed the true power of Facebook. Everything was there - people I met, places I visited, lots of pictures of the new city I would be living at and most importantly, I discovered lots of interesting new things, like a couple that bakes bread and other stuff we eat only back home and I could order from them. You didn't even really need to know so much specifics, because everything was interconnected when just knowing a few people. Getting to know the new people and places was amazingly easy, and at the same time I get to keep up with my old friends and family members. Otherwise you would have to be active to talk to all those people often, which would be a lot of work. Now I can quite passively still keep up, they can keep up with me and the relationship still remains. But when moving to a new place, it is amazingly easy to get to know everybody that way.

    8. Re:Yes, absolutely by hedwards · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Slashdot isn't a social networking site. I'd hazard that only a small portion of the people here actually use the journal, and those that do use it as a way of submitting a short article.

      Slashdot is essentially a blog with user submitted articles that people comment on. The only reason why there's a karma sytsem at all is to help filter out the known trolls and crap posters, and it does an alright job of that.

      Or in other words, apart from a very superficial, community of people posting on a subject there isn't really a whole lot of similarity.

    9. Re:Yes, absolutely by hedwards · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No evidence required. It was a response to the GGP's assertion that there was a positive correlation between number of facebook friends and number of real world friends. There is no reasonable basis for the assumption that there was a connection.

      It's rather clever of you to turn it into a false dilemma, given that there could be a positive correlation, a negative correlation or no correlation at all. Rather deft of you to ignore that last one.

    10. Re:Yes, absolutely by Randle_Revar · · Score: 2

      There was an attempt at a real community here, but it ultimately failed, with many members migrating en mass to other sites, due largely to /. having really poor tools for social stuff. I think /. would be better off if it did embrace the community aspect a bit more, at least providing the tools needed to those that are interested.

      --
      Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
    11. Re:Yes, absolutely by Sanat · · Score: 1

      Where in Thailand are you... if you are allowed to say?

      In the military (60's) I had orders for "Bomb disposal" in Udorn, Thailand which was very near Laos and a stones throw from North Vietnam. Lots of "Special Ops" and other stuff occurring there. That is all a distant memory anymore.

      Thanks for sharing your insights.

      --
      And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
    12. Re:Yes, absolutely by TitusC3v5 · · Score: 1

      An easier route is just to be young, attractive, and female. Instant friends*, guaranteed.

      * Stalkers and creepers inclusive.

      --
      And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
    13. Re:Yes, absolutely by joebagodonuts · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to account for the increase in # of unwanted female enemies generated by being "young, attractive, and female". "She is such a slut!"

      Seems to come with the territory.

      --
      "Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
    14. Re:Yes, absolutely by Gamer_2k4 · · Score: 1

      I know it is popular to sneer at Facebook on Slashdot (which is kind of ironic given the similarities between two community internet sites people spend time posting stuff on hoping it is of interest to others, but mostly not), but this "they are not real friends" argument really baffles me.

      It shouldn't baffle you if you've spent any time at all in the real world. On the internet, someone is just a face and a name, and any deeper relationship is delusion. There are no expressions, no gestures, and no intonation, and most importantly, no physical aspect, so talking and interacting are only a shadow of what they are in the real world. I would argue that the depth of friendship is dependent on the depth of interaction, and using the internet as a medium necessarily restricts that.

      Social structures change, the way people relate and communicate change. People I have on Facebook are there because I know them (they are still in the hundreds), they sometime share and/or discuss something interesting or funny, and it is sometimes ok to catch up this way, quite a few live in other countries.

      "Sometimes sharing or discussing something funny" is NOT a qualification for friendship. Websites do that. TV shows do that. Neither of those entities are friends, and neither are the actors, characters, or writers related to them. I agree that social structures change, but that's exactly why we can draw a distinction between a Facebook friend and a real friend. Having a hundred Facebook friends is the equivalent of a celebrity having a hundred fans. Are they people that say they like you? Sure. Might you like them back? Yeah, it's possible. Could you get something valuable out of the relationship? Sure, why not. But at the end of the day, these are names you know, or rather, names that know you. The relationship is shallow, much more shallow than a true friendship.

      "There is no greater love than this, that one lays down his life for his friend." THAT'S a real friend. How many of your Facebook "friends" would do the same? How many of them could EVER conceivably do the same?

    15. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is like democracy. It sucks major ass, but at least it's better than anything else we've ever tried. The comments here are very very enlightening much more so than any other website I've seen, but the stories suck, editors suck, and the comments themselves quixotically suck. (every good comment has like 50 comments so bad, the universe weeps)

    16. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dont you see you are slave? even to the social standards that define us... there is no freedom in these four walls that the devil owns, giving up so much precious time for nothing just to say hi.

    17. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know it is popular to sneer at Facebook on Slashdot (which is kind of ironic given the similarities between two community internet sites people spend time posting stuff on hoping it is of interest to others, but mostly not), but this "they are not real friends" argument really baffles me.

      It shouldn't baffle you if you've spent any time at all in the real world.

      I clearly haven't spent any time in your world.

      On the internet, someone is just a face and a name, and any deeper relationship is delusion.

      Who said I only know them on the Internet? It's just one of several ways to interact.

      There are no expressions, no gestures, and no intonation, and most importantly, no physical aspect, so talking and interacting are only a shadow of what they are in the real world. I would argue that the depth of friendship is dependent on the depth of interaction, and using the internet as a medium necessarily restricts that.

      And, tell me, how do you keep up this intense face to face contact, which seems the only thing that counts, with friends living on the other side of the world?

      Social structures change, the way people relate and communicate change. People I have on Facebook are there because I know them (they are still in the hundreds), they sometime share and/or discuss something interesting or funny, and it is sometimes ok to catch up this way, quite a few live in other countries.

      "Sometimes sharing or discussing something funny" is NOT a qualification for friendship.

      Jesus man, lighten up. I said it was one aspect. What do you do with friends at a pub?

      Websites do that. TV shows do that. Neither of those entities are friends, and neither are the actors, characters, or writers related to them. I agree that social structures change, but that's exactly why we can draw a distinction between a Facebook friend and a real friend. Having a hundred Facebook friends is the equivalent of a celebrity having a hundred fans. Are they people that say they like you? Sure. Might you like them back? Yeah, it's possible. Could you get something valuable out of the relationship? Sure, why not. But at the end of the day, these are names you know, or rather, names that know you. The relationship is shallow, much more shallow than a true friendship.

      Thanks for putting me, my life and my friends in your place.

      "There is no greater love than this, that one lays down his life for his friend." THAT'S a real friend. How many of your Facebook "friends" would do the same? How many of them could EVER conceivably do the same?

      You're very black and white categorical about being either a "real" friend or a Facebook friend. And only people willing do die for you are real friends. I see more variations on the theme of human interactions.

    18. Re:Yes, absolutely by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I admit I never looked at things this way. I always sneered at all those "so-called" facebook friends.

      Despite the GPs post that facebook "friends" have their apropriate niche and how he's neatly integrated facebook into his life in a healthy and reasonable way. And despite the handful of inevitable me-too posts, the reality is that most people haven't looked at it that way and approached it that way... Including most facebook users.

    19. Re:Yes, absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And poof - God disapears in a puff of logic
      Along with the smoking gun.

    20. Re:Yes, absolutely by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      Mod++ The problem seems to stem from the Facebook use of the word 'friend'. If they called it 'acquaintance', or 'connection' there probably wouldn't be such a big deal. But using the word 'friend' seems to strike a nerve with so many people, I wonder why that is? I've never heard anyone give anyone stick for having lots of Linked-in 'friends'.

    21. Re:Yes, absolutely by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the comments here are better, even better than Ars, Anandtech, etc, which always surprises me, given how much better the articles at those places are. That's the moderation system at work though - if I use a flat view, with all comments visible, my opinion of the comments here suddenly drops like a rock.

      --
      Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
  5. This just in by Titoxd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Trolling people encourages replies in online fora.

    News at 11

    1. Re:This just in by Kilrah_il · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand it, how come someone tells us that the news is at 11 and he is modded insightful? Let me try it also: Simpsons at 8! Jay Leno at 10!

      P.S.
      If you are going to reply with a Whoosh, then I Whoosh you back, be warned :).

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    2. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 silly

    3. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because the trend the past few years on Slashdot has been to mod +5 insightful one liner comments that don't contribute any actual content or argument that adds to the discussion in any meaningful way.

    4. Re:This just in by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      The great thing is that I was modded insightful too... and I was going for funny. Well, QED.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    5. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes I take the fish out of the tank to watch them flop around trying to breathe.

  6. Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of this is doable, except the "music and sports" part...

  7. new mod... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

    "+1, negative"

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  8. So does tihs mean... by xscarecrowx · · Score: 2

    we are finally going to get a dislike button?

    just wondering...

    1. Re:So does tihs mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we are finally going to get a dislike button?

      just wondering...

      Not until you learn to spell "this". You put "tihs", which, of course, spelled backwards is...

    2. Re:So does tihs mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tihs or GTFO

  9. None of the correlations seem particularly high by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the charts, they range from -0.04 to +0.10 for the classifications given. Now I'm no statistician, but those ranges of values don't seem to be much more than a slight tendency. They certainly don't seem to me to be "dead cert" formulae for getting more comments or likes.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:None of the correlations seem particularly high by holamundo · · Score: 2
      Quoting from the "official" reply on the wall

      The measure for correlations used is r. We would actually expect the correlation coefficients to be low, since there are so much more to status updates not captured by the word counts. The correlations coloured are statistically significant, though.

      ...so your observation is correct.

      On the other hand, from my own experience, the decisive factors in determining the "popularity" of a status update are
      1) real-life popularity of that person (you don't add only virtual "friends", do you?) and
      2) that person's tendency to "like" and repeatedly comment on his own status updates
      Now I'm no statistician as well and I have no studies to back me up. Duh.

    2. Re:None of the correlations seem particularly high by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Online popularity is not the same as real life popularity. Online I can have a hot chixxor avatar and become popular quickly without having to really work for it. Occasionally, I can post hot pictures of women and talk about things that appeal to everybody.

      Do that for a while and word of mouth grows. As opposed to in real life where I'd be expected to meet most of those people, or at least notice that they exist.

      Doing that is almost certain to guarantee a huge number of "friends" but really once the number of friends hits about 5 or so, some of those relationships are going to suffer if they're genuine friendships.

    3. Re:None of the correlations seem particularly high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The author (Lisa Zhang of Facebook) reports a great many correlations of 0, and almost all approach 0. In these cases, there is no predictive relationship to report. That is, as age, popularity, and other factors rise, the frequency of terms in most of these categories rises, falls, or stays the same. The author would have done well to omit correlations around 0 altogether. They tell us nothing except that their use is unrelated to the supposed predictors (age, popularity, etc.).

  10. News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by GF678 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This story is about as far from Slashdot's slogan as you can get.

    1. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by knotprawn · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Total agreement.

    2. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Funny

      This story is about as far from Slashdot's slogan as you can get.

      True. Facebook requires friends.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    3. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Facebook requires friends.

      No. Facebook requires "friends".

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    4. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least "friends" don't tell you to take out the trash.

    5. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      I think the word "friend" as it is used on Facebook should really be something else. Maybe "associate" or "interesting person" would fit the bill. If instead of "friending" someone you "linked" to them, or "subscribed" to their updates, I could see the dynamics changing. Same functionality, different mindset and expectations. Perhaps even less stress and offence taken when "unfriending" - these would become "unsubscribe", "unlink" - something less personal. I'm sure someone could whip up a browser addon that changes Facebook's terminology fairly easily.

      On the topic of Facebook, I'd like to see ways to group friends better, like have a "closeness" rating that I can set when I friend someone.. or just one or more tags that I could filter by when publishing to my wall. eg. "show this link to all friends I've tagged as techies".

    6. Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters by Phurge · · Score: 1

      you can do this already - use the "friend lists" feature within facebook

      --
      I'll see your hokum and raise you a boondoggle.
  11. meanwhile, on Slashdot.. by orange47 · · Score: 5, Funny

    to be popular you need to be fast enough to firstpost, talk about what happens in Soviet Russia, praise the laser-equipped sharks as new overlords.. etc

    1. Re:meanwhile, on Slashdot.. by alexhs · · Score: 1

      The problem being that "Funny" points don't give you any karma... Early copy-pasting parts of TFA seems more efficient. Or "correlation != causation" negative posts.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  12. Facebook? Who is interested in that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not me. There are enough ways to invest precious life-time without utterly wasting it.

  13. Re:This just in3 628 800 by ThePangolino · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am sorry but I couldn't find The Simpsons at 40 320 nor Jay Leno at 3 628 600.

    --
    My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.
  14. Uh, what's the point?!? by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...all you have to do is write longer status updates, talk about music and sports, don't be overly emotional, don't talk about your family, don't refer to time and use the word 'you' a lot.

    Uh, don't talk about family? Don't refer to time? What's next, we shouldn't talk about friends either? Seems to me they're kind of missing the whole point of Facebook. I don't think it was meant to be a sports and music site.

    And what kills me is since when did Facebook need to become a popularity contest? There's no "winner" for who has the most "friends". It's an extended address book to stay connected with friends and family when you really break it down. YOUR friends and family, not friends of friends of friends families (kind of starts sounding like the old jokes that start with "my cousins best friends sisters roommates dog groomer"). And all the other bullshit on there (games, polls, puzzles) are all just revenue streams for Facebook, which don't really change the whole point of the site.

    And as far as people who run entire businesses off Facebook and nothing else, do yourself a favor now and stop being cheap and just get your own domain and host your own site. Because when the popularity of Facebook dies, so will your company.

    1. Re:Uh, what's the point?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. People use Facebook in different ways. Some people treat it as a game to be won by having the highest number in the friends field. Other people use it to actually key up with and in touch with a small closer knit group of individuals. If someone wants to have 1,000 friends and they're happy with that then who cares? Likewise if someone else has 3 friends, who are all just their immediate family and has locked every privacy setting as far down as possible to limit anyone else seeing anything and they are happy with that than more power to them.

      It's nice that Facebook is flexible enough to be used in these diverse roles.

    2. Re:Uh, what's the point?!? by sinclair44 · · Score: 1

      Likewise if someone else has 3 friends, who are all just their immediate family and has locked every privacy setting as far down as possible to limit anyone else seeing anything and they are happy with that than more power to them.

      I'm not sure if that was just hypothetical, but I do actually know people who do that. Indeed, more power to them.

      --
      Omnes stulti sunt.
    3. Re:Uh, what's the point?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, don't talk about family? Don't refer to time? What's next, we shouldn't talk about friends either? Seems to me they're kind of missing the whole point of Facebook. I don't think it was meant to be a sports and music site.

      It depends on what you want out of Facebook. Replace "Facebook" with "blog", and I suspect the same rules would apply: Only your friends and family are going to be particularly interested (or willing to feign interest) if you post about having a bagel for lunch or how little Montgomery has learned to crawl. But start addressing content that interests a wider crowd, whether it's sports, music, humor, technology, or what Lady Gaga had for breakfast, and more people pay attention.

    4. Re:Uh, what's the point?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what kills me is since when did High School need to become a popularity contest? There's no "winner" for who has the most "friends". It's a place to learn when you really break it down.

      Lemme guess, you've said these words before. ;)

      Remarkable the behavioral similarities though, no?

  15. I can't see anything on Facebook by houghi · · Score: 0

    I do not see anything on Facebook. I don't even see many of the icons people use on their pages. But that is perhaps because I have the folowing in my hosts file:
    0.0.0.0 www.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 static.ak.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 login.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.login.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn.com
    0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.com
    0.0.0.0 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.connect.facebook.com

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:I can't see anything on Facebook by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Funny

      Congrats: you are the newest iteration of that guy

    2. Re:I can't see anything on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I don't care who ya are, that's funny right there." -- Larry the Cable Guy

      "Larry who? Am I supposed to have heard of him? I'm sorry, but I haven't." -- That Guy

    3. Re:I can't see anything on Facebook by Christopher+Fritz · · Score: 1

      It doesn't even take that much to see nothing on Facebook. I don't give Facebook Javascript access, and I found their new profiles don't load without Javascript. Then soon after, nothing else on the site loads without Javascript. I get essentially a blank page (with a few static layout items).

      Doesn't matter to me as I only have a Facebook account so people can find me (recently reconnected with a childhood school friend, for example). I mostly just find it interesting that there is no Facebook for me with my no-Javascript setting.

  16. Re:This just in3 628 800 by Nialin · · Score: 1

    How has the parent not been modded up? I'm losing faith in the nerd community.

  17. And Slashdot? by n0rr1s · · Score: 1

    Facebook's study also confirms something that bloggers and Fox News have known for years: negative comments produce more online activity.

    I would say the slashdot editors know it too. (And if you disagree with this post, I'll know you're only doing it for the karma).

  18. When did popularity on Facebook become all that? by LABarr · · Score: 2

    Seriously?! I thought Facebook was a means of staying connected with one's own friends?

    --
    If you've got more than a couple of hundred "friends" of Facebook then it's not Facebook that you need, it's your own wikileaks...

  19. Re:When did popularity on Facebook become all that by SnowHog · · Score: 0

    When people realized that they could use Facebook as an electronic smoke screen to obscure the reality of their pathetic lives.

  20. Re:You can win by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only way to win facebook is NOT TO PLAY.

  21. Wrong on the Internet... by kennymeyer · · Score: 0

    I thought Facebook was about staying in touch with family and friends, and not crawling into others' asses and pretending to be someone else to have a certain number of "friends" -- see MySpace. Maybe there are just too many people wrong in the Internet. http://xkcd.com/386/

  22. Re:You can win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Professor Falken.

  23. Re:You can win by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

    assuming that it is even a game...

    --
    Balderdash!
  24. Popularity contests... by pongo000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...are so grade school. Why are people so incredibly self-centered, self-absorbed, and egotistical? Those are exactly the type of people I wouldn't want to have as "friends".

    1. Re:Popularity contests... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...are so public school.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Popularity contests... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because of the sickening celebrity adoration culture

  25. 34 known infectors on facebook list (w/ source) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    FROM -> http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/

    0.0.0.0 2006mindfreaklike.blogspot.com
    0.0.0.0 allhqpics.com
    0.0.0.0 brunga.at
    0.0.0.0 changduk26.com
    0.0.0.0 chelick.net
    0.0.0.0 en.likefever.org
    0.0.0.0 fu.golikeus.net
    0.0.0.0 girlownedbypolicelike.blogspot.com
    0.0.0.0 hatrecord.ru
    0.0.0.0 konflow.com
    0.0.0.0 likeportal.com
    0.0.0.0 likespike.com
    0.0.0.0 likethis.mbosoft.com
    0.0.0.0 likethislist.biz
    0.0.0.0 mylike.co.uk
    0.0.0.0 proflashdata.com
    0.0.0.0 tattooshaha.info
    0.0.0.0 thedatesafe.com
    0.0.0.0 www.allhqpics.com
    0.0.0.0 www.chelick.net
    0.0.0.0 www.likeportal.com
    0.0.0.0 www.likespike.com
    0.0.0.0 www.likethis.mbosoft.com
    0.0.0.0 www.likethislist.biz
    0.0.0.0 www.lomalindasda.org
    0.0.0.0 www.mylike.co.uk
    0.0.0.0 www.proflashdata.com
    0.0.0.0 www.tattooshaha.info
    0.0.0.0 www.thedatesafe.com
    0.0.0.0 www.upi6.pillsstore-c.com
    0.0.0.0 kirgo.at
    0.0.0.0 proflashdata.com

    APK

    P.S.=> That's a reputable & reliable (+ regularly updated) site for HOSTS file data, & you MAY be "better served" by blocking THOSE out, rather than facebook in its entirety... IF you intend to use facebook, that is!

    I don't use facebook myself though, & the ONLY reason why is because of malware makers using it to "bushwhack" folks - as shown above as just some KNOWN examples of it happening!

    The actual payloads are contained on those links above though, NOT facebook itself - facebook's just a "snagging point" (subway/trainstation/busstation/crowded street) for the malware makers in facebook is all...

    (Malware makers' are JUST LIKE PICKPOCKETS - they don't go where there's only 1-2 people to victimize... the malware making crowd goes to the "train stations/subways" online, where there are MILLIONS of potential victims to ensnare w/ malwares they create - millions of people like facebook, & there you are: The REASON it's being used by malware makers as shown here!)... apk

  26. Re:You can win by djscoumoune · · Score: 1

    The only winning move is to play, perfectly, waiting for your opponent to make a mistake.

  27. Re:This just in3 628 800 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Readability error for me, I didn't see any commas.

  28. Re:You can win by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    Win Facebook, still be a geek LOSER. I think of all the stories I've read on /. this one has to be the one with the least amount of interest for me.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  29. Keywords by UDChris · · Score: 1

    What I'm seeing is that using certain keywords will attract people to your site. What a discovery! If only someone had figured this out a decade ago we could have, I don't know, some sort of "engines" to help us with our searches for stuff that interest us.

    --
    "Hey, I know what we're gonna do today." -- Phineas Flynn
  30. Re:This just in3 628 800 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He got it right in the title and that's close enough.

  31. I wonder what else FB is analyzing and sharing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting analysis in the website article.

    It goes without saying that if they're busy analyzing these trends that FB most definitely performs other complex analysis and likely shares that with other entities. They are in the business of information analysis, just like Google.

  32. Re:Uh, what's the point?!? -- flawed "study" by hackstraw · · Score: 1

    They never even define "popular". I would assume popular means the number of friends you have or some other metric. There are people on FB that have a good number of friends that are really obnoxious (at least to me) to have as friends on FB.

    A friend of mine on FB who has over 4,000 friends is a nationally known guitar player/singer in a band.

  33. I said same on 04-08-2010 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " don't give Facebook Javascript access, and I found their new profiles don't load without Javascript." - by Christopher Fritz (1550669) on Sunday December 26, @12:16PM (#34670544)

    That's good, I agree - javascript's a vector in & of itself (noscript's good, opera's got site by site control built in for this also), & I do the same myself wherever possible, as noted here ->

    "It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript (especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security" APK http://forums.tweaktown.com/windows/25596-how-secure-windows-2000-xp-server-2003-vista-fully-per-cis-tool-scoring-7.html 04-08-2010 12:15 AM

    APK

    P.S.=> ... &, there you are... between blocking out KNOWN infectors on facebook (like your DNA does vs. actual viruses), & noscript? Hey... so as to your reply? Yes, "great minds think alike" - & "the sincerest form of flattery? IMITATION!", lol... apk

  34. Re:I wonder what else FB is analyzing and sharing. by UDChris · · Score: 1

    ...FB most definitely performs other complex analysis and likely shares that with other entities.

    You mean entites like those that provide the targeted ads in the right column? Again, not new, and really not news...

    --
    "Hey, I know what we're gonna do today." -- Phineas Flynn
  35. Re:You can win by monkyyy · · Score: 1

    it is; its like a drinking game while diving and first one to od or crash* wins(or if everyone gives up/ arrested the person with highest blood alcohol wins)

    *crash defined as 2 cars getting totaled or a death

    --
    warning pointless sig
  36. Re:You can win by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

    Being the most popular person on Facebook is an honour reserved for the very stupid.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  37. ...Fox News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When are you pussies going to stop whining and crying about Fox News? "Waa waa it's negative." ALL news is negative you sissy fucking tools. But when your party is an even bigger joke than the party of the "rich white man", you have to attack your Fox News boogie man.

  38. Re:You can win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And yet you still commented...

  39. Re:You can win by arisvega · · Score: 1

    The only way to win facebook is NOT TO PLAY.

    My sig applies

    --
    The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  40. Re:You can win by wmanoble · · Score: 1

    With a game, fair play....

    --
    http://www.squidoo.com/ipod-headphones-today
  41. Don't talk about Time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    crap, there goes my dissertation *sigh*

  42. Is FB the Antichrist? by UBfusion · · Score: 1

    "don't talk about your family": subconscious rule to suppress the guilt both FB posters and readers might experience due to the fact that spending time on FB is by definition cheating (== stealing time from your family). Somehow I sense a similarity of this rule with the Mickey Mouse universe, where parents don't exist (only uncles, aunts, nieces and cousins).

    "don't refer to time": subconscious rule strongly related to the previous one (spare time should be spent with the family) and also used to suppress the guilt caused by procrastination (instead of working or taking care of pressing errands, they got stuck in FB).

    Mine is a psychoanalytic approach. My guess is that eventually somebody will come up with a religious interpretation of the results, demonstrating that these FB commandments are the inverse of the biblical Ten Commandments and therefore FB is the Antichrist.

  43. Re:You can win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But we thank you for your time, and your thoughtful reply.

  44. Re:You can win by Pompz1 · · Score: 1

    If you hang out with the right kind of people, everything is a game.

  45. Re:You can win by ultranova · · Score: 1

    Win Facebook, still be a geek LOSER. I think of all the stories I've read on /. this one has to be the one with the least amount of interest for me.

    And yet you still felt the need to comment on it.

    How's it feel like being a geek LOSER, loser?

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.