Slashdot Mirror


MySpace Loses Ten Million Users In One Month

Goldiloxx writes "Social networking website MySpace lost over ten million users between January and February 2011, according to comScore. In February 2011, the Internet website had less than 63 million users, down from a previous total of approximately 73 million."

336 comments

  1. QQ by disopaos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    MySpace has no change in surviving anymore. Facebook has 600+ million users and Windows Live Messenger has 330+ million users. The only larger network than those two is interestingly Chinese QQ, which has 636 million users.

    1. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      For those who don't know, "QQ" is a pair of crying eyes in ascii. That's why it's so interesting.

    2. Re:QQ by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MySpace has no change in surviving anymore.

      That's like saying "AOL has no chance in surviving" now that dialup is a joke. But yet, they remain....

      Most things that have gotten that big will die a very slow death.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    3. Re:QQ by blai · · Score: 1

      "Tencent was founded in Shenzhen, China"

      --
      In soviet Russia, God creates you!
    4. Re:QQ by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird.

      I'm pretty sure you're the one who equated Chinese with strange and weird, I don't see that in the OP. Due to the fact that QQ is developed and operated by a Chinese company, there's nothing racist in saying that QQ is Chinese. It is. "Chinese" is not a racist term, it's a demonym.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    5. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only racists are those that accuse others of racism.

    6. Re:QQ by croddy · · Score: 2

      Wikipedia tells me that QQ is owned by a Chinese company and is the most popular IM service in China. Is that incorrect? If so, you may wish to edit the article.

    7. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you really believe that Facebook has 600 million users? Or is it more like 600 million unique login names?

      Because I personally know several people with several dozen accounts that they use to game the games that require you to have scads of social acquaintances willing to play the games along with you.

      I'd put FB's real usership at 50-150 million. The rest are fake.

    8. Re:QQ by chispito · · Score: 1

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird. (The technical term is "Orientalism" - implying that "the East" is antithetical to "the West".) QQ has been in use for ages. It is very big in South Africa...uh-oh, South Africa has a lot of black people. Yikes, when we start stereotyping, it's a minefield!

      "Strange and weird?" What the hell?

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    9. Re:QQ by Illicon · · Score: 1

      Falsely.

    10. Re:QQ by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird. (The technical term is "Orientalism" - implying that "the East" is antithetical to "the West".) QQ has been in use for ages. It is very big in South Africa...uh-oh, South Africa has a lot of black people. Yikes, when we start stereotyping, it's a minefield!

      Don't read to much into it, not everything is about race. Maybe he meant it's interesting because unlike the other 2 most of us are unlikely to have heard of it despite its size (I certainly hadn't), thought of that ? And why the heck can't he call it chinese when its wikipedia page says : "Tencent was founded in Shenzhen, China, in 11 November 1998, by Ma Huateng." ?

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    11. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is interesting about it is that there a social network filled with 636 million rage quitters. I would imagine there should be no members left.

    12. Re:QQ by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some people see "racism" everywhere. They see race first in just about everything. They are the real racists, but try telling them that, and they'll deny it profusely because the idea that people who inject "race" into everything, even when it is clearly not a factor as being "racism", escapes their limited small minds.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    13. Re:QQ by Omestes · · Score: 2

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird.

      So am I racist when I say Facebook is an American company? Since when is referring to where things were founded racism? If I say "LiveJournal is Russian", and I somehow attacking Russians?

      Stop being so quick to the gun. I didn't see anything remotely racist in the OP's post, nor, I doubt, did most other people. I don't know why you really want to be offended by things, but it probably isn't healthy. People who constantly look for offense are more annoying than the genuinely offensive.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    14. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or even more likely scam and spam accounts.

    15. Re:QQ by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      She could have just said, "QQ" instead of "Chinese QQ". A person's definition of the 'Other' is part of what defines or even constitutes the self. It is the process by which societies and groups exclude 'Others' who do not fit into their society. Othering helps distinguish between home and away, the uncertain or certain.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    16. Re:QQ by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Hence the saying, "QQ more".

    17. Re:QQ by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2

      The only larger network than those two is interestingly Chinese QQ, which has 636 million users.

      Well, considering that the population of China is just over 1.3 billion, I think that size of user base is to be expected

    18. Re:QQ by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 1

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird.

      I always thought that China is inhabitated by homo sapiens as is the whole rest of our planet...

    19. Re:QQ by skids · · Score: 1

      Or more likely, it's entirely appropriate to note it separately because it serves a larger population, so its subscriber numbers are apples-to-oranges. Though that's not quite yet true as lower penetration of Internet services in China means it has more users than the US, but possibly not more than the US + EU.

      Actually I'm more astounded that Windows Live Messenger deserved remark, considering it is but a chat client, hardly a social content repository like facebook or myspace. It had started to do content with the photo-album, but has since punted to integrate with actual social content sites instead,

    20. Re:QQ by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 1

      important addition

    21. Re:QQ by skids · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's actually 63.6 million rage quitters and their other nine accounts they are ashamed to log back into.

    22. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      MySpace has no change in surviving anymore.

      [italics mine]

      You have no change to survive, make your time...

    23. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most popular game only has 90 million users. Try again.

    24. Re:QQ by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      I think that the KKK is racist.

    25. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Have you counted the games?

    26. Re:QQ by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      By which standard, you are a racist! Oops! So am I. Wait, wait, I mean you are NOT a racist, NOBODY is a racist, not even people that commit horrific acts that seem to be racist to an unbiased third party observer because if they even so much as thought the word racist, they would thereby magically become racist.

      Damn! I didn't mean it! They would not become racist, no matter how often they accused others of racism.

      #!@% Godellian knots...

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    27. Re:QQ by chispito · · Score: 1

      She could have just said, "QQ" instead of "Chinese QQ". A person's definition of the 'Other' is part of what defines or even constitutes the self. It is the process by which societies and groups exclude 'Others' who do not fit into their society. Othering helps distinguish between home and away, the uncertain or certain.

      And yet YOU are the one who created the association between "Chinese" and "strange and weird" in the minds of slashdotters everywhere where no such association had existed.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    28. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate niggers too brah.

    29. Re:QQ by egamma · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that Facebook has 600 million users? Or is it more like 600 million unique login names?

      Because I personally know several people with several dozen accounts that they use to game the games that require you to have scads of social acquaintances willing to play the games along with you.

      I'd put FB's real usership at 50-150 million. The rest are fake.

      You're assuming that everyone creates duplicate accounts. I don't know a single person who does. I think that there are at least 400 million real accounts. ...And I have as much evidence for my position, as you have for yours.

    30. Re:QQ by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Oh, and nice racism there, calling QQ "Chinese", thus implying it is strange and weird.

      Whoah, dude. He likely just called it "Chinese" because it appears to be a Chinese company. From the imqq home page summary: "Connecting the information in China that you need, you have now the tools to discover, meet and experience with others who share your vision of China" Funny how nobody referred to or appeared to intend racism or stereotyping until you replied...

      QQ has been in use for ages. It is very big in South Africa...uh-oh, South Africa has a lot of black people. Yikes, when we start stereotyping, it's a minefield!

      Please clarify how naming a product "Chinese" is stereotyping?

    31. Re:QQ by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      With an average of 6 accounts per player, that equals 450 million fake accounts. Sounds like the previous poster had a pretty good estimate.

    32. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calling something Chinese does not make it racist any more then saying French Wine is great. Racism exists because it's taught. Your teaching people that racism exists and even uttering the word Chinese is racist. Thing is it's not - you just want it to be. People like you are why racism will never die sadly. You won't let it. Maybe you have a very real direct benefit for letting racism continue (perhaps your a lawyer?) or perhaps your really just that messed up in the head.

    33. Re:QQ by Zerth · · Score: 4, Funny

      Once all the old people who don't realize AOL is still hitting their credit card have died, so will AOL.

    34. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, who doesn't have a few secondary accounts for trolling and such.

    35. Re:QQ by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Really?

      It would surprise me if truly 50% of the population were using it (though I imagine it spreads past China).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    36. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True. The only time I did that was to get free mousepads a year or so ago, users would make dozens accounts and friend them to each other to get the required 50 friends. I probably made 10 myself, and that was going on for a few months.

      But the scams for games and shit probably doesn't even compare to the number of teenagers who make 2, one for friends, one for Mom, trolling only accounts, people that made accounts and quit, and people who quit because of privacy concerns; I would estimate it at far less than 150M. 50M tops.
      For that reason, I bet that they will never release the number of people that logged in in the last month, as it would be pretty embarrassing.

    37. Re:QQ by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Strictly speaking, it's inhabited by homo sapiens sapiens, a subspecies... (plus - some areas do appear to have slight genetic admixture of hominid species living there previously)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    38. Re:QQ by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Racism is not a position or disposition. That is simple hatred, bigotry and prejudice - which have a number of psychological and sociological bases.

      Racism is an "ism" - like Fascism or Capitalism or Communism. Racism is ideological and institutionalised - formally or culturally. It refers to systematic effect on a class of individuals, and individual experience of that effect.

      People may be part of a Racist society or institution - regardless of their own personal bigotry or inclusiveness.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    39. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck that. I found ten cents walking down the sidewalk this morning. I'm not going to China just to get a dime.

    40. Re:QQ by linear+a · · Score: 1

      Caution: Godwin's Law kicks in below here.

    41. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense intended, but if they're chinese, wouldn't the ASCII be instead: T T ?

    42. Re:QQ by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      News Corp.

      Is there any other white elephant we can sell to that bastard, Murdoch?

      Bleed him slowly - from a thousand cuts.

      Ahh.... One can dream.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    43. Re:QQ by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 1

      According to wikipedia the definition of homo sapiens sapiens is outdated, because the Neanderthaler is not classified as a subspecies of homo sapiens anymore, but I'm no expert in this field.

    44. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not feed the troll...

    45. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A good reason for pointing out that it's Chinese is that this simple fact means most people outside of China will never be able to use it, because they don't speak the language. That's also the reason why most people have never heard about China's "Google", "eBay", etc.

    46. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're going to assume that on the low end, the average number of accounts people have is four, and on the high end 12? Really now?

    47. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cobol is still around in places.

    48. Re:QQ by DeadboltX · · Score: 1

      AOL survives because the majority of their users are paying for features they don't need or use

      If people stop visiting MySpace then they won't make as much ad revenue and will eventually collapse.

    49. Re:QQ by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      /sarcasm

      First LiveJournel, and now MySpace jumped the shark?! No Way!!

      Now if only Faceook would as well ... What do you mean lack of privacy, isn't an issue you care about? You should, and will when it breaks.

    50. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 0

      T T is "japanese"
      Q Q I'd not seen before, but if it's Chinese, it just strengthens the evidence for "all you asians look alike."
      Oh boy.

    51. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would suggest 1 in 6 FB users are as retarded as your gaming friends ... I highly doubt that.

    52. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you meant " you're a lawyer".

    53. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      That the remaining percentage will be the slowest in the exodus doesn't matter. AOL's kind of "life" is exactly what a brain-dead patient on life-support has after the majority of its userbase left --very, very quickly, I might add.

      The sound a falling [software] giant makes is the perfect example of "Is there really a sound of a tree falling in an empty forest where there's nobody around to hear it?"

    54. Re:QQ by sznupi · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with Neanderthals ("according to wiki... because"?). Just our classification / there were earlier forms - definitely anatomically modern humans, but not quite us. Homo sapiens idaltu would be another subspecies, extinct one.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    55. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      Oops. I meant MySpace, rather than AOL losing their userbase quickly.
      On closer inspection, that is useful: AOL had a hardware business (modems) and it cannot die quickly because infrastructure changes are involved (users switching away from models and/or getting new email accounts even if they already have broadband)

      So escaping out of AOL means a slower death and more marginal profit because they're on life-support for longer with a less flexible userbase. Compare to switching away from Myspace and other purely 'free virtual' services. Think about how easy and painless it is, to just 'stop' using one and sign up for another free service out of the dozens out there.

    56. Re:QQ by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 1

      Sounds reasonable. Then the German wikipedia article seems to be misleading. That's why I outlined that I'm no expert. :) Thanks for the clarification though!

    57. Re:QQ by laktech · · Score: 1

      In publishing the 600 million statistic, FB has accounted for duplicate accounts, since a "user" is not an "account". And I have as much evidence for my position as you have for yours. Moron.

    58. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the Chinese govt. released the program free of charge.

    59. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, MySpace's 10 million loss may be only 4m or less. But still, when it counts down to 0, it will be zero.

    60. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook only counts active accounts. You'd think they'd be pretty good at that considering that active users are the goods that Facebook is selling to advertisers.

      It's 10% of the world's population. It's only 20 times the number of people that are logged in on Skype at this moment (consider that Skype needs to be installed and run on the user's computer). These numbers sound quite reasonable to me.

    61. Re:QQ by Dishevel · · Score: 0

      You must be a racist for calling a racist person bitching about racism racist.
      Do I qualify as a racist now?

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    62. Re:QQ by supermariosd · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the same thing apply to these other services? I think we should use the official data as a metric given that we're not sure whether we can trust one service above the others.

      Also, I've read interviews from employees at Facebook that say they try to cull duplicate accounts from the statistics they release. Plus, over half of Americans now use Facebook, so I don't think that 600 million is a bad estimate when one considers their international audience.

    63. Re:QQ by Dishevel · · Score: 0

      So. You automatically believe that just the word "Chinese" implies strange and weird.
      Most of us do not think that way when we see that word.
      When you see the phrase "African" do you think "Lazy Monkey"?
      When you see the phrase "Japanese" do you think "Polite Pedophile"?

      Who here is really the racist?

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    64. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that Facebook has 600 [unique] million users? [instead of 50-150 million]

      The same investors' money that has valued then at X billion dollars and the ad-sellers wouldn't be there unless they could prove statements put on FB's public page. It doesn't matter what slashdot believes because money is what talks. Remember that those guys have access to FB's private logs, and need them before plunking their hard cash to pay for your bandwidth, hard drive costs and so on.

      The "public" information for non-investors says that 250 million log in at any given day. You can bet they have plenty 'semi-active' accounts besides these, and see confirmation from the lion's own mouth that the 500-600m is an active count, so it's safe to assume that they have private data on how many other accounts are out there and exact usage frequency of those old people who only use it once a week.

    65. Re:QQ by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Claiming that because it has an -ism suffix that it must be "ideological and institutionalised - formally or culturally" is just trying to skirt the issue. Racism is holding a grudge against another person or group due simply to their biological race. That's it. The appropriateness of other adjectives like hatred, bigotry, or prejudice do not mean that racism must be redefined to a more narrow context.

      Heck if we went by your definition that all "-isms" must be "institutionalized - formally or culturally", I'd hate to see what you come up with for priapism.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    66. Re:QQ by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      And yet YOU are the one who created the association between "Chinese" and "strange and weird" in the minds of slashdotters everywhere where no such association had existed.

      Not only that, but "Chinese" isn't really even a race - it's a nationality. If you want to get broad most Southeast Asians physically resemble each other to a degree that most could be considered racially the same. Same with most of Europe. It'd be akin to calling "English" or "Dutch" a race. No, they're nationalities, and most people from all the countries in that area looked racially pretty close. Taxing that issue even further is the fact that in modern times, people of just about any race can be found in any country you visit. You can find people of Southeast-Asian descent in England. You can find people of European descent in China. Trying to equate the naming of a country with "racism" is just plain silliness these days, and is far more indicative of someone either incredibly easily offended, or simply looking to pick a fight and make an issue where there is none.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    67. Re:QQ by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I always thought that China is inhabitated by homo sapiens as is the whole rest of our planet...

      Do you know of a stranger or weirder species than that?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    68. Re:QQ by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      There is no significant biological basis for "race". Phenotype is the least significant factor in, for instance, being "Black".
      http://www.ahc.umn.edu/bioethics/afrgen/html/Themythofrace.html

      More food for thought, on the question of racial bigotry vs. racism:
      http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/define/bigots.html

      Why are so-called "white people" so often uncomfortable thinking about this issue, and so seldom interested in it as a topic for study?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    69. Re:QQ by MBGMorden · · Score: 2

      Cobol isn't just "around", Cobol is all over the place. It's not new or interesting, and IMHO is a decidedly outdated language (I'd slap anyone who proposed developing a NEW system in Cobol), but realistically, it works for what it's intended to in most of the places where it's deployed, otherwise it would have been long replaced.

      Regardless of what's currently "in style", it's a tough business case to throw money at a problem that has already been solved. That rings even more true in a troubled economy.

      NOTE: I say this as a person who knows absolutely zero Cobol. I program mostly in C# and Java, but I DO still have to interface with a lot of Cobol programs that likely won't be replaced any time soon.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    70. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comscore doesn't look at unique login names. It's based on unique visitors. Typically if you have X number of unique visitors, you have a fraction of that as registered users. The multiple account aspects doesn't outweigh the flood of SEO search traffic which is almost always 1 page bounces that come in from Google.

    71. Re:QQ by mijelh · · Score: 1

      Plus, there is more than one game.

    72. Re:QQ by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

      So you think that a large portion of people have the time and will to do this? I doubt it.

    73. Re:QQ by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Where is that 6 number coming from? You could have literally pulled any number you wanted to make that statement true.

      If it had been "only 10 million users" then you could have easily said "With an average of 46 accounts per player, that equals 450 million fake accounts. Sounds like the previous poster had a pretty good estimate.".

      Come on people - random ass numbers aren't correct merely because you can adjust them to fit your desired result.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    74. Re:QQ by mijelh · · Score: 1
      False. From Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsabilities:

      4 Registration and Account Security:
      ...

      1. 2.You will not create more than one personal profile.

      Facebook considers an user the same thing as an account. Plus, resorting to "ad hominem" says little about yourself.

    75. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      No, I'm clearly not assuming everyone creates fake accounts. If I were, then the 50-150 million real users could equate to a couple of billion accounts.

      I said I know of several real humans who have at least 10^1 accounts. I suspect I've encountered people in the games who have 10^100 or more.

      Frankly, I think the people who are giving Zuckerberg money that "values the company at N Billion dollars" are being had, because they are likely looking at the account numbers and multiplying by a profit factor, but not considering that many of their potential audience are actually nonexistent.

    76. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I'm going to assume your math teachers gave up on you after 4th grade.

    77. Re:QQ by Ucklak · · Score: 1

      I read somewhere, trying to find the source, that it's 150 million unique logins/month.

      Even comscore has uniques at 10mil in 2010.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    78. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      See, here's the thing. The idea behind the fake accounts is to send little game tchotchkes to each other in order to build lists of items that represent game value, and to level-up the fake friends so as to give the aggregate team greater power. Just having the fake friends in a big list is rarely a significant boost in game value. So these people are logging into all of their fake accounts on a regular or semi-regular basis, because that's the game within the game. Thus, they're active if the main account is playing. I have no doubt that facebook has no way of knowing whether an account has a unique person behind it. And I have no doubt that Zynga et al have no compunction about ignoring the situation when pricing ad space. Their advertisers are likely less clued than the average /. reader, and I'm getting a skein of wide eyes and doubting responses here, so you can imagine how little they know.

    79. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Well, let's do it in reverse.

      Presuming the 600 million is actual, breathing, unique personages, then by my factorization there are likely to be 2.4-7.2 Billion accounts open on facebook.

    80. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 2

      250 million log in at any given day.

      The fb app on my phone remains logged in and retrieves the latest news in the background. But that's beside the point.

      The point is, someone who has 25 avatars in a game will log in 25 times to perform the tasks that a game player has to do to improve enough to be significant in the game. Usually there is the player's primary character, who is the focus of all the avatars' attention, being a collection point for gifts and the primary initiator of quest activities (to get the loot and other benefits of being the one initiating it) that the avatars converge on to complete.

      This is not a reasonable thing to do in a game with a realtime component (like WoW) since it would involve in some cases needing two pairs of hands to operate in concert to complete tasks. But all the games I know of on fb don't require real-time action (other than completing certain tasks in under a certain number of hours or days). Well, except the poker game. Though if you have two computers you can put up two avatars and join a table and spoof the games, trade chips, give gifts, etc; so it's not impossible or useless.

      So there's nothing inconsistent between my estimate of the numbers and your observation that they are "active" numbers.

    81. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I think a large portion (not a majority) have the time, will do it, do it, and do it zealously. 150 million humans is a small fraction of the world's population, and the number of those that have to have a dozen or more avatars to rule in a game is even smaller. Don't forget there are also people sending Zynga several hundred dollars a day to buy credits in some of these games. The point being that online gaming is not a monolithically reasonable society. Expect the unexpected.

    82. Re:QQ by Zencyde · · Score: 1

      I suspect I've encountered people in the games who have 10^100 or more.

      A googol? A whole googol? I suspect Facebook's servers don't have that much storage space.

      --
      What day is it? Could you please tell me?
    83. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose it's like the ghost towns in china.

    84. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This explains a lot of my facebook friends. I was wondering where they all came from, and why they kept sending me pixelated farm equipment.

      Tara Maya
      The Unfinished Song: Initiate
      Conmergence: An Anthology of Speculative Fiction

    85. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moron.

    86. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlikely. AOL survives by mostly being a collective of blogs now (engadget and others). The fact that they were able to do things like acquire Huffington Post strongly suggests they're doing ok.

    87. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Oops.

      I typed a Googol when I meant to type a Gogol. Vybachte mene.

    88. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really believe that Facebook has 600 million users? Or is it more like 600 million unique login names?

      Because I personally know several people with several dozen accounts that they use to game the games that require you to have scads of social acquaintances willing to play the games along with you.

      I'd put FB's real usership at 50-150 million. The rest are fake.

      From my companies latest phone survey (nationally representative 18rs and older) 31% of NZers use Facebook at least once a day. That is about 1.2 to 1.3 million people using facebook eveyday in NZ. Now I know you can't extrapolate that to all countries but for arguments sake if those percentages were similar in other English speaking countries alone, it will go close to exceeding your estimate. Using market research, rather than the number of accounts, is probably a better method to estimate the number of users.

    89. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say even less than that estimate. Consider myself, I once went crazy over Farmville (I have no idea why, now), and I had created something like 50 accounts so that I could 'beat' it quickly. Imagine how many others are Farmville fanatics.. if not willing to create 50 accounts, 10-20 accounts knocks that down to 60-30 million actual users, assuming that's the 'average per user.'

    90. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol u mad bro?

    91. Re:QQ by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      True, 6 is a WAG. The thing is, it is more legit of a number for counting users than using login accounts. It is well know that creating extra accounts for Facebook games is extremely common. We don't know how many users Facebook really has, but we know that it is less than the number of accounts on the system.

    92. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying the 300 million pages dedicated to users cats don't count?

    93. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that it is, indeed, both interesting and unexpected for roughly half of China's population to have social networking accounts.

    94. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      It is not "vlueboy's observation" --it's Facebook's observations based on private data and actual logs being analyzed month by month by managers, developers and the advertisers we're so afraid of giving up our fake/real data to. Ours "observations" on /. are based on "guesstimates" and the unfair assumption that millions of uneducated former myspace users (and ALL their old, young and distant relatives who didn't necessarily know PCs could be useful till FB arrived) suddenly boarded the web in force and got savvy enough to have 4 to 10 sock-puppets each*, and security-unconscious (at least per /. opinion), devious enough to do multi-browser windows, and savvy enough to somehow hide from their sneaky FB App all that data that ties their Smartphone to a single real identity according to what the cellphone provider used to validate their mandatory contracts. Contracts are the norm, not anonymous pay options.

      I thought the concensus was that even plain cookies and javascript worked magic on tracking our identities. Why is a company that bested Google in several competitive spying areas so hard to believe?

      They have enough room to publish all your txt data and pictures and keep them "forever," so what prevents them from logging a few bytes with the IPs you are known to use? What about cellphone Apps? Besides, websites *know* when your router is running 25 simultaneus clients and your approximate geolocation. Remember those users getting a spoof warning when they travel 3000 miles away? Thats the power of their info. We are doing armchair discussions while the money guys pound FB for more concrete data on their users than this. They have averages knows for dummy inactive accounts, including how your sock puppets have zero to some handful # of friends in similar conditions, and seeing how their total users avera 180 friends, it's clear the can flag abnormalities.

      * per your estimate --btw spammers can't drive up averages much, or their fake accounts would come up all over our FB Friend Searches, just like happens @myspace today

    95. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Do you really believe that Facebook has 600 million users? Or is it more like 600 million unique login names?

      I remember reading a recent article about HBGary Federal's projects with the Feds that included a "persona management suite" intended to allow one person to maintain ~50 online profiles across facebook, twitter, and other social media sites for psyops and other purposes.

    96. Re:QQ by blackwizard · · Score: 1

      The interesting part to me, if you browse to qq.com you'll see a logo that was clearly ripped off from the Google Chrome logo.

      My interpretation is that the Chinese government is mocking Google's attempts to scorn them - hence, they are a bunch of whiners - QQ.

    97. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or when people stop reading Engadget, TechCrunch, HuffPo and stop using AIM.

    98. Re:QQ by cciRRus · · Score: 1

      The only larger network than those two is interestingly Chinese QQ, which has 636 million users.

      Well, considering that the population of China is just over 1.3 billion, I think that size of user base is to be expected

      Well, China had 420 million Internet users by June 2010. A substantial part of China is rural and does not have Internet access. It's amazing to "expect" half of the entire Chinese population have QQ accounts.

      --
      w00t
    99. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      remember that facebook is blocked in China.

    100. Re:QQ by yeshuawatso · · Score: 1

      Since when did intellectual property of other nations mean anything to the Chinese?

    101. Re:QQ by yeshuawatso · · Score: 2

      Well, let's see. My wife has one account she uses personally, another account for her photo business, another account she manages for the four year old since he's apparently old enough to be exploited by Facebook's lack of privacy but not old enough to at least enjoy the exploitation himself, and two more other accounts she uses to spy on me and other women she doesn't trust. That's five right there. I only have one account, but then again, Facebook is just another email address for me. I personally don't get the whole "social" fad.

    102. Re:QQ by giorgist · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding me, there are at least 50-150 million real users in Australia alone !!!

    103. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when did IP rights mean anything to Americans? Maybe you missed it, but there's a been a huge battle going on in the United States between "pirates" and the recording and movie industries.

      If you're going to generalize against an entire nation...

    104. Re:QQ by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Where is that 6 number coming from? You could have literally pulled any number you wanted to make that statement true.

      If it had been "only 10 million users" then you could have easily said "With an average of 46 accounts per player, that equals 450 million fake accounts. Sounds like the previous poster had a pretty good estimate.".

      Come on people - random ass numbers aren't correct merely because you can adjust them to fit your desired result.

      What is an ass number? If it is random, then what is the distribution?

    105. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cobol isn't just "around", Cobol is all over the place.

      Is it? I always hear that, but never from anybody who's actually doing Cobol. Where is all this Cobol? Do you know anybody writing it, or is it just a rumor you've heard?

    106. Re:QQ by ultranova · · Score: 1

      The same investors' money that has valued then at X billion dollars and the ad-sellers wouldn't be there unless they could prove statements put on FB's public page. It doesn't matter what slashdot believes because money is what talks. Remember that those guys have access to FB's private logs, and need them before plunking their hard cash to pay for your bandwidth, hard drive costs and so on.

      More likely, the investors simply remember having heard of Facebook and throw money at them after a nominal examination, if that. Just like they did during the housing bubble, and before that the dotcom bubble, and every other bubble in history.

      Investors are just as much a bunch of lazy bastards as the rest of us. The sooner people realize that, and that people don't stop being people because money's involved, the sooner we can stop blindly trusting their judgement and implement the economic controls needed keep crashes from happening.

      In the meantime, most investors who's money's at Facebook likely tought like you do, and skipped any serious investigation because surely those who came before them did it, right?

      --

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

    107. Re:QQ by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      I have to politely disagree. Nobody ever amassed money in the millions of dollars by being stupid, or we would all be rich. On top of that, the economic crash you mention is from 2007 and everyone still investing today already trimmed their goals, learned their lessons and started over. So why has Facebook continued to make money? I think you're mistaking investors for purely commercial ad revenue --one is asking for a stake of profits, while the other simply pays X euros, gets what they want and bail out next month if things look risky. There are no angel-seed-investor contracts for them, because they don't care about facebook as much as they want ad sales and user data.

      Keeping that in mind...

      Most investors who's money's at Facebook likely tought like you do, and skipped any serious investigation because surely those who came before them did it, right?

      Before anyone signs an agreement for a single cent to go to facebook, serious investigation takes place. Even Google's startup was nothing more than a very risky ad business model that everyone "serious" denied them at first. Eventually someone gave them 100k and others followed suit. where you're going to put money than

      Bad things will happen and luck has a role at startup times. But Facebook stopped being a startup half a decade ago. That means that it's not investors so much as well-informed paying customers. And with all the money they're throwing at Facebook, you can be sure they pay their private analysts to run 'credit reports' and stay on top of their game to jump on whatever the next successful looking revenue source well before the other well-informed giants do. If bubbles happen --well, there's always risk funds, insurance, and sadly, the newborn expectation of 'too big to fail' and taxpayer bailouts.

    108. Re:QQ by repapetilto · · Score: 1

      Polite Pedophile?

    109. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So 150 million people have 4 accounts each?

    110. Re:QQ by feepness · · Score: 1

      Some people see "racism" everywhere. They see race first in just about everything. They are the real racists, but try telling them that, and they'll deny it profusely because the idea that people who inject "race" into everything, even when it is clearly not a factor as being "racism", escapes their limited small minds.

      I know exactly what you mean! And white people are always doing that too...

    111. Re:QQ by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      I said I know of several real humans who have at least 10^1 accounts. I suspect I've encountered people in the games who have 10^100 or more.

      Are you sure about that second number? A googol is a very large number for a single person to have that many accounts of. (It has been a while since I've used the original spelling!)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    112. Re:QQ by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      Maybe you need glasses. Just because it's round and uses several colors does not make it a rip-off. They're different content areas entirely - chrome is a browser while qq is a social website. It's like saying that these products are ripping off other companies for name recognition.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    113. Re:QQ by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Did you seriously not read the last sentence I wrote? I'm not writing it but the guys in the next 2 offices past me still are writing and maintaining a mountain of old COBOL code that our organization still uses (and has used since the early 80's) and that I have to interface with.

      Also, having gone to various meetings with other counties around the state (I work in local government), I know that around half of them are also still running old COBOL code as well. Several others also still have systems written in RPG.

      This particular area is in tax collection, but the financial industry as a whole still has a lot of very old code running it.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    114. Re:QQ by blair1q · · Score: 1

      You do know that typically an IP is used by several people. It does no good to say "this is the same IP, therefore it's the same person". Especially where NAT is involved.

    115. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On the subject of talking about it: it isn't that white people aren't interested in a dialogue or study about race; it's that they are often discouraged by non-whites from engaging in those things. White people can easily be made to feel unwelcome in studies on race, and conversations are often used as platforms for releasing pent-up frustrations. Because of these things, as well as the inherently controversial nature of the subject, the emotional arguments and accusatory atmosphere that commonly arise (on both sides) make most conversations on the subject of less value (in terms of progress) than having said nothing at all, at least from the white person's perspective. Understand that white people have a lot less to gain here; their primary motivation is empathy, not self-interest. If it's being intentionally made into an uncomfortable process there is no overriding need to even bother; from their point of view the problem is mostly academic. I think the better question is why so many non-whites seem to believe that an atmosphere of accusation and a vague acrimony is a recipe for meaningful dialogue.

      Let me give you a concrete example: in the link you posted, it is stated that all Americans inherently hold racist ideas. Although I fail to see how nationality plays into this, the underlying ideas seem sound to me, or at least rational enough to talk about. The problem there is that the label "racist" has become so socially repugnant that if you start a conversation with, "you're a racist, you just don't know it," you've effectively estranged the other side, whether they are white or not. One way to approach it might be to point out an actual viewpoint of either person that is inherently racist; for example, many white people will freely admit that they believe black people to be inherently more athletic, or Asian people to be inherently smarter, while black people commonly expect white people to be afraid of them; some will disguise this belief by citing cultural selection, but if you probe further you will find that they do not stop to find out whether an individual is from such a culture before making an assumption based entirely on appearance. You might ask for some sort of logical argument to support this hypothesis, and when the person sees that their evidence is self-selecting and anecdotal they might be more receptive to such ideas of institutionalized racism. This is not how the subject is usually broached, however.

      If you want to have a real dialogue about anything, a confrontational attitude is likely to be counterproductive. All too often, this is exactly how conversations on race proceed. Is it any wonder that white people are not much interested in such a minefield?

    116. Re:QQ by hovelander · · Score: 1

      If it is the new crap Chrome logo, they can have it...

      And now that I just looked at it, c'mon, way too generic. (Which does make me think of the new, crap Chrome logo.)

    117. Re:QQ by raorajesh · · Score: 1

      The only larger network than those two is interestingly Chinese QQ, which has 636 million users.

      So I find this hard to believe since according to the latest CNNIC numbers for January 2011, China’s total Internet users has reached 457 million http://bit.ly/icm9wY

    118. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with that defense if you have an unencrypted Wifi so your neighbors turn this mythical NAT-shield into fed-bait. Aggregate information is good enough, and it didn't prevent google from sniff certain OLD non-google logins under my sleeve and offer me to link them.

      You do not understand technology companies, the underlying tech they covet and pay dearly for, and the business greed on deals that glue them together. It will be more obvious to all in a few more years.

      Defaults on 1st and 3rd-party Cookies, referrer loging, Flash, EFF-style browser sniffing, and even usage patterns provide what NAT obfuscates.

    119. Re:QQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attention News Corp:

      Dear Rupert, Chase, and Jonathan,

      Bet you never thought your mistakes, as well as your practice of lying to people, would ever become public did you?

      Would assume it is hard to dispute the facts when there are correspondences and audio recordings of all communications that support said representations as it relates to the conduct and activities by, and/or on the behalf of, News Corp, MySpace, and its representatives.

      If Chase, Jonathan, or Rupert would personally, and on behalf of News Corp and MySpace, provide authorization and permission to release all correspondences and recorded telephone conversations related to this matter. We would be willing to accommodate that request by providing to several media outlets, including Fox News, all related materials so that a “fair and balanced” determination could be made as to how News Corp does business.

      This shall also allow outside individuals, parties, media and the pubic to determine how badly Carey and Miller, through their activities and conduct, destroyed MySpace and drove it from a success to a complete failure.

      As a result of their unwillingness to further discuss and initiate a process that would have generated the stated revenues and results as referenced due to their egos and the greed obstructing their ability to apply common sense and to utilize their brains. They have effectively destroyed MySpace and drove its value down more than any other reasons for the decline and eventual failure of MySpace.

      We shall see if Carey, Miller, or Murdoch are willing to let the public in on the truth, and provide authorization so that the referenced material may be released, as well as all related documentation in support of the representations that have been made as they relate to this matter.

      Here are the facts; Carey and Miller were provided the opportunity to change the direction of MySpace last year with a proposal that would increase net profits of MySpace to 1.5 billion dollars by the third year.

      Based on our experience with News Corp, Carey, and Miller no one should trust any of them.

      They wanted us to disclose the plan to them without any written agreement in place. When that was refused, there were no further discussions. And for the record New Corp has a documented history of being given ideas and concepts and then incorporated said ideas or concepts. They later claim that they already had been developing that idea or concept, and effectively cut out the parties providing them with any such ideas or concepts. This knowledge not only comes from other such occurrences that were learned, but also from prior experiences in dealing with News Corp. Bottom line you can not trust News Corp if there is not an agreement and detailed documentation and records maintained when doing any business with News Corp.

      I would venture to guess anyone they claim to be offering more than 10 million dollars for MySpace would be another one of their lies considering the current state and condition of MySpace.

      It is believed that the damage that Carey and Miller have done to MySpace has brought the value of MySpace down to nothing.

      Anyone willing to pay the 50 to 200 million dollars for MySpace as News Corp alleges would mean one of two things. EITHER THEY LIED TO MYSPACE ABOUT WHAT THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY,,,,

      OR MORE LIKELY IS NEWS CORP, CAREY, AND MILLER ARE LYING AGAIN IN AN EFFORT TO DRIVE THE PRICE UP.

      TIME WILL TELL!!!

    120. Re:QQ by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Neither am I / it's something I care to dig into from time to time(*). Plus of course the whole taxonomic classification is kinda, well... fluid (heck, real biology essentially was established merely ~150 years ago, only after the taxonomies were largely already in place... started in times when we universally believed quite silly things about biological world (many people still can't snap out of it...), mostly just observed singular cases without them making much sense; small snippets without having the full perspective of connections between them, how they form an evolving system. Afterwards it all started to fall into place); many small points of contention are pretty much expected. :)

      And I imagine Germans to have some unique focus on Neanderthals, considering one valley... ;)

      * the usual "exploring own origins", etc. (but then maybe I'm weird - too many people seem unable to resist "...including myths" part; even urban ones, like the "we're so important, gods love us, more of us live now than have ever lived!" BS lie & ignoring 100+ billion dead homo sapiens sapiens ...at least we will be similarly ignored very quickly, so there's some "balance"... But hey, what to expect after a quick look at the list of human cognitive biases)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  2. News? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised it's not more. Facebook is at or near its apex, and will soon experience the same downward slippage. Twitter should have IPOâ(TM)d long ago, they missed the money boat.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:News? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      The even cooler news is 1/7.3 or 13.7% of their users migrated away in one month. Imagine Slashdot losing 10 million users? That happens like every day; the flux is probably on the order of 40 million. When you don't have 2.8 billion page hits an hour though, losing ten or twenty million users is pretty big.

    2. Re:News? by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      Why will Facebook decline?

      Ebay is still the top auction site (in general) after a decade.

    3. Re:News? by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MySpace is destined to go the way of Geocities, Livejournal, etc. The latter is still hanging on by a thread, the former was devoured by Yahoo! who then killed it. And yes, Twitter is about to follow suit. Facebook I'm not so sure will suffer the same fate. The partnership with Zynga and its addictive games means that it will have users for years who would have otherwise dumped the site for greener pastures. The only danger is when/if Zynga abandons Facebook to strike out on its own, allowing access via apps from mobile devices directly. That will be FB's downfall.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    4. Re:News? by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      My point is that staying dominant in a market is easier than becoming dominant. All you basically have if anything vaguely becomes a threat is to copy what makes the up and comers popular if nothing else.

    5. Re:News? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      My initial reaction was, "MySpace had 10 million users?"

    6. Re:News? by mlts · · Score: 1

      I'd disagree. There isn't a social networking site that is cool enough to compete with FB as of now.

      When FB came to common view, for a couple years, it and MySpace coexisted, where the "cool" kids were on MySpace and the others ended up on FB. Then by the force of peer pressure, pretty much people moved to FB in toto.

      MySpace still may exist -- it is a decent place for bands and having music ready to listen to. However, as a social network, its days are past. Maybe MySpace's best bet is to retool as a band site, similar to the heyday of mp3.com.

      I'd love to see something replace FB... perhaps a network with security from the ground up built in, and the option for having more elaborate security measures as an option (free or paid), such as a Vasco token, SMS authentication, or something along those lines.

    7. Re:News? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      My initial reaction was, "MySpace had 10 million users?"

      Mine was more along the lines that since I hadn't heard them mentioned in any news stories for so long, they likely didn't exist anymore. :-P

      Obviously, not being a user I have no idea ... I know Facebook still exists, because they're in the news all of the time.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:News? by tooyoung · · Score: 2

      The news is that you can actually cancel your account! Now, if I could just remember my password...

    9. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ebay and Facebook are different beasts, but Facebook can remain the top social networking site while still being in decline. Maybe it's because I think Facebook's appeal is in part due to its relative newness.

      "Hey, I can post my thoughts in one place and all these people will see them!"

      "Hey, I haven't talked to her in years and now I can find out what's going on in her daily life without picking up the phone."

      After awhile you realize that getting the 1 page update in the Xmas card each year is more than enough.

    10. Re:News? by skids · · Score: 1

      When twitter first rolled out I suspected, because it was being so relentlessly hyped, that it was some sort of venture capital ploy. I haven't followed, do they have a financial plan yet?

    11. Re:News? by istartedi · · Score: 2

      eBay seems like a natural monopoly to me. When you auction something, you have to pick one site. You can't auction the same item at multiple auction sites. Since everybody has to pick one, they pick what they think is the best one. For an auction "best" is closely tied to "popular" since exposure is important. Once a clear winner emerged, it was all she wrote.

      Frankly, I'm surprised that eBay/paypal gets away with this monopoly. It definitely keeps me away. I'd like to see them forced to use competing payment services in particular.

      Anyway, I digress. You could cross-post all your stupid updates and baby pictures to multiple sites and it wouldn't matter.

      FaceBook's lock-in is switching cost. It's a lower barrier. If you're a teenager and you haven't really put anything important on FB then switching is easy. If you've put someting embarassing on FB then switching might also be desireable. You just start telling people, "Oh, I'm on the hip new NewBook" and hope they don't go looking for your old FB account.

      Before FB started waging war on anonymity, a lot of people had disposable IDs. That's a market that FB can't serve.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    12. Re:News? by Rizimar · · Score: 2

      That's basically what Facebook did to MySpace. It improved on social networking beyond what MySpace offered because it was more personalized and less childish (using real names and not allowing horrible page layouts, for starters. Facebook also didn't stop loading pages within every five internal links like MySpace often did). Facebook also monetizes more intelligently and less intrusively, aiming ads at users who may be interested in seeing them using a small box on the side panel rather than Flash popups on music players and whatever else MySpace did.

      Needless to say, I think that Facebook is going to be around for some time. They've known what they're doing since they started.

    13. Re:News? by RJHelms · · Score: 2

      I'm not surprised they are losing this many users. Rather than stagnating and becoming irrelevant like Geocities and Livejournal, MySpace is actively alienating it's userbase.

      They saw that people were moving to other platforms, and decided to engage in a poorly thought out redesign that took the features people actually used, and removed, broke, or hid them.

      I haven't deleted my MySpace accounts, but as a musician until recently did have a worthwhile reason for logging in periodically to keep in touch with venues and other bands, and as a URL I could give out to showcase recordings and show dates. All that functionality is fubed now, as is the layout and design of my page.

      I won't be back.

    14. Re:News? by gweilo8888 · · Score: 1

      Ebay is a totally different beast. There's nothing to stop people signing up for multiple social networking sites, and jumping ship when one of the alternate sites suddenly reaches critical mass and becomes "the next big thing".

      Auction sites don't work that way. If you list your item on an unpopular site and it gets a bid, you're obligated to sell it for that bid -- even though it might've received a low value because the unpopular site didn't have enough of a userbase for multiple people to find and want to bid on the auction. Hence, most sellers won't list their items at anything less than a profit-making price on an unpopular site, to prevent themselves selling at a loss. On Ebay, they'll often list the item at a lower price to reduce the listing cost, because they know that the huge userbase will make it unlikely that they'll have to sell at a loss.

      From the user's point, Ebay hence appears to be a more attractive option, because most users pay attention to the current bid price, not the final prices that similar items have historically sold for. Compare the current bid price on Ebay and it'll always look like it offers better value than an unpopular site, even if realistically the final bids are indistinguishable on both sites.

      Ebay are unlike almost any other type of website, in that now they're at the top, they're almost impossible to topple. The only way to do so would be for Ebay themselves to make a major misstep that angered a large portion of their userbase, and spend far too long dithering before they responded to their users' demands, or for a major company with deep pockets to finance a competitor and literally pour money on making it a more attractive option for both buyers and sellers for a lengthy period (much like Microsoft unsuccessfully attempted to do with Bing in the search space) -- and even then it would be hard to get a foothold.

      Facebook, by contrast, are only king until the next big thing rolls along, and they fail to respond quickly enough...

    15. Re:News? by tooyoung · · Score: 3, Informative

      When I cancelled my account, I noticed a few interesting things:

      1. My list of friends was significantly reduced from what it had been in the past, making me think that they cancelled their accounts.
      2. Myspace is completely different looking than it was however long ago I last logged in. You wouldn't even recognize it now. Apparently when they redid the look, they wiped out any customized backgrounds that were set.
      3. For some reason, myspace decided that I am following Justin Bieber, Russell Crowe, Tom Petty, and a whole slew of other celebrities, most of which I have never heard of. The entire content of my 'home' screen is a bunch of updates from bands and actors that I have no interest in.
      4. None of my remaining friends have posted a comment in over a year.
      5. I apparently 'earned' a 'badge' for joining myspace 'before it was cool'. I'm pretty sure I was a late adopter.
      6. You can cancel your account, but it is a separate step process that involves you responding to a confirmation email. Perhaps that is reasonable. They grovel for you to stay at several points in the process.

    16. Re:News? by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 2

      Your argument in defense of eBay works for Facebook as well though. Another auction site can't gain traction because eBay has a user base and is well known? Well same with Facebook. Users won't start suddenly using iAuctionSite just like they won't start suddenly using Face-whatever. For another company to break into the market, they will have to convince users to switch and users won't switch unless their personal threshold of other users who have already switched is met. What is an auction site with no auctions and buyers? And what is a social networking site with no people? It can be done, but it is much harder than just stealing people away from a brand.

      Facebook knows that a million social networking sites exist for specific topics. They created an API so that these sites can piggyback off of Facebook rather than compete. A small company that doesn't want to compete with Facebook wins because they are more likely to get registered users. Larger sites are sort of forced into integrating with Facebook because it is expected of them. Ones that aren't in direct competition like it too for marketing. A site in direct competition with Facebook can add it to the list of problems they are already facing by attempting to exist.

      Facebook just rolled out commenting inline with a blog or website. Now, comments are going to start being Facebook centric more and more, even if you aren't on Facebook. They use meta tags now that allow someone to have their webpage recognized as a Facebook searchable entity (Open Graph protocol). Facebook's hooks are deep because they have a userbase and are embedded throughout the web. Logins rely on them, social media relies on them, commenting systems are starting to rely on them.

      Myspace was unlucky because they found themselves as a big player in the start of an important game. Unfortunately, coming into it completely new left them with something unsustainable: an immature implementation of social networking that only went as far as the website itself.

      Myspace is like Altavista, Excite, AskJeeves and/or Yahoo. They all were big names in the emerging search engine market and everyone tech-saavy or with a computer in the 90s heard of them. They had great ideas and really opened up an entire world that is still important. However Google came along and did everything right. They all (or most) still exist in some form I believe but it's like Myspace is now. These were huge companies at one point. They aren't going to collapse in on themselves the same way as smaller companies, but they aren't relevant. Google and Facebook meanwhile aren't showing signs of stopping and a collapse would affect things much much more than just a website going down, at this point, due to the massive amount of integration.

    17. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it really auctions? Or just online stores selling on ebay? I haven't noticed a real true auction on there in years, granted I check maybe once every few months.

    18. Re:News? by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. I just checked my old MySpace account and saw the list of friends was empty and I, too, was apparently "following" a bunch of people I despise. I canceled the account.

      I did note that it won't let you cancel unless you select a reason why -- you get all the way to the last page but their "final" cancel button (the one that sends you the email which requires you to re-enter your email address and click once again to cancel) does NOTHING unless you selected a reason why earlier in the process.

    19. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why will Facebook decline?

      Ebay is still the top auction site (in general) after a decade.

      Ebay is still the top auction site for the time being, but make no mistake - Ebay is in decline and is way past their heyday, and they are struggling to get away from the auction format. They want to be Amazon, which is why they purchased GSI Commerce just yesterday.

    20. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Why will Facebook decline?

      Quote, yourself, 3 years ago: Why will MySpace decline?
      Quote, yourself, 8 years ago: Why will ICQ decline?
      Quote, yourself, 12 years ago: Why will IRC decline?
      Quote, yourself, 18 years ago: Why will Usenet decline?
      Quote, John Travolta, 40 years ago: Why will Disco decline?
      Quote, Adolf Hitler, 80 years ago: Why will Third Reich decline?

      Etc.

      Stuff declines because it gets old, and new shiny stuff comes up, and a new, curious generation leaves the old shores for the new stuff where their boring, monitoring parents arent around.

    21. Re:News? by shermo · · Score: 2

      Agreed. MySpace was in a great position to become THE indy music network, but they failed to realise that opportunity and went through with a massive redesign that alienated all those users.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    22. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MySpace is destined to go the way of Geocities, Livejournal, etc

      The way of Livejournal? You mean it's gonna thrive as a niche site featuring a closely-knit community, after having been a niche site featuring a closely-knit community ever since its inception?

      Since I'm on LJ, let's make no mistake: a) LJ isn't dying. b) LJ isn't hugely popular. c) LJ never was hugely popular. ;)

    23. Re:News? by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2

      Who knew there were that many 14 year old Emo chicks?

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    24. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking that very thing, well kinda... I don't understand why people still use MySpace. It was never cool and everyone was hoping something -better- would come out and there were a few alternatives and facebook was the lucky winner. Thankfully, we don't get to have Mark Zuckerberg on our friends list giving us the thumbs up.

    25. Re:News? by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

      Apparently when they redid the look, they wiped out any customized backgrounds that were set.

      And that's a bad thing???!!!!

      As far as I'm concerned, MySpaces eye-gougingly fugly "customized backgrounds" should have been nuked from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    26. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, auction sites are different because you can only sell an item once. You better sell it at the most popular auction site if you want a good price. Almost nothing aside from a "bribe" could make you use the second most popular auction site.

      Social networking sites don't work that way. You can't actually sell your soul to Facebook. You can join as many networks as you like. A single interesting person could make you want to join an unpopular social networking site.

    27. Re:News? by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      Oh, I'm still on Livejournal too. But very few of my friends are still there actively, and many of my favorite communities are now ghost towns except for the occasional drive by spam in Russian.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    28. Re:News? by satuon · · Score: 1

      I don't live in the U.S., and half the people I know under 30 use Facebook but I don't know anyone that uses Twitter. I wonder how Twitter fares outside America.

    29. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't say Livejournal is hanging on by a thread. It was purchased a while back by a Russian company and it's now pretty big in Russia.

  3. From TFA by Moderator · · Score: 0

    "Zack Whittaker, of business technology news website ZDNet, has commented that he "would be surprised if MySpace survives the year".

    Really, I'm surprised it survived this long.

    It wouldn't surprise me if Facebook started to decline as well in the next few years. Most of my friends who were using the network back five or six years ago have left. It has become worse than Myspace ever was.

    --
    The World is Yours.
    1. Re:From TFA by fermat1313 · · Score: 1

      You're right, Facebook is definitely on the decline. They've only added 100 million users in the last year.

      Your anecdotal evidence about friends who have abandoned it is kind of irrelevant in the face of facts that show Facebook is clearly growing. Like it or not, you can't dislike it into non-existence.

    2. Re:From TFA by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Huh. I only started using it little more than a year ago. If they shut it off I wouldn't really care, but I have a lot of friends who would.

      I did have the misfortune of looking at a few myspace pages, though (never had an account), and they made me want to rip my eyes out. My brother was actually boasting about having his own website and, when I asked what the address was, gave me a link to his myspace page. So... I guess what I'm saying is I don't see how facebook has become worse...

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:From TFA by wmbetts · · Score: 2

      But my life coach said if I think hard enough it'll come true!

      --
      "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
    4. Re:From TFA by Octorian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You were actually able to view a MySpace page for long enough to want to rip your eyes out? I'm impressed. Back when MySpace was popular, most of those pages would crash my web browser long before I actually got to look at them.

    5. Re:From TFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like it or not, you can't dislike it into non-existence.

      But... but... but... if that's true, what's Slashdot for?

    6. Re:From TFA by MrEricSir · · Score: 1

      Like it or not, you can't dislike it into non-existence.

      That's because Facebook doesn't have a "Dislike" button.

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    7. Re:From TFA by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 1

      Well, you can ignore it. The good thing about FB is that it is absolutely useless and a total waste of time, so you won't be missing anything when you cancel your account.

  4. Keep trying... by fermat1313 · · Score: 2
    From TFA:

    MySpace's Chief Executive Officer Michael Jones has claimed that the website is "no longer a social network anymore" and that it is currently a "social entertainment destination".

    Allow me to translate: "Our business model is screwed, because someone else did it much better, so we're desperately trying to rebrand ourself as something else"

    It's in people's nature to never give up, keep trying to the bitter end, but this is a sinking ship that cannot be saved.

    1. Re:Keep trying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why can't it be saved? people used to say the same about apple before it came out with the ipod/itunes

    2. Re:Keep trying... by Stuntmonkey · · Score: 2

      Their CEO has a background in international business and marketing. Talk about the kiss of death for a technology company.

      Has there ever been a successful tech company run by a marketing person? This is an honest question.

    3. Re:Keep trying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Apple?

    4. Re:Keep trying... by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 1

      "social entertainment destination"

      WTF does this even mean??? If I want social entertainment I go out with friends, play a game or whatever, but I'm surely not visiting any myspace pages...

    5. Re:Keep trying... by vlm · · Score: 3, Informative

      Has there ever been a successful tech company run by a marketing person? This is an honest question.

      DAK is as close as I can think of. I enjoyed reading his catalog. Of course they went bankrupt but for many years they were somewhat successful.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAK_Industries

      The wikipedia article carefully avoids discussing the demise of DAK, but as I recall the problem was he was quite talented at profitably selling "last years stereo" but he bought heavily, and tried to sell "last years computer" and went bankrupt.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Keep trying... by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Jobs isn't exactly a marketing person, more a sort of technological missionary. And when Sculley was running it, Apple tanked. Sculley *was* a marketing person (imported from Pepsi).

      Even Sculley has admitted that he was the wrong choice as director. He's a marketer, and a good one. But that wasn't the right specialty.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    7. Re:Keep trying... by mrclisdue · · Score: 1

      why can't it be saved? people used to say the same about apple before it came out with the ipod/itunes

      You mean, before Microsoft propped it up with a huge cash infusion, don't you?

      cheers,

    8. Re:Keep trying... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      What, the Wikipedia entry isn't descriptive enough for you? "In 1992, DAK Industries filed a petition regarding selling the personal properties due to the company getting bankrupt."

      Man, I was thinking of that catalog just the other day, trying to remember their name. All I could remember was that they sold generic electronics at brand-name prices was. I'd just seen a commercial for some crappy wireless headphones that immediately reminded me of the DAK catalog. They even used the same sales pitch about not disturbing your spouse. I cut a lot of lawns to buy some of the crap they sold, almost invariably disappointed by the quality of the products. At least I learned a valuable lesson at a young age: don't listen to marketing hype.

    9. Re:Keep trying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple.

    10. Re:Keep trying... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Their CEO has a background in international business and marketing. Talk about the kiss of death for a technology company.

      Has there ever been a successful tech company run by a marketing person? This is an honest question.

      Myspace isn't really a tech company, neither is facebook. They are content companies. The tech is just a conduit, means to an end.

      That being said, isnt Myspace now owned by Newscorp? That probably has more to do with why they are failing, orders are coming down from Rupert to run the business in a certain way, users don't like so they leave.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    11. Re:Keep trying... by yeshuawatso · · Score: 1

      Here. You can read it again.

      http://www.dak2000.com/

    12. Re:Keep trying... by on+the+8ball · · Score: 1

      DAK is back, I bought some noise-cancelling earbuds from them recently and they work great. He is still writing interesting product promos.

      https://www.dak.com/index.cfm

      --
      Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment â" Buddha
    13. Re:Keep trying... by vlm · · Score: 1

      All I could remember was that they sold generic electronics at brand-name prices was.

      Yeah they did have that, but they also had really weird stuff. As far as I know, the first mass marketed bread maker machine sold in the USA. Crazy as it sounds, my grandparents breadmaker is sitting in my kitchen and still works perfectly. That was well before they got good at engineering them to break right after the warranty expires, somebody probably got fired because in 25 years I probably should have purchased about 25 breadmakers instead of 1. I also recall saving my pennies to buy the "gorilla banana printer" which was by far the worst print quality I had ever seen, but it had the virtue of being about one third the price of the cheapest competition.. Was an easy choice for a kid, a poor printer does printing a lot better than $100 in the bank account does printing. I do remember seeing pages of "generic stereo" and "generic speaker" in the catalog but I generally skipped over those pages.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    14. Re:Keep trying... by vlm · · Score: 1

      Here. You can read it again.

      http://www.dak2000.com/

      OMG its even the same font and typographical layout. I haven't seen that since Reagan was president. Talk about a nostalgia rush.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    15. Re:Keep trying... by Stuntmonkey · · Score: 1

      Myspace isn't really a tech company, neither is facebook. They are content companies. The tech is just a conduit, means to an end.

      I see a lot of technology companies seduced by this false idea. Yahoo! is another shining example of a tech company run into the ground by a non-tech CEO with a vision to remake it into an "entertainment" business. It baffles me, since content and entertainment are pretty crummy businesses to be in objectively speaking.

      You look well-run companies like Apple, Google, or Facebook and both technology and content play important roles in what they offer. The meaningful distinction is: Which is harder to get right? The fact is, it's much harder to design and build an iPad 2 than it is to negotiate the deals for the content that will go onto it. Likewise, it's harder to build and deploy the technology behind Google Maps than it is to acquire the mapping data. It was harder for Facebook to figure out how to enable 3rd parties to embed games etc. into their site in a scalable, secure way than it was to negotiate for the rights to those games. That's not to say the content partnerships aren't important, just that if you have non-technical people running these companies you have the tail wagging the dog.

  5. I don't think it's that bad... by fivevoltforest · · Score: 5, Funny

    I doubt they actually lost 10 million users, probably just a few thousand 50-year-old men *pretending* to be 10 million teenage girls.

    1. Re:I don't think it's that bad... by dstyle5 · · Score: 1

      Why did you close your account? ;)

    2. Re:I don't think it's that bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most of whom are FBI agents and Chris Hansen sock puppets?

  6. Huge loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, that must suck for Tom. Its hard to lose friends, especially 10 million of them.

    1. Re:Huge loss by superslacker87 · · Score: 1

      Heh. When I was on Myspace, the first thing I did was defriend him.

      --
      I run Ubuntu skinned to look like a Mac on a PC. Go figure.
  7. Spring Cleaning! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must have done some spring cleaning on there user db. Last login over 2 years ago sort of thing.

  8. And nothing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... of value was lost.

  9. Murdoch by firewrought · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Thank goodness he bet on the wrong social network. If you think Facebook is evil now, imagine that tyrant at the wheel...

    --
    -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    1. Re:Murdoch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Had he managed to buy FB, which he can't actually afford, people would have left in droves too.

    2. Re:Murdoch by HangingChad · · Score: 2

      >Thank goodness he bet on the wrong social network.

      MySpace is what you get when Rupert Murdoch tries to be hip. He should stick to scaring old people and giving them sound bite answers to complex problems, it's what he does best.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    3. Re:Murdoch by blair1q · · Score: 2

      This is true, but at the time he bought MySpace, it was worth a lot more than Facebook was. Which is why he bought it. He thought he was going to rule with MySpace and Facebook would remain smaller forever.

    4. Re:Murdoch by vlm · · Score: 2

      scaring old people and giving them sound bite answers to complex problems

      Isn't that the business model of myspace / facebook / twitter?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:Murdoch by gangien · · Score: 1

      this is just nonsense. people left myspace because facebook was better. Not because of who owned it. Myspace hadn't changed significantly at that point.

  10. 10,000,001 by DynamoJoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    i knew I forgot something....

    --
    bah.
    1. Re:10,000,001 by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I can't remember my login, let alone my password to delete mine...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    2. Re:10,000,001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. The only thing I can remember about it is that it's some email address that's been dead for years. Hmm...

  11. Good Job FBI by Nameisyoung007 · · Score: 1

    I didn't know the FBI's Pedophile Hunting Team was doing such a great job! 10 million accounts closed in a month?

    oh, you mean there are other people who still use(d) MySpace? #newsToMe

    1. Re:Good Job FBI by Belial6 · · Score: 1
  12. wrong place for my bandsite by ruebarb · · Score: 2, Funny

    so printing my myspace address on the back of a CD like I did 3 years ago was a bad idea?

    crap

    www.myspace.com/russbro - say hello to www.facebook.com/russbrownmusic

    --

    ----------
    ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
    1. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a whore.

    2. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by trollertron3000 · · Score: 2

      The irony is myspace seems to be the place all musical artists go to these days, with facebook being an afterthought. I do concert and show promotion as a side business and I see tons of myspace band sites still. Facebook doesn't really cater to them like myspace did. It's ashame.

      --
      Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
    3. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by bedouin · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad, there's vinyl releases out there with MySpace links written on them. I thought that was a bad idea even before the site's downfall. But . . . it's not much different than those expired fan club addresses on releases from the 80s and 90s.

    4. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by shish · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Protip to all musicians (and indeed, everyone everywhere): for about $10/year you can buy a domain name, put that on your CDs / business cards / etc, and stick up a redirect to whichever social network you're on this week

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    5. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      probably should've printed on the front, don't you think?

    6. Re:wrong place for my bandsite by spiralx · · Score: 1

      Soundcloud is where I find stuff nowadays, at least for electronic music. It's so much better than Myspace in terms of usability it's ridiculous, especially since Myspace's horrible redesign. Plus, Soundcloud provides very nice embeddable widgets for playing tracks or albums - lots of artists have a Facebook page which provides a news feed of releases which embed tracks from their Soundcloud page, and use FB for events and so on.

  13. this is facebook's fate too by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    anyone remember friendster?

    it's my belief that social networks will rise and fall, endlessly in succession. simply because ubiquity eventually becomes a liability amongst a crowd who views exclusion and superiority to be more important. eventually, one of these smaller exclusive networks becomes the object of envy for others to be "in" that exclusive group, and the long march to ubiquity begins, until you start all over again

    its an empty vapid game. its also pretty much boilerplate sociological fact. consider nightclubs in cities: the small chic "in" club that everyone wants to get into, overexposure, then decline because the "cool" kids want their own exclusive club. rinse, repeat

    and no, facebook will not become ubiquitous plumbing. because they need to make money to survive. to make that money, they need to sell the personal details of their members. which is a force that will drive people from facebook as they wise up to how creepy that really is: by feeding their personal details to the machine, they are telling their abuser how to abuse them

    so be on the lookout for the next friendster/ myspace/ facebook. could be diaspora. or maybe being programmed right now in some dorm room. $$$ to the chaps who start/ find the right network at the right time, and ride that rocket all the way up

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:this is facebook's fate too by Octorian · · Score: 1

      anyone remember friendster?

      Oh, that service... The one where I had maybe one or two friends sent me invites from a few years ago, I foolishly signed up, and to this day I still keep getting periodic automated E-Mails from?

      Still haven't seen a reason to login since.

    2. Re:this is facebook's fate too by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      its an empty vapid game. its also pretty much boilerplate sociological fact. consider nightclubs in cities: the small chic "in" club that everyone wants to get into, overexposure, then decline because the "cool" kids want their own exclusive club. rinse, repeat

      The problem with your analogy is that Facebook isn't a chic 'in' club for young hipsters. It's Disneyworld and *everyone* is there - Grandpa, Grandma, Mom, Dad, all the aunts and uncles, all the cousins... And they don't give a damn which nightclub the young hipsters are currently flocking to.
       
      And like Disneyworld, every one else is seeking to locate nearby (I.E. the 'share' buttons on damn near every website) in order to take advantage of the millions flocking there. What's dying, in the virtual world as in the real, are all the old and increasingly decrepit attractions and lodgings scattered about that can't take advantage of this. Equally, I suspect that while the hipsters may lemming from one nightclub to the next - they'll take their kids to Disneyworld.

    3. Re:this is facebook's fate too by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

      I joined when you used to have to belong to a university network and it tied into your university email account. It was a nice place for students so sure, and it was good to be exclusive. It kept things more intelligent at first and seemed more adult. This was the era of myspace and social networking really hadn't taken off yet. I guess the perception was that only 13 year old idiots and pervs join these contentless voids and that's really why I and my friends resisted at first. But then it started to become useful and we couldn't avoid it. Within 2 years or so, everyone was allowed on it and facebook changed it's layout and feature set about a dozen times to reflect this. It's less about professional now and more about social. Everyone is on it and the desire for exclusivity is long gone since we realize it's just better to have everyone on it. That's kind of the point of these things.

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    4. Re:this is facebook's fate too by circletimessquare · · Score: 1, Insightful

      you are making the ubiquitous plumbing end game argument. remember compuserve? at one time, we had walled gardens you had to pay for like compuserve. all swept aside by a free and open internet. likewise, facebook can have all the inertia in the world, but it can't compete with free and open. and as time goes on, could take five years, could take ten years, you reach a tipping point, and it becomes a mass exodus. so facebook is not end game. end game is something like facebook, but free and open and not beholden to selling your personal info to keep running

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    5. Re:this is facebook's fate too by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      i see you understand the resistance to myspace that made exclusivity attractive, but you say its better to have everyone on it. what i'd like you to consider is that you are only 120 degrees of an arc along a story that has an endless 360 degree circle. the story keeps going around and around: 1. desire for exclusivity, 2. desire for ubiquity, rinse, repeat

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    6. Re:this is facebook's fate too by firewrought · · Score: 1

      it's my belief that social networks will rise and fall, endlessly in succession

      I see this idea on slashdot often. I want it to be true, and in some sort of ultimate all-companies-eventually-fail sense, it probably is true. But don't be so sure that Facebook can't achieve some sort of long term hegemony... it may very well still be king 5, 10, or 20 years down the road.

      ubiquity eventually becomes a liability amongst a crowd who views exclusion and superiority to be more important

      You are proposing that there exists a fundamental instability in the membership dynamics of social networks. That's a good way to prove your point, but I'm doubtful that exclusivity itself will be a large driver of membership migrations: whenever people talk about Facebook they emphasize that it allows them to keep touch with a large number of people (Kelly's more give more principal). As long as they don't abuse their base too much or muck up the user experience (like myspace), their adoption rate will exceed their defection rate for the foreseeable future (as more and more of humanity gets online).

      facebook will not become ubiquitous plumbing. because they need to make money to survive. to make that money, they need to sell the personal details of their members. which is a force that will drive people from facebook as they wise up to how creepy that really is

      Except that so far, they haven't. (Heck, if humanity were more like you and me, marketing data would be illegal and nobody would pay for cable TV that's one-third advertisements.) I think you'd have to see this spectacularly mismanaged before it made a dent. Facebook is not (to use your example) a night club: it's a communications venue and it could very much become like mail, email, telephone, etc... that is, obsolete but still necessary.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    7. Re:this is facebook's fate too by timeOday · · Score: 2

      ubiquity eventually becomes a liability amongst a crowd who views exclusion and superiority to be more important.

      But that's exactly the key innovation of facebook - exclusion. All its users are not in one big group that can all see each other; you have to be invited, i.e. "friended." Thus the lame people aren't too bothersome to the cool people, even if they do access the same domain name. Friend networks can rise and fall all within facebook. At least that's the idea. We'll see.

    8. Re:this is facebook's fate too by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      I described the Social Network Cycle here on /. not too far back. Basically, the story is that young social networks are fantastic, because they serve users' needs, are unobtrusive, maintain privacy, etc etc. Lots of people sign up. Then business folks see this site with lots of users, and think "I can make a big pile of money off of that, if we just 'monetize' that user base." They then add in lots of obnoxious ads, sell user data, and stop doing what users really need them to do in an attempt to turn the user base into profits.

      Then some college kid comes along thinking "I could build this better", and builds a new social network, which goes through the exact same cycle.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    9. Re:this is facebook's fate too by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I think you may be on to something.

      I initially resisted facebook. As recently as 4 years ago, I had accounts on both, but used myspace to the exclusion of facebook. I NEVER liked the whole "exclusive niche" that facebook initially tried to be. I never wanted a facebook account, and only ended up gradually moving over as facebook became more useful for talking to people that I knew.

      I know that "4 years ago" was about the point where it started to change because one of the last things I did on myspace was meet the girl who would become my wife.

      I just logged into myspace this past weekend, as I do about every 6 months to a year. It was... wholly different. Nothing like I remember, I could barely find any of the old social networking stuff.... as a social networking site, it has castrated itself. I can't imagine anyone wanting to use it any more than I can imagine people wanting to set the yahoo portal page to be their default web browser "home page".

      Its all vapid entertainment "news" now.

      That said... it was exactly what I hated about it, the exclusivity, that helped it really catch on. Personally I would like to see a completely p2p social networking "site". Something like the gnutella of social networking.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    10. Re:this is facebook's fate too by antdude · · Score: 1

      Yep, I am on Friendster and MySpace. I am not sure how Friendster is still alive today. I used to be on Facebook, but they kicked me off for using fake datas. I had no problems on the other two social networks and many other web sites.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    11. Re:this is facebook's fate too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook is the only big social network so far which is used mainly to stay in touch with people you already know irl. That is what makes Facebook huge, and what will make it survive for a *long* time.

    12. Re:this is facebook's fate too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the 'new' network will also need to make money...

    13. Re:this is facebook's fate too by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      I disagree- People left friendster and myspace because there were parts of the experience they were unhappy with and the new social network offered them a compelling reason to switch. I think Facebook will be here to stay because it has reached a "good enough" point that it is going to be difficult to get users to switch to another social network. I honestly can't even remember why I left friendster, but I definitely remember leaving Facebook because of the eye bleeding pages and flash players. Facebook was clean, simple, and relatively stable. FB also utilized ajax for as long as I joined, which was a huge improvement.

      Could someone innovate on the social network concept and cause facebook to fall? I suppose its possible, but FB seems to be quite nimble and has a huge amount of resources at its disposal. When foursquare came around and threatened to eat some of FB's lunch, they cloned it quickly.

      Look at it like the browser wars. Everyone used to jump from IE to netscape, then back to IE, and then Firefox came along and out innovated all the others. It was damn good, and even though chrome has come along, and is arguably better, it hasn't really eaten into FF's userbase all that much.

  14. 63 million users by mrdoogee · · Score: 1

    And 62.9 Million of them are pornobots and promotional pages for crappy bands.

  15. It's called my[___] now by Control-Z · · Score: 3, Funny

    As if it could get any worse, now their name has underscores in it.

    1. Re:It's called my[___] now by brian0918 · · Score: 2

      That space represents the increasingly empty void of content and creativity. Expect to see their name get longer with time.

    2. Re:It's called my[___] now by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Really? Maybe I've been corrupted by the Internet, but I thought it was a clever ASCII version of Goatse.

    3. Re:It's called my[___] now by dadelbunts · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hate you so much. What has been seen, cannot be unseen.

  16. Band Spam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I started getting spam messages from bands. Maybe they tweaked something resulting in spam message increase and people are bailing.

  17. Even Tom left. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, he took the money are ran a while ago.

  18. Thanks by brian0918 · · Score: 0

    Thanks for reminding me to close my account!

  19. Future...??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just shows the future of all Social Networking -

  20. The next social network by rednip · · Score: 2

    The next and 'final' social network will be an open source peer-to-peer network with commercial caching and hosting; if my plan works.

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    1. Re:The next social network by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      hey! that's my plan!

      maybe i can sue you for billions for disclosure of intellectual property secrets on a public comment board. hmmm. the question is, what technology did you use to read my mind?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    2. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't sue me.... we're twins and only one of us is guilty...but which one... which one? My twin is my alibi and my twin's alibi is me.

    3. Re:The next social network by rednip · · Score: 1

      I did not detail the plan, I promised the results of the plan in broad terms. Sadly, however, the patent office doesn't seem to know the difference either.

      --
      The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    4. Re:The next social network by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      actually, everybody commenting on this board is the many different personalities of one insane individual. only you are a different person, who has unwittingly descended into the petty internal arguments of a deranged mind

      hmmm... that's actually a good plot for a matrixy inceptiony type movie

      oh shit! intellectual property disclosed in public again! curses!

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    5. Re:The next social network by circletimessquare · · Score: 0

      exactly!

      and my plan is to open a social network where whatever people talk about i sue them on the basis that what they said is my personal intellectual property. i'll make billions

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    6. Re:The next social network by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I've always thought this was a much more viable solution. Host your own data on your own servers, or get a free/paid account from and account provider. Kind of like the way email works. Design a set of protocols for sharing this information, and let everyone use whatever provider they want. Let everyone be in control of their own data.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    7. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget both of yall - I will implement it and you can quibble about who thought of it first.

    8. Re:The next social network by circletimessquare · · Score: 0

      well yeah. you do all the hard work implementing it, then we just sue you claiming you stole our idea and we take your cash

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    9. Re:The next social network by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      The next and 'final' social network will be an open source peer-to-peer network with commercial caching and hosting; if my plan works.

      The problem with that theory is that people who care about open source and peer-to-peer are basically just the Slashdot crowd, and they won't have any friends to link to!

      --

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

    10. Re:The next social network by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Great, you just invented ... the Internet! Al Gore is gonna be PISSED

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:The next social network by tukang · · Score: 1

      I came up with a similar idea but concluded that even though the idea of controlling your own data is attractive - the work that goes into maintaining your own server is not. Who's going to make sure your server is up 24/7 and maintain it? Your average facebook user will not be interested in that.

    13. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's my idea, but with free caching and hosting. Gonna make millions.

    14. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will I be able to host my account as a service running in the background on a smartphone? That seems to be the most convenient way to do it in a world where mobile phones have multi core processors, gigabytes of RAM, a terabyte of flash storage and dataplans that run in the hundreds of gigabytes per month. We'll be in that world by the time you're done developing your network.

    15. Re:The next social network by rtconner · · Score: 0
      --
      023AD01("Child", "Evil");
    16. Re:The next social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They wouldn't need to, of course. The internet is built on this same principle: most people (by far) don't run their own servers, but the possibility was and is absolutely crucial for the whole internet phenomenon.

    17. Re:The next social network by xclr8r · · Score: 1

      The next social next work is the one that HR departments, school administrators and parents do not know about. Kids get smart after getting in trouble.

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
    18. Re:The next social network by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I currently pay $10 a month for a shared hosting account. I could host it on that. It's pretty reliable. You can get other accounts on other hosting companies for less than $7 a month. If that's not cheap enough, I'm sure some company would be willing to hook you up with some free server space in exchange for looking at some ads while you look at your social networking stuff. Point is, is that you would have a choice. You could host it on a free site and look at ads, or host it on a paid service, and never have to look at ads.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  21. MySpace lost over ten million users ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    So, where are they? Abducted by aliens? Can Mulder and Scully look into this? Spontaneous human combustion? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_human_combustion ? Maybe they are on a small island in the Pacific, playing Pinochle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinochle ) with Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison?

    Question: "How do you lose ten million users? " Answer: "One customer at a time."

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:MySpace lost over ten million users ? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Have you checked under the sofa cushions? That's where I find a lot of lost things. Many that should have stayed lost, unfortunately.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    2. Re:MySpace lost over ten million users ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seriousness#Taking_oneself_seriously ? You (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You) do know how hyperlinks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperlink) are supposed to work, right? Also, do you really think (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_death) you had to define Pinochle and spontaneous combustion? Did those citations in any way help you make your point (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocy)?

  22. 1 million users lost? by Burning1 · · Score: 2

    Does that include users who have abandoned the service?

    I have a myspace account. I don't think I've updated it in 5 years.

    1. Re:1 million users lost? by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      It's not a service. It's an Internet website . RTFS!

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:1 million users lost? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Those two thing are not mutual exclusive.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  23. Owned by NewsCorp by gQuigs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Awesome news. I wish it had more to do with people actively looking at boycotting News Corp.

    I've been working on a firefox extension to help people boycott News Corp, NBC and others: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/webcott/
    Also looking at alternatives to myspace here: http://bryanquigley.com/webcott/leave-myspace-for-wordpress-com

    1. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      Yes, the correct thing to do is exclude yourself from experiencing diverse points of view. Scientology did the same thing, its adherents boycott heretical websites via an automated filter. Remember, ideas are weapons, don't let yourself think dangerous or subversive ideas.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by theskipper · · Score: 1

      While we're on the topic, this one blocks Newscorp articles (Fox News and WSJ) from displaying in Google news:

      http://userstyles.org/styles/13510

    3. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by gQuigs · · Score: 1

      The add-on can also be used to just tell you which sites are owned by key corporate entities (News Corp, GE, etc).

      Ideas are indeed weapons.

    4. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      A mind only works if it is open. - Bumper Sticker on leftist car.

      Ask that person if they have ever watched Fox News and see their response then ask them how that fits with their bumper sticker, and watch the ensuing mind melt.

      People rant at Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly while never having watched them. AND yet, these are the same people who rail against right wingers for doing the same thing about some book they never read.

      Irony or hypocrisy, your choice

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen of Beck, he really is batshit crazy. Hannity is just an idiot parroting the party line. O'Reilly at least makes a pretense of being civil and fair. O'Reilly is the most respectable "journalist" at Fox News, but that's kind of like being the least slutty girl in the whorehouse, isn't it?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    6. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by spauldo · · Score: 1

      Beck, O'Reilly, and Rush (dunno about Hannity, I don't have a TV but I do catch the other three on radio sometimes) are not meant to be listened to with an open mind. They're pep rallies for the right. If you were a Dallas Cowboys fan, would you attend a Redskins pep rally? (sorry if that doesn't make sense, I give two shits about sports)

      The left has similar shows. There's a channel for it on Sirius radio. I've listened to it once. It was about as worthless as the equivalent right wing channels.

      News, political discussion, and entertainment are different things. Fox News isn't too bad, as long as you remember they lean to the right. NPR news is pretty neutral (I'm talking about the hourly news, not the shows, which do lean to the left a bit generally). I don't mind either one. I don't mind a political discussion if the host keeps everything open (a few NPR shows are good about this, while some are not).

      I can't stand political entertainment shows, and I won't listen to them. They serve no purpose but to create divisiveness among the people. No, scratch that - they serve no purpose but to make the networks and hosts rich, and they do that by creating divisiveness among the people. These people are not the patriots they claim to be - they're domestic terrorists who are crippling our government by turning the governing process into a football game in the eyes of most people. That goes for the left and the right.

      Does that make me closed minded? I don't think so, and honestly, if you get your political opinions from people like Beck, then I don't really care about your opinion anyway.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    7. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Let's take that at face value. How do you feel about the big three at MSNBC?

      My point, Fox gets bashed, and rightly so, but the left handles MSNBC with kit gloves and the anchors there seem to get a pass. And they are every bit as looney as those at Fox. And these people rip Murdoch but hardly a peep about Imelt. The rip the rich guys propping up the TeaParty, but hardly ever say a word about Soros.

      You see my point yet?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      "Does that make me closed minded?"

      Do you have a "Minds only work if they are open" bumper sticker on your car? My point is many people who have that particular bumbersticker are so closed minded that they can't even realize it. If you can't speak against a book not having read it, then why is it that not ever seeing Fox News qualifies you to say anything about it.

      Mind you, I don't have cable TV. How closed minded is that?? ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re:Owned by NewsCorp by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Keith Olbermann was just as bad as the clowns at Fox, but they fired his ass, didn't they? While I agree that there are asshats at both ends of the spectrum, Fox is rightfully criticized for having such an astounding collection of asshats all in one place.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  24. Woot! by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    Now that's what I call a good start! just 63 million to go!

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    1. Re:Woot! by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Now that's what I call a good start! just 63 million to go!

      Didn't Carson get in trouble when McDonalds had around that many hamburgers sold? Something about them having used up one cow?

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  25. but I love slashbook.org! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do!

  26. Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Homer Simpson): The Internet... Is that thing still around?

  27. Myspace and Rustock Botnet by thejuggler · · Score: 2

    Interesting coincidence that the Rustock Botnet spam network was taken down and MySpace loses 10 Million accounts? I know these two events can't be connected to each other, right?

    1. Re:Myspace and Rustock Botnet by trollertron3000 · · Score: 1

      Considering Rustock was taken down in March and this is data between January and February I'd say it's probably not related.

      --
      Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
  28. And yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The world did not end.

    Let's abandon facebook and other phantom interactions too. Pretty soon I suspect it'll be like the talking walls in F451.

  29. Re:Who? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    You know. That thing. With the things.

  30. Myspace Beta killed the musical star by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1

    Considering their new beta plan screwed up a lot of sites for bands, I think the migration numbers are not only right, but also will increase as more bands move to other social media platforms. The only reason I even think to go to Myspace is because some band has made it their landing page. If Myspace continues to be hostile to the only group that keeps it alive, they will have no choice but to go away.

    1. Re:Myspace Beta killed the musical star by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tenth time I landed on a myspace page that started blasting music automatically, I was careful to never click on a myspace link again, fwiw.

  31. I tried to cancel Myspace, they activated email! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I closed my Myspace account a few weeks ago, and when I filled out the online cancel account form, they sent me a 'confirmation' email stating, "Thanks for activating your Myspace.com email address!" Talk about clingy! I had to cancel again and after verifying my request in another email it finally worked. Desperate I guess...

  32. I created a MySpace page as a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I created a MySpace page as a joke years ago. Never went back. It seemed like a place where teenagers posted naughty pics and hooked up. The pages remined me of those horrible free web pages from Geocities.

    Facebook is place where my mom would have a page and I think that an older crowd and businesses found a home there. I don't care about it either.

    1. Re:I created a MySpace page as a joke by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      It seemed like a place where teenagers posted naughty pics and hooked up.

      You got a problem with that???

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  33. Fewer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In February 2011, the Internet website had less than 63 million users, down from a previous total of approximately 73 million."

    Actually, I'm pretty sure it had fewer than 63 million users...

  34. Mexico City analogy. by istartedi · · Score: 1

    Bakersfield has no chance of surviving. New York MSA has 19 million+ residents and LA has 17 million+ residents. The only other city north of the Isthmus larger than those two is interestingly Mexico City, which has 22.8 million.

    Granted that there are a lot more people who want to live in the other three. The point is, mom-n-pop stores exist despite the onslaught of the big boxes. Internet sites are probably more egalitarian.

    Someone will probably pull the plug on MySpace at some point though, if only because it's an unrewarding task to downscale from corporation to personal blog. The trip up is exciting and potentially rewarding. The trip down is the domain of archivers, fans, etc. and usually the few people that want to do it can't wrest control from the corporate shell. They always want to cling on to that little last bit. They couldn't stand to see anybody make an ordinary small biz out of it, and employ just one or two people, or a small fan site hosted by a non-profit.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Mexico City analogy. by demonbug · · Score: 2

      Bakersfield has no chance of surviving.

      Now there's a relief.

    2. Re:Mexico City analogy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bakersfield will always live on of course, but it residents . . . that's another story.

    3. Re:Mexico City analogy. by OffaMyLawn · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that had a vision of Tom Hanks staring at part of a port-a-john quizically going "Bakersfield?"

  35. I can't wait... by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    ...until that starts happening at Facebook.

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  36. Loss? by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

    You may have chosen to close your account, but they still have your data.

    --
    There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
  37. exactly by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    you're talking about a social network protocol, like http, smtp, nntp, etc

    the point is, we'd have many different internets today if it was started as different walled gardens you had to pay for. well, actually, that is the way it was: bbses, compuserve, etc. all of which died in favor of the free and the open

    so end game for friendster/ myspace/ facebook is a free and open social network protocol. sntp sounds too confusingly like smtp so lets call it...

    vytp

    vapid yammering transfer protocol

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the fact that sntp is Simple Network Time Protocol already!

    2. Re:exactly by polymeris · · Score: 1

      I think more than a protocol it will be a set of ad-hoc protocols, a large collection of different open ways to tie your email(s) to your image hosting (flickr, picasa) to your blog to your wiki to your slashdot account to your music (myspace could fill that role!) to other social stuff. Networks will grow organically around it without a central defined protocol or website. Some content maybe local, some hosted by others, but as it get's more refined it won't matter. Mostly it wil be web-based, but not exclusively.
      A web upon the web.

      Then, facebook's monolithic nature will be its decline. Unless it adapts & opens up.

    3. Re:exactly by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      a web upon the web

      very poetic ;-)

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  38. Uniques, not users by gweilo8888 · · Score: 1

    It's pretty disappointing to see a supposedly geek-friendly site get a story this badly wrong. Everybody crowing about Myspace losing 10%+ of their userbase in one month is completely missing the point. Of course, other sites that got to the story first have made the exact same mistake, but they don't have the focus on tech that this site supposedly does.

    Myspace didn't lose 10 million users in a month. What we're talking about isn't people canceling accounts, what we're talking about is a reduction in the number of unique IP addresses recorded in Myspace's logs for the month. Uniques are not the same thing as users -- as any self-respecting geek should know, many of those IP addresses will be single users getting dynamic IP addresses or using multiple locations (home, work, etc.) to access their account. At the same time, many other users will be behind proxy servers, or connecting from shared (public, work, etc.) locations that make multiple users all appear to be from the same IP.

    Which is all to say that this number is relatively meaningless, without detailed knowledge of the other numbers that would be reported along with it.

    And it's not to say Myspace aren't dead. They've been essentially dead for several years now, to be quite honest.

  39. You gotta fudge numbers like a pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I closed 3 Bank of America accounts at the end of January. Zero balance. Definitely closed.

    And yet... I am still getting three statements a month. I assume this is an effort to make it appear that they are not losing customers. Seems like fraud, if they are reporting those stats as part of earnings, etc.

  40. Design is the key. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Myspace used to have a fantastically simple interface.
    Everything was placed in logically separate sections, everything was usually a click or 2 away.

    Now? The interface is atrocious. Seriously. It looks like it was designed by some kid learning CSS for the first time.
    Visual horizontal separations, hundreds of them. Huge amounts of white space.
    Less important things are placed higher than personal things. (seriously, FUCK recommendations on websites. Youtube added that shit recently and it annoys me every single time i see that terrible sidebar since it takes up so much damn space. Worse is the crap keeps appearing. I need to userstyle that crap out of existence)
    Way too much information as well. It's all fine and well if you hide information behind something, such as a simple "More >>" button, even tooltips, or stuff that only appears as you hover over the post item. (and this is coming from a programmer who tends to deal with a lot of information and data)

    Not only that, they killed off one of the main things that made it popular: CUSTOM. PROFILES.
    I'm all for base profiles that have basic information about a person being placed at the top of profiles.
    But to remove the ability to do most of the stuff that people could do in the past is just awful.
    To think I even helped testing filters and finding new exploits to get them patched so we could keep those custom profiles in addition to the header section, only for it to be ditched for this static crap.
    It was one of the few places that could actually be called My Space. But now it is My Space As Myspace Says It Should Be.
    Facebook is partly to blame as well (imitation). But at least Facebooks UI is nice to look at.

    Better yet, for all you social networking sites, why not add a "My Page" that gives people near enough absolute freedom to do whatever they want in it.
    A simple header at the top. Prevent it from being covered. (stupidly easy to do)
    Maybe let people add gadgets on to it, drag-and-drop, resize, minimum dimensions, blah blah etc. All the usual stuff.
    Done. This way, people can absolutely 100% have a profile AND a page that lets them express themselves.
    Hey, I can dream, right?

  41. Poor Tom by Alphaman001 · · Score: 1

    Tom - "They're my friends" / Gollum - "You don't have any friends"

  42. Yikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only thing more unprofessional than a professional musician directing potential new fans to a social networking website is a business doing the same (god help us). Many people don't have or want a social networking account, and you'd be wise to realize that you're immediately turning those people off -- before they even have a chance to hear your music. I know that I always hesitate to click on a facebook or myspace link, for music or otherwise, and I'm a music lover and musician myself. Try to get me to sign-up (or do any ounce of work) and I'm right out the door.

    I suggest you put together a static informational website, find a low-cost (or free) hosting provider, and make that your official band website. Then, if you really need the interactive commenting, link to the social networking page from your official website. But for christ's sake, don't host your tour dates, discography, bio, clips, or any other piece of essential information with somebody whose primary goal is to get their own word out, rather than yours.

    1. Re:Yikes by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You don't have to log into MySpace to see the bands website or even to listen to the music they post. Myspace IS a low-cost (or free) hosting provider. They also supply the tools to easily put bands pages up. Basically, what you said was "Do exactly what you are doing, but with a different company because I am too hip to see you of MySpace".

    2. Re:Yikes by metalmaster · · Score: 1

      There was nothing wrong with hosting a music page back in the days of Myspace's popularity. As long as it was a public page anyone could go and view content. It was simple to design for because there were applets that let you pick color schemes, add pictures and arrange content with copy/paste ease of use. The addition of the video and music players let artists host content on myspace's dime

  43. Mmm, WHAT YOU SAY !! by tepples · · Score: 1

    You have no change to survive, make your time

    I was about to make the same joke, but it was "chance". (Mmm, WHAT YOU SAY !!)

  44. Google? by tibbetts · · Score: 1

    Can't it just Google them?

    --
    :wq
  45. Why it failed by kehren77 · · Score: 2

    MySpace was the GeoCities of social media sites. Every page had horrific backgrounds and thousands of animated GIFs and there was crap blinking everywhere.

    I'm surprised that a good percentage of MySpace users didn't die from epileptic seizures induced by all that flashing.

    1. Re:Why it failed by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that a good percentage of MySpace users didn't die from epileptic seizures

      Well, their user base is shrinking.

    2. Re:Why it failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now Deviantart is the next site with this disease, very sad.

  46. Apples and Oranges by westlake · · Score: 1

    it's my belief that social networks will rise and fall, endlessly in succession. simply because ubiquity eventually becomes a liability amongst a crowd who views exclusion and superiority to be more important

    That sounds like a fair description of Slashdot, but does it really apply to Facebook?

    1. Re:Apples and Oranges by circletimessquare · · Score: 0

      an arrogant fool would said yes. an arrogant fool would say no. so i will say maybe. its a good bet, from my point of view, that an endless cycle of exclusivity, ubiquity, exclusivity, ubiquity, etc., will play out in the world of social networking on the internet. i could be wrong. i don't think i am. it is ok if you think i am. but you would be dead wrong if you were certain

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  47. some pe(rson)ople still uses it.... by metalmaster · · Score: 1

    Just the other day I got an event invite on facebook for a "delete your account party"

    The description said "hey people im deleting my facebook. you should too! you can reach me at...." he rambled off a bunch of email, IM, forum contacts and a voip. I made it a point that he shouldnt try to influence people to give up facebook just because does. I then pointed out that its counterproductive to replace x with y and z if they function exactly the same and everyone uses x anyway.

    He didnt give a phone# or wanna resolve to hangout more in person, but his last contact was his myspace url. I was curious and clicked on it. Surprisingly enough it was current. It suffices to say that he didnt like what i had to say and got pissy, so i gave up.

  48. somehow that's not reducing it's spam by nopainogain · · Score: 0

    I maintain my old page for bands and show information but this week i got hit with numerous "imaginary" attractive female user adds. i thought the idea of spam was to head for a target rich environment.

    1. Re:somehow that's not reducing it's spam by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      Usenet still gets spam. Figure THAT one out!

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  49. Bad example.. by romanval · · Score: 1

    Steve Jobs doesn't have a marketing degree. In face he doesn't have any degree at all. But he was directly involved in transitioning personal computers from a 70's garage hobby into a mainstream market. The same cannot be said for anybody else that helmed Apple (hence why apple did so poorly when only sales and marketing guys ran it).

  50. Friendster by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

    Anyone been to Friendster lately? They're trying to position themselves as a place to go for gaming.

    And does anyone remember that UK site, Friends Reunited? The one where you had to pay to contact your old school friends? I still get an occasional email from them saying "latest happenings on Friends Reunited". There's nothing happening.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  51. I am shocked! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    I didn't think MySpace still had 10 million users left!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  52. Hey Thanks for reminding me!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had forgotten that I have a myspace account. I'm so glad this article came up. I've been reminded that I need to get my password reset on it so I can login and delete my myspace account.

    Thanks!!!

  53. No longer competing--COLALBORATING! by swordgeek · · Score: 1

    Because of this article, I logged into my myspace account. Lo and behold, there was a message waiting for me saying, "you can upgrade your profile and sync with facebook!"
    When they're trying to link you to their supposed competitor, you know they're dead.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  54. Know your memes by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Netcraft confirms it: MySpace is dying!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  55. Blh balh balh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This story has been circ'ing the net for the last week.

    Your comment is plagiarism or a dupe.

  56. Over 60 million users? by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    THAT's the real surprise.

  57. Open source ehh, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got the perfect name for it. GnuFace.

  58. Just spam anyway by curado · · Score: 1

    Why don't they shut down the other 63 million spam pages? It would clean up my Google search results. Nobody uses it for anything else anymore, anyway.

  59. I thought it was dead years ago by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    So does that mean my inactive MySpace account from last century still counts as a "MySpace user"?

    I think I changed my home email three times since then.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  60. From the horse's mouth by AC-x · · Score: 1

    I met someone who worked at Myspace, they said they laying almost all their employees off this summer.

  61. MySpace Loses Ten Million Users In One Month by Minwee · · Score: 1

    Have they tried looking behind the couch?

  62. Internet Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh?

  63. have they done anything worthwhile ? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    have they done anything worthwhile to keep their customers lately, anything new, anything.....not like facebook which is always pushing (like google) to be on top....i see myspace as the first gen floppy, to be replaced by next gen cd (facebook) until dvds come out, and usb keys...etc.... myspace in my opinion was just a first stepping stone to better things, ....twitter is the same too in my books, although charlie sheen is helping them stay on top...

  64. and via extension... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is to say the 10 million accounts lost by MySpace are real?

  65. Great by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

    If they can now just loose 63 million more, Ruppert Murdoch will get what he deserves.

  66. Suck it Rupert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope FOX is next.

  67. MOD PARENT UP by lhaeh · · Score: 1

    From the original article:
    "Tech industry analysts comScore say figures show MySpace lost more than 10 million unique users worldwide between January and February."

  68. Friendface by andreyvul · · Score: 1

    But what about Friendface? Somebody _please_ think of Friendface!

    --
    proud caffeine whore
  69. MySpace has no change in surviving anymore. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    MySpace can lose 1 million users a month and it'll still last 5 years unless closed earlier. The Chinese social networking websites are just as likely to grow and grow then shrink too. I wouldn't invest in News Corp, the owner of MySpace, but if I could I would invest in the Chinese businesses. Then in a few more years I'd move to other investments.

    Falcon

  70. NPR & PBS by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    NPR news is pretty neutral (I'm talking about the hourly news, not the shows, which do lean to the left a bit generally)

    Years ago I liked to watch Crossfire on PBS where Conservatives and (NOT) Liberals would sit across from each other debating an issue.

    if you get your political opinions from people like Beck

    I used to be accused of getting my beliefs and opinions from him. When I was it was the first tyme I heard of him. Though it's been more than 10 years I used to like to listen to Rush. He'd spew all these numbers that were easy to prove wrong. I don't listen to leftists either, they're just as bad.

    Falcon

    Notice I didn't say "Liberals" above, instead I used "leftists". That is because they are not Liberals. A real liberal believes in liberty and small government, but many of those called "liberal" today believe in big government.

  71. Fox News by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Mind you, I don't have cable TV. How closed minded is that?? ;)

    Cable TV not needed for Fox News. There are over the air-waves Fox radio and TV stations.

    Falcon

  72. "What's Myspace...?" by randombilly · · Score: 1

    Says my 18 year old cousin, from his college dorm room.

  73. Requiem for Detroit by robogun · · Score: 1

    Once one of the largest cities in America, Detroit has no chance for surviving. In the latest tally the population is down to just 700,000. The city is finished, it really is.

    From an article in today's Wall Street Journal:

    "For years, Detroit was a synonym for American energy and opportunity. Here Motown Records was born and General Motors became the first company to make a billion dollars in a single year. And here the auto industry that we now think of as geriatric drove the American economy, helped create the American Dream, and defined American culture to the world."

    Times change, people move on, they leave the city, website, whatever it is, because it is no longer relevant.

  74. I can't even login anymore! Cookie problem? by Gunstick · · Score: 1

    Since some months, after logging in successfully, my session seems to get lost and I have to login again.
    So the site is quite unusable for me.
    I don't have any fancy stuff installed in firefox. adblock plus, that's all.
    Solution: well facebook does not have that problem, so I'll go and use that one...

    --
    Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
  75. Myspace has gone down, Deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its not interesting, social trends change, MySpace was the place to be. Is it now? No. The Same with 'Bebo', and people that still use IM such as IRC, and AIM. People use different things now its really that that big of a deal. MySpace is survives now because of the bands and music projects that use it. Facebook offer's much better things and its easier to use and get to.

    Simples

  76. Open Letter To News Corp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open Letter To News Corp:

    Dear Rupert, Chase, and Jonathan,

    Bet you never thought your mistakes, as well as your practice of lying to people, would ever become public did you?

    Would assume it is hard to dispute the facts when there are correspondences and audio recordings of all communications that support said representations as it relates to the conduct and activities by, and/or on the behalf of, News Corp, MySpace, and its representatives.

    If Chase, Jonathan, or Rupert would personally, and on behalf of News Corp and MySpace, provide authorization and permission to release all correspondences and recorded telephone conversations related to this matter. We would be willing to accommodate that request by providing to several media outlets, including Fox News, all related materials so that a “fair and balanced” determination could be made as to how News Corp does business.

    This shall also allow outside individuals, parties, media and the pubic to determine how badly Carey and Miller, through their activities and conduct, destroyed MySpace and drove it from a success to a complete failure.

    As a result of their unwillingness to further discuss and initiate a process that would have generated the stated revenues and results as referenced due to their egos and the greed obstructing their ability to apply common sense and to utilize their brains. They have effectively destroyed MySpace and drove its value down more than any other reasons for the decline and eventual failure of MySpace.

    We shall see if Carey, Miller, or Murdoch are willing to let the public in on the truth, and provide authorization so that the referenced material may be released, as well as all related documentation in support of the representations that have been made as they relate to this matter.

    Here are the facts; Carey and Miller were provided the opportunity to change the direction of MySpace last year with a proposal that would increase net profits of MySpace to 1.5 billion dollars by the third year.

    Based on our experience with News Corp, Carey, and Miller no one should trust any of them.

    They wanted us to disclose the plan to them without any written agreement in place. When that was refused, there were no further discussions. And for the record New Corp has a documented history of being given ideas and concepts and then incorporated said ideas or concepts. They later claim that they already had been developing that idea or concept, and effectively cut out the parties providing them with any such ideas or concepts. This knowledge not only comes from other such occurrences that were learned, but also from prior experiences in dealing with News Corp. Bottom line you can not trust News Corp if there is not an agreement and detailed documentation and records maintained when doing any business with News Corp.

    I would venture to guess anyone they claim to be offering more than 10 million dollars for MySpace would be another one of their lies considering the current state and condition of MySpace.

    It is believed that the damage that Carey and Miller have done to MySpace has brought the value of MySpace down to nothing.

    Anyone willing to pay the 50 to 200 million dollars for MySpace as News Corp alleges would mean one of two things. EITHER THEY LIED TO MYSPACE ABOUT WHAT THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY,,,,

    OR MORE LIKELY IS NEWS CORP, CAREY, AND MILLER ARE LYING AGAIN IN AN EFFORT TO DRIVE THE PRICE UP.

    TIME WILL TELL!!!