Slashdot Mirror
Executive Says Facebook Will Be All Video, No Text In 5 Years (mashable.com)
Kellen Beck, writing for Mashable: Video must be doing well on Facebook, because an executive at the company just predicted that's all Facebook will be in five years. Nicola Mendelsohn, Facebook's vice president of European, Middle Eastern and African operations, said at a conference Tuesday that in five years, Facebook "will be probably all video," Quartz reported. Mendelsohn added that video is "the best way to tell stories in this world" and "helps us to digest much more information." Mendelsohn is predicting the obsolescence of the written word, at least on Facebook, according to Quartz. That sounds far-fetched, but consider the way Facebook is decreasing an emphasis on text and diving headfirst into video with numerous recent updates and features.
how stupid
There are countless situations where it is easier and more appropriate to write a short text comment than to make sure you are presentable enough to record video of you saying something.
All video... that is ridiculous.
"helps us to digest much more information."
Yes, if you have the attention span of a goldfish.
Of course, if you're a facebook executive, that's probably the case.
That means that the only users that will use Facebook are people that want videos.
People that do not want videos will not use Facebook anymore.
Well, don't worry about that. We can get you back before you leave. (Dr. Who)
this sounds for FB subscribers will have to watch videos of what meals their friends had.
mfwright@batnet.com
Now when people have a joke that goes over someone's head, we'll have the joy of a real human going "WHOOSH!"
Contrary to the pithy saying, words summarise a thousand pictures. There's nothing more annoying than having to download and watch a video when I can quietly read or write and get straight to the point.
As younger kids move off FB and it becomes more a platform for older people, the appeal for video will be even less.
But this is a Facebook executive, so there's something video-y he's trying to buy/sell, is all.
No.
It's not the bandwidth-- it's just that video is too damn slow.
I can skim a text post in a second, maybe two. If I slow down to read it, maybe fifteen seconds tops. If I have to watch a video from every person on my friends list-- I just won't.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Ms Mendelsohn,
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
It's quicker to consume text than video. Just an FYI
Much easier and faster to type "good morning!" or "I just had lunch" or "going to bed" than making a video.
It's not hard for anyone to write quickly write readable text, like I'm doing now. For me to make a comment like this in video it would either generate a stammering barely understandable video, or require fifteen minutes of planning, rehearsal and editing to make it a reasonable 30 second video, that is still less convent then the 10 seconds you look to read this.
The advertisers creating content find it easier to reuse whatever video their agency churns out rather than create a nice experience like a micros item or custom ad. So of course they are pushing the narrative that everything will be video.
How many times have you seen a clunky video jammed into a banner and wondered why the fuck it was there? Because the advertiser could care less about creating a native experience that the target eyeballs might care about. Or more accurately, the media agency doesn't want to go back to the ad agency who doesn't want to go back to the client because their producers might actually have to do some work.
I tried watching a couple of physics lectures on youtube and it was a useless learning experience, video just sucks as a medium for much other than film.
However, seeing as there is zero of value on facebook anyway maybe this is a good idea.
Only thing that makes Facebook remotely tolerable is being able to quickly scroll/skim - same reason I love blogs and dislike podcasts. If I can't skim the content quickly, I'll be looking elsewhere for it.
Because the advertiser could care less about creating a native experience that the target eyeballs might care about.
https://xkcd.com/1576/
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Video isn't searchable. You have very limited control over how quickly you can take it in (I'm glad Youtube has adjustable speed settings now, at least). Video takes up massive amounts of storage space or bandwidth, especially on a per-word basis vs. plain text. Video can be computationally expensive to play back (how many of your computers can play a 1080p HEVC/H.265 video?).
Video is not a good medium for everyday communication. I will usually look for information in text form and avoid video.
Video calls are rarely made even though it's trivially easy with today's technology. Why does Facebook think they can turn that trend around on a dime?
I hope this trend will remain limited to a walled garden that I hardly ever look at.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Are they also planning to subsidize the data plans for FB users?
Yup. At least for people in areas where data is prohibitively expensive.
Remember the news about Facebook Free Basics?
I for one only use FaceBook while listening to audiobooks or am in meetings.
Stolen from YouTube content creators, of course.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2015/07/freebooting_stolen_youtube_videos_going_viral_on_facebook.html
All video in 5 years?
That's a bold statement! It assumes that facebook will still be relevant by then.
Video is not 'the best way to tell stories', it is one way, and for certain stories a 'good way' but nobody who has every seen the movie based off a book they really like (LoTR) would ever claim the movie is 'better than the book'. Don't get me wrong the LoTR movies were really good but the book is far & away much deeper, fuller & just 'better' (at least I think so).
Ultimately just because this guy is an executive doesn't mean he's fit to predict the future & certainly not here. In fact I'd argue that if he's in any position to set direction at Facebook that this statement would be proof he's not fit for his position.
Furthermore not everyone, everywhere will capture every last thing they do on video, and since 'shit happens' at the weirdest of times telling the potentially funny story of how 'shit happened to me' will always be important. Heck, I have a great story about a golfing 'incident' that if it had been captured on video would have easily generated millions of hits on YouTube & calls that it HAD to have been fake. But this happened LONG before smartphones & people taking video at the drop of a hat so it only remains alive in my memory (and the 3 other people who were there) & as a 'written/verbal story'.
Furthermore, phone calls are closer to video than text. We had audio phone conversations before we had instant text communication in everyone's hands, and text communication caught on like wildfire as an easier, less intrusive thing to do.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Prior to joining Facebook, Nicola Mendelsohn had an illustrious career in advertising. I suspect that her vision of Facebook is one in which video ads are seamlessly weaved throughout the content you actually care about.
The trouble is that Videobook would dramatically lose information density and become almost unusable as a result.
Facebook executives need to pat themselves on the back for this. Every time I think they can't manage to make Facebook any worse, they come up with some new innovation to make it even more terrible than before. I see now that even that isn't enough for them - they're going above and beyond to make it completely awful. Keep up the good work, guys!
It's been going for over 10 years now - so it#s well into ( the internet version of ) middle age. To look forward to 2021 and try to predict what people will want, how they will act, or what technology will be mainstream is a formula for disaster,
I would suggest that if FB is 100% in 5 years, then in 6 years every FB app will be an AI that people use in order to extract the useful information from all that waffle and wasted bandwidth. it takes megabytes of video to say what a few dozen bytes of text say - and worse: you have to play through a video, linearly. One thing the world seems to be doing is to move away from linear "broadcast" formats.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Although yeah... I think it's a dumb idea too... but this point isn't necessarily going to be as true in 5 years as it is now.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
...Mendelsohn added that video is "the best way to tell stories in this world"...
Videos have their place. But most of the time, I find the Facebook-type videos move far too slowly for me to stay interested. I'd much rather read a posting than view a video. Maybe I can read more quickly than Mendelsohn, maybe I'm not mesmerized by video technology, or maybe I'm not trying to push the marketplace into a certain direction where my company competes better than others.
.
The day Facebook goes all-video, I'm out of there.
Before every 15 seconds of user video there will be 30 seconds of advertising video content.
Yay for progress.
Good!! No more stupid posts showing some sick kid from 10 years ago and telling me to type amen.
Furthermore, phone calls are closer to video than text. We had audio phone conversations before we had instant text communication in everyone's hands, and text communication caught on like wildfire as an easier, less intrusive thing to do.
I think the asynchronous nature of text is a bigger contributing factor to it's success than how unobtrusive it is.
This is their death blow. Like snapchat is fucking useless at conducting chats.
You can already disable video over mobile data on Facebook. VERY useful feature.
It will be a good while before video becomes easily searchable.
Take game walkthroughs. Stuck at the Butcher's Paradise or some such nonsensical level name in a game? Easy to search for in a five megabyte walkthrough, NOT so easy to search for in a video. Automatic transcript? Let's hope the player speaks the level name at some point.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Text ads are all but worthless at this point, users are quickly becoming jaded by still image advertising, but an all-video platform provides more opportunities to present video ads which seem to be the latest rage. My cynical side firmly believes that's why Facebook has placed more emphasis on video content lately, and introduced features like autoplaying videos in the news feed.
And yes, it's far-fetched to think that FB will be all-video at any point before they fade completely into irrelevancy. After all, it seems like virtually everything on my news feed at this point is links to clickbait websites, sappy inspirational quotes superimposed over stock photos, and "comment below then put this as your status" copypasta.
Would make it easier to ban access to it on networks used for productive work.
FTS: "... consider the way Facebook is decreasing an emphasis on text ..."
Consider the way people seem to be decreasing their use of Facebook and other social media.
If this decrease actually constitutes a trend, and the trend accelerates, then in five years FB will have bigger problems to worry about than encouraging its users to be less literate.
Also, in light of the fantastical nature of Mendelsohn's conjecture, I'd say that Facebook's Kool-Aid is laced with some very powerful hallucinogens.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Have gnu, will travel.
That's an obvious move. It's only a short step away from Facebook's current user base.
Look, if I wanted an all video experience, I would TURN ON THE TV.
I despise most videos on the internet.
1) You can't have 20 tabs open, because one of them will autostart.
2) The ads invade are far more invasive - taking more attention and of course, more your ears as well as your eyes. And the audio means you can't goof at work ;D
3) You have to consume it at THEIR convenience, not yours - even if you can pause/restart it, it generally means you miss a thing or two. No stopping at will to read an email.
4) In general it takes more brain power, more bandwidth, and more time to consume video than words
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Did they forget about ugly people, or do they plan on restricting their access to their service?
Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
sure it will.
Most of their users can barely read and write anyway
> to write quickly write readable text, like I'm doing now.
Is that what you're doing now now doing now?
> it would either generate a stammering
Yeah, I'm betting on stammering. ;)
I'm not on it for all video all the time. mostly do NOT look at any.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
No. :D
I hate most video howtos, and much prefer articles. The reason is they take forever to get to the meat of the topic. I read very quickly and just want to accomplish what I set out to do. If I want to watch someone drone on and say absolutely nothing I'll watch Seinfeld or any number of Monty Python sketches.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I totally disagree. I'd NEVER read and write purely textual comments on any site.
One of my largest pet peeves of internet trends is the posting of a tutorial, review, hands on, or just a small bit of useful information, in a 15 minute video padded by intro, random babbling, and outro, when a couple paragraphs and a few photos would have done.
Count this right up there with 'clean design' filled with useless white space and large typeface and design features.
Is it so hard to ask for nicely laid-out information dense pages that are quickly absorb-able without some annoying person babbling or needing to scroll all over the page? Bah
Hmm when I read this all I could think was "Oh Gods.. so you're saying that FaceBook will just be another Chat Roulette... so cue the dick picks for everyone in 3...2...1.."
Seriously DO NOT WANT.
The Digital Sorceress
Since our screwed-up education system can't teach kids how to read and write, they'll need some other way to communicate with each other.
Furthermore, phone calls are closer to video than text. We had audio phone conversations before we had instant text communication in everyone's hands, and text communication caught on like wildfire as an easier, less intrusive thing to do.
I think the asynchronous nature of text is a bigger contributing factor to it's success than how unobtrusive it is. (reposted because I wasn't logged in the first time)
Facebook is becoming youtube for "I'm on the crapper and thought of this", "look at my food" and "everybody upvote this but dont' do a damned real thing about it" videos.
And i thought it was brain garbage before...
All video... that is ridiculous.
We're almost there
Did this guy used to work for ATT in the 1960s??? Because they predicted that ALL phone calls would be video calls. And guess what there not. And that's despite that most people have the technology already without paying extra for it in the palm of their hands*!! Something those early ATT executives hadn't imagined. Text, (if you're literate) just has so many benefits. Look at how many people don't even want to talk someone when ordering a pizza instead use text/picture system. Partly because it's more precise. And how many women even ones with attractive bodies don't want to have sex with the lights on. Do you think they want to be recorded every-time they have something witty to say.
And no I'm not saying that people don't ever want to have video call because it someone you know and like seeing there face when they are talking can be just emotionally valuable as words. But that doesn't mean I want to see the face of a buddy from High-School telling me his opinion on who won the Super Bowl.
*Data charges still apply. But if video calling was so great T-Mobile at least would offer it as part of binge on which I can't find that they do.
I do not go to a single major news site. Why not? Because autoplay video. I go to google news, click on an article I want to read, and then instead of the article, I get autoplay video with the article for some stupid reason (CNN, I'm looking at you).
And I have to immediately kill the site. Because I'm at work, where blaring audio of Wolf Blitzer is frowned upon. So, now they are proposing to do the same thing at facebook? Well, there goes another web site. Soon, I'll be reduced to giving up on the web entirely.
I'm thinking LYNX for my smartphone and every computer I own. But too bad I don't control the computer I'm forced to use at work.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Aside from being the absolutely stupidest idea I've heard yet, chances are that in 5 years from now, Facebook will be going the way of Myspace, Livejournal, and all the other now-irrelevant social media sites. People are already moving away from all this fake 'sharing' nonsense anyway, posting less and less relevant things, and more and more fluff. I'm sure something else will come along to replace Facebook when it truly transforms into Failbook (and I will cheer on that day) and chaces are it's replacement will be more invasive, more draconic, and even more chillingly ominous than Facebook has become, but at least Facebook will, sooner or later, die -- and nothing of value will have been lost.
Waiting with eagerly, with open arms, for the trolls and Facebook shills to rain their negative moderation points down upon me, like pennies from heaven; their discomfiture assures me I'm speaking Truth. xD
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
They will be lucky if they are alive in 20 minutes. Facebook just profiles you for easier government access to your information.
It is eavesdropping on willing dummies for government usage. Whether intended to be or not, it is now.
Every time Facebook (or anyone else) gets us to discuss some jaw-slacking eyeball-poking idea of theirs, God kills a kitten. Think of the kittens!
What's sad is,
1. No kittens died when turd brains proposed paperless voting machines with no receipt printers or paper record.
2. No kittens died when the first car with power windows and no cranks was built.
3. No kittens died when Firefox disabled the ESC key, which used to unconditionally abandon DNS lookups and shut down stalled network connections.
4. Whole additional litters upon request.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
UK has already addressed this. Can't be too fat and on the internet!
Given the sheer quantity of stuff on Facebook which is just photos of text, I predict that in five years Facebook will be mostly videos of text being typed. Or, if anyone still remembers how, written by hand.
Log in or piss off.
Ha, Slashdot has Facebook beat, in 3 years it will be all Video...
Will they also implant tiny video screens and cameras in our eyes so we can't avoid the latest update on Cynthia's McDonald's breakfast or the awesome deal that Biff just got on his new pair of Nike Extreme Radical Ranger Jumpmaster(tm) tennis shoes? And will the implanted circuitry be free?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
They used to say that "all programs evolve until they can send email."
I propose a corollary: "All web services evolve until they turn into shit-laden advertising platforms and become annoying and irrelevant."
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
so they will buy it?
Something else to make up for declining public school standards in the U.S. Now the little darlings won't have to read or write at all, and good thing since most have barely rudimentary skills.
This story makes me turn purple and expand until my head is the size of an elephant. Then it explodes into a thousand wiggling little worms, each one brighter than the Sun, each singing a tune so sublime as to transfix the audience into unfathomable reverie. They then go on to found their own individual religions based on the experience. Via astral projection they inspire beings on other worlds inhabited by intelligent life forms, who in a thousand years time converge upon Earth via multi-generation star-ships. There, they consecrate a monument to the event that spawned a million cultures. Curiously, it's a monument to an idiot. An idiot who thought a story like this could be more easily told with video only.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Just another story to get some focus on facebook. People are posting much less on facebook and I don't think the number of people creating new accounts is growing much. In 5 years facebook could be gone.
The asynchronous nature is a part of why it is unobtrusive. A phone call demands your attention right now. A text you can get back to whenever.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
video is "the best way to tell stories in this world"
Reading is way faster. Show me anyone who has watched a movie after reading the book and preferred the movie.
Jesus wept. Can I get a job at FB as a VP? The bar can't be very high if this is the level of intelligence required.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
So in five years, would that just block facebook?
...
How will people edit their posts? How can every utterance of "x" be changed into "z" (a more appropriate word) in a video? Changing the object and subject of written sentence is easy; what's the plan for video?
Using a high-bandwidth AV stream to replace a few hundred bytes of text cached on the viewing device, is ludicrous. Is Facebook that desperate to monetize their subscribers?
If you recall F541 by ray bradbury you may recall the sad social life of the fireman's wife who lived in a room with four video walls and interacted with her facebook "freinds" / soap operas. Text was not used, indeed it was burned.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
A phone call demands your attention right now.
Yes and no. Personally, I use an answering machine and rarely let the phone interrupt what I'm doing.
Yeah, same here, I leave my phone on do not disturb basically all the time and check my voicemail when I feel like it, and if someone doesn't leave a voicemail, they obviously didn't really need to talk to me that much.
But we're in the minority, and the default behavior is that your phone screams "HEY! HEY PAY ATTENTION TO ME! HEY! SOMEONE WANT TO TALK TO YOU! HEY! STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND PAY ATTENTION TO ME!" when a voice call comes in, while a text just says "hey, when you got a sec...?"
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
Perhaps, but I think that is more of a technological limitation than one inherent in the format. Although barring some unexpected technological breakthrough, I don't think we'll necessarily be there in just five years. Maybe 15, however.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Sure, Facebook video has expanded greatly (thanks in part to facebook pirates stealing and reuploading Youtube content without repercussions), but just like anything, it will peak well before 100% coverage.
Seriously, did all CEO's skip math?
Video is searchable. Adobe Premiere lets you search video. You just index it as metadata through automatic transcription.
That being said. Who wants to have to make themselves presentable to post something on facebook? Or put on clothes.
So Facebook will be youtube. Exec is admitting that Google has outfaced-booked Facebook, despite the total war Zuck declared. RIP FB!
Nuff said.
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
See subject: Like YOU being able to do better, earlier, & more than I have in the art & science of computing - it'll NEVER happen.
* Shit for brains morons like you ruin the place for the rest of us...
APK
P.S.=> You're pitiful... apk
I foresee voice phone calls replacing text messages in the next 5 years.
See subject & read + understand https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... as fools like you clot up forums w/ your dope-brained waste of life "breather/eater" level STUPID comments - seriously imbecile level moronic stupidity!
* See, by way of comparison, @ least folks like myself contribute back good things that actually work well vs. cretins like yourself clotting up the pages of places like this online with your utter imbecilic stupidity.
APK
P.S.=> Why don't morons like you just DIE? Please, do - you are wastes of others' time, & life as well as your own... apk
... it will all be porn.
Video isn't searchable.
So, it could be a good thing.
How do these picture and video sharing services make money? I can see youtube break even by sticking in its video ads, but what about dedicated picture sharing services? Have hard drives, CPUs, and bandwidth fallen that much in price since the early 2000s?
Most literate people can read many magnitudes faster than information can be relayed by audio or video, and our brains actually retain the information better. The same thing goes for writing by hand vs. typing or dictating. As if Facebook weren't annoying enough already. :/
Video isn't exactly a new thing. If it's still going to take fifteen years (cold fusion is just twenty years away!) to make it easily searchable then it IS an issue with the format itself.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
And what's the odds that nobody wears earbuds whilst watching them in public places. This really isn't progress...
Reading is an order of magnitude faster than listening.
For most of us - but for Facebook mouth-breathers who sound out their words as they read?
Nobody wants to watch (even short) videos to see if they are intresting, when they could read a text and judge it by skipping over it before reading in detail.
"helps us to digest much more information."
Yes, if you have the attention span of a goldfish.
Of course, if you're a facebook executive, that's probably the case.
Perhaps your own attention span hasn't noticed how much $ these guys make... More to the point, I'm damn sure their office communication is not video; video is only for their product (Facebook viewers.)
We have asynchronous voice communication, too. They're called "voicemail". People hate those, too.
Cat videos must be doing well on Facebook, because an executive at the company just predicted that's all Facebook will be in five years. Nicola Mendelsohn, Facebook's vice president of European, Middle Eastern and African operations, said at a conference Tuesday that in five years, Facebook "will be probably all cat videos," Quartz reported. Mendelsohn added that cat videos are "the best way to tell stories in this world" and "helps us to digest much more information." Mendelsohn is predicting the obsolescence of the written word, at least on Facebook, according to Quartz. That sounds far-fetched, but consider the way Facebook is decreasing an emphasis on text and diving headfirst into cat videos with numerous recent updates and features.
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
True, but I hate voicemail, *particularly* when they leave a novel worth of stuff. A lot of people I know will hang up rather than leave a voicemail, and instead send a text (even if they dictate it).
There's a reason why voicemail transcription is such a popular feature. Our ability to read text is much faster than our ability to process voice. Also, books on tape are much less popular than just reading, only tolerated in scenarios like driving or other situation where actually reading is just infeasible.
Now video/pictures do frequently add something, but generally for personal communication it's more trouble than it is worth and really most data is conveyed through voice in such a scenario. There are specific exceptions to this of course...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
The live video thing will be short lived. If Skype and Facetime haven't really taken off, live video on Facebook won't either. Of course, there will be special occasions from time to time when it will make sense, and people will use it -- just like Skype and Facetime -- but once the novelty wears off, most people are going to be like, "Meh".
Proverbs 21:19
I agree completely. I think it will be short-lived. Look at applications like Skype and Facetime. They are certainly useful, and when people first get them, they use them a lot, but the novelty wears off pretty fast. There are occasions where video apps make sense, but no one wants to do video all the time -- whether they are the sender or receiver.
Proverbs 21:19
I would say "easily searchable" video would be one which isn't dependent on whether the video has been previously indexed in a particular way. Text searching is fast because you use the exact binary data that you are searching for to find it. It is self-indexed in this respect, while with current technology, video searching is limited to either moving to particular frames, which require that you know the frame number (or time index) that you want in advance, or else are only searchable with additional annotations or metadata that might be provided which cross-reference to particular frames (such as scene indexes that you might find in a dvd menu) However, it is theoretically possible to search through an entire video without any auxiliary metadata using a plain-text description of what you are trying to find, if the searching system has a sophisticated enough AI. For example, "the first scene with harrison ford" in star wars could use face-recognition technology that exists right now to quickly find the scene in the cantina where Obiwan and Luke are negotiating with Han Solo for passage to get to Alderaan. This is just one example where the tech exists right now to achieve this, but the fact that this isn't equally applicable to more general descriptions (eg, "Luke being whiney" corresponding to "But I was going into Tosche Station to pick up some power converters") is not a limitation of the format, but reflective on the current limits of technology.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
They want to cater to analfabets.
I keep audio turned off on my machine for exactly this reason.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
In all fairness, some people genuinely like listening to someone read the book better than reading it themselves. Personally, I think those people are crazy, but hey, it's not like they're forcing me to listen to audiobooks.
If that happens it will be time to find another social media platform. I like to read. I don't like video for conversational purposes.
Stuck at the Butcher's Paradise or some such nonsensical level name in a game?
Sounds like the last level of Psychonauts :-P
(Actually it's "Meat Circus")
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
In 5 years, nobody will use paper anymore
- Adobe Acrobat CPO, 1995
Some people are embarrassed by how they look and will not want to ever post video of themselves. I am one of these people and barely tolerate posting photos, and even then only the handful of photos that show my "good side". Who the hell wants to be inundated with video spam from companies you follow anyways? Facebook is trying really hard to force me to deactivate my account there.
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
Do we need another youtube? I doubt that text will go away. Anyone wish to make a wager on this?
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
See subject: You, a nobody who uses a fake name online who hasn't done shit since you're a druggie??? LOL - no thanks...
* I'd rather be myself & do things that are useful to others for others instead!
APK
P.S.=> A fake delusional name online isn't going to make you "my better" - however, creating something good as or better than my work might (I don't worry about that though from the likes of "your kind", lol - as it'll NEVER happen)... apk