
Reverse Network Effects: Why Todays Social Networks Can Fail as They Grow Larger - kiyanwang
http://www.wired.com/insights/2014/03/reverse-network-effects-todays-social-networks-can-fail-grow-larger/
======
andybak
This partially explains Reddit's staying power. A popular subreddit that hits
the point of degeneracy spawns new subreddits that aim to return to it's
roots. No-one leaves the platform and the cycle continues.

~~~
jedberg
I still say that the smartest thing we ever did at reddit was allow users to
create their own subreddits and then decorate them how they choose. The second
smartest thing was making text posts official.

Both of those features differentiated us from the competitors, and as you
aptly point out, it has a nice side effect of keeping people on the platform
who might otherwise leave (although that wasn't an intended consequence).

~~~
brettproctor
I always thought the smartest thing was keeping the frontpage unappealing
enough to scare off anyone who hadn't already been told by a good friend it
was worth checking out. It is sort of this pseudo invite-only filter.

~~~
visarga
I would love to see a "defluffing" filter for reddit. Just remove low effort
comments, memes and low effort content such as images and short videos under 3
minutes. I'd like it to be easier to locate the comments and articles that are
worth reading.

~~~
pavel_lishin
> _I 'd like it to be easier to locate the comments and articles that are
> worth reading._

This is done by joining better subreddits, and/or adding them to multis.

------
jasode
The writer (Sangeet Paul Choudary) doesn't mention Clay Shirky but as far as I
can tell, Clay has written the most essays about web communities and scaling
problems:

[http://shirky.com/writings/community_scale.html](http://shirky.com/writings/community_scale.html)

[http://www.shirky.com/writings/herecomeseverybody/herecomese...](http://www.shirky.com/writings/herecomeseverybody/herecomeseverybody/group_politics.html)

[https://www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Everybody-Organizing-
Organ...](https://www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Everybody-Organizing-
Organizations/dp/0143114948)

------
katpas
This quote made me laugh -

"LinkedIn creates friction by preventing users from communicating with distant
connections. This ensures that users do not receive unsolicited messages. This
also allows LinkedIn to offer frictionless access (OpenMail) as a premium
value proposition."

I'd say my inmail is 95% unsolicited messages from people who have bought
access.

~~~
hammock
Then it's working as intended. The only unsolicited messages you get are ones
that were paid for.

~~~
katpas
I read that phrase as meaning the degrees of connection feature is a way to
stop users receiving unsolicited messages, something which contributes to the
reverse network effects the author talks about.

Having the paid, 'message indiscriminately' feature undermines that. So if the
intention is to reduce unsolicited messages to reduce spam then it doesn't
work.

I think the intention actually is to reduce spam from those who don't pay for
it. So yes, working as intended.

------
webwanderings
The real social network is the one you create on your own, with people you
wish to network with. And it has to be small by design, otherwise it doesn't
work.

Now, it doesn't matter what you use to create such a network, be that email
list, facebook group, whatsapp, or fill in the blank.

No company or platform have been able to "create" such a social network for
you. The best they can do, is provide appropriate tools for you to create your
network.

And as far as I can tell, email lists still serve that purpose, irrespective
of the hype the platforms like Facebook, Slack etc may generate.

~~~
crottypeter
> No company or platform have been able to "create" such a social network for
> you.

This is not quite true. For many people you go to facebook and your friends
are already there ... you friend a few and others friend you.

> The best they can do, is provide appropriate tools for you to create your
> network.

or perhaps they "provide appropriate tools for your friends to create your
network"

~~~
webwanderings
> you go to facebook....

As I mentioned in my first comment, you create network with whom you wish to
create network with. So it doesn't matter where your friends are (be that
Facebook, or at home, just a phone call away); it is you who is going to reach
out to them, to create a social network.

> provide appropriate tools for your friends to create your network

Each individual creates his or her own network. So if someone reaches you
first, seeking your company to get you into their network, it is as same as
you reaching them, asking them to join yours.

My ultimate point is, that the "platform" does not create a social network
(for humans). The best they can do, is create bells, whistles and tools.
Humans create their own social network.

------
sverige
YouTube long ago reached the failure point for me in delivering recommended
content. Their recommendations frequently include things I've already watched,
and the tangentially related items they recommend miss the salient point more
often than not. I still use it, but only when searching for specific things.

~~~
Animats
A browser add-on to remove the right column from Facebook would be a win.
Youtube apparently needs this as well. So do a lot of "social" sites. It's
become a convention - that's where the crap links are.

~~~
RileyKyeden
You can do this with uBlock Origin.

------
vonklaus
The article makes a halfway decent attempt at the pitfalls of large-scale
networks. However, the article doesn't come close (in my opinion) to making a
case that this will lead them to "fail".

Facebook has become massively popular and is still growing. While I am not
particularly active on it, I recognize this is atypical. Think about how many
devs ise FB OAuth for example, as it is insanely prolific.

Networks _can_ fail at any time, but very few have after reaching escape
velocity. Probably the most notable was AOL/IM and more recently the
significant degradation of reddit. Networks must seriously mess up accross the
3 main identified categories, and not keep any pace with their users changing
needs.

I would say the biggest threat to networks at scale, which oddly wasnt really
discussed, is a failure to monetize or convert their network into value. Many
people find twitter useful, for example, but it is rumored to be shopping
itself around. If anything, the danger of networks is expecting data and
adrevenue to be a sustainable business at scale. Obviously, it is a good
problem to have 500million plus active users, but it is expensive and
difficult. It is harder, one might inagine, to have 50m paying users.

~~~
eggie
> Facebook has become massively popular and is still growing. While I am not
> particularly active on it, I recognize this is atypical. Think about how
> many devs ise FB OAuth for example, as it is insanely prolific.

But are they real users? There are lots of reports of many "users" being bots
or sharecroppers on click farms.

------
bikamonki
There's this social network that all of us readers have been using since birth
and will continue to use for life: the city. It also delivers connections,
content and clout. It keeps growing the userbase eventhough friction is huge,
content quality mostly sucks and clout for new users is a far-fetched dream.

My point: maybe Facebook is the first online-city and is here forever.

Ps: so far I am the only e-hermit I know that has left FB. Yet, once my kids
grow and join FB I may need to re-join to go _visit_ them.

~~~
pjc50
The first 'online city' was definitely geocities. FB is quite enduring but not
guaranteed to last, especially across generations.

------
noonespecial
"Facebook is cool until your mom wants to friend you."

 _\-- My daughters 10 year old friend on the merits of social networking_

~~~
phicoh
I'm amazed at the failure of Facebook in this regard.

They were in a unique position to make it work, and then failed.

With make it work, I mean that everybody moves in different circles, family,
work, friends, hobbies, etc. And you need to have easy control over who sees
what.

And Facebook has most of it, except that last bit of UI to make it work.

(Not that I like Facebook)

------
hazeii
Well, stating that the "value to a user increases as more users use it" seems
incorrect for Skype and Facebook at least (not familiar with WhatsApp).

In fact, I'd say the more people around that you don't know or relate to is
actually detrimental to community spirit.

~~~
wtracy
That statement might lack nuance, but it's not wrong. Skype and Facebook only
have value to me because my friends and family use them. The value to me
increases as more friends use those platforms, and would decrease if my
friends left.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Yes, but you can also get reverse network effects, e.g. young people not being
active on Facebook because their parents are there (and denying a friend
request would be awkward).

------
ape4
Personally, it would be ok with me of some of those bigger networks die.

~~~
Bakary
They will die only to be replaced by another Leviathan

------
Kiro
I'm surprised that HN hasn't acknowledged the rise of musical.ly or live.ly.
It's already the next big thing.

------
z3t4
Investors like big markets, just like users chose the biggest platform.

