
Facebook is for grandparents: What we need in a next-gen social network - stasy
http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2013/11/24/facebook-grandparents-need-next-gen-social-network/
======
cft
The social networks are like TV shows. They have a limited run. This is
because it's entertainment, rather than tech.

Hollywood knows how this works, and they do not incorporate or IPO each
individual TV show: instead they incorporate studios, that produce many
different shows. Facebook is forced into this model too by reality, thus they
bought Instagram, and tried to buy Snapchat. Those shows will also have a
limited lifetime. Facebook will fail, because they do not recognize that they
are in the entertainment business and they will cling to their one single
show.

Someone needs to create a non-gaming software studio, that is tooled to make
or to buy Instagrams for less than $1bn, knowing that they constantly need to
retire the old shows and come up with the new ones.

~~~
voltagex_
Does this mean I'm going to have to rescue my data every time a
software/network is "retired"?

~~~
personlurking
'Rescue' might be the wrong word here. A simple transfer, or updated 'address'
form would seem more likely. Like when you want to delete a WP blog, it gives
you several options for your content/blog (though most imply not owning it
anymore).

~~~
voltagex_
That assumes the services you're moving between are based on any kind of
standard. Try moving your Facebook data to Google+ and see how far you get.

------
brudgers
Being for grandparents makes Facebook stable - at least in markets like the US
with greying demographics. Heck, the people who were on it when it was
student-oriented invite-only and hook-up driven are pushing 30 these days.

And that means they''re headed into life phases where they buy high profit
goods and services like stroller systems and financial services. And old folks
like grandpa? Well he's buying pharmaceuticals and taking cruises.

------
AndrewKemendo
>I’m a business man and a family man. I love collecting chairs and getting
drunk on the weekends. I want to introduce all of these aspects to my
network...Combining your identities, creates a synergy and depth to your
online persona.

Isn't this what Google+ has been trying to do from the start?

------
Amadou
Where is the disintermediation?

All this talk of "products" seems to miss the root problem with these social
networks - they aren't networks. They are centralized databases that are
designed that way not for the benefit of the users but as means of simplifying
the profit model. Because they all share that same inherent design, they will
all share the same fate.

The next generation in social networks will be something that is actually a
network, until then all that's really going on is "rearranging deckchairs on
the titanic."

------
emp_
A see a huge problem with the shared profit thing, with virtual worthless
points like Likes you already have all sorts of retardness from people dying
to pull a hit stunt to profile for a dead baby mummy, can you imagine if the
users were paid for the attention their posts get? "A thousand likes or this
kitty goes in the microwave". I think the nice new place to be would be one
where you are not the product, doesn't matter if you are being paid or not, or
if you are paying or not.

~~~
stasy
Yeah, I think you would need to make something new and un-thought of.
Something unique that draws a lot of attention.

------
mattquiros
Anyone else feel that no one knows this "next-generation social network"
better than, well, the next generation? I'm talking about today's young teens
and little kids. Facebook took off during our time because we were _the_ cool
demographic back then. It was everything we wanted and needed that MySpace and
Friendster failed to give. I think it's difficult for us to comprehend what
the next-gen social network will be because we think differently. We didn't
exactly grow up with touch-screen devices and mobile internet, for one.

~~~
unclebucknasty
I agree with this. I'm not sure that the next-big-thing is even imaginable
yet. I don't think it will be just a product or service like Facebook. I think
it will involve a complete paradigm shift, and perhaps some tech that we
haven't yet envisioned.

This article makes some interesting points and, perhaps, the next generation
will incorporate some of these ideas. But, it feels like a modest iteration
over the current state of affairs. And, much like the current landscape (FB,
Vine, Instagram, SnapChat, etc), the article feels fragmented. It consists of
a lot of related ideas, but there's no real cohesion or unifying theme.

------
nickconfer
I think the obvious answer here is there won't be a next-gen social network
that is Facebook. Instead there will be several social networks that are laser
focused on being the best for X.

Ala Instagram, Twitter, Tumblr, Vine, Pinterest, Path, OKCupid, Github, etc...

------
rayiner
Hey guys! The old people found us. Time to head somewhere more hip!

~~~
zht
have you guys heard of this great thing called myspace? None of my relatives
on there, and I hear Justin Timberlake owns a stake in it.

it's super cool!

~~~
sliverstorm
_the circle of liiiiiifeee..._

~~~
yen223
Friendster shall rise again!

~~~
daegloe
Ahem. Anyone remember Six Degrees?

~~~
halostatue
Yup.

~~~
72deluxe
Bebo anyone?

------
byoung2
_The new social network should share profits with users who create the
content. In fact, it shall only take a small commission, and offer the option
to convert the commission to a fixed monthly sum in exchange for the
technology services it provides._

An interesting idea, but won't that encourage spam?

~~~
unclebucknasty
Yeah, variations of this have been tried repeatedly and failed. Refer.ly is
one of the most recent that comes to mind.

The whole point of social networks is to be social with people you enjoy. As
soon as you provide financial incentive, then things get skewed.

Maybe there's a model or variation under which this could work. But, simply
allowing people to monetize interactions, the stuff they share, etc. will
pervert the incentive and devalue the platform.

~~~
Amadou
_As soon as you provide financial incentive, then things get skewed._

I would go so far as to say that what is required is something that
_discourages_ financial gain. Money perverts social relationships. Long before
the internet people were saying things like "never lend money to a friend
because you won't be friends any more." The green card lawyers were among the
first to _abuse_ the net for financial gain and that model of spam has gone on
to be an enormous drag on the utility of the net.

------
onedev
We actually don't "need" anything more social.

~~~
coldtea
There's a distinct lack of a service that I can post filtered photos of the
toilet bowl after crapping for my friends.

------
sergiosgc
The next paradigm shift in social networks is the distribution of the social
graph. Ten years ago, this would seem unacceptable because of privacy issues.
Today, we know people have learned to embrace the fact that once you publish
it, it's public, so they do not care about privacy online.

A truly open social graph, distributed so it isn't controlled by a single
entity, is a game changer. It lowers the barriers to vertical oriented social
networks, which wouldn't have the barrier of reconstructing every user's
social graph.

The trick is the transition. It's like we are stuck in a local maximum. Once
we move to distributed social graphs we are obviously better, but I can't
imagine how this transition would occur, other than Facebook itself having an
amazingly long term vision and going all in with this vision. There's a lot to
be gained from being the industry leader for 50 years instead of monopolist
for 10...

------
grantph
I'm enjoying the interesting analogies.

I rather view the internet as a party where everyone is invited. The social
networks are the loud attention seekers yelling "look at how cool we are".
People are wow'd and sucked in. The problem is, it's a keg party and the only
way they've been able to monetize is to sell ads at their party. Once the ads
go up, the venue is no longer cool and the party moves to a new venue.

Of course, there are other types of parties and my prediction is that quality
is going to trump quantity in future networks. Who wants a keg party that
sells advertising when the quality of the people I meet at a cocktail party
could lead to new opportunities without advertising?

The next wave will build on social and actually generate real value.
Therefore, it'll have a new name and it won't be Social 2.0 It'll be something
entirely new that addresses that value.

------
StavrosK
This article surprisingly misses the fact that I _want_ to communicate with my
grandparents. Sure, I don't want them in the same circle as my friends, but
communication there is important too.

There are many social networks who aren't tailored to the older generation, so
there's a bit of a problem there: My mom has no interest in Twitter. That's
why I like attempts like togethera.com, I think there are plenty of
alternatives for "the social network we think we want", but not enough for the
ones we actually would find useful. "Faster horse", etc.

~~~
coldtea
> _This article surprisingly misses the fact that I want to communicate with
> my grandparents. Sure, I don 't want them in the same circle as my friends,
> but communication there is important too._

Which is beside the point he makes.

You can always communicate with your grantparents on FB.

Plus, on the scheme he presents, you can just make a personal profile for
communication with your extended family and grandparents.

------
amykhar
As long as you can target your content to the various different types of
people in your life, why does it matter if they are all in one place? You
don't stop using your phone because your parents have a phone too. What
Facebook needs is a good, reliable way to keep your conversations with your
friends away from your conversations with your parents. Who wants to have to
go to a bunch of different places to talk to the people you need to talk to?

~~~
capsule_toy
The problem is Facebook seems to want to do exactly the opposite: open up your
life to as many people as possible. It's also shown that it wants to monetize
your social connections i.e. beacon and endorsed ads. If Facebook was a
service like a phone, then I'd have no issue with it, but it has shown that it
wants to play a bigger and more opinionated part of people's lives.

------
wmw
We are building a platform network around this idea. we believe that a social
network is defined by the places were you are regularly (sport club, work,
bar). Our plattform lets you communicate with the people at those places even
if you are at a rock concert.

------
samman
The next social network should not be site or app at all, but instead be a
_protocol_.

------
ananth99
I find Path(www.path.com) to be promising. Pretty neat and intuitive.

~~~
torbit
Isn't closed to your social circle? OP wants something that helps you expand
to other social circles. Arrive to a new city none of your friends are in, and
have an app tell you what is around you based on your interests and posts.

~~~
ananth99
Yeah, true. OP expresses his concern over Facebook's ad revenue system, the
clutter it creates and how it spoils his entire Social Network experience.
Path, on the other hand gives a user a rich and a personal experience. I guess
that's the trade-off there. For getting recommendations based on location and
interests, I use Circle(discovercircle.com). Works fine for me. :-)

------
MisterBastahrd
Ford is for great, great grandparents. It's still around.

------
toadi
Don't see what 'radical' change there is to move to another social site.
Besides my grandparents are using it so it's not cool.

------
ohwp
All the kids are already switching to WeChat, Vine, Flickr and others.

With the mobile number as identifier, mobile is the next Facebook.

------
kreeben
Facebook is dying! New business idea: bitcoin-based social network! With
bitcoins!

------
mtgx
So is the iPhone at this point.

------
j546
lt30.com (if they accept you)

~~~
kevin818
Not really sure why this was downvoted - the site is legit and much better
than facebook.

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
probably because it30.com is a squatter, and it's difficult to distinguish
between the two - terrible domain-name choice there.

