Facebook's real problem is not user backlash from their privacy shortcomings, but the future of social networking in general. Some visionary will beat them to the future while they are busy milking the status quo.
This is not visionary, sorry.
Facebook's real problem is not user backlash from their privacy shortcomings, but the future of social networking in general. Some visionary will beat them to the future while they are busy milking the status quo.
This is not visionary, sorry.
I'd say the most important thing is to deal with the social flatland problem (which I explain here: http://interuserface.net/2010/02/buzz-facebook-and-social-fl...), and then pretty much follow every suggestion Joey Tyson makes in this post: http://theharmonyguy.com/2010/05/10/dont-simply-build-a-more... .
If that kind of advancement can be built into a well-engineered product with good UX, then we might really be looking at something that could start siphoning a bit of market share from Facebook.
This is the Craigslist secret sauce.
All early internet protocols where distributed before the web became companies playground and Conway law followed.
I think a visionary replacement will happen when something will just replace the cloud (which is too often a data ghetto) by giving users a way to easily and completely control their data and services, local as well as remote, in a homogeneous and synchronized way. A merge between the two approaches: "everything on the web" and "everything on your computer". Data (and metadata) and services being identities, media, documents, events, tags, access rights, version history, and links between all those things... So all this without giving all your data to google :)
But if you read their project description, it doesn't sound like what they're building only duplicates Facebook's functionality. They're talking about providing software to give you your own portable persistent data vault, that you can selectively allow other people & services to access, while keeping the ability to remove their access at any time.
That's pretty cool, and it has the potential for a lot more uses than what Facebook is doing.
Maybe positioning a competitor as "guaranteed to always be free" could be a better plan (even when FB will likely always be free).
Based on their posts, they appear to be positioning themselves as a "Facebook Killer" solely to take advantage of the current backlash against Facebook (considering their current funding, I would say it's working). What they are attempting to create transcends anything we currently have; the closest you might come would be if you hosted a cryptographically secured peer-to-peer server only your friends could access (once you have that, now make it easily replicable and spread it across the net).