Hacker News Reader

Comment by alttab | Hacker News Reader

For a website created to get people into the service, its terrible that I have to click the tiny-ass 'About' link at the bottom to learn anything about the service.

"Create shared experiences with people you know, and people you want to know" sounds like social web buzz-word bullshit.

My advice to the web designer - put some real info on the front page, and don't require me to watch a video. If you can't explain it with text, then you probably don't have a product.

View on HN

I understand (and agree) but you really should watch the video [1]. I'd have a hard time putting most of that into words.

Here's an attempt [2] "Airtime is a Web-based application designed to foster spontaneous sharing and interaction with video. There's no download or registration required"

[1] http://vimeo.com/43359572

[2] http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57447417-93/sean-parkers-ai...

If I have to login with Facebook how is that 'no registration'? They will know more about me than if I had registered with a throw away email address.

True, but for most folks logging in with another service (FB, Twitter etc) is the same as 'no registration'. Clearly, it's also where they get the data about you to use the service at all. Seems they need FB connect and 'additional permissions' [1].

It'll be interesting to see if they decide to add further methods of logging in (twitter/linkedin) but I wouldn't be surprised if this remains FB-only (I've decided I won't be trying it out since it's FB only).

[1] https://www.airtime.com/faq#ss1

If their target audience is teens then I could see it not being a barrier. But I am getting more and more concerned with whom I share my data. Especially if I am not certain I will receive any corresponding value.

It's still a sign-in, but it's not a registration. Agreed that they will know more information about you, beyond that which you tell them within their app.

>Airtime is a Web-based application designed to foster spontaneous sharing and interaction with video. There's no download or registration required

How about this instead:

"Airtime is Chatroulette limited to your Facebook social graph. Eg, no more random strangers' private parts, but instead chat with your friends, and meet their friends, via video."

It's basically curated Chatroulette, automating the curation with your FB social graph.

It's also pretty cool in that it's using Flash multicast to stream video P2P instead of via central server.

It's pretty much made for a Facebook aquisition. Completely dependent on FB's social API, co-founded by Sean Parker, adds social video to FB, and released right after FB's IPO.

I can't help but wonder a few things - could a FB acquisition of Airtime actually help FB's stock price? It's a rather brilliant addition to FB.

Also, could FB buy Spotify too? There are several parallels - It's also a P2P service that integrates the FB API (not quite so dependent on it as Airtime is though), Sean Parker is a board member.

Facebook + Spotify + Airtime (+ Instagram) covers almost all the social media bases. Only thing missing is movies and TV, but that's not as social as music or user-generated pictures and videos. That would be a hell of a social web company.

interesting point. did sean parker see the missing link in facebooks product? aka the google hangout for facebook?

Probably. I think Airtime originally came about just from seeing Chatroulette's initial wild success and traction. He and Fanning saw an opportunity to do it better. Then that idea got some validation as Chatroulette filled up with pervs and imploded. Which is the big problem Airtime solves.

But beside that, it's a pretty obvious next step for the world's largest social network and I'm sure he saw that early on. As did Google with hangouts.

"Airtime lets you find and make new friends face-to-face, using common interests broadcast over video chat. Mix, flirt, mingle. Get some Airtime."

"... could a FB acquisition of Airtime actually help FB's stock price?"

I don't see how. Adding more 'products' to FB's portfolio isn't going to help if the questions people have are about the underlying platform itself.

Facebook do have access to Skype via Microsoft.

I do not know so much about Flash Multicast but this is not IP multicast, right? it is more like: Application Layer Multicast which is peer-to-peer but like a star or mesh or tree type of topology.

If Airtime is one person talking to another it does not really need multicast but just be peer to peer. However, if it is similar to hangouts then at some point (or at some degree of users in a chat room) you'll need to introduce a central server or need a tree type of topology to distribute video (especially when users have asymmetric uplink and downlink throughputs).

>"Create shared experiences with people you know, and people you want to know" sounds like social web buzz-word bullshit.

Thats because it is?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com