Survey says Facebook still in use by young, but Snapchat/Instagram are real
blog.garrytan.com
blog.garrytan.com
Obviously Instagram falls under the Facebook umbrella, but it did serve as a wake up call to me about there possibly being a group of young professionals that is more than willing to completely ditch Facebook proper for something that better fits their social networking goals.
G+ solve this with circles, but I don't know anyone on G+, and it's too easy to make privacy mistakes on Facebook.
My Facebook profile is turning into my new Linkedin as I'm getting older.
Unfortunately, it's also the only thing Facebook pretty much seeks to avoid, in favor of making the most connections between users as possible.
Separate accounts seems to really be the only option aside from trudging through heaps of menus to make lists. I had a list relegated to family/distant connections, however I can't for the life of me find out how to configure it again, or find it for that matter.
This is likely to occur after some particularly egregious and underhanded sale/use of user data by Facebook.
It's likely to be more popular among older professionals, who care more about their reputation because of their career, and don't care about paying a minimal fee.
My main point was that a 5$ ONE TIME charge is way too low. Typically ARPU is calculated over a certain period of time (monthly, quarterly, yearly).
Another problem with a $5 one-time fees is that people expect to use your service in perpetuity. That price point probably isn't sustainable over a more than a few year period.
But eventually it seems like the same people will move to the new network of choice, and try to contact you there, and you've got the same problem all over again? Or you drift out of touch with that new network...
So in my experience I've found that people follow me but because the tool doesn't very easily show if someone follows you back, without digging back and forth through your followers, it's very easy to just unfollow the friends who don't provide content I care about.
It's more similar to Twitters model of pub/sub vs facebooks 1 to 1 dynamic. If I 'defriend' on facebook it forces you to defriend both ways right? I think facebook has made attempts at fixing this with subscriptions but ...
I've muted hundreds of people in my friends list, and they are none-the-wiser.
Maybe the list shouldn't be called 'friends' anymore? That list is bigger than my list of Outlook + GMail contacts.
As a prime example for a very different use of social networks: Can you explain to me how adding these people to your account (friends, acquaintances, whatever you name the list) adds, especially if they are muted and don't show up in your feed of social stuff (tm) anyway? Fascinating.
I'd say that most people I know just leaving university have around 500-600 friends. Younger people who got facebook earlier in high school tend to have more. It takes a lot more effort to remove friends than it does to add them, and so they build up.
friends used in the facebook sense. I certainly wouldn't consider most of my facebook contacts to be more than acquaintances.
Because of both of those, I get about 10 friend requests in Facebook a week. I accept them all in hopes of driving my traffic to my websites. So you are correct - these are not "friends" in the strict sense of the word.
There is absolutely zero information on the data source he or Survate was using. The population seems to be selected based on the single factor age - meaning they might be getting the data from the easiest, cheapest accessible data sources available. In the end most of the responses could be coming from 30 y/o guys in India clicking on random answers to earn their 5c on mTurk.
In contrast to that, the original anecdotal evidence had the full story, provided the exact context on why and how the data was generated. But data without context is no data.
I never claimed to have more anecdotal evidence -- the whole point is to try to validate the claims via some form of data collection. It was cheap and fast to do.
Garry's explanation is a good one. The data for this survey was collected via surveywalls (example at [1]), which let visitors access premium content online for free in exchange for answering a few questions. All respondents here have US IP addresses and self-report age in the 13-25yr range. We generally see honesty rates of 90% or higher to questions for which we can verify the answer (e.g. "Which OS are you currently using?" or "Who is the President of the US?").
1. Example surveywall: http://www.hyperink.com/So-You-Want-To-Be-A-Programmer-b1559...)
The first thing every adult says when I explain Snapchat is "oh, it is a sexting app!"
It's really annoying when people confuse humility and an acknowledgement of a scarcity of evidence with jumping head-first into making a useless, fallacious argument.
Personal stories are fine[1], but it's worth keeping in mind that one of the pre-eminent unironic peddlers of anecdotal evidence as proof is Thomas friggin' Friedman.
[1]: For spotting "black swans", for instance.
maybe we just subconsciously hope that maybe, someday, someone/thing/program will just come along and compile all our "just anecdotes" into real, hard, data? So we just have to write it down, just in-case maybe that person is reading our story right now!
http://www.buzzfeed.com/joshmiller/what-the-tech-world-looks...
It got marked dead on submission. I'm not sure if the domain is marked spam, or I'm banned from submission, or what.
Curious about Survata' methodology. Neither the author nor their website go into a great deal of information about this. (I mostly want to know who crafts the questions, as it's easy to inadvertntly skew survey results).
As an aside, linking to Survata's homepage not just once but three times in a ~600 word post makes this thing, aside from its casual observations, feel like an 'advertorial.'
Survata has a DIY survey creation tool, but we review and suggest wording changes to avoid biased questions. We also advise on how to arrange (and randomize) answer choices to allow us to calculate and compensate for answer biases like always clicking the first or last option.
Responses are gathered on surveywalls across the web, where visitors answer short surveys in exchange for free access to premium content (e.g. ebook or video).
It gives a confidence interval of plus or minus 3% (regardless of the size of population being surveyed!)
http://www.publicagenda.org/pages/best-estimates-guide-sampl...
For example, if 50 percent of a sample of 1,000 randomly selected Americans said they favor recycling laws, in 95 cases out of 100, 50 percent of the entire population in the U.S. would also have given the same response had they been asked, give or take 3 percentage points (i.e., the true proportion could be 47 percent or 53 percent). The bigger the sample, the smaller the margin of error, but once you get past a certain point -- say, a sample size of 800 or 1,000 — the improvement is very small.