AwayGoalsRule Football Forum

The Internet's Finest Football Forum

Get moneyback specials on your football betting at PaddyPower


It is currently Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:56 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Facebook
It's a waste of time 63%  63%  [ 7 ]
Shut up, you don't know what you're talking about 36%  36%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 11
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:39 pm 
Offline
General of the Army
General of the Army
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:12 am
Posts: 19588
Highscores: 1
Mr Carrot wrote:
my life is full of u turns, I once voted you poster of the year :|


Just seen this post :lol:

Quote:
Sharing. Now there's a basic social concept that has somehow got all out of whack. The idea behind sharing is simple. Let's say I'm a caveman. I hunt and slaughter a bison, but I can't eat it all myself, so I share the carcass with others, many of whom really appreciate it, such as my infirm 86-year-old neighbour who hasn't had a proper meal in weeks because he is incapable of killing anything larger than a woodlouse. Have you tried grilling a woodlouse? It's scarcely worth the effort.

But it's not all bison meat. Let's say I am still a caveman. The other thing I share is information: the thoughts inside my head or stirring tales of the things I have done. I grunt a hilarious anecdote about the time I dropped a huge rock on a duck and an egg popped out, and mime scandalous gossip about well-known tribesmen. I'm the life and soul of the cave-party.

All this sharing served a purpose. It kept the community fed, as well as entertained and informed. Now zip forward to the present day and, like I say, sharing has somehow got all out of whack. A small percentage of the population hoards more bison meat than it could eat in 2,000 lifetimes, awarding itself huge bison meat bonuses on top of its base-rate bison meat "salary". I say "bison meat". In case you hadn't noticed, I'm using it as a clever metaphor for money.

The huge salaries and bonuses, we are told, are essential if we are to prevent this tiny percentage of selfish, hoarding arseholes from moving overseas. Imagine if they flew to Singapore and started selfishly hoarding things over there instead. Drained of their expertise and reassuring presence, how would Britain cope? Within days we'd be walking on all fours and devouring our offspring for food.

I don't want to panic you, but that's the reality. Never mind weeping over the size of their bonuses: we should be dropping to our knees and giving them blowjobs, tearfully imploring them to remain seated each time we come up for air. Treble their wages. Form a human ring around Britain's airports to prevent them from leaving. And for God's sake don't ask them to share anything. That kind of talk merely angers them.

Sharing is for the rest of us. Not sharing money or bison meat, but personal information. Where we are. What we're doing. Share it! Make it public! Go on! It's fun!

Increasingly, I stumble across apps and services that expect me to automatically share my every waking action on Facebook and Twitter. The key word here is "automatically". Take Spotify, the streaming music service. I have written before about my admiration for Spotify, about what a technical marvel it is. A world of music at your fingertips! Incredible!

The love affair was doomed. Spotify recently reinvented itself as a kind of adjunct to Facebook and has subsequently adopted some truly hideous "social features". For instance: it will tell other people what you're listening to, live. Yes, you can switch this feature off. That's not the point. The point is that it does it by default. By default. IT DOES IT BY DEFAULT.

When Sony launched the Walkman back in the late 70s, its main appeal was that for the first time in history you could stroll down the high street listening to Neil Diamond belting out Sweet Caroline and no one could judge you for it. It made you the master of a private world of music. If the Walkman had, by default, silently contacted your friends and told them what you were listening to, not only would no one have bought a Walkman in the first place, its designers would have been viewed with the utmost suspicion.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for sharing thoughts, no matter how banal (as every column I have ever written rather sadly proves). Humans will always babble. If someone wants to tweet that they can't decide whether to wear blue socks or brown socks, then fair enough. But when sharing becomes automated, I get the heebie-jeebies. People already create exaggerated versions of themselves for online consumption: snarkier tweets, more outraged reactions. Online, you play at being yourself. Apply that pressure of public performance to private, inconsequential actions – such as listening to songs in the comfort of your own room – and what happens, exactly?

It'll only get worse. Here's what I am listening to on Spotify. This is the page of the book I am reading. I am currently watching the 43rd minute of a Will Ferrell movie. And I'm not telling you this stuff. The software is. I am a character in The Sims. Hover the cursor over my head and watch that stat feed scroll.

You know how annoying it is when you're sitting on the train with a magazine and the person sitting beside you starts reading over your shoulder? Welcome to every single moment of your future. Might as well get used to it. It's an experience we'll all be sharing.

Yes, sharing. A basic social concept that's somehow got all out of whack.


Did you return back to using Facebook Riq?

Image

_________________
Because I'm young enough to be all pi**ed off
But I'm old enough to be jaded
I'm at the age where I want things to change
But with age my hopes have faded


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:00 pm 
Offline
Major General
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:40 pm
Posts: 8003
Location: The Library
Highscores: 1
idontfeardeath wrote:
Did you return back to using Facebook Riq?

Image


:lol:

Nah mate, almost been a year now since I've been off Facebook and I don't regret it at all. Not many people noticed I'd gone off anyway so that's a good sign I wasn't missed. I also realised how much time I wasn't wasting logging in and stalking etc.

Admittedly, I did only get about 6-8 people texting me happy birthday this year but I'd rather have that than people you haven't spoken to for an age, superficially writing 'happy birthday' on your wall. Seems I'm not as popular I was with Facebook.

Ironically, the now infamous crazy b*tch has been asking me to come back on for the past 2-3 months so we can 'discuss things' but I just ignore.

However, I've recently considered joining tw*tter. :ninja:

_________________
Do nothing; nothing will change.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:03 am 
Offline
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:27 pm
Posts: 17205
Location: Over there.
Highscores: 2
Facebook IPO: Boom or bubble?

We look at the numbers - and what's missing...


By Andrew Orlowski • Register



Analysis Is Facebook hugely overvalued or a solid business with some reliable growth ahead of it? A great deal of both.

The reason the Facebook flotation is different from yourfunny.co.ck, or anything conceived by a Shoreditch "leisure startup", is that it already has a large and devoted audience. When you can reliably draw a large crowd every day, you should be able to make some money. This is the one constant between the medieval minstrel and the modern media company - it's the same business proposition.

And this is what makes Facebook special and, incidentally, quite different to Google. The Chocolate Factory was an integral part of web life and internet commerce when it floated in 2004, but despite being a global brand, it was a website that people only ever left for other destinations. (Google only realised the importance of this quite belatedly.)

By contrast, Facebook is very sticky, at least for a lot of people. Facebook's S-1 registration statement says it has 845m active users and 483m active daily users. A more important statistic offered is that in December 360m checked in six days out of seven.

Now, I'd be wary of inferring too much from any communication statistic offered for a time period that includes Christmas. It tends to inflate "connection metrics"; many people communicate just once a year and it'll be in December. If every month was like December, it would be Hallmark Cards who'd have the Facebook-sized evaluation this morning. But that's still a pretty decent number.

Image
He also had a cunning plan.
Does Mark Zuckerberg?


So think of Facebook as a new TV channel, with some Facebook users already spending far more time on the site than they do watching TV. But how much time - and what kind of TV channel is Facebook?

As one analyst has noted, the S-1 lacks even the most basic information on how the usage figures were worked out. And where it appears, it's obfuscated. "On average, users in the aggregate spent more than 9.7 billion minutes per day on Facebook on personal computers during December 2011," is all we're told. So we must to do the maths for ourselves.

This is odd.

If you ask us nicely here at El Reg, our commercial department will send you a lovely pack telling you how many people read us, what sort of people are they and how they read us - you can even read the "sticky" story we've put up for advertisers. But it's actually standard practice: every publication must disclose this kind of information if it wants to be taken seriously by advertisers. TV companies obsess about seconds of attention. Facebook's evasiveness is striking - for whatever reason, it doesn't want us to know.

Now many independent monitors work hard figuring out how web visitors spend their surfing time, and although their estimates differ to Facebook's (Nielsen has always estimated a significantly lower number for time-on-site than Facebook itself) nobody is disputing that Facebook consumes far more minutes than anyone else, and is on an impressive upward trajectory. It would have been nice to hear it from the mouth of Zuck.

So where does Facebook see its growth? Let's find out.

Waiting for an explosion of online advertising and manure

Facebook's commercial proposition largely depends on growth in online advertising, and using its knowledge of the habits and behaviour of users to exploit into this. More offline advertising money will be spent online, says Facebook, and this will grow. The S-1 says worldwide online advertising market "is projected to increase from $68 billion to $120 billion, representing 12 per cent and 16 per cent, respectively, of the worldwide advertising market".

Facebook naturally makes much of the fact that users have (on the whole) real names. Whether this translates into "real behaviour" is something nobody in advertising really wants to talk about. Likes are cheap, but transactions are expensive.

The other is from - and please ensure that you're sitting down before reading this - in-app purchases made in virtual currencies. Games operator Zynga, famous for Farmville, contributed 12 per cent of Facebook's revenues last year.

As Peggy Lee sang, "Is that all there is?" There's a paradox here, one between the attention people give Facebook and its commercial ability to exploit it.

Facebook's lack of ambition

As Alan Patrick, of multimedia consultancy Broadsight, points out in two very interesting posts, Facebook is starting from a low base. Facebook's average revenue per user (ARPU) today, he estimates, is between $2 and $5 - let's be generous and say five. Google's ARPU at IPO was around $20 and it hit $20. Facebook has set itself some ambitious targets, however: "A lot more things have to go right, for a long time, for Facebook," notes Patrick, for it to achieve these.

Facebook may be able to get there with web advertising, developing such wonderful gifts to humanity such as (ahem) "sponsored stories", and micro-payments for virtual manure. But the S-1 shows a lack of ambition that would disappoint even a medieval minstrel.

Even Blackadder devised a cunning plan of selling fake religious artefacts (and indulgences and pardons) - although the Greenies have cornered the market in the latter in recent years.

This is all very odd. The internet has proved itself to be a disruptive technology - drawing millions of people into a new channel for media for hours every day. We know people pay for media they value. Facebook is already in the business of distributing media. Distributors of media who command regular footfall get to dictate terms - look at what the supermarkets have done unto the music business. And for media, substitute all kinds of other transactional services.

So Facebook is a potentially a really significant platform. But Facebook doesn't want to talk about any of this - let alone exploit it. And it shows an astonishing lack of ambition.

Instead the S-1 is full of some real blather: "We also have posted the phrase 'this journey is 1 per cent finished' across many of our office walls to remind employees that we believe that we have only begun fulfilling our mission to make the world more open and connected."

It's almost as if Facebook has discovered lumps of coal for the first time, discovered that this new thing is highly combustible in a predictable way - and decided to set up in the snowman-dressing business. They're perfect for the eyes.

Bootnote

You can find the Facebook S-1 filing right here. As an interesting comparison, shopping channel QVC, which employees 2,000 people in Kirkby alone (Facebook 3,200 worldwide), turned over $2.2bn in 2010. It sells stuff.

_________________
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.

Image
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 11:41 pm 
Offline
Major General
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:40 pm
Posts: 8003
Location: The Library
Highscores: 1
Didn't know where else to post this, but this video has gone viral on YouTube, notching up over 14 million views in a few days.



Some darned good parenting there. :cool:

For those that are impatient, the fun starts at around the 7 minute mark.

_________________
Do nothing; nothing will change.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:08 pm 
Offline
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:27 pm
Posts: 17205
Location: Over there.
Highscores: 2
That's 1-0 to Dad and the final whistle has blown. :lol:

That's an absolutely brilliant reaction, and a great way to teach respect and consequences of your actions. Posting it on her Facebook page was a touch of genius too. :clap:

You can hear the bedroom door slamming from here! :D

_________________
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.

Image
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:16 pm 
Offline
Major
Major
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 2949
I know most of you guys dont like facebook but if you got a free crappy anti-virus software like AVG then you should go on facebook right now and get yourself a decent one for free... :fonz: :fonz: :fonz:

Worried about the cost of anti-virus software? An unlikely white knight has come to your rescue.

At noon ET today (April 25), Facebook unveiled "The Facebook Anti-Virus Marketplace," which offers free downloads of five well-regarded anti-virus products from Microsoft, McAfee, Trend Micro, Sophos and Symantec.

"Now, all of Facebook's more than 900 million users will be protected by the combined intelligence of these industry leaders,"

https://www.facebook.com/security/app_363688420329497

_________________
Isn't hip and cool


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:06 pm 
Offline
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:27 pm
Posts: 17205
Location: Over there.
Highscores: 2
Nearly 2 MILLION US Facebook users quit social network

Wall Street bitches... bitch


By Kelly Fiveash • The Register



Shares in Facebook continued to slide on Tuesday, after an analyst claimed the dominant social network had seen a modest drop in its userbase.

Capstone Investment's Rory Maher said Mark Zuckerberg's company suffered a 1.1 per cent fall in US users over the last six months. The number of European Facebookers had also declined, he added.

Meanwhile, Facebook's stock hit a month-long low yesterday finishing the day at $28.09 on Nasdaq, after falling some 8 per cent at the start of the week.

Maher's methodology was based on proprietary software his outfit had used to track how many people were accessing Facebook over the past two quarters in more than 200 countries on 500 user pages.

He also spotted that Facebook had hit a wall in terms of trying to build its userbase in the 23 countries where the network had already surpassed 50 per cent of the population.

Only nine of those countries actually exceeded the 50 per cent userbase in the last three months. But the remaining 14 countries either saw minor changes (UK growth was flat, for example) or had fewer signups to Facebook.

The company claims to have around 900 million people worldwide using Facebook. And it has previously said in regulatory filings that it needed to penetrate other markets, such as China, to help generate growth in its userbase.

It has also noted the plateau effect of user growth in its more mature markets.

Either way, Wall Street clearly took umbrage with Facebook yesterday, and as noted by Forbes the company's Q2 earnings report due on 26 July may well be making some investors rather twitchy.

Facebook were asked to comment on this story, but it hadn't got back to us by the time of publication.

_________________
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.

Image
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:17 pm 
Offline
General
General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:27 pm
Posts: 17205
Location: Over there.
Highscores: 2
Ouch! $28 is a far cry from the launch price of $38 (£24).

And in other news, Google+ got better ratings than Facebook in to customer satisfaction. Not going well for them right now then.

Quote:
Study: Users prefer Google+ over Facebook

For a ghost town, it's a nice place to visit


By Neil McAllister • The Register



Google+ is regularly derided as a "ghost town," but at least the spirits who haunt it are happy. According to a study from the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), the Chocolate Factory's fledgling social network scores top marks in customer satisfaction, leaving Facebook far behind.

According to ACSI's figures, Google+ tied Wikipedia with a score of 78 out of 100, leading the pack of all the social websites surveyed. By comparison, Facebook scored only a 61, which was actually 7.6 per cent lower than the previous year.

"Facebook's drop coincides with the release of its Timeline profile, a significant change to the look and organization of its pages," ACSI said in a statement. "Users complain that they cannot opt out of the new profile design."

ACSI attributes some of Google+'s high satisfaction marks to its ability to integrate Google services such as search, YouTube, and Gmail. It also calls out the "well liked" Google+ mobile app, which Google says now accounts for the majority of its social network's traffic.

"In addition," ACSI writes, "the Google+ social network is not inundated with the kind of advertising that seems to irritate many Facebook and other social media users."

Chart of social media satisfaction ratings from ACSI

Image
Nobody may use Google+, but at least it's not Facebook

ACSI expanded its coverage of social sites only this year, so no satisfaction rating was available for Google+ for 2011.

Still, the survey results come hot on the heels of the latest figures from website analytics firm Compete, which show the number of unique visitors to Google+ growing 43 per cent from May to June.

Compete puts the network's total number of unique visitors at around 32 million per month, which doesn't quite jibe with Google's own, rather more optimistic figures: at the Google I/O conference this year, engineering veep Vic Gundotra said Google+ now has 250 million accounts, with 150 million active users per month and 75 million daily users.

Whichever numbers you believe, the ghosts of Google+ do seem to be rising from the dead a little more often than before. Just don't expect them to drag Facebook into its grave any time soon.

"It may seem odd that a company with more users than any other company in the world has such a low, and falling, level of customer satisfaction," ACSI writes. "But, paradoxically, Facebook's enormous user base also has created a certain degree of monopoly power."

In other words, it doesn't matter how unhappy Facebook users become, or how green the grass looks on the other side. Users will stick with it as long as it's just too much hassle to switch.

_________________
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.

Image
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 2:27 pm 
Offline
General of the Army
General of the Army

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:53 am
Posts: 31151
Location: Milton Keynes
Quote:
Facebook CEO and cofounder Mark Zuckerberg's salary was down last year, but don't cry for him. He'll be OK.

In fact, the megawealthy Facebook (NasdaqGS: FB - news) boss was just following the CEO salary downsizing trend for some industry heavyweights, such as Google (NasdaqGS: GOOG - news) .

The social networking site paid him a salary of $1 last year, stock market documents showed Monday.

The same documents, released ahead of the company annual meeting, showed Zuckerberg's full compensation last year hit $653,165, down from $1.99 million in 2012.

Most of that was from personal trips in private jets paid for by the company because they are seen as justified for safety reasons.

And Zuckerberg did not net a bonus or stock options last year.

But don't fret about that lonely dollar. Zuckerberg reaped $3.3 billion just last year from exercising stock options.

He is still the leading shareholder in the business he started in his college dorm room, with a fortune of $26.7 billion, according to Forbes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:40 pm 
Offline
General of the Army
General of the Army

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:53 am
Posts: 31151
Location: Milton Keynes
Quote:
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan say they will give away 99% of their shares in the company to good causes as they announce the birth of their daughter Max.

Mr Zuckerberg made the statement in a letter to Max on his Facebook page.

He said they are donating their fortune to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative because they want to make the world a better place for Max to grow up in.

Mr Zuckerberg said the donation currently amounts to $45bn (£30bn).

He said the aim of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is "to advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation".

Its initial areas of focus will be personalised learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities.

"Your mother and I don't yet have the words to describe the hope you give us for the future," Mr Zuckerberg said at the start of his letter to Max.

"You've already given us a reason to reflect on the world we hope you live in," it added.

The letter highlighted the important role of technology in achieving the couple's goals of advancing human potential and equality.

"Many of the greatest opportunities for your generation will come from giving everyone access to the internet," Mr Zuckerberg wrote to his daughter.

He said more details about the donation will be released once he and Ms Chan return from paternity and maternity leave, the letter said.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 12:03 am 
Offline
General of the Army
General of the Army
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:12 am
Posts: 19588
Highscores: 1
That's a ridiculous amount!

_________________
Because I'm young enough to be all pi**ed off
But I'm old enough to be jaded
I'm at the age where I want things to change
But with age my hopes have faded


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:16 am 
Offline
General of the Army
General of the Army

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:53 am
Posts: 31151
Location: Milton Keynes
Fair play to him he doesn't need the money he's still probably got Billions in the bank from the bits he's already sold off more than enough for his family and the next generation and the next to live off the interest


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Facebook.
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 11:02 am 
Offline
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:56 am
Posts: 7998
Location: 52 Festive Road
Highscores: 6
could give me some


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron