Ask HN: What will be the tipping point for Facebook?
I think it’s clear now that Facebook is a horrible company that operates with machiavellian efficiency, lacks any human empathy, and has applied deplorable methods to deflect fundamental problems of the platform instead of actually fixing them.
Still, they keep on going just fine with a slightly dented image, while ads dollars keep pouring in.
So, what needs to change for Facebook to pass a point of unsustainability?
It looks just like another “kill someone on 5th avenue” scenario to me.
39 comments
[ 0.14 ms ] story [ 115 ms ] threadOvertime, people (including myself) have the FOMO and are in a way forced to be addicted to FB.
So as long as FB triggers the small dopamine rush people have when they see they have 10 notifications everytime they're on the site, a majority of people will stay on, regardless of the news.
After being thoroughly annoyed for a few weeks, i decided to do something about it, and found a way to disable it, only to discover Facebook replaced the "marketplace" icon with a "videos" icon, which now displays it's needy notification icon.
So i took the next logical step, which was to remove the thing from all my devices.
According to Apple's screen time, i now spend <5 minutes a day on Facebook, which is mostly spent checking notifications from friends/family, and _quickly_ scrolling down my news feed scanning for anything interesting.
I've never used Instagram, and i try my best to educate my friends to use iMessage or Signal for messaging instead of Messenger/Whatsapp, but so far i don't have much luck :)
I think this’ll have both user engagement and regulatory aspects to it, and it’ll decimate FB’s market cap, leaving them open to meaningful change inside the company.
My friends were posting interesting stuff on FB, so I needed to join FB. Then my friends started posting stuff twice an hour from their phone, so I needed to check FB twice an hour from my phone.
Reverse network effects undo that growth.
First slowly, then seemingly all at once.
My most influential and interesting friends rarely post on FB anymore. Most of my ordinary friends are still there, but they only post once a week or once a month.
So I've deleted the FB app from my phone and now I check it a couple times a week from my laptop instead of a couple times an hour from my phone.
It's like Gresham's Law for social networks. Bad actors drive out good actors.
A falling signal-to-noise ratio is a vicious cycle that drives out signal and attracts more noise.
FB overreached in driving engagement, and it's backfired spectacularly. The FB brand is damaged and young people are embarrassed to use it.
Reverse network effects will remorselessly undo what network effects originally built.
As long as they are successful in doing this and there is no other way to be "properly social" on the internet without them or their child companies, they win.
If we view FB core platform as strictly a distribution platform for FB to push new product out, it is a stronghold/moat.
Single auth and FB login's ubiquity may continue to allow FB to safeguard their position as a distribution platform. Not to mention the current success of WhatsApp and Instagram, as many others pointed out on the thread.
From Elad Gil's interview with Marc Andreessen [1]:
> "In fact, the general model for successful tech companies, contrary to myth and legend, is that they become distribution-centric rather than product-centric."
> "They become a distribution channel, so they can get to the world. And then they put many new products through that distribution channel."
[1] http://growth.eladgil.com/book/introduction/where-to-go-afte...
Edit: elaborated on why I asked about up and coming products like Oculus
Facebook (the product) != Facebook (the company) and the company is diversified enough at this point to remain one of the top ad networks for a long long time.
Having said that, FB lives and dies by 2 metrics: MAU and Timespent/DAU. An outcome of those is Ad revenue. If you want to understand how Facebook is doing, watch those metrics. MAU is still growing globally, but it has peaked in the US. Lately a big driver of growth is Instagram. Workplace is an awesome product, if it takes off, a lot of people will be using "Facebook" in the workplace, too. If VR ends up being a generally useful thing (eg. we have our meetings in VR), Facebook will dominate due to their lead with Oculus.
Well, it may have a lot of empathy internally, externally, it just does not show.
FB & Twitter & YouTube seem to play the very same game: while they do provide great connection and progress with their tools, they also heavily contribute to setting the world on fire by giving everyone tools that highly benefit (and are incentivised by) extreme/clickbait/fake information.
And they seem not to be willing to act on it. Twitter is particularly demonstrative by its apathy (and its CEO discourse) regarding bot accounts. YouTube by its conspiracy contents. Facebook by its displayed ingenuity about their knowledge of what happened ("oh really? oups, sorry, nevermind, won't do it again").
It's like they act with social data & behaviour exploitation such as oil companies act with crude oil: a spill here and there? so what? we destroyed your ecosystem? listen, we bring so much more to the world, you can't blame us.
It's really like... boys with toys.
I don't think this report on Facebook's role in the Rohingya massacres should be dismissed as biased reporting:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-45449938
"But there was also a much more fundamental issue - the lack of Burmese-speaking content monitors. According to the Reuters report, the company had just one such employee in 2014, a number that had increased to four the following year."
Facebook can work great for connecting friends, family and community groups but it's real world impact can be devastating when it strays into 'news' and politics. Across social media personalised feeds reinforce echo-chambers and attention metrics push users towards provocative content.
Also as a side note, bigger worse companies than Facebook have existed and done more obviously terrible things and still exist. Good PR, skilled marketers/advertisers, and money can go a long way.
I think the tipping point for something like Facebook is if it gets broken up by a government force, I don't think it's possible for Facebook to reach it's tipping point solely by users leaving -- that's like saying junk food companies are likely to reach their tipping point once everyone realizes how bad junk food is for them.
[EDIT] - I completely forgot -- they also bought Instagram, which is just about the only place everyone is jumping off Facebook to. Snapchat fumbled their core value proposition, Tumblr is niche, Twitter is for flamewars and not as personal, Reddit is still relatively niche/nerdy. I don't know where people go when they quit FB if not Instagram.
This brings another point into view -- FB probably wouldn't even die from a max exodus of it's users, as long as it buys whatever competition is next up to take it's place.
[0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly...
The definition of an "active user" can get pretty contentious, but let's just say it's someone opening the application at least once in a month (which is a pretty ridiculous metric but works as a baseline) -- FB is in uncharted territory.
1. Non-technical people are educated about their data being sold to advertisers who are in turn selling them stuff that is destructive/unhealthy. e.g: getting them into debt to buy things they don't need to impress people they don't like!
2. Willingness of these people to pay for storing their data in order to control their personal details and who can see them.
3. Availability and awareness of a low-friction-to-adoption alternative platform where people control their own data which has similar features to Fb's "core" products and biggest "child" products (Insta, WhatsApp). The "alternative" needs to be: distributed/decentralised, encrypted and mobile-first.
I am bullish on all 3 of these things and feel that it's only a matter of time before the alternative is available.
As others have said, Fb has a massive cash reserve and they won't go down without a fight. My only hope is that the EU will take Fb to the cleaners under GDPR and that will keep the Fb execs busy for long enough for the alternative social network to win!
Nobody outside of the tech ecosystem gives a crap about tracking (they already see ads all around them anyways). Nobody would even been aware of an alternative to Facebook, the same way people are barely aware Bing exists. Hell, people can barely get off their asses to vote and you think they’re going to care what the EU parliament does?
The only way Facebook will go down is by a major outage. Grandma logs on one day and can’t chat to her grandson so she calls him up instead. Boyfriend opens messenger to chat to his girlfriend about their date tonight, but can’t because it’s down, so he texts her instead. Friends can’t upload pictures of their trip so they use email or google photos.
It would take a sustained outage of a few days to break the habits Facebook has created in us. I don’t see any way for a competitor get past their moat, they have too many features and too many people on board.
Just because something is the "status quo" doesn't mean that it won't be possible to change. History is full of examples of where once popular ideas/systems/regimes have crumbled in the face of something new.
Again, I remain optimistic that the (unhealthy) "habits Facebook has created in us" can/will be broken. (and not replaced by something worse!)
Just as Rome was not built in a day, it also did not "fall" in day either. i.e. I don't think a single outage will have much effect on Facebook's dominance.
The first step in helping people "detox" from Facebook is creating an objectively healthier way to spend those "bored" or "lonely" minutes Zuckerberg is obsessed with owning.
Facebook will however be able to survive for a VERY long time, due to groups and Messenger. They have effectively kill the forum business for a large number of communities. Those communities will have to be rebuilt.
In the end people don't remember or even care about Facebooks missteps. If they did most politicians won't be elected for more than one term. A small number of us care and we don't have Facebook accounts anymore, the rest are outraged for a week or two and then it's business a usual.
Agree. I have moved most of my newspaper listings towards feedly. Friends I care about are on Whatsapp. Groups, on the other hand - for example: there's a group that regularly shares shit art sold in charity shops in the UK; it's content is brilliant and incredibly funny - way beyond anything you could find on the likes of Reddit.
I skew more towards the techie and older (relatively, in my 30s) side of the Facebook world so I'll probably be in the second, third, fourth wave of people to leave forever but I'm starting to notice the younger people in my family have moved on to other apps and services already. If you try to get in touch they'll refer to whatsapp (I know.) for messaging and other apps that fill in the social side of things.
Personally I've started to notice my feed ending if I go past the second "page" - it just says there's no more posts to display.. Out of the 11 years or whatever I've been on Facebook there's.. nothing.. more to display, Facebook? Boring!
Ever since that's started I've noticed I only really use their messenger service to keep in touch with people who have no replacement IM app yet, and even that's starting to shift more towards Discord in my nerdy gaming circles
Unfortunately I have to veer away from the other comments that suggest the mainstream will learn how much data is being harvested. The mainstream doesn't care. We've already had Cambridge Analytica and still I see people cramming data into apps like "OMG" that are blatantly hoovering up personal information. Facebook will die when enough people find it boring enough that a snowball effect starts
Facebook took it's sweet time to deeply integrate in the web like a cancer spread in the body and this is largely due to the failure of creating/adopting a standardized social networking protocol. Thus, in my opinion FB should have be replaced by an open identity, content protocols otherwise it's here to stay on the web filling this need.
Also FB the company is here to stay since they bought all the major social networks while everyone is watching.
FB is a data behemoth, with both profile and shadow-profile info of billions of people. They will continue to make money by exploiting that data. People will eventually stop using FB, but many will move their activity to Instagram. Plenty of people don't use FB or IG, but do use Whatsapp, another FB company.
without GDPR-style regulation, FB's influence will continue to loom large unfortunately.