38 comments

[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 87.3 ms ] thread
Saw this ad via the deck on @Dribbble.

Not sure, but I saw some pics of some devs who built a loft in the facebook office and thought this picture might have been the loft.

Whoa, refreshed the page and the image changed!

Checked the source and found this, haha:

<!--

  Facebook - The Deck Ad (Summer 2011)
  ====================================
 
  If you're looking at our html, this is a good thing.
  You should reach out to our design team recruiter directly.
 
  Drop a line to Greg Hoy at: Greg Hoy <greghoy@fb.com>
 
-->
By the way, this was the image I was talking about re: the loft:

http://dragon.ak.fbcdn.net/cfs-ak-snc6/84980/169/bgdarker.jp...

I saw that, wondered who wouldn't look at the html just out of habit...
Ha, does everyone else do that too? I always feel like I'm alone.
I come here to tell you, you are not alone my friend.
(comment deleted)
Just also realized...is this the Greg Hoy from Happy Cog? Thought he lived in Philly not PA.
In case folks don't realize, the image changes on reload
if you'd like to cycle through the background images, go to the site and paste this in your URL bar:

  javascript:document.getElementsByTagName('a')[0].onclick=function(e){e.preventDefault();document.body.id=switcher[(switcher.indexOf(document.body.id)+1)%switcher.length]};void(0);
now each time you click the facebook logo, the next background image will load

edit: in related news, it looks like Chrome won't let you paste javascript links into your URL bar. you may need to manually type the 'javascript:' part at the beginning.

Interesting. I just did that in Firefox 5 and the following message popped up:

"javascript: and data: URIs typed or pasted in the address bar are disabled to prevent social engineering attacks. Developers can enable them for testing purposes by toggling the "noscript.allowURLBarJS" preference."

I guess that is a new FF5 feature.

EDIT: Oh. That's NoScript, not Firefox. Will read more carefully next time.

"Move fast and break stuff" - they're actually proud of that shit?

I heard that line before but I didn't realize they had made it their mantra. I wonder if they realize how it rings to all the third party developers who are fighting a daily struggle against the notoriously fickle Facebook APIs.

My guess is they're trying to see more edgy than they actually are.
Well, that explains a lot. Every time I attempt to accomplish something on Facebook, one of two things happens: (1) the interface has changed in some way or (2) the feature is broken. Just last week, every "Load More" link was broken in Google Chrome (but worked in Firefox). The week before, I wasn't able to upload photos repeatedly failed, but the iPhoto integration worked fine.

Agile development is great, but Facebook is a mature product: I wish they would keep the breaking to internal test builds.

The spirit of that slogan is more like "Move fast and don't be afraid to disrupt established patterns". The intention is to give employees licence to think out of the box and try out lots of new ideas, without being bogged down by what has gone before. Everyone I've talked to (I personally don't have a lot of experience at jobs outside of Facebook and academia) agrees that Facebook offers you unparalleled freedom to go forth and have impact, unencumbered by red tape and naysayers.

That's not to defend API breakages or incomplete documentation and the pain it causes developers -- I'm not directly involved, but I know that we're definitely trying to get that turned around and fix some of the issues with Facebook Platform.

When things break, get fixed and then break again, its just a childish mistake, not "freedom".
From my experience with their platform, they are really proud of it. The full slogan is "Move fast, break things, oh shit it broke, fix it, start breaking again". Is there a therapist for websites?
I used to maintain some fb social plugins for a site, and every Wednesday they would break.
The text is illegible against a good number of the background images they've chosen (at least on a mobile browser). That doesn't seem like a good advert for a design team, or am I missing the point?
I could read the text fine. It seems like they even set it up so that the text turns black or white based on the lightness or darkness of the current background.
They have, but it hasn't worked particularly well: http://imgur.com/PSvIm
I'm curious, what browser/OS are you using? Your screenshots look different from my view of the site, specifically, the text is either displaced or enlarged in your screenshots, making it look weird.
Safari on iOS 4.3.3; standard 3GS setup.
Interesting. I'll file a bug. Thanks for the info.
Pointing out that bug to the developers (with a patch for the html code to fix it in Safari) would be a wonderful way to apply for the job :)
Wow. On a desktop it looks fine- the text is oriented differently and the background is much larger compared to the text
That was my first thought too... "if they are looking to appeal to people who want to fix stuff... they are doing it right".

Otherwise I'd say that's a minor fail by the designer of that page.

I am such a facebook noob. When I think of facebook design, all that comes to mind is walls of light blue text on white and pages and functionality that I find difficult to navigate.

What am I missing?

(I did that reloading background image thing back in 99 if I recall, but you don't find my valuation at 20 gazillion dollars. :( )

Clearly ahead of your time, my friend. If Facebook does it, it's cool...
That one picture looks like something out of a Japanese horror film
Why is the word "Hipster" suddenly trending so much? http://trends.google.com/trends?q=hipster&ctab=0&geo...
Good question. I'm not sure what the recent momentum is about, but I remember two widely-linked stories about "hipsters" and "hipsterdom" back in 2007 and 2008:

http://newyork.timeout.com/things-to-do/this-week-in-new-yor...

http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html

It's interesting to note that "hipster" really started ramping up after "emo" had started sliding downward:

http://trends.google.com/trends?q=emo%2C+hipster&ctab=0&...

I compare the two because they are both subcultural labels that have become terms of abuse in fairly recent years.

Please note, bold design and strong typography !== hipster.