Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Baba_Chaghaloo's commentslogin

I think because Facebook does something very smart: they keep it jumpin'. They change things on an almost weekly basis, which everyone complains about, but it keeps them coming back even though the overall experience became sour for them years ago.

They can't keep that up forever though, people will move on. But I disagree with the idea of another site in the same mold (Friendster, MySpace, Facebook) that will move in and conveniently replace it. I think people are starting to realize those things are just a pain in the ass and will move to semi-anonymous networks like Twitter or Reddit for more stress-free entertainment.


Who voted this advertisement up, I wonder? Fuck you Facebook. I'm never signing back up, your site is harmful to people, everyone who works there can go to hell.


I'm going to share this link with you, since it appears you haven't read it before.

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It's also that link in the footer called "Guidelines". Read them.


I'm fully willing to say that to their face though. If I made a dumb website that accidentally caused even one divorce I'd shutter it, Facebook must cause hundreds every year. It created, intentionally or not, a culture of bragging and narcissism. They're stockpiling facial recognition data. It's a terrible company. If you work there, Fuck You. You're a bad person. I don't know how else to say it.


>I don't know how else to say it.

Consider not.


A faster, more terminal cancer. Oh happy day.


They asked for $500,000 to make a Twitter clone and they got it. Who's laughing at whom?


Because people who use Facebook post such great content? Srs?


No, but the people who rail against what they've said is a temporary measure with all the reasonableness of a bull smashing a china shop aren't the sort of community I'd be pleased to participate in.


Yeah it was based on an anonymous blog comment and I think it's still ongoing. I asked a couple guys at Grooveshark about it and they didn't seem concerned at all, they described it as a last, desperate move by the record companies.


>I've always had a lot of respect for what they've done for the world

Did I miss something? What has Craigslist done for the world besides put newspapers out of business?


Using CL I furnished a whole house with super high-quality stuff for less than US$2K. Wouldn't have been realistic pre-CL since traditional classified ads don't have pictures. I also found my house through CL.


They nearly killed newspapers in this country, which has nearly killed investigative journalism, which for whatever noble reasons they had is reeeealy bad karma. If anybody wants to put a dent in these fuckers, I'm on board.


They can sell Mp3s but not for 99 cents a song... especially when Angry Birds costs $1.99. An entire album should be 99 cents or less. 25 cents sounds good to me.

EDIT: my point is don't complain that people aren't buying your product if you're charging them a price that's waaay above market value


I can only speak for myself, but I listen to music far more often and for longer after initial purchase than any game. Dollar for dollar, minute for minute, $10 on a vnv album provides nearly incalculable level of satisfaction greater than any 10 iPhone games combined.

25 cents, really? That's what a second rate pickle costs. A lifetime of enjoyment is only worth a bite of a pickle? I happen to think music is way undervalued, because people just aren't very good at evaluating the long term value of it.


25 cents might be a bit low but 99 cents is very reasonable when you're competing with free. It's not that I'm complaining about feeling ripped off when buying music(although I do) it's more about taking a look at what works, ie the low-price or in store app model, and emulating it.


>>>They can sell Mp3s but not for 99 cents a song... especially when Angry Birds costs $1.99.

Now wait a minute there. What about an eBook? What about a movie or TV episode?

If Angry Birds for $1.99 is the price standard for everything, you're setting up a trap that most everything is going to fall into.

I've tried Angry Birds on demo tablets in stores -- and countless YouTube videos demoing tablets -- and I don't see the appeal. Even free, I wouldn't want it. Most games simply don't appeal to me. I'd rather read or listen to music or watch video.

Angry Birds might be worth $1.99 to you, but to me it has negative value.


Angry Birds made over a hundred million in profits so far, I'm saying maybe the music business should examine it's pricing structure. Don't get me started on Ebooks or TV shows.


>>>Angry Birds made over a hundred million in profits so far

And added what to human productivity and betterment? Never use money as a measure for anything except money.


As far as ebooks go, in traditional book publishing usually the shop takes about half the price and the printing and distribution takes around another quarter, leaving a quarter of the sale price for the publisher and author to split between them, so there should be a significant price drop in ebooks when compared to the dead tree version.


You think the price is too high, that doesn't mean that it's above market value.


You could pirate Angry Birds too if you really wanted to but they found a price point that defeats that and made $100 million.


That piano player in the video is hardly what I'd call a savant, more like he hit his head and woke up as a douchebag but music is one of those things that gets stored way back in your brain somewhere, I think. I have songs stuck in my head all the time and I'll sleep for 12 hours and the damn thing will still be there. Maybe after a head injury some people can recall tunes they've heard throughout their lives more clearly which would make them easier to play.


Ummm.... I can 'recall' music in incredible detail - piano, guitar, horns, the works, and I've been playing a variety of instruments for 30 years. 'recall' doesn't make the stuff any easier to play at all. To go from no musical ability to what that guy was able to do in a day, assuming it's true, is pretty amazing.

You can 'recall' tunes hours after sleeping - does that make it easier to play them fluently on instruments you'd never had training on?


As a once-professional musician who later learned a different instrument from the one I grew up learning, I can say that his learning to play the piano, with all it's fine motor control, is nothing short of miraculous.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: