WEBVTT - Social Networks that Didn't Make It

0:00:04.120 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>Get in touch with technology with tech Stuff from how

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:13.800
<v Speaker 1>stuff Works dot com. Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff.

0:00:13.840 --> 0:00:17.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with

0:00:17.720 --> 0:00:20.320
<v Speaker 1>how Stuff Works in Dieheart Radio and I love all

0:00:20.440 --> 0:00:25.160
<v Speaker 1>things tech. And as I record this episode, it's still

0:00:25.200 --> 0:00:28.639
<v Speaker 1>pretty early in two thousand nineteen. It's February two thou nineteen,

0:00:28.720 --> 0:00:32.120
<v Speaker 1>and the social networking site Facebook has been in the

0:00:32.159 --> 0:00:37.440
<v Speaker 1>news frequently for several reasons over the last many months,

0:00:38.040 --> 0:00:40.720
<v Speaker 1>mostly to the company's constern nation. These have not been

0:00:41.520 --> 0:00:45.400
<v Speaker 1>positive news stories for the company. Mark Zuckerberg himself said

0:00:45.800 --> 0:00:50.400
<v Speaker 1>that perhaps the social networking industry in particular might require regulation.

0:00:50.640 --> 0:00:53.240
<v Speaker 1>And I've seen a few calls from lots of different

0:00:53.280 --> 0:00:57.200
<v Speaker 1>people that Facebook should either divest itself of some of

0:00:57.240 --> 0:01:01.560
<v Speaker 1>its properties like Instagram or else maybe the government should

0:01:01.600 --> 0:01:03.960
<v Speaker 1>come in and do it for them and bust it up,

0:01:04.080 --> 0:01:07.640
<v Speaker 1>kind of like busting up the old telephone monopolies back

0:01:07.640 --> 0:01:09.960
<v Speaker 1>in the day before they kind of reformed. That's a

0:01:10.000 --> 0:01:14.480
<v Speaker 1>different story. Facebook is one of a few enormous companies

0:01:15.080 --> 0:01:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Amazon and Google would be two others that has so

0:01:18.680 --> 0:01:21.759
<v Speaker 1>much access to our personal information that it's always going

0:01:21.800 --> 0:01:23.720
<v Speaker 1>to be a potential threat, and it could be a

0:01:23.720 --> 0:01:28.200
<v Speaker 1>potential threat either through internal company decisions, things that Facebook

0:01:28.240 --> 0:01:33.240
<v Speaker 1>itself does, or there's the possibility of external interference, such

0:01:33.240 --> 0:01:37.560
<v Speaker 1>as during the presidential election in the United States. It's

0:01:37.600 --> 0:01:40.360
<v Speaker 1>a powerful tool that could be used positively or negatively.

0:01:40.600 --> 0:01:43.600
<v Speaker 1>Facebook was largely able to grow to this size by

0:01:43.640 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 1>outperforming numerous other social networking sites, all of which aim

0:01:48.040 --> 0:01:51.000
<v Speaker 1>to make a business out of connecting people online. So

0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:53.880
<v Speaker 1>in this episode, I want to talk about a few

0:01:54.040 --> 0:01:57.000
<v Speaker 1>of the social networking sites that attempted to carve out

0:01:57.080 --> 0:02:01.000
<v Speaker 1>a place online. Some of them even predated Facebook. But

0:02:01.080 --> 0:02:02.960
<v Speaker 1>this is just a small selection I'm going to give

0:02:02.960 --> 0:02:05.520
<v Speaker 1>you in this episode, because there have been lots of

0:02:05.560 --> 0:02:07.800
<v Speaker 1>different attempts to do this, and some of them are

0:02:08.480 --> 0:02:13.680
<v Speaker 1>really localized to specific countries or two specific interests, so

0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.679
<v Speaker 1>I couldn't cover them all, uh, and some of them

0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 1>didn't even make it past the early development stages. Also,

0:02:20.880 --> 0:02:23.880
<v Speaker 1>I do not plan to cover my Space in any

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:27.040
<v Speaker 1>sort of detail, because I've done an entire episode, actually

0:02:27.120 --> 0:02:31.400
<v Speaker 1>multiple episodes, dedicated to my Space, and technically it's still around,

0:02:31.639 --> 0:02:35.680
<v Speaker 1>though it's not anything like what it was originally. So

0:02:35.760 --> 0:02:38.640
<v Speaker 1>some people would argue that my Space itself is no

0:02:38.720 --> 0:02:41.720
<v Speaker 1>longer a thing, at least not as it was originally intended.

0:02:41.840 --> 0:02:45.520
<v Speaker 1>So anyway, here's a selection of social networking sites that

0:02:45.680 --> 0:02:48.600
<v Speaker 1>ultimately failed, and a little bit about each of them.

0:02:48.840 --> 0:02:50.960
<v Speaker 1>And I figured it might be a good idea to

0:02:51.000 --> 0:02:54.400
<v Speaker 1>start off with a couple of examples from truly huge companies,

0:02:54.400 --> 0:02:57.240
<v Speaker 1>because that helps illustrate how hard it can be to

0:02:57.440 --> 0:03:01.800
<v Speaker 1>establish a social networking service that people actually want to use.

0:03:02.400 --> 0:03:06.160
<v Speaker 1>So if Google and Apple can't do it, these huge

0:03:06.240 --> 0:03:11.399
<v Speaker 1>companies that have billions of dollars of support behind them,

0:03:11.480 --> 0:03:13.680
<v Speaker 1>it's got to be hard to do, right. So we're

0:03:13.680 --> 0:03:17.080
<v Speaker 1>gonna start off with Google Plus, keeping in mind that

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:20.800
<v Speaker 1>Google will pop up again and again in this episode

0:03:20.800 --> 0:03:25.200
<v Speaker 1>because of their involvement in trying to establish social networks.

0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:28.840
<v Speaker 1>But Google Plus is a pretty recent one and one

0:03:28.960 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 1>that has some more news coming up very shortly. And

0:03:32.440 --> 0:03:37.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, Google Plus tried a lot. It tried hard

0:03:37.360 --> 0:03:41.480
<v Speaker 1>for many years to become a true social network destination,

0:03:41.600 --> 0:03:45.400
<v Speaker 1>but as of April twenty nineteen, it's going to be

0:03:45.480 --> 0:03:49.320
<v Speaker 1>shut down for good. And honestly, it probably could have

0:03:49.360 --> 0:03:51.640
<v Speaker 1>closed up shop a few years ago and the world

0:03:51.680 --> 0:03:56.000
<v Speaker 1>in general wouldn't have noticed. Instead, it took a massive

0:03:56.120 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 1>data breach, or at least the possibility of one, for

0:04:00.000 --> 0:04:02.480
<v Speaker 1>Google to close the door on Google Plus. So let

0:04:02.520 --> 0:04:06.400
<v Speaker 1>me talk a little bit about it. So Google Plus

0:04:06.480 --> 0:04:11.080
<v Speaker 1>wasn't the Internet uh companies first foray into social networking.

0:04:11.080 --> 0:04:13.880
<v Speaker 1>As I had mentioned, there had also been Google Buzz,

0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:16.600
<v Speaker 1>which was a tool that was integrated directly into Gmail,

0:04:16.760 --> 0:04:19.839
<v Speaker 1>but was discontinued when the company prepared to launch Google Plus.

0:04:20.320 --> 0:04:23.600
<v Speaker 1>There was also Google friend Connect, which lasted from two

0:04:23.600 --> 0:04:26.159
<v Speaker 1>thousand eight to two thousand and twelve for all non

0:04:26.279 --> 0:04:29.920
<v Speaker 1>blogger sites. As in Google Blogger sites, even the blogger

0:04:29.960 --> 0:04:33.080
<v Speaker 1>sites had to say goodbye to it. In Google Plus

0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:35.480
<v Speaker 1>was supposed to take the best ideas from both of

0:04:35.520 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 1>those earlier efforts and add more innovation when it would

0:04:38.120 --> 0:04:42.280
<v Speaker 1>launch in And there's some other social networks that relate

0:04:42.320 --> 0:04:44.440
<v Speaker 1>back to Google that we'll talk about later in this episode.

0:04:44.839 --> 0:04:48.680
<v Speaker 1>So Google Plus would let you organize the people in

0:04:48.800 --> 0:04:53.200
<v Speaker 1>your online social circle into circles. That's what it called

0:04:53.240 --> 0:04:56.360
<v Speaker 1>the different groups. You had circles, and you could drag

0:04:56.880 --> 0:05:00.840
<v Speaker 1>a person's picture into circles to sort them. So you

0:05:00.839 --> 0:05:03.400
<v Speaker 1>could name circles whatever you wanted, and you could create

0:05:03.480 --> 0:05:05.479
<v Speaker 1>lots of them in order to sort people out into

0:05:05.560 --> 0:05:10.880
<v Speaker 1>specific groups. So you could create circles like friends, family, coworkers,

0:05:11.560 --> 0:05:14.360
<v Speaker 1>or you could create people who really like that one

0:05:14.480 --> 0:05:17.520
<v Speaker 1>joke I tell. In my case, I had a circle

0:05:17.640 --> 0:05:20.000
<v Speaker 1>just for people that worked with me at the Georgia

0:05:20.080 --> 0:05:22.919
<v Speaker 1>Renaissance Festival because there were a few of them on

0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:26.160
<v Speaker 1>Google Plus back in the day. Then when you posted

0:05:26.200 --> 0:05:29.600
<v Speaker 1>on the social networking platform, you could choose which circles

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:32.920
<v Speaker 1>could see your post. You might want the whole world

0:05:32.920 --> 0:05:34.160
<v Speaker 1>to be able to view it, in which case you

0:05:34.200 --> 0:05:36.880
<v Speaker 1>would just make it public. But let's say that you

0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:40.159
<v Speaker 1>wanted to address one group and leave out everybody else,

0:05:40.200 --> 0:05:43.680
<v Speaker 1>like maybe you're asking your friends about recommendations for a

0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:47.000
<v Speaker 1>job search, in which case you probably don't want your

0:05:47.040 --> 0:05:50.880
<v Speaker 1>coworkers to see that post. Then you would select your friends,

0:05:51.120 --> 0:05:53.960
<v Speaker 1>you would leave out your coworkers, and that would be

0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:56.080
<v Speaker 1>that you know, you would just post in The only

0:05:56.080 --> 0:05:58.000
<v Speaker 1>people who would see it were the ones that you

0:05:58.120 --> 0:06:01.200
<v Speaker 1>had authorized to see it. That was the basic idea,

0:06:01.880 --> 0:06:04.640
<v Speaker 1>and the platform had all the features that you would

0:06:04.640 --> 0:06:08.240
<v Speaker 1>expect to find on social networks. You could post updates,

0:06:08.240 --> 0:06:10.960
<v Speaker 1>you could share links, you can share photos, you can

0:06:11.000 --> 0:06:13.840
<v Speaker 1>make new friends, you can join groups. There's a lot

0:06:13.839 --> 0:06:18.320
<v Speaker 1>of integration with Google's other services like YouTube. But apart

0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:22.359
<v Speaker 1>from the initial excitement when the platform first opened, fueled

0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:24.560
<v Speaker 1>in large part by the fact that when it was

0:06:24.640 --> 0:06:28.760
<v Speaker 1>first open, Google held an invitation only closed beta, so

0:06:28.839 --> 0:06:30.480
<v Speaker 1>the only way you could get an account was if

0:06:30.480 --> 0:06:34.200
<v Speaker 1>you've got to invite. It gave the platform some exclusivity,

0:06:34.240 --> 0:06:37.080
<v Speaker 1>which made people want to be part of it more. Now.

0:06:37.080 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 1>I know because I was part of that first group

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:43.279
<v Speaker 1>and I was invited to participate, and it was kind

0:06:43.320 --> 0:06:46.440
<v Speaker 1>of fun because it was still a very small group

0:06:46.440 --> 0:06:49.480
<v Speaker 1>of people, generally speaking, who were online, and they were

0:06:49.480 --> 0:06:53.440
<v Speaker 1>almost all business leaders or tech journalists. So I got

0:06:53.440 --> 0:06:56.560
<v Speaker 1>the chance to catch up with friends of mine who

0:06:56.760 --> 0:07:00.800
<v Speaker 1>also got in on that closed beta. Once it opened up,

0:07:00.800 --> 0:07:04.680
<v Speaker 1>and after I had that initial rush of everyone adding

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:07.600
<v Speaker 1>in their accounts, it had trouble catching on. And it

0:07:07.680 --> 0:07:12.000
<v Speaker 1>wasn't just the design that didn't really grab people's interests.

0:07:12.560 --> 0:07:14.680
<v Speaker 1>It was some of the policies that Google had put

0:07:14.720 --> 0:07:17.360
<v Speaker 1>into place. So this was around the same time that

0:07:17.400 --> 0:07:19.800
<v Speaker 1>Google had decided to make a single log in for

0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:24.200
<v Speaker 1>all its services, including stuff like YouTube, and they wanted

0:07:24.360 --> 0:07:28.760
<v Speaker 1>to link each account to the account owner's real name,

0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 1>so they wanted to make sure that the name of

0:07:33.440 --> 0:07:36.600
<v Speaker 1>the account was the same as the person who created

0:07:36.600 --> 0:07:39.520
<v Speaker 1>that account. Never mind if you have an online following

0:07:39.640 --> 0:07:42.160
<v Speaker 1>that knows you by a stage name or a brand.

0:07:42.760 --> 0:07:46.520
<v Speaker 1>The intent was to create accountability, so I would say

0:07:46.520 --> 0:07:50.119
<v Speaker 1>the intentions were honorable. Google figured people would behave better

0:07:50.600 --> 0:07:53.520
<v Speaker 1>if their actions online could be traced back to their

0:07:53.560 --> 0:07:58.320
<v Speaker 1>real identities. If you can't hide behind anonymity, ne're less

0:07:58.360 --> 0:08:00.720
<v Speaker 1>likely to be a jerk face on line. That was

0:08:00.760 --> 0:08:03.920
<v Speaker 1>the logic, but there was an intense backlash from the

0:08:04.000 --> 0:08:07.560
<v Speaker 1>online community due to this policy, and there were legitimate

0:08:07.600 --> 0:08:10.520
<v Speaker 1>objections to it. It wasn't just people saying I don't

0:08:10.520 --> 0:08:13.320
<v Speaker 1>want to have my name on the internet. Some were

0:08:13.360 --> 0:08:16.680
<v Speaker 1>worried that they could be targeted if their identities were revealed.

0:08:17.120 --> 0:08:20.600
<v Speaker 1>Maybe they use online social networks as a way of

0:08:20.680 --> 0:08:25.960
<v Speaker 1>expressing opinions about an oppressive government. You know, they might

0:08:25.960 --> 0:08:28.600
<v Speaker 1>not live in a place where such things are are

0:08:28.680 --> 0:08:33.640
<v Speaker 1>tolerated and might even be actively punished. They don't want

0:08:33.640 --> 0:08:36.200
<v Speaker 1>to have their identity traced directly back to them, but

0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:38.400
<v Speaker 1>they still want to be able to share those views

0:08:38.600 --> 0:08:43.680
<v Speaker 1>with the wider world. Some people had undergone extremely personal changes,

0:08:43.800 --> 0:08:45.960
<v Speaker 1>like maybe there was someone who had had a sex

0:08:46.080 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 1>change operation and literally they were no longer the person

0:08:50.080 --> 0:08:54.720
<v Speaker 1>they used to be. They have transformed into a new identity.

0:08:54.760 --> 0:08:57.800
<v Speaker 1>They did not want their online presence to reflect someone

0:08:57.880 --> 0:09:02.560
<v Speaker 1>who no longer existed. Google eventually backed off this policy,

0:09:02.600 --> 0:09:05.920
<v Speaker 1>but the platform never really recovered from that. In fact,

0:09:06.559 --> 0:09:09.200
<v Speaker 1>there was a lot of animosity, not just on Google Plus,

0:09:09.240 --> 0:09:13.040
<v Speaker 1>but particularly on YouTube related to all of this. Now,

0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:16.439
<v Speaker 1>in first glance, the platform seemed to be doing fairly well.

0:09:16.600 --> 0:09:18.360
<v Speaker 1>If you were just looking at numbers and you weren't

0:09:18.400 --> 0:09:21.760
<v Speaker 1>looking too hard, it looked like things were going pretty smoothly,

0:09:21.880 --> 0:09:24.840
<v Speaker 1>or at least there was an encouraging trend, because in

0:09:25.280 --> 0:09:30.439
<v Speaker 1>six there were around three million registered accounts that were

0:09:30.480 --> 0:09:34.199
<v Speaker 1>listed as active. Now that's not like the billion of

0:09:34.240 --> 0:09:38.360
<v Speaker 1>accounts that Facebook was boasting, but still it's almost half

0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:40.240
<v Speaker 1>a billion. You're getting close to half a billion. That's

0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:46.560
<v Speaker 1>a respectable population. Except cent of those accounts had nothing

0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:50.360
<v Speaker 1>in them. They were empty. They had someone who had

0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:54.440
<v Speaker 1>created them, but they weren't posting anything. The nail in

0:09:54.480 --> 0:09:56.920
<v Speaker 1>the coffin would be that data breach I had mentioned,

0:09:56.960 --> 0:09:59.880
<v Speaker 1>or really it was more of a vulnerability the design

0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:04.960
<v Speaker 1>Google Plus would potentially allow a third party app developer

0:10:05.000 --> 0:10:09.160
<v Speaker 1>to get far more data access than was intended. So

0:10:09.440 --> 0:10:12.280
<v Speaker 1>let's say that you have a Google Plus account and

0:10:12.320 --> 0:10:15.600
<v Speaker 1>you want to enable an app that will work on

0:10:15.760 --> 0:10:20.720
<v Speaker 1>top of Google Plus. You could give that app access

0:10:21.040 --> 0:10:24.480
<v Speaker 1>to your information on your profile. Maybe it's just the

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:28.360
<v Speaker 1>public information, and you could also give access to the

0:10:28.440 --> 0:10:32.520
<v Speaker 1>public profile information of your of your friends, so but

0:10:32.559 --> 0:10:35.520
<v Speaker 1>it's not anything that was listed privately. It would just

0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:37.280
<v Speaker 1>be the same sort of stuff you would see on

0:10:37.360 --> 0:10:40.640
<v Speaker 1>your friends profile if you were a total stranger and

0:10:40.679 --> 0:10:43.840
<v Speaker 1>you just navigated to that person's profile. So anything they

0:10:43.960 --> 0:10:49.440
<v Speaker 1>chose that was public this app could see a security probe. However,

0:10:49.520 --> 0:10:52.280
<v Speaker 1>discovered that the app developers could also get access to

0:10:52.320 --> 0:10:55.840
<v Speaker 1>information stored in fields that were not tagged as public,

0:10:56.880 --> 0:11:00.440
<v Speaker 1>so that meant that there this vulnerability would allow a

0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:03.640
<v Speaker 1>third party developer to see all sorts of information someone

0:11:03.720 --> 0:11:07.880
<v Speaker 1>had voluntarily put into their profile but had not chosen

0:11:07.920 --> 0:11:11.600
<v Speaker 1>to reveal publicly. That can include stuff like real names,

0:11:11.760 --> 0:11:17.640
<v Speaker 1>email addresses, uh, the occupations. These are mostly optional fields,

0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:20.640
<v Speaker 1>not ones that you had to fill out. But even

0:11:20.640 --> 0:11:23.439
<v Speaker 1>if you had filled them out and told Google Plus

0:11:23.440 --> 0:11:26.520
<v Speaker 1>that you wanted them to be private unless you sorted

0:11:26.640 --> 0:11:29.719
<v Speaker 1>someone into a friend bucket for example, or circle. I

0:11:29.720 --> 0:11:34.079
<v Speaker 1>should say that these apps could get access to that information.

0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:38.000
<v Speaker 1>So Google posted a message that said it had independently

0:11:38.080 --> 0:11:41.800
<v Speaker 1>discovered this vulnerability. It wasn't brought to their attention from

0:11:41.840 --> 0:11:46.400
<v Speaker 1>a breach, but rather while investigating Google Plus, they discovered

0:11:46.440 --> 0:11:51.840
<v Speaker 1>it and according to Google, according to their their experience,

0:11:51.880 --> 0:11:54.800
<v Speaker 1>they didn't see any evidence the developer had ever discovered

0:11:54.920 --> 0:11:56.800
<v Speaker 1>or exploited it, and at least that's what they said.

0:11:57.840 --> 0:12:00.960
<v Speaker 1>So the company patched the vulnerability in March two thousand eighteen.

0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:04.000
<v Speaker 1>But the message was clear. Google Plus was actually more

0:12:04.040 --> 0:12:06.640
<v Speaker 1>trouble than it was worth to keep around, and so

0:12:06.760 --> 0:12:10.640
<v Speaker 1>there will be no more Google Plus after April nineteen.

0:12:11.080 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 1>It just doesn't make sense to keep uh expending energy

0:12:14.960 --> 0:12:17.920
<v Speaker 1>and money and resources on a product that very few

0:12:17.920 --> 0:12:21.280
<v Speaker 1>people are using. But what about Apple? I mentioned Apple

0:12:21.320 --> 0:12:23.720
<v Speaker 1>as well as one of the other big companies that

0:12:23.880 --> 0:12:27.120
<v Speaker 1>attempted to create a social network and failed. Well. They

0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:31.920
<v Speaker 1>tried to integrate a social network like feature into the

0:12:32.000 --> 0:12:37.600
<v Speaker 1>Juggernaut program, iTunes. So Apple launched iTunes way back in

0:12:37.600 --> 0:12:40.960
<v Speaker 1>two thousand one. They announced it at the Macworld Expo

0:12:41.040 --> 0:12:43.840
<v Speaker 1>that year and revealed to the world an enormous digital

0:12:43.920 --> 0:12:47.920
<v Speaker 1>music online storefront, which would end up changing the way

0:12:48.080 --> 0:12:52.199
<v Speaker 1>people bought music and and would even change the way

0:12:52.240 --> 0:12:57.040
<v Speaker 1>that music would be recorded. The album experience became less

0:12:57.040 --> 0:13:01.079
<v Speaker 1>important than the single experience became way more important, and

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:04.320
<v Speaker 1>then it would go on to support the creation of

0:13:04.360 --> 0:13:08.360
<v Speaker 1>a burgeoning art form called the podcast. But nine years later,

0:13:08.360 --> 0:13:13.520
<v Speaker 1>in upon the release of iTunes version ten, Apple would

0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:19.280
<v Speaker 1>introduce Ping. Ping was a music centric social networking platform.

0:13:19.360 --> 0:13:22.280
<v Speaker 1>So with your profile on iTunes, you could follow other

0:13:22.400 --> 0:13:27.800
<v Speaker 1>users or music artists. You could choose bands or musicians

0:13:28.160 --> 0:13:31.360
<v Speaker 1>to follow, and you could search out their concert listings.

0:13:31.360 --> 0:13:33.960
<v Speaker 1>You could also use paying to indicate that you are

0:13:34.000 --> 0:13:36.720
<v Speaker 1>attending one of those concerts, you know, kind of be

0:13:36.760 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>one of those super cool people, almost almost a social

0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:42.120
<v Speaker 1>status sort of thing, like, Yeah, I'm gonna be at

0:13:42.120 --> 0:13:45.720
<v Speaker 1>the concert in Brooklyn of this band that four people

0:13:45.760 --> 0:13:47.800
<v Speaker 1>know about, but don't worry, you'll all know about it

0:13:47.840 --> 0:13:52.080
<v Speaker 1>in two years. Or you could create or peru's song

0:13:52.200 --> 0:13:56.360
<v Speaker 1>lists or album charts. You could see the photos and

0:13:56.360 --> 0:13:59.439
<v Speaker 1>the videos that your favorite musicians were sharing, and ideally

0:13:59.760 --> 0:14:04.360
<v Speaker 1>it allow for easier music discovery, something that is pretty tricky,

0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:07.680
<v Speaker 1>but Ping did not get much traction, and one possible

0:14:07.720 --> 0:14:11.280
<v Speaker 1>reason for that was that upon launch, there was no

0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:15.920
<v Speaker 1>way to integrate Paying's features into Facebook profiles. According to

0:14:15.960 --> 0:14:20.920
<v Speaker 1>The Verge, that wasn't necessarily Apple's choice. The Verge reported

0:14:20.960 --> 0:14:23.040
<v Speaker 1>that there were rumors at the very least that Apple

0:14:23.080 --> 0:14:26.760
<v Speaker 1>had intended to integrate Facebook Support and Paying, but they

0:14:26.760 --> 0:14:28.840
<v Speaker 1>had to pull it out at the last minute for

0:14:30.080 --> 0:14:34.240
<v Speaker 1>unsaid reasons. I have no idea what the reasoning was. Now,

0:14:34.280 --> 0:14:38.280
<v Speaker 1>despite an early rush of users making profiles, just like

0:14:38.360 --> 0:14:42.800
<v Speaker 1>with Google Plus, Ping didn't really catch on. Apple chose

0:14:42.840 --> 0:14:45.320
<v Speaker 1>to shut down the service just two years later in

0:14:45.400 --> 0:14:49.480
<v Speaker 1>twent Both Google Plus and Paying were latecomers to the

0:14:49.520 --> 0:14:53.120
<v Speaker 1>social networking party. Though after the break, I'll talk about

0:14:53.120 --> 0:14:57.040
<v Speaker 1>a site that actually debuted before Facebook and MySpace. But

0:14:57.160 --> 0:14:59.960
<v Speaker 1>first let's take a quick break to thank our sponsor.

0:15:07.400 --> 0:15:11.360
<v Speaker 1>Back in two thousand two, three developers named Peter Chen,

0:15:11.760 --> 0:15:15.840
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan Abrams, and Dave Lee wanted to create an online

0:15:15.840 --> 0:15:17.960
<v Speaker 1>tool that would make it easy for people to connect

0:15:17.960 --> 0:15:20.600
<v Speaker 1>with one another on the Internet. You would be able

0:15:20.640 --> 0:15:23.040
<v Speaker 1>to link up with folks you already knew, and you

0:15:23.040 --> 0:15:26.160
<v Speaker 1>would be able to make new friends over this great

0:15:26.200 --> 0:15:30.760
<v Speaker 1>communications tool. No longer would your real world environment limit

0:15:30.880 --> 0:15:34.360
<v Speaker 1>who you could befriend. So these three got together and

0:15:34.400 --> 0:15:37.440
<v Speaker 1>they began to develop this tool one of the earlier

0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:41.400
<v Speaker 1>social networking sites. Sometimes people refer to it as the

0:15:41.480 --> 0:15:45.160
<v Speaker 1>first real social network, or at least the first real

0:15:45.240 --> 0:15:49.320
<v Speaker 1>one to enjoy mainstream success. It was called Friendster, but

0:15:49.360 --> 0:15:51.200
<v Speaker 1>I want to be clear, this was two thousand two.

0:15:51.760 --> 0:15:55.720
<v Speaker 1>There were sites that I would call social network sites

0:15:55.800 --> 0:15:59.120
<v Speaker 1>that predated friends Ster. I do agree that Friendster was

0:15:59.160 --> 0:16:02.480
<v Speaker 1>the first one to be really successful. So they were

0:16:02.520 --> 0:16:07.200
<v Speaker 1>able to launch a prototype of this Friendster site in

0:16:07.240 --> 0:16:09.760
<v Speaker 1>the spring of two thousand two, and within a few

0:16:09.800 --> 0:16:12.760
<v Speaker 1>months they had more than three million users, which is

0:16:12.840 --> 0:16:16.280
<v Speaker 1>not bad when you remember that this was a pretty

0:16:16.320 --> 0:16:19.120
<v Speaker 1>early idea. Still, even though there had been a couple

0:16:19.200 --> 0:16:22.120
<v Speaker 1>of other attempts at creating social networks, that was at

0:16:22.120 --> 0:16:24.640
<v Speaker 1>a time when there were very few people online at all.

0:16:25.200 --> 0:16:27.760
<v Speaker 1>So this is still a new concept for a lot

0:16:27.840 --> 0:16:30.280
<v Speaker 1>of people. So you had to explain to people what

0:16:30.400 --> 0:16:32.360
<v Speaker 1>this was all about in the first place before you

0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:34.960
<v Speaker 1>could even get them to decide whether or not they

0:16:34.960 --> 0:16:37.880
<v Speaker 1>wanted to join. And Friendster tried to turn everyone into

0:16:37.960 --> 0:16:41.280
<v Speaker 1>Kevin Bacon, and by that I mean Friendster would show

0:16:41.320 --> 0:16:44.240
<v Speaker 1>you how you were connected to strangers through a network

0:16:44.360 --> 0:16:47.720
<v Speaker 1>of mutual friends. So you might discover that someone you

0:16:47.760 --> 0:16:51.040
<v Speaker 1>have never met, someone you do not know, is actually

0:16:51.120 --> 0:16:53.320
<v Speaker 1>very good friends with a couple of people you do know,

0:16:53.440 --> 0:16:57.080
<v Speaker 1>and maybe those people you know are actually in totally

0:16:57.080 --> 0:17:00.680
<v Speaker 1>different social circles. Like otherwise, you wouldn't realize that these

0:17:00.720 --> 0:17:03.880
<v Speaker 1>two people had anything in common. Uh. The example I

0:17:03.880 --> 0:17:06.160
<v Speaker 1>would give is, say, let's say that I found out

0:17:06.160 --> 0:17:08.959
<v Speaker 1>that someone I knew from my work at the Georgia

0:17:09.000 --> 0:17:13.359
<v Speaker 1>Renaissance Festival was friends with someone uh that was also

0:17:13.400 --> 0:17:15.680
<v Speaker 1>friends with a coworker, And I would have thought, well,

0:17:15.720 --> 0:17:18.080
<v Speaker 1>I didn't expect those two worlds to cross because I've

0:17:18.119 --> 0:17:21.960
<v Speaker 1>never seen seen them interact. But now here's this third

0:17:22.040 --> 0:17:24.720
<v Speaker 1>person or fourth person. Really, because I'm counting myself in

0:17:24.760 --> 0:17:28.320
<v Speaker 1>here too, this fourth person who is a connection both

0:17:28.359 --> 0:17:30.960
<v Speaker 1>to my co workers and to the folks that I

0:17:31.000 --> 0:17:34.720
<v Speaker 1>work with at the Georgia Renaissance Festival. Maybe I would

0:17:34.760 --> 0:17:37.359
<v Speaker 1>like to be friends with that person too, because chances

0:17:37.400 --> 0:17:41.400
<v Speaker 1>are I share more than a few common interests with them.

0:17:41.440 --> 0:17:44.480
<v Speaker 1>That was the theory. It was a very compelling concept.

0:17:44.520 --> 0:17:47.679
<v Speaker 1>This idea that you could meet people that you would

0:17:47.880 --> 0:17:50.480
<v Speaker 1>very much be friends with, you just hadn't had the

0:17:50.520 --> 0:17:52.920
<v Speaker 1>opportunity yet, you hadn't met them yet, and this would

0:17:52.920 --> 0:17:55.520
<v Speaker 1>be a way to meet them. Unless I'd be remiss,

0:17:55.560 --> 0:17:57.760
<v Speaker 1>I have to mention this was not a new idea,

0:17:57.920 --> 0:18:01.880
<v Speaker 1>even for online social networks. Back in the mid nineties,

0:18:01.920 --> 0:18:05.160
<v Speaker 1>there was a sort of proto social network site called

0:18:05.320 --> 0:18:09.240
<v Speaker 1>six degrees and it was built on that very premise. However,

0:18:09.800 --> 0:18:12.120
<v Speaker 1>it appeared online at that time I was talking about

0:18:12.119 --> 0:18:15.040
<v Speaker 1>when there weren't that many people on the World Wide Web.

0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:19.359
<v Speaker 1>Very few people were aware of what the web was

0:18:19.480 --> 0:18:22.119
<v Speaker 1>or had any experience with it, so there weren't a

0:18:22.119 --> 0:18:24.119
<v Speaker 1>whole lot of people to sign up for it, and

0:18:24.119 --> 0:18:28.040
<v Speaker 1>it eventually kind of faded away. Not many people remember it, however,

0:18:28.040 --> 0:18:32.040
<v Speaker 1>I will say the site did return years later, and

0:18:32.080 --> 0:18:34.920
<v Speaker 1>if you have an account, if you if you had

0:18:34.960 --> 0:18:38.080
<v Speaker 1>made an account for six degrees back in the mid nineties,

0:18:38.440 --> 0:18:43.080
<v Speaker 1>then you could still log in to that old account. Um,

0:18:43.119 --> 0:18:46.200
<v Speaker 1>so it does technically exist, but there's fewer than like

0:18:46.240 --> 0:18:49.760
<v Speaker 1>a quarter million people on there these days. In two

0:18:49.760 --> 0:18:54.480
<v Speaker 1>thousand three, the developers of Friendster were able to secure

0:18:54.520 --> 0:18:57.960
<v Speaker 1>twelve million dollars in funding from an investment firm. But

0:18:58.359 --> 0:19:00.760
<v Speaker 1>while that was a really good shot in the arm,

0:19:00.800 --> 0:19:03.879
<v Speaker 1>the site was finding it difficult to handle its rapidly

0:19:04.080 --> 0:19:08.360
<v Speaker 1>expanding popularity. There were more people joining the site than

0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:12.199
<v Speaker 1>they could accommodate, and so they were always trying to

0:19:12.200 --> 0:19:16.439
<v Speaker 1>play catch up, trying to build out enough capacity to

0:19:16.560 --> 0:19:19.640
<v Speaker 1>handle the people who wanted to use the service. There

0:19:19.640 --> 0:19:23.200
<v Speaker 1>were glitches and server issues, the site would load slowly

0:19:23.560 --> 0:19:27.360
<v Speaker 1>and users would become frustrated it had grown too quickly

0:19:27.560 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 1>for the company to manage. My Space, which launched in

0:19:31.359 --> 0:19:34.919
<v Speaker 1>August two thousand three, also began to get popular and

0:19:35.000 --> 0:19:39.720
<v Speaker 1>siphon away users, and Friendster never really recovered from that.

0:19:39.800 --> 0:19:42.640
<v Speaker 1>The site continued on for a few more years. While

0:19:42.640 --> 0:19:45.840
<v Speaker 1>it's popularity declined in the States, it did remain strong

0:19:45.880 --> 0:19:49.040
<v Speaker 1>in Asia, so it wasn't like it was going obsolete everywhere.

0:19:50.000 --> 0:19:54.800
<v Speaker 1>But then Facebook emerged and started to gain in popularity,

0:19:54.840 --> 0:19:57.479
<v Speaker 1>and Friendster would continue its decline in the United States,

0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:00.160
<v Speaker 1>and two thousand nine, the company launched a read as sign,

0:20:00.200 --> 0:20:03.960
<v Speaker 1>attempting to position itself as the cool social network. In fact,

0:20:03.960 --> 0:20:06.520
<v Speaker 1>it actually tried to leverage the fact the more people

0:20:06.560 --> 0:20:10.200
<v Speaker 1>were on MySpace and Facebook. It was essentially saying, why

0:20:10.240 --> 0:20:12.920
<v Speaker 1>do you want to be where everybody else is? Why

0:20:12.960 --> 0:20:15.080
<v Speaker 1>do you want to be mainstream? Man? It's very hipster

0:20:15.320 --> 0:20:18.280
<v Speaker 1>kind of mentality, like let's let's go someplace that not

0:20:18.400 --> 0:20:22.560
<v Speaker 1>everyone's already at. Later, in two thousand nine, a company

0:20:22.600 --> 0:20:27.280
<v Speaker 1>called m OL Global acquired Friendster for around forty million dollars,

0:20:27.320 --> 0:20:30.280
<v Speaker 1>although when you subtract all the debts and everything, it

0:20:30.359 --> 0:20:33.960
<v Speaker 1>was closer to twenty six million, so most most sites

0:20:34.160 --> 0:20:37.680
<v Speaker 1>list the actual purchase price at twenty six point four

0:20:37.720 --> 0:20:42.520
<v Speaker 1>million dollars um. That's deducting stuff like Friendster's secured debt

0:20:43.200 --> 0:20:46.639
<v Speaker 1>or payouts to Friendster executives. This wasn't great news for

0:20:46.680 --> 0:20:49.760
<v Speaker 1>the company in two thousand nine because way back in

0:20:49.840 --> 0:20:52.840
<v Speaker 1>two thousand three, Google had offered to acquire the company

0:20:52.880 --> 0:20:56.920
<v Speaker 1>for around thirty million dollars, before all that debt was

0:20:56.960 --> 0:21:00.600
<v Speaker 1>accrued and before all those executive payments would be necessary,

0:21:00.720 --> 0:21:03.080
<v Speaker 1>so this was actually a step down. Six years later,

0:21:03.560 --> 0:21:07.200
<v Speaker 1>Friendster continue to operate as designed for a short while,

0:21:08.040 --> 0:21:10.639
<v Speaker 1>but m OL would go back to the drawing board

0:21:10.680 --> 0:21:15.600
<v Speaker 1>and relaunch Friendster as a gaming social networking site. But

0:21:15.640 --> 0:21:18.879
<v Speaker 1>even that effort failed, and in June two thousand fifteen,

0:21:18.960 --> 0:21:23.439
<v Speaker 1>the site shut down and has remained that way ever since. Now,

0:21:23.520 --> 0:21:25.760
<v Speaker 1>jumping back to Google for a second, I want to

0:21:25.800 --> 0:21:30.640
<v Speaker 1>talk about or Cut, another early social networking site, Ork.

0:21:30.680 --> 0:21:34.280
<v Speaker 1>It would debut after Friendster and MySpace. It was one

0:21:34.320 --> 0:21:38.679
<v Speaker 1>of the famed twenty percent projects so over at Google

0:21:38.800 --> 0:21:40.639
<v Speaker 1>back in the day. I don't know if this is

0:21:40.680 --> 0:21:45.720
<v Speaker 1>still the case, but Google part of its reputation was

0:21:45.800 --> 0:21:48.919
<v Speaker 1>that it had a common practice to allow employees to

0:21:48.960 --> 0:21:53.440
<v Speaker 1>dedicate up to twenty of their work time to personal projects,

0:21:53.440 --> 0:21:56.800
<v Speaker 1>as long as those personal projects were aligned with Google's goals.

0:21:57.760 --> 0:22:01.959
<v Speaker 1>So whatever your normal job was N five at Google,

0:22:02.400 --> 0:22:04.320
<v Speaker 1>you would do that for eight percent of your time,

0:22:04.359 --> 0:22:06.120
<v Speaker 1>and then for twenty of your time you could work

0:22:06.160 --> 0:22:12.600
<v Speaker 1>on something else. Sometimes those projects would grow into something

0:22:12.680 --> 0:22:15.200
<v Speaker 1>more than that. They might evolve into a feature or

0:22:15.240 --> 0:22:18.040
<v Speaker 1>even a fully fledged product at Google. And one of

0:22:18.080 --> 0:22:21.200
<v Speaker 1>those was or Kit, which was named after its creator,

0:22:21.520 --> 0:22:26.560
<v Speaker 1>a Turkish developer named Orcit Bouya Cockton or Could joined

0:22:26.640 --> 0:22:30.760
<v Speaker 1>Google or At the man joined Google after graduating from Stanford.

0:22:30.800 --> 0:22:34.000
<v Speaker 1>He built a social network and called it Eden, but

0:22:34.560 --> 0:22:37.680
<v Speaker 1>then discovered they wouldn't be able to secure the domain

0:22:37.960 --> 0:22:40.560
<v Speaker 1>Eden dot com so they needed to go back to

0:22:40.560 --> 0:22:43.639
<v Speaker 1>the drawing board for the name, and ultimately he was

0:22:43.680 --> 0:22:46.000
<v Speaker 1>told that he should really name it after himself and

0:22:46.040 --> 0:22:49.840
<v Speaker 1>call it or Kit or kitt and Turkish means happy city,

0:22:50.000 --> 0:22:53.000
<v Speaker 1>so it seemed like a good fit. Or Kit would

0:22:53.080 --> 0:22:57.040
<v Speaker 1>become a social networking site and became popular pretty quickly.

0:22:57.080 --> 0:23:00.840
<v Speaker 1>It actually overtook Friendster in popularity, and by two thousand

0:23:00.880 --> 0:23:04.119
<v Speaker 1>and six it was the second most popular social network

0:23:04.160 --> 0:23:07.280
<v Speaker 1>on the Internet. Number one at that time was my Space,

0:23:08.000 --> 0:23:11.520
<v Speaker 1>and the majority of orchits users were in Brazil. Se

0:23:13.040 --> 0:23:15.959
<v Speaker 1>of the users of orch at were in Brazil, and

0:23:16.000 --> 0:23:19.040
<v Speaker 1>in fact the site would maintain a dominant position in

0:23:19.040 --> 0:23:22.960
<v Speaker 1>India and Brazil for several years, but would eventually lose

0:23:23.000 --> 0:23:28.440
<v Speaker 1>ground to Facebook, to all other domains in the United States,

0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:32.399
<v Speaker 1>in India, and in two thousand twelve, they finally lost

0:23:32.880 --> 0:23:37.440
<v Speaker 1>to Facebook in Brazil. Facebook would displace it and never

0:23:37.520 --> 0:23:41.000
<v Speaker 1>look back. Google would continue to support orch at dot

0:23:41.040 --> 0:23:45.160
<v Speaker 1>com until two thousand fourteen. Orc At, the man by

0:23:45.200 --> 0:23:48.159
<v Speaker 1>then had already left the orchid team. In fact, he

0:23:48.160 --> 0:23:50.000
<v Speaker 1>had left the orch At team in two thousand eight

0:23:50.200 --> 0:23:52.600
<v Speaker 1>and became a product manager at Google, but then he

0:23:52.720 --> 0:23:56.160
<v Speaker 1>left Google entirely. In the same year that the social

0:23:56.200 --> 0:23:59.399
<v Speaker 1>networking site went offline, he would go on to found

0:23:59.520 --> 0:24:03.880
<v Speaker 1>another social network called Hello, which still exists. It initially

0:24:03.960 --> 0:24:07.960
<v Speaker 1>launched in Brazil and it expanded from there, so that

0:24:08.000 --> 0:24:10.760
<v Speaker 1>one's still around. You could join Hello today if you

0:24:10.800 --> 0:24:13.080
<v Speaker 1>wanted to. Now there have been a lot of social

0:24:13.119 --> 0:24:16.600
<v Speaker 1>networks that have also been aimed at niche audiences, not

0:24:16.720 --> 0:24:20.960
<v Speaker 1>just the mainstream general Internet audience. There's actually an Early

0:24:21.000 --> 0:24:24.600
<v Speaker 1>Tech Stuff episode dedicated to these niche social networks, and

0:24:24.640 --> 0:24:28.240
<v Speaker 1>it included stuff like Ravelry, which is a social network

0:24:28.280 --> 0:24:31.800
<v Speaker 1>site dedicated to knitting. This, by the way, isn't me

0:24:31.920 --> 0:24:34.800
<v Speaker 1>dismissing knitting. As far as I'm concerned, Knitting is a

0:24:34.840 --> 0:24:37.920
<v Speaker 1>pretty awesome creative hobby. But it surprised me at the

0:24:37.960 --> 0:24:41.600
<v Speaker 1>time that there was a social network dedicated to it. Eventually,

0:24:41.640 --> 0:24:44.840
<v Speaker 1>my horizons expanded. My wife started knitting, and then I

0:24:44.880 --> 0:24:48.320
<v Speaker 1>realized exactly how social and activity it can be. She

0:24:48.880 --> 0:24:51.880
<v Speaker 1>does knitting circles and so of course it makes sense

0:24:51.920 --> 0:24:54.320
<v Speaker 1>to have a social network dedicated to it. But at

0:24:54.320 --> 0:24:58.520
<v Speaker 1>the time I just thought that's just weird. Anyway, Ravelry

0:24:58.560 --> 0:25:00.480
<v Speaker 1>is not what I really wanted to talk about. The

0:25:00.520 --> 0:25:04.800
<v Speaker 1>social network that I wanted to mention escaped my attention

0:25:04.920 --> 0:25:09.320
<v Speaker 1>until I started looking into this episode. I didn't know

0:25:09.359 --> 0:25:11.600
<v Speaker 1>about it, or if I had heard about it, I

0:25:11.640 --> 0:25:16.160
<v Speaker 1>didn't remember it. It was called eons e O N

0:25:16.359 --> 0:25:20.240
<v Speaker 1>s Now. Part of the reason of not knowing about

0:25:20.280 --> 0:25:22.679
<v Speaker 1>it was because I'm not in the generation that was

0:25:22.760 --> 0:25:26.400
<v Speaker 1>targeted by that social network. It was aimed at baby boomers,

0:25:27.040 --> 0:25:30.479
<v Speaker 1>people who were at least forty, although most reports at

0:25:30.480 --> 0:25:33.000
<v Speaker 1>the time said it was aiming at the fifty plus

0:25:33.040 --> 0:25:35.800
<v Speaker 1>crowd when the site launched back in two thousand six.

0:25:36.520 --> 0:25:39.840
<v Speaker 1>And while a certain former tech Stuff co host would

0:25:39.840 --> 0:25:43.280
<v Speaker 1>take great joy in pointing out how old I am,

0:25:43.320 --> 0:25:47.480
<v Speaker 1>I was not in my forties back in two thousand six. Heck,

0:25:47.520 --> 0:25:49.840
<v Speaker 1>I wasn't even working for how Stuff works in two

0:25:49.840 --> 0:25:52.600
<v Speaker 1>thousand six, So maybe I can be forgiven for being

0:25:52.720 --> 0:25:56.840
<v Speaker 1>ignorant of this particular social network. Jeff Taylor, who was

0:25:56.920 --> 0:26:00.639
<v Speaker 1>the founder of the site Monster dot com, also was

0:26:00.680 --> 0:26:04.040
<v Speaker 1>the founder of eons dot com. He created it to

0:26:04.240 --> 0:26:07.719
<v Speaker 1>target this market of baby boomers, the fifty plus crowd.

0:26:08.040 --> 0:26:11.280
<v Speaker 1>He felt that they were under served in the social

0:26:11.320 --> 0:26:14.840
<v Speaker 1>network space, and I'm inclined to agree with that assessment.

0:26:15.440 --> 0:26:18.200
<v Speaker 1>Social network sites when they first launch, or at least

0:26:18.200 --> 0:26:20.920
<v Speaker 1>when they first catch on, tend to do so within

0:26:21.160 --> 0:26:25.639
<v Speaker 1>a certain generation band of users, a certain age range.

0:26:25.800 --> 0:26:28.640
<v Speaker 1>In general, there's always going to be exceptions, but you'll

0:26:28.640 --> 0:26:30.880
<v Speaker 1>see that the majority of your users tend to fall

0:26:30.960 --> 0:26:34.320
<v Speaker 1>within a certain range, and unless the network is able

0:26:34.359 --> 0:26:37.880
<v Speaker 1>to adapt over time, that generation band remains pretty much

0:26:37.920 --> 0:26:41.800
<v Speaker 1>the same it ages as the the demographic of the

0:26:41.800 --> 0:26:46.840
<v Speaker 1>the audience. Ages and younger generations tend to opt for

0:26:46.960 --> 0:26:51.160
<v Speaker 1>alternatives because, among many reasons, there are a quote too

0:26:51.160 --> 0:26:54.800
<v Speaker 1>many old people end quote on that other site. Eons

0:26:54.800 --> 0:26:56.800
<v Speaker 1>dot com was supposed to be a site dedicated to

0:26:56.840 --> 0:27:00.800
<v Speaker 1>those quote unquote old people now. The site aimed for

0:27:00.880 --> 0:27:05.240
<v Speaker 1>a clean, easy to navigate interface. They wanted to get

0:27:05.400 --> 0:27:07.560
<v Speaker 1>rid of a lot of the things that would clutter

0:27:07.760 --> 0:27:12.160
<v Speaker 1>up the profiles on competing social network sites. It had

0:27:12.160 --> 0:27:15.920
<v Speaker 1>a simplified search engine, and it also boasted get ready

0:27:15.960 --> 0:27:20.879
<v Speaker 1>for it, the world's largest obituary database. The goal was

0:27:20.920 --> 0:27:24.160
<v Speaker 1>to aim at boomer's interests while keeping the features as

0:27:24.280 --> 0:27:28.000
<v Speaker 1>easy to understand and to use as possible for those

0:27:28.000 --> 0:27:32.439
<v Speaker 1>who lacked computer savvy. In two thousand eleven, a company

0:27:32.480 --> 0:27:35.879
<v Speaker 1>called Crew Media purchased the site from Jeff Taylor for

0:27:35.920 --> 0:27:38.960
<v Speaker 1>an undisclosed amount. At the time, the site had about

0:27:39.000 --> 0:27:43.399
<v Speaker 1>eight hundred thousand registered users, very small number compared to

0:27:43.440 --> 0:27:46.600
<v Speaker 1>other social network sites, but you're also talking about people

0:27:46.640 --> 0:27:50.400
<v Speaker 1>who have probably a lot of a lot of revenue,

0:27:50.440 --> 0:27:53.040
<v Speaker 1>who a love income they could they could use on

0:27:53.160 --> 0:27:58.440
<v Speaker 1>various advertising if if you were so inclined. The following year,

0:27:58.440 --> 0:28:02.919
<v Speaker 1>in you Jers became concerned because the site went offline

0:28:02.920 --> 0:28:08.080
<v Speaker 1>without any warning, and after about a week, executive said

0:28:08.080 --> 0:28:10.760
<v Speaker 1>the problem was that the server company they were working

0:28:10.800 --> 0:28:13.800
<v Speaker 1>with had some sort of error and that this was

0:28:13.840 --> 0:28:16.960
<v Speaker 1>all getting fixed behind the scenes. But after a little

0:28:16.960 --> 0:28:18.920
<v Speaker 1>more time it turned out that there was a bit

0:28:18.960 --> 0:28:21.600
<v Speaker 1>more to it than that, and in June two thousand twelve,

0:28:22.280 --> 0:28:26.240
<v Speaker 1>the Eons team posted to the site's Facebook page the boy,

0:28:26.320 --> 0:28:28.880
<v Speaker 1>isn't that fun that a social network site had its

0:28:28.880 --> 0:28:33.040
<v Speaker 1>own page on another social network? Anyway, they explained that

0:28:33.160 --> 0:28:37.400
<v Speaker 1>the sites service provider was asking for a financial commitment

0:28:37.720 --> 0:28:41.760
<v Speaker 1>that the company could not meet, and in return, the

0:28:41.760 --> 0:28:45.760
<v Speaker 1>the service would end up fixing this problem and getting

0:28:45.920 --> 0:28:50.400
<v Speaker 1>the eons dot com site back up online, But because

0:28:50.400 --> 0:28:53.360
<v Speaker 1>they said they couldn't meet that financial commitment, they couldn't

0:28:53.360 --> 0:28:56.440
<v Speaker 1>pay to have the site fixed, and so it remained down.

0:28:56.880 --> 0:28:59.720
<v Speaker 1>The executive said they hoped they could get the site

0:28:59.720 --> 0:29:03.320
<v Speaker 1>back up and running, but that never happened. Users were

0:29:03.360 --> 0:29:06.680
<v Speaker 1>told that their information would remain locked away and safe.

0:29:06.720 --> 0:29:09.440
<v Speaker 1>It wasn't going to be sold off or shared with anyone.

0:29:10.320 --> 0:29:13.920
<v Speaker 1>But as of this date, the site has remained dark.

0:29:14.640 --> 0:29:17.200
<v Speaker 1>I've got a couple more networks I want to mention,

0:29:17.400 --> 0:29:19.760
<v Speaker 1>but before I get to those, let's take another quick

0:29:19.760 --> 0:29:30.040
<v Speaker 1>break to thank our sponsor. Hey, it's been a minute.

0:29:30.120 --> 0:29:32.239
<v Speaker 1>How about we pop back over to Google, you know,

0:29:32.480 --> 0:29:36.640
<v Speaker 1>the giant social network killing machine. Now. Sadly, for Google,

0:29:36.760 --> 0:29:41.400
<v Speaker 1>the social networks it has slain haven't been competitors. Instead,

0:29:41.480 --> 0:29:45.400
<v Speaker 1>they've been the company's own properties. Not all of them, however,

0:29:45.480 --> 0:29:49.720
<v Speaker 1>were developed within Google. Some of them came through acquisitions,

0:29:50.320 --> 0:29:54.160
<v Speaker 1>like jaiqu or if you prefer Haiku, that's with a J,

0:29:55.240 --> 0:29:58.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna call it Jaiku. So Jaiku was a service

0:29:58.840 --> 0:30:02.800
<v Speaker 1>launched by a couple finished developers whose names I would

0:30:02.840 --> 0:30:06.480
<v Speaker 1>absolutely butcher if I tried to say them, and I

0:30:06.560 --> 0:30:09.120
<v Speaker 1>already did that to poor or cut, so let's just

0:30:09.360 --> 0:30:13.200
<v Speaker 1>move on. The crux of Jaiku was essentially the same

0:30:13.200 --> 0:30:18.240
<v Speaker 1>as Twitter. It was founded as an SMS messaging service.

0:30:19.040 --> 0:30:22.920
<v Speaker 1>Kind of add on, it was called a micro blogging service,

0:30:23.480 --> 0:30:27.080
<v Speaker 1>and you were limited to one forty characters for your posts,

0:30:27.120 --> 0:30:30.400
<v Speaker 1>the same as Twitter's original limit. Now, the reason for

0:30:30.440 --> 0:30:33.640
<v Speaker 1>that had to do with the limitations of the SMS format,

0:30:33.680 --> 0:30:37.240
<v Speaker 1>which could carry one hundred sixty characters. Some of those

0:30:37.320 --> 0:30:40.080
<v Speaker 1>characters needed to be set aside for user names, so

0:30:40.400 --> 0:30:44.120
<v Speaker 1>the limit for the actual message length was one forty characters.

0:30:45.080 --> 0:30:48.520
<v Speaker 1>Users could choose to make their Jaiku stream public or

0:30:48.760 --> 0:30:51.680
<v Speaker 1>private and thus invitation only, so in other words, it

0:30:51.760 --> 0:30:54.600
<v Speaker 1>was really similar to Twitter, though in those early days,

0:30:54.640 --> 0:30:59.800
<v Speaker 1>early adopters said that Jaiku's implementation was slightly better, largely

0:31:00.160 --> 0:31:03.320
<v Speaker 1>to a dedicated mobile app that allowed users to leave

0:31:03.360 --> 0:31:07.400
<v Speaker 1>comments on other people's messages, almost like a Facebook post,

0:31:07.520 --> 0:31:10.120
<v Speaker 1>as opposed to the at reply method that Twitter relied on.

0:31:11.000 --> 0:31:14.520
<v Speaker 1>And keep in mind this was before the smartphone revolution,

0:31:14.600 --> 0:31:18.120
<v Speaker 1>so this is in the old symbian operating system days.

0:31:19.440 --> 0:31:23.800
<v Speaker 1>Google purchased Jaiku in two thousand seven, which made some

0:31:24.000 --> 0:31:27.480
<v Speaker 1>users nervous. Google had a bad reputation for this. They

0:31:27.520 --> 0:31:31.360
<v Speaker 1>had already purchased a service called Dodgeball, which was an

0:31:31.400 --> 0:31:34.280
<v Speaker 1>early check in service, you know, one of those where

0:31:34.600 --> 0:31:36.840
<v Speaker 1>you go someplace in real life and you open up

0:31:36.840 --> 0:31:39.240
<v Speaker 1>your phone and you open up an app, and then

0:31:39.240 --> 0:31:41.840
<v Speaker 1>you check into that place, so it lets other people

0:31:41.840 --> 0:31:45.200
<v Speaker 1>know where you are. Well. The founders of Dodgeball would

0:31:45.200 --> 0:31:48.240
<v Speaker 1>go on to later create four Square, which would kind

0:31:48.240 --> 0:31:51.200
<v Speaker 1>of take that same same idea and run with it,

0:31:51.200 --> 0:31:52.800
<v Speaker 1>at least for a while. I'll have to do another

0:31:52.800 --> 0:31:55.840
<v Speaker 1>episode about four Square at some point, because that's an

0:31:55.840 --> 0:31:59.920
<v Speaker 1>interesting story too, about how that service changed dramatically over time. Anyway,

0:32:00.800 --> 0:32:03.280
<v Speaker 1>it turned out that the Jaiku fans had good reason

0:32:03.320 --> 0:32:07.200
<v Speaker 1>to be nervous because Google did very very little with Jiku,

0:32:07.360 --> 0:32:09.240
<v Speaker 1>or if it did do very much with it, it

0:32:09.360 --> 0:32:13.640
<v Speaker 1>was never publicly disclosed. They did shut down the service

0:32:14.160 --> 0:32:17.000
<v Speaker 1>two thousand nine, just two years after purchasing it. That

0:32:17.040 --> 0:32:20.120
<v Speaker 1>was around the same time that Google also shut down Dodgeball,

0:32:20.720 --> 0:32:22.760
<v Speaker 1>So if you were to try and visit the U

0:32:22.880 --> 0:32:24.920
<v Speaker 1>r L to Jiku dot com, you would get a

0:32:24.960 --> 0:32:30.120
<v Speaker 1>Google four oh four error. Sad story. A similar micro

0:32:30.280 --> 0:32:34.640
<v Speaker 1>blogging service called Pounce stuck around a little bit longer,

0:32:35.280 --> 0:32:39.920
<v Speaker 1>but ultimately it also bowed to Twitter's dominance in the field.

0:32:40.560 --> 0:32:44.880
<v Speaker 1>The founders of Pounds were Daniel Berka, Leah Culver, and

0:32:44.960 --> 0:32:49.160
<v Speaker 1>Kevin Rose. Kevin Rose had co founded Revision three and

0:32:49.240 --> 0:32:53.400
<v Speaker 1>Dig Daniel Burka. Burka was a creative director over a dig.

0:32:53.840 --> 0:32:56.520
<v Speaker 1>Leah Culver was fresh out of grad school, and they

0:32:56.640 --> 0:32:59.760
<v Speaker 1>launched Pounds in two thousand seven. The service had more

0:33:00.080 --> 0:33:03.280
<v Speaker 1>cheers than Twitter, including the ability to share stuff like

0:33:03.360 --> 0:33:06.600
<v Speaker 1>photos or videos or MP three's you could embed them

0:33:06.600 --> 0:33:09.000
<v Speaker 1>in messages. That was something that would take a while

0:33:09.160 --> 0:33:13.239
<v Speaker 1>to get implemented into Twitter. Even so, the service just

0:33:13.360 --> 0:33:16.400
<v Speaker 1>wasn't attracting users at the same rate that Twitter was.

0:33:17.000 --> 0:33:19.840
<v Speaker 1>It got launched just a little too late, I think,

0:33:19.920 --> 0:33:24.280
<v Speaker 1>to take advantage of that, and one year after being founded,

0:33:24.320 --> 0:33:29.320
<v Speaker 1>a company called six Apart approach the founders and offered

0:33:29.320 --> 0:33:32.160
<v Speaker 1>to buy Pounds off of them, and they agreed, so

0:33:32.360 --> 0:33:36.040
<v Speaker 1>six Apart purchase Pounds and then they announced that the

0:33:36.040 --> 0:33:37.960
<v Speaker 1>service was going to get shut down in just a

0:33:37.960 --> 0:33:39.880
<v Speaker 1>couple of weeks. So you might say, well, why would

0:33:39.880 --> 0:33:41.920
<v Speaker 1>a company come in and buy something just to shut

0:33:41.960 --> 0:33:45.720
<v Speaker 1>it off, And typically the answer to that question is

0:33:45.800 --> 0:33:48.840
<v Speaker 1>the company isn't interested in the product. The company is

0:33:48.880 --> 0:33:52.560
<v Speaker 1>interested in the people who made the product. Not necessarily

0:33:52.560 --> 0:33:57.280
<v Speaker 1>the founders but the actual developers. So it's quite possible

0:33:57.280 --> 0:34:01.000
<v Speaker 1>that that was the whole reason why, apart when after

0:34:01.520 --> 0:34:05.080
<v Speaker 1>Pounds in the first place. Either way, Pounds was no

0:34:05.200 --> 0:34:09.080
<v Speaker 1>more just a short time after it had been founded. Now,

0:34:09.080 --> 0:34:12.440
<v Speaker 1>it's important to remember that for most social network sites,

0:34:12.760 --> 0:34:18.440
<v Speaker 1>the users are in fact the product. It's we gotta remember,

0:34:18.480 --> 0:34:20.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, you always asked if if a service is free,

0:34:21.200 --> 0:34:23.520
<v Speaker 1>that really means that you are the thing that's being sold.

0:34:24.440 --> 0:34:27.799
<v Speaker 1>Social networks tend to make money through advertising, and they

0:34:27.840 --> 0:34:32.480
<v Speaker 1>attract advertisers because those social networks are privy two tons

0:34:32.680 --> 0:34:37.600
<v Speaker 1>of private information about users, and advertisers would kill for

0:34:37.680 --> 0:34:42.160
<v Speaker 1>that sort of granular demographic information. I say that because

0:34:42.200 --> 0:34:45.480
<v Speaker 1>the next social network I want to mention came from

0:34:45.480 --> 0:34:49.240
<v Speaker 1>a behemoth in the retail space that was actually launched

0:34:49.280 --> 0:34:52.680
<v Speaker 1>by the company Walmart, and a lot of people dismissed

0:34:52.680 --> 0:34:55.920
<v Speaker 1>it immediately as a crass attempt to cash in on

0:34:55.960 --> 0:34:59.879
<v Speaker 1>the social network trend, and honestly, it's hard to dis

0:35:00.040 --> 0:35:03.319
<v Speaker 1>missed those criticisms. However, I would argue that Walmart was

0:35:03.400 --> 0:35:07.080
<v Speaker 1>just more blatant in its motivations than other social networks.

0:35:07.480 --> 0:35:10.360
<v Speaker 1>A lot of social networks out there were just equally

0:35:10.400 --> 0:35:14.640
<v Speaker 1>as concerned with leveraging a social network in order to

0:35:14.719 --> 0:35:19.400
<v Speaker 1>make money. They just it just wasn't as obvious. So

0:35:19.840 --> 0:35:22.440
<v Speaker 1>while it's easy to to cast dispersions, I think we

0:35:22.480 --> 0:35:25.000
<v Speaker 1>need to cast them equally across the field. Anyway, let's

0:35:25.000 --> 0:35:28.759
<v Speaker 1>talk about the Hub. So Walmart created the Hub in

0:35:28.840 --> 0:35:32.000
<v Speaker 1>two thousand six. And part of the reason why I

0:35:32.000 --> 0:35:34.480
<v Speaker 1>think a lot of people criticize this is because of

0:35:34.520 --> 0:35:37.840
<v Speaker 1>the target demographic. It wasn't meant for adults. It was

0:35:37.880 --> 0:35:42.040
<v Speaker 1>actually targeted toward teens. Now, according to the company, the

0:35:42.120 --> 0:35:45.080
<v Speaker 1>purpose of the site was so that teens could quote

0:35:45.080 --> 0:35:51.160
<v Speaker 1>express their individuality end quote. But this expression wasn't exactly

0:35:51.320 --> 0:35:55.120
<v Speaker 1>free expression. It actually came with some very strict limitations.

0:35:55.880 --> 0:36:00.279
<v Speaker 1>For one thing, it would notify a user's parents that

0:36:00.360 --> 0:36:03.480
<v Speaker 1>the user had joined the service. So you know, you

0:36:03.520 --> 0:36:06.520
<v Speaker 1>had to provide email, I address I assume of your

0:36:06.640 --> 0:36:09.120
<v Speaker 1>your parents, and as part of that, the parents would

0:36:09.120 --> 0:36:11.919
<v Speaker 1>get a notification saying, Hey, your kids trying to join

0:36:11.920 --> 0:36:14.160
<v Speaker 1>the social networking service. Thought you should know just in case.

0:36:14.719 --> 0:36:17.080
<v Speaker 1>Users were not allowed to send messages to one another

0:36:17.120 --> 0:36:19.480
<v Speaker 1>privately on the platform, so you couldn't send emails or

0:36:19.520 --> 0:36:23.279
<v Speaker 1>anything like that to each other um. It screened all

0:36:23.280 --> 0:36:26.920
<v Speaker 1>the content that was coming through the site, and it

0:36:26.960 --> 0:36:30.800
<v Speaker 1>was largely geared towards the commerce side of social networking.

0:36:30.880 --> 0:36:34.760
<v Speaker 1>So it was a restrictive platform that was obviously self serving,

0:36:34.920 --> 0:36:38.080
<v Speaker 1>and it didn't work. It did not attract users the

0:36:38.120 --> 0:36:41.880
<v Speaker 1>way Walmart had hoped, and after just three months, Walmart

0:36:41.920 --> 0:36:46.000
<v Speaker 1>pulled the plug on the site and the hub went flat. Now,

0:36:46.080 --> 0:36:50.840
<v Speaker 1>my last entry of all these failed social networks is

0:36:51.520 --> 0:36:54.320
<v Speaker 1>just kind of sort of social network. It's it's social

0:36:54.360 --> 0:36:59.520
<v Speaker 1>network adjacent, and that would be Yahoo Buzz. This one's

0:36:59.560 --> 0:37:01.759
<v Speaker 1>also a weird for me to talk about because while

0:37:01.800 --> 0:37:06.560
<v Speaker 1>I cannot remember which article it was, I remember distinctly

0:37:06.640 --> 0:37:09.760
<v Speaker 1>early in my career. It was shortly after we started

0:37:09.800 --> 0:37:13.759
<v Speaker 1>adding more staff writers for how Stuff Works dot com,

0:37:13.800 --> 0:37:16.160
<v Speaker 1>So this would be in the era when Josh and

0:37:16.239 --> 0:37:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Chuck of Stuff you Should Know had joined and a

0:37:18.560 --> 0:37:22.320
<v Speaker 1>few others were just fresh on the staff. Yahoo Buzz

0:37:22.440 --> 0:37:25.799
<v Speaker 1>started to really get a big push behind it, even

0:37:25.800 --> 0:37:27.880
<v Speaker 1>though it had been around for several years at that point,

0:37:28.520 --> 0:37:31.400
<v Speaker 1>and one of my articles got featured on Yahoo Buzz

0:37:31.520 --> 0:37:34.880
<v Speaker 1>early on in this in this push, and as a result,

0:37:34.960 --> 0:37:38.600
<v Speaker 1>the numbers for that article skyrocketed. It became one of

0:37:38.600 --> 0:37:41.600
<v Speaker 1>the most visited articles on the house stuff works dot

0:37:41.640 --> 0:37:45.040
<v Speaker 1>com site, and it was mine, which is fantastic. It's

0:37:45.040 --> 0:37:47.960
<v Speaker 1>a great feeling to see one of your articles just

0:37:48.040 --> 0:37:52.200
<v Speaker 1>go viral like this. Now, as it turns out, manufacturing

0:37:52.239 --> 0:37:54.319
<v Speaker 1>that kind of thing is pretty darn hard to do,

0:37:54.920 --> 0:37:58.080
<v Speaker 1>and people can typically suss out when you're trying to

0:37:58.160 --> 0:38:01.080
<v Speaker 1>do it and they just dismiss it. So these days

0:38:01.120 --> 0:38:03.200
<v Speaker 1>I just focus on trying to do a good job

0:38:03.360 --> 0:38:06.360
<v Speaker 1>and create good content and not worry about whether or

0:38:06.360 --> 0:38:08.840
<v Speaker 1>not it goes viral, because I figure that's up to

0:38:08.920 --> 0:38:12.239
<v Speaker 1>other people. That's not up to me. Anyway. Let's get

0:38:12.239 --> 0:38:15.840
<v Speaker 1>back to Buzz. So technically, Buzz was a community news

0:38:15.880 --> 0:38:19.279
<v Speaker 1>site where users could share articles they had seen online

0:38:19.640 --> 0:38:22.400
<v Speaker 1>with each other. You could have your own news feed

0:38:22.480 --> 0:38:25.480
<v Speaker 1>of curated articles that you found interesting, and other people

0:38:25.520 --> 0:38:27.920
<v Speaker 1>could visit your profile and read the articles that you

0:38:27.960 --> 0:38:32.200
<v Speaker 1>had curated. It was pretty darn similar to what dig

0:38:32.480 --> 0:38:36.000
<v Speaker 1>was already doing and what Reddit would go on to

0:38:36.120 --> 0:38:39.360
<v Speaker 1>do in the future. Yeah who. Buzz originally launched in

0:38:39.400 --> 0:38:42.719
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and Yahoo would sunset the service in two

0:38:42.719 --> 0:38:47.600
<v Speaker 1>thousand eleven, along with several other social media and blog services,

0:38:47.640 --> 0:38:49.480
<v Speaker 1>all At the same time, the company had come to

0:38:49.520 --> 0:38:54.200
<v Speaker 1>the conclusion that Buzz and its companions were too challenging

0:38:54.280 --> 0:38:57.799
<v Speaker 1>to monetize effectively, and so it made more sense to

0:38:58.080 --> 0:39:02.760
<v Speaker 1>drop those services and focus on strategies that did generate revenue.

0:39:03.360 --> 0:39:06.799
<v Speaker 1>So along with Buzz, my blog log, Yahoo picks, and

0:39:06.880 --> 0:39:11.680
<v Speaker 1>Yahoo bookmarks all got the acts and it all ended. Now,

0:39:12.080 --> 0:39:18.399
<v Speaker 1>these are all the social networks that for one reason

0:39:18.480 --> 0:39:21.840
<v Speaker 1>or another went out of business, got shuttered, got shut down.

0:39:22.960 --> 0:39:26.480
<v Speaker 1>But there are lots of other ones that are technically

0:39:26.520 --> 0:39:30.320
<v Speaker 1>still around but have very little activity around them or

0:39:30.680 --> 0:39:33.880
<v Speaker 1>a very small population where they don't get very much coverage.

0:39:33.920 --> 0:39:37.080
<v Speaker 1>They don't they aren't able to emerge from beneath the

0:39:37.120 --> 0:39:40.680
<v Speaker 1>shadow of the giants of Facebook and Twitter. For example,

0:39:40.680 --> 0:39:43.440
<v Speaker 1>there's plerk, which is a Twitter alternative that a lot

0:39:43.480 --> 0:39:46.120
<v Speaker 1>of people loved when it first came out. It still exists.

0:39:46.920 --> 0:39:50.280
<v Speaker 1>There's l O E l l O that was pitched

0:39:50.320 --> 0:39:54.560
<v Speaker 1>as an ad free social network experience and these days

0:39:54.800 --> 0:39:58.040
<v Speaker 1>is largely populated by artists and creative types, so it

0:39:58.160 --> 0:40:01.879
<v Speaker 1>still exists. It's much more stripped down simple. Uh. Some

0:40:01.920 --> 0:40:05.919
<v Speaker 1>people would say it's too simple, but uh, it's one

0:40:06.000 --> 0:40:08.480
<v Speaker 1>that a lot of artists are using these days rather

0:40:08.520 --> 0:40:12.200
<v Speaker 1>than Facebook. So there's still a few dozen smaller social

0:40:12.200 --> 0:40:16.040
<v Speaker 1>network sites that don't have the attention or influence of

0:40:16.080 --> 0:40:19.239
<v Speaker 1>the big guys, and some people tend to put those

0:40:19.360 --> 0:40:23.440
<v Speaker 1>on the same lists as as the defunct ones I've mentioned.

0:40:23.719 --> 0:40:25.799
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that's entirely fair because the ones I'm

0:40:25.800 --> 0:40:29.600
<v Speaker 1>talking about literally they don't exist anymore, or at least

0:40:30.200 --> 0:40:33.359
<v Speaker 1>they don't exist as their own separate entity. If they

0:40:33.440 --> 0:40:35.840
<v Speaker 1>exist at all, they exist in the form of features

0:40:35.880 --> 0:40:40.319
<v Speaker 1>that have been implemented into other social networks. Um. One

0:40:40.400 --> 0:40:44.920
<v Speaker 1>person suggested, I do uh Diaspora as an example, but

0:40:45.000 --> 0:40:49.400
<v Speaker 1>that one technically is still going. It's uh not incredibly popular,

0:40:49.520 --> 0:40:52.120
<v Speaker 1>there's not a huge number of people using it, but

0:40:52.560 --> 0:40:56.840
<v Speaker 1>it hasn't gone away yet. So there are more that

0:40:56.920 --> 0:41:00.359
<v Speaker 1>I could talk about that are are still going. They

0:41:00.360 --> 0:41:04.000
<v Speaker 1>still have a passionate base in some cases at least,

0:41:04.800 --> 0:41:08.360
<v Speaker 1>but they don't, you know, they don't even have a

0:41:08.440 --> 0:41:11.719
<v Speaker 1>metric to compare against the big ones. I guess the

0:41:11.760 --> 0:41:15.080
<v Speaker 1>point of all this is that maybe it is time

0:41:15.200 --> 0:41:17.480
<v Speaker 1>to go in and break up Facebook a bit. It's

0:41:17.600 --> 0:41:20.640
<v Speaker 1>essentially a monopoly when it comes to the social network space,

0:41:20.719 --> 0:41:24.040
<v Speaker 1>especially now that, you know, Google Plus. Google Plus probably

0:41:24.080 --> 0:41:27.080
<v Speaker 1>had a decent chance if it had been implemented in

0:41:27.120 --> 0:41:29.160
<v Speaker 1>a better way, and if it hadn't had that data

0:41:29.160 --> 0:41:33.560
<v Speaker 1>breach problem to have really challenged Facebook, but it never

0:41:33.640 --> 0:41:36.880
<v Speaker 1>quite had the cool factor beyond that exclusivity when it

0:41:37.080 --> 0:41:41.960
<v Speaker 1>first launched. Uh, no one else has really come close. However,

0:41:42.160 --> 0:41:44.080
<v Speaker 1>we said the same thing about my Space back in

0:41:44.120 --> 0:41:46.440
<v Speaker 1>the day, and then Facebook was able to turn all

0:41:46.440 --> 0:41:50.080
<v Speaker 1>that around. So it may just mean that somebody has

0:41:50.120 --> 0:41:54.239
<v Speaker 1>to come up with a very compelling approach to social networks,

0:41:54.600 --> 0:41:58.880
<v Speaker 1>possibly one that appeals to a younger audience, and maybe

0:41:58.880 --> 0:42:01.360
<v Speaker 1>then they could topple face it that way. But honestly,

0:42:01.640 --> 0:42:03.520
<v Speaker 1>at the rate the company is going right now, they're

0:42:03.520 --> 0:42:06.840
<v Speaker 1>doing a pretty good job toppling themselves, or at least

0:42:07.040 --> 0:42:10.640
<v Speaker 1>sticking their corporate foot into their corporate mouth. But that

0:42:10.640 --> 0:42:13.120
<v Speaker 1>wraps up this episode. I hope you enjoyed it. If

0:42:13.120 --> 0:42:16.120
<v Speaker 1>you have any suggestions for future topics of tech Stuff,

0:42:16.120 --> 0:42:19.280
<v Speaker 1>why not send me a quick message. The email address

0:42:19.320 --> 0:42:21.760
<v Speaker 1>for the show is tech Stuff at how stuff works

0:42:21.840 --> 0:42:25.080
<v Speaker 1>dot com or dropped by our website that's tech Stuff

0:42:25.080 --> 0:42:28.120
<v Speaker 1>podcast dot com. You'll find other ways to contact me there.

0:42:28.160 --> 0:42:31.040
<v Speaker 1>You'll find the archives of the show. There. Go check

0:42:31.080 --> 0:42:33.239
<v Speaker 1>that out, and don't forget to visit our store that's

0:42:33.239 --> 0:42:35.960
<v Speaker 1>over at t public dot com slash tech stuff. Remember,

0:42:35.960 --> 0:42:38.279
<v Speaker 1>every purchase you make goes to help the show, and

0:42:38.320 --> 0:42:40.800
<v Speaker 1>we greatly appreciate it. And I'll talk to you again

0:42:41.480 --> 0:42:49.840
<v Speaker 1>really soon for more on this and thousands of other topics.

0:42:50.080 --> 0:43:01.200
<v Speaker 1>Is it how stuff works dot com