Hacker News Reader

Comment by run4yourlives | Hacker News Reader

It's official, there is a bubble around "web 2.0".

I'm sorry, but there is next to zero value in an app that's sole purpose is to be a minor distraction while using another app that is itself a minor distraction.

I've had this bad feeling for a while now that facebook will be the app that we look back upon as the harbinger of the 2.0 bust.

It's a fad,(FB that is) and like all fads, from hula hoops to acid wash, it fades as fast as it grows. I honestly hope I'm wrong, but I'm starting to see more and more startups and such that provide little value for mega valuations. This isn't a good thing.

end of rant. (Sorry, it's before my coffee)

View on HN

I don't know anything about your background, but it's clear that you are not Facebook's targeted audience. As a FB user from early (summer 2004), I can attest to how much it has impacted college.

Almost everyone I know is on Facebook. While this may just be my circle of friends, or my particular Uni (UCSB) it is clear that there is value with FB. Being able to keep in touch with your friends, to see what their up to, hell even to throw parties is all done on facebook.

Just this weekend, I asked my friend who was turning 21 why he didn't throw a party. He told me that having moved into his new place he didn't have internet. I asked what the hell that had to do with anything. He said that he couldn't create an event on facebook and thus no one would come.

So anyway, the whole point of this work-avoiding rant is that I wouldn't be so quick to judge the value of FB when it has already impacted my life and perhaps changed the college experience forever.

P.S. I do agree with you that FB apps are overrated. Most of my friends are sick of them, and the only one worth having is the Graffiti app.

P.P.S. Have some coffee. It helps.

Facebook is having an enormous lifestyle impact on current college students. It's a sociological shift. Most of my peers are so attached to facebook that the extraordinary valuations for facebook seem perfectly reasonable.

It doesn't matter what value FB has to you, really. You don't pay for it!

My issue is FB is a leader in terms of "2.0". A leader based economically on a pile of sand (ads) If FB fails, it will scare the market and poof! There goes your "2.0 boom".

I'm not looking at FB from a consumer's perspective, I'm looking at it from an investment/business perspective.

Being that you're still in college, you should keep in mind that many of us have experienced this same exact phenomenon before.

How does paying 60K for 1.4 million users qualify as a bubble. It's just a few months salary for one developer. Slide has now hired a developer who created something that 1.4 million people wanted. Think of 60K as signing bonus. Hardly a bubble.

It's not so much the single occurrence as the general activity that I was railing against.

You view it as "creating something that 1.4 million people wanted", I view it as "1.4 people thought it was marginally amusing for a brief period".

My complaint isn't that those 1.4 people aren't there, it's that their approach to the "product" will result in a non-viable long term position.

I'm not saying you can't make money on fads, I'm saying that you can't make money long term (ie enough to recoup investment) on fads. This case may be small, but it's a symptom of a type of thinking that is gaining prevalence - the same type of thinking that caught us in version 1.0 with our pants down.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com