These are the trends I feel that should be laid to rest in 2008, which I intend to discuss across various posts.

Social Networking Sites

The social networking space is a bad business idea, and it’s beyond me why entrepreneurs continue to go into this type of medium – other than to do a “smash and grab” job to make fast money and cash out to the highest bidder; more on that later.

The social networking business is one that relies on fickle users who continuously prove that they have short term loyalty. After a year or two, they leave one social networking site in order to be apart of the “new thing” that everyone is talking about. Just look at the social networking sites that have taken off then crashed and burned throughout the years: the Globe, Friendster, Google’s Orkut, and Yahoo 360, the later two of which were barely alive to begin with. Up next on the death watch list are Bebo, MySpace, and eventually Facebook because everyone will move to LinkedIn or Ning. Aside from me thinking that it’s stupid to re-setup a profile all over again – because you can’t currently take your data with you, which is an issue that may or may not be resolved with OpenSocial – I just don’t see much purpose in social networking sites. They don’t do or offer anything useful to the average user other than LinkedIn and perhaps Ning.

As for founders and investors in social networking sites, their business is only beneficial if they cash out while they’re hot; otherwise, they’re in a business that lives and dies by the fickleness of its users, which is something Mark Zuckerberg should take note of. That being said, I think companies that acquire social networking sites are dumb for doing so because they’re throwing their money away. Companies acquire these sites for the user base; however, the end result is a bad move considering the users will eventually flock away. We’ve seen an exodus of users too many times in the past, and I don’t see people settling down with just one social network anytime soon.

YouTube Video Link: 

In my personal opinion, I think tech is heading for another bubble. Facebook’s $15 billion dollar evaluation is a shining example of why I think that.

[Spotted over at Valleywag]

Facebook introduced Beacon as a part of its Social Ads program to try and monetize from the surge in the site’s popularity. Beacon essentially tracks your purchases from participating sites such as Blockbuster, Overstock, and Fandango, and broadcasts that information to your Facebook friends. Oh and by the way, the program uses your data to make money for Facebook while you receive nothing in return. When introduced, Beacon was automatically turned on and supposedly gave users an on-screen message to opt-out of transmitting their purchases to friends, a message that many users say they never saw. Even before Beacon launched, there was some backlash and privacy concerns, and many rose up against the program after the launch. Just as I figured, Facebook did an about face and made Beacon opt-in to its users, hoping to quell another News Feeds-like backlash. From an outsider looking in, this debacle is another example of why you shouldn’t trust Facebook with your privacy.

Unlike News Feeds, Beacon didn’t use information that was already in a user’s Facebook profile. It collected and used data from other sites and transmitted that information to other Facebook users. One would think that Mark Zuckerberg and crew would have learned a lesson from privacy issues with the News Feeds debacle, but obviously, they didn’t. Instead, they took privacy violations to a whole new level with Beacon. The News Feeds and Beacon mishaps are shining examples of how Facebook no longer values privacy of its users and thus, can’t be trusted. That being said, if you still have a Facebook account, my question to you is, why? They’ve obviously shown that they value money over your privacy and don’t think out features as well as they should; News Feeds and Beacon shows that. It makes you wonder what’s next in Facebook’s Social Ads program and in what way will any future programs step all over your privacy; I have a feeling that they will. I understand that the company has to justify their 15 billion dollar valuation by ramping up revenues, but sacrificing user privacy and allegedly lie to advertisers to earn profits is not the way to do it.

Facebook might be the hot playground that all the cool kids want to play in, but I wonder how long that will last with these highly visible privacy breaches. My personal opinion is that people should be running away from Facebook in droves. Any company that claims to value your privacy yet consistently violates it is a company you should not support. Period. With Facebook being such a young, small company and pulling these kinds of things now, can you imagine what they might be capable of if they were Microsoft-sized? Think about it, and think about why you should stay away from Facebook.

It’s bad enough that Soulja Boy has infected the music scene with the obnoxious “Crank That (Soulja Boy),” which is inexplicably a major hit. I’ve seen sports commentators and football players doing that stupid dance. Just hearing this song or catching a glimpse of the video almost sends me into a blind rage. Yes, I hate this song and dance just that much. Now, to my horror, “Crank That (Soulja Boy)” is spreading to ballet classes like a bad case of Herpes.

brightcove Video Link: 

I will be so glad when Soulja Boy’s 5 minutes is up and he fades into obscurity with his vomit-inducing one hit wonder. Even Travis Barker is doing remixes! What is the world coming to?

Note: I actually do think Travis Barker’s remix is an improvement, but I still hate this song.

I’ve been a member of Digg “community” for approximately a year. As I have mentioned before, I don’t interact with other Digg members and only used the site to digg stories rather than spend useless time submitting stories. There was a time when I used Digg every day, but those days have long passed. For one, I’m a much busier person than I was when I first joined Digg. The other reason I don’t use the site as much is because it is still heavily niche-based in tech that non geeks may not find as appealing. Yes, I know that the politics section has seen some growth, but 99% of the political stories are about Ron Paul. For me, Digg doesn’t give me a proper balance of news because there is more to life than tech and Ron Paul stories, you know. And balance is one of the reasons why I feel Digg is having an issue with their exit strategy: acquisition.

There have been rumors swirling that a sale of Digg is imminent. If true, I hope it’s to a buyer than can make some changes to Digg. While the site’s numbers in terms of page views and new sign ups continues to grow, the type of news that’s presented to the front page on Digg is pretty much the same every day – tech, Ron Paul stories, or “wacky and weird” stories. For Digg to be a mainstream player, a hierarchy of editors will need to be added to bring some balance to the site. In the past, CEO Jay Adelson has rejected the idea of adding an editorial process to the stories on Digg – although some think editors do exist. While I can understand his view of allowing the users to filter the content, the content isn’t varied enough to draw in and retain an audience who visit traditional news sites on a daily basis; I still have to visit mainstream news sites for “real” news instead of just relying on Digg for all of my news. This is where an editorial process would help. Editors could gather a batch of submitted/dugg stories from all genre types and promote those on the front page. Of course, doing this would anger (more like rage) the Digg community in large because they feel the site is theirs – an unfortunate side effect from allowing the community to be in charge of content. However, I think for Digg to really become a mainstream player in the news space, an overlaying editorial process is a necessary step to move beyond its current news base. I just don’t think it will happen as long as Digg is run by Adelson and Kevin Rose. (more…)