The pursuit of cash and the pursuit of knowledge should be independently pursued. Otherwise one encounters some very sad compromises.
(my side of a conversation)
Come on folks, get with the program. Facebook is not a technology company - its core competency is community management - technology is a means, not an end. Oracle, is a technology company...
FB works in meta/macro dimensions/scopes to facilitate measurable traffic, which it sells.
I would maintain, for discussion's sake... while tech is in FB's value chain, it's not the end-product that FB optimises that value chain for...
(Assuming we are debating the nature of FB's #1 core competency, or that a company only has one:) But Facebook's competitors didn't lose due to "bad technology" - they lost due to bad community (i.e. traffic) management.
A middleground to consider: FB's core competency is "user interface design for social networking." But to back that up conclusively might involve a dissertation haha.
Friendster: there's an epic SIC write-up by the founder on what killed it - death by committee, leading to capex churn, and mistargeted marketing. So without further research, I would tend to think about it that way.
MySpace: death by UI/UX - leading to reduced engagement.
Hello KL traffic jams. So more arguments for the sake of amusement:
- FB's early growth tactic (intentional or otherwise) which was oriented around US college campuses, was key to its traction (I just happened to be there)
- UI design for software is actually analogous to the more traditional discipline of civil architecture; the design of space defines the daily traffic (physical and mental) of the people operating within that space; community management depends more on architectural design than on the engineering finesse by which such design is delivered; it's the architect's job to bridge the availability of engineering resources, and the utilisation of space for a given purpose... and so...
- FB and Friendster's core competencies were respectively, the same: community management... Friendster fucked up on delivery, because it didn't control its user growth intelligently (in the logistical sense) - it didn't even know where its users were coming from until the databases choked (or was it the ad dollars - I'll have to go refresh myself on that)
The problem with tolerance for (high-volatility && multi-year horizons) is that it becomes incompatible with counterparties seeking (shorter-term returns || lower vol). This seems related to the Herbertian Litany Against Fear (consider the fable of the pain-machine). More musings on being a phil major that ended up working with startups.
No parking tickets, no flat tires, engine still starts, disrupted my recovery of personal work for a week (for better or for worse), took a few nice photos, and both made and lost enough money to pay for the whole thing... I guess that counts as a successful vacation. #wingingIt
Combined two meetings. Met up with the USAPPS bunch.
CMO for a financial consumer product. I like the sound of that. There's a trivial technological hurdle. There's no funding question mark. We just need to explain how the god-damn math works. To your grandma. That's easy. ;)
One more counselling case before returning, finally, to the office...
10 days till EOM. Clean-up schedule at 67%. Progress uncertain. Proceeding. Occupy, bed...