In China on 07/07/2016 at 5:19 am
The usual ang moh tua kee suspects are blaming the PAP IB of manipulating Facebook’s algorithms to get anti-PAP stuff taken off Facebook.They could be right in their usual attitudes of blaming the PAP (“PAP is always wrong”)and absolving an ang moh company (“Ang mohs know best”) of blame.
But have they ever tot that Facebook is using S’pore to test software for the China market.
Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear that he’s prepared to kowtow to if they’ll let Facebook in. He says he read president Xi’s writings and has invited China’s chief censor to dinner in his home. He’s even run in Beijing without a face-mask. But all to no avail.
So maybe he’s using Spore to test censorship software? Software that can detect and remove criticism of the PAP here that can be modified to detect and remove criticism of Xi, the CCP and other PRC authorities. Surely such software will allow Facebook into China? The Chinese would want competition for their own internet players, lest they think they are more powerful than the CCP.
Mark Zuckerberg a running dog of Xi and the CCP? Now that would upset the ang moh tua kees here: only PAPies do things for money, not ang moh billionaires from Silicon Valley.
In Financial competency, Internet on 09/02/2012 at 5:21 am
On the first page of Facebook’s prospectus, it puts the number of its “monthly active users” at 845 million people. It reports the “daily active users” as 483 million people.
Err: According to the company, a user is considered active if he or she “took an action to share content or activity with his or her Facebook friends or connections via a third-party Web site that is integrated with Facebook.”
In other words, every time you press the “Like” button on NFL.com, for example, you’re an “active user” of Facebook. Perhaps you share a Twitter message on your Facebook account? That would make you an active Facebook user, too. Have you ever shared music on Spotify with a friend? You’re an active Facebook user. If you’ve logged into Huffington Post using your Facebook account and left a comment on the site — and your comment was automatically shared on Facebook — you, too, are an “active user” even though you’ve never actually spent any time on facebook.com.
Read more here
In Internet on 09/03/2011 at 9:36 am
Just a few months ago, an investment led by Goldman Sachs valued the social network at $50bn. Now, a group of analysts at an investment bank has looked at how the business is growing and come up with something 50% higher.
A study in BS analysis.
In Internet on 14/01/2011 at 5:50 am
Or the brutality of the Net. Or “Easy come, easy go”.
Remember MySpace? Latest woes — cutting half of staff.
MySpace valuation: That would put the valuation at about $500 million to $1.2 billion–with the lower end being LESS than Rupert paid for it, and the upper end being twice what he paid for it (hardly the steal of the century).
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-myspace-worth-zero-2010-2#ixzz1An0bhJ6J All in US$ and Murdoch paid US$580m for it
Facebook is now valued at US$50bn. But only a few yrs ago MySpace was “valued” at US$65bn, though the foot notes said US$5bn.
In Internet on 13/01/2011 at 5:17 am
Wayne Chang’s lawsuit claims he is entitled to a portion of the original $65m settlement made with Facebook.
The 27-year-old formed a file-sharing network called i2hub while studying at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, which he later merged with their social network ConnectU in 2004.
ConnectU was bought by Facebook as part of the settlement and Mr Chang said that means he is due a share of the deal.
Mr Chang said he was “back-stabbed” and that he has been treated the way the Winklevosses claim they have been treated by Facebook.
BBC Online article on the Facebook story.