Web 2.0 is stealing my life!

AdWright

AdWright

Suspended / Banned
Messages
522
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone else suffering from an addiction to user-driven websites (aside from TP of course)? I was recently introduced to facebook, which just encourages people to be nosy and now I've embraced flickr and spend hours just browsing through photos...

I want my evenings back! :p
 
I am hooked on flickr and tp (of course), they are both so addictive and great fun.

Here's my contribution to getting people addicted

flickr.com/photos/rmw_77
 
facebook is awful - just hours and hours joining random groups, adding photos, having poking wars, convo's on walls. Tis bad.

/stands up/ My names Michael, and I too am a Web 2.0 addict
 
Facebook, flikr and here...... what can i say ;)
 
i have been addicted to the net for over 10 years now :(
i have tried going on a "web diet" but dont have the will power

web 2.0 hasnt kicked off properly yet IMO.
 
You're all noobs. Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Flickr, occasional DeviantArt, etc :)
 
Facebook is just like Faceparty but minus the sex with teenage girls
Flickr is just full of people saying "wow great photo" to absolutely anything
Myspace is for people who have difficulty planning their social lives

I really CBA with any of them quite frankly
 
Nah. Facebook is just like any other social networking site, just as Myspace is and Bebo and Orkut and Virb and so on. The beauty of Facebook is that you can create and join groups relating to things you're into. You can't on Faceparty. Faceparty is just a teenage whore fest. "Look I'm pretty!! Um now what?" Flickr is great for browsing great photos, just like DeviantArt. Sure its full of people saying "Great shot!" but then so is this place some days. Its the nature of the beast. When you put a million people in a room you'll probably get the same answers, the same cliches and stereotypes. MySpace is, for me, networking with bands and people looking for free modelling shoots. They all have their purpose but for now Facebook is the complete anti-Myspace and looks to become very nice. I'm on them because its another way to get my work seen by people who might not see them.
 
I'm just messing with you mate, no need to qualify your surfing activities to me :razz:

The way I see Flickr and Deviantart is market research, see what people click on and what they don't. One thing I have learnt is that quick snaps of semi-naked munters get more clicks than technically excellent photos that take ages to produce :lol:

I don't use any of the networking sites at all, I just don't have the time and I prefer talking to REAL LIFE™ friends than virtual ones ;)
 
Well of course a naked girl will get a huge number of faves, its just the way things work. It hasn't stopped me building up a collection of artists that I consider good and draw inspiration from though.
 
Just looking at the T&Cs of Facebook, presumably no one would post their work on there?

By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.
Click to expand...

Strangely it goes on to say that if you delete content the irrevocable perpetual license is revoked.

Michael.
 
mij said:
Just looking at the T&Cs of Facebook, presumably no one would post their work on there?



Strangely it goes on to say that if you delete content the irrevocable perpetual license is revoked.

Michael.
Click to expand...

Fairly standard. If you think about it things on their site do get published all over the place so you have to grant them a license to do so. You're not handing over copyright or anything. You're just allowing them to not be sued.
 
evilowl said:
Facebook is just like Faceparty but minus the sex with teenage girls
Flickr is just full of people saying "wow great photo" to absolutely anything
Myspace is for people who have difficulty planning their social lives

I really CBA with any of them quite frankly
Click to expand...

Im with you 100% i dont do blogs, facebook etc etc just cant be bothered with them.

Im trying to upgrade to RealLife 1.0 from Web 2.0 and im winning slowly ;)
 
Yes its true that there are stereotypes that make somethings look bad but imho theres a hell of a lot of great user content out there that makes it all worthwhile.
 
not running people down that do like them, they just arent for me, i have about 3 forums i check up on, and thats it really, the longer i go on the less interested i get in t'internet ! lol maybe its just my day job being working with servers thats done it
 
petemc said:
Fairly standard. If you think about it things on their site do get published all over the place so you have to grant them a license to do so. You're not handing over copyright or anything. You're just allowing them to not be sued.
Click to expand...

I would not say they are standard though. Under those terms, for example, they legally have the right to use something you post on the site as part of an advertising campaign for the site and not have to pay you anything for it!

Not to mention the inherent contradiction that the irrevocable rights could be revoked, which at the very least gives them a legal basis to contest that they last in perpetuity making it too expensive for many to challenge them if they do use deleted content.

Last year MySpace famously had to change their policy when Billy Bragg removed his content because it handed over too much power. Now it only grants them the rights necessary to provide the service. Yahoo's policy for Flickr is similarly restricted in that way. In fact it makes an interesting comparison with Facebook:

With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Service and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Service.
Click to expand...

I think we will see another big controversy, like the Bragg one, as Facebook continue to grow. Until then I am very wary of the site.

Michael.
 
Personally I just think that its so their asses are covered by distributing your content throughout the world because everyone will be sharing it. Has Youtube or anyone who has a license like this actually used anyones content in advertising? Flickr's is good because you can set the license term per photo.
 
I did set up a myspace page, then i realised it was full of teenagers and angst, so i havnt updated it in months.
I love flickr, its a fantastic site and flickr nicely integrates itself into windows (so right click menu for pictures has a 'upload to flickr' option)
Heres mine
http://www.flickr.com/photos/danleach
:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top