Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Mocks 'Infection' Study, Predicts Princeton's Demise

samzenpus posted about 7 months ago | from the you-are-more-of-it dept.

Facebook 193

Okian Warrior writes "In a followup to the earlier story about Princeton researchers predicting the end of Facebook by 2017, Facebook has struck back with a post using similar statistical techniques to predict that Princeton itself may be facing irreversible decline. By using similar methods ('likes', mentions in scholarly papers, Google searches) Facebook has created graphs that indicate Princeton is losing ground compared with its rivals and may have no students at all by 2021."

cancel ×

193 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Atleast.. (5, Funny)

durrr (1316311) | about 7 months ago | (#46055211)

Princeton will have the last laugh as facebook will be dead before it.

Re:Atleast.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055397)

Who to hate when given these two choices. It's causing me a mental breakdown...

Re:Atleast.. (2)

BreakBad (2955249) | about 7 months ago | (#46055653)

There are no winners in a war. In this case... YAY!

Re:Atleast.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055647)

FB could buy Princeton with its spare change.

Re:Atleast.. (3, Insightful)

McGruber (1417641) | about 7 months ago | (#46056457)

In the long run we are all dead. - John Maynard Keynes

Pseudoscience (4, Funny)

Notabadguy (961343) | about 7 months ago | (#46055213)

Turn about is fair play sir!

Re:Pseudoscience (2)

zoomshorts (137587) | about 7 months ago | (#46055357)

Lies, damned lies and statistics. "Samuel Clemmons"

Re:Pseudoscience (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055391)

Ah, yes, Princeton. That bus stop in New Jersey. Reap what you sew, boys.

Re: Pseudoscience (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055445)

It's sow

Re: Pseudoscience (4, Funny)

Jade_Wayfarer (1741180) | about 7 months ago | (#46055461)

He probably meant "Rip what you sew".

Re: Pseudoscience (1)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about 7 months ago | (#46056355)

It could be "sew what you rip", except most people just throw it out and buy new cheap stuff from overseas...

For Princeton, it could be "reap less than half of what you sow", the part the government doesn't toss to the birds...

Re: Pseudoscience (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055469)

Nope. Princeton is famous for it's Home Economics program, you dolt.

Re: Pseudoscience (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055607)

Their, their. I'm pretty sure the GP's "error" was sewn into there comment on porpoise.

At least Princeton... (5, Insightful)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | about 7 months ago | (#46055231)

Offers good value for the time and money you spend there.

FAIL (1)

westlake (615356) | about 7 months ago | (#46055305)

Offers good value for the time and money you spend there.

You wouldn't know it from the idiocies exposed in the Facebook paper.

Re:At least Princeton... (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 months ago | (#46055335)

The kids that go to Princeton would probably do just fine in life no matter where they go.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 7 months ago | (#46055805)

I think this is probably the major problem with the US college/university system. They say students end up with hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans, but I imagine that's only students who insist on going to elite out-of-state/private schools.From the numbers I've seen, going to an in-state college/university in the US isn't any more expensive then going to university in Canada, yet somehow it's completely unaffordable in the US, while in Canada, it's only more expensive than most would like it to be. Most people would probably be better off going to a reasonably affordable state school, and having minimal debts, then they would going to an expensive private school and creating a debt they couldn't possibly hope to pay off.

Re:At least Princeton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055883)

You've noticed the discrepancy, but not caught on to the problem.

Things like the original OWS were the result of rich kids getting degrees in useless majors and then getting outraged that their job opportunities did not include "paid $250,000 a year to do nothing." So they had hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, no useful skills, and parents that were getting sick of their "endless party" lifestyle.

Others joined the protests for their own reasons after that group started things.

Re:At least Princeton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46056321)

Things like the original OWS were the result of rich kids getting degrees in useless majors and then getting outraged that their job opportunities did not include "paid $250,000 a year to do nothing." So they had hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, no useful skills, and parents that were getting sick of their "endless party" lifestyle.

America. Where being rich and in debt are not considered exclusive propositions.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 months ago | (#46056761)

If the government gives you a 3% subsidized loan that doesn't start accruing interest until you start paying it off, you take that thing.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 7 months ago | (#46056081)

And probably you end up with the same skills no matter what university you're on, but get hired only if you went to the expensive one.

That's the only reason why paying more in tuition sometimes might pay of.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 months ago | (#46056779)

While it is true that the Princeton grad will have the superior resume, that really only matters for the first job out of college. While I'm sure someone here will point out exceptions, work experience quickly eclipses education on the resume.

Re:At least Princeton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46056129)

America, where education costs gigabillions and produces empty suits. Scandinavia with its free socialist education system with free education all the way to Universities is laughing!

Re:At least Princeton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46056589)

I *highly* doubt it's free. The money to pay the teachers and others HAS to come from somewhere.. my guess is taxes.
So just because the student isn't handing money directly from their pockets to the school DOES NOT mean it's free.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 7 months ago | (#46056419)

Princeton has "needs-blind" admission. They'll help you graduate loan free: https://www.princeton.edu/admi... [princeton.edu]

You have the filthy rich sitting next to the dirt poor in lectures. But the one thing they both have in common, desides the grim and grit, is that they are both smart and work hard.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 months ago | (#46056797)

That's great, but who is more likely to be at the top of their high-school class and go to fancy private schools so that they have a leg up on Princeton's admissions criteria?

Re:At least Princeton... (3, Interesting)

kilgortrout (674919) | about 7 months ago | (#46056635)

The big three Ivies, Harvard, Princeton and Yale, have unbelievably huge endowments. Harvard leads with $40 billion, and Yale and Princeton have about $20 billion endowments each. As a result, they can afford to offer very generous need based financial aid. In fact, the only financial aid available from the Ivies is need based. If the family makes under about $75K, the student gets a free ride; that's tuition, books and room & board. The financial aid awards go down on a graduated scale based on income and don't cut out until family income is in the $250K range. They appear to intentionally peg it so for a middle to upper middle class family the financial aid award is large enough to make going to the Ivy slightly more affordable than going to an in state public university.

Re:At least Princeton... (1, Flamebait)

plopez (54068) | about 7 months ago | (#46055769)

I worked with a Princeton grad. He said the valedictorian speech was in Greek, but since no one at Princeton knows Greek anymore the student programs had it translated complete with notations as to where to clap and laugh at jokes. For this his dad paid Ivy league tuition. It aptly shows what said Ivy League education actually is, an overpriced sham.

BTW, I am an A&M grad who was his boss and flogged him at chess.

Re:At least Princeton... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055955)

The valedictorian speech is in English, actually. It's the salutatorian's speech that is in a dead language (Latin, not Greek). I'm not sure how this fun tradition (the parents aren't in on the joke, so they think all Princeton students understand Latin fluently) implies that Ivy League education is a sham.

Re:At least Princeton... (5, Insightful)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about 7 months ago | (#46056039)

I worked with a Princeton grad. He said the valedictorian speech was in Greek, but since no one at Princeton knows Greek anymore the student programs had it translated complete with notations as to where to clap and laugh at jokes. For this his dad paid Ivy league tuition. It aptly shows what said Ivy League education actually is, an overpriced sham.

BTW, I am an A&M grad who was his boss and flogged him at chess.

You don't go to an Ivy League school for the education. You go for the contacts, networking and prestige. It's not about what you learn at Princeton, but whom you meet.

Re:At least Princeton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46056101)

That's a standard Ivy League gag, the kids find it amusing. Anybody looking on, maybe not so much.

With your attitude towards Princeton, I bet he didn't stick around long. Congratulations on driving him away.

Actually... (4, Funny)

Notabadguy (961343) | about 7 months ago | (#46055239)

The best part of Facebook's article is where they use identical research methodology to prove that there will be no air left by 2060.

I predict an immediate rush on all stockpiles of canned air!

Re:Actually... (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 7 months ago | (#46055303)

The best part of Facebook's article is where they use identical research methodology to prove that there will be no air left by 2060.

I predict an immediate rush on all stockpiles of canned air!

I maintain a reserve supply of bottled air in my garage. I've got almost 700 cubic feet. 10-15 hours worth at my average consumption rate.

Re:Actually... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055405)

I maintain a reserve supply of bottled air in my garage. I've got almost 700 cubic feet. 10-15 hours worth at my average consumption rate.

Gee, it would be a real shame if something happened to your precious air reserve. Such as, I don't know, if someone pressed this little button on your garage door opener?

Re: Actually... (1)

FishTankX (1539069) | about 7 months ago | (#46055507)

i think he was referencing an air compressor.

Re:Actually... (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 7 months ago | (#46055551)

I maintain a reserve supply of bottled air in my garage. I've got almost 700 cubic feet. 10-15 hours worth at my average consumption rate.

Gee, it would be a real shame if something happened to your precious air reserve. Such as, I don't know, if someone pressed this little button on your garage door opener?

It's compressed and in bottles. I wasn't talking about the ambient air in the garage.

Re:Actually... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055661)

It's compressed and in bottles. I wasn't talking about the ambient air in the garage.

I seeeee .... give me 5 minutes and an anatomically correct mannequin, and I'll get back to you with a another bad joke.

Re:Actually... (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 7 months ago | (#46055435)

If you mean your car (I have no notion of how much 700 cubic feet is, nor do I want to, as I'm quite happy with SI units), don't forget it's not airtight. Be sure to cover everything with tape, so that your reserve doesn't disappear!

Re:Actually... (1)

Chickenlips (33524) | about 7 months ago | (#46055517)

He clearly stated "bottled air".

Re:Actually... (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 7 months ago | (#46056701)

But he didn't define bottled. Must it be a bottle or is the act of storing air in a container, whichever it is, still bottling?

Re:Actually... (0)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 7 months ago | (#46055835)

Any idiot knows that there's roughly 3 feet in a meter, so obviously 700 ft^3 is roughly equivalent to 700/9 or around 78 m^3. If you can't figure that out on your own, you're woefully ignorant.

Re:Actually... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055929)

Roughly equal to 700/27, it's cubed, not squared. (It's actually closer to 700/35), so about 20 m^3. Sounds like someone is woefully ignorant.

Re:Actually... (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 7 months ago | (#46056755)

My life contains 0 imperial units, unless some american comes along.

I have better things to do than spend time memorizing conversions for imperial units. I do know some, but I made no effort to learn them.

Brand? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055487)

Is it Perri-Air?

Re:Actually... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055495)

And that'll give you what, 10-15 hours to contemplate everyone around you having already died, and that you're hours away from the same fate?

Re:Actually... (1)

stewsters (1406737) | about 7 months ago | (#46055585)

You laugh now, but when our atmosphere boils off in 46 years your children won't be.

Re:Actually... (1)

phrostie (121428) | about 7 months ago | (#46055901)

would bags of potato chips be acceptable?

Re:Actually... (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 7 months ago | (#46055993)

Quick! We'll have to steal Druidia's air!

This just in (4, Insightful)

Mdk754 (3014249) | about 7 months ago | (#46055243)

You can make numbers look however you like in a study, who knew?

Re:This just in (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055291)

That's what happens you become a data scientist. They invent numbers out of thin air. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Re:This just in (1)

Mdk754 (3014249) | about 7 months ago | (#46055327)

To be fair the Facebook rebuttal has a hilarious tone to it, and Princeton started it...

Re:This just in (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 7 months ago | (#46056105)

As much as I love to hate on FB, they win the internets for today.

Re:This just in (1)

Rhaban (987410) | about 7 months ago | (#46055353)

That's what happens you become a data scientist. They invent numbers out of thin air.

They won’t do that for long when there will be no air left.

Re:This just in (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 7 months ago | (#46055363)

Only if you do it wrong.

Re:This just in (1)

borl (586949) | about 7 months ago | (#46055849)

Congrats, that was Facebook's point.

Re:This just in (1)

njnnja (2833511) | about 7 months ago | (#46056557)

I don't know if Facebook really want to promote the idea that numerical analytics are suspect. Isn't their whole business plan that advertising with them is so effective because they are able to target ads to people who are most receptive to them, based on proprietary models of behavior? Even if they win the argument, they lose.

dark matters II the hogwash; aired on POT.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055245)

(Personal Open Terminal). in this episode mutant crown royal dna is composted in the lhc. 'we're going to grow something here' was the official statement? viewers are feeling ill frequently... tbc do not miss episode III, the never ending holycost

NERD FIGHT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055293)

5 bucks on the skilly pasty white boy!

Facebook is too big to fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055297)

I mean, what would we do as a society if we lost Facebook and thus the ability to keep tabs on people we haven't spoken to since high school?

A message from Facebook that earns my respect? (1)

jeffb (2.718) (1189693) | about 7 months ago | (#46055313)

Okay, that's not what I was expecting to see this morning. Or ever, come to think about it.

I guess it's good to know that I can respect a well-crafted response, even when it comes from a source I don't respect.

Re:A message from Facebook that earns my respect? (1)

pauljlucas (529435) | about 7 months ago | (#46056473)

I guess it's good to know that I can respect a well-crafted response, even when it comes from a source I don't respect.

That should have been obvious. Occasionally, people I generally strongly disagree with say or write something I do agree with -- just like a broken clock is right twice a day.

Bets are open (2)

vikingpower (768921) | about 7 months ago | (#46055329)

10 : 1 that Princeton wins. Bookie can be contacted over my email .

Re:Bets are open (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055367)

That's a sucker bet....

Playing with fire, Mr Zuckerberg (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055361)

Some of America's most powerful anti-Semites attended Princeton.

Re:Playing with fire, Mr Zuckerberg (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 7 months ago | (#46056133)

Assuming an even distribution of Americas most powerful anti-Semites across the US and across US universities, that conclusion is logically correct.

That was quick... (5, Insightful)

toxickitty (1758282) | about 7 months ago | (#46055365)

Funny how quick they replied to this study, feeling a bit nervous facebook?

Re:That was quick... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055425)

They hit the nerve for sure.
For something vaporware like FB, predictions of the unavoidable sound really frightening.

Re:That was quick... (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 7 months ago | (#46055509)

You have an interesting definition of 'vaporware'.

Re:That was quick... (3, Insightful)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 7 months ago | (#46055471)

Funny how quick they replied to this study, feeling a bit nervous facebook?

Probably less nervous about Princeton's analysis than Wallstreet's, which shows the same thing. It's hard for any business to lose 20% of it's main demographic. When your main revenue stream is online ads and young people are the primary target of those ads, and studies show that once they leave, they are unlikely to return, it doesn't speak well for the future.

Does that mean FB will go out of business? That's up to them. Tech companies have to keep re-inventing themselves to stay relevant.

Re:That was quick... (1)

egranlund (1827406) | about 7 months ago | (#46056605)

Considering how quick a misleading study by a top university could totally ruin their stock price, it was be stupid not to respond quickly.

Brilliant Response (5, Insightful)

thoth (7907) | about 7 months ago | (#46055369)

This is a brilliant way to respond to the Princeton study - the correct way - rather than issue a press release denouncing it, or whine about it some other way.

Instead, use the study's own methodology against them to show other ridiculous conclusions. What are the academics at Princeton going to do, say "oh wait the original methods are bullshit". Anything they say against just weakens their original paper/study.

Re:Brilliant Response (3, Insightful)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 7 months ago | (#46055433)

This is a brilliant way to respond to the Princeton study - the correct way - rather than issue a press release denouncing it, or whine about it some other way.

Instead, use the study's own methodology against them to show other ridiculous conclusions. What are the academics at Princeton going to do, say "oh wait the original methods are bullshit". Anything they say against just weakens their original paper/study.

Maybe if Zuckerberg had finished his studies at Harvard, he would realize that an internet company and a university have two totally different business models and the analysis methods for one do not translate to the other.

Re:Brilliant Response (2)

abies (607076) | about 7 months ago | (#46055477)

True. Which doesn't mean that ones used in both "studies" are valid for Facebook and invalid for Princeton. They might as well invalid for both. Or, which would be even more funny, applicable to universities, but not to internet portals.

Re:Brilliant Response (4, Insightful)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 7 months ago | (#46055625)

True. Which doesn't mean that ones used in both "studies" are valid for Facebook and invalid for Princeton. They might as well invalid for both. Or, which would be even more funny, applicable to universities, but not to internet portals.

That might be true, but FB didn't attempt to show the study was invalid. Instead they tried to discredit it with a straw man argument.

Re:Brilliant Response (-1, Flamebait)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 7 months ago | (#46055677)

Maybe if Zuckerberg had finished his studies at Harvard, he would realize that an internet company and a university have two totally different business models and the analysis methods for one do not translate to the other.

Thank Fuck Almighty that Internet companies aren't run like Harvard! [youtube.com] ... yet.

I wouldn't wish Harvard on my worst enemies. Princeton's not a whole hell of a lot better. Academia is screwed, mate; It's become the realm of pseudo scientific propaganda, and guilt until proven innocent. [thefire.org] Abandon brain all ye who enter there.

Re:Brilliant Response (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 7 months ago | (#46056203)

Maybe if Zuckerberg had finished his studies at Harvard, he would realize that an internet company and a university have two totally different business models and the analysis methods for one do not translate to the other.

Thank Fuck Almighty that Internet companies aren't run like Harvard! [youtube.com] ... yet.

I wouldn't wish Harvard on my worst enemies. Princeton's not a whole hell of a lot better. Academia is screwed, mate; It's become the realm of pseudo scientific propaganda, and guilt until proven innocent. [thefire.org] Abandon brain all ye who enter there.

The real tragedy comes when profs decide to commercialize their ideas. Then all hell breaks loose, when, for example, you are part of a team trying to implement the dream and you realize the emperor's clothing is not of the most reliable material..

Re:Brilliant Response (2)

Salgat (1098063) | about 7 months ago | (#46055627)

I dunno, it sounds a bit childish. The fact that they took this so seriously and devoted resources to this also shows they have a strong concern about losing users, as if that is a real possibility.

Re:Brilliant Response (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46056161)

What do you think about Google's April Fools projects? Bet ya think those are awesome and not a waste of time.

What will replace Facebook? (4, Insightful)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about 7 months ago | (#46055385)

While I can certainly see Facebook fading away, the problem with the Princeton study is that an essential assumption was that since Facebook is the successor to Myspace the data regarding Myspace's rise and fall can be extrapolated to Facebook (using the resemblance of Myspace's rise and fall to certain other phenomena). The problem with this assumption is that Myspace's fall was a result of Facebook existing as its successor. Currently there is no "successor" to Facebook which fills the same niche as Facebook, Myspace, and Friendster filled.
I am not arguing that Facebook will not fall in the same way that Myspace did. I am just arguing that we do not have the data to make the case. Accurately predicting the fall of Facebook is a matter of "art", not of science and most of those doing so are expressing an opinion based on a WAG (and perhaps on what they hope will happen). Myspace and Friendster were fads. Facebook started as a fad, Myspace and Friendster faded away when they lost their novelty and were replaced by the next fad. However, Facebook has survived past the fad stage. I will repeat that just because Facebook has survived past the fad stage that does not mean that it will last.

Re:What will replace Facebook? (3, Interesting)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 7 months ago | (#46055563)

I'm not sure it's passed the fad stage.

That is probably true for the traditional social network audience (kids), however, Facebook has a very large user base that arrived more recently and has a greater tendency towards inertia.

As I've said before, I have no doubt Facebook will somehow disappear. I'm just not sure how.

Myspace-esque replacement with something else?
A new overarching medium to replace social networks?
Some scandal that will drive users (and/or advertisers directly) away, making it less interesting for advertisers?
Will it morph into something completely different, keeping essentially just the name?
Will the process drag on for years?
What will happen to everything that ties into Facebook today? We're talking about phones whose OSes integrate some Facebook stuff, appliances that integrate with facebook, websites that use facebook for authentication...

Or, of course, Facebook might live forever, but that is not what I'd bet on.

I'm not going to group Facebook with companies like IBM or General Electric. The former is absolutely dependant on the whims of millions of people. The latter two only have to sell (and support in exchange for big bucks) expensive items to businesses, instead of relying on advertising.

Re:What will replace Facebook? (1)

techstar25 (556988) | about 7 months ago | (#46055815)

"Currently there is no "successor" to Facebook". Well, of course there isn't. And there wasn't a successor to Myspace for a while either. What we are saying is that we "can't imagine" a successor to Facebook, because, let's face it, if we could we would certainly build it. But the way these things work is that something will come out of nowhere and we'll immediately feel like we "need" to be a part of it. It will fulfill a need we didn't even know we had. Oh, there will be something that knocks off Facebook and probably Google as well.

Re:What will replace Facebook? (1)

swampfriend (2629073) | about 7 months ago | (#46055841)

Every feature of Facebook that caused me to sign on with it when it first opened, is available through Twitter. I'm linked to everyone I know and I can give them status updates and post photos and view theirs. There is no reason for me to ever use Facebook now that I have Twitter.

Re:What will replace Facebook? (1)

egranlund (1827406) | about 7 months ago | (#46056775)

The problem with this assumption is that Myspace's fall was a result of Facebook existing as its successor.

This.

I refused to use MySpace mostly due to the terrible "customization" that it allowed. I suspect that was the reason a lot of people switched over.

Facebook will go away regardless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055395)

What i would like to know is what separates Facebook from AOL, Myspace, AIM, ICQ, BBS etc that came and went.

Unless someone can pinpoint something different with Facebook, its history will follow every other similar service since the dawn of the BBS. Something better / more popular will come and take the users away.

Re:Facebook will go away regardless. (1)

Kvan (30429) | about 7 months ago | (#46055603)

The main difference is sheer numbers. None of its predecessors had this many users, and we don't know if there is a tipping point where network effects become large enough to sustain such a site for a much longer period.

The difference is... (4, Insightful)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 7 months ago | (#46055401)

The difference is that Princeton hasn't seen major declines (in the millions) of its primary demographic group. FB is funded both directly and indirectly by advertising/marketers. If the demographic for FB shifts elsewhere, so will the revenue stream. Princeton's funding is more diverse coming from tuition/fees, grants and contributions/bequests. Unless there is a scandal, it is unlikely that those sources will change.

In addition, the competition of universities is pretty fixed. It is extremely expensive to start a new one (and get accredited). FB, on the other hand, well, it wasn't too long ago that Myspace was the king of the hill and FB was the challenger.

Good (5, Funny)

StripedCow (776465) | about 7 months ago | (#46055429)

Facebook has used the same techniques as Princeton, and as such we can conclude that they approve of these techniques, and find them useful analytical instruments.

The only conclusion we can draw from this is the demise of both Princeton and Facebook.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055631)

Facebook has used the same techniques as Princeton, and as such we can conclude that they approve of these techniques, and find them useful analytical instruments.

The only conclusion we can draw from this is the demise of both Princeton and Facebook.

GrumpyCatGOOD.jpg

Why not both? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055483)

I hope both Facebook and Princeton will be out of business by 2021. Facebook is a plague, and a tool Big Brother couldn't have even thought up. And Universities have become one more way to keep lower class peons in debt to the rich ruling class.

Good riddance to both, I say. If only we could be so lucky.

Re:Why not both? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055879)

Why not Zoidberg?

Die already (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46055567)

Fuck Facebook.

Obligatory XKCD (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | about 7 months ago | (#46055593)

http://xkcd.com/605/

Only extrapolate in the opposite direction.

Re:Obligatory XKCD (1)

teslar (706653) | about 7 months ago | (#46056475)

Better xkcd [xkcd.com] - at least this also uses data collected from Google.

It's not the same. (2)

xvan (2935999) | about 7 months ago | (#46055615)

Facebook's reply was even really stupid.

Princenton article proposed a 'virus' model that fitted pretty well to Facebook growth and current decline, and made a prediction based on that, ignoring some social parameters, and made a prediction.

Facebook's article is just extrapolating, and not being a virtual entity, the virtual presence of Princenton might not be an equally good indicator.

Gramps says no (4, Funny)

paiute (550198) | about 7 months ago | (#46056055)

The difference being that one is proud if their grandfather went to Princeton and horrified if their grandfather is friending them on Facebook.

but (1)

superwiz (655733) | about 7 months ago | (#46056205)

Princeton has a longer history of being resilient and adapting to changing times.

Yeah right! (1)

XilE (2952649) | about 7 months ago | (#46056209)

There is no way in hell they're going to lose 500 million users by 2017, hell not even NSA could accomplish that.

Princeton and Facebook will both cease to exist (1)

davidwr (791652) | about 7 months ago | (#46056299)

It's just a matter of when. Perhaps long after I die [slashdot.org] , perhaps even later [wikipedia.org] .

By 2021... (1)

trailerparkcassanova (469342) | about 7 months ago | (#46056411)

Facebook will be a Somalian-owned brand of cheap electronics.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>