Here's the 30 Second Zuckerberg Video That Should Terrify All Facebook Investors - Forbes

Image via CrunchBase

Two weeks ago, I wrote a post laying out a scenario whereby Facebook and Google could be dead (read: irrelevant) in 5 – 8 years.

I discussed how I believe there have 3 generations in the world of the Web: (1) Web 1.0/Portals, (2) Web 2.0/Social, and now (3) Mobile.

I made the case for why companies’ founding dates determine their generation and how each generation seems ill-equipped and incapable of really adjusting to subsequent generations.

Google was the best of the best search engine from Web 1.0.  It’s tried to adapt to social and now mobile but it really hasn’t yet — at least in terms of revenues and profits.

Facebook is the king of its social generation.  However, I argued that I doubt it will be able to truly adapt to the new Mobile generation, despite its acquiring the current king of Mobile – Instagram.

If you watch the 30 minute Facebook IPO Roadshow video, it’s clear – to me at least – that senior Facebook management sees Facebook as defined by its core product; the product that it first created and that still defines it today: its website, Facebook.com.

All the talk of social graph, and ads, and timeline are mere extensions of the core desktop PC Facebook experience.  It’s about supplementing that experience.

Now we have mobile.  So it makes sense that Facebook management would see mobile, again, as another mere extension of the core social website.

People are out on the go with their mobile devices and they need a way of logging back into the PC-based Facebook service.  So, Facebook gave them an app to do that.  Problem solved, right? Wrong.

What’s revolutionary about each new Web generation is that those born within that generation see the new dynamics of that experience as a tabula rasa – a blank sheet – instead as an add-on to the service they already have.

View the original article here

Khar feels NATO supply routes should be reopened - Business Standard

Khar feels NATO supply routes should be reopened Press Trust of India / Islamabad May 14, 2012, 13:45

Nearly six months after Pakistan shut NATO supply lines to Afghanistan, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar has said she personally believes that the routes should be reopened.

Khar made the remarks while speaking to reporters, who accompanied Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on an official visit to Britain, 'The Express Tribune' said today.

She said it is in Pakistan's interest to facilitate the international operation in Afghanistan and that there are many friendly countries whose supplies have been blocked.

NATO and ISAF supplies should not be seen in the context of Pakistan's relations with the US, Khar said.

NATO and ISAF are umbrella organisations for over 40 countries, including Pakistan's close friends like Turkey and Britain, she said.

Pakistan shut the supply routes to Afghanistan after a cross-border NATO air strike on November 26 last year killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

A joint session of Parliament recently adopted a resolution that demanded an unconditional apology from the US for the attack.

Islamabad's insistence on an apology has held up efforts to put Pakistan-US ties back on an even keel after a year of crises, including the NATO attack and the unilateral American raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

Pakistan's participation in a crucial NATO Summit to be held in Chicago from May 20 too has been linked to the resetting of ties with the US.

Speaking at the end of Gilani's five-day visit to Britain, Khar, however, said Pakistan's decision to close the supply routes was the correct one.

In this regard, she recalled the NATO air strike and the American "incursion" to kill bin Laden.

Khar described the operation against the al-Qaeda chief as an effort by the US to take sole credit for finding bin Laden. (More)

View the original article here

FTC Should Tread Carefully With Mobile: NRF - Supermarket News

WASHINGTON — The National Retail Federation on Friday urged the Federal Trade Commission to move cautiously in establishing regulations for mobile payments, and said any rules that are adopted should parallel those for the underlying form of payment and not be specific to the technology.

“Mobile technology and processes are just beginning to emerge and we won’t know which practices the public will like or what methods will provide new benefits until the technology begins to coalesce,” NRF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel Mallory Duncan said in a statement. “The government should not impose regulations that would forestall yet-to-be-imagined advances and innovation in order to avoid potential ‘harm’ based largely on speculation.

“Some of the best innovations on the Internet today might have been suspect a generation ago but today they are benefits few consumers would want to live without,” Duncan added. “The public very often embraces change as the ‘future’ becomes ‘now.’ Familiarity breeds content.”

In-Depth Report: Mobile Payment's Birth Pangs

Duncan noted that a phone itself is “just a device, not a payment” and that actual payment could take place via a credit or debit card, directly from a bank account, be processed through the user’s phone bill, or be made through other means. Any privacy rules developed for mobile payments should be no more restrictive than those for the underlying form of payment, he said.

Duncan said federal officials need to address a number of issues including a definition of what constitutes a mobile payment. While the term is largely used to mean a payment made in a bricks-and-mortar store using a smartphone, officials need to decide whether a payment made for an online purchase on the same device constitutes a mobile payment, or if payments made on a portable device like an iPad tablet or a laptop computer are “mobile.”

View the original article here