The Haunting & Inevitable Future of Facebook

It’s no secret that technology is in constant change. If you’re not privy to this, do yourself justice and look around. 10 years ago nobody was face-planted into a 4 inch device, yet here we are. Technology is an extremely powerful outlet. It effects every aspect of our life, and whether you agree with it’s existence or not one thing is certain,  technology is here to stay.

As a tech follower for sometime now, I have learned a few things that remain true. The most important aspect and guarantee you can take from the tech industry is: it won’t stay still. It’s here to progress. It has to. Because it’s customers do. New customers (age groups and demographics) bring new needs. Different trends spawn fresh redesigns and feature sets. Nothing in tech is by accident. This is an important fact to remember simply because we are the customer and we should be aware of what is trying to target us, our time and our priorities. We should enjoy the product to an extent but also be knowledgable of why it is doing what it is doing. For example: When google starts asking you why you are searching for something instead of just searching for you, that should raise a bright red flag.

The future of the tech world is of immense interest to me. I find it fascinating how culture shifts with plastic tech products. I am always thinking of what could come next. These answers aren’t hard to gather if you look closely and due diligence in research. Like I mentioned, Tech’s target is us. What do we want? Do we even know? Some companies think we do. Some think we don’t. But no other company as of recent has fascinated me more than Facebook. In my opinion, the most influential company in the world.

I guess it’s only fair if I tell you my personal relationship with Facebook. Consider the source right? I joined Facebook in 2006. Right as myspace was slowing down. It was actually quite fun at first. There wasn’t many people on, you basically friended your friends, which was nice. And the end result was a nice compartmentalization of your life, nice and neat. It wasn’t long before everyone came in and flooded the servers of Facebook. And personally, it just got to be too much for me. It was too much to control, too much content to take in intelligently and too overbearing. When a tech product starts to control me, I leave. And I did. Sure countless people asked me why and how it was dumb to leave. But as for me? I knew it was the right move personally.

Facebook did something really clever before I left though. They prompted a screen in the exit process. First off, they wouldn’t let me delete my account. Only to add that they knew best and they would intelligently “deactivate” my account. (RED FLAG #1). This didn’t seat well with me . Maybe to an uninformed regular human this doesn’t matter. But to me it meant I was still living on Facebook’s servers. Since there is no option, I had to agree and so I did. I would rather be “deactivated” on their servers than participating in the confused nonsense. What also bothered me and is the point of this post is what came next: The “don’t leave, your friends will miss you page.” (RED FLAG #2). Facebook intelligently took my closest (most interacted with) friends and placed them in JPEG holders and proudly stated “they” would miss me. As if they didn’t exist beyond my computer screen. As if they weren’t real people living in the real world.

As of present day, It almost feels like everyone is attending a party that I chose and continually choose not to attend. As an introvert, this kind of makes me feel good, but as a human being , I still peak in from time to time. Facebook is attractive. It gives you up to the second news feeds of people you seemingly care about and continually refreshes to birth a new stream of content at an exhausting rate. Although in print, that description probably seems crazy, in real life usage it actually works quite well and is extravagantly addictive.

Facebook as a company fascinates me. More so, Facebook’s future as a company is the most interesting future any tech company has to offer in my opinion. Not Apple, not Google, not Samsung, not Tesla, not Twitter but Facebook.

DISCLAIMER: I would like to run at a disclaimer at this point: I am not a shareholder of any Facebook stock. Besides Apple Inc, I don’t have any internal knowledge of future product roadmaps (hardware, software or services) of any tech company. Everything I am about to put on the table about Facebook’s future is completely speculative. But it should be stated that these are informed guesses from obtainable information that any individual can dig and find on the interwebs.

PAST

To look at Facebook’s possible future we first have to look at what Facebook is capable of. The best way to do this is to simply look at their past. This is a company that started at a small university level, a limited social network that grew like no company in the history of any industry in the terms of users and marketing profit margins. So to make a long story short, Facebook has set the gold standard for a rising startup. They quickly spread and grew across the world, flicking the switch in an obscene amount of time in a ridiculous amount of places.

They also are a company who is ran by a very smart man. Enter Marc Zuckerburg. Since Steve Jobs, the smartest man in technology in my opinion. We all know Zuck’s story. Its what every young college computer science major wants to do. Start a company, be a billionaire, change the world. But personally, I don’t think Zuckerburg wanted the first two nearly as bad as he wants to change the world. And he did it and he’s doing it now. But this article will focus on how he will continue to do it.

PRESENT

By the end of 2013, Facebook boasted 1.23bn monthly active users worldwide, adding 170m in just one year. According to Facebook, 757m users log on to Facebook daily, as of 31 December 2013. Maybe you didn’t get that because those numbers seem fairytale-ish. But 757 million user log in daily. Thats an extreme amount of people giving you information, Personal information as well as public.

As good as those numbers sound though Facebook is actually on the decline in the present day. Internally they are struggling to reach core demographics of teenagers believe it or not. Twitter is actually getting more and more teens by the day, Many analysts think this is because teens do not desire to be on the same social media outlet as their parents. So the problem for Facebook now is they have too many users and they are “sherlocking” their own product. Actually that is quite fascinating and funny all at the same time.

All of this success has not made Mark Zuckerburg ignorant though. He understands as well as anyone that revolutions come from below. A small start up could one day dethrone a big giant who is basking in their own success. The innovators dilemma – where you get so caught up in your own innovation you miss the next wave of real innovation. Zuckerburg knows this all to well and he is consistently on the look out for the next big thing. Take into account his three big recent purchases:

1. Instagram – A social networking photo service that works flawless and simple. PURCHASE PRICE: 1 BILLION
2. whatsapp – A multi-platform, worldwide messaging service that was highly successful for teenagers mostly in Europe. PURCHASE PRICE: 19 BILLION!
3. Oculus Rift – A virtual reality start up that was leading the charge in real time virtual reality creation. PURCHASE PRICE: 2 BILLION

Do you notice anything about those companies? They’re all about connecting. Here it is: Facebook is about connecting you with data, in a simple sentence we have just discovered Facebook’s mission statement. Data is their business. They collect everyone’s data and literally sell it to companies and then you will see smart ads pop up on the sidebar of your pages. Coincidentally with content of your interest. This is no coincidence .

FUTURE

You see the truth and future of Facebook is right in front of you and users hardly realize it. Your information, your tendencies, your likes and dislikes your time spent on and off. Your friends, your new friends your old friends, the friend you just unfriended, the boy or girlfriend you just broke things off with, your husband, your wife, your kids, your kid’s kids, your grandchildren, their friends and your pets. Are you getting the picture yet? They keep EVERYTHING logged and they use it to their advantage, literally. It’s their business to know you. Remember YOU are the reason they exist. And they take complete advantage of such information.

Lets fast forward now and take a look down the road:

APPS
Down the road Facebook will no doubt continue it’s mobile presence. They already are turning out new iOS apps almost weekly by some of the best designers in the industry. Mike Madas and Loren Brichter just to name a few. They have released (in addition to a new revamped official app):

1. Facebook Messenger
2. Instagram
3. Facebook Page Manager
4. whatsapp
5. Facebook Paper

These are all available on iOS platform, and you may think to yourself so what? But if you look even 2 years ago, none of these existed under Facebook’s authority except their official app. Its clear Facebook is making a huge push into mobile. But why?

They are working extremely hard to be mobile-only and they will certainly continue down that road because mobile is the future and Facebook needs to be there. And they will be. Thats where the users are. Thats where the data is.

HARDWARE
This is quite tricky actually. Facebook has attempted hardware in the past, most notably the HTC Facebook phone. As far as numbers show, the phone was introduced with subpar selling number and since HTC has halted production.

Facebook’s purchase of Oculus Rift is very interesting though. Oculus Rift is an actual headset you wear to turn your world into a virtual world. So is Facebook trying to make a Facebook headset you wear to create dystopia for you to live in? Im skeptical of that, but it can’t quite be put to bed either. The jury is still out on a hardware future for Facebook.

SERVICES
Ah, here is where I want to land. This is the backbone of Facebook. Internet Services, data consumption and “connecting” users. Surly, Facebook’s future depends on this. But how? How will they and Mark Zuckerburg ensure no small start up does something fresh and unique to make Facebook look like a dinosaur. Simple answer in my opinion; They use what they already have: “data.” Your data, my data, everyone’s data; living and dead. Yes, dead.

If you’ve made it this far then I applaud you bearing my ramblings. But at last, here is my prediction:

VIRTUAL IMMORTALITY

Facebook, one day will allow you to “connect” with dead people. I know this is a dark subject but please bear with me (for a little longer). Think about that as a feature and don’t be so naive to tell me its impossible. Consider these points:

A. No one can delete anything from Facebook’s servers. Ever.
B. We’ve already established they are data hoarders.
C. Their main source of income is information.
D. Their company goal is to “connect” people.

So don’t tell me they can’t. They most certainly can and most probably will. Facebook is a publicly traded company which means numbers matter. Profit and growth matter. What better way to make growth happen to keep users “active” after they die.

The idea of replicating a personality is quite interesting. Isn’t that what actors do? They get into a different mind set for each role they play. Well, why is Facebook any less capable? If anything (in theory) they’re much more capable. An actor has to go out and do many hours and days of research on his or her role. Facebook’s research is already done. You have already given them the data. They know your personality, they just have to mirror it.

Facebook can and will intelligently replicate you after your death. Keep your profile active and operating. Think of it. If a dear love one of your’s passes away but their Facebook profile stays and more than that, you can interact. Facebook has grown so intelligent in their data consumption and Ai intelligence that they can easily reproduce your likes, dislikes, tendencies, views, opinions, past experiences, memories, photos, videos etc. You see it is all at their disposal. And don’t be so naive to think the human mind can’t be replicated. Because in reality, their not attempting to replicate your brain. Their attempting and will succeed at replicating your personality.

Who wouldn’t want to do use that service. Who wouldn’t want to ask a dead loved one a question and get a real, intelligently generated response. Of course you would. The kicker would be the accuracy level. It would be immensely sharp. All the data they have stored can easily replicate a person because they already know everything about you. They already know your family, your vacations , your pictures, your videos, your ex girlfriends and boyfriends and your already passed relatives. Your political views, your religious views your opinions on everything from newborn babies to a funeral of close friend. They know you in many ways, in a better more organized manner than you know yourself.

It’s not that this doesn’t scare me. It truly does and I’m not sure why. It could be because were so far along in a tech familiar world that this would just be another feature set of Facebook. Another software update that people just tap “update.” We are extremely numb to things that make our life convenient, me included. Facebook knows this, any tech company knows this.

Which is more horrifically scary? That you can’t delete your account from Facebook, you can only deactivate? Or that in Facebook’s agreement that we all have accepted, they have the right to do whatever they want whenever they want with your information, your photos, etc. Basically paving the way for such a service. It’s almost too simple for them. Its scary world we live in. Not only outside your computer screen, but inside internet servers. Indeed, one day my son will be able to talk to me after I’m dead through the features of Facebook. I just hope I get around to making an updated Facebook account before I die. If not for me, to transcend my content from living to afterlife, from reality to digital. But then again what is reality and what isn’t? Ask Facebook and their answer may surprise you.

Grand Budapest Hotel Analysis

Rather than trying to show the naysayers that he’s capable of more than they think, Wes Anderson has instead devoted himself to proving the value of what they think he is – rather than broadening his film universe, Anderson has narrowed, deepened and dimensionalized it, the difference between The Royal Tenenbaums and Moonrise Kingdom being similar to that between a 2d painting and a 3d experience.

The framing device of The Grand Budapest Hotel would be enough in and of itself to continue Anderson’s inward trajectory, the story unfolding via a simple nesting doll structure that allows the filmmaker to practically incept himself. But The Grand Budapest Hotel isn’t the most Wes Anderson film because of how densely it delivers all of the familiar tropes and fetishes (Miniatures! Orphans! Characters dangling from high places!), no, his eighth feature is a great leap further down the rabbit hole of his own imagination because it’s the first Wes Anderson movie that’s about Wes Anderson movies, in my opinion.

A four-tiered confection that moves with the wild energy of Fantastic Mr. Fox but lingers with a more brutal, weaponized version of the wistfulness that haunted Moonrise Kingdom, The Grand Budapest Hotel is a caper comedy about how the rise of fascism in the 1930s robbed an entire continent of its civility. It’s Wes Anderson’s third consecutive home run, but more importantly it’s the only one of his films to make all of them better.

Here’s my theory: Like Inception, there are four different levels, the ones here representing four pointedly different periods. Unlike Inception, The Grand Budapest Hotel never depicts parallel action across the threads – one is the bunk bed, the other is the ladder. We start at the top, descend to the bottom, and climb back up to leave. Lest anyone be confused, Anderson and his longtime cinematographer Robert Yeoman cleverly assign separate aspect ratios to each of the time periods, the various picture sizes reflecting the look of movies endemic to their era.

Timeline 1: Present Day. A young girl with a good book in her hands visits the memorial of a late writer (the inscription on the bust simply reads: “Author”).

Timeline 2: The 1980s. The nameless Author – now a fleshy Tom Wilkinson – reads an excerpt from his treasured book, The Grand Budapest Hotel.

Timeline 3: The 1960s. A fictionalized version of the Author (Jude Law) visits the institution, which rots atop a snowy peak in the fictional Republic of Zubrowka. The lodging is obviously a pale ghost of its former self, the hollowed out home for a skeleton crew of employees who make Jack Torrance look busy. It’s there that the Author encounters Mr. Moustafa (the great F. Murray Abraham), the warm but palpably sad man who owns the worthless estate. Moustafa invites the Author to join him for dinner in a barren ballroom, and there the old man tells his guest with the story of how he first came to The Grand Budapest Hotel in the early 1930s, when he was a bright but penniless kid named Zero.

Timeline 4: The 1930s. The vast majority of the film transpires in the hotel’s majestic pre-war period (shot in boxy 1.37:1 to capture the lobby’s awesome vertical span), where a young immigrant without a family or a home is reluctantly hired as the new lobby boy by legendary concierge Gustave H (Ralph Fiennes, delivering his best work since Schindler’s List, not to mention the single most dynamic lead performance a Wes Anderson movie has ever known or required). I have no issues making that statement.

Fractured further into five separate chapters, each of which seems possessed by a different genre, The Grand Budapest Hotel welcomes you in fits and starts. It lacks the cohesive forward momentum of Anderson’s last two films, the story little more than a flimsy means of making you fall in love with its setting. The Republic of Zubrowka is like a snow globe with the hotel loosely glued to the bottom.

Gustave isn’t only the heart of this film, he’s also its soul. Both the character and the film around him are hilarious and uncommonly vulgar, but neither is ever coarse – this is by far Anderson’s most violent and unforgiving movie, his coldest in every which way, but it treasures the sweetness that survives. Likewise, Gustave may accept acts from the rich old ladies who frequent the hotel, but he does so gallantly and with pride (despite being as outwardly queer as would be allowed of a character in an early ‘30s farce). When one of those rich old ladies (Swinton) is murdered and Gustave learns that he’s the sole benefactor of a massive fortune, the dedicated concierge is far more shocked than he is satisfied, the restless plot kicking into gear as the thuggish son of the deceased (Adrien Brody) and his henchman (Willem Dafoe) seek to forcibly reclaim their inheritance.

Gustave runs the place as though he were both the king and caretaker of a self-contained fiefdom in which every detail is ruthlessly selected so as to protect the hotel from the steady march of time. The Grand Budapest Hotel is Gustave’s Moonrise Kingdom, but he gets to live there. Why give up a fantasy world if reality is a nightmare?

The Grand Budapest Hotel is a Wes Anderson movie, but The Grand Budapest Hotel is also a Wes Anderson movie. While each and every one of his movies has mirthfully celebrated the bond instilled by a shared vocation (just think of Team Zissou and its interns), The Grand Budapest Hotel sanctifies that solidarity with The Society of the Crossed Keys, a brotherhood of concierges that serves to explicitly underline the significance of what some people may have previously dismissed as an easy affectation.

Sure, its concierge is so desperately clinging to the illusion of permanence that Zero has to descend a mountain in order to fetch a newspaper, but he only shields himself from the growing fascist threat because he understands the full extent of what’s at risk. Gustave recognizes that an unyielding commitment to such individuality is itself a profound rebuke to oppression, and if you mourn how the hotel is callously gutted by the outside world – and you will – it becomes impossible to deny the value of Wes Anderson’s work, or his decision to double down on what makes it unique. Sight unseen, it might sound like cinema as defensive posturing, but The Grand Budapest Hotel locates the human element at the heart of Anderson’s style, in the process becoming his most stylish film to date.

What lazy viewers might see as more of the same, others will recognize as Anderson testing the limits of his control, the precision of his filmmaking increasing in tandem with the frenzied pace of his plot. In fact, things move and resolve so fast that the movie’s reservoir of pain almost feels iced over, like you’ve lost something but can’t quite remember what. Yet the film’s final cut is so abrupt that it’s tempting to think it instructive. After all, like the book that a girl brings to its Author’s grave, the movie will always be waiting for you to return, its story surviving what its setting could not.

Of course, at the end of the day it’s really pretty simple: either you want to see a movie in which a bearded Jeff Goldblum plays a character named Deputy Vilmos Kovacs, or you don’t. But trust me, you do. You really do.