[clobber]

> there are countless people who rely on Facebook to communicate

They can try e-mail, IM, SMS, picking up the telephone, smoke signals. Let's stop pretending Facebook is so ingrained in people's lives that they cannot live without it. We're talking about a website that's merely a time waster.

> a billion people log into Facebook every month

I'd bet that number is way off once you account for spam profiles and how Facebook defines 'active' [1]

Edit: to satisfy ghost downvoters (HN, go figure) here is previous discussion on the billion users

1. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4611734

[drumdance]

None of those are good for passive communication. No one said they "can't live without it." But it certainly adds value to a lot of people's lives.

[clobber]

Disagree. I feel e-mail can serve the same purpose but then some would argue the usefulness or value in 'passive' communication.

[untog]

I feel like this has been hashed out a million times on HN. Yes, e-mail works. I could e-mail a photo album to people. But what if they want to comment on it? Either everyone gets spammed with hundreds of e-mails, or there's no group conversation. Add to that, being tagged in other people's albums. Facebook provides value to people. Not all people, but that's the way the world works.

And of course there is a value in passive communication. I want to see the photos my friend posted of his holiday. I don't want to have to look at them right now, though- I'm busy. So I'll look later. Ta-da: passive communication.

[estel]

I don't see how that isn't true for the other examples of Google and Amazon?