snapchat
by Ben Basche
通过本·巴什
机器中的幽灵：Snapchat不是移动优先的-完全是另一回事 (Ghost in the machine: Snapchat isn’t mobile-first — it’s something else entirely)
“Oh, you think darkness is your ally? You merely adopted the dark, I was born in it, molded by it.” — Bane
“哦，您认为黑暗是您的盟友？ 您只是领养了黑暗，我就在其中诞生，被它塑造而成。” —贝恩
It’s tempting to think of Snapchat as a part of the app revolution, as one of the shining examples of mobile-first design that has defined our smartphone age.
将Snapchat视为应用革命的一部分是很诱人的，它是定义我们的智能手机时代的移动优先设计的光辉榜样之一。
This is of course true to an extent, but seeing Snapchat take its place at a consistent #1 or 2 in the US App Store alongside Facebook and Google’s main properties (and the other flavors of the week) somewhat obscures what is actually going on here.
这在一定程度上当然是正确的，但是看到Snapchat在美国App Store中排在第一名或第二名的位置，与Facebook和Google的主要资产(以及本周的其他风味)并列，在某种程度上掩盖了实际情况。
Snapchat is not mobile-first, and it’s not really an app anymore. Nor is it a meta-app platform at this point like Facebook Messenger is angling to become (at least not yet). Snapchat is a true creature of mobile, a living, breathing embodiment of everything that our camera-enabled, networked pocket computer can possibly offer. And in its cooption of smartphones into a true social operating system, we see the inklings of what is beyond mobile.
Snapchat不是移动优先的，它不再是真正的应用程序。 目前还不是一个元应用程序平台，就像Facebook Messenger正在努力成为(至少现在还没有)。 Snapchat是移动设备的真正造物，它是我们带摄像头的联网掌上电脑可能提供的一切的生动体现。 在将智能手机纳入真正的社交操作系统的过程中，我们看到了移动以外的东西的含义。
When I open Snapchat up to the camera, I can’t shake the feeling that the ghost is banging on the glass, trying to break out into the world.
当我打开Snapchat进入相机时，我无法撼动幽灵在玻璃上撞击，试图闯入世界的感觉。
移动优先 (Mobile-first)
As we come up on year 8 of of the app economy, it’s absolutely remarkable to think about just how far we’ve come. Mobile has completely reshaped old industries, created new ones, and turned the entire computing world on its head.
当我们进入应用经济第八年的时候，思考我们已经走了多远绝对是非凡的。 移动已经完全重塑了旧行业，创造了新行业，并使整个计算世界处于领先地位。
Companies from all sectors have met their end (or become shells of their former selves) for failing to think “mobile-first” — a term coined by Luke Wroblewski that has defined the age as much as “lean” and “design-thinking.” Most consumer-facing and many B2B verticals are being driven by companies that have designed or adapted their customer experiences to fit a smartphone dominated world.
各行各业的公司都因为未能考虑“移动优先”而走到了尽头(或者变成了以前的自我的外壳)， 这是Luke Wroblewski创造的一个术语 ，定义了“精益”和“设计思维”的时代。 ” 大多数面向消费者和许多B2B垂直行业都受到设计或调整其客户体验以适应智能手机主导世界的公司的推动。
And yet — like all great waves in technology — the ground shifts beneath the feet of even those who have aligned themselves around the dominant ethos.
但是，就像所有技术浪潮一样，即使在那些支配主导风气的人的脚下，地面也会转移。
Peter Wagner and Martin Giles astutely wrote about these very rumblings last year in “Mobile First, But What’s Next?” They coined the term “authentically mobile” to distinguish services that not only are tailored for the mobile world, but who so thoroughly leverage the unique capabilities of mobile devices that they could literally not exist without them.
彼得·瓦格纳(Peter Wagner)和马丁·吉尔斯(Martin Giles)去年在“移动优先，但下一步是什么？”中巧妙地写下了这些隆隆声。 他们创造了“真正的移动”一词，以区分不仅为移动世界量身定制的服务，而且还充分利用了移动设备的独特功能，以至于没有它们就无法提供这些服务。
Where mobile-first companies take the new, portable form factor and riff on things that were more or less possible but limited in some way on the desktop, authentically mobile companies are truly creating experiences that would either be impossible or entirely meaningless without a networked supercomputer in our pockets.
移动优先公司采用新的便携式形式并在桌面上或多或少地限制了某些事情，但真正意义上的移动公司正在真正创造体验，而如果没有网络超级计算机，这些体验将是不可能或完全没有意义的在我们的口袋里。
A classic example of authentically mobile would be Uber, which without a location-enabled computing device always on our person (on both sides of the 2-sided marketplace), would almost certainly not exist. Wagner and Giles’ table here summarizes the shift:
真正意义上的移动设备的经典示例是Uber，几乎没有人会发现，如果不总是在我们个人(在两面市场的两侧)上安装支持位置的计算设备，就不会出现这种情况。 Wagner和Giles的表格总结了这一变化：
It’s clear that Snapchat is extremely well described by column #3 — particularly with regard to its emphasis on collection — and if there were a column #4, it would be straddling the line. The “emphasis on collection” couldn’t describe Snapchat — an app which famously defaults to its camera — any more perfectly. CEO Evan Spiegel recently characterized Snapchat as primarily “a camera company.”
显然，第3列对Snapchat的描述非常好-特别是在强调收藏方面-如果有第4列，它将跨界。 “强调收藏”无法更好地描述Snapchat(著名的默认应用是相机)Snapchat。 首席执行官埃文·斯皮格(Evan Spiegel) 最近将Snapchat归类为“相机公司”。
饲料 (The Feed)
No user-interface metaphor is as widely associated with the idea of “mobile first” design than the scrollable feed — whether it’s standard reverse chronology or algorithmically driven. One need only to observe people on public transit with their necks craned over their phones flicking up endlessly to feel just how pervasive feeds have become in our daily lives.
用户界面隐喻与可滚动提要相比，“移动优先”设计的思想与之广泛关联，无论它是标准的逆向年代学还是算法驱动的。 人们只需要观察一下公共交通中的人们，他们的脖子就被吊在手机上，不断地跳动起来，就可以感觉到我们的日常生活中饲料的普及程度。
Outside of the big social players, the feed is found in countless other mobile apps ranging from productivity to personal finance. But although the smartphone form factor suits the feed incredibly well — from the focused screen size to the portability that has allowed content consumption to consume all the idle moments of our lives — it wasn’t born on mobile.
除了大型社交网站之外，Feed还可以在无数其他移动应用程序中找到，从生产力到个人理财。 但是，尽管智能手机的外形尺寸非常适合饲料(从集中的屏幕尺寸到可移植性，这使内容消耗可以消耗我们一生的所有闲暇时光)， 但它并不是在移动设备上诞生的 。
We began to see feeds everywhere towards the end of the desktop browser heyday, with the most important feed obviously being Facebook’s. In a way, Facebook made the browser wars irrelevant by essentially itself becoming the browser — the jumping off point for how we experienced the web. And despite intense skepticism from Wall Street, Facebook has been wildly successful in porting the News Feed over to mobile.
在全盛时期，桌面浏览器即将结束时，我们开始看到提要，最重要的提要显然是Facebook的。 从某种意义上说，Facebook 本身就成为了浏览器，从而使浏览器之战变得无关紧要，这是我们体验网络的起点。 尽管华尔街对此表示怀疑 ，但Facebook在将News Feed移植到移动设备方面取得了巨大的成功。
Adam Gale has a nice summary of just how handsomely this mobile bet has paid off for Facebook:
亚当·盖尔(Adam Gale)很好地总结了这一移动赌注为Facebook带来了多大的回报：
Indeed, Facebook (which includes WhatsApp and Instagram) is essentially a mobile company. Revenues on the platform jumped 70% year on year in the first quarter of 2016 (to $4.4bn, out of $5.4bn total revenues), having grown 82% the previous quarter. Mobile income now represents 82% of the business.
实际上，Facebook(包括WhatsApp和Instagram) 本质上是一家移动公司。 该平台的收入在2016年第一季度同比增长了70％(在总收入54亿美元中达到了44亿美元)，比上一季度增长了82％。 现在，移动收入占业务的82％。
Just as Facebook was making this transition, and right when the iPhone’s camera gained the capability to take acceptable photos, a more pure, focused version of the Facebook News Feed emerged: Instagram. You post a few Instagram photos per week. Then you spend a lot of time scrolling through and looking at content, much like you would with the Facebook blue app. Instagram’s simple design, creative constraints and s̶u̶s̶p̶i̶c̶i̶o̶u̶s̶l̶y̶̶ consistently beautiful content make it a delightful mobile experience, and in many ways the crown jewel of Facebook’s attention empire.
就在Facebook进行这种过渡的同时，恰好在iPhone的摄像头具备了拍摄可接受照片的能力时，出现了一个更加纯净，专注的Facebook News Feed：Instagram。 您每周发布几张Instagram照片。 然后，您将花费大量时间浏览和查看内容，就像使用Facebook blue应用程序一样。 Instagram简单设计，创造性的局限性以及始终如一的精美内容使之成为令人愉悦的移动体验，并在许多方面成为了Facebook关注帝国的皇冠上的明珠。
Instagram is the pinnacle of Wagner & Giles’ “emphasis on presentation” hallmark of mobile-first. Instagram has long since eclipsed Facebook’s mindshare in the younger generation, and the acquisition has been hailed as one of the greatest in the history of technology. Facebook’s dominance over the feed metaphor is essentially complete and uncontested.
Instagram是Wagner＆Giles的“注重展示”移动优先的巅峰之作。 Instagram早在年轻一代就已经超越了Facebook的思维份额，并且这项收购被誉为技术史上最伟大的收购之一。 Facebook在feed隐喻上的主导地位基本上是完整且无争议的。
But we are beginning to see some cracks appear in both Facebook and Instagram. Earlier this year (ironically?) the Twittersphere was abuzz over a report in Bloomberg about sinking original (i.e. user generated) sharing on Facebook in what the company refers to internally as “context collapse.”
但是，我们开始看到Facebook和Instagram都出现了一些漏洞。 今年早些时候(具有讽刺意味的是)，Twittersphere 对于彭博社有关将原始(即用户生成的)共享沉没在Facebook上的报告感到震惊，该公司内部将其称为“上下文崩溃”。
Anyone who has been on Facebook for long time probably didn’t need numbers to back up the general feeling that they and their friends weren’t posting big photo albums from the weekend’s events anymore, let alone sharing a cool song on someone else’s wall. VentureBeat reported around the same time that Instagram engagement had dropped a whopping 40% in 2015.
长期在Facebook上工作的任何人可能都不需要数字来支持他们和他们的朋友不再在周末活动中发布大型相册的一般感觉，更不用说在别人的墙上分享一首很酷的歌曲了。 VentureBeat大约在同一时间报道称 ，Instagram参与度在2015年下降了40％。
The Instagram numbers I take with a bit of a grain of salt as they don’t entirely pass the sniff test, but I think that while Instagram continues to grow (recently passed Twitter in a big way) and maintains a very privileged place in mediating our social hierarchies, people (especially young people) seem to be posting less frequently and are starting to spend their time elsewhere. It remains to be seen if Instagram’s algorithmic feed will fix this.
我对Instagram关注有些微，因为它们并没有完全通过嗅觉测试，但是我认为，尽管Instagram继续增长(最近通过Twitter取得了很大进步)，并且在调解方面保持着非常特权的地位在我们的社会阶层中，人们(尤其是年轻人)似乎发布的频率降低了，并且开始在其他地方度过时光。 Instagram算法提要能否解决此问题，还有待观察。
To be sure, Facebook and Instagram are still part of people’s hourly (ok — every 15 minutes) routine of “checking your phone,” but I don’t think anyone can deny that their apparent evolution into more passive consumption experiences doesn’t raise a few red flags.
可以肯定的是，Facebook和Instagram仍是人们每小时(可以每15分钟检查一次)例行检查“手机”的一部分，但我认为没有人能否认他们向更被动的消费体验的明显转变不会增加一些红旗。
物理学-回到“现在” (Physics — back to the “now”)
So what exactly is going on here? The numbers support the idea that Facebook and Instagram are wobbling a little in the US, and I think it’s reasonable to look at Snapchat’s continued explosive growth in users & engagement as one of the causes.
那么，这到底是怎么回事？ 这些数据支持Facebook和Instagram在美国出现一些波动的想法，我认为将Snapchat的用户和参与度持续爆炸性增长视为原因之一是合理的。
But why exactly are the two scions of the feed and the lynchpins of a mobile-first empire seemingly struggling to drive people to share their lives? Perhaps the task of constantly manicuring a persistent online identity — of carefully considering what effect your digital exhaust will have on your ego — is beginning to weigh on people. Both Facebook and Instagram are supposed to be arenas for the best version of yourself, and with each post you are putting something out into the ether to be judged both now and forever.
但是，为什么饲料的两个接班人和流动优先的帝国的关键人物似乎在努力促使人们分享生活呢？ 也许不断地维护一个持久的在线身份的任务-仔细考虑您的数字资产将对您的自我产生什么影响-的任务正在开始给人们带来压力。 Facebook和Instagram都应该是自己最好的竞技场，每发布一则帖子，您都会发现一些东西，无论现在还是将来，都要加以评判。
Mark Zuckerberg is famous for his extreme views on the singularity and persistence of our identity, going so far as to say that “having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.” Consuming the feed exacerbates some of our darker insecurities which, in turn, put a ton of pressure on our contributions to it.
马克·扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)以他对我们身份的奇异性和持久性的极端见解而闻名，甚至说“自己拥有两个身份就是缺乏诚信的一个例子”。 食用饲料会加剧我们一些较暗的不安全感，这反过来又给我们做出的贡献带来了巨大压力。
As everyone with a mom who made the family stop for a picture at every turn while on vacation can attest to, the urge to photograph all of the best moments of our lives is nothing new, but social media has turned this up to a fever pitch such that if it’s not posted, a moment might as well have not happened.
每个人都有一个妈妈在度假时动不动就停下来拍照的人都可以证明，渴望拍摄我们一生中所有美好时光的渴望并不是什么新鲜事，但是社交媒体却把这变成了狂热的推销。这样一来，如果未发布，那么片刻可能也不会发生。
Before joining Snapchat as a researcher in 2013, Nathan Jurgenson wrote an essay called “Pics and It Didn’t Happen” that sheds some light on the chickens that are finally coming home to roost. He begins one of the most poignant sections here with a quote from Susan Sontag:
在2013年加入Snapchat担任研究人员之前， 内森·于根森(Nathan Jurgenson)撰写了一篇名为《 Pics and It Notn't Happen》的文章 ，为最终归巢的鸡提供了一些信息。 他从苏珊·桑塔格(Susan Sontag)的名言开始，介绍了最令人发指的部分之一：
As Susan Sontag wrote in On Photography,
正如Susan Sontag在《摄影》中写道，
“there is something predatory in the act of taking a picture. To photograph people is to violate them, by seeing them as they never see themselves, by having knowledge of them they can never have; it turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed.”
“拍照的行为有些掠夺性。 拍摄人物就是违反他们的想法，因为他们看到了他们从未见过的东西，了解了他们永远无法拥有的东西； 它将人们变成可以象征性拥有的物体。”
Sontag notes that this makes for a nostalgic gaze, an understanding of the world as primarily documentable. For those who live with status updates, check-ins, likes, retweets, and ubiquitous photography, such an understanding is near inescapable. Social media have invited users to adopt a sort of documentary vision, through which the present is always apprehended as a potential past. This is most triumphantly exemplified by Instagram’s faux-vintage filters.
桑塔格(Sontag)指出，这引起了怀旧的目光，将对世界的理解主要记录在案。 对于那些了解状态更新，签到，喜欢，转发和无处不在的摄影的人来说，这种理解几乎是不可避免的。 社交媒体已邀请用户采用一种文档化的愿景，通过该愿景，人们总是将现在视为潜在的过去。 Instagram仿老式滤镜最能说明这一点。
I don’t think it’s so much the simultaneous massaging and crushing of our egos that is weighing on the mobile-first giants of the feed. Snapchat Stories certainly have a component of performance and voyeurism that probably never goes away in social.
我认为，对我们的自负同时进行按摩和压榨并没有给饲料的移动优先巨头带来压力。 Snapchat Stories当然具有性能和偷窥狂，在社交场合可能永远不会消失。
Rather, as we drown in an over-abundance of content destined for archive that has lost its meaning, the immediacy and intimacy of those platforms like Snapchat and plain old messaging have given us an island of engagement with the present moment.
恰恰相反，当我们淹没在准备用于存档的过多内容中而失去了意义时，诸如Snapchat和普通的旧消息传递等平台的即时性和亲密性使我们对当前时刻充满了孤岛。
Jurgenson absolutely nails it when he says “By being quick, the temporary photograph is a tiny protest against time.” In contrast, the feeds are crushing in their insistence that we are constantly living to relive the past.
于尔根森(Jurgenson)说道：“通过快速，临时照片是对时间的微小抗议。” 相反，这些提要却压制了我们坚持不懈地努力重温过去。
机器中的幽灵-即将发生的信号 (The ghost in the machine — a sign of what’s to come)
Countless people have observed (and often lamented) Snapchat’s “bad UX/UI” according to generally accepted design practices on mobile. Where “good design” calls for feature discoverability, Snapchat does almost no hand holding for new users and buries features behind complex gestures and unintuitively placed screens. From pressing on Discover stories to compose a snap to share + markup the content, to double filters (hold the first down and then keep swiping through), Snapchat is at once one of the simplest apps of its stature in the world and one of the hardest to learn.
根据普遍接受的移动设计实践，无数人已经观察到(并常常感叹)Snapchat的“不良UX / UI”。 在“好的设计”要求功能可发现性的地方，Snapchat几乎没有为新用户提供帮助，并且将功能隐藏在复杂的手势和不直观的屏幕后面。 从按下“发现故事”以组成一个快照来共享内容并为其加标记，到将过滤器加倍(先按住不放，然后继续滑动)，Snapchat立刻成为世界上最简单的应用程序之一，也是其中之一最难学的。
Importantly though, it’s not really the UI that is the “hard” part about learning Snapchat (many have overstated the role of this feature bamboozling in keeping out “the olds”). Rather, the ambiguity around what Snapchat “is” and “what it’s for” is primarily responsible for the incredulity of onlookers and the so-called steep learning curve.
但是重要的是，并不是真正的UI是学习Snapchat的“难”部分(很多人夸大了此功能在阻止“过时”中的作用)。 相反，关于“ Snapchat”是什么和“它是什么”的含糊不清主要是造成旁观者的不确定性和所谓的陡峭学习曲线的原因。
Beyond the visual design practices that have defined the smartphone era, perhaps an even more overarching principle that has guided the critique of mobile apps has been the idea of a core “problem” to be solved, a single organizing principle around which users can rally. Reminiscent of the early days of Twitter, Snapchat has faced questions about what it’s core use case is, but unlike Twitter which has arguably been consumed by this dilemma, Snapchat has embraced the ambiguity and essentially responded with ?.
除了定义智能手机时代的视觉设计实践之外，引导移动应用程序批判的一个甚至更重要的原则也许就是要解决的核心“问题”的思想，即用户可以团结的单一组织原则。 让人回想起Twitter的早期时代，Snapchat面临着关于其核心用例是什么的问题，但是与可以被这种困境所困扰的Twitter不同，Snapchat拥抱了歧义，并以？做出了回应。
Snapchat is very difficult to understand, even for those who use it regularly and think about it until their head hurts. The tangible reasons for its incredible success are numerous, overlapping and, at the end of the day, inadequate when compared to the actual feeling and experience of using it.
Snapchat很难理解，即使对于那些经常使用它并想到头疼的人也是如此。 取得令人难以置信的成功的实在原因是众多的，相互重叠的，而且到最后，与使用它的实际感觉和经验相比，还不够。
An interview Evan Spiegel gave to The Verge back in 2013 for the launch of Stories gives one of the best lenses (no pun intended) through which to understand what Snapchat is and what it was about to become. He said, describing the new feature:
埃文·斯皮格尔(Evan Spiegel)早在2013年就接受了The Stories 的采访，采访了埃文·斯皮格尔(Evan Spiegel )。 他说，描述了新功能：
When you have a minute in your day and are curious about what your friends are up to, you can jump into their experience. The last snap today will also be the beginning of tomorrow so there’s no pressure to compose a narrative. There’s this weird thing that happens when you contribute something to a static profile. You have to worry about how this new content fits in with your online persona that’s supposed to be you. It’s uncomfortable and unfortunate.
当您有一天的时间并且对朋友的工作感到好奇时，您可以加入他们的经验。 今天的最后一刻也将是明天的开始，因此没有压力来撰写叙述。 当您向静态配置文件中添加内容时，会发生这种奇怪的事情。 您必须担心此新内容如何适合您本来应该是您的在线角色。 这是不舒服和不幸的。
“Jumping into their experience,” I think is probably the closest thing I’ve heard to a unified theory of what Snapchat is. It connotes an active give and take between friends (and more recently, influencers). It foreshadows the importance of the doodles, stickers and filters that have come to define much of Snapchat, which are more about giving us an excuse to share anything — profound or mundane — than posing for an eternal self portrait. It’s something that only really works when the capture and consumption device are the same, and where the output — vertical photos/videos — fully immerses you in each experience shared with you.
“跳入他们的经验，”我认为这可能是我听过的关于Snapchat是什么的最统一理论。 它意味着朋友之间(以及最近的影响者)之间的积极奉献。 它预示了涂鸦，贴纸和滤镜的重要性，这些涂鸦，贴纸和滤镜已经定义了Snapchat的大部分内容，它们更多的是为我们提供借口来分享任何东西(深刻或平凡)，而不是摆出永恒的自画像。 只有当捕获和消费设备相同并且输出(垂直的照片/视频)完全使您沉浸在与您共享的每种体验中时，这才真正起作用。
And like all real experiences, these shared “jumpings” are fleeting. We can put a different persona on (with face filters, now literally) each moment and be reborn the next. Snapchat itself feels like it’s constantly pulsing like one of those time lapse videos of cars and city lights. We all go “there” when we get a peek into each other’s lives, but really there’s no there, there.
像所有实际经历一样，这些共享的“跳跃”正在转瞬即逝。 我们可以在每时每刻都使用不同的角色( 现在使用面部滤镜)，然后在下一刻重生。 Snapchat本身就像是汽车和城市灯光的延时录像之一，一直在不断跳动。 当我们窥视彼此的生活时，我们所有人都会进入“那里”，但实际上那里没有那里。
In this way, Snapchat the “place” is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. The “app” lives as much in our own mind and habits— the latent potential of any moment to be instantly shared, experienced together, and forgotten — as it does on Snapchat’s servers. Rather than looking at the inherent ephemerality of life as a bug like some of its competitors, Snapchat sees it unequivocally as a feature. Without this impermanence, Snapchat would feel like surveillance. Instead, it feels more like teleportation — somehow allowing us to be together when we’re apart.
通过这种方式，Snapchat的“地方”无处不在。 “应用程序”与我们在Snapchat的服务器上一样，生活在我们自己的思想和习惯中，即随时可以共享，一起体验和忘记的任何潜在潜能。 Snapchat没有像其他竞争对手那样将生活的内在短暂性视为错误，而是将其明确地视为功能。 没有这种无常性，Snapchat就会感觉像是监视。 取而代之的是，它感觉更像是隐形传讯-某种程度上使我们彼此分开时可以在一起。
It’s no surprise that even as Snapchat remains a fraction of Facebook’s size, it has nearly caught the blue giant in terms of photos shared daily. Ben Thompson had a great piece where he posited that tech markets all seem to have a “phonebook” and a “phone” — the phonebook being the grand directory of both people and content, and the phone as the go-to place for actively connecting with the most important people in our lives. In the US, he stated the obvious: Facebook is the phonebook, and Snapchat is increasingly becoming the phone.
毫无疑问，即使Snapchat仍然只是Facebook的一小部分，但就每日共享的照片而言，它几乎已经吸引了这家蓝色巨人。 本·汤普森(Ben Thompson)有一篇很棒的文章 ，他认为技术市场似乎都有一个“电话簿”和“电话”，电话簿既是人和内容的大目录，又是电话，是人们积极联系的必经之地与我们生命中最重要的人在一起。 他说在美国很明显：Facebook是电话簿，Snapchat越来越成为电话。
This might appear to be a stable stalemate, but I pose the question in light of Facebook’s frantic attempts to get Messenger to catch on in the US: how long can the phonebook live without the phone? Much like Facebook became the browser on the desktop and took its momentum into the mobile-first world, I think we should expect authentically mobile Snapchat to parlay its takeover of the phone into whatever comes next.
这似乎是一个稳定的僵局，但鉴于Facebook疯狂地试图使Messenger在美国流行的问题，我提出了这个问题：没有电话，电话簿能活多久？ 就像Facebook的成为桌面上的浏览器，并把它的声势推向移动世界第一，我认为我们应该期待真正的移动Snapchat到大洲其手机的收购到任何随之而来的。
Update 6/30: Two interesting new stories I felt I should include here as an addendum
更新6/30：我觉得我应该在此处作为附录编入两个有趣的新故事
Facebook is changing the newsfeed to refocus on friends and family
snapchat
6759
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
