Thanks to another funding round, Twitter now has a rumored $15 million in funding. Joining the team are Bijan Sabet with Spark Capital and Jeff Bezos (you know, the guy that owns Amazon.com), which explains all the new bling. The best news? “Twitter will become a sustainable business supported by a revenue model.”

Let’s just see if they can manage that before Google does.

Facebook: the more people who join, the less useful it becomes.

In an all-too-long post, Ben Brown (self-professed internet rockstar) laments the failings of Facebook, likening it to a Walmart or Costco with a collection of mediocre crap that “just happen to be conveniently located in the same place.” In other words, Facebook has become another example of a faceless big business, and we as internet denizens would do better to frequent the Mom & Pop sites run by people that provide a better service with more heart. (Sites that, for instance, aren’t overrun by advertising or useless applications like vampire bites.)

My problems with such a conclusion is that it lacks any substance. It’s all clouds and sweet talking. Firstly, as Andrew Dupont puts it, “these are valid critiques of Facebook, but they’re also critiques of social networking sites in general, to varying degrees.” There is a clear catch-22 faced by any social network: in order to be popular, and oftentimes successful, the site needs (by definition) a lot of users. Having a lot of users, however, makes room for misuse of the system, resulting in “Facebook friends” and pointless add-ons. (Not to mention that advertising is the name-of-the-game these days, and your site is not lasting long without a good advertising model in place.)

Ultimately, the onus is on the user base to shape the system. If everyone on Facebook was more conservative in their use of the site, there would be little to complain about. But the users are by-and-large doing whatever makes them happy. This is not a bad thing at all, except for the few users who have become fed up with what has happened to their beloved Facebook. Again, it depends on how you use the site. I hate all the things Ben hates, but for whatever reason (perhaps due to who I have and have not added to my friends) I rarely come across these annoyances.

Yes, I agree that Facebook has gone downhill in some ways since its inception, but it has also improved in other ways. Furthermore, any complaints you levy against it, barring those dealing with privacy issues (Facebook, you underhanded bastards), can also be applied to any other social network. What social network has not grown more cumbersome as the number of users increased?

Secondly, what are these Mom & Pop social networks we should be supporting? Smaller social networks are inherently less useful in general. They may provide exponentially more utility in specific areas (such as Doostang, which is only for business networking), but hardly offer the broad reach that a site like Facebook offers. Another option like Virb is certainly much prettier than MySpace, but it will be covered in just as much spam as soon as it gets big. (Granted, it will be pretty spam.)

Finally, I have to stress there is nothing innately wrong with Facebook (in theory). Cry all day about it, but social networking is ultimately about (you guessed it) being social, and that is simply fun to do in a huge community where all of your friends live. It is important to understand that moving to a smaller social network would be like leaving Verizon for a cell phone provider with a fraction of the customers and the ability to only communicate within the network. The mom and pop cell phone service might be crystal clear, cheap as hell, and have loving customer service out the wazoo, but don’t go denying the substantial utility involved in being in a network with all of your friends just because it cost a bit more and sounds a bit crappier.