Nerve just put up a list of the top 50 unsexiest things, including:
Friendster.com. For a few months, it was a secret cute-kid sex party. Then all your exes heard about it. Then Courtney Love got on it. Then strangers started insisting you’d shared some magical experience with them outside Tuscaloosa. You told them you’d never been to Tuscaloosa and that they must have the wrong person. Then they told you your pet hamster’s name from when you were five and you started shaking.
In meeting people to date, the generic “you” is theoretically looking for one lifetime partner. S/he wants to be introduced to many candidates and feels little consequence if things don’t work out. Worst case scenario: two of them meet and call you a shit.
In meeting people for business purposes, you are motivated to connect with many people who provide you a diverse but meaningful social network. You have limited time to engage with people, so you must choose wisely and then slowly massage that relationship, particularly if the person you want to know cares little for you. The people you meet in business are often intertwined so you have to play nice from the getgo.
These are two totally different ways of operating your social network. Yet we think that the same architecture makes sense. Hmm.
I used to be good about posting news articles about Friendster, but i’ve been dreadful lately, mostly because very few say something new. –sigh–
Of course, CNews seems to have a small obsession, fueled by the spread of rumors. Ah, yes, the power of gossip to keep anyone in the public eye. It’s kinda a funny twist on social networking, no? Gossip keeps friends connected; rumors keeps individuals connected with the press. Maybe “press” should be a Fakester….
[Oh, if you have articles that i should post here, either add them to the comments or send them my way.]
Cash from contacts is a BBC article that discusses LinkedIn’s model of letting the have nots have access to the haves.
My inner child is ten years old!
The adult world is pretty irrelevant to me. Whether
I’m off on my bicycle (or pony) exploring, lost
in a good book, or giggling with my best
friend, I live in a world apart, one full of
adventure and wonder and other stuff adults
don’t understand.
How Old is Your Inner Child?
brought to you by Quizilla
Last night, i was on a panel at the Hillside. Afterwards, someone asked me how i managed to cram a whole lot of theory into 8 minutes. The answer was simple: the press. I’ve found that the press is one of the best bouncing boards for working through academic ideas. They ask silly questions, have totally different motives, and are so far outside of academia that everything seems new and interesting. Other academics are jaded, too involved in the details and otherwise unable to provide that fresh perspective. I’ve given up paying attention to how they might quote me, because i don’t care; i simply enjoy the conversations.
Last week, i was talking to a reporter. She asked me a question about what makes interacting with people on something like Tribe or LinkedIn different than Friendster. This prompted a little a-hah moment. Dating is all about people matching.. people meeting other people. Classifieds are all about people connecting with *information.* Say what you want about the effectiveness of meeting people online, but the Internet has certainly been successful at connecting people to information… for almost everyone. And the Internet has definitely been successful at helping mediate relationships that already exist.
Even when you break down the kinds of relationships that form on Friendster, you start to realize that Friendster is most useful as an information gathering tool. (Yeah, yeah… a people DNS.) Familiar strangers. Headhunters using it to look up people. Tracking down old friends. Information, not necessarily socialization. Of course, information about people is far more fascinating than information about random objects. But getting information about people doesn’t necessarily prompt a desire to interact with or engage them.
Must process more, but when i said it out loud, i realized that the dichotomy of people/information is a really powerful axes for reflection on these tools.
Dina Mehta has an interesting entry called Social Networks and Brand Identity where she describes Kapferer’s Brand Identity Prism (a combination of 6 internal & external characteristics that comprise a consumer’s reaction to a brand). It seems as though she’s doing a lot of crunching on ideas in the knowledge management space.
Most of what she focuses on are the more business-y approaches, but her entries are a reminder that i need to learn more about the academic theories underlying knowledge management (’cause that’s the type of information management that i want to be playing with).
Before i left for vacation, a wonderful woman sent me a set of survey data she collected on 61 identified Fakesters (mostly Pets). Having lost track of my email during that period, i forgot to post it. The survey isn’t that serious so it’s mighty fun to read and there are some humorous quotes.
While Berkeley is far more like Brown than MIT could ever dream to be, one thing drives me batty: there is way too much of the Northern California process, self analysis shit in the classroom. I just sat through 2 one-hour classes where over half of each class was devoted to process, analysis of the professors (section) or self-analysis by the professors (lecture). We’re no longer in the first week of school so i have *no* patience for this.
I’m also having a really really hard time dealing with the slowness of speech of most professors. Out of all of my professors, one of them is a New Yorker/total East Coaster. He talks as fast i do, makes no apologies for it and demands that you keep up just by his assertive manner of speaking. It’s odd how refreshing this is for me. (And added bonus is that while he can do the whole post-structuralist speak, he keeps it to a minimum instead of trying to validate his existence through incomprehensible combinations of discourse words.)
As most of my SF friends are actually natives of the East Coast, i forget how much the slow-paced, process-centric Californian tendencies drive me up the wall. I just want to plow through the material. If i don’t get something in the first round, i’d rather repeat it than think that a slow version will allow for better comprehension. That never works for me and by going slow, my mind wanders.
I think i need more sleep.
For anyone intending to attend Sunday’s talk to heckle Jonathan instead of me, please note that you’ll have to redirect your tomatoes as Jonathan seems to have bailed.