“I don’t believe Privacy is a real issue to most people, but most people think it is a real issue to them. As thus, it plays a big role in the psychological justification for defecting from competitors. “Safety” hysteria destroyed MySpace in the press. It got MySpace banned from schools, Apple stores, and by well-meaning parents who had been terrorized by what they were reading.”—Tom Anderson | Five Things I Learned At MySpace That Could Help Google — TechCrunch
“Out of 1000 people surveyed after being cut off from the Internet for 24 hours, 53% reported feeling “upset” about being deprived of online access and 40% said that they felt lonely after not being able to connect to the Internet. Participants described the digital detox akin to quitting drinking or smoking and one even said it was like having his hand chopped off (!).”—Technology Is The New Smoking | TechCrunch
Decades of research in social psychology have shown that people often share strong emotions as a means of fostering connection and solidarity.
“If I’m angry, and then you get angry, we can bond over what we’re feeling.”
The Internet reflects this ancient social instinct. The only difference is that, when online, we often can’t express our emotions directly. (It’s not easy expressing genuine joy in a tweet.) Instead, we’re forced to spread arousal through short videos and articles, using the images and words of others as a proxy.
“The biggest difference between Google and Facebook right now is that thanks to search intent data, Google knows what consumers want. Facebook, on the other hand, has a very clear understanding of what users like and who they know. Google is the first step for Google to close this gap.”—How Google Will Transform Search and Search Marketing | AdAge
“The 140-character limit is one of the most brilliant things Twitter has ever done — and might even explain why it is still around… Not only did that limit feel comfortable to many users who were familiar with text messaging, but it restricted what people could post, so that Twitter didn’t become a massive time-sink of 1,000-word missives and rambling nonsense, the way so many blogs are.”—Why changing Twitter’s 140-character limit is a dumb idea
“The survey of 70,000 US consumers found Facebook to be the least satisfying of the largest social sites on the web. Only 66% of respondents said they were satisfied by Facebook, compared to market leader Wikipedia at 78%.”—Survey Says: US Consumers Most Unhappy With Facebook
“Like curiosity, beauty is a motivational force, an emotional reaction not to the perfect or the complete, but to the imperfect and incomplete. We know just enough to know that we want to know more; there is something here, we just don’t what. That’s why we call it beautiful.”—Why Does Beauty Exist? | Wired Science
…My initial thoughts are that grouping seems to work well for mobile, ephemeral states. This is why group messaging works, and why I think something like Color, while poorly executed, is interesting.
Trying to create explicit groups for you entire social graph and being forced to maintain them just doesn’t seem tenable to me. Some people may think it is now because something like Circles offers a nice-looking tool, but I think as time goes on, they’ll stop maintaining as well.
100% agree. I’ve added a dozen people to Circles and I’m overwhelmed just thinking about figuring out the rest, much less maintaining any of it. I have geographical Twitter lists that I actively use and a single Facebook list for the purpose of chat. I’m exhausted. No more list-making, please.
Wegner proposed the idea of “transactive memory” as a collective social memory of sorts. For example, if a friend has an exhaustive knowledge of Greek history, you can simply remember that The Iliad is Greek and that your friend knows about Greek things, rather than remembering who wrote the epic poem. Sparrow and Wegner say that the Internet may serve a similar function, acting as an extension of this external memory.
Can you imagine the implications? Especially for education. Crazy.
Although we’ve been romanticizing human memory ever since Socrates, our recall is profoundly flawed… Every time we recall a memory we also remake it, subtly tweaking the neuronal details. (This is why the more we remember something, the less accurate the memory becomes.) Although we like to think of our memories as being immutable impressions, somehow separate from the act of remembering them, they aren’t. A memory is only as real as the last time you remembered it.
“Google is like a kind of Troll-Borg. You think they put out something that stands on its own, a “Facebook killer” or an “iPhone killer” — but it’s only later that you realize that the separation from the mothership was just an illusion, and the entire bulk of Google was right there the whole time. But it’s too late — you’ve been assimilated. Problem?”—Google : One Hell Of A Trojan Horse
I’ve noticed that most futurists (and doomsday prophets) seem to favor timetables which place the amazing world-changing events within their own lifetimes, especially when the prophets in question seem obsessed with their own mortality. Anyone know if there is a name for this kind of predictive bias?
“People are really concerned with categorizing other people online — with being forced to decide where they rank. Some people will definitely find it really useful, especially very, very active social media users, but most people feel anxious about having to decide which category their friends fall into.”—James Fowler, author of Connected, political science professor | Organizing My Online Friends - NYTimes.com