The executive order regarding social media is in part meant to serve as a flex at social media companies. It paves the way for legal recourse against any action perceived as negative toward conservatives – or the ruling party, really. Given that the president likes the ease with which he can communicate with his constituents over a service like Twitter as well as the following her commands on Facebook, nothing lethal will occur to either service. The threat is there, though. And money is the blood shed in a capitalist culture.
There’s a second meaning to the order, though.
Continue reading “Censorship and Visibility in the Age of Trump”
There are a couple of things I get out of this tweet:
Continue reading “Social Media Futility”
No ‘Facebook fatigue’ for longtime users | Reuters.
“This examination of people’s activities in a very new realm affirms one of the oldest truths about the value of friendship,” said Lee Rainie, head of Pew’s Internet project. “Those who are socially active have a better shot at getting the help and emotional help they need.”
They need emotional help? I don’t like the way this article was written. That implies to me that the users of Facebook are turning to the site instead of going to therapy. To be completely honest, your friends on Facebook are most likely to be emotional enablers, supporting most of your choices no matter how stupid they are. If they didn’t do that, it takes only a few clicks to unfriend someone.
The article means emotional support, which does not make it better. There’s nothing socially active about Facebook, or any social network in general – I explored that a while ago. This is all about providing your network with your best face and in return getting the best response. There’s no dislike button on Facebook for a reason, and, like I said already, those who are disagreeable are easily silenced. Facebook is all about positive feedback.
And the reason longtime users experience no fatigue or, in other words, have no desire to leave the network is because it’s difficult to go from positive feedback all the time to having nothing but your own means. I’m certain there’s a bit of withdrawal involved. Yes, I believe that social networks can cause addiction; I believe that Facebook is worth billions because of addicts.
Dating Site Says Android Users Are More Likely to Give It Up on the First Date
Thanks go out to the Consumerist for bringing this article to my attention. It says that not only are Android users more likely to have sex on the first date, but they are also more likely to have one night stands and access dating websites than people who use iPhones or Blackberrys. Meanwhile, iPhone users are more likely to have office romances and call someone a day after the first date. Lastly, Blackberry users are most likely to drink on the first date and admit to having experienced love at first sight. But what does this all mean? Continue reading “Reading between the lines”
Before the end of the year, I said, “Social networking is the fog we use to confuse our relationships and obscure our antisocial habits. Thoughts?” That was the entire post, so only click the link if you like the idea of my hit count increasing. I didn’t get much response. What I got was incredibly thoughtful. I just wish I had gotten more.
I’m not opposed to the existence of social networking. I was an early adopter of Facebook when it hit the University of Michigan. This had to be between my sophomore and junior years, if memory serves. Someone in the University of Michigan community on LiveJournal, a proto-social network itself, announced that The Facebook had finally hit Michigan and we could all sign up. Curiosity led to my account on the network, no matter how creepy it was at the time. Some may find the timeline feature disturbing, but there was a time when the site urged its users to post their class scheduled and share them – and there were no privacy controls.
But social networks are not in and of themselves problematic. They are essentially programs. They supply none of their own information, and they only occasionally pull information about you from other locations. Social networks are ultimately at the mercy of their users. Continue reading “Social Networking”
Social networking is the fog we use to confuse our relationships and obscure our antisocial habits. Thoughts?
I have been thinking more and more about user interfaces(UIs) lately. Maybe it’s the proliferation of devices in our everyday lives, but I cannot shake out of my head that individuals designing interfaces seem to shrug off the idea that there should be rules governing their choices. The two rules necessary for UIs are as follows: simplicity and accessibility. Continue reading “The User Interface”
As someone whose intended research focus will purposed toward integrating multimedia with the various therapies intended for children on the autism spectrum, I have definitely taken notice of the national competition for using video games to help children better understand science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). I also appreciate the endorsement for this competition by President Obama. As always, there are issues that need to be addressed.
As someone whose intended research focus will purposed toward integrating multimedia with the various therapies intended for children on the autism spectrum, I have definitely taken notice of the national competition for using video games to help children better understand science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). I also appreciate the endorsement for this competition by President Obama. As always, there are issues that need to be addressed. Continue reading “STEM Video Game Challenge and culture critique”
How the Nielsen TV ratings work — and what could replace them.
Great article on how the Nielsen ratings work (duh, you can read) and why you probably do not have a box yourself. The determinants are your being representative of a broader population as determined by a set of “normal behaviors”. Obviously irksome to me. I never liked the idea of “normal” people deciding anything for me.
I generally do not like Ebert. I have seen reviews that were too critical of the lowbrow and others that were too light on those that considered themselves highbrow. Some reviews have revealed that he is not as observant as he should be. Then there is his whole argument about video games not being art, which basically sums up to, “I know art when I see art. I don’t play games, so I don’t see art there. Since I haven’t seen it, games cannot be art.” (Check out this blog post or the other blog post he has written on the subject. I am not inaccurate here.) Ebert does not sit well with me.
What makes me dislike him more is when I do agree with him. It just does not seem right. However, he made some great points about 3-D. I see 3-D as just another marketing gimmick, and Ebert seems to agree and then some. Check out his latest in Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110