We went to see Angels & Demons last week with R and for some odd reason I always get very annoyed at the movie theater. Granted, the movie itself wasn't as horrible as I was afraid of, but it seems that the typical moviegoer these days is not capable of being in any way considerate when it comes to the experience of other viewers. One of my pet peeves is how people are checking their phone in a dark movie theater. Just maybe it's not a good idea, namely because when the backlight of the phone's screen kicks on in a dark room, your movie viewing experience is degraded as your view is automatically turned to the new source of stimulus. And when this happens every ten minutes you can't help but complain to the person (if they are close to you) and wish that you'd have a bottle to throw at the person if they're sitting further away.
Another brilliant thing to do is to leave the movie theater in the middle of the movie in disgust. Nothing's better than directly and immediately protesting against the shitty quality of the plot and acting than to march out in protest. That may work in a theater where the actors are present and attempting to perform (and I have to admit that even I haven't dared disrupt theater presentations in this way, even though I've seen quite a few rather appalling ones in my time), but for some odd reason I think the protest is lost on the fact that at movies you don't have a direct feedback channel available to the actors or the producer or the director. So please, fly to California and bitch and moan at them, but please don't do it in the movie theater. The only thing you accomplish is the same that you get when you play with your phone: the other moviegoers will be wishing that someone would decapitate you.
It's funny since I recall that I've bitched and moaned about these things before. But all seems to not be lost yet as the people playing with their phones seem to know on some level that they're doing something wrong. Or at least I get this feeling when I tell them to lose the phone and shut up. In my experience everyone thus far has put their phones away without trouble. Maybe it's because we Finns inherently adhere to rules or maybe it's because I look scary or something. But from my point of view it doesn't matter what the reason is as long as it continues to work in the future as well.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
Sunday, May 03, 2009
On microblogging and such
Antti, a friend of mine, was recently writing about the issues with micro-blogging services like Twitter. He also reflected his own personal usage and identified the requirement to commit oneself to the micro-blogging as of the single biggest issues for him and the services in general. I see the point, but do not necessarily agree on the potential impact that it has for the systems.
Social software like blogs and social networking sites do require some level of activity. If I don't blog anything here for a while, the few readers that this blog has will disappear. I disagree, however, with the notion that the commitment needs to be that big. Even less so with sites like Twitter. If I don't post anything in a while, it doesn't really matter: I might be away from network connectivity or something similar, but I doubt that people would send search parties to find me. I can't help but feel that Antti's example is not necessarily that realistic. The real value from these services comes from the network externalities. The more friends you have using the systems the more you get from them in the form of updates and such. Even if you're not too active yourself, you can still follow what other people are doing. And when you do post something yourself, you're contributing something to the system, making it that much more valuable.
Now, the systems do indeed require activity, but for me this activity comes from intrinsic motivators. I don't blog for others; I blog for myself. I may update my Facebook status or send a tweet to notify other people, but again I do this out of free will, not because I feel that I have to do so. Antti does, however, brush upon one point that is relevant here: if you feel that you "have to" update your blog and if you are driven by external motivators, you are of course a lot more likely to stop blogging and using Twitter than if you were doing it for yourself instead of other people.
While most of the social software these days does benefit from network externalities, I do feel that there is one very tangible threat around the corner. While technically the more information that goes through the network has traditionally meant more value for each node of the network, the same problem lurks nearby that Google has been tackling for the World Wide Web since the mid-90s: creating some sense into the chaos of information tidbits. So the risk is that as our social links go increasingly online, there need to be proper tools to filter and manage the information that spreads in the network. A fine and very tangible example of this is the Facebook phenomenon of quizes: many people feel a need to fill out tons of different quizes to supposedly learn something interesting about themselves. These quiz notifications go out to all of the friends in the network, but even with some hundred contacts the problem is easily that the quiz notifications drown all the other signals in the network and thus actually reduce the value of the network by increasing the noise level and making it more difficult for me to pick up the signals that interest me.
Social software like blogs and social networking sites do require some level of activity. If I don't blog anything here for a while, the few readers that this blog has will disappear. I disagree, however, with the notion that the commitment needs to be that big. Even less so with sites like Twitter. If I don't post anything in a while, it doesn't really matter: I might be away from network connectivity or something similar, but I doubt that people would send search parties to find me. I can't help but feel that Antti's example is not necessarily that realistic. The real value from these services comes from the network externalities. The more friends you have using the systems the more you get from them in the form of updates and such. Even if you're not too active yourself, you can still follow what other people are doing. And when you do post something yourself, you're contributing something to the system, making it that much more valuable.
Now, the systems do indeed require activity, but for me this activity comes from intrinsic motivators. I don't blog for others; I blog for myself. I may update my Facebook status or send a tweet to notify other people, but again I do this out of free will, not because I feel that I have to do so. Antti does, however, brush upon one point that is relevant here: if you feel that you "have to" update your blog and if you are driven by external motivators, you are of course a lot more likely to stop blogging and using Twitter than if you were doing it for yourself instead of other people.
While most of the social software these days does benefit from network externalities, I do feel that there is one very tangible threat around the corner. While technically the more information that goes through the network has traditionally meant more value for each node of the network, the same problem lurks nearby that Google has been tackling for the World Wide Web since the mid-90s: creating some sense into the chaos of information tidbits. So the risk is that as our social links go increasingly online, there need to be proper tools to filter and manage the information that spreads in the network. A fine and very tangible example of this is the Facebook phenomenon of quizes: many people feel a need to fill out tons of different quizes to supposedly learn something interesting about themselves. These quiz notifications go out to all of the friends in the network, but even with some hundred contacts the problem is easily that the quiz notifications drown all the other signals in the network and thus actually reduce the value of the network by increasing the noise level and making it more difficult for me to pick up the signals that interest me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
