Comments on: THE ONE

By: Derek Rey

Derek Rey — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:36:59 +0000

Hi Betsy,

First off, your conversation is astounding! I’m glad to have the opportunity to participate. I also like the fact that you’ve been able to bring an entirely different approach to these topics, even incorporating generational differences. Wonderful!

Second, some really interesting products were unveiled this week at CES in Vegas. One of which is DELL’s new era of netbook PC’s (yes Betsy, you hit this one on the head). Not disagreeing with O’Reilly in that cell phones (i.e. mobile computers) will become our senors for computing in the real world, but before this I think the netbook will have it’s moment to shine and 2009 just might be it. Dell’s new line is not only REALLY cool to hold and expereince, they’re affordable too.

One last thing I wanted to hint on was ambient intimacy. I follow almost 2,000 people on Twitter. Of those 2,000 people I’ve made relationships beyond that of the TwitterUniverse. I now have offline friends who I snowboard with. I’m receiving marathon advice from @smellycents. I helped a guy get a job interview at an Ad Agency in LA yesterday… By reaching far and wide, having this very ambient level of following and interest, paves the way for more personal, nuclear connections.

Imagine how many new friends I could make following 10,000?

Use twitter. Make new friends. Love the web.

Derek Rey´s last blog post..2009 Social Media Prediction: The Year of DELL

By: Betsy Wuebker

Betsy Wuebker — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:59:31 +0000

Hi Lance – It definitely is comforting to carve out one’s little piece of the web, isn’t it? I’d rather be an active participant in that than inadvertent – which is what troubles me about the perceptions inherent in the concept of ambient intimacy. It’s less direct in a medium that I’m already predisposed to think of as less than real. Thanks.

Hi Dot – I’m not sure which jargon you’re referring to, but what troubles me about the concept behind O’Reilly’s term “ambient intimacy” – as I understand it – is the apparent willingness or even desire to settle for less in relationships. It seems to me that more depth is more satisfying in what should or could be our most important relationships. Does ambience create a veil? I think it might.

I’m with you on portable devices. In my comment to Derek, I asked Santa for a screen size that old people (like me) could actually read. It’s why I’m very interested in a netbook/cellphone hybrid with sufficient RAM as to make me totally mobile. I want to go smaller and as powerful, but not so small that I’m exasperated.

I also agree that developers often don’t anticipate how the usage of their tools will be adapted by users. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

By: Dot

Dot — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:30:14 +0000

I’m with Mike — most of this discussion went over my head. I hate it when people jargonize everyday things. What on earth is “the One?” I did not get any idea. My first thought was this must mean God. “Ambient intimacy” makes it sound like contacting people on Twitter or Facebook is floating in the air that we breathe or decorating the walls. A more accurate term would be “electronic intimacy.”

It’s useful for a variety of things, especially when combined with direct contact, or if you’re a shut-in and can’t see people. It’s very useful for sharing photos of one’s children with faraway relatives and other things that support a relationship, but it’s not a substitute for an in-person relationship.

I sincerely hope that things won’t totally move to mobile devices, because with my vision handicaps I’ll never be able to read anything on those tiny screens. As far as social media, people will use them in the ways they find useful. Such things can”t really be decided by the developers. For instance, Twitter’s creator seemed to think that “What am I doing right now?” was a question we wanted answered, but it turned out that mostly only to teenagers cared about that.

Dot´s last blog post..This and That

By: Lance

Lance — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 11:11:22 +0000

Hi Betsy,
The idea of “one” is intriguing to me. What I do see is the Internet as a big ocean, with lots of inlets, islands, rivers flowing into it, etc. As a whole, it seems very big and vast. Yet, when you look at the “islands” you visit – what matters to you – they are small and “known” pieces of the great big ocean. And I, for one, really feel comforted in all of this.

To Vered’s point – yes, it can be easy to “lose” an online friendship – will this change over time? I’m not sure it will. Still, online connections have become to mean a lot to me – just as offline connections do to…

Lance´s last blog post..And The Word Is…

By: Betsy Wuebker

Betsy Wuebker — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:14:59 +0000

Hi Barbara – Yes, the ambient intimacy thing creates the “smaller reality” that lots of us find more meaningful and easier to wrap around. Mastering communication and personalization, such as you do with your blog, is a key factor. Thank you.

By: Barbara Swafford - Blogging Without A Blog

Barbara Swafford - Blogging Without A Blog — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:23:54 +0000

Hi Betsy – The part where you said “The craving for “small’ is already manifesting itself in micro-economic solutions” reminds me of how when we blog, or communicate online, the world becomes smaller and we find out we’re not that much different than the person who lives across the world from us.

Barbara Swafford – Blogging Without A Blog´s last blog post..Join Twitter – It’s Easier Than You Think

By: Betsy Wuebker

Betsy Wuebker — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:06:12 +0000

Hi Vered – Nice to have you back and Happy New Year! I agree. This is what is troubling about ambient intimacy to me: replacing what we know or prefer as real with a parallel. Also, don’t we lose some choice about what we share offline if our acquaintances and intimates are checking our communications and keeping tabs, as it were? It reminds me of bloggers who share and then hope family or friends IRL don’t read the blog, or kids posting pictures they might wish they didn’t on Facebook. I think on some level they do, or they wouldn’t do it, no? If less of our information is ’safe’ will we become more guarded? There’s an element of laziness to ambient intimacy in my perception, too. Thanks.

By: Vered - MomGrind

Vered - MomGrind — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 18:07:13 +0000

“Commenters on this blog are from all parts of the globe, yet our connections are real and satisfying.” I used to feel this way too. But I spent the past couple of weeks mostly with my real-life friends and family, and I have to day that cyber connections have their limitations. They are not as real or as satisfying as real-life interactions. And they can evaporate more easily. I had several blogging friends who simply disappeared. It’s not as easy to do in a real-life situation.

Vered – MomGrind´s last blog post..Last-Minute Holiday Shopping? May I Suggest The Perfect Gift

By: Betsy Wuebker

Betsy Wuebker — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:00:36 +0000

Hi Grace – Parasocial relationships, yeah, as in ambient intimacy. Thank you for the term!

You’d enjoy this article: http://www.cultureby.com/trilogy/2008/12/more-on-millennials-expansionary-individualism.html

Here’s a piece of it:

It is possible we are witnessing the creation of a global self and an expansionary individualism. The global self is curious and catholic in searching out new definitional options, credulous in trying them on, mobile in its incorporation of diverse and improbable materials, adroit in its embrace of several at once, skillful in managing the portfolio of selves that is the result, and sturdy enough to live with the ideational and emotion turbulence that must ensue.

By: Grace Kleppin

Grace Kleppin — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:33:30 +0000

As long as the Internet has been in existance, psychologists have been studying what they term, “parasocial relationships.” I think that the field has just grown too big too fast to keep up with it.

Our beliefs about privacy may need to be re-evaluated, as you suggest by the world in 2.0.

New information has a way of cycling through phases of rapid expansion and then a synthesis phase when we make sense out of all the new information that we ‘know.’ I believe we are definitely in an the expansion phase right now.

If this were the Big Bang theory of the universe, we are defining moving outward at an exponential rate!

Good post. Got me thinking!

Grace Kleppin´s last blog post..The best advice I gave myself in 2008