TALK KOK.
hello world, whoever spends time reading the crap i write (yes i acknowledge the degenerating theme that seems to string all my posts together, if bywk was a stock it would certainly send investors' hearts pumping every night hoping it would jump back up) you should be happy now cuz here is an update from me!
tomorrow at 12am would officially mark the middle of 2009! this is only applicable if you count the year month wise, day wise the middle of 09 would be 2nd june 12am. oh shit my internet just screwed up. its always doing that. sigh. the starhub modem i've been using since 2004 has not been changed since 2004 and perhaps it has decided to take a bow (rihanna lol lol) okay its back up again yay. i can now see all my friends displayed on msn.
have you wondered why we add people on msn? is it really to talk to them? or is it to boost your ego that you have a hell lot of friends? or is it to boost your friend's ego to say that you treasure them enough so you let yourself be contactable when you're online? or is it because they added you? or is it because it just seems like what everybody is doing? or is it because you want to stay in contact with that person but giving your number seems too personal? or is msn more personal for you?
haha. lots of questions and if we can have the answer we'll find out the societal significance of instant messaging in the singaporean community. then again what msn means for me might not be what it means for someone else. singapore albeit a little red dot, still has a significant demographic spectrum. humans themselves are complex and hence we can only draw generalizations from what things mean to us. hence social hypotheses are only as accurate as its level of generalization?
my recent more intensive drowning in bloghopping, twitter and facebook status updates (see the parallel between t and fbsu? fb is trying to copy twitter) has led to a observation that we as a web community seem to be building some sort of anarchist nineteen eighty four (which is obviously a colossal paradox). for those of you who have yet to pick up the orwellian masterpiece, 1984 is a work of fiction that details a society with no access to freedom and no excess of privacy. or wait, no privacy at all. the lives of the people are subject to the scrutiny of the greater power (in this case, the government) and their actions effect huge consequences.
in this case, the anarchist nineteen eighty four seems to be the web that we're spinning (pun intended) as we pour our lives onto walls and twitter timelines and blog entries (which are undoubtedly more passe now then years ago). when blogger caught on as a social craze, naysayers exclaimed at such an explicit concept. today, we have taken this many levels further. i know when somebody is in the toilet, i know when somebody is at starbucks (which one even if i know them well if enough to know where they work, study etc), i know when somebody is cycling, running, working out, eatdrinking. and it won't be long before the location factor comes into popularization. fyi you can tweet your location if you have gps on your phone.
this flurry of knowledge that WE are giving out to the world- webcompanies included, seem oddly parallel to the nineteen eighty four i was talking about. instead of telescreens (two way cameras in the book) that monitor every citizen's movement, the citizens are the one choosing to give out that information. it is self-motivated. what are the consequences of these actions? will they be as tragic as the ones ending in orwell's novels? (i consider them tragic fyi, if you don't, then... get a dprk citizenship)
or will it not be? since the motivations for the proliferation of information is completely different, motivated by a spirit of self-interest instead of state domination. whatever the outcome might be, we must take caution. the hoarding of personal information by billion dollar dotcom firms (fb, twitter) could be exploited financially. how many of you actually read the t&c of facebook anyway?
as web2.0 gets more intimate with us, lets celebrate the change that the internet has brought to mankind. guns were never intended to attack, but to defend. and so were the peaceful purposes of dynamite. think.
p.s. wow look where rambling brought me!
tomorrow at 12am would officially mark the middle of 2009! this is only applicable if you count the year month wise, day wise the middle of 09 would be 2nd june 12am. oh shit my internet just screwed up. its always doing that. sigh. the starhub modem i've been using since 2004 has not been changed since 2004 and perhaps it has decided to take a bow (rihanna lol lol) okay its back up again yay. i can now see all my friends displayed on msn.
have you wondered why we add people on msn? is it really to talk to them? or is it to boost your ego that you have a hell lot of friends? or is it to boost your friend's ego to say that you treasure them enough so you let yourself be contactable when you're online? or is it because they added you? or is it because it just seems like what everybody is doing? or is it because you want to stay in contact with that person but giving your number seems too personal? or is msn more personal for you?
haha. lots of questions and if we can have the answer we'll find out the societal significance of instant messaging in the singaporean community. then again what msn means for me might not be what it means for someone else. singapore albeit a little red dot, still has a significant demographic spectrum. humans themselves are complex and hence we can only draw generalizations from what things mean to us. hence social hypotheses are only as accurate as its level of generalization?
my recent more intensive drowning in bloghopping, twitter and facebook status updates (see the parallel between t and fbsu? fb is trying to copy twitter) has led to a observation that we as a web community seem to be building some sort of anarchist nineteen eighty four (which is obviously a colossal paradox). for those of you who have yet to pick up the orwellian masterpiece, 1984 is a work of fiction that details a society with no access to freedom and no excess of privacy. or wait, no privacy at all. the lives of the people are subject to the scrutiny of the greater power (in this case, the government) and their actions effect huge consequences.
in this case, the anarchist nineteen eighty four seems to be the web that we're spinning (pun intended) as we pour our lives onto walls and twitter timelines and blog entries (which are undoubtedly more passe now then years ago). when blogger caught on as a social craze, naysayers exclaimed at such an explicit concept. today, we have taken this many levels further. i know when somebody is in the toilet, i know when somebody is at starbucks (which one even if i know them well if enough to know where they work, study etc), i know when somebody is cycling, running, working out, eatdrinking. and it won't be long before the location factor comes into popularization. fyi you can tweet your location if you have gps on your phone.
this flurry of knowledge that WE are giving out to the world- webcompanies included, seem oddly parallel to the nineteen eighty four i was talking about. instead of telescreens (two way cameras in the book) that monitor every citizen's movement, the citizens are the one choosing to give out that information. it is self-motivated. what are the consequences of these actions? will they be as tragic as the ones ending in orwell's novels? (i consider them tragic fyi, if you don't, then... get a dprk citizenship)
or will it not be? since the motivations for the proliferation of information is completely different, motivated by a spirit of self-interest instead of state domination. whatever the outcome might be, we must take caution. the hoarding of personal information by billion dollar dotcom firms (fb, twitter) could be exploited financially. how many of you actually read the t&c of facebook anyway?
as web2.0 gets more intimate with us, lets celebrate the change that the internet has brought to mankind. guns were never intended to attack, but to defend. and so were the peaceful purposes of dynamite. think.
p.s. wow look where rambling brought me!
Opinari
0 Responses to “WEB TWO POINT OH.”
Post a Comment