Status Updates: let's stop lying

Posted on by
6

What if we all started being a little more honest in our status updates?
We all know the drill: untag the bad photo, check-in to that cute bar, never post an update on those days when you cant stop crying and all you want to eat is chicken.

We often only share our stories that are positive online. We don’t share the things that hurt us, or scare us: the ramifications of which, I think, are are Stepford society. Everyone is happy and successful. Except us. And no one can relate to us when we have problems: because everyone is happy. We become frustrated and angry when we feel emotions like depression and frustration because we feel weak: we don’t see these emotions around us in the friends we love and respect. We feel like there’s something wrong with us and that we’re all alone.

I’ve been pondering, of late, creating a social site that requires you to fill in four statuses each week, before you can do any other updates: “this week something made me: happy/ hopeful/ sad/ angry.” No, it’s not the full spectrum of emotion, but it feels like a start to break down the barriers of current social networks, where only “here’s me being happy” is reflected.

I think if the site were either anonymous numbers (ie Anonymous0001) or restricted to 5 close friends it could be really useful to act as a support network for people who are experiencing similar issues and share experiences and insights. Ideally, the site could
be sorted by emotion or keyword to see everyone’s emotion from each category; in order to enable this supportive connection.

What do you think? Is this enough to begin breaking down these barriers in perception?

Or should we begin a campaign for Honest August: where to support positive mental health, we encourage  people to share emotions on Facebook outside of ‘happy’ and ‘angry’?

What do you think?

My Supermarket Of The Future

Posted on by
Reply

Self-service checkouts are the most humiliating thing in the world. There’s the beeping, the staff members rolling their eyes, the dropping money, the torn bags, the humiliation. If self-service checkouts are the way of the future, I’m not that keen.

supermarketby thomasfavrebulleonflicker 300x197 My Supermarket Of The Future

Let’s put grocery shopping into the year 2011. Here’s a how I’d like to see supermarkets innovate.

I’ve dreamt up a new kind of supermarket. It’s a combination on the ALDI model with online shopping: but it’s not centralized around home-delivery. In fact, it’s more like ordering a pizza. Let’s go for a stroll and I’ll tell you about it.

My grocery store is a takeaway grocery store. It’d be primarily for tech-savvy time-poor young professionals. In an iPhone (or Android or web) app, shoppers select items they would like to pickup later that day. They list the time the expect to arrive at the store to pick it up (either at x time, or ‘I’m on my way!’ ot dissimilar to taxi booking). Set up like a take-away pizza store, customers head to the counter to pick up their groceries.

When they arrive at the store, they check-in to the store Foursquare-esqe. While cash and eftpos would be catered for, mobile-wallets, near-field payments or a credit card synced directly to the app would be the way the transaction would take place. If you share your check-in with facebook, twitter or foursquare you can receive loyalty points, rewards or discounts. The customer then grabs their groceries and head on home. Done!

The waiting room wouldn’t feel as sterile as a pizza store. There’d be a computer where you can either order  from scratch or check on your groceries if there’s a line up. If there’s a bit of a wait, you can sit on the couches nearby and order a coffee. There would also the walls covered in canvases from local street artists and music from awesome Aussie bands.

Sounds pretty sweet, right? Hell yes.

So let’s get digital: the store would also have a lot of really cute options which could be integrated into the app. Storing your buying habits, it can offer suggestions like “Usually you’re out of milk by this time… Did you want to double check if you needed any?”.

It remembers your favourite items. Don’t scroll through every cereal in existence. The app ranks your favourite cereals at the top and the rest in alphabetical/brand order.

Nicknames can be applied to food: Awesome chilli noodles. Mum’s gross cereal. That shampoo that John buys because he thinks he’s going bald. You don’t need to remember a brand name and the difference between six slightly different product derivetives.

Send shopping lists to friends or family. If they don’t know the exact product your friend has asked for – they can find it, give it a nickname and send it to you to pick up. No more awkward “do these come in a larger size” moments.



In addition to this, it could sync with the app with recipe sites where you can simply say “order these items” and the ingredients to cook a certain meal would be added to your shopping list (drawn on the infamous “Like” button – with one-click to add the items to your account).

Obviously, promoted specials or recipes could be integrated into the app, in addition to highlighting sale items: “you’ve ordered x cheese, but x is on sale. Do you want to swap your order?”. (And, if nothing else, might be a good way to break even. ;))

While we’re at it – let’s set geolocative reminders. You don’t want to go shopping now, but know you need to pick up more bread? Geolocation updates will remind you when you’re near the store to pick up some bread. Just order it from your phone and swing by the store.

Now let’s go behind the curtain.

If you submit your order in the morning, or with two hour’s notice, there is either a discount or loyalty points – this is so staff packing the groceries can prepare as many deliveries in advance as possible to reduce waiting time when the inevitable peak-hour rush comes on. The computer which delivers the order to the staff would rank the orders as per priority based on their arrival time. If someone is “heading over now”, their order is bumped up the queue, however, a subsequent ranking looks at who placed their order first. If it appears like there is a backlog of orders, an alert would let the consumer know that there may be a wait and asks whether they’re happy to drop by a bit later (or to hang out and have a coffee.) ;)

When the order is sent through to the staff, the docket is split into the multiple divisions of the store, where staff fill a tray or trolley with that customers’ surname and order code to keep their groceries together. Once the dry goods are packed, that customer’s tray  is placed an initial holding area. In this area, all the goods until that point are checked off manually by staff who cross check all the items from the dry goods.

When the customer checks-in to the store, the dairy and cold goods are added to their tray . This customers’ tray is then added to the secondary waiting area, where the frontdesk service staff meet the customers and deliver their groceries to them.

For customers who are more than 2 hours later than their stated pick-up time, a small fee is incurred and, if groceries are not picked up that day without notice, the order is dissolved and 70% of the cost of the groceries is returned to the customer. Cancellation outside of two hours incurs no cost.
All-in-all, the overheads are quite low, it can be run with minimal staff, and stock can be brought in on a just-in-time system and with the back of the store with the simple warehouse layout like ALDI.

In theory, if the store wanted to outsource, it could also have parcels delivered to the store to be picked up with the next time a customer drops into the store.

What do you reckon? Would you swing by my Supermarket of the Future? The supermarket where the only beeping is your phone reminding you to buy That shampoo that John buys because he thinks he’s going bald?

Rebecca v Jessi: Should we be putting online reputation management in schools?

Posted on by
2

I think it’s been really interesting that over the past few months, there’s been a lot of talk (well, who am I kidding, a lot of memes) about Rebecca Black. Her YouTube clip Friday went viral, resulting in fame in just three short months, which includes being invited to making an appearance at the MTV O Music awards.

rebecca black 300x234 Rebecca v Jessi: Should we be putting online reputation management in schools?

rebecca black

I want to discuss is the difference between Rebecca Black’s rise to fame, and Jessi Slaughter‘s infamy. Both of whom have become memes online – but Rebecca has a recording contract, while Jessi’s father has faced criminal charges as a result of his daughter’s online infamy. How did these end up on such different paths?
I believe a key difference in the way that these two entered the online stage, and responded to their new audience was, simply what I will call “online literacy”: understanding how and why online culture works, and knowing how to work it. I’m not saying 13-year-old Rebecca has a magic formula to making videos viral – I’m saying that when the internet did pluck her from anonymity, her response was to play smart and cash in. 11-year-old Jessi responded in the way an 11-year-old would to harassment, but unfortunately, antagonized the wrong people because she didn’t really understand the implications of what she was doing. (Obviously, due to her age, which I will discuss shortly).
Rebecca Black understood how to play the online game. Her family paid a production company to create a YouTube video for her, so she placed herself on the online stage in a very formulated way*. While the video is made a mockery of, she’s a girl who made a decision to make a lame video, and she’s standing by it, playing cool, saying the “haters don’t bother her“. Jessi Slaughter, however, stumbled into the online world, making YouTube videos from the perspective of an eleven-year-old to a small online community, lashing out at anyone who attacked her. The result was that the online community, in particular, 4Chan, believed this girl needed to be taught a lesson in manners, which translated in to a string of real-world pranks. Jessi’s family, however, don’t understand this online culture, nor were they aware what her daughter was doing online. They didn’t understand how to use the internet, nor why they were being attacked, exhibited in the meme-tastic, “We’ve called the cyberpolice”. In fact, even as the family were being interviewed by media about the harassment and police intervention, Jessi’s mother still had no idea that her daughter had even made online videos.
One of the biggest issues here, is that the most naive members of our society, are also the most information rich regarding this new form of media. We have eleven-year-olds who can make videos for the world to see, more fluently and faster than people in their twenties, thirties, fourties, fifties. The response to try to combat young people using technology has been to lock social networks down for kids under 13, such as Facebook.  Cyberbullying help buttons on Facebook have been implemented in the US but the reality is that there are more than enough online communities for preeteens to explore outside of these places, which are unmonitored.
The issue is that adults are aware of some of the dangers of the online world, especially those of a predatory nature, but don’t understand enough about navigating the online space to encourage or support healthy relationships with people online, including strangers such as people on forums, on twitter, in chat rooms, on chatroulette. All of the cyber safety information I see is about ‘what if someone tries to friend you on Facebook’ and completely overlooks the literacy needed around conversing with online-only friends in all these other spaces, or even, what is really the case with these teens, online reputation management.
Schools will palm it off to parents. Parents will palm it off to teachers. The reality is, that in general, both these groups are as likely to be as confused as each other.
It’s funny, that for a piece of technology which has grown so quickly as part of our everyday lives, there is a vast number of people who still really have no idea how to use it – my favourite example being Read Write Web’s ‘Facebook Login redesign article saga‘, it beg the question – what if we were allowed on the roads without driving lessons?
We need to recognise that there are a lot of people who don’t understand the basics of how the internet works and are forced to learn on the fly. However the nature of the internet is that these interactions are in a public space and people make mistakes which most of the time, no one cares about. But in the case of teens like Jessi Slaughter, public mistakes can lead to some very serious consequences.
What do you think? How should be address the lack on online literacy in our communities? Schools? Parents? Community-based workshops? Training manuals which come with new computers? Or, would a great big internet delete button be a better approach during people fumbling about on the internet? Let me know – I’d love to begin to seriously think about way to challenge this issue.

-Rach.

*Interesting, one of the other girls in the Friday video has also received harassment online from her role. See how well presented her response is (Y’know, despite her ramblings about Justin Bieber, her braces and her driveway length in the middle)?

Ad:Tech Sydney – The Future Of Television is…?

Posted on by
1

Yesterday I headed to Ad:Tech in Sydney to check out the keynote “The Future of Television“. It had a really interesting panel, which consisted in a group which  right across the spectrum of television as we know it now (and how we could know it in the future). Representatives were from television production company, Shine360, Broadcasters Nine and SBS, Freeview Australia, and thrown in for good measure was a representative from Sony and Microsoft.

tv bysubonflickr 300x226 Ad:Tech Sydney The Future Of Television is...?

Television graffiti

Part of the discussion I enjoyed the most was the look at what television means - and the perspective of whether ‘television’ means something in your loungeroom, or something mobile. While it’s evident that society would generally deem ‘television’ as any screen you can carry in your pocket, the presenters on the panel emphasised that until metrics from viewers online are classified as ‘ratings’, then small-screen viewing simply won’t be counted as television from an industry perspective.

One presenter pointed out*, Broadcasters would care more about the”screen” if mobile interaction counted as ratings. “Music industry didn’t care about digital until online sales existed – so until these metrics become tangible in regards to the business, they have no impact.”

And, let’s face it, this won’t happen any time soon with industry regulations being different across free-to-air and pay tv, which is amplified by the fact that online and mobile aren’t even classified as Broadcast according to Industry bodies.

Sony representative, Paul Colley, estimated that 50% of all TVs currently being sold are internet-capable, and this figure could be 80% of all televisions within three to four years’ time. The legal and regulatory questions around accountability of this content need to be addressed very soon in order to keep pace with technology, or we might find ourself in a situation where what we would classify today as “broadcast media” entirely without regulation.

One of the other debates I found most interesting was how to engage those viewers who increasingly want to interact with their television shows. This is, in reference to appointment television – this is not a question of whether people want to choose what they want to watch as per torrenting and YouTube, but a question for when people do want their viewing on shuffle**.

It’s no secret that people are more and more interacting with television via a second device, whether it’s checking in, tweeting about it or discussing it with friends on Facebook.

There are loads of studies looking at the increasing trend of people simultaneously watching tv and using online spaces to discuss these shows or interact with these show. The way we use media is changing.

The real question around this issue was how we interact with television: do we just want to converse around the show online, or want a deeper immersion?

The fine line between interaction needs to be balanced: how can we create an interactive environment to work with a show, not taking it over? How do we have a Twitter feed integrated with the show, without the amusing tweets taking centre stage?

A discussion I had with some friends outside the conference led to the discussion around how you could sync a mobile device and television so that they could work separately or concurrently (for example, could the tv show be broadcasting and additional interactive content work concurrently on an iPad? Could it be tweets, video extras, polls, ability to purchase items from that moment in the show, all sent out – and interactive – at the same time as the show? Could there be episode specific content, even when it’s a rerun?)

Iain MacDonald presented an awesome pic (the closest thing to it I could get was the image above) in the opening statement got me thinking: why do these devices need to be complementary? When would technology be available to sync all mobile computer devices in a room so that if I’m tweeting on one device, the television can optionally support additional content?

A fair point was raised that “multitasking” is a misnomer, where watching tv and reading email was not the activity of doing both at the same time, but switching your attention from one to the other. The ramifications of this is that the interaction work best if limited simply around ‘conversation’ rather than actually shifting the storyline, as per experiments of interactive television in the past decade.

The debate also launched into gamification of shows (and the revenue stream it could provide) and whether shifting shows into an experience would be a viable option – such as ‘playing’ the Biggest Loser, while you watch it, a suggested by Microsoft’s Kordahi.

There’s a fine line with interactivity around ‘forcing’ interaction, the panelist pointed out, where people switch off if they are instructed ‘how’ to interact, but the model should be to provide the tools, observe the behaviours of how people interact using those tools.

The Grey’s Anatomy iPad app could be the first reflection of networks taking advantage of this secondary-device behaviour, which both gamifies and creates a secondary revenue stream for traditional television long term. Do television networks need to begin owning that secondary space?

As Kordahi stated regarding mobile devices, “People don’t want to watch what’s on TV on a smaller screen, they want a companion app.” – which might very much be the case.

But, in the end, the same issue still applies: the metrics don’t exist to encourage traditional media to attempt these models and the laws and regulations aren’t in place to protect either the viewers or broadcasters attempting this.

What do you think? The question of if we should adapt is long gone, but it’s still very pertinent to ask ‘how?’ and ‘why?’.

What do you think – are ‘companion apps’ the way of television watching in the future? Or, with most of Australia’s broadcast being content which has often already broadcast in the US, would this model simply not be applicable?

Till next time,

Rach.

*Apologies, I was live tweeting so I didn’t have a chance to reference all the quotes. If you know, let me know so I can credit y’all. :)

** To reference a fabulous quote from my nineteen-year-old flatmate: “Television is like YouTube on shuffle.” Gold!

Mythbusting: Digital Natives

Posted on by
Reply

I’m kind of astounded that there are still articles popping up which are astounded that Digital Natives can use a computer, and that that online communication could possibly be a translation of real-world communication. I mean, it’s only 2011.

I thought it was a while ago that we realised that online culture is simply a translation of the activities we do offline. The way we interact with social connections, public messages, private messages, ways to convey status (social check-ins, relationship status, flattering photos), and emotions (sure, emoticons aren’t perfect, but they do exist for a reason: to convey information which is traditionally non-verbal.) are all direct translations for the way we behave in the real world. The motivations are all the same: make friends. Be loved.

Admittedly, the most frequently used online systems don’t necessarily reflect this transition from online to real world perfectly, however, we work with what we have. Facebook, for example, provides updates to people publically across multiple networks, instead of select friend groups, which is how we interact in real life. (Check out @padday’s awesome The Real Life Social Network presentation which explores this.)* However, this is the medium which is very much the norm today in regards to relating to friends and family.

I read an article earlier today which discusses teens ‘using code‘ to express the way they feel online. It’s possible that this research is more layered that the article implied, however, to me it reads like the author didn’t realise that parents have been prying in the lives of their teens since the dawn of time. Facebook doesn’t change that. If teenagers didn’t write letters to their best friends in code, or talk around an issue on the family shared phone in years gone by, I’ll eat my hat. I think this research reflects that people communicate in the same ways that they always have across time. It’s seems to be yet another case of ‘because it’s on the internet, it’s new’. But communication is still communication, irrespective of medium.

Secondly, it seems that there an assumption that teens can’t navigate online spaces. It feels a little like the world operated on this assumption that Gen Y are stupid and superficial because these updates are publically available (as opposed to, perhaps, in one’s diary?) Sure, teens might me more comfortable having conversations in public than other generations, but studies have shown that teens are more aware of the things they put online and are more likely to self-censor than other groups**.

Yep, a new online way of communicating has developed, (using lolspeak and the like), but this is no different to the slang of other generations. Emoticons exist, to replace the non-verbal cues we usually receive when we communicate in person.

How can we judge a generation for posting comments about their personal lives in public and developing a language to suit the online environment we’re in, when our culture expects we be fluent in this form of communication?

It’s nothing new that teens hide information from their parents. It’s nothing new that they need to do this in a public sphere. It’s nothing new that they communicate with their friends.

It’s 2011. We’re not cyborgs. We’re not raised in factories. We still communicate with our friends and loved ones (and hide things from friends and loved ones ;)).

Or… did I just step out of a parallel universe and haven’t found my bearings yet?

Keep it real guys,

-Rach.

*Yes, we could set filters and sort friends into groups, but, I’ll admit, I can’t bring myself to go through my friends list and sort people mainly because I don’t want to humiliate myself with realising the number of people I have on my Facebook who I met once at a party and I stumbled away exclaiming “YES! I AM TOTALLY ON FACEBOOK! LET’S HANG OUT!” and still to this day have neither hung out with them, nor gleaned a solid recollection of them.

** I’ve totally read this but can’t find a reference right now. Let me know if you have one lying around!

Will the real You please stand up? Social Schizophrenia in 2011

Posted on by
Reply

It’s the time of year we all channel our inner Timelord and make predictions about the coming year. Pretty game, I reckon, in a time when every year for the past four years has been “the year of the mobile”. Nonetheless, I was intrigued when I read that 2011 will be the year the ordinary social network user will experience Social Schizophrenia.

This is described as the following by HBR:

While social media schizophrenia (the overload of multiple social profiles) is nothing new to tech mavens, it will become something that more and more “average” users experience as they tweet, Facebook, G-mail, chat, Skype, BBM, SMS, and Tumble their way across the social web. While many mavens have adopted ways to manage and cope, average users may find themselves at the beginning of the curve in need of a 12-step social identity program.

For a niche group, this concept of balancing multiple profiles and identities online is not new. I believe the issue is not the adjustment of how people manage these multiple profiles, as touched on by HBR (“This may lead to increased demand from typical participants to have a more integrated and simplified social graph and an opportunity for platforms and companies alike to meet this demand.”) as people already know what it is to manage multiple identities (friend, sibling, child, colleague, partner). I don’t believe this is a big shift in culture. It is potentially a shift in computer literacy, but I believe it will be an organic shift, as the addition to SMS, email and Facebook and Skype have been over the past decade.

I think the shift that people will experience is not of a split identity online, but of people fufilling different purposes in an online ecosystem. This isn’t about whether you’re a friend or sibling [Facebook], colleague [Linked In], or a friend from afar [Tumblr/Youtube/Twitter]; but the role you play of each of these places.

On Facebook, Linked In, and Twitter, you can play multiple roles in the online ecosystem. Think of this as more the tasks which are undertaken rather than the side of yourself you reveal – sharing a funny story, snapping a photo of a local event or emergency, or sharing your experience with a product/film/event/venue which you may or may not recommend. I think the Social Schizophrenia will come from individuals balancing content for different audiences. Divisions of how to represent oneself in regards to their role online will become more complicated, with grey lines of citizen journalism, being internet famous (even if its created in strange ways like the infamous @its_k_isabella), or being the go-to person for  information on a certain topic in real-time. In addition to being ourselves online, we will provide a services to our community through these tasks we undertake – which I will call online citizenship, for the lack of a better term at this point in time.

Like Wikipedia empowered the average person to share their knowledge and that they, too, could be experts in whatever they were passionate about*; this shift in Social Schizophrenia will change the way the average person sees themselves online – they aren’t simply individuals sharing their stories online, but part of a community. This community and roles in communities is something we’ve seen with Twitter thusfar; but possibly this will shift mainstream.

This is not to make the assumption that every person will take on a visibly active in their online citizenry (how many people actively edit or write in Wikipedia? Or answer a question on Ask.com? Looking at Gravity7′s outline of online personas, this is most certainly not on the cards), but the potential for this new community perspective will be available. I might not edit Wikipedia: but that is my choice. This is in the same way that our culture has shifted to believe information is a right** (look at the strong case for and against Assange’s Wikileaks), that having something freely available creates the expectation in society that this is the norm.

In this vein, we will have the potential to see ourselves not just as an online representation of ourselves: but a news source, a reviewer, a moderator, a mentor. We will be both a source of information as much as an expression of our thoughts and feelings in order to contribute to the community. That is the shift I believe we will see – whether this will happen in 2011 or not, we are yet to find out.

I think that this layer or citizenship will potentially be taken up in greater numbers by the younger generation, to whom civics and citizenship are unfamiliar in the model they have existed in in the past – the rights gained and things once fought for are a very foreign thing.

The understanding will be ‘helping a mate out’ is more likely to be the way this is interpreted (whether they have met the person “in real life” or not); however, the combination of a cultural shift where people ‘help a mate out’ will evolve into a subculture; a culture; and then a new form of online etiquette: civic duty.

What do you reckon? Will the roles played in social channels be more important than the volume of social channels used? Do you think that the use of online social channels in themselves will create Social Skitsophrenia, or it is the tasks therein that will cause the stress?

I’d love to hear your thoughts – hook me up. ;)

-Rach.

*Obviously, being backed up by multiple sources is always awesome.

** It’s totally not. It’s a privilege. For more information about the rights we have in Australia, let me Google that for you.

Dear Santa: My 2011 Wish List

Posted on by
Reply

Dear Santa,
I know it’s a little early to be making a Christmas List for 2011, but I figured I’d better get in before anyone else. And so you, y’know, can prepare. Because it’s a pretty epic list.

I know that online shopping is what all the cool kids are doing, but as the awesome eBay ads around Sydney point out – sometimes you need to see and touch something before buying it. And in this vein, I don’t think IRL Shopping is going to disappear anytime soon.westfield 248x300 Dear Santa: My 2011 Wish List

So, my wishlist is around the kind of things I’d like to be using at Christmas in 2011 when I’m shopping. Because, I’ll admit it, shopping this year was a bit of a saga, and I’ll be honest, I’m pretty over it.

When we talk about shopping and technology, we always touch on things like being able to scan barcodes to buy items and turn on augmented reality to see deals – but here’s a few more things, Santa, that I’m after:

  1. I want see a Navman on my mobile for shopping centres, which can lead me to the store I want to find. None of this Gruen Transfer fusspotty stuff (yes, I’m looking at you Bondi Junction Westfield).
  2. I want to be able to scan a barcode in the supermarket and find  out the ingredients and see the ingredients list (and I want it to alert me if it contains any of the items my friends or I are allergic to. Because Christmas dinner is no fun if you’re the only one who can eat.)
  3. I want to be able to get lost looking for something in a department store and geotag a tweet for help: I want an assistant will find me and help me. (Admittedly, it might need to be something a little more specific than a Geotag, but Santa, I’m sure you can work something out ;))
  4. I want to be able to search an item and I receive map of all the stores in my vicinity which have that item (and if they’re in stock).
  5. Geolocation alerts for friends and family based on Social Check-ins (If the person I’m buying a present for is in the same shopping centre, I want to be able to make a sly exit.)
  6. Gift recommendation engine: Like Etsy’s cute gift recommendation quiz; I’d like to be able to scan a friend’s social feed for the year for links to products and create recommendations for the kind of items they like; or the items they’ve announced they need or want.
  7. Annnnnd while were at it – I want to tweet my barista on route to my coffee shop it’s ready when I arrive. I’d also like my coffee to be paid from my credit card or straight from phone bill. (This isn’t really a Christmas thing – but when do you need coffee more that Chrissy shopping?! …But if you can arrange this one before Christmas, that would be sweet! ;))

I swear I’m not trying to put you out of a job, Santa, but this stuff would be pretty sweet to have next year. (But if you do find yourself in the Centrelink queue, I will totally deersit for you!)

Til next year,
Rach. xo

Main reindeer image from Teresa Thomson @ flickr

Why I'm Pumped About Diaspora

Posted on by
1

I’ll admit it: I’m super excited about Diaspora, the new open-source social network which has just launched. You know, this week’s “Facebook Killer”?
(Not the Jewish Diaspora, like certain history nerds I know seemed to think I was referring to.)

Why am I excited about Diaspora? Because it encourages invention, creativity and an open framework so people can build what they wish existed, but don’t have the capacity to build single-handedly (or without building a whole social network of their own.)

For a while I’ve had a few ideas playing around in the back of my head of ways online communication could be made more useful – and I’ve been working on a few projects with not-for-profits aimed at connecting people by their passions in order to make change. I’m really excited by the potential for Diaspora to innovate the way we connect.

I’ve heard a few cynics mention how something like Diaspora isn’t going to take off because it doesn’t have critical mass: but I honestly don’t think that’s a valid argument in dissing Diaspora.

Part of what makes Diaspora unique is that it intends* to separate social groups (see this awesome Powerpoint** which examines how we socialise in real life) instead of lumping all our social networks into one. (Although, the “who are our mutual contacts? game” on Facebook is always good fun ;)) For this reason, I don’t believe a huge critical mass is needed – simply niche groups who actively use Diaspora.

I believe that as developers begin playing with the Twitter and Facebook APIs to feed in information through Diaspora, it could become a really interesting space. I’d hope it could become like WordPress, where individuals can plug-in widgets with a one-click process, where they can really easily transform the kind of information they receive in their account, and how it’s used. I want to be able to create a dashboard of friends updates, news recommended for me, private threads with my bestie, a place to find and answer community questions, a place to participate in citizen journalism, a place to work on community projects with friends or strangers with an hour to give.

I’m inspired by the cheeky Please Rob Me, the ever-so-game Chatroulette, the intricacies of the works in Gov 2.0 (especially the awesome “Know Where You Live“), the user-generated community mapping like Foursquare tips, the emotional support of networks like Reach Out, the community-funding style of Flattr, and the news-recommendation engine Zite – which is based on the things I tweet about.

I want to see the way we collect information shift, where we can link questions with answers by pulling in crowdsourced info from across the web on a very global and very local scale.

Am I asking too much? We’ll see. ;)

Diaspora has just launched for developers. It hasn’t launched yet for everyone else, so it’s still very early days yet.

We are yet to see what happens when a Social Network is thrown into the wild. I think there’s a lot of conflict around what will happen with Diaspora. I think this conflict is based around what will happen technologically, and what will happen socially. Like many open-source community projects, it is hard to push direction and innovation in a cohesive way, so technologically, I think Diaspora will be very challenging to maintain. However, socially, and giving individuals the opportunity to craft their networks as they please (on the assumption there will be something like plugins for individuals to sort their fave data) it might very well change the say we communicate online. (I would like to point out that my use of the word ‘we’ could be as simple as a single social or community group, not necessarily everyone on the planet. ;))

I’m an optimist. Sure, rip on me if it crumbles like Wave. But, in the meantime, I’m going to remain hopeful. I would really love to see Diaspora take off and make communication across channels streamlined both socially and for community projects.

It’s times like these I wish I were a coder, because I’d love to be able to see what I can play with in regards to hauling information, preferences and data across the web to make it work for me. I’d love to be able to sort preferences on a website, and the information I want, simply finds me.

Yes, I’m excited by Diaspora. No, I’m not expecting it to take off overnight. But maybe in a year or two, there will be enough sweet plugins (or whatever the equivalent term is) for it to become a really useful tool in organizing our multifaceted lives.

Dear Reader, do you have any thoughts on Diaspora? Or the impact of open-source social networks?

That’s it from me!

Keep it real, guys.
-Rach.

* Note: I’m not affiliated with Diaspora, merely a fan-girl. This is all based on my impressions of what Diaspora is, and what it could become – I’m not certain it can do any of the things I claim: but it would be sweet if it did! ;)

** Actually, I think this Powerpoint by @Padday is so awesome, I’m embedding it below. But I totes recommend checking it out in full-screen mode. (…All the cool kids are doing it…)

The Real Life Social Network v2

View more documents from Paul Adams.

Identity Theft: When Online Identities Becomes Real

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been thinking recently about what it’s been like growing up with the internet as a pretty big part of my personal development. Don’t worry, I do remember the world before iPods existed: but I don’t remember a world before computers. Sure, they were uglier and not quite as user-friendly, but, yep, always there as far back as I can remember.

I came to this discussion with myself after a rather round-about discussion with a few fellow Gen Yers, inspired by discussions brought about by the recent SMCSYD – where the topic of discussion was whether your online persona matches your persona in real life.

I got to thinking that it wasn’t really that simple: it’s not just your thoughts online, and not just a fictionalised version of yourself.

As the most common thing seen of Gen Y reflecting themselves online – profile pictures are easy to make assumptions about. Gen Y are labelled as highly superficial due to the fact that large percentages of Gen Y’s have photoshopped their Facebook pictures.

However, I believe that the construction of identity is completely overlooked in this assumption of superficiality.

Katie Roiphe has written an awesome article sharing how teenagers tell the novel of their lives on Facebook, ever-so-slightly fictionalising their interactions (‘OMG’ being both real and satire) and I think that this is true, but not the only reason for Gen Y to reflect of themselves in online environments.

I believe that young people aren’t just writing a fiction of themselves online: I believe we’re creating our ideal selves. I think that as we project the perfect version of ourselves online (which might be anything from the cute photoshopped pictures, to tweeting academic articles to make us look more professional to our peers). I think that because our online persona is the basis for how many of our real-world associates know us, they then begin to see us that way, and in turn, treat us that way.

I’ve been chatting to some people who mention that when they were younger, they began acting more confident in order to encourage people to treat them that way, even when they feel terribly shy inside. Over time, they became this confident projection. I believe it’s not dissimilar to the old ‘dress for the job you want, not the job you have’ kind of adage. Everyone has their own safety net and techniques for self-projection in an attempt to find themselves, and simply, attempt to do this big scary thing called growing up.

However, we can do the same thing with our online identity. When people interact with us more online than in reallife (or, even, know our online selves before they meet us in person) they see us, and treat us, in our ideal projected way. In turn, we must become that projected person – and, become who we want to be.

Yes, social identities are fiction, a bit of fantasy and fun: but it’s also about identity creation, self-esteem establishment, reinforcement of our strength and beliefs. It’s about not finding your place in the world, but carving it.

What do you reckon? Do you see it? Do you not?

Keep it real, guys.
-Rach.

p.s. Thanks to the the awesome @tali3sin for the link to Katie’s article! ;)

Digital Citizens 5 Liveblog Details

Posted on by
Reply

Hey guys,

I’m running this month’s liveblog, covering Crisis and reputation management Digicitz. I’m filling in for Warlach who is the usual CoverItLive-er-er for Digital Citizens.

I’ll be pulling in tweets which use the #digicitz hashtag, or you can participate below. If you’re wanting to ask the Panel a question, please use the #digicitz hashtag, and also chuck in a #question tag so we know it’s for the Panel.

Keep it real guys,
Rach.