You guys spend all of your time investing in Face Book, the reason it is so dead here most of the time.

So why don't you either settle into nice Face Book persona's and delete this place, or shine Face Book on and post here?

This format that I love so much seems doomed. 

Why don't you sober up and stop thinking that ou know what people are doing on the other side of the fucking planet... I stop here every day the site is up. When I have something interesting to say, or you say something interesting that bears response, you'll read it.

Just sayin, and No.

Why don't you sober up and stop thinking that ou know what people are doing on the other side of the fucking planet... I stop here every day the site is up. When I have something interesting to say, or you say something interesting that bears response, you'll read it.

tru dat.


I temporarily deactivated my fb recently and apparently that means I'm probably a psychopath.

My favorite cartoon.


The Best Of Archer

I wondered what happened to you, G.

I still maintain this as a "living archive" of us, past, present, and future ...
I'll never close it ...

*waves* Hi Tru!

I've been fakebook free for three years. I still do tumblr, though.

*waves* Hi Tru!

Facebook is just so useful; for organising social stuff, staying in touch with people, getting photos uploaded, getting help / keeping up to date with course related stuff, anything to do with the fencing club committee.

Facebook is just so useful; for organising social stuff, staying in touch with people, getting photos uploaded, getting help / keeping up to date with course related stuff, anything to do with the fencing club committee.

This is something that Lucky and I were discussing at the bar a couple weeks ago. While FB gives you access socially, it creates a social barrier in real life. For a lot of us on L-G, anonymity and socializing in a conventional format without intimate interaction is commonplace. But, as we see today, the influx of everyday people (co-workers, family, friends, neighbors) into one amalgamated sludge of collectivity has not done wonders for social interaction. Is there a study that concludes that people will interact more in real life due to the FB equation? The closest good I can see through facebook is organizing demonstrations or public action (e.g. - The Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street).

I think organizing public action through virtual means makes things weaker.

I was listening to a lecture by David Graeber the other day and one of the points he made was that in the past, public action was much easier.  For instance, he points out that in a not-too-distant era of American history, you would see things happen like farmers showing up at a neighbor farm's foreclosure auction, bid a buck or whatever on the property, then give it back to the farmer the bank was claiming it from.

It's much more difficult for something like that to happen now, in part because it's much more difficult to develop the networks and trust when everything is non-localized. 

I think organizing public action and protest through electronic means makes it much more likely that it will be infiltrated and diverted from its actual goals.  And while there's something to be said for a diverse movement, there's also something to be said for having skin in the game.  A well-off northerner traveling to the south during segregation to engage in protest, for instance, is putting something on the line.  You have to build up trust and become part of a community.

The difference with something like Occupy & electronic organization/protest is that people aren't putting nearly as much on the line - they're more free to engage and disengage at will.  How much trust and solidarity can you even build? 

I think organizing public action through virtual means makes things weaker.

I was listening to a lecture by David Graeber the other day and one of the points he made was that in the past, public action was much easier.  For instance, he points out that in a not-too-distant era of American history, you would see things happen like farmers showing up at a neighbor farm's foreclosure auction, bid a buck or whatever on the property, then give it back to the farmer the bank was claiming it from.

Send me a link to this lecture, Mike. I would like to know if this public action taken up by farmers is locally isolated or on a national level.

It's much more difficult for something like that to happen now, in part because it's much more difficult to develop the networks and trust when everything is non-localized. 

I think organizing public action and protest through electronic means makes it much more likely that it will be infiltrated and diverted from its actual goals.  And while there's something to be said for a diverse movement, there's also something to be said for having skin in the game.  A well-off northerner traveling to the south during segregation to engage in protest, for instance, is putting something on the line.  You have to build up trust and become part of a community.

I guess if I had to defend FB as socially beneficial: It is an inexpensive means of getting the word out to a greater number of people. If I were, say, a poor person, I could easily go into a public library and use their internet connection/computers to establish/create a demonstration through facebook that will reach a broader range of people rather than printing out pamphlets/fliers and distributing them. As you have addressed, there are variables when considering this dynamic: whether the average user can trust you, if anyone cares about the issue, infiltration by outside opposition, disinformation, and the importance of the cause to others.

I completely agree that people such as the Freedom Riders back in the 60s showed a tenacity to the civil rights struggle that could rarely be questioned. Though, there is questionable authenticity when you approach any movement, but the people that are already a part of the movement have essentially created a trust bond with those people around them by being a part of the numbers in support.

The difference with something like Occupy & electronic organization/protest is that people aren't putting nearly as much on the line - they're more free to engage and disengage at will. How much trust and solidarity can you even build?

I think this is, by far, the most important aspect to the problem with electronic organization. A person needs to stay involved in order for the organization to build its strength. I'm especially guilty of this when it comes to donating/signing petitions for online organizations. They aren't as effective online.

I'll try to find the lecture again - I don't think he provided a source, though.  I'll check his book, too, since he's far more likely to have provided a source there.

I think my experience volunteering at a DIY music venue/collective really soured me on using social media to organize anything.  People would invest a ton of time in promoting things on FB, Twitter, etc. with basically no results.  Of course, the sort of pamphleting/flyering where you just hang things on bulletin boards doesn't do much either. 

My personal opinion is that you actually have to engage with people if you want them to do something.  I think it applies across the board - whether its email or FB or whatever.  I always get better outcomes when I engage directly.  Even a negative outcome is better face to face in my opinion, because it feels more definitive and less wishy-washy passive aggressive as a "No" in an email typically seems. 

Is there a study that concludes that people will interact more in real life due to the FB equation? The closest good I can see through facebook is organizing demonstrations or public action (e.g. - The Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street).

I would have thought it means people interact more but less in real life.

Personally for me it definitely means more real life interaction cause it's how I find out about and get invited to events, and I think the same goes for most of my friends. It's easy to invite people you don't know as well or don't see as often. Most societies at the uni use facebook to organise their socials as well because it's the easiest and quickest way to do it.

Is there a study that concludes that people will interact more in real life due to the FB equation? The closest good I can see through facebook is organizing demonstrations or public action (e.g. - The Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street).

I would have thought it means people interact more but less in real life.

Personally for me it definitely means more real life interaction cause it's how I find out about and get invited to events, and I think the same goes for most of my friends. It's easy to invite people you don't know as well or don't see as often. Most societies at the uni use facebook to organise their socials as well because it's the easiest and quickest way to do it.

I was purposely trying to circumnavigate certain events (i.e. - parties, sports, bar-hopping) as positive inclusion. I would prefer to hoist public dissent above partying in the hierarchy of social importance.

However a person socializes is their business, obviously. FB does that for millions of people. Has anything changed about the social dynamic in this country? In my opinion: no. Thirty years ago the same people that preferred watching a sitcom than going out with friends are probably using social networking sites to manage their personal connections with people they don't see on a daily basis. In essence, it's not real interaction. Just like texting is a substitute for vocal interaction. We are using a medium to virtually associate with people. Facebooking (new term) is taking up a purist ideal of socializing where the user has no need for shaking a hand, hugging, smelling, kissing--the trivially impertinent functions that make us social beings.

If there's going to be demonstrations / public action it's going to happen regardless of how easy it is to get involved. As in, if people really care they will make the effort to get involved.

Facebook is just a tool, the same as texting, I'd like to think people don't use it as a replacement.

I think that mediating social interaction through electronic mediums - whether its people whose best friends are Jay Leno and the cast of Seinfeld or its facebooking while you're standing in front of a cashier, while you're at dinner with your friends, etc. - places you in a passive orientation.

 

I've noticed this before but there are a lot of sort of random sites now that allow you to use your Face Book (and several other formats) log in. On their site!
Doesn't that mean they get to keep your FB (or other) log in information?

I've noticed this before but there are a lot of sort of random sites now that allow you to use your Face Book (and several other formats) log in. On their site!
Doesn't that mean they get to keep your FB (or other) log in information?

I would wake up Grand Master Thrash and ask him.

Yes.  Facebook is tracking your other internet activity and other sites are accessing your Facebook information.  Technically they ask you to approve this, but I doubt it matter if you say no.

Also: You can download ghostery and find what trackers are active on pages.

Facebook is active all over the place.

I do ghostery and its a trip how many sites try to track you.

Why don't you sober up and stop thinking that ou know what people are doing on the other side of the fucking planet... I stop here every day the site is up. When I have something interesting to say, or you say something interesting that bears response, you'll read it.

Thanks man.

WTF? I downloaded Ghostery and I had 1300+ trackers on my puter. Fuckin' marvelous! I'm nothing but drone collecting pollen for these fuckers.

Speaking of freeware:
A friend of mine recommended that I get Adblock Plus.  http://adblockplus.org

It's nifty and blocks everything that your browser refuses to.

And when used with Fire Fox can be used to ferret out the download address for streaming videos. Doesn't work with Chrome or Opera, well it works for blocking sites but doesn't have the listed blockable items option.

Business promotion SUCKS via FB ...
They have a lot of work to do with it to make it economically viable to me ...

You mean in terms of paying for ads? Otherwise I would say that advertising one's business to a local market is about as perfect a use as there is for facebook.

I've PAID and gotten nowhere with it ...

Seems weird.