Slashdot Mirror


Social Networking in the Digital Age

An anonymous reader writes "It used to be if you wanted to win more friends, influence more people or make more money, you bought one of those self-improvement tomes and tried to pump up your personality. These days, all you have to do is go online and join a "social networking" site. The pumping will be done for you."

267 comments

  1. Orkut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    What? No orkut link, but an MSN link instead? On Slashdot? Did hell freeze over or something? :)

    1. Re:Orkut? by flewp · · Score: 1, Funny

      It must be, what with RMS moving in the William Gates building at MIT....

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    2. Re:Orkut? by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1

      Then why is it acting like it's been slashdotted as this posting came out?

      --
      Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
    3. Re:Orkut? by Trigun · · Score: 5, Interesting

      nobody's registering, just going there to try to, and being shown the door.

      From the site:
      orkut is unique, because it's an organically growing network of trusted friends. That way we won't grow too large, too quickly and everyone will have at least one person to vouch for them.

      If you know someone who is a member of orkut, that person can invite you to join as well. If you don't know an orkut member, wait a bit and most likely you soon will.

      We look forward to having you as part of the orkut community.


      We need a Slashdot Orkut whore!

    4. Re:Orkut? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll invite you in. All you need to do is send me your e-mail address. Credit card information is optional.

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    5. Re:Orkut? by Aliencow · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll invite people too, but my domain expired today cause I'm a moron...anyways email me at gepeto@aliencow.com, eventually my spam filter will reply to you when my domain is back up...so I guess by tonight I could invite a few Slashbots.

    6. Re:Orkut? by spellraiser · · Score: 1

      Btw - Does anyone else feel that he/she needs some 'social networking' to recover from having accidentally clicked on that msn link? Man, that bone-chilling, spinning popunder ad was enough to send me into fits. The horror, the horror ...

      --
      I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
    7. Re:Orkut? by rescuesok · · Score: 1

      CowboyNeal is on Orkut. Perhaps give him a ring? I am on Orkut too, but I just don't care anymore.

    8. Re:Orkut? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

      We need a Slashdot Orkut whore!

      Why not cut out the middleman?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    9. Re:Orkut? by Zoshnell · · Score: 0

      I'd rather join the Stonecutters, or even better, the ancient and mystical order of No Homers.

      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
    10. Re:Orkut? by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Goddamnit, not flamebait, hilarious.

    11. Re:Orkut? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      There's a fine line between funny and flamebait. Apparently I blew past it with the DNC referece. Maybe I should have said Republicons?

      Oh well, I made the Bushies smile. So what's a little Karma.

    12. Re:Orkut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROLOSTAR is a much better site. On ROLOSTAR i am getting paid $2.00 USD for each referral i provide. I made $2000 last week. This is great. I get to use the site and i get paid. I Love it!!

    13. Re:Orkut? by coaxial · · Score: 1

      okay how about me?

    14. Re:Orkut? by daytona8 · · Score: 1

      Why dont you guys instead try RoloStar? None of this phony Invite crap!! Also ROLOSTAR is much more private. I love it!!

    15. Re:Orkut? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      Done. Look for the invite in your Inbox (it took mine a couple of days to deliver, though).

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    16. Re:Orkut? by daytona8 · · Score: 1

      Why wait for such shenaigans from Orkut et.al....Why not simply sign up on ROLOSTAR. I like RoloStar, it is much more private and there are no shenanigans about Invite/friends etc....You can sign up and simply search for business partners, vendors, suppliers, and hookup with companies/managers for jobs etc..

    17. Re:Orkut? by Jayjay75 · · Score: 1

      You've said this like four times in the last dozen posts. What, do you get money for recruiting people or something?

    18. Re:Orkut? by coaxial · · Score: 1

      I got it. Only to find out one of my friends was already a member and never told anyone! :P

    19. Re:Orkut? by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      I've voulenteered for the DNC, it's funny because it's true. You could say the same thing about the RNC I guess, but it's still fucking funny. You sit in a strip mall answering phones for a week for either one and you'd better believe you'll have conversations that make you feel like you work for the fucking Illuminati or some shit.

      Ah, but that's what makes it fun.

    20. Re:Orkut? by manson909 · · Score: 1

      can i join too? 5 karma points if you invite me... my credit card info is ... hey wait a minute!

    21. Re:Orkut? by GlenRaphael · · Score: 1

      I'd like to check it out too. Thanks! raphael @ pobox . com

      --
      I play Nerd-Folk!
    22. Re:Orkut? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      You're invited. Look for the message, and apologies in advance if I swapped firstname/lastname. Guess I should have probably been a little more specific as to what Orkut wants on the invite screen ;-)

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    23. Re:Orkut? by GlenRaphael · · Score: 1
      oops, I think I deleted the invitation as spam. And it looks like the "I forgot my password" link doesn't work if you haven't accepted the initial invitation yet. So, sigh, Could you send it again? Thanks!

      Glen Raphael
      raphael@pobox.com

      --
      I play Nerd-Folk!
  2. What? by ziondreams · · Score: 4, Funny


    I always used to look in the mirror and say "...because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and dogonnit, people like me!"

    --
    01000001 01011001 01000010 01000001 01000010 01010100 01010101
  3. IRC by scumbucket · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    IRC is my social network. Forget that orkut crap.....

    #slashdot is my home-away-from home.

    --
    CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
    1. Re:IRC by dan+dan+the+dna+man · · Score: 4, Funny

      Orkut has pics of hot geek chicks. What more excuse do you need?

      --
      I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
    2. Re:IRC by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 4, Funny
      IRC is my social network.

      And this is why, at 35, you are still a virgin.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:IRC by Steamhead · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Go ahead, mod me Troll but some of us don't want to be part of a service that you can't join outright.

    4. Re:IRC by AnthonyZEO · · Score: 1

      An invitation?

    5. Re:IRC by pilgrim23 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      efnet rulz! I have been an irc "regular" for well over a decade.

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    6. Re:IRC by dan+dan+the+dna+man · · Score: 1

      AnthonyZEO
      (email not shown publicly)

      You're not helping me ;)

      --
      I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
    7. Re:IRC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. Forget the Orkut Crap. Instead try RoloStar. It is much more private and limited which is what most of us on rolostar seem to like.

    8. Re:IRC by Brainboy · · Score: 1

      This is really insightful and i agree. As Groucho Marx said famously, "I do not want to be part of a club that would have me as a member."

      --
      Just a guy with an opinion
    9. Re:IRC by nastyphil · · Score: 1

      That's why you weren't invited! ;)

      --
      Dialectician. Archology.
    10. Re:IRC by buck-yar · · Score: 1

      I can attest to the destructive nature of IRC. My Race Relations textbook states that IRC is good for minorities because they can talk to everyone else without anything but the substance of the conversation being an issue. I agree partly.

      The other part of me remembers when I was 15 and 90% of my "friends" were online. I was good at making online friends, but I couldn't talk to people in the real world at all. Best thing I ever did was kiss those chatrooms goodbye. As with anything, practice a little and socialization becomes easy, and more importantly, fun.

    11. Re:IRC by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
      "My Race Relations textbook states that IRC is good for minorities...

      Wow. All I can say is wow. A non-technical textbook that mentions IRC... Wow.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  4. "Pumping"? by Mattintosh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ummm... Social networking? Pumping? Joining a site? Making money? Am I the only one thinking about pr0n here?

  5. personality by cshark · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, but even then personality has to count for something. If you're a pill, it's going to show through.

    --

    This signature has Super Cow Powers

    1. Re:personality by spincycle1953 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're right. Social networking is to lousy personality as advertising is to lousy product; if it works, soon everybody knows about your, um, shortcomings.

      --
      My other machine is a lever.
    2. Re:personality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why I post AC....no one on /. will know my shortcomings

    3. Re:personality by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      Actually, by posting as AC you tell something about yourself. e.g. you don't want to take responsibility for what you say.

    4. Re:personality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, by posting as AC you tell something about yourself. e.g. you don't want to take responsibility for what you say.

      Yes, but you don't know who you've been told it about.

    5. Re:personality by spincycle1953 · · Score: 1

      What does it say about myself if I post as me, but you think I posted as AC? Sheesh, I feel like Roxie Hart's husband.

      --
      My other machine is a lever.
    6. Re:personality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU won't fool us James !

    7. Re:personality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, by posting as AC you tell something about yourself.


      • I have forgotten my password(s).
      • I no longer have access to the email address I was signed up under.
      • My current email address is temporary. (It will be history when the real email to spam ratio is 1:100, which I expect will occur by the end of the week.)

  6. The Next Big Thing by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article: If you haven't yet heard of social networking, stay tuned because it's the Next Big Thing.

    Really? Every time some site (MSN, in this case) or article tells you that such-and-such is the "Next Big Thing," ask yourself what they might have to gain...

    1. Re:The Next Big Thing by PetWolverine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're right--look to see what the people who brought you the news have to gain by your getting that particular news. The same idea extends to /., which has been a social networking site from the beginning, and is trying to push the whole social networking concept. What people don't get is that while the social networking makes /. much better at what it does--the friend/fans/foes/freaks system makes it that much more fun for those of us who participate in it--it's not something to base a site on to begin with. Social networking sites require a certain critical mass to become interesting, and at the moment, there aren't enough people interesting in engaging in this sort of activity online to achieve that critical mass solely by attracting people to the social networking aspect of a site. If, like /., a site has something to it that tends to get it a lot of repeat visitors anyway, and if it allows repeat visitors to interact and build reputations, then a social networking scheme is a natural add-on so that people can declare their associations with others, thereby risking their own reputations to add to that of someone else.

      This is why--and I've said this before--Orkut and similar sites won't take off until they can interface with /. and similar sites, and have a standard API for Web programmers wanting to make online communities that are tied to the social network. If there were a single other reputation-based site that I used as much as /., I would pay for a way to combine my reputations from the two sites into one, and have one interface between the two for keeping track of friends and so on. (As a broke college student I pay for virtually nothing online, so that's a rather emphatic way of saying I'd like such a site.) Even as someone who only uses one social networking site, a site allowing me to bring together different online personalities in one place would encourage me to participate more in a site like ~. (pronounced "smoke-dot", in case you're too lazy to mouse over the link--for those who don't know, it's a site that was originally based on /code and is sort of "news for stoners, stuff that doesn't matter as much as we'd like it to")--it's not that interesting to post there in comparison to /., but if I were surfing it and saw a post by someone I'd marked as a friend on /., I might be a bit more interested. Multiply by thousands, and ~. might actually become interesting again.

      Of course, right now the only viable candidate for the aforementioned standard API would be /code, which is horribly bloated already (so I hear--I don't read Perl) and therefore may not be the best candidate for adding lots of fun new features.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    2. Re:The Next Big Thing by XorNand · · Score: 1

      You might be onto something here, but... the biggest problem I see is that many communites cannot really co-exist; they are either totally unrelated or other times even completely at odds with each other (religious/politic messageboards). This would break your idea of a shared reputation. For example, I'm a Washington Capitals fan despite living in Detroit. In this town, people take their hockey *very* seriously. Using your system, if I posted something in a local-Detroit messageboard about liking the Caps, my karma at /. would also suffer. Am I misunderstanding your system?

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    3. Re:The Next Big Thing by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "the friend/fans/foes/freaks system makes it that much more fun for those of us who participate in it"

      I've seen this mentioned in my preferences areas..but, what is this exactly and what does it do to you? I can't find a good explanation of what the friends/foes/freaks thing is supposed to be all about...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:The Next Big Thing by PetWolverine · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I should call it a shared personality, not a shared reputation. You could still have a /. karma and perhaps a separate karma for some other major sites, but you could also have a global karma that various other sites would use. It could easily get as complex as different communities having different sorts of relationships and even karma of their own, I think, and still be comprehensible as long as users had a say at each part of the process, if they wanted it. There are people who choose not to moderate on /., presumably feeling that the current moderators are good enough that their contribution isn't worth taking the time to make; likewise, relatively few users would participate in the political games that would develop between communities, but they would be mostly self-selected, and just about anyone who wanted to make a difference could join them.

      In time, a system would have to be developed to resolve disputes, so courts would appear, a source of authority would be created, and a Constitution would be designed and implemented. This Constitution would be seen not as a monolithic document, like that of the U.S. or, really, any other country; it would be more of a framework within which to develop constitutions, offering an open-source based method of modifying both the current implementation of the constitution for any one geographic area, and the general Constitution of the Internet.

      Eventually, the Internet Government will subsume local governments and create a World Government that would be a direct democracy, truly by and for the people, and your say in how it worked would depend on your level of involvement in the community. Karma would become currency, but it would remain the case that beyond a certain amount, the amount of karma you had wouldn't help you be heard. If you had excess, you could splurge on something expensive or give some to people you like or people who need it, but you couldn't just buy more airtime for campaign commercials--campaigns would, naturally, be restricted to the medium that people would, after all, be campaigning for control of, namely the Web. And of course, the elected officials would have the task only of implementing the whims of the people. Laws would be passed by direct vote from the populace, but the votes would not be permanent. They would be stored in a database separate from the main user database, with an entry in the vote database being untraceable back to its associated entry in the user database; however the user database would contain, decryptable only with the user's private key, which even the government wouldn't have, the primary key of the user's entry in the vote database, allowing all previous votes to be changed at any time. Thus if a new argument came up in the forums, i might change my mind on the most recent statement of principle i voted for, say, that individual rights should in all reasonable cases triumph--or maybe i would just go back and offer an amendment to the definition of "reasonable", and vote for it as a way of putting some money in the tip jar, so to speak, then write a quick post to head the forum that would open up for debate of the amendment. A certain threshold of votes would have to be met, before it could pass just for lack of opposition, but events like the initial passing (pending review before being implemented, of course) of some law would push those issues closer to the front page. But this would also be a matter of preference--one could choose what sort of news one wanted to read, concentrating maybe on law regarding technology, communications, flight regulation, laws that have just been passed by a narrow margin, laws that were passed previously that have recently been reversed by people changing their votes--and everywhere would be discussion about everything that mattered enough to someone that they commented on it.

      Sorry...you got me started, now look where I've gone.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    5. Re:The Next Big Thing by PetWolverine · · Score: 2, Informative

      You use it however you want to. I use it to highlight comments of people whose past comments I've enjoyed reading. You can set a bonus in your user preferences for users who are your friends, and then when you see someone you want that bonus to apply to in the future, you click the circle next to their name and set your relationship. Combine with mod points, and it becomes a powerful tool for bringing about change in the moderation around here...if you're into that sort of thing. Or, you could find a few people who actually write in their journals regularly, and use the friends system to keep up with their new entries. I also like to check people's posting histories and so on who I find in my fans list, though I do this less now that I have trouble keeping track of who my old fans are and who is new. (If you want me to notice you, put yourself on my freaks list...)

      Anyway, part of what's great about /. is that there's no need to use all the features to have a good experience. You decide your own level of participation.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
  7. Been there, done that... by mirko · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just terminated my Orkut account : I don't like to be asked to quantify my level of friendship with people, it is only my business.
    I'd rather keep meeting people IRL, there are still much more people offline than online, after all.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:Been there, done that... by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      good for you. these things are so lame. i wish more people would quit these or ignore them.

    2. Re:Been there, done that... by Unoti · · Score: 3, Funny

      You should ebay your account!

    3. Re:Been there, done that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather keep meeting people IRL

      Then you better get out of the basement and get some fresh air.

    4. Re:Been there, done that... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Orkut is still beta, so I'm willing to forgive it some hiccups. But the new friend ranking thing is just weird. The whole point of the "friend" class is to link you up to people you know...so why the hell do you need to rank those? You know them. "Oh, right! John Smith is my best friend! I totally would have forgotten that! Thank you, Orkut!"

      But, that said...if there's a use for Orkut beyond spammy friend-of-friend messages, I haven't found it yet.

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    5. Re:Been there, done that... by maximilln · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was a story on Slashdot a while back about a social networking mapping program. In fact, if you google for "social networking visualization software" you'll find a number of them.

      I imagine that Orkut is working to develop their own social networking mapping software and all of its users are becoming part of a vast experiment in modeling of social systems.

      You are not people. Your number is Liberty-4527. :))))

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    6. Re:Been there, done that... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I imagine that Orkut is working to develop their own social networking mapping software and all of its users are becoming part of a vast experiment in modeling of social systems.

      Okay...so what's in it for me? They're not going to get a very accurate map if they can't keep people signed up. There's some potential in the forums, I think, and for business networking, but I don't sign on more than once a week anymore unless I get an alert that someone has friended me.

      You are not people. Your number is Liberty-4527. :))))

      Flash me back to freshman English again, and I will track you down and force you to read The Fountainhead. ;)

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    7. Re:Been there, done that... by maximilln · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is nothing in it for you. It's a business model. If they can't dazzle you with the brilliance of their service they'll get 1000 other people to sign up based upon their b_llsh_t. The end goal of these social networking services is not to work for the advancement of society. Their end goal is to make money. If they can come up with five or six poster children whose lives were advanced then so much the better for their marketing spiel.

      Pyramid schemes, pyramid schemes. All I see in America are pyramid schemes.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    8. Re:Been there, done that... by dr_dank · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't like to be asked to quantify my level of friendship with people, it is only my business.

      IIRC, those ratings can only be seen by you.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    9. Re:Been there, done that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC, those ratings can only be seen by you. Well, you and orkut. Which makes all the difference.

    10. Re:Been there, done that... by hackrobat · · Score: 1

      Me too! I find the whole testimonial and rating system a great suck-up-to-me thing.

      Another thing: Identity crisis. There's no way to prove your identity. Now, it's okay with bloggers, because you don't care who the person is as long as you like reading their blog, but in case of social networking, you want to know who you're talking to.

      With Orkut in particular, the UI sucks bad. I prefer LinkedIn, it's more professional. Orkut is a mess. I wonder where it'd be without Google.

    11. Re:Been there, done that... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 1

      There is nothing in it for you. It's a business model. If they can't dazzle you with the brilliance of their service they'll get 1000 other people to sign up based upon their b_llsh_t. The end goal of these social networking services is not to work for the advancement of society. Their end goal is to make money. If they can come up with five or six poster children whose lives were advanced then so much the better for their marketing spiel.

      Eh. Even if the goal is some sort of marketing social networking map, it's going to skew very geek. Orkut, being invite-only, is self-selecting for early adopters and heavily wired types. I question how much useful data they'll get out of knowing that I'm two degrees away from every geek in New England. I'm also not going to be inviting people with very important social links to me to join...like my parents, or my boss, which will serve to generate an incomplete network at best.

      And, Orkut is all kinds of free. It costs them to serve me pages, and they're all dynamically generated. Google isn't making money on Orkut. I tend to trust Orkut a smidgen more than I would another social-networking service, since it comes out of Google Labs. Orkut feels very toy-like right now, as though they're just playing around with the software to see if they hit on something cool. (Their policy on copyright is sketchy, though.)

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    12. Re:Been there, done that... by maximilln · · Score: 1

      -----
      And, Orkut is all kinds of free
      -----
      Be careful when you say "free".

      For example: broadcast television is "free" but that doesn't mean that you aren't shelling out for it through your tax dollars or service fees imposed on other parts of your life. Major media companies are intimately tied to many other companies and industries through collaborations, contracts, investments, and informally through their executive boards. While they may not be able to charge you to receive broadcast signals their charging the advertisers or receiving supplemental income from government agencies. Trickle down (and around) isn't just about job creation it's also about billing. It may seem free on the front end but rest assured that the suits are getting more than their fair share of revenue from it.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    13. Re:Been there, done that... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 1

      Be careful when you say "free".

      For example: broadcast television is "free" but that doesn't mean that you aren't shelling out for it through your tax dollars or service fees imposed on other parts of your life. Major media companies are intimately tied to many other companies and industries through collaborations, contracts, investments, and informally through their executive boards. While they may not be able to charge you to receive broadcast signals their charging the advertisers or receiving supplemental income from government agencies. Trickle down (and around) isn't just about job creation it's also about billing. It may seem free on the front end but rest assured that the suits are getting more than their fair share of revenue from it.


      Free? Nope; no reception without cable.

      I'm quite okay with TANSTAAFL. I don't begrudge my tax dollars (much) because I like infrastructure. It costs money to run a country. I don't begrudge paying for things I want, or advertisers supporting the programs I watch or the websites I frequent. It costs money to produce things, whether it's chocolate bars or snarky social commentary. Orkut is being underwritten by Google, which I help pay for by clicking through the AdWords text links that advertise services useful to me. Everybody wins.

      Now, corporate law and the distribution of wealth...that could use some work.

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    14. Re:Been there, done that... by maximilln · · Score: 1

      It's a sad day when you don't begrudge your tax dollars because you like infrastructure or because it's something you want. You're too easily giving a blank check away. My point is: _other_ people don't begrudge _your_ tax dollars either because there's something _else_ that _they_ want.

      You don't just help pay for Google by clicking on AdWords links. While that's a nice easy explanation it's also terribly naive. Google has a board of directors and investment brokers like anyone else. If they don't have a "board of directors" or "investment brokers" they have an equivalent. Names change, the system's the same. If Google isn't making enough money from their AdWords links that's okay. As long as the consumer base remains complacent they (the board of directors and investment brokers) can fund a losing venture using the gains that they make from artificially raising revenue in other investments. The same broker hypothetically losing money on Google could be making a killing by raising your insurance rates if that's where he manages investments and holds influence. In some ways it's completely desirable to continue to hold losing bets. If the consumer base ever staggers out of complacency the losing bets are tax writeoffs to offset the capital gains won by pulling out of an investment portfolio that is targeted by activist groups.

      For example: Consumer watchdog groups file an unfair practices suit against company XYZ which I own a large amount of stock in. As an investment broker I cash out of XYZ and similarly bankrupt the 6 losing .com startups that I'm funding. I collect business insurance on the .coms, keep my winnings from XYZ, and skip out on the taxes by balancing the gains and losses in the stock portfolio. Meanwhile it's the end consumer that ends up footing the bill for the lawsuit filed against XYZ because the same company which pays me for business insurance recoups the loss by raising rates on auto or homeowners insurance.

      It's a cat-and-mouse game that most Anericans can't follow mathematically and, in their minds, that makes it impossible. This explains why Americans are suckers born, bred and educated by public schools.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    15. Re:Been there, done that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely agree with you. You may want to look at rolostar.com. On Rolostar, you cannot see other people's network. Rolostar folks are exremely privacy conscious. Everyone on rolostar is truly anonymous and private. There is no brute force attempt to link people etc...

    16. Re:Been there, done that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may want to try ROLOSTAR. It is much more sensible site, no hype. It is more privacy focussed. No one can find your true identity ever unless you choose to disclose it. Also, when you rate information or people or companies, the rating is completely confidential and never show up on any user's screen etc....

    17. Re:Been there, done that... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Now, corporate law and the distribution of wealth...that could use some work"

      Hmm...now if you said "..RE-distribution of wealth" through gouging me for taxes and giving them to people who won't work and other free giveaways, and 'targeted' tax breaks...sure I'd go along with you.

      I believe in basic infrastructure...roads, fire/police, and a small safety net for elderly, truly infirmed, and unemployment ins....but, welfare families that just live off the system....taxes taken from me to be given to someone else...that sucks...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    18. Re:Been there, done that... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 1

      It's a sad day when you don't begrudge your tax dollars because you like infrastructure or because it's something you want. You're too easily giving a blank check away. My point is: _other_ people don't begrudge _your_ tax dollars either because there's something _else_ that _they_ want.

      Goddamn, man. You live in a society, you pay for the upkeep of that society, in one form or another. In the US, (I assume you're a fellow USAian), and other First World nations, that form is taxes. I get a value return every year far in excess of what I pay. It's inevitable that my tax money is going to go to some programs I don't like. That's okay; someone else's dollars are going to fund something that they hate and I love. That's another price paid for living a pluralistic society. I'd willingly pay more if it meant I would get longer vacations and shorter working hours. My time is the only capital that really matters to me.

      Though I am starting to worry about just how many of my tax dollars are going towards things I find not just to be wastes of money, but ethically reprehensible. That's what the ballot box is for, I suppose...until someone manages to hijack it entirely. I like reading about dark, distopian futures, but I don't want to live in one.

      *snip corporate shenanigans*

      Yup. True capitalism, like any other pure system, is impossible. The sooner we stop pretending, the better.

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    19. Re:Been there, done that... by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 1

      I don't like to be asked to quantify my level of friendship with people, it is only my business.

      Make sure you read any help next time. Friend rating is visible only to you and it is used to sort friend list.

    20. Re:Been there, done that... by mirko · · Score: 1

      I read the help, I do not know about the Orkut guy(S?) and I do not like to see my network exposed.
      I also hated getting the friendsoffriendsspam, etc.

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    21. Re:Been there, done that... by maximilln · · Score: 1

      -----
      The sooner we stop pretending, the better.
      -----
      I agree. Let's get it right out in the open: The constitution is dead, the Tenth amendment doesn't exist, we live in a socialist society managed by a communist government that breeds a middle and lower class for the express purpose of exploitation to the financial advantage of those in the upper class.

      Wow... life's pretty bleak.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    22. Re:Been there, done that... by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 1

      I also hated getting the friendsoffriendsspam, etc.

      I am repeating again: "read instruction!".
      Each type of msg can be set as "message", "email" or ignored.
      If you want to flame Orkut use true arguments. You can say about very bad copyright and stuff, but not things which show that you haven't read docs at all.

    23. Re:Been there, done that... by mirko · · Score: 1

      I do not want to flame them, I just wanted to leave once I realised that after getting rid of all of its drawbacks, there'd be no point using it.

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
  8. Friendster != friends, Carnagie Course!=friends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Friendster and others seem to be falling into the same traps as Carnagie Courses and all those self-help books... They all promise so much and yet the means to do any of these things can be found inside one's own mind. Just take a bit more interesting thoughts put into a few words and a few fears excorcised, and you have a much more interesting person who others want to be friends with. This seems like the Diet Industry, where eat less and excercise more is the actual reality that everyone will pay $$$ to avoid!

    1. Re:Friendster != friends, Carnagie Course!=friends by Welsh+Dwarf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point is that people are afraid of change. /. analogy: look at OSs, we may have an OS of the week (or use a different distro for each day of the week) but most people are just scared to change.

      It's even worse when the problems are social. What people are looking for is more someone to say, "Yes, you can do it. Yes it will make a difference. No, you are not better off in your hole/basement" rather than an instruction manual on how to 'get a life'.

      --
      Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
  9. Help! Looking for work! by qualico · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm looking for work. Does that mean my social net, Slashdot, will come to my rescue?

    1. Re:Help! Looking for work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or how about http://www.rolostar.com/ ? You can certainly find a job there.

  10. This may come as a shock to you guys... by zapp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But an online social circle is a poor substitute for a real social network. I've been there, done that, and sure I see the appeal. But honestly, get some real ('f2f' as they say) friends.

    --
    no comment
    1. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by graveytrain · · Score: 2, Funny

      >Want to be modded +5: Insightful, garanteed? Say this in your post: "Go ahead, mod me -1: Troll" ... works every time!

      A comment on your tagline... or rather, in addition --

      And don't dare Meta-Moderate those people down, lest you be called UnFair! (Not that I speak from personal experience or anything!)

      --
      "Just tell him ya did it! That's what he wants to hear anyway..."
    2. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by deman1985 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, is does seem appealing at the surface, but it can also be dangerous. If the idea of having only online social networks and online friends doesn't depress you at first glance, it certainly will after trying it for a while. Like you said, face to face interaction is far more healthy-- physically, mentally and emotionally.

    3. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by beeblebrox87 · · Score: 1

      I've been relying soley on online friendships for several years. For reasons beyond my control, I attend a small boarding school in Africa, and "get some face to face friends" is a lot more difficult when you only have about 50 people to choose from. While I look forward to attending university in the states where I will no longer be the only geek/nerd in a 100km radius, I haven't really had any problems stemming from my online-only social life. Well, aside from lack of fulfilling female companionship (15 females my age here, chances of finding someone with interests remotely similar to mine are roughly nil), but that seems to be a problem for almost all slashdotters.

    4. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by deman1985 · · Score: 1

      Well, aside from lack of fulfilling female companionship (15 females my age here, chances of finding someone with interests remotely similar to mine are roughly nil), but that seems to be a problem for almost all slashdotters.

      I wouldn't say it's a problem for *all* slashdotters. As difficult as it may be, it is indeed possible for us to get girlfriends; I myself was in a year long relationship, and not long after was in a four-month long relationship just a few months back... You just have to learn how to be a smooth talker ;)

    5. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      these are useful if you already have a decent amount of friends and go out to the bars alot. im sorry but its true.

      just throw everything out there in your profile and sooner or later, male or female, you will get alot of messages from similiar people.

      thanks to two of these ive met alot of people i ended up going home with.

    6. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

      I've made a number of lasting friends online. However, I wouldn't vouch for their ability to wipe their own asses for several years--just as with "real world" friends. Sure enough, after a year or two, quite a few of those online acquaintances turned out to be complete cons. Not so oddly enough, in the other cases when both parties moved from acquaintance to trusted friend, the online connection would become almost a guarded secret as neither party wanted to become that "IN" for some random con untill a decent vetting had occured. If you are in fact a trusted friend, I don't need a computer to remind me. This is the same as it's always been and the online non-solutions to this non-problem will not change a damned thing for anyone but multi-level marketers and serial fraudsters who ARE the problem to begin with.

    7. Re:This may come as a shock to you guys... by jedi_gras · · Score: 1

      It's weird.. I met a few girls online through friendster or other online sites and met them in person. Yes I am a geek, nerd, avid /. reader..is that so wrong? Now it's all good cuz the girls are nerds too but their friends are like..you met each other WHERE? and kinda labeled us as the online freaky couples. There should be more acceptance with the online browsing and real life dating. Until that gap is bridged, I will always feel weird catalog shopping for girls online :) Of course it make sense to me to filter out the ugly ones before I get to meet them in person...but some people don't see it that way. Lol.. ass is ass, all them haters gotta leave me be!!

      -Declared Online Dater

  11. "The pumping will be done for you" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    by your own well-lubricated fingers. (Two for the girls, all five for the boys.)

    Really, isn't what those sites are for?

    1. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by BgJonson79 · · Score: 1

      But the Shocker takes three fingers!

      --

      There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.

    2. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by vDave420 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      ".sig: Why are the people who call Bush a dictator the same ones who want to take away our guns?"

      Sorry to reply to your .sig...

      I read Michael Moore's books and agree with him on nearly all points EXCEPT this one (gun control)

      In principle, I agree that guns are used to hurt those we care about, rather to protect ourselves, on average. I applaud his (and others') efforts to secure our society from accidental danger by controlling guns. Never mind that more (civilian) people die from Autos then from Guns.

      However, one of the big points that he (and other anti-Bush-ites) seem to miss is exactly that which you bring up, and irritates me to no end:
      We don't need guns to hunt. We don't need guns to 'protect ourselves' in case of intrusion, despite what gunowners (like myself) will tell you.
      We will say such things, however, because the truth is too aweful-sounding: We need them to keep Government close to reasonable! We need them to keep those Washington fools semi-open and semi-transparent. We need the constant threat they provide, the threat to our societies' foundations, the threat to dramatically alter our way of life.

      We NEED them, not so we can shoot the intruder who is (apparently) breaking into our house, we need them so we can still effectively "threaten" the Gaylord Fockers who would suppress and control us, without our consent, as happened here, and will undoubtedly happen again.

      This is what bothers me so much when I see comments like "If you want assault rifles, join the [US] Army, we have tons" (misquote, I know) is that the whole point of citizens having guns is the ability to overthrow that army and Take Back the control of the country.
      Obviously, joining the Army and not owning a gun would have exactly the opposite effect.

      Yes, a world without guns would (possibly) be a more peaceful one, but not one in which I would particularly want to live. Why? The ruling powers-that-be would be almost infintely secure.

      The (presumably constant) threat of assasination is at least in the mind of current leaders, like D.Cheny, J.Ashcroft, and GWB, for instance, and hopefully serves as a constant anchor to reality for them. (emphasis on hopefully)

      The ultimate problem for them is that many see a democratic process as being ultimately the one true way towards change. While I agree in principle (again with these principles) I don't think that this is the reality in which we live. Violence is sometimes the only reason things change, for better or for worse.
      Will I go and start a revolution myself? No. Would I go and join a pre-existing revolution, bent on overthrow of our current government, should they refuse to yield political power this November? Probably. However, this would be a last resort, and I am taking other (more democaratic, less violent) steps first.

      -dave-

      --
      The pig browse. With Google. Sigh is to the chicken. Chicken is fool. Giggle. The DailyWTF giggle.
    3. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you hit the nail on the head. Good post!

    4. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      We will say such things, however, because the truth is too aweful-sounding: We need them to keep Government close to reasonable! We need them to keep those Washington fools semi-open and semi-transparent. We need the constant threat they provide, the threat to our societies' foundations, the threat to dramatically alter our way of life.

      Just the same as we need tactical nuclear weapons in our homes to match the force of the military. We need aircraft carriers and 'daisy cutters' to maintain orderly democracy.

      Pea shooters aren't going to stop the military from taking your stuff.

    5. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's unlikely the government is going to drop nuclear weapons or launch airstrikes on its own citizens. Besides, as we've all seen, you need soldiers to hold territory, and they're not bullet proof. It would also require the soldiers to participate in said coup, which I would find unlikely.

    6. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by gatki · · Score: 1

      Someone once told me that:

      "Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't."

      There's a bit of truth in that.

    7. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1
      Sorry to reply to your .sig... I read Michael Moore's books and agree with him on nearly all points EXCEPT this one (gun control)
      Sorry to feed a gun control thread ..
      We will say such things, however, because the truth is too aweful-sounding: We need them to keep Government close to reasonable! We need them to keep those Washington fools semi-open and semi-transparent. We need the constant threat they provide, the threat to our societies' foundations, the threat to dramatically alter our way of life.
      This may have been possible at the time your constitution was drafted (or was it one of the amendments), but how can a citizen's militia stand up to the power of the US army / national guard? I think citizens can overthrow their governments easily, of enough people participate, but not through force, but politics (not necessarily the type of politics that goes in suits, however)..
    8. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by SnappleMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to bother refuting any of that logic. It's BS, obviously and seriously you have to ask yourself: do you really want to live in a country where the govt is only honest because citizens have guns? Fuck, that's some scary shit there!

      My $0.02 on gun control always has been and always will be: look around you at your fellow citizens. The USA is filled with nuts/idiots/criminals. All kinds of wack jobs. Do you want all of the people to own, carry, and inevitably use guns?

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    9. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by potat0man · · Score: 1
      We don't need guns to 'protect ourselves' in case of intrusion

      So when I go spend a couple of weeks in my adobe cabin in southern New Mexico, in a relatively high crime area compared with the rest of the U.S., with no phone access and the nearest state police about 70 minutes away (That's driving 130mph) and I hear a bump in the night that turns out to be an armed burglar or two, should I just hide under my bed until they leave with all my electronics? And then get in my car (which only goes about 85pmh) to drive two hours to the police station so they can drive one hour back and what... nab 'em while they're at the end of my drive way? They'd be in Mexico by then. From my cold dead hands.

    10. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The citizens have guns and the government is dishonest. The social character of the people who are attracted to government service and law enforcement in the US is not like that of Iceland, Sweden, or even Canada. Look at Guantanamo Bay -- getting rid of guns just means no boat ride to get there.

    11. Re:"The pumping will be done for you" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you think that BECAUSE the US is filled with nuts/idiots/criminals, guns would be necessary? There are plenty of people I trust with guns. It's too bad it seems there's nobody you trust that much.

  12. Musicmobs by tobes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you want to see the social network idea extended to music, I suggest you check out my site Musicmobs. It links users together not only by the music they listen to, but also creating a web of "favorite users".

    My goal is to make a place where people can not only find new music, but learn more about the music that they already listen to.

    1. Re:Musicmobs by deman1985 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Audioscrobbler is another site with a similar purpose. Although it doesn't directly link users together by their musical tastes, it is easy enough to find people who frequently listen to the same artists that you enjoy by looking at the rankings.

    2. Re:Musicmobs by costas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Another self-plug: my newsbot extends the same ideas (peer recommendations, collaborative filtering) for news articles: it's a much more powerful way to filter the news than say, /. :-)

  13. Doesn't seem likely by deman1985 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've considered joining such online social circles in the past because I, like many others, do enjoy online interaction. I spend many hours per day talking to people on AIM or some other service, I maintain a livejournal, and as I'm doing right now, I enjoy posting on sites like Slashdot. However, I've yet to actually do it. Why? Because the people I would really be interested in having join along with me are already on AIM, or they simply aren't online very often.

    Existing chat services already serve this purpose quite well. I have a number of contacts on my lists which I personally don't know very well, but they are friends of friends who I might talk to once a year. The only real difference with these sites is that the process is automated, in some sense or another. I can see the purpose to them and I would like to see a concept like this take off, but I just can't see anything like that really getting established and lasting any length of time.

    1. Re:Doesn't seem likely by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      i have yet to find an advantage to this that isnt covered in real time, messaging such as aim icq, jabber etc. however, the social networking aspect to these is inherently different as is the medium. the ability to navigate through a friends profiles etc, and meet their friends and their friend etc is unique. However, what are the primary differences between friendster, orkut my wallop etc? i have already seen php apps that let people create real maps of connections between the groups. having too much freetime on my hand my friend and i built one and are currently experimenting with it, and one of the most immediate observation is i stumbled across is that everyone links back to me well, cos i built it and invited a few friends. i understand the ability to advertise, as per a very controlled db etc. but fail to see the real shift in communication that is apparently occurring.

  14. No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    > The pumping will be done for you.

    That hasn't been my experience. I signed up for the Monster.com networking thing, and all it does is send me periodic messages stating "other people who are like you". What am I supposed to do with this?

    Crap. I get far more kudos from people e-mailing me to ask about or compliment source code and articles I post on my web site, and often times they contribute code back to me.

    1. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Damn. First one's female so I clicked "introduce me" and it just said "there was an unexpected problem processing your request". This is as hard work as real life socialising :(

    2. Re:No thanks... by maximilln · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree. I've investigated several online social networking sites and have discovered the same thing about every one of them: they promise a lot, give very little, and charge money for the next opportunity. The next opportunity rarely produces any real connection. There are always a million excuses why the last opportunity didn't work out and, for an additional $20/mo., the scheme will bump you up to the next level where the next opportunity awaits. Like that pyramid scheme that keeps holding informational meetings at the local Holiday Inn hall or business suite.

      The sad part is that if enough estranged yuppies start using this it _will_ turn into the next big pyramid scheme like the .com boom. You'll have to get in on it if you want to move ahead but the only way of moving ahead will be to become personally attached to someone who's already closer to the top. If you don't already know someone then you'll be just more cannon fodder sending in your money with the dreamy hope that it'll work out.

      With odds like that you can go sit at the local bar and become George Bush's best friend or buy a lottery ticket. Who needs social networking if you're connected to the top or rich?

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    3. Re:No thanks... by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      The greatest benefit I've found out of the Monster networking service is finding people that I used to work with. As large as Monster is, I've found a good number of people I've already F2Fed with and sort of have them in my regular network now.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
  15. Why I don't believe in this by amigoro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1. Many still prefer human face to face (or any other body part to any other body part ;) ) contact to the virtual impersonal environment of cyberspace.
    2. Identity theft. You can register yourself as Bill Gates, with BG's photo, on Friendster. Chances are, you'll get away with it.
    3. Abuse by trolls. Need I say more?

    I keep my personal life well off the internet. I do it mainly for privacy and security reasons.

    Friendster, in my eyes, is a vast spam engine. I get dozens of emails from people I barely know as acquiantances trying to be my "friends" on Friendster. No thanks. I know who my friends are. I don't want a website to remind me.

    Moderate this comment
    Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
    Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny

    --


    Nothing to see here
    1. Re:Why I don't believe in this by sulli · · Score: 1, Troll
      Abuse by trolls. Need I say more?

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    2. Re:Why I don't believe in this by ArseneLuppin · · Score: 0
      Score: 5, Troll

      Only on Slashdot!

      [I know, I'll be modded down for this...]

    3. Re:Why I don't believe in this by flewp · · Score: 1

      I agree. I still use the internet a lot to talk to friends and stuff, especially ones who live out of state now, and people on IRC I've known for years.

      Not sure how it is with IM, but I recently joined a channel on IRC that I used to go to years back. To my suprise it was there. Then I realised it wasn't really suprising considering how seriously these people took IRC. I can understand making casual friends and whatnot through IRC, but these people just took it so seriously. What I wonder though, is if it affected their actual social lives (IRC is NOT a social life people!). The way they acted on IRC, and talked about events that happened on IRC as if they happened out in the real world leads me to believe it has utterly destroyed any social skills they had before. This is why I've always seen (and this just confirmed it) the internet as a way of communication, not as a whole different way of life.

      As for friendster, my friend got me to sign up, saying I could stay in touch with all these people from high school. I signed up, forgot I did, didn't login for a couple weeks/months and realised there's a reason I didn't stay in touch with half those people. I've never really gotten any emails saying someone wants to be my friend on friendster though. I don't think I filled out any of the profile stuff, or if I did it was all garbage.

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    4. Re:Why I don't believe in this by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Informative
      Many still prefer human face to face (or any other body part to any other body part ;) ) contact to the virtual impersonal environment of cyberspace.
      Yes, but the virtual impersonal environment can be an icebreaker, when people are shy or otherwise don't talk as much as they should.

      There was a girl I often saw at local metal shows, but we just didn't talk much, and when we did, the conversations were pretty short. But she mentioned one of these 'social network' sites (a really cheezy and unreliable one too) and out of curiosity I checked it out, "friended" her, and started making journal entries with comments about various local metal shows. So did she. Then we started commenting on each other's journals. We got to know each other better in these "batch mode " communications, and that carried over to when we are in person.

      Not dating or anything like that (nor do I expect that to happen, we'd be pretty incompatible, I think -- though she does happen to be a pretty hot babe :-) but now we're a lot more familiar and friendly. One of these dumb sites turned a near-stranger into a friendly acquaintance. I like that! It makes me want everyone in my local metal scene to get on that cheezy website.

      Ultimately, these things are just another tool, which can be used stupidly or smartly. But having more tools for communication is better, especially given how socially disfunctional people are these days... Ok, maybe the disfunction is a consequence of all the other tools. (e.g. people using computers instead of talking face-to-face) But the computers are not going away, and the people are not getting any less fucked-up, so you might as well use and leverage the tools.

      Identity theft. You can register yourself as Bill Gates, with BG's photo, on Friendster. Chances are, you'll get away with it.
      I think you have a damned good point there. AFAIK, except for celebrities, the potential doesn't seem to be getting abused much, but it's certainly possible. Obviously these networks should be integrated with the PGP WoT. ;-)

      Actually, that would a good challenge for me: Can I explain the PGP WoT to my new non-hacker, Windows98-using, 18-year-old-metal-chick friend? Hmmm...

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    5. Re:Why I don't believe in this by Politburo · · Score: 1

      The way they acted on IRC, and talked about events that happened on IRC as if they happened out in the real world leads me to believe it has utterly destroyed any social skills they had before.

      Why is this? It appears you assume that people act exactly the same IRL as they do on IRC. From my experience, this is mostly wrong. What is so wrong with talking about events on IRC "as if they happened out in the real world"? Are you suggesting events that transpire on IRC did not actually occur? Or that they shouldn't be discussed?

      I understand that there are people that take IRC too seriously. I was a channel service admin for the Undernet for a while, and the people that we would get coming to us for help "taking their channel back" were at times so serious that they involved lawyers in the whole thing. Yes, lawsuits over IRC channels. However, just because some people take IRC that seriously does not mean all IRC users do this, nor does it mean that some people who take IRC a little more serious than others necessarily "destroy any social skills they had before [IRC]."

      I recently joined a channel on IRC that I used to go to years back. To my surprise it was there. Then I realised it wasn't really surprising considering how seriously these people took IRC.

      To some people, especially seasoned users of the internet, IRC is/was used like most people use IM. Most (chat) users today will sit down, dial up if needed, and then start their IM client(s). To me, and others, this includes an IRC client. Would you be surprised if you logged on a IM client in 3 years and saw the same people? Would you think they took IM too seriously? Why or why not?

    6. Re:Why I don't believe in this by shadowmatter · · Score: 1

      2. Identity theft. You can register yourself as Bill Gates, with BG's photo, on Friendster. Chances are, you'll get away with it.

      Not true ;)

      - shadowmatter

    7. Re:Why I don't believe in this by TheSync · · Score: 1

      This has been my experience as well. I've met several people from the local goth scene whom I don't think I really would have met without LiveJournal (which is really the key social network site, although it doesn't sell itself as such).

      I've also met some fellow classical liberals through Friendster and Tribe, and have actually hung out with them.

      Clearly this is most empowering for people like me who are not naturally highly outgoing. I can meet someone at a venue, exchange LiveJournal names, and an online conversation can start (aided with IM as well). The next time I see them we are slowly becoming virtual friends.

      Moreover, some of these people would probably freak out if complete strangers tried to have in-depth communication with them at public venues anyway. So it is a way of reaching people who wouldn't normally be reached, as well as a way of helping people make contacts they normally would not initiate.

      The most powerful things of humanity are driven by social networking. The use of computer technology to order and drive these, like the PDA/Outlook/email/etc., is going to make for a better humanity.

    8. Re:Why I don't believe in this by spacefight · · Score: 1

      You are so damn lame. Move your stupid moderation options either to your sig or just away from /. There is already a very good moderation system in please. Thanks.

    9. Re:Why I don't believe in this by flewp · · Score: 1

      I understand people act differently on IRC than IRL. However, the way they acted led me to believe that IRC had consumed their lives, as they didn't even seem capable of a normal conversation. Everywhere else I go where people just use IRC to chat, rather than to use it as their social life, can hold normal conversations without it breaking down into chaos.

      As for the "as if they happened in the real world" comment was meant more as they took it as seriously as they might something that happened outside, in a normal social context. An example is someone wouldn't op someone, and they got into an arguement, and started name calling. Then, one of them left because she was so distraught she was going to go lay down, and later she told someone she cried for a couple hours. That is just plain unhealthy if you ask me.

      I never said, nor implied all people take IRC too seriously. If you notice, I use the word "these", as in "these people took it way too seriously".

      In fact, I was referring to that select channel, and also people like the frequenters of said channel. I never said "some people who take IRC a little more serious than others necessarily "destroy any social skills they had before [IRC]" as you seem to imply I did. All I said that it seemed possible for some people to become so hooked, and almost dependant on IRC that they lose any normal social abilities they once had. Essentially, it becomes their social life, and once that happens, they may forget what it's like to actually interact with people face to face.

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  16. Valid? by HogGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't agree...

    Most "online" people like the anonominity of the online world, so that can be someone, or something that they aren't in real life. That is what makes IRC, Chat, ... so "interesting" to most individuals.

    Computers and software will never replace real world "networking" and friendships, as a lot of that is built on your real personality, and (like it or not) appearance.

    1. Re:Valid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if I can be the greased up Yoda Doll.

  17. The opposite of Groucho by fuzzy12345 · · Score: 1
    If you wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have you, these places are out of the question!

    Here's more from Business 2.0 I like the "already peaked" bit.

    --

    Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
  18. The bubble is back, baby! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the best overblown, over reaching hyperbole since the Silicon Valley venture vultures were leading us willingly down the yellow brick road. This is a bunch of hype by new players trying to convince us their new products are SO much better at creating social networks than the BBS, slashblogs, and USENET that's been building social networks forever. This is a virtual velvet rope that creates the artificial scarcity that makes an exclusive club seem so much more exclusive than it really is.

    1. Re:The bubble is back, baby! by Eil · · Score: 1


      You're just jealous because no one's invited you to Orkut yet.

  19. No way to break in... by cabingirl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But what do you do if your friends aren't interested in joining one of these sites - or you don't have any friends? If you don't have connections, you don't get to play. That's hardly a way for an introvert to better their social standing.

    --
    I could kill you, sure, but I could only make you cry with these words
    1. Re:No way to break in... by tzanger · · Score: 1

      People are selling orkut invitations on ebay... the epitome of capitalism... can't make it on your own, buy your way in.

  20. Livejournal is definitely not one of them by British · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With my experiences on orkut, friendster(before they ran out of bandwidth), myspace, and such, LJ is not very social.

    Being a "blogger" site, most of the people there post entries just to hear themselves talk. It gets very cliquey, and even though you might get added to someone's friends list, they might not be so open or receptive to your comments.

    Hell, you could post a thought-provoking, insightful journal entry and recieve zero comments, while any 19 year old grrl who posts pics of her clevage gets 20 "you're so beautiful!" comments. Don't expect intelligent discussion on LJ like you would see on here or on kuro5hin. LJ is a bit socially xenophobic.

    With myspace and friendster, the journalling functions are 99% ignored.

    With orkut, I actually see some decent activity in the communities. It's much better structured than myspace or friendster. Now as for meeting new people, that's a different story.

    Oh, and don't bother with the livejournal meetups. They are 100% sausage fests.

    1. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intelligent discussion here or on Kuroshin? Yeah fucking right!

    2. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by VE3MTM · · Score: 2, Informative

      I disagree. I use LJ, as do many of my friends (RL and otherwise). Pretty much everyone posts daily or semi-daily. It's almost a closed group of about 15 people, and I know every one of them. There's none of the "cliquey" things you describe going on. If you have these problems with LJ, maybe you should rethink who's on your friends list.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Whoops, silly middle mouse button...
    3. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's almost a closed group of about 15 people, and I know every one of them. There's none of the "cliquey" things you describe going on.

      do you understand what "clique" means?

    4. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by ahem · · Score: 2, Funny
      Does anyone else smell a certain lack of self-awareness here:

      1. a closed group of about 15 people
      2. There's none of the "cliquey" things

      Perhaps just an incorrect sense of the word 'clique?'

      --
      Not A Sig
    5. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Sloppy · · Score: 1
      Hell, you could post a thought-provoking, insightful journal entry and recieve zero comments, while any 19 year old grrl who posts pics of her clevage gets 20 "you're so beautiful!" comments. Don't expect intelligent discussion on LJ like you would see on here or on kuro5hin. LJ is a bit socially xenophobic.
      You get what you make of it. Take some of Slashdot's or K5's people and put them on MySpace, and MySpace won't suck. Take MySpace's people and put them on Slashdot, and it will. It's the people, not the tool.

      With that in mind, use the tool wisely. Don't go on a friending-rampage; play hard-to-get, and only friend people who post journals. Unfriend people if they just post shallow comments.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    6. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 1
      Hell, you could post a thought-provoking, insightful journal entry and recieve zero comments, while any 19 year old grrl who posts pics of her clevage gets 20 "you're so beautiful!" comments. Don't expect intelligent discussion on LJ like you would see on here or on kuro5hin. LJ is a bit socially xenophobic.

      And you are surprised?

      Wow, let me be the first to welcome you to the internet, then!

    7. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Eil · · Score: 1


      Don't expect intelligent discussion on LJ like you would see on here or on kuro5hin.

      Er... put down the pipe, sir! That stuff can get addictive after awhile!

    8. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by VE3MTM · · Score: 1

      Yes, prehaps my use of the word was a bit wrong. I wrote that post rather hurriedly. I meant it in the sense I interpreted it as being used in the parent.

      I call it a "closed group" because none of us, as far as I know, advertise our LJs openly (in public profiles or otherwise), nor do we use our full real names in our posts, so there's really no way to find them (and identify who they actually belong to).

      The main point of my post, which I think was missed, was to show that the LJ community isn't all 19 year-old girls showing their cleavage. Some users actually use it for what it's intended to be used for, amazingly enough, and that's for putting down your experiences and thought on issues for people to read.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Whoops, silly middle mouse button...
    9. Re:Livejournal is definitely not one of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. I just started a LiveJournal five weeks ago and already it has connected me with others of similar interests. I'm a deaf athiest, a very rare species, yet I discovered two like-minded deaf folks in the last couple of weeks alone, and there are others I haven't gotten to know yet. Contrast with F2F encounters - I've met 4 agnostic/atheist deaf people in 10 years.

      You reap what you sow. If you're involved, posting regularly to your journal and actively commenting in others, your network and your choices expand. You just have to get in there and make the most of the tools and the opportunity. If I can find people with very obscure interests in common, you can surely do as well or better.

  21. Sorta Offtopic by CGP314 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just this week I met up with some people from Orkut. I wrote about my experience for those interested.

    I know a lot of people on slashdot make fun of social networks, but trust me, if you are new to a city and don't know many people there, it's nice to join a network of (mostly) real people as opposed to some anonymous bulliten board.

    -Colin

    1. Re:Sorta Offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Panhandler!!!

      -Mom

  22. What outrageous stupidity by Illserve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fundamental law of social environments is that it takes effort to be well noticed, and online social networks certainly do not violate that principle. They just change the fitness landscape a bit by allowing those who aren't equipped with f2f social graces to compete.

    But as it turns out, if you're a dork in real life, you're usually a dork online too. People that are popular in real life but not so much online generally just haven't invested the time required to build an online presence.

    In other words, the same basic laws of social interaction apply, you just get to interact with more people.

  23. Social Networking that is more than just dating? by thened · · Score: 3, Informative

    I help run a website that has social networking aspects, Mediachest.com and have looked around at all the other social networking sites, and they don't really seem to offer much. They either try to replace existing communities with a site that has fewer features than the original or they are worthless, slow lists of people who are essentially strangers. Sure, it is nice if you want to look at profiles of girls without having to pay to contact them, but are any of the sites any more useful than that? Mediachest is more about finding new people and sharing items. It is like the distributed library project but centralized so it is easier to find things. Social networking can be very valuable when trying to find a DVD to watch or a book to borrow. Social networking can be more than just dating.

  24. Here's my *funny* answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EVERQUEST!

    1. Re:Here's my *funny* answer by absurdist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Personally, I prefer Everclear.

    2. Re:Here's my *funny* answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  25. Re:OH blah by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

    Which is why it's so popular for a sizable percentage of people.

  26. Uggg by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

    I hope slashdot counts.

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  27. Isn't /. one of those communities? by Don+Tworry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and even though most of the postings are against the article, we are participating in an online community.

    --
    humble and proud of it.
    1. Re:Isn't /. one of those communities? by amigoro · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Yes I totally agree with you. But the point is /. is not a replacement for real life networking

      But then... considering the percentage of waking time people spend reading and writing comments on /. I wonder....

      Moderate this comment
      Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
      Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny

      --


      Nothing to see here
  28. Hagiography sites will die by 2005 by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Gee, it looks like everyone on LinkedIn is a visionary paradigm-smashing thinker who strangely enough isn't remembered by anyone at their last three employers, and can't seem to land a job at all right now even though they are obviously one of the leading thinkers in their field, which of course is based on blending creativity with tech in ways no one else has thought of before.

    Folks, a club anyone can join is a club no one will see value in joining. These networks exist so the unemployed can BS themselves to high heaven and link to other people with equally fictional self-appraisals. Once it becomes obvious how high the BS meter is on these sites, they will crash.

    1. Re:Hagiography sites will die by 2005 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of E2.

    2. Re:Hagiography sites will die by 2005 by maximilln · · Score: 1

      With the stagnation of upper management I think anyone with even a mildly original thought is paradigm smashing. Most companies have a policy regarding former employees: refuse to answer any questions about them. Of course they're "not remembered".

      Aside from that, though, I agree. A club that anyone can join has no value. My personal take on this is to cut out the middle entirely: a club has no value.

      Either you'll win or you'll lose. Memberships, degrees, friends, money--none of it really matters. What matters is food, shelter, and clothing.

      If your natural knee jerk response is to say "what about a house, what about a car, what about a mate, what about a family" just relax. None of it really matters. All of those things are just society playing with your head trying to get you to run in more circles and jump through more hoops and hurdles for their amusement.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    3. Re:Hagiography sites will die by 2005 by Alien+Conspiracy · · Score: 1

      If you've got shelter, why would you need clothing?

      OTOH, Water would be a bonus.

  29. GPG by femto · · Score: 1, Funny

    By any other name it's GNU Privacy Guard and the "web of trust". A verified, accountable network of friends.

    1. Re:GPG by ManiaX+Killerian · · Score: 1

      Okay, I resisted this far, but now it's unstopable, here's a shameless plug.

      An idea for secure/reliable social network. It's based on PKC and PGP/GPG style web-of-trust, and in the next few weeks after the first desing phase, I intend to start coding on it...

    2. Re:GPG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Glad to see this comment! I was beginning to think I was losing my mind.

      I guess slashdot must be going 'mainstream' when the average slashdotter cannot make a simple abstraction and spot that GPG (and similar) are essentially social networks. Now if you will excuse me, I will go and indulge in a little smugness ;-)

      femto

  30. Social + chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    a "social" site without real time chat is not that social... that is why huminity is the more faverable site

    1. Re:Social + chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are gonna pimp your site at least login. I on the other hand can't login cuz I dun member me passy and I'm not at home.

  31. Re:Real life is definitely not one of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With my experiences on orkut, friendster(before they ran out of bandwidth), myspace, and such, real life is not very social.

    Being about life, most of the people just want to hear themselves talk. It gets very cliquey, and even though you might get added to someone's diary, they might not be so open or receptive to your comments.

    Hell, you could say something thought-provoking, and insightful and no one listens, while any 19 year old grrl who flashes her cleavage gets 20 "you're so beautiful!" comments. Don't expect intelligent discussion in real life like you would see on here or on kuro5hin. Real life is a bit socially xenophobic.

    With myspace and friendster, the journalling functions are 99% ignored.

    With orkut, I actually see some decent activity in the communities. It's much better structured than myspace or friendster. Now as for meeting new people, that's a different story.

    Oh, and don't bother with the real life meetups. They are 100% sausage fests.

  32. Re:OH blah by smitty45 · · Score: 0, Troll

    well with Friendster now getting more traffic than Expedia.com and Craigslist.org....I don't see how it's no longer cool, for many people.

  33. Yet another dotbomb idea by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 5, Interesting
    the article says:

    All the fervor has skeptics talking of a social networking bubble and its inevitable collapse. While such speculation is premature, issues do have to be resolved -- functionality and privacy concerns among them -- before the sector can be judged a safe bet.

    Ummm, no. the skeptics are skeptical because we heard all the same hoo haa back around 1999. And investment is not profit something these dot-commies still don't understand.

    The article then goes on to blather:

    Perhaps the strongest arguments for social networking's success has nothing to do with the bottom-line success of the companies behind the sites. Rather it's one of those unintended consequences that's no less welcome and needed for being unexpected.

    First off, that is an atrociously written paragraph. What is IT'S? "Social networking" or the "bottom line success of the companies"? But, never mind...

    Secondly, these companies are having millions of dollars poured down their gullet by VCs. That is NOT bottom line success. That is investment on the prediction of bottom line success, but we ALL know where that little train went back around March 2001...

    The article is just another rah-rah bit of internet blather - so five minutes ago (actually five years ago) it's kind of sad, really.

    The fact is this: if you want to build a network of professional relationships, you have to get off your fat ass and go meet people. There are many organisations for just about every concievable interest. Join one. You have to go out and meet people. And if you're a loser at that, then eventually you'll be a loser online as well, because all the online thing can do is facilitate the development of f2f where the real business goes down.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  34. Musicmobs here we come.. by SailfishMac · · Score: 0

    Prepare for a /. anything is better than that MSN link,

    makes me want to kill butterflies...

    1. Re:Musicmobs here we come.. by tobes · · Score: 1

      I'm just about to leave my apartment too. Hopefully, I'll still have a site when I get back!

  35. Orkut?-Social Pimps. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We need a Slashdot Orkut whore!"

    Is that were the "pumping" comes in?

  36. uhhuh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, you are right. Your personallty DOES show through - you replied to a blank troll just so your message appears at the top of the page and gets more views + karma.

    FFS, MODS: Moderation keeps being abused by people replying to irrelevant threads just to get their posts in the first view comments. Mod them down as offtopic.

    1. Re:uhhuh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/view/few

  37. Social networking == online BS machine by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Until one of these sites acutally validates the data people enter about themselves, they will continue to be utterly useless.

    The dating networks are filled with fake pics.

    The business networks are filled with people with inflated egos and phony credentials.

    Sure its fun to surf them but they are useless for any valid application. Just surf LinkedIn sometime to see BS artists on steriods linking to each other in a circle jerk of mutual validation for their collective hagiography.

    1. Re:Social networking == online BS machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dating networks are filled with fake pics.

      It's actually not that bad on networks like Friendster. Since these are friends of your friends, you get more real people and less phonies, or at least you can easilly figure out who is real or not.

  38. What, I thought that... by rthille · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashdot was a social network site! I've even got friends here! :-)

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    1. Re:What, I thought that... by Lakers · · Score: 1

      Alas, I am alone in the world!

    2. Re:What, I thought that... by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      So that's what all those yellow dots next to people's names mean! When the hell did we get all this newfangled tech-no-lo-gee? Somebody should've told me my infamy was being quantified somewhere.

  39. Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 4, Informative

    While I see some great potential for these types of sites, I have to wonder about the strength or veracity of the social networks they claim to foster. For example, Orkut tells me I'm now "connected" to over 150,000 folks, even though I only have three "friends" added to my profile. Just because I joined to the Debian/Apache/PHP/EFF/Dachshund forums doesn't mean all the other members even know of my existence, or care.

    Still though, it does do wonders for the ego . . .

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    1. Re:Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree and that is why i like ROLOSTAR. On ROLOSTAR you cannot really see who is connected to who? Why would i want anyone to see who i am connected to anyway? On ROLOSTAR there is a lot more privacy, and the matching engine seem to work well for getting leads and referrals. I just wish they add a few more features etc...

    2. Re:Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by disembodied · · Score: 1

      You just have unusually popular friends ;)

    3. Re:Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by daytona8 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. Why would anyone want their network to be all public. I wouldn't. Also i hate explicit rating systems. That is why i love ROLOSTAR. These Rolostar folks seem to get it, much more privacy conscious. You can truly remain anonymous on ROLOSTAR. That is the it should be.

    4. Re:Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by Jahf · · Score: 1

      Funny, I've just got three direct friends on there, too, but I also have over 150,000 connections. Looks like we got the same gregarious rogue somewhere in the list. Did yours balloon from 2,000 to 150K+ in the span of a week or so?

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    5. Re:Yeah, but how accurate are the numbers? by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      Yep. But I don't think its a rogue, I think its more the way Orkut tallies the numbers.

      What I think is happening is that upon subscribing to a group, there's a slight delay as the system backtraces the other members of the group to geta near accurate count of all the links between the members and their friends. Once its finished, your count increases. All well and good from a visual perspective, but a gross overstatement of popularity in the real world.

      Oh, and just as an FYI, my "friends" count increased another 5000 since I last checked it yesterday morning.

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

  40. Orkut and "rating" friends ? by smitty45 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having to "rate" my friends could possibly be the worst concept to hit social networking.

    I'm either friends, or not, with someone, and my own classification of my friendships change so often that updating (forget about revealing it to other folks) a website is just impossible.

    1. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by Illserve · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Having to "rate" my friends could possibly be the worst concept to hit social networking

      Not at all. The idea is a good one, if the social network is to have any useful value for interpersonal networking, it has to know the strength of the links. If I'm trying to chart a path to Bob, the network needs to know which are the "close-friend" links, which are more likely to hold up and be worth something.

      I won't get very far trying to use a chain of 3 barely acquainted people to get from Alice to Bob

    2. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by smitty45 · · Score: 1

      Right, but that's not helping the real-world life of your connections. I want to use social networking sites to ENHANCE my real world life, not live in yet another chat room.

      While I understand your point, again, how I feel about my friends can change daily, and keeping track of that is just not feasible.

      Plus...if I am indeed friends with someone, I'll know what sort of activities I'll do with that person. I can make that judgement in real life, and leave the "finding connections" problem to the software.

    3. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by yet+another+coward · · Score: 1

      IMO, they would be better off judging closeness of friendship using clustering. Besides their direct link, how well linked are the pair? It is not the same thing, however, and it has some obvious biases.

      Clustering importantly avoids the social clumsiness of rating. Ranking people is a social faux pas in many eyes, and a social networking site might do well to avoid offense.

      Whether they have the computing power to compute the clustering measures is another question.

    4. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by smitty45 · · Score: 1

      most social networking sites, friendster included, count the degrees of separation already.

      and I would guess that there is indeed a large computing requirment. :)

    5. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by Welsh+Dwarf · · Score: 1

      Another method, would be to rate relationships on how many messages (and sizes of said messages) people exchange.

      You naturally talk more with people who are closer to you.

      Oh, and naturally, the conversations have to be 2 way for this to work, otherwise it'd be spammed to death

      --
      Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
    6. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1
      IMO, they would be better off judging closeness of friendship using clustering. Besides their direct link, how well linked are the pair? It is not the same thing, however, and it has some obvious biases.
      Indeed, I don't think this would be a very good indicator. Cliques can have weak links, and strong links (good friendships) don't have to be cliquey at all.
      Clustering importantly avoids the social clumsiness of rating. Ranking people is a social faux pas in many eyes, and a social networking site might do well to avoid offense.
      Absolutely, but I doubt link strength can be induced from the rest of the 'social graph'. Maybe auxilary things, such as messages exchanged (and see if it's outside business hours a lot, how fast replies are, if anyone is consistently given priority in some order, what reply rate is each way - remember links aren't symmetrical..) But this is all kinda spooky.
      Whether they have the computing power to compute the clustering measures is another question.
      I think that could be done very efficiently and incrementally..
    7. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by yet+another+coward · · Score: 1

      They don't judge the strength of those connections. Connections between any pair are rated as present or absent. Then second order present or absent, and so on. There are degrees of presence that are much finer than an integer count of degrees. Two people unknown to each other but sharing a very good friend in common probably are closer on average than two people unknown to each other who have only a common acquaintance.

    8. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by smitty45 · · Score: 1

      I think that could be done very efficiently and incrementally.

      but could it be done in 'real-time' ?
      social networks under considerable load are having problems just keeping up with managing the updates to a connections graph database as it is. I don't think it would be trivial to handle this amount of calculation.

      users want up-to-date stats.

    9. Re:Orkut and "rating" friends ? by smitty45 · · Score: 1

      agreed, but I'm not sure that a social networking site needs to be that finely-grained, or would be used, even if it was. and again, the quality of friendships can change so easily that I don't think people would want (or care) to keep those quality metrics updated on their profile.

      for one, I'm not sure the average user (i.e. someone really not so technical) will care, and two, these judgements can take place in real life. I think that to make social networking software replace what can be quickly done in real life is counter-intuitive.

      I use social networking sites to get connected to people who I am 'connected' with, no matter what the quality of that connection. I will do better than the software in figuring out the quality of that connection. :)

  41. Automatic friends? please. by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 3, Insightful
    These days, all you have to do is go online and join a "social networking" site. The pumping will be done for you."

    I doubt that. I've seen plenty of boring Friendster profiles who I'd never contact the person behind, and I've de-Friendster-ated more than a couple of people who signed up and added me, but frankly just ended up not being interesting enough to bother. "Favorite color: OMG-Pink. Favorite Music: Britney Houston."

    Thankfully, to keep it interesting we always have the Fakesters.

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
  42. Hagiography sites will die by 2005-Blogs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Folks, a club anyone can join is a club no one will see value in joining. These networks exist so the unemployed can BS themselves to high heaven and link to other people with equally fictional self-appraisals. Once it becomes obvious how high the BS meter is on these sites, they will crash."

    So by your argument. Blogs should be crashing about now.

  43. Mmm you have a point by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    Only way I can see for companies like this to make a profit is by advertising -- either in-page advertising or spamming their members. In-page advertising has already proven to be worthless and while spamming is apparently profitable, I doubt many of the members would appreciate getting spammed.

    You'd think after the dot-bomb implosion, VCs would be less gullable. Maybe it's time for The Daily Show to pitch transmitting cake through fiber optic cables again (If you didn't see that segment you missed out -- it's a beautiful piece of journalism.)

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Mmm you have a point by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      I doubt many of the members would appreciate getting spammed.

      If the companies do it right, the result might not resemble spam. It can be much more targeted, based on the heavy amount of info advertisers can see.

      The very social-network which attracts users can be even more attractive to advertisers. Who wants to bet that the best analysis of the network will be reserved for paying corporations and not individual consumers?

      Suppose a major seller like Amazon hooks up with a social-network service. They'll be able to cross-correlate an individual's known purchases with those of his friends and related persons. You know the quasi-spam from Amazon that starts "You bought book X, so you'll probably also be interested in book Y"? Expect that type of thing to be intensified.

      Even if Amazon doesn't "spam" per se, and instead only sends to people who've already "opted in" to targeted ads, those ads will become more effective because the seller will know more about the customer's personal life.

    2. Re:Mmm you have a point by Welsh+Dwarf · · Score: 1

      Even if Amazon doesn't "spam" per se, and instead only sends to people who've already "opted in" to targeted ads, those ads will become more effective because the seller will know more about the customer's personal life.

      And is this exactly a bad thing. What is it about spam that irritates us the most? It's the fact that, as the bbc once said, spem proves once and for all that Big Brother is either blind or stupid.

      If the publicity I got in my mail box was _remotly_ linked to what I am likely to need or want, then I'd probably spend much less time building up an armada of filters to ward it off, and I don't think I'm alone here.

      --
      Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
  44. ecademy.com by Gunzour · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have recently been trying out another social networking site -- ecademy.com. It started in the UK apparently, and is just now starting to get some USA folks on it.

    I've been on Orkut, Friendster, LinkedIn, and now Ecademy. One thing is for sure, there is no such thing as "if you've seen one you've seen them all". Every one of these sites has unique features and a unique atmosphere to it. LinkedIn is very polished and professional and formal. Ecademy is in many way the opposite -- people there will say hi just because they noticed you online, even though you have never met them. The openness of ecademy certainly makes it a lot friendlier.

    All of these sites are tools that can be used or abused just like anything else.

  45. Privacy, anonymity, and the rise of the net by GPLDAN · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here is a quote from the MSN article: "By bringing a real-world relationship model online -- one where individuals are identified and held accountable -- social networking has the potential to make the Internet a healthier, more civil place. "

    And there you have it, folks. That is what it is really all about. It's a false mechanism to strip the Internet of the ability to act and speak anonymously. What MSN and other VC dollars are pushing for, is a world where every TCP socket uses SSL, everything is digitially signed, where you can't even get ON the net until you are tied to a PKI infrastructure.

    Social clubs like these create the natural response to the stories of 45 year old fat guys posing as teenage girls. It smashes a key attribute of the Internet that made it alluring for many. I'm not passing judgement on this, as good or bad, just pointing out that creating exclusionary groups and networking the "good" people is a predictable response. This is what gives University campuses the feeling of safety, esp. at Ivy League schools. The sense that everyone was "chosen" to be there.

    What will happen to groups like Orkut that are founded from places like Stanford are they will come to reflect the population of Stanford. Alumnis will get pref treatment. Then what happens is a fragmentation of social networks, pretty soon you have social networks based on race, such as the Hispanic or Latino social network, and you get the Republican golf league social network, and pretty soon the system breaks down under the weight of 8 million social networks that are split up along cultural and economic lines, and there is no anonymity, and it just mirrors society, and while that may make it "accepted", it removes all the sense of wonder and finding new things that the net was about.

    I join a web board for SimRacing (www.racesimcentral.com) because that is an activity that I enjoy. Because of people I've met there, I could attend the Goodwood festival in the UK even though I'm an American. And I may only know the people from their Nom De Plume, I may never know their real names. And it doesn't matter. I think social networks really exist to destroy things like that.

  46. Yup by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2, Funny
    So by your argument. Blogs should be crashing about now.

    I would expect 80% of bloggers to realize no one is reading their mindless tripe by the end of this year. I mean, how many times can you read -

    Really hard to get out of bed today, Lord of the Rings is so cool, This blog is important...

    ????????

    1. Re:Yup by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      See, if you'd ever been a teacher, you'd know better then that. You tell the little fuckers all about the Spanish-American war, how Linkin Park sucks, how nobody wants to read another shitty blog and next year they walk right back in the door with new faces and the same stupid brains.

    2. Re:Yup by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1

      Which is why you post 50% blatent lies to make a semi-decent blog. Can't get out of bed, met this awesome chick today, school is terrible.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
  47. Slashdot needs a chatroom! by bill_doors · · Score: 1

    I think that is the time to meet us on a chatroom and talk in a direct and interactive way... don't you feel slashdot need a chatroom? (an irc channel?)

  48. What drivel! by spankfish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That was, bar none, the most content-free article I've read this year.

    --

    NO TOUCH MONKEY!
  49. Want an Orkut invite? by roj3 · · Score: 0, Troll

    email me and I'll invite you.. info@bushboy.com

  50. Validation Needed! by Vagary · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Until one of these sites acutally validates the data people enter about themselves, they will continue to be utterly useless.

    I agree completely. I'm going to be switching careers in a few months and it'd be pretty damn helpful if I could find some friends of friends already on the inside, but it's clear to me that these networks are either secret or just for dating. So why hasn't anyone created one with validation? If VCs are giving out that kind of cash, one of us really should...

    1. Re:Validation Needed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've been working on a site called Connection Pipeline, and have been thinking about the validation piece quite a bit. It seems that usual 'friend-of-a-friend' approach doesn't hold up all that well as a validation model as a system scales -- the same thing that is attractive about the Six Degrees of Separation model ("everyone is connected") can also be the worst thing about it ("EVERYONE is connected.") The fact that I have 210,000 "friends" on friendster doesn't really get me much. The question seems to be, how do you strike the proper balance between being restrictive and being open? Over-validate and you become an "old boys network" and you haven't really taken advantage of the openness of being online. Under-validate and you are overwhelmed as above. It seems this in an area which could use a great deal of research, rather than each network just trying to be the biggest.

    2. Re:Validation Needed! by 1iar_parad0x · · Score: 1

      How can the internet enhance social networks? The issue about most connections has little to do with distance and more to do with some sort of social stigma. "Skull and Bones" isn't going to be inviting me to join them any time soon.

      --
      What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean....
  51. Who's the TWIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's the TWIT who posts an MSN link? This isn't serious or something? Asshole Gates pays ass-licker McBride to harass us and this TWIT thinks it's fun?

    Stop patronizing these 13yos.

    And you - TWIT - yeah you - eat shit, you fucking twit. Go home to MOMMY and eat some shit.

  52. Social networking software: whither value? by fal13n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have yet to find a social networking service that isn't just a bunch of crappy collaboration tools glued together in a dating site format.

    Take Orkut communities. They're just low rent versions of web based message boards that have been around for quite a while now. There are communities for just about any subject already, but technology-wise they offer nothing that other online communication tools haven't been doing better for some time now. Ditto for most of the other features orkut has. Do we really need to reinvent email, message boards, IRC, and IM; badly?

    Yeah, you can read someone's profile. But that's really more useful on a special purpose dating site. For most other purposes it's just not need to know information. Does the fact that you can't easily call up Linus's preferences in movies matter at all in the context of discussions about the Linux kernel? I don't think so.

    I don't see the value added, quite the opposite in fact. Orkut interests me more as a playground for bots that game it's various ranking systems than anything that I would use to meet people and exchange information.

  53. These Can Be Real, Too by Vagary · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nothing forcing you to make friends online, you could just one one of these pieces of software to track the F2F friends of your F2F friends. And then rather than dropping by their estate with a calling card, you could use some kind of digital medium to network with them.

    Many of my F2F friends are in different parts of the world such that I haven't actually communicated with them F2F for months or years. As a result, I have no idea who their friends are anymore, and therefore without technology they are nothing more than a leaf in my network.

  54. You Never Know... by Vagary · · Score: 1

    You know it could if it were leveraged properly. Your posts to Developers stories (even when filtered through our tendancies to troll and vent) probably say a lot more about your abilities than most of the brain-dead interview questions that get discussed here. And your posts to socially relevant stories hopefully demonstrate some of your logical thinking abilities.

    If I were in a hiring position, I could imagine myself using Slashdot for recruiting: if I like your posts, I'm likely to check out your resume. In fact, I occasionally see taglines that are "employment wanted" ads -- I have no idea if the posters get any hits, but at least somebody's trying.

    Unfortunately, the people who run Slashdot don't seem to be particularly driven to change it into something more powerful. They seem content to do the minimum amount of editing work possible to draw their salaries. I guess if OSDN (or whoever the parent company is these days) had some more cashflow they'd be able to afford R&D.

    1. Re:You Never Know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is a social net that is a good place to exercise our brains while making alliances that can lead to bigger opportunities.

      I received some work for my postings in Hylafax.org.

      So it is worthwhile to participate.
      Although I must confess, the Slashdot game is challenging.

    2. Re:You Never Know... by Roblimo · · Score: 1

      Actually, we ran an article on (OSDN owned) IT Managers Journal a few weeks back about hiring open source developers that mentioned checking a candidate's posts on Slashdot and other community sites.

      (A link to that article was on Slashdot, come to think of it.)

      - Robin

    3. Re:You Never Know... by Vagary · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was thinking of that exact article, actually. :)

      Of course, only having the most recent posts listed for each user somewhat limits that technique (although I suppose Google indexes all of them?). I think that if you guys wanted to add job-hunting features to /. there's a lot of other possibilities. Hell, the brand is probably strong enough that a straight-up Monster clone would be competitive?

  55. Re:Law Students LOVE this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about what you are paying in law school tuition. And the Career Services is telling YOU to network ? You should, of course, but shouldn't Career Services be making sure you have a job ?

  56. too many friends? by Jahf · · Score: 1

    What strikes me as weird is that in 1 day I went from having about 2,000 FoFs (friend of friends) on Orkut to have over 200,000 and I hadn't added any new connections myself so it came from someone I was connected to who had connected with someone else who was -too- connected.

    At that point, ranking may actually be useful. I would rather not be considered to be ranking my friendships, but I wouldn't mind having more than one category (for instance, acquaintance, friend, family). Otherwise it is just too many to be useful.

    --
    It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
  57. on the other hand by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Interesting

    you could forgo the "getting to know you" part and go out "toothin" as described in one of the front page articles of wired.com

    Brits Going at It Tooth and Nail By Daniel Terdiman
    Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,62687,00. html

    02:00 AM Mar. 22, 2004 PT

    The Brits sure are randy.

    First came dogging, an underground swinging scene where couples and sometimes third or fourth parties engage in public sex for an exhibitionist thrill.

    And now comes "toothing," where strangers on trains and buses and at bars and concerts hook up for clandestine sex by text messaging each other with their Bluetooth-enabled cell phones or PDAs.

    "I've always loved the idea of random sexual encounters, but have never felt brave enough to go to (sex) parties," says Steve, a toother from Hitchin, England. "The beauty of toothing is that there's no pressure. I was reluctant to send messages at first, but the standard greeting, which I found out from (an online toothing forum) is so innocuous there is no chance of offending anyone by sending a random message."

    According to the Beginner's Guide to Toothing, the online FAQ written by a man who calls himself Toothy Toothing, toothing is "a form of anonymous sex with strangers -- usually on some form of transport or enclosed area such as a conference or training seminar.... Users 'discover' other computers or phones in the vicinity and then send a speculative message. The usual greeting is: 'Toothing?'"

    Toothing takes advantage of the capabilities of Bluetooth, a wireless technology that allows two devices to communicate with each other over short distances. Many mobile phones and PDAs now have built-in Bluetooth functionality and allow users to automatically locate other such devices in their vicinity.

    "I live in a commuting town outside London," says Jon, or Toothy Toothing. "The train journey in the morning and evening is slow, tiresome and packed full of miserable people halfheartedly prodding at shiny new tech. You recognize faces within your tiny half-hour community, but you never talk to them."

    So last November, Jon remembers, he received a text message on the train from a device called "Angela." That night, he went home and figured out how to respond to incoming text messages and did so the next day.

    "Cut a long story short, the messages got more and more flirty -- and after a while I had a good idea of who she was, and I think she'd worked out who I was -- and a couple of days later she dared me to meet next to the toilets at the mainline station we were heading to. We met, we fucked and toothing was born."

    Steve's introduction to toothing was similar. He had just bought himself a new mobile phone when he was pinged by someone on his commuter line. "Bored? Talk to me," the message read.

    "I thought it was some kind of SMS spam," says Steve. "I was messing with the phone's settings, trying to work out what to do when I got the second message, 'I can see you struggling. Meet me in the toilet and I'll show you what to do.'"

    Intrigued, he says, he did as bid.

    "It was unlocked," he remembers. "A girl was ... in there with her shirt undone. 'This beats the crossword,' she said. And we took it from there."

    Steve and hundreds, if not thousands, of others have formed a loose-knit community via Jon's Toothing forum. Although the majority of them are men, there are also many women on the forum, such as "Mysterious Girl," "annie 2uesday," "CandyGrrrl" and others. Members discuss the etiquette of toothing, the best locations to hook up with a toothing partner and whom they hope will be the first celebrities to get involved.

    Sometimes they even have a little fun with language.

    Under a posting titled "3's company?" one member asked, "Anyone got any views on the statistical chance of a toothing threesome? Would it be Threething?"

    In any case, toothing seems to give its participants an exercise in figur

  58. Old friends by greatmazinger · · Score: 1
    Not everyone joins Friendster to make new friends. A lot of people I know just get a kick out of getting in touch with old friends that they have lost track of through the years.

    I agree with the Diet Industry bit completely. That's human nature for you.

  59. Re:Quite true by symbolic · · Score: 1


    One series of stupid comments from someone I spoke with quite often put him on my "talk to only when absolutely necessary" list for several months. I can see a lot of negative repurcussions from translating this into a rating of some kind. As it turns out, this eventually smoothed itself over, and things are getting back to the way they were. Because of the potential for these kinds of things to happen, sometimes, at least in my opinion, it's better to leave things in a state of nebulous existence rather than casting it in stone.

  60. Social Networking Directory by c4ytan · · Score: 1

    Found one here... http://www.privinfo.com.

    1. Re:Social Networking Directory by daytona8 · · Score: 1

      Try ROLOSTAR.COM, i think this is the best one so far.

  61. My Karma Means People Like Me! by JBMcB · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...snd my XP in in Ultima Online make me one of the wisest people around. ...snd my ngWorldStats in Unreal Tournament makes me one of the worst serial killers in the world.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
  62. A social network for game players by justinrossetti · · Score: 1

    Here is a social network geared to game developers and video game players:

    www.gamersglue.com

    enjoy :P

  63. Business oriented . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Ever since I became a freelance contractor / consultant it has amazed me the extent to which the business world relies on informal social networks. Decisions involving huge amounts of money often turn on whether or not somebody's cousin has heard of so-and-so, or if the place where George's ex-wife works used this service, etc.

    I used to think, man, when they finally get over this crufty networking and everybody just uses google or ebay or rent-a-coder for everything, then a massive amount of friction will be taken out of the economy and there will be a boom.

    Instead, I think businesspeople are to some extent just automating the word-of-mouth method. The particular site I am thinking of is rolostar.com. The question is, is just doing the old, biased, rather random word-of-mouth methods in a faster and more organized way better than trying to just run a massive ebay for every service ?

    I guess for things that are commodities, and I don't exclude services here -- writing a Will is a commodity legal service -- finding the lowest priced stranger on the internet is the best way. But for stuff were the very nature of it means it is custom done with a lot of interaction every time, I think social networking may prevail -- whether it is online or off.

  64. This will fail because of poor business models by Infonaut · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It's bizarre to me that so many people are attacking online social networking because of its ineffectiveness, or because it's a secret ploy to make all our identities known, or whatever.

    We're still trapped in the same vortex of stupidity that caught us all in the Dot-Bomb Era. Just like the foolish VCs who are funding these companies, we're not focusing on the bottom line. How do they make money? Do they have serious business plans? Are their projections at all realistic?

    Every article, every piece of information I've come across indicates that the rise of these social networking operations is evidence of yet another case of the VC sheep following the flock. Maybe I should use the term lemmings instead.

    Follow the money on these operations and you'll see it's all headed relentlessly down the drain.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
    1. Re:This will fail because of poor business models by maximilln · · Score: 4, Interesting

      -----
      the same vortex of stupidity that caught us all in the Dot-Bomb Era.
      -----
      Your viewpoint is a little too limited. Think about it as a pyramid scheme. There are a small number of people in very elevated positions that made schloads of money off of the Dot-Bomb Era. To them it wasn't a vortex of stupidity. To them it was nothing short of sheer brilliance supported by the herd mentality in society. Those top-level investors led the public into huge investments, funneled the cash to themselves, disappeared via the back route, and left the rest of the economy holding the bag full of dogpoop.

      The social networking and VC sites are operating on the same premise. Hype up the service, milk it for all it's worth, and then duck out the back door once the critical mass of incoming money has been reached. When the small controlling minority at the top leaves (rich) the rest of us will lose our investments (poor).

      It's really no different than what the banks did back in the 20s. They encouraged the government first to funnel taxpayer money into the system. This inflated the system. Because the system was inflated the private investors began contributing heavily. Once the critical mass was reached in 1929 the top investors walked off with the profits and couldn't be found. The banks closed their doors and said the gov't had the money. The gov't said the money was with the investment brokers. The investment brokers said they had loaned the money out to small businesses.

      Twelve thousand cups, three peas, and the real magician is hiding in some big mansion out in Nevada.

      Pyramid schemes, pyramid schemes. All I see in America are pyramid schemes.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    2. Re:This will fail because of poor business models by daytona8 · · Score: 1

      There is one site ROLOSTAR that is not VC backed and is very strong on encryption, authentication and privacy. If you wish to stay anonymous you can stay compeletely anonymous. Your contacts or your ID is never revealed to anyone.

  65. i wonder by presmike · · Score: 1

    if slashdot and irc wouldn't actually serve techies better than most "social" sites.

    --
    presmike
  66. social dynamics in Open Source Projects by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    A real interesting article in this regard can be found at http://www.verbumvanum.org/shirky where some additional insight is given about social dynamics in Open Source Projects.

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
  67. The Persuasion Age, what comes after Info Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Coming Persuasion Age. Geeks are doomed, just as Ferengi's didn't like geeks. Maybe it should be called the Ferengi Age.

    1. Re:The Persuasion Age, what comes after Info Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Here is the full text in case readers slashdot the original:

      The US started out in the "agriculture age". This nation was founded by wealthy
      farmers for the most part. We then graduated to the "industrial age" where
      manufacturing reigned supreme, and peaked in the 1950's. However, eventually
      lower overseas labor rates slowed and then reversed our manufacturing might.
      Then came the "information age" where "knowledge workers" reigned supreme.
      However, cheap overseas educated labor is now cutting into information careers
      also. India cranks out software, financial, and even legal experts the same way
      that factories in China crank out battery-operated toys. Mass-production
      education, and thus mass production "knowledge workers" have arrived at our
      doorstep and want a piece of our pie. Brains are becoming a cheap commodity.

      So what is the next "age" that we as a nation have to shift toward to stay ahead
      of the 3rd world economies? Many analysts trying to figure out a solution to
      this offshoring mess have repeatedly asked, "What comes after information?"

      I am going to make an educated guess based on patterns and trends that I
      observe, and call it "The Persuasion Age". The persuasion age will revolve
      around people, not machines, not physics, and not bits and bytes. Sales,
      marketing, customer service, politics, diplomacy, and entertainment will be the
      primary growth industries, or at least the industries least threatened, in the
      persuasion age.

      Expect "People Skills" schools to pop up all over the same way that IT
      (computer) schools popped up in the decade of the 1990's. Books with titles
      such as "Social Skills for Geeks" and "Learn Persuasion in 21 Days" will appear on
      bookstore shelves. Acting courses will take on the same importance that science
      and math have now. Reading, writing, and arithmetic will not be enough. "Human
      math" will surpass numerical math in importance.

      Nerds and geeks, who enjoyed some notoriety in the information age, will again
      be seen as the bane of humanity. Finding out your child is a nerd will be like
      having a child born without arms or legs. Being "socially crippled" will be
      worse than being physically crippled, because a wheelchair does not keep one
      from wheeling and dealing (no pun intended).

      The US will become like the Ferengi, a species in the Star Trek TV series who
      turned business into a religion. They are the wheelers and dealers of the
      galaxy. Their "Bible" is a set of roughly 300 rules. Here is a sample:

      #6: Never allow family to stand in the way of [business] opportunity
      #27: There's nothing more dangerous than an honest businessman.
      #33: It never hurts to suck up to the boss.
      #48: The bigger the smile, the sharper the knife.
      #60: Keep your lies consistent.
      #121: Everything is for sale, even friendship.
      #141: Only fools pay retail.
      #177: Know your enemies... but do business with them anyways.
      #189: Let others keep their reputation. You keep their money.
      #229: Latinum [money] lasts longer than lust.
      #284: Deep down, everyone's a Ferengi.
      (Curtesy LCS Creations and Leroy C. Smith)

      I personally don't think we could be proud of such a nation, but I suppose it is
      probably inevitable, barring some major global upset. Plus, there is the risk of
      not having the ability to produce anything tangible that we talked about on the
      main page [link].

      Another problem is that the US will not have a monopoly on such "services". Many
      cultures in other nations have been adept dealers and persuaders for many
      generations. And, persuasion is often a localized skill due to cultural and
      language differences. Thus, exporting persuasion will be more difficult than
      exporting computer chips. Thus, I fear that America's Golden Age is coming to an
      end, and we will become just another middle-of-the-road nation among many rather
      than an economic superpower. The Internet Bubble, whi

  68. Scientology! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like scientology....

  69. No longer! by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Now all you have to do is return the favor

    Congratulations! You've entered the crazy world of online social networking.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  70. whois still blowing smoke up yOUR .asp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ?this? is the ?social? net...wwworking?

    even with stuff that really matters frequeNTly shuffled aside buy corepirate nazi stock markup felon hypenosys, this is really it?

    lookout bullow.

    consult with/trust in yOUR creators.... prepare to cooperate with/take care of each other.

  71. Popunder? Not a Mozilla user, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know knot these "popunders" of which you speak.

  72. social networking.. then and now by mabu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This article is about 7 years too late.

    IMO, the likelihood of using the Internet to find substantive connections is now analagous to the chances you have of becoming good friends with someone who dials a wrong number to your telephone.

    Yea, it still happens all the time, but there's a completely different dynamic to cyberspace now. Many years ago, I got a book deal off the newsgroups, found investors for a venture (who funded a startup to the tune of 6 figures without even meeting in person or talking on the phone), dated a bunch of women and more.

    Nowadays, the online scene is a lot different. There are still pockets of people and meet-ups happening with networking going on, but the dynamics are not the same.

    For example, an online game such as Everquest, which is a social vehicle, now seems to be mostly filled with people who use the game as an escape from reality and have no desire to communicate or get to know others outside of the game. Nobody reveals as much of themselves any more, and those that do are likely to be more on the unstable side. Cyberspace is viewed more as a medium to be vent, pretend to be someone you're not, or a distraction, rather than a catalyst for networking.

    I remember the good ol' days when you could enter a chat room and actually CHAT. Now these places are arenas where people engage in contests to see who has the most meaningless one-liner.

  73. Microsoft's event horizon by whyde · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who thinks the Wallop logo looks like the Cingular guy getting ripped apart by the tidal forces of a black hole?

  74. Yeah right by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 1

    Joining a "social networking" site doesn't teach you how to deal with people. In fact, chances are very good it just gives you a lot more people to annoy.

  75. Interesting Posts. by Snoobs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just spent last night trying to add friends to my friendster account. The main reason?

    Its interesting to see who your friends know. This girl that I am into is on friendster and she just added me. She was talking about going to Texas to visit friends and for some reason all her friends in Texas are guys. I don't suspect anything or really care, cause we ain't even dating. This certainly does bring up some privacy concerns. . .

  76. Content by ojQj · · Score: 1
    I think you hit on the real problem with these.

    People talk to other people to learn something. The genetic "feel good" of socializing is just positive reinforcement. So if a social network is content-free or too content general, what's the point? Existing internet applications (static web-pages, chatting, etc...) are just as good if not better.

    Maybe the major advantage these things bring is in having data model rigorous enough to make them searchable which contains typical fields useful for social networking (friends, enemies, interests, skills, birthday, whatever). But if that's the case, all you'd need to do is define an RDF Schema for this sort of information and add some XML to existing datasets (ie html pages, slashdot profiles, etc.) You don't really need these proprietary solutions.

    Just a thought...

  77. Ugh MSN.. by Archwyrm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I am sorry, but immediately upon opening up that article the whole layout of the site bitch slapped me with one big Microsoft ad. After having read the entire article, I am still recovering..

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
  78. doesn't always work by amigabill · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I fileld out a thing on friendster once, but none of my friends were interested. You can't just meet people not in your existing network there, so to this day my friend network there ends with myself. You need to have friends that will sign up for these things, and they have to have other friends that will sign up, and so forth for this idea to work as it's implemented where I've seen it. Otherwise it's a total waste of time, as it was in my case. Were my buds a bunch of party poopers by not wanting to get into that thing, or were they smarter than I? Hmmm...

  79. Traffic for social networking sites by smitty45 · · Score: 1

    How the hell did my comment about traffic get modded as a troll ? I'm only posting facts:

    http://tinyurl.com/3gc7o

  80. It's about granularity and organization by ArmedLemming · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I was a little put off by the rating-my-friends thing too.

    After I went through and rated them (some actually *were* acquaintances -- future friends should I hang out with them more), I noticed that Orkut had already used that information to filter out my acquaintances from who was shown.

    It was a little annoying at first to see the granularity popping up with that default, but I could see it as being very helpful for people with > 30 friends or for people who are actually trying to make use of the Business Networking aspect.

    There are many people with over 100 friends in Orkut. Without that kind of granularity I think it'd be a lot more difficult to manage the information. (They also offer the ability to make friend 'groups'.) Not all 100 friends are likely to be real friends (although I suppose that's up to one's definition of 'friend').

    If you have business contacts, there's a good chance that they'll be more acquaintances than friends, and if you log into your homepage there for personal stuff, you'd want to be able to filter out all the business contacts (and other acquaintances).

    Surely this isn't for everyone, and I can see how it'd rankle some people to have to rate their friends, but that level of granularity can be very useful. Of course it opens up the possibility of Orkut/Google mining your information for future considerations, but this thing's still in beta and they seem receptive to input...

    --
    Two fish swim into a wall, one turns to the other and says, "Dam".
  81. MOD PARENT UP, +1 UNDERRATED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    relevant to parent discussion of masturbation

  82. ala Office Space.. by jedi_gras · · Score: 1

    "I'm a people person damnit!!!"

  83. Has anyone tried ROLOSTAR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have heard great things about it. Thought i ask?

    1. Re:Has anyone tried ROLOSTAR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes i have and it works, it is done right. I recommend the site to all of you.

  84. Wish ROLOSTAR has more features? by daytona8 · · Score: 1

    I like rolostar.com better than the rest of the junk that is out there. RoloStar is privacy enhanced, SSL encrypted, and more business focussed, no social networking crap. I just wish they had a bit more features. I hope they are working on it.

  85. Re:OH blah by daytona8 · · Score: 1

    So is ROLOSTAR. They are claiming more traffic that Travelocity and Craigslist as well.

  86. Re:OH blah by smitty45 · · Score: 1

    but do they have proof ? see my post about Alexa's traffic graphs.

  87. sixdegrees.com, back in the day by aclarke · · Score: 1
    www.sixdegrees.com was doing this back in 1997 or earlier. I worked on a HDML (think WAP 0.1) version of their site back in the day. The idea was if you had an HDML-compliant device like a Palm VII, you could go into a bar and meet somebody. If you got their name, you could sneak away and see if you knew anybody who knew them, then use that information to get into their pants. Well, I guess there were other uses for a mobile version too. Pretty geeky, nonetheless...

    Anyway, they burned through their funding and basically went defunct and we're gone for a couple years. Now apparently they're relaunching. It must suck to have the "next big thing" but to be 7 years too early with it.

  88. Identity Commons by Broadcatch · · Score: 1
    Social networking and social software have taken off in the new millennium, expanding outward from content-based communities like the WELL and Slashdot to systems focused on connecting people, such as Ryze, LinkedIn, Friendster and Tribe. While these new networks offer services that help one connect to others of like mind, they remain isolated islands with centralized control of profile data and no mechanism for their users to transfer accumulated profile information or reputation capital from one community to another. As such, the primary beneficiaries remain the site owners and not the people that create the value.

    In short, the goal of Identity Commons is to create a trusted data interchange network - an interoperable means of sharing private, identifiable data about people and organizations in such a way that all Identity Commons members can trust the safety and security of this data. Such a network can:

    • Enable new forms of online community, interaction, and dialog that empower digital citizenship and improve the quality of life
    • Pave the way for new identity and profile-based products, services and applications that:
      • Significantly simplify online transactions and improve the value of digital relationships for individuals
      • Reduce costs, improve customer relationships, and enable new products and services from all types of organizations (non-profit, commercial, governmental, informal).
    --

    The antidote for misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.
    -- Molly Ivins

  89. for me? how 'bout to me by drDugan · · Score: 1



    The pumping will be done for you.


    most people join these sites so the pumping will be done to you .

  90. My cell-phone does that too! by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    The quatifications is just one way to organize your "adress book". There are others. And you can ignore it. The default is "friend", stick to that and everything works just fine. I do that, I have less than a screenful of Orkut friends, no need quantifice them.

    On the other hand, I have a zillion names in my cell-phone. Here I find it very useful that there is two levels, I use the "vip" level for those I call often, and the default level for everyone else. Which mean I can find the vip numbers very fast.

  91. Re:This is so over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    John, have you not had your Geritol(tm) yet? Seriously, why so negative? What's the significance of the author's place of residence? I didn't peg you as a snob.

    Online dating deserves more credit than you give it. It's not the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it's a great idea and it worked for me.

  92. Re:Yeah, how accurate are the numbers ROLOSTAR? by daytona8 · · Score: 1

    I heard the same about ROLOSTAR. It seems ROLOSTAR has around 360,000 subscribers. That is a huge number, isnt it?