Slashdot Mirror


Kids Say Email is Dead

An anonymous reader writes "'E-mail is, like, soooo dead' is the headline at News.com, where a piece looks at youth attitudes towards communication mediums. A group of teenage internet business entrepreneurs confessed that they really only use email to 'talk to adults'. Primarily, these folks are using social networks to communicate. 'More and more, social networks are playing a bigger role on the cell phone. In the last six to nine months, teens in the United States have taken to text messaging in numbers that rival usage in Europe and Asia. According to market research firm JupiterResearch, 80 percent of teens with cell phones regularly use text messaging. Catherine Cook, the 17-year-old founder and president of MyYearbook.com, was the lone teen entrepreneur who said she still uses e-mail regularly to keep up with camp friends or business relationships. Still, that usage pales in comparison to her habit of text messaging. She said she sends a thousand text messages a month.'"

85 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by yagu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This only says what youth does, not what they'll use as adults. I'm guessing for more durable and more effective communications the youth of today will opt for something more substantial than "c u 2nit".

    Youth today do what they do because it's there, not because it's going to replace traditional communications.

    When "we" were young, we passed notes on pieces of paper. The girls passed messages by lip-reading (never understood how they were so good at that). I never saw any articles predicting "note passing", and lip-reading becoming the protocol de jour. If we'd had text messaging, we'd have done it too.

    Consider from the article:

    "I only use e-mail for my business and to get sponsors," Martina Butler
    That seems to contradict the main thesis of the article. Basically, for important things like business and/or sponsors Martina uses e-mail? The e-mail is not dead, or as the article claims like, soooo dead.

    Text messaging, social web sites serve a purpose, not replace one. (This is akin the predictions recently "laptops to replace desktops".)

    Critical thought, thorough discussion, deep understanding -- none are much served by the text messaging medium. (e-mail doesn't do much for them either.)

    They "only use e-mail to 'talk to adults'". They'll use e-mail and more traditional forms of communication when they become adults. It doesn't mean they'll stop using the text messaging and other forms, it just means they'll need the more traditional forms.

    i cld b wrng. i hope im not.

    1. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Sometimes I say I e-mailed you, but I mean I Myspace'd or Facebook'ed you," she said.
      For all intents and purposes, isn't a PM on a social networking site the exact same thing as an e-mail? Just a bit less portable.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by Divebus · · Score: 4, Funny

      using000c

      ?

      Data error on transmission: "I stopped using it"

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    3. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by Dissman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      and less secure... I connect to e-mail through SSL, not to mention that i can easily use enigmail to encrypt it.

    4. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by Doogie5526 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is the thing the drives me nuts about all the social network messaging and whatnot. I've had friends say "I'll myspace you (something)." and I'd wonder why they couldn't just email it. Hell, myspace (and others) just send you an email to tell you that you have a private message. It makes things harder to search through (was that a myspace message, facebook message, forum pm, or email?). I can understand using it to keep your email addy private, but it shouldn't replace email, especially when there's no additional benefits.

    5. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by misleb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Less portable" is a significant difference.... at least when you grow up and leave your little adolescent social circle for the real world. The reason telephone, email, and snail-mail are still in such wide use today is that they are ubiquitous. You can reach just about anyone with them. A PM on a social networking site is limited to that social networking site. It cannot become a primary means of communication in the long term. Instant Messaging has a similar limitation. Several times I've tried to establish IM as a primary means of communication with people and it often comes down to "Oh, I don't have an _____ account." So you either get an account with every major service or you fall back to more universal (though perhaps slower) means of communication such as email.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    6. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by bcat24 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe it's more secure. After all, just because you send an email over a secure connection, that doesn't mean the recipient will download it over a secure connection. A social networking site that redirects all users to an HTTPS URI would solve that problem.

      (Of course, encrypting the message body itself also works, but that's more of a pain than most people are willing to deal with.)

    7. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by OakDragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      using000c

      ?

      Data error on transmission: "I stopped using it"

      Thanks for clearing that up. I was trying to translate some l337 term into human-readable language.

      Now if you kids will excuse grandpa, this ol' fart has got to check his email...

    8. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by Salgat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I keep my social networking very private, as it tends to reveal a lot of information. Imagine your boss typing up a memo to send to you on Myspace, only to find some obscene picture(not that I have obscene pictures on my facebook, hehe).

    9. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by beyondkaoru · · Score: 4, Informative

      connecting through ssl doesn't make email more secure; it can be messed with by your mailserver, the mailserver of whoever you're talking to, or anyone in between those. the usefulness of ssl or ssh is that it is more difficult for me to read/modify your mail/password (i have to hack a server as opposed to optionally controlling a router).

      gpg really is what makes it secure. still, ssl is a plus. strangely gmail defaults to having it off... weird. and they don't do imap, which makes me sad.

      but anyway, the whole social network thing largely exists so that the owners of those servers get to read your messages -- and let future employers, etc, read them too, for a fee. and they don't really do much that people couldn't set up on their own (like, have everyone make an rss feed of their life and aggregate it, is an example).

      --
      the privacy of one's mind is important.
      you do have something to hide.
    10. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On one level yes. Although it means you have to trust the carrier not to go snooping.

      Personally I just use MSN & Jabber for stuff now. My inboxes are spam ridden hellholes, and its just not worth it.

      I actually do think Email's days are numbered. But thats not because of social networking. Its because of fucking spammers. Getting 600+ emails a day *AFTER* its been purged by spamassassin aint fun (I turned it off once and got nearly 2000 emails a day in the inbox. Granted its a 10 year old email address.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    11. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by Schemat1c · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My inboxes are spam ridden hellholes, and its just not worth it. Use Gmail, about 1 or 2 spams a month slink by the filter but other than that 99.98% spam free.
      --

      "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
    12. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by superphreak · · Score: 3, Informative

      Seems you're a bit behind the times. I had heard about AOL/ICQ, but I don't use either much, so I looked it up: Since 2000, ICQ and AIM users are able to add each other to their contact list without the need of any external clients.[2] (wikipedia: ICQ)
      I know Y!/MSN can IM each other because I've done it.
      2 Accounts. Thank you. Next! :P

      --
      Evolution is a state-sponsored, state-protected religion.
    13. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by MT628496 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm guessing for more durable and more effective communications the youth of today will opt for something more substantial than "c u 2nit".

      What makes you so sure about that? Personally, I think that the chat-speak epidemic is only going to get worse.
    14. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by amber_of_luxor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I get 30 Spam emails each day into my gmail account

      I get about 150 legit emails per day in my gmail spam box. :( Every couple of days I click "select all" for the spambox, and move everything to my inbox, saying "not spam".

      Amber

      --
      Wind Beneath Thy Wings
    15. Re:muggles still use e-mail, mail, phones, etc. by It'sYerMam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Let me guess, you're a reseller for t0p qu4l1ty c14lis?

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
  2. More useful for "kids" by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When all these kids get in the real world and have more important things to do than pay constant/immediate attention to the cell phone's IM's it won't be so "cool" and useful. An intelligent communication can be handled a lot better through an E-mail (or phone call or in person) than IM'ing.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    1. Re:More useful for "kids" by amstrad · · Score: 4, Funny

      Holy crap! You haven't been around very many middle management types with their crackberries, have you?

    2. Re:More useful for "kids" by daeg · · Score: 5, Funny

      I already shudder at any group in my company hiring anyone under 25, and I'm under 25! I can't imagine relying on teenagers as a labor source (grocery stores, restaurants, etc). Even the interns we get from a very well-to-do private school are, in terms of professionalism, socially retarded. I've had to filter and lock down their e-mail and other communications from them to our clients because their messages are full of misspellings, wrong words, "u" instead of "you", and bad structure altogether. How do you misspell "their" with Outlook? I have to TRY to misspell it and even then it isn't easy.

    3. Re:More useful for "kids" by Nerdfest · · Score: 3, Funny

      Relax. I'm sure their enhanced 'esteem' will more than make up for their lack of spelling and grammar knowledge.

    4. Re:More useful for "kids" by Stiletto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They will just float from CEO job to CEO job.

      What, CEO of their mom's basement? A "social network" is next to useless for building professional contacts if it's just full of other dumbass teenagers texting OMG WTF BBQ at each other all day.

    5. Re:More useful for "kids" by Escogido · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The essential problem with the email/"communication 2.0" dualism is that they are perceived in different environments - email remains a "Ding an sich" while the real communication is being done "somewhere else". So young people ditch one in favor of the other, in spite of the fact that the private messages they send in every communication environment work practically the same as email does. But as long as the "interesting" part is being done on a friendly site with nice looking graphics and for the "dull" communication you have to run a boring mail client (or at least load up some "other" site), there will indeed be a gap in perception.

      Once the communication systems mature enough to integrate the full power of today's email features into the services they provide, the gap will close. And yes indeed Google's GMail chat integration is a logical step in this direction.

    6. Re:More useful for "kids" by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 5, Funny

      He said 'intelligent communications' and you responded about 'middle management types.'

      Please parse for errors.

  3. Not if today's kids are like I was. by Ckwop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know about you guys but when ten years ago when I was fourteen, e-mail was dead too. Initially, I used to use Web based IM clients to talk to my friends quickly followed by ICQ and and even later MSN.

    I only started using e-mail when my group of friends started working full time. I think the reason for this is that e-mail is mostly open at work because it's required for the business. Moreover, employers don't really care if you e-mail your friends from your account, provided you're not taking the piss. In contrast, browsing social networking sites from work can get you sacked.

    In short, there's nothing new here. I think the youngsters of today will follow the same path as I did ten years ago; they will adopt e-mail when their circle of friends grow-up and go to work.

    Simon

    1. Re:Not if today's kids are like I was. by nacturation · · Score: 4, Informative

      Moreover, employers don't really care if you e-mail your friends from your account, provided you're not taking the piss. In contrast, browsing social networking sites from work can get you sacked. Strange policy your employer has. I've never sent a personal email from my company account, nor have I ever made a personal phone call from a company phone. Unless I've given them a business card, my friends and family don't even know how to contact me at work. And why should they? I have a cell phone for personal calls and I use gmail for personal email. Do you really want your personal emails archived along with every other corporate email in perpetuity? So the next time the company is issued a court order to produce a log of emails, all your personal junk is in there too and made public record for anyone to see?
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    2. Re:Not if today's kids are like I was. by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Informative

      nor have I ever made a personal phone call from a company phone.

      You've never called your significant other that you're going to be late? You've never called up your insurance agent from work? Made an appointment with your doctor?

      Most employers don't mind a little bit - but when it takes hours out of your day, then it becomes an issue. Other than that, the occasional phone call to get an issue sorted out can result in an employee who's not obsessing over it, thus being a happier and more productive worker.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Not if today's kids are like I was. by misleb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Strange policy your employer has. I've never sent a personal email from my company account, nor have I ever made a personal phone call from a company phone. Unless I've given them a business card, my friends and family don't even know how to contact me at work. And why should they?


      I dunno... in case of emergency? Maybe if your cell phone is not getting a signal, is misplaced, or is uncharged?

      I have a cell phone for personal calls


      So what difference does it make whether you get a personal call on your cell phone or your desk phone? Either way you're taking/making a personal call on company time. Seems like a pretty arbitrary distinction to me.

      What if your cell phone is paid for by your company? Do you just not get any personal calls except for at home? Would you own two different cell phones?

      Do you really want your personal emails archived along with every other corporate email in perpetuity?


      Well, I'm not going to be passing love notes on the corporate email. Besides those types of messages, why not? What do I care?

      So the next time the company is issued a court order to produce a log of emails, all your personal junk is in there too and made public record for anyone to see?


      Dude, if there's a court order to see my corporate email, I'm going to have bigger things to worry about than having some boring personal messages go public. :-P

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    4. Re:Not if today's kids are like I was. by syousef · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My employer blocks webmail. Justification is they're scared of virii getting through (even though they have web filtering). When this came in I did fight it but not very hard because I knew I'd get nowhere. My main agrument was do you really want people asking for help on web forums and usenet using real mail addresses. (We still can use Google groups so usenet is not such a problem anyway). It's damned inconvenient though.

      Every employer is different and it's not your top priority when deciding whether to take a job or when you're deciding if you want to stay at one when a new policy comes in.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  4. email IS text messaging by jdogalt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So people are using _different clients_ to send their ascii messages.

    whatever...

  5. Fine, so e-mail is dead by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now get the hell off my lawn.

  6. Well duh by Tarlus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Teenage Social Agenda != Professional Business Applications

    --
    /* No Comment */
    1. Re:Well duh by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I agree with you, I can't help but think that it might've been precisely the thing IBM said in the 70s when it saw kids playing with garage built computers.

      Maybe we're old farts who are missing something fundamental, and in 30 years, people will laugh how short sighted we all were...

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:Well duh by Troed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, that's exactly it. Frankly I'm a bit surprised as to the hostility towards "youth" here at Slashdot. They won't change at all when they "grow up" - any more than we who grew up with Fidonet and Usenet stopped all forms of digital communication and went back to pen and paper ...

      Instant messaging and accounts on social networking sites is becoming part of the workplace. Now.

  7. So what they are saying... by mojowantshappy · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...is soon I'll be using myspace to update my boss on my TPS reports?

    --

    This page was generated by a Barrel of Circus Midgets, and that is the way I like it!!!

    1. Re:So what they are saying... by eclectro · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or your boss will post a "your fired" on your myspace profile for those incorrect TPS reports...

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    2. Re:So what they are saying... by the_tsi · · Score: 5, Funny

      plz use cvr sheet 4 tps, also need u @ ofc sat

  8. Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by SerpentMage · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes youth use text messaging... But there is another reason... A more realistic reason... COST...

    Talking on the phone is expensive. Sending messages is cheap. Do you REALLY think that kids prefer sending messages to talking? "Why when I was young" kids were talking hours and hours on the phone. WHY? Because local calls were FREE... If kids had the option to talking or sending messages via a keyboard, they would have talked, not text messaged...

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    1. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by grazzy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wrong, here in sweden (a country with VERY high ratio of text messages sent to spoken minutes on the phone) a SMS is around 14 cents, but talking on the phone for a minute is about the same.

      What is the cheapest? Certainly not sending 120 characters versus the communication time you get for the correpsonding call time.

    2. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, some people prefer sending messages to talking. Women in their 20s do it a lot... I see them at parties gossiping about other people at the party, it's really annoying.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    3. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And email is free, and less hassle too (decent sized screen, full keyboard) - so why do kids prefer text messaging to email? Because they're not always in front of an Internet-connected PC. Children have much less freedom of movement than adults do.
    4. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by PachmanP · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well actually they're talking about you.

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    5. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by ozzee · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But there is another reason... A more realistic reason... COST...

      I have a counter-example. I had a "family" plan with Cingular - oodles of roll-over talk time, free after 7PM etc etc but no allowance for text messages. Before I stopped allowing text messages, my daughter racked up $335 in text messaging in the second month of the plan which was after I told her the text messaging was coming out of her pocket - that's 3,350 text messages that month - over 100 per day - admittedly she paid for incoming as well as outgoing messages. This is the case where talk was free and SMS was expensive.

      Go figure...

      After that month she toned down on the messages but I still removed that service from the plan altogether after the 5th month or so as it was proving too expensive and I didn't want to spend money on a service that could be easily dealt with using plan old voice !

    6. Re:Real Reason Kids Use Text Messaging... by ParadoxicalPostulate · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I don't agree with that. As someone else said, text messaging has more to do with convenience. You can send an receive texts during class, dinner, meeting (rude), or wherever. More generally, I would say that texting is the preferred alternative when you don't want to interrupt what you are doing to communicate with a person. Suppose you just want to say one thing to them -- something funny, something about what you're currently doing. Instead of calling them and taking your attention (and that of everybody who's with you) away from what you're in the process of doing, and also interrupting them, you just text. It's that simple. Besides, quite often you text because you don't actually want to have a long conversation with them. You just want to say one thing (and maybe talk about it LATER), not get dragged into a full-length discussion. So you text. Generally, if I find myself in a text conversation that lasts more than 2-3 send/receives, I stop texting and just dial.

  9. email is as dead as by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    radio (not dead)
    television (not dead)
    the newspaper (not dead)
    the cinema house (very not dead)

    etc.

    no form of mass communication ever dies, it just moves out of the limelight. and then it's called "dead" by people wishing to make a melodrama out of the evolution of media

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:email is as dead as by 808140 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Physical mail is most certainly not "almost dead". Just because you don't use it doesn't mean others don't; I frequently correspond with people I know, especially abroad, via snail mail. Have you ever gotten a hand-written letter from a friend? It's great.

      Plus, snail mail will continue to be used for packages and anything else that requires actual shipping of something concrete, not just information. Which means that the infrastructure to mail letters will continue to exist until we have replicators. It is therefore highly probable that people will continue to write letters, even if their number is much reduced from the practice's heyday in the late 19th/early 20th century. It therefore follows that it will never be "dead", at least not by any strict definition of the term.

      I think the OP hit the nail right on the head -- these things do not die, they simply leave the limelight. E-mail was at one time hot technology -- it has since become commonplace, and its ubiquity makes it boring to the teenager, who thrives on the new and exciting. The same will likely happen with social networks, which are in actuality just a user-friendly implementation of the web-of-trust or reputation metric that has existed in cryptographic circles for some time now. The technology will eventually become relatively mainstream; it will find its niche and then it too will fade from the limelight.

      Relatively few promising or important technologies have become so uncommon that they could reasonably be considered "dead". Among these I count gopher, but its most salient features were absorbed by the world wide web, and so it did not really die so much as evolve. Dial-up BBSs, likewise, are dead in the sense that the ones that exist exist only for the sake of nostalgia -- but again, the internet has largely replaced their functionality, and the problems they were created to solve are better solved by internet anyway. Proprietary pre-internets, like CompuServ, GEnie, and Prodigy are also dead, for the same reason, although they were once very common.

      I think Myspace, Facebook, and its predecessors -- many now defunct -- are the social networking equivalent of CompuServ and its ilk. They are centralized, proprietary and incompatible implementations of what essentially amounts to the same basic concept -- a web of trust. While people here on Slashdot often lambaste todays young people for not understanding the importance of privacy, I think the vast majority of them are attracted to services like Facebook precisely because they do value their privacy. People want to share their pictures, want to share their experiences -- but they don't want to do it with everyone on the internet, as we used to with our HTML 3.2 homepages, back when the internet was a safer place.

      The web of trust concept provides a perfect system to deal with this problem, as cryptography geeks have been saying for years. Current social networks divide people into friends and non-friends, and they use these distinctions to control what parts of their little chunk of the internet people have access to. It's no surprise to me at all that they prefer this managed approach to the classic "make a web page for everyone to read" approach.

      Going forward, I fully expect an open, social networking "protocol" to emerge that allows people to incorporate such distinctions into their own websites without being part of a Facebook or Myspace site. It may be that the open standard takes precedence quickly, as e-mail did, or slowly, as has been the case with IM, but as soon as a technology becomes truly mainstream, interoperability becomes too important and corporate distrust too great to allow any one company to monopolize the field.

  10. As a college instructor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I see this all the time. My take on it: younger people are in a hurry for response. They want immediate replies. But adults (as will these teens eventually) live in a different world, where the speed of response is part of the value but the message itself is important, too. I have to train my students to understand that leaving an email message for me will always result in a response, even if it is a little later, while IM may not.

    From another perspective, MySpace and Facebook have messaging features which are simply email in a different form (posting to the web site). I am still at a loss to understand why posting a message on a web site (with the exception of group communication) is more beneficial than sending an email.

  11. "Teenage Internet Business Entreprenuers" by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, that's sure to cut you a better than fair sampling of the "youth culture."

    And in a related story, a survey of classically-trained teenaged cellists has determined that young people are listening to less hip-hop and have begun to prefer champagne to beer.

    Now, how do I text-message "GET OFF OF MY LAWN" ? Anybody...?

  12. Summary: Email is dead... by cromar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... Long live email.

    P.S. I wish face-to-face speech would die. I hate my coworkers.

  13. Re:Article is HORSE TURDS. About as bad as DIGG no by aichpvee · · Score: 5, Funny

    So he'll have a terrible article to repost tomorrow.

    --
    The Farewell Tour II
  14. In Korea... by nurhussein · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...only old people use email. Looks like the US has caught up with Korea. I thought the "in Korea..." thing made a good internet meme. It didn't really catch on that well though.

  15. Re:Kids say the darnest things... by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Think in full sentences?

    Well, there's your problem, right there.

    This is a cognitive issue. Kids can't/won't string together solid thoughts, aren't entertained by people that do, and aren't rewarded for trying to do so themselves. Of course they can't imagine doing boring, old-people stuff like learning to use tools that are built around a more verbose (and demanding, and useful) form of communication. GOML!

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  16. As an 18 year old, I notice the reason people SMS by ZakuSage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Primarily, it's because they want to talk when they're at work, in school, or on the go, but the vast majority of them can't afford a Blackberry.

  17. Relevance by Token_Internet_Girl · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't give you an educated response because I'm texting my BFF Jill.

    --
    Sure baby, I'll give you my phone number...in Hex
  18. Re:I think many of them by bdraschk · · Score: 3, Informative

    No way. MMS is very similar to email, but SMS is SS7-based, which is as weird a protocol as only the telco types could come up with.

  19. "E-mail is, like, soooo dead" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I was writing an email on the PC, and it was, like, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep-- and then, like, half of my email was gone. And I was, like- It devoured my email. It was a really good email. And then I had to do it again and I had to do it fast so it wasn't as good. It's kind of a bummer."

  20. "Email is sooo dead", the kids say... by ElGanzoLoco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... until they have to send their first resumé and cover letter :)

    On a more serious note, I have just been sucked into the wonderful/scary world of Facebook, and I must say, wow. I knew people liked to reinvent the wheel all the time, but what's with this new thing of "writing" on each other's "wall" instead of just sending emails? What was wrong with emails in the first place? I mean, I can see the attraction of writing fun things on these "walls", but many go much beyond that and use it to organize meetings, leave their phone numbers, addresses, and whereabouts for the next 3 weeks, for the recipient, but also everyone else to see.

    So either this generation does not realize what it's doing (basically posting their contact details while broadcasting their private lives on teh internets), or it doesn't care at all about that thing called privacy.

    I haven't even reached 30, and I already feel like I'm getting old :)

    --
    Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
    1. Re:"Email is sooo dead", the kids say... by mr_matticus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      but what's with this new thing of "writing" on each other's "wall" instead of just sending emails? More flexible messaging tools. As a fellow "old person" I've never understood why email clients don't provide a simple way of sorting address books and threading conversations with individuals. You're also presented with a message space in a convenient location--looking up someone's profile for their mailing address or current email allows you to send a quick message right there. The profile is self-managed, so you don't have to worry about it being out of date. If the person wants current information available, it's there, and s/he doesn't have to notify anyone.

      does not realize what it's doing (basically posting their contact details while broadcasting their private lives on teh internets) As opposed to before when they were using public telephone networks, public electronic infrastructure, or business cards with personally identifying information? "Broadcasting" is an asinine overstatement, considering you have the ability to control who has access to your profile and how much access they have. If I want everyone I consider a "friend" to have access to my telephone number and physical address, I can do it. No one else in the world can see that information. I can show strangers in my "networks" a profile with interests and favorites, but no personal contact information/photos/ability to see my "wall." It's surprisingly robust and flexible. Potential employers doing spying won't be able to see those vacation photos from five years ago, but my friends who were there can and they can enjoy the visual record of those nights we have no memory of.

      Society is changing, and it's not so much about privacy as about changing expectations of what should be kept private and what doesn't matter. It's a more open society all around, and privacy simply for the sake of privacy never made sense as a value anyway. It's not even the "nothing to hide" argument--it's "why should I be encouraged to hide anything?" A more open and tolerant society is better for everyone. If you choose to be a privacy nut, have at it, but what would you actually want a society where anything on Facebook of all places should be kept private?
    2. Re:"Email is sooo dead", the kids say... by TeknoHog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I knew people liked to reinvent the wheel all the time, but what's with this new thing of "writing" on each other's "wall" instead of just sending emails?

      The article ends with the problem of lots of separate communities: "It's a problem for teens--you're like losing out on some of your friends if you choose just one. To have all your buddy lists in one place, that's where this is going." So they are working on finally getting to a point where we've been with email for decades.

      Also, it's quite sad that sometimes you hear kids talking like "What's your Hotmail address?", as if electronic communication requires a closed web-based system. I imagine it would be a scalability and administration nightmare to have all of email replaced by web communities, and I'm glad we have a relatively light and crossplatform standard, despite the many shortcomings of email.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:"Email is sooo dead", the kids say... by mr_matticus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see you failed basic reading comprehension. That's not privacy for the sake of privacy. That's "privacy" for self-protection and is patently NOT what I'm talking about. Moreover, none of those problems are the result of increased information--they've always existed. Identity theft isn't really about privacy, it's about proper control of records--it's not "private" information if it's held by a third party in the first place. Profiling, further, does not rely on private information, nor does it amount to anything--you can be accused of a crime at any time, by anyone. But still, not the point.

      More open exchange of information (i.e. a more open society) removes the expectation of "privacy" and produces a more tolerant society. I'm not talking about financial records or police records. Nothing on Facebook facilitates "identity theft" nor does it provide a "description" of anything to the general public or to law enforcement that they couldn't get before--if you're being investigate for a crime, your "favorite book" can be found just as easily through your purchase history and library records. You also can't be stalked by a stranger on Facebook if you don't let them see your information. Your entire post is meaningless FUD.

      Why should a person be expected to keep anything on Facebook or other social networking sites private? The only possible reason to do so is if society finds it distasteful, which is a problem solved by increased sharing of information. Openness begets tolerance.

      The idea that third-party information is "private" in any way is a myth and has always been a myth. There's no reason a person should have to conceal anything about their personal or social lives--the expectation is absurd.

  21. IM is annoying by Cthefuture · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Over time I think these kids will learn that in the real world where you're trying to get work done, IM is annoying as hell. It's like having someone call you on the phone every few seconds. No thanks.

    E-mail, web forums, and other "delayed" forms of communication are so much better for almost everything.

    IM is really only a substitute for the phone. And then only when it makes sense, like to save money on long distance or when you need to be quiet.

    --
    The ratio of people to cake is too big
    1. Re:IM is annoying by fermion · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I find the telephone to be annoying as people expect immediate access, and immediate attention. I mean, I may be hanging with my friend, having a nice cuddle, and the phone rings and people get bent out of shape because you won't answer. I ask, what is more evil than being expected to interrupt a cuddle for some bozo who wants to sell you insurance, or even a friend that just wants to check on some activity for the next week. Both of those things can wait.

      I found email to be a liberating innovation as it allowed full asynchronous communication without anyone feelings getting hurt. You send me an email, and when I get a chance, I send you an email. It is a cheap efficient method of communication. Phones and voicemail is nearly as effecient, but people do tend to get their feeling hurt when one never answers a phone.

      And all this innovation is ruined by IM. One is forced back into the world of synchronous communication, and really no more effecient than a telephone. I mean we might as well be back to the days of the telegraph as inefficient as IM is. Back in the mid 19th century we effectively had this IM technology, and a good operator could do perhaps 30 words a minute. On wonders why replaced such a perfect system with telephones. Insanity.

      In my experience IM has one advantage over email or voice. It can be done without disturbing other people on relatively compact kit. A corollary of this, which I think may be more important to it's popularity, is it can be done covertly. So instead of learning in school, or earning you pay at work, or generally interacting with those around you, one can text. I certainly do not blame IM, as poeple who want to waste time will always find a way to do it, and people who are always looking for that better person will always do that as well, However, it is a new vector, and people use it mostly because is new. Much like the phone, most people will outgrow the novelty, and stop spending every waking minute using it. Sometimes this growth occurs at 20, sometimes 30, and sometime never.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  22. Archiving discussions? by harmonica · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can archive my e-mail discussions, save them to an mbox file and load them into most other mail applications. That's not possible with all that web-based stuff. With some IM programs exporting works, too, but it's hard or impossible to import those discussions elsewhere. Text messages as part of a cellphone - can you archive those? I never tried.

    Anyway, I still have my first mail conversations from the mid 90s. Can't say the same thing for other forms of digital conversation.

  23. Give them time by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Once the grow up they will realize that not everything needs to be instantaneous short bursts of emoticons, and you really do want to send people actual coherent thoughts ( ie, "letters" ) at times.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  24. Stop the press by nagora · · Score: 5, Funny

    Teenagers shallow and faddish. Details at 11.

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  25. Sigh by gregholt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why do I read the "news" here? Seems they try to find all the mildly sensationalist stuff they can, and now the news. The logical fallacy is obvious but, just in case, the conclusion made is that if kids do X more than Y, then X will win and Y will die out. While that conclusion *can* be true, it isn't true on its own grounds. They could grow out of it. With kids, fads are embraced and discarded at a very high rate.

    Still, I guess it's fun for moment to imagine a Corporate MySpace system. Even more fun to imagine it as the primary communications method with the email server turned off. I bet somebody would build a client so they could easily send and retrieve their MySpace postings.

    Oh, and far as the mail is dying "given the annoyance of spam", gimme a break. Spam will migrate to any sufficiently used open communications medium. Hell, have you seen all the anti-spam tools bloggers have to use these days?

  26. Money by Trogre · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm pretty sure this all comes back to the almighty buck.

    Remember that it effectively costs nothing to send an email, but I've yet to see an SMS messaging service with a pricing model I like. That isn't to say I don't use SMS, I just don't like it :)

    With telcos buying up ISPs in droves, it's in their interests to keep kids off email and TXTing each other for as long as possible. As a side-effect, don't expect much progress from your ISP on the spam-battling front.

    I think I'll stick with email for now.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  27. I can understand it by poliopteragriseoapte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can understand it. I grew up doing email, now email is my main communication medium, I am in my 40s, and you know what? I am shifting more and more towards IM myself. Why? Consider the following:

    • No spam.
    • Email fills your inbox. If you don't have time to answer something, it stays there, begging for your time forever - or at least, for the couple of weeks it takes me to realize that no, I will never in fact get back to that, and I'll file it away from my attention. You have all these "open" communication threads, things to which you own an answer but you don't care enough. IM is not like that. If you are away, people don't IM you. If you have an IM conversation, when it's closed, it's closed, you move on to other stuff - you don't have this feeling of these hundreds of threads demanding your attention.
    • IM requires symmetrical effort. In email, a lot of the messages I get are sent to more than one person: workplace mailing lists, even the usual habit of CCs. The junk accumulates, and this is a bigger problem than spam, as there are no effective automatic filters for workplace mailing-lists. In IM, if somebody IMs me, they are giving me their full attention.

    We as humans are not geared to multiprocessing and having a hundred open threads of communication. I want to talk or IM with someone, say what we want to say, then move on to other things with our full attention, without this lingering feeling that there is a zillion things we haven't really taken care of and we are leaving open.

    If you are wondering, I might get only about 30/40 emails a day, and I may write only 20 or so, but still it's a chore. Young people communicate more, and I can fully understand why they prefer IM, so more similar to speech, so more natural, so more lightweight. I am going the same direction myself, and let me tell you, it feels liberating. I look forward to the day when all the communication with colleagues and friends is over IM, and email is relegated to that twice-a-week habit that is now for me physical mail.

  28. Re:So what you're saying is... by Synonymous+Dastard · · Score: 2, Funny
  29. Because of spam? by FridayBob · · Score: 5, Informative

    Earlier this year, I discussed this matter with a 16-year-old girl. She said she preferred IM (MSN) over SMTP, because any email account she used would quickly get overloaded with spam. Many of us have different ways of dealing with that problem, but her solution was simply to never use the same email account for too long if she had to use it, and preferably not to use it at all. I suspect that this is not the only reason why she and her friends don't like to use email, but by itself spam seems like a valid complaint.

  30. Re:Kids say the darnest things... by hmccabe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Kids can't/won't string together solid thoughts

    It's true!

  31. You young whippersnappers!!!! by the_skywise · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is pretty far down for a reply but I've got to post this...

    My great grandmother passed down an old photograph book containing postcards she had received (we're talking circa 1900's) to my grandmother who, in turn, passed it to my mother who, in turn, was about to throw it in the garbage when I intercepted it (Being the family geek/tech/now digital archivist)

    They were 1 cent postcards containing one or two sentence messages addressed from my grandmother and her sisters to family relations the next state over.

    Or so I thought... the messages were your standard high-school girl talk along the lines of "I went out to the after-game dance with so and so last night, looking forward to seeing you this weekend." From the postcards it seemed like they saw each other every week. Not a big deal until you consider that transportation consisted of horse, buggy and train so no family was going to make a weekly journey by train unless they were rich (whoo-hoo!) Until I remembered that my family wasn't (D'oh!)

    A little more research and I realized they weren't in different states, they were in neighboring towns (long since absorbed into greater cities), no phones were arount yet so I was looking at the early 20th century equivalent of...

    text messaging.

    And my great-grandmother, in her nostalgia, had collected all the messages they had received from her sisters and cousins and saved them in this album.

    Kind of unfortunate that we won't be able to keep the same for our great grandkids (and thus omg! cnt w8 2cu 2nit @ cncrt! lol! will be lost to the centuries...)

  32. You forgot the best part by emkman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Building on your great joke:
    plz use cvr sheet 4 tps, also need u @ ofc sat TBG

    --
    Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
  33. it's still a social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    On the contrary, that is how a lot of high stakes business is done, on the golf course, at fancy restaurants, hotel suites,etc, the "good ole boy" network. And for formal ones, ponder the influence of just one fraternity, skull and bones, or say scroll and key. Those are social networks.

    You just don't like kids and want a way to feel superior.

    Nope, I am not a kid, most likely way older than you are, but I have always known about "social networks", because they work. People who start earlier with them build contacts that last a lifetime. Sure, it may be goofy in the beginning, but RTFA, these are teenagers already getting into business, and the only place they use email for the most part is talking to older folks, but their peer group is using IM, and that peer group will be the mainstream "business" community in a very short time frame. Time marches on friend, things change, but social networking is the best way to get ahead short of being born a billionaire.

    What is the internet? A network of networks? The more presence you have networking-in all the forms-the better off you can be in business, it's all about timing and contacts. When I first started out working, the internet didn't exist, not at all. We didn't even do a lot of telephone shopping, it was dead trees catalogs and snail mail. Since when is even "email" mainstream? Oh, it happened in a fast time frame? Why yes it did. IM, or what IM evolves into, will be the same.

    Don't become an old fogey before your time, it will make you chronically bitter.

    Now, you can get off my lawn before I turn the sprinklers on....

  34. Re:Kids say the darnest things... by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh and old people are any better? If anything kids are more intensly curious than adults. And adults are far more closed minded and unable to think rationally when it conflicts with their biases.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  35. Aren't they kind of. . . totally different? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I suppose you can compare, but really they are different enough animals to both hold individual merit.

    Heck, I still use the paper post system all the time, because electronic mail is useless for physical delivery of packages. Of course.

    Text messaging is for people who want real-time, but for whom clarity and deliberate content are not important. I must be old, because I find communications done in IM seem to have a rather light-weight ADD quality about them. --Which is probably appropriate for kids these days. --Keeping in mind, that the kids using computer communications are regular kids who are worried about clothes and popularity contests and who's dating who, etc. Light fluffy stuff. Email was developed by geeks for geeks, and because of its usefulness, was adopted by business, and I expect will remain in use that way for some time to come. (Try keeping 50 clients sorted in real-time!) Maybe when the ADD kids raised and trained in information sorting of that magnitude reach the business world, they will create a different type of work place and style of business management, but I don't see how they'll manage without something as stable as email. Attention to detail, record keeping and being able to take an hour or a few days to think about all the ramifications of a question before responding become important when you enter the business world.

    (Although, given some of the communications I've done a back and forth on with various businesses might sometimes suggest otherwise.)

    I see IM and today's social networks as having potential for something very useful in the future, but right now they still seem to be in a rather proto-gimik-time-wasting stage of development. When the business world finally adopts them, it will mean that their value has been proven, at which point the next New Hip Thing will be popular with the kids, and only old farts will spend time on Facebook. If we survive long enough as a culture, that is. . .


    -FL

  36. I doubt it by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Different technologies have different uses. IM, text messaging, e-mail, etc have not killed phone calls. Why? Phone calls allow for you to hear someone's voice, which is useful and/or nice in a number of different situations. Likewise IM will not kill e-mail. IM is nice, and I have an IM client running pretty much all the time but it's more for contacting friends with quick tech questions, or BSing while I was for a slow lab install to finish. It would work for support, because IM expects a realtime response which I can't always give. E-mail works much better hence why we use it. Likewise, my parents, friends, etc often will e-mail me when I'm at work because they have something to say or want information, but realise that I may be busy and not able to immediately respond.

    As for communicating on social network sites, this is just people playing around. E-mail has the same function, but is universally compatible. We are not going to go around telling everyone at work they have to sign up for myspace. Sure it may be fun to use when you are talking to friends who also have accounts, but it does not replace the universal access of e-mail.

    You have to remember that they aren't talking about any new technology here. IM/text messaging have been around for a long time, and social network sites are doing nothing other than sending e-mails in a closed system.

    For a technology to kill off another technology it more or less has to either be a better version or really change the way we live to the point we don't need the old technology. None of this is a better e-mail, hence e-mail is fine.

  37. But there ARE additional benefits! by raehl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    especially when there's no additional benefits.

    What you're missing is that social network messaging solves THE problem that email has. You know who sent you the message. And barrier to spam is higher than with email.

    Lots of other email-like functionality is missing, but the authentication issue (sender and receiver have authenticated themselves to a third party) has been fixed.

    1. Re:But there ARE additional benefits! by Doogie5526 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I still fail to see the benefit. I've never had a problem of who sent me a message (among my circle of friends). If I know them, they're in my address book and I see it was from them. I've never had a problem of emails spoofing my known contacts.

      Yes they've authenticated with a third party, but it doesn't mean I know them or want them to message me. I get myspace message spam all the time.

      The same benefits claimed could be accomplished with a white-list.

    2. Re:But there ARE additional benefits! by ryanov · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bzzzt, wrong.

      I get "I'm cute, please come fuck me tonight" spam all the time on there. I know I'm irresistible and all, but... I think the volume is suspicious.

  38. In South Korea by Igmuth · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm surprised no one has pointed out the fact that the same thing happed 3 years ago: In South Korea, email is for old people

  39. Filter by ability, not age. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I shudder along with you, but I'd say if their job requires writing something, ask for a resume, and maybe have them write a letter about why they want to work at your company, what their goals are, etc.

    In other words, have their first contact with you be via email. Bonus: You can probably write a script to reject the ones who can't spell "you" before it hits your inbox, though I wouldn't recommend it.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  40. I like email... by gunny01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Being one of those non-trendy teenagers who still wears brown despite black is the new black, I came to the IM game quite late: I preferred email for communication with my friends purely for the reason I prefer phone calls to text messages: the intent is clear and the message often more detailed.

    The only thing I really use IM for is IRC, and I prefer email for everything else, because there is a possibility that the response may well be legible and not abbreviation filled.

    I also like the idea of a constant record of all my communications. Gmail is excellent in this regard.

    IM is fine for quick question and idle banter, but for serious matters, email and phone are king.

    --
    kill all the fucking niggers
  41. And here's the thing: by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I was a kid, when ICQ was new, all of us used ICQ or (later) AIM to communicate anyway. None of us used email to strike up conversations and organize stuff, because we needed that spur-of-the-moment realtime interaction that augmented calling the person up on the phone.

    IM supplanted the phone because not everyone had cell phones at the time, and calling the person up would interrupt the rest of the family unless they had a private line. More than likely they were tying up the one phone line for the internet anyway.

    So, IM gained rapid acceptance.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  42. Re:Communication by social networking has advantag by ryanov · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If teenagers want to live in the real world and communicate with other people, they'll stop changing their phone number and e-mail address every 15 mins. I personally don't have time for that shit -- if I send you mail and it bounces, it bounces. Not my problem.

    I was a teenager rather recently and even I knew this shit.

  43. Re:Not necessarily by Keeper+Of+Keys · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...because email is so over, Grandpa