h a l f b a k e r yWhere life irritates science.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Facebook has changed the way we relate to each other, has
broadened our definition of friendship, and has encouraged us to
focus on the positive - even if only by only letting us "like" things
and
thereby avoid
the neurolinguistic trap of "disliking" things.
One thing it hasn't
done
is
really change the way we refer to the way we relate to each
other
-- Facebook relationship status choices are pretty traditional: "It's
complicated" could really go for most of the relationships in the
world, I think, if we were being honest. And it is a very American
and neurolinguistic lesson that if you just say, "like", 30,000 times
a
day,
you will eventually gather a bunch of happy clowns around you
and
probably find it hard to feel bad.
So most of us are content to
wallow in our "is in a relationship with" or "is married to", or "is
single" statuses (stati?) and snark smarmily into our fists every
time
we see an "it's complicated" pop up in the relationship status box,
saying to ourselves, "heh-, we ALL know what THAT means.".
But I think we are missing a major opportunity here -- especially in
light of all of the various kinds of alternative relationships pending
official recognition here in the US depending on the political
outcome of the next few months::-- to create a crowd sourced
platform on top of which the platform of Facebook can look
back
in the next few years and say they allowed us to change the actual
relationships we have and not just how we refer to them.
I don't know whether that takes the form of an App or a quiz or a
system of hash tags or what... just that I am really looking
forward
to
polyamory being something you can choose as your relationship
status on fb.
You know what I mean? ;)
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
//One thing it hasn't done is really change the way we refer to the way we relate to each other // |
|
| |
But why should we all be waiting with baited breath for facebook to change aspects of our lives? Virulent anti-social networking rant ommitted. |
|
| |
Wonder how much it would cost to get a disgruntled FB employee to crash the servers and return 300zillion people to the sorts of contact carried out using what's come to be known as 'voice'. |
|
| |
I hear you [Phrontistery]. Well, read your posting anyway. |
|
| |
Never mind that. Too risky (One does not simply walk
into Facebook's server room) and too impermanent
(You bet your sweet share price we've got backups).
What about a virus that detects traffic to and from
Facebook, and slows it down for random periods of
time, throwing in the occasional connection reset for
good measure? Not constantly, mind you—just often
enough to make it frustrating for the truly rabid
Facebookers. |
|
| |
I suggest a web-like graphical view of the relationships between people with different colours representing exactly what they get up to in and out of the bedroom, and arrows, which has no respect for anyone's privacy, mainly because it would be evil. It should also have callouts to Google Maps for voyeurs, jealous soon-to-be-ex-partners and stalkers. |
|
| |
It could just show that everyone has a relationship with Jesus Christ |
|
| |
// It could just show that everyone has a relationship with Jesus Christ//
A purely Platonic one, you understand. |
|
| |