-
Website
http://mashable.com/ -
Original page
http://mashable.com/2008/07/11/online-interaction/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Robert Basil
142 comments · 8 points
-
Jennifer Van Grove
149 comments · 23 points
-
r0cketman22
317 comments · 52 points
-
rajagiri4
160 comments · 2 points
-
barringtonarch
150 comments · 4 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Enter the Zappos Sharing Happiness $3,000 Shopping Spree Giveaway Contest
4 hours ago · 88 comments
-
Your Next Car Radio Might Be Pandora
3 hours ago · 21 comments
-
Google Launches Chrome for Mac
5 hours ago · 26 comments
-
iPhone App Offers Instant Speech-to-Text Transcription
2 hours ago · 16 comments
-
BREAKING: Google Launches Real-Time Search Results
1 day ago · 96 comments
-
Enter the Zappos Sharing Happiness $3,000 Shopping Spree Giveaway Contest
*points for using the word umpteenth.
I'm also not sure that an in-person interaction is by nature more meaningful. Example. I am thousands of miles away from home, about to make a big presentation. I'm a bit nervous moments before walking into the conference room.. Then, I get a text message from a loved one, reminding me that it will go great. Wow. Perfect connection to help me go into that presentation with more confidence. Given the place and timing, no in-person interaction could have happened.
Perhaps, what is more important than comparing the type of interaction (in-person to tech) what we need to focus on is the quality of our relationships. Do we have a broad mix of very intimate friendships and relationships all the way to loose aquaintenances, or are most all of our relationships fairly shallow surface level?
We are by nature social creatures. And we are tactile creatures who appreciate touch and all the other things that make in-person interactions of value to us. Perhaps we do have a harder time today, given all of the choices- choosing to seek out high quality interactions. It is so easy to do what comes fast. So, all of us have choices (and a need to recognize and make those choices) so that our lives are filled with a balance of relationships and intimacy.
But yes - I think that when technology enables us to communicate more clearly face to face, we'll really have something. But what does that even look like?
Thanks for a thoughtful and soulful post.
I spend lots of time online communicating through the prism of technology. It's convenient but somewhat impersonal. Face to face contact brings a richness and depth to personal interaction. And meditation gives me a 'connection' to a Higher awareness. I play in three places. It's all about balance.
People have always run the gamut of experience. Some people reach for high levels of engagement in life, while others do not and settle for what is easiest. Each of us individually have to ask ourselves- at the end of the day, did we get everything we wanted out of out last 24 hours? and if not, what do we want to do differently in the next 24 hours?
Even before technology (as we are discussing it) some people could and did choose to remain unconnected- and shy away from intimate interactions. This is not a new thing. Perhaps easier today, but not new.
I don't ever want to see technology replace in-person interaction completely. I want to see it find its place, and use it where it makes the most sense and fits well.
Steve, the biggest problem I have with your argument is the dualistic nature of it. This is better than that. Rather than both have pros and cons- both have a valued place, and what might the best use of each be. Does that make sense?
That's not a very safe thing to say given the horrific history of the human race until now, and the fact (which of course might change) that the net and attendant forms of communication have been on the whole pretty damn good for all of us.
I think a lot of "nerds" (and I say it loosely to avoid sounding condescending) spend too much of their lives in a fictional reality of IMs and Twitter and blogging and forums and the like.
They have e-friends and e-girlfriends and e-lives that don't necessarily correlate with actual living. Since many of these people possess a lack of social skills, they use the internet to recreate the lives they wish they could have in their own reality.
When writing for my own site, I try to get as far away from my PC as humanly possible, just to avoid the writer's block that used to occur from checking e-mail and other nuisances that come with being on the internet. I understand Chastney's take on it completely.
Think: The smell of an old lover's cologne brings back a memory long locked away. If you have no smells, no breezes on your skin, no light glinting off of your companion's arm to associate with the conversation you had with him, how much different is the memory of the conversation stored in your brain? Can it incite the same kind of response in your mind, the same string of connections that are the hallmark of great art?
But goddam if I don't love me some lolcats!
I think we still have a long way to go with technology before it does some of the things we do without it. It's going to be a very long time before you can do everything on a teleconference/videoconference that you can do on in a face to face meeting. Have you ever tried brainstorming with more than two people over a video link - pointless. Give the same set of people a room and bits of paper and magic happens.
In almost every country in the world, I have people that I can hang with, socialize with, do deals with-- nearly all of whom are those I've connected with online or other technological means.
When my wife and I went to Tokyo for my birthday, our schedule was pretty maxxed since there were so many people to hang out with face-to-face.
So the future is bright, as long as we learn to find balance now.
For example, I am currently vacationing on Long Island where the locals gather to chat or even gossip at diners. Diners are the central stations of surburban conversation.
Conversely, as I was sitting before the opening curtain of a Broadway show the audiences' teenagers were busily texting their last messages.
Each symbolize an extreme and it takes effort to keep it balanced.
This is a long forgotten practice in cities (even before the rise of the Internet).
We can use it as a "remediation for a communication disability" :o)
However, is this time spent together relevant? Will we be able to find interesting conversation points other than the lack of parking space or the newly acquired bbq?
We could also start organising small mashable bbqs. This will provide informal meetings for the members.
But then again, why would you like to meet me? (don't worry I'm quite ok)
Are you planning to start a real conversation on this topic hoping we'll find more related interests?
The technology streches our reach, helping us develop new relevant connections based on similarities and interests. And this is great because someone in Peru might be more relevant to me than my neighbors two houses away.
The sad part is that most connections are extremely superficial and are based on limited profiles or cool pictures, we waste our time developing new "empty" relations. Some might feel comfortable with the feeling they are heard, even if virtually, but then again, it's just a sham.
And with the new ?Phones, it will worsen...
Some cities have a "no driving day", why not start with a "no mobile phone and internet day"?
Preferably during sunny weekends...
Nietzsche, of all people, predicted that technology would fundamentally change the way people interacted with their own words. For most of his life, he had written his manuscripts by hand, but as he went blind, he was forced to adopt the typewriter as his primary writing mechanism, and predicted that human communication would become less nuanced as technology developed to allow for faster word-to-page translation.
Combine that with instantaneous delivery mechanisms (which he alluded to but were never realized in his lifetime), and it becomes easy to see that he was, at least in the literal sense, correct -- a million Twitter-ers on a million computers will never materialize as the next Beyond Good and Evil.
But at the same time, I think fast-paced communication has afforded opportunities to introduce a new level of context into cultural communication, and that ultimately, in comparison to the ways the elder generations communicate, ours is, or as the potential to be, more expressive than what could have been provided strictly by language.
I guess I'm saying I try not to worry about how computers tamper with human interaction, because its going to happen, is happening, and I think culture will ultimately realize that human interaction is essential, and find ways to bolster it, or that maybe its not as important to progress as we once thought. I'm not convinced that social/cultural alienation is more common now, in the age of technology, than it was before.
taking me as example i don't communicate much even with my husband i don't i just Google them up i just feel Google is my best friend
who don't want to get updated i thing being updated makes lot of sense in todays world.
so frnd nice article but its just matter of thing
either its goes worst or it goes nice ?