Archive for March, 2010

Blogging vs. shiny baubles

I have three* social media profiles I use regularly. Chances are, you’re reading this on one of them (as opposed to my personal website at www.damonkaswell.com, where this was originally published). They are:

One of these things is not like the others.

LiveJournal is first and foremost a social blogging tool, designed for long posts and detailed, threaded discussions. It is quite possible to have a days-long — or even weeks-long — conversation on LiveJournal.

Google Buzz is the new kid on the block in social media. It integrates with your GMail account and is sort of like if Twitter was a blogging tool. It’s fine for short “status update” posts, but it has a lot of very nice features for blogging, too, and active discussions float to the top of your buzz feed. I’m finding the clutter-free interface and GMail contact integration to be very nice. It wants to stay out of your way. I have my concerns about Google and how embedded it has become in our lives, but that aside, Buzz does a good job for both quick and longer updates.

LiveJournal and Google Buzz appeal to me as a writer. And then there’s Facebook…

Facebook has some perfunctory blogging tools, but by and large it’s intended for posts not much larger than those on Twitter. With a limit of 420 characters on status updates, and blog posts relegated to a sub-page, Facebook is appealing to the ADHD kid in all of us. There are lots of shiny baubles (“Join a group!” “Support this cause!” “Become a fan!”) and quick, easily digested infotainment bits from our friends (or “friends,” as the case may be).

I don’t blog as much as I used to since joining Facebook. It doesn’t reward long, complicated thoughts and detailed analysis the way LiveJournal and Buzz do. It doesn’t reward content. Rather, it rewards bouncing rapidly from one thing to another. I don’t think using it that way is very good for me.

There are other ways in which Facebook has its uses, so long as you reign in the unproductive and unhealthy hyperactivity it incites. It can be a useful contact manager. It’s a good way to impart brief but useful pieces of information to actual friends and family. It even has some fun games, so long as you avoid FarmVille. It is possible to use Facebook in a way that doesn’t reduce your attention span to that of a gnat.

But it’s not easy. Those shiny baubles are very appealing. They’re designed to be, because the longer you spend on Facebook not doing anything, the longer their advertisers have access to some parts of your brain. Kate Yule has an excellent post on some of the evils of Facebook’s advertising model, and you should read it: http://kateyule.livejournal.com/143713.html. In a nutshell, you are the product.

I’m not sure I entirely agree with her, at least on her decision to close her Facebook account. But I’m tempted enough by the idea that I’m instituting a few new rules for myself and its use:

  1. Clean up my news feed. I want nothing from apps, groups, fan pages, etc., unless it’s from one I actually, actively care about and involves one of my real-world interests, such as writing science fiction. Sorry, this also means purging any individual from my news feed I don’t actually know in some way. I want my news feed to be useful to me, and that means family updates, author updates, real-world friend updates, and very little else.
  2. No advertainment. No FarmVille, PetVille, or any other -Ville of any kind. I have friends who’ve invited me to play those, and they’re fun at first, which they’re designed to be, but there’s no end, no final reward, no “you won” from them. They’re designed to be eternal, and to pester you to log in enough that you’ll consider paying real money for the advantage of not needing to. I’m not talking about the games like Scrabble (which is actually quite fun, and can be a vocabulary expander). I’m talking about the ones that very cleverly manipulate you into caring about them, fussing over them… and eventually spending money on them, for no personal gain whatsoever.
  3. Avoid logging in. There are tools available for retrieving your Facebook feed and notices, and displaying them in a clutter- and distraction-free way. From now on, I will use those, and log directly into the page only when needed for some reason.

After thinking about all this, all the work it will take to strip the clutter from my Facebook page and make it a useful information feed, I find myself wondering what took me so long to reach this point.

EDIT: Credit where credit is due. The inestimable David D. Levine got me thinking about this.


*One might wonder about Twitter. I reject any service that restricts my thoughts to 140 characters. If Facebook gives us ADHD, Twitter gives us ADHD and then feeds us a steady diet of sugar.

2010-03-21 08.41.26

A good weekend

Friday

Started recovering from the latest bout of sinus infection, and made preliminary plans to deal more permanently (read: surgically) with sinus problems. Reviewed contractor bid to replace our heating with a ductless heat pump. Prepped for Beatrix’s 3rd birthday party.

Saturday

Epic birthday party win. Damon: Fully recovered. Face-painted kids: Cute. Cake and icecream: Delicious. Fire engine ride: Awesome. Sugar-fueled fights: None. Sleep afterwards: Mandatory

Sunday

The United States finally joins the 20th century in how we pay for health care. Maybe soon, we’ll catch up with the 21st century.

All in all, a very good weekend. Now if only I could get focused on that novel…

The benevolent dictator

This morning, I woke up and listened to a science fiction broadcast I’m subscribed to on Google Reader while getting ready for the DayJeorb. I downloaded it using Google Listen on my Google Android-powered phone. While the broadcast played, I checked my Google Mail and made a couple notes on my Google Calendar.

I have documents on Google Docs. I’m a member of several Google newsgroups. I use Google Maps for all kinds of things, from finding phone numbers (goodbye, environmentally devastating and utterly obsolete phonebooks) to getting directions. And, like damn near everyone else, I use Google to search for things. It’s hard to imagine a day without using any Google services or software whatsoever, unless I’m taking a sabbatical from the internet itself. The big G makes a lot of my daily activities a lot easier.

And they’ve figured out how to operate effectively in an area where Microsoft distinctly lags: Working with, not against, the internet’s inherent openness. Microsoft got where they are today by making nearly every computer a Windows computer, and making it difficult to use anything other than Windows with other Windows computers. But this strategy doesn’t work against a competitor that literally doesn’t care what OS your computer uses, and is hell-bent on making everything you do online platform-agnostic. Want to check Gmail using Linux? Fine! Want to do a Google search using a Mac? OK! Want to manage your Google Reader subscriptions on FreeBSD running the Opera browser in a VirtualBox emulation on Solaris 10? No problem! Want Microsoft to provide internet services that don’t care what OS you’re using? Not a chance.

Google has managed to do this without engaging in any pernicious vendor lock-in. It would take me a matter of minutes to switch every Google service I use to something else. I stay with Google for ease of use, simplicity, and the fact that every Google service talks to every other Google service without any effort on my part, which makes it attractive to keep using them. But by no means am I required to. Google never tries to make me use more of their services than I want to. Despite all their interoperability, they don’t engage in anything resembling Microsoft’s infamous bundling.

In fact, Google keeps their APIs open and makes it surprisingly easy to build third-party applications which can take advantage of just key portions of Google. They seem to recognize the fact that not everyone will want to use everything they offer, and they seem to be fine with that. Microsoft, with its proprietary file formats, proprietary protocols, and closed APIs, is exactly the opposite. This strategy of platform-agnosticism and openness has made Google an internet powerhouse. Lately, everything they touch seems to turn to gold, and they touch everything.

Which is why I’m a little scared of them.

Google wields tremendous power in our lives now, and collects an enormous amount of data from each of us. So far, they don’t seem to be too inclined to use that data for ill. Mostly, they just use it to serve up targeted advertising, which I really don’t mind since I’m using their services for free. I could always switch to pay services, or applications that are installed locally, if it bothered me. And frankly, I think the trend of showing me unobtrusive advertisements for things I’m actually interested in is a good thing (as opposed to the “enhancement” products that invariably flood everyone’s mailboxes). I frequently see ads for sci-fi/fantasy books and movies, writing tools, and so on. Not the kinds of things that are going to bother me.

But of course, Google is by no means perfect, and their motto, “Don’t be evil,” is sadly unenforceable. All that data could easily be abused, Google’s treatment of the copyrights of authors* leaves much to be desired, and the recent Chinese government cyberattacks on Google’s data servers resulted in the company enlisting the aid of the NSA, a move that understandably upset privacy and civil liberties advocates. Any handshaking going on between Google and a quasi-illegal, unregulated organization like the NSA merits serious scrutiny.

So the hordes of Google users must hope the dictator remains a benevolent one, And we should more or less assume the government can — and will — take control of Google’s vast data stores whenever it feels like it. That’s not to say we shouldn’t keep using Google, but we should keep an eye on it. And we should make sure it knows, at all times, that we can take our business elsewhere should that be necessary. After all, the open internet and agnostic services Google has championed have essentially won, which means there are dozens of other providers for every service Google offers, and they’re all ready to jump in and fill the void if Google forgets its motto.

And if you don’t believe that, look it up. You can find them all with Google.


*Resulting in the much-maligned Google book settlement

And so it begins…

I have officially started editing the manuscript that, Squash willing, will become a marketable novel by the end of the year. I’m starting out by mapping out the plot, characters, and storyline threads, with the goal of breaking the novel down into bite-sized, easily digested chunks complete with cross-referencing links so I don’t lose track of details like character descriptions.

I have never done this before. I have no idea whether this will be a useful exercise or a waste of time. But I do know I was terrified of opening the manuscript up until I started doing this, so it’s already accomplished that, at least.