Or, Google doesn’t care if you think they’re creepy.
Photo credit to halilgokdal
Google’s corporate policy is don’t be evil, but sometimes in their quest for power (um, I mean information, yeah, that’s it…), they sometimes lose sight of that. Recently, Google’s come under a lot of fire for enforcing a real name policy on Google+. (Basically, Google requires you to use your name that you go by in real life, not any sort of handle or screen name. For more on the Google+ real policy and the debate behind it, read my earlier post “Publicness, Persistence, and the case against Real Name policies”.)
Photo credit to sashafatcat
In their enforcement of the real name policy, they’ve made a lot of mistakes: not accepting people’s actual real names because they didn’t fit into a common western name paradigm, disabling users’ accounts for violating the policy, not being flexible in borderline cases … But, generally, they’ve acted pretty conciliatory about their actions. The party line was: this is for users’ benefit, people want to be in an environment where they know who their talking to, etc. Continue reading
Or, I like it, I really like it
This is my 100th blog post. TV shows get a party when they reach their 100th episode, because it means that they’re ready for syndication. What does is mean for a blog? Do I get a cake with my face on it? (Can we have a reverse blog giveaway contest where you all send me cakes?)
Joking aside, I’m strangely proud of myself. I’m not usually big on the concept of “follow-through”. (Last time I moved, I found like four journals with the first page written in them: “Dear Diary, This time I’m really going to do it…” Never happened.) Continue reading
Or, I worry for my generation
Photo credit to madelinetosh
So, apparently our bodies were built for running not reading; you could have fooled me. My brain, body, and general self like reading (whether physical or digital text) more than pretty much any other activity. I feel a deep affinity with text; for me, it’s central to my human condition.
Today I read an article (“Will the speed of online reading deplete our analytic thought?” – The Guardian) that started with the premise that humans weren’t built for reading; that it’s not something that we’re genetically coded to do.
“To begin with, the human brain was never meant to read. Not text, not papyrus, not computer screens, not tablets. There are no genes or areas in the brain devoted uniquely to reading. Rather, our ability to read represents our brain’s protean capacity to learn something outside our repertoire by creating new circuits that connect existing circuits in a different way. Indeed, every time we learn a new skill – whether knitting or playing the cello or using Facebook – that is what we are doing.” Continue reading