Cohere

This may be heretical, but I question if social is a foundation for the current networked capabilities. It's a nebulous term that is often promoted as the raison d'etre of Web 2.0. However it looks to be the result of innovation and participation, rather than a means in itself. The innovation of sites like flickr, YouTube, etc. that connect people based on common interests. The participation of users who create connections that are meaningful to their current work, needs and interests. The result is social, but it has no meaning in itself.

I was recently at the Geek Entertainment TV turns 1000 event which was fun. I said "Hello" to a group of guys and asked them what they thought of the party. One of them declared that it's just like the dot.com bubble all over again: People partying, drinking, and so on. I was a bit taken aback. Then later a friend talked on about how wonderful things will be with Web 2.0. This equally seemed strange.

It's just as much a mistake to say "no ostentatious parties" as it's a given that all will be great now that we have "Web 2.0". Such judgments are based on the appearance rather than their content and value of things. A raucous, zealous party is only inappropriate when undeserved. Apple had party blowouts long before the dot.com period and it was for hardworking employees that deserved to splurge and enjoy.

At the same time, to assume that the fuzzy identifiers of Web 2.0 are a given. That we are in a state of technological bliss is similarly superficial. Technologies are advancing and making an impact on people's overall usage of net software with AJAX, microformats, RSS, and so on. But none of these technologies are a given, some will likely not pan out as expected and all require serious work into the future.

* Desires race beyond the capacity to realize.

After coming out of two dot.com's (GomoTech & HelloBrain) erasures in 2002, I pursued the somedays. You know: "Some day I'm going to become pianist", "Someday I'm going to build my dream house", "Someday I'm going to sail the California coast", "Someday I'm going to be a filmmaker." Well for me it was the last one, "...be a filmmaker."

Reading in Judith Weston's book "Directing Actors..." that the director who understands how to work with actors has an advantage, I decided to spend a period of time being an actor. I took classes at the Jean Shelton acting studio from about 2002-2003, had a role in Durang's play "Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All For You" and acted in small parts for indie films and TV shows. I found to, somewhat my surprise, I really enjoyed acting. The acting craft and how to use yourself as an instrument of art and performance is fascinating. In time I had new ideas of performing which I tested out in acting gigs.

At the same time I focused more on writing short scenes, shooting them with actors and participating in the film events of Cinemasports and The National Film Challenge. My focus shifted to editing. In 2004 after being a PC programmer since 1985, I relented and got a Mac G5 with the Production Suite. And as 2005 arrived, I kept an eye on a new phenomenon, videoblogging.

Finally in August, I went to a Meet the Vloggers presentation at the San Francisco Apple Store. The enthusiasm, openness and inclusion of those involved related directly to my interest in film/video/media. So I jumped in. But as I made videos, spending a day to edit a four minute piece, put it up on my vlog and waited to see responses, I missed developing software. At the same time I began to envision different ways to view and edit video on the net.

So now I've come back to software development with developing net software for video. However I am finding the motion of prior work and recognition in videoblogging holding some of my focus. With inertia in doing software development . I read the group participatory vlog I'm in, EvilVlog, habitually -- commenting here and there, waiting to see which responses come in. I put up images on flickr and watch the number of views and new comments.

We are biological creatures that can take time to switch and train neural cell connections, putting in place brain to eye to hand coordination skills. So while my desire races, change moves at it's stride...

*Image from invisible-temple's photos

"The Medium is the Message"

or

"In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact, the medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium - that is, of any extension of ourselves - result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology."

-- Marshall McLuhan

IRC is not blogging.

Mena Trott, president of Six Apart which organized Les Blogs, was speaking on civility and accountability when she pointed out an example of rudeness on the IRC back channel projected behind the speakers. Mena apparently confused the media of blogging which is often related to newspaper editorializing with IRC chat which is related to chatting with a group of friends and passing notes in class. They are different mediums of expressions with different rules. One doesn't project the notes students pass in class during a lecture onto an overhead projector without editing. Or put the gossip of students over the school PA system without moderating them. The same goes for projecting an IRC back channel during the Les Blogs sessions. The fault was not with the IRC participants but with the lack of appropriate moderation.

Unfortunately this mix-up seems to have gone mostly unnoticed and bloggers continued talking past each other. Dave joined in, disagreeing with Ben Metcalfe and Tara's positive assessment of him. Both pointing to broad concepts of net accountability and the individual being the determinant of the net. These ideas don't contradict each other or compete. And the confusion of misidentifying the nature of the mediums remained in the background.