"I don't see how having hundreds or thousands of 'friends' is leading to any kind of substantive friendships .... The whole thing seems so weird to me. Now you really have to turn off your computer and just go out to live real life and make real connections with people that way. I don't think it's healthy." http://www.slate.com/id/2208678/

Neither true nor false. If you read further down, you discover that it really depends on the reasons "everyone else" uses Facebook. And one argument to which I can totally relate is the fact that for those people whose relatives live in other countries, it is an efficient way to keep in touch, while at the same time creating a network of "friends" allows you to expand social connections. And I think that its popularity has also to do with curiosity, it's human nature, most of us would like to know what our friends and their friends' friends are doing, no matter how wierd it might seem. If you're willing to give up a small part of your precious privacy, and even that as I read it in the article can be dealt with, it is an opportunity even for those introverts like me to become more extrovert, and not the other way round.It is to a certain extent virtual, but what's not virtual nowadays?

Ines

Once again... There should have been a third option. The statement is rather true, but there should be no "rathers" to vote...

I think it's easier to elicit verbal replies, though, if you narrow down the choices...

 Karlsson-on-the-roof once asked Miss Box: "Have you quit drinking rum for breakfast, yes or no?"

An article in French...

It doesn't! How could it?

The idea for me is to be able to communicate with my close family and a few people who were friends before Facebook.

No one but my eight friends, and that includes my family, can access my profile. And I don't accept 'gifts' from, nor do I play any games with any of them.  I mainly use Facebook for exchanging news and pictures of my children and grandchildren.

Nanna

That may be true, but since I prefer having options...I didn't vote

N.

<<Toutes ces infos que j'ai publiées sur moi, elles étaient pour les gens qui m'entourent.>>

Cf.: Blogger in France sues after being fired - USATODAY.com

Good luck!

Wasn't he a sage?

Might it be a good idea to join Facebook and there discuss Karlson på Taget?

Nanna

And when the Miss answered NO!, because she didn`t drink rum at all, he commented: "Too bad! Alcoholism will lead to no good."

Almost Shakespearian.

Dodo, Liliana - while funny anecdotes and OT whatevers are OK once in a while, I fail, no matter HOW hard I try, to comprehend what "Karlson på taket" has to to do with this thread and the subject - Facebook

It has to do with there being just two options, Yes and No (True and False).

So, then explain what you mean - how is it related to Karlson på taket? While I have read the book - maybe others have not...and yes, now I am asking you to go OT

Well there are only two options in this poll. I cannot vote, because the statement is neither completely false nor completely true. That makes me remember the book: Miss Box demanding a simple and straight answer, Yes or No, to some unpleasant question, and Karlson asking about her quitting drinking. She answers No - she drinks; she answers Yes - she used to drink. But the truth is, she doesn`t drink at all, so should she say Yes or No ?

Originally written by Becky Barath on January 15, 2009 5:29 PM Thank you...I understand you were trying to make some obscure point...I like Lindgren as well, and I also did not vote because it needed a third option - but, instead of quoting Lindgren - I would have simply said so

Lindgren was the reason why I survived my childhood in Poland so she needs some respect.

Where and when did I disrespect Lindgren?

Let's call it a special treatment,  rather than respect.

Let me add a few words about the poll for whom it may concern and no, I haven't read Astrid Lindgren although I do remember a TV series about that obnoxious kid wit a propellor on his back. All he could do was hanging over a footballfield and disrupt the match by blowing a whistle in stead of trying to look at a free football match , I  hope the book was better than the TV show.

Maybe it's me and perhaps I'm a bit old-fashioned, but hey: an internet-based website to make friends? How? By sharing raunchy holiday pictures and computer viruses (FaceBook seems to be well-known for the latter)? Is there some phobia I am not aware of that makes physical meetings socially unacceptable? Has some horrible disease broken out that makes it inadvisable to go out and make friends or meet people? In other words, I agree with the statement of the poll: you do need to turn of the computer and meet real people. Very healthy, at least you get some sunlight in your face (or rain, if you happen to live in the wrong place).

Originally written by Dodo Kaipdodo on January 15, 2009 11:13 PM the statement is neither completely false nor completely true.

I love en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction!

Originally written by Becky Barath on January 15, 2009 7:34 PM Lindgren is special - I agree, but next time I want to make an obscure point that not everyone will understand - I'll quote Dr. Seuss! Anyway....

I don't like Dr. Seuss, and I guess not everybody knows him either, especially in other countries.

Becky's warning is all the more effective then...

"If you never did you should. These things are fun and fun is good”

Another one from Dr. Seuss:

"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.”

This is what Astrid Lindgren says too, in a more extreme way. I think we will just get kicked out of this thread for good.

What with all this OT on Astrid Lindgren and Dr. Seuss, we might as well throw in Sesame Street and the famous COOPERATION song:

Astrid Lindgren ... Dr. Seuss ... Sesame Street

I think these are all relevant to the extent they represent the pre-computer-Facebook times when children would make new virtual friends by reading books, before or simultaneously with going out to live real life and make real connections with people. I am glad the latter is still a prevailing attitude among participants of this poll.

Jacek

Is there some phobia I am not aware of that makes physical meetings socially unacceptable? Has some horrible disease broken out that makes it inadvisable to go out and make friends or meet people?

That`s not phobia, as yet. I suppose that`s just being lazy and net-addicted.

Maybe so, but this is not a website for children, who often feel they have the right to say what they think is true at the moment or do as they want just because their world is all that matters to them and therefore it must matter equally so to the rest of the world.

Nanna

Not only children, artists too, and probably many other inspired people.

Originally written by Liliana Boladz-Nekipelov on January 16, 2009 6:50 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on January 16, 2009 9:09 AM ...this is not a website for children, who often feel they have the right to say what they think is true at the moment or do as they want just because their world is all that matters to them and therefore it must matter equally so to the rest of the world. Not only children, artists too, and probably many other inspired people.

This, Liliana, is a website for professional linguists, who may be inspired artists, but children, no.

Many of us are tired of the sometimes grotesque and irrelevant word associations that are dotted across the board. People simply stop posting in exasperation. 

This is a warning. The board is not yours to do with as you think fit. You must share the board with other posters and you must do so in a sane and orderly manner.

Nanna 

I understand that the children being referred to are the children who are posting on Facebook, and their behaviour in life. 

Regardless, I will risk going off topic on what has been written next.  Nanna, you have created the scenario of children posting on TranslatorsCafe.  To the best of my knowledge, no children are currently posting here.

However, I do belong to several forums which are populated by both children and adults, ages 12 - 95 I would say.  Given that experience, I wish that children did post on TC.  Lots and lots of them!  Perhaps then we would see something of self-discipline, circumspection, care, and respect, not to mention tolerance.  I am not coming from what children might theoretically do, but from what I have seen them do.

In two such forums that I visit, the children have brought the adults to shame more than once.  The adults bicker, and the children are reasonable.  In fact, I have received a PM from a young woman still in her teens who is appalled by the behaviour of adults.   "Is this what I will become?" she asked.  I sincerely hope not. 

And if someone says what he believes is true, is this not ideal?  The same tired things are trotted out time, and time, and time again - what is supposed to be true, what we are supposed to think.  And we adults quote this authority, and that authority, and never or seldom use the authority of common sense and experience. 

No, I have not posted in this thread.  My reason is not the one cited.  We begin with a tired stereotype of modern young people and we're supposed to discuss it, and vote on it in a poll that has no true options.  The article itself does not say what the out of context quote proposes - in fact, it says the opposite.

Maxi

Originally written by Dodo Kaipdodo on January 16, 2009 7:50 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on January 16, 2009 1:29 PM This is a warning. The board is not yours to do with as you think fit. You must share the board with other posters and you must do so in a sane and orderly manner. Perfectly true. What I post I post not because I would annoy you, I promise!

That, Dodo, is the problem in a nutshell. 

My grandson, Josh, is a gifted nine-year-old, who absolutely hates losing. Whenever I visit, he wants to play Scrabble. I love playing Scrabble and Josh is good with words. So we play. Obviously, I can beat him, but I usually allow him to win albeit with a very narrow margin. Once in a while I allow myself a win, which invariably makes Josh throw a near hysterical fit. Last, I was there, he wanted to play and I said no. He asked me why and I explained that I find it stressful and exasperating to play with him when I know that he will become irate and throw a fit if he loses.

Josh promised, cross his heart and all that, " I promise, Farmor. I will be good loser."

What do you think happened?

Josh who is a kind, loving and talented child never intends to annoy or exasperate...

Nanna

I am a professional linguist, and so is Dodo: we just have a different kind of imagination. This is very sad that the contemporary world became so dry as far as imagination is concerned, of course, not all of the world.

I am tired too, sometimes, reading about certain mundane things, that do not interest me in the least, so I simply do not read certain postings and go to another thread. There is plenty of space for everyone.

Well, then it is a good thing that you are not a moderator. I cannot ignore mundane postings and go on to other threads I find more interesting.

I am terribly sorry you are tired of the mundane things that are posted here. Some of us have been here for years and continue to answer (for the 500th time) the same old question about how to quote or how to post and for the most part, we do so with loving patience.  

Nanna  

I think that the deconstruction of his thread went too far. I am sorry I did not make my point clear from the start.

The question I had planned was:

Is it true/false for you to say

"I don't see how having hundreds or thousands of 'friends' is leading to any kind of substantive friendships .... The whole thing seems so weird to me. Now you really have to turn off your computer and just go out to live real life and make real connections with people that way. I don't think it's healthy."

In other words, do you agree/disagree, in your life, with the statement

"I don't see how having hundreds or thousands of 'friends' is leading to any kind of substantive friendships .... The whole thing seems so weird to me. Now you really have to turn off your computer and just go out to live real life and make real connections with people that way. I don't think it's healthy."

Translators went duly looking for the context and what they found was the Slate article and not their lives. Despite its wording this was not supposed to be a TOEFL reading comprehension test, though, and I was not interested in answers telling me that within that specific Slate article there is no unequivocal answer to my query.

In this confused state of affairs, I appreciate straighforward answers from a few people. As far as I am concerned, I have to confess that I prefer to come to TC for my coffee breaks rather than go downstairs to Coffee Heaven to socialize, and when I take a train, I prefer not to chat with fellow passengers either. (BTW, in pre-cellular times, train chat was more likely to happen in Italy than in Poland anyway. Now, everywhere everyone is on their mobile so there is no difference.) Yet, I had no problem voting ‘Yes, I agree’ on this poll for reasons explained by Theo.

So, Dodo, the question is not whether you are on Facebook or not. Rather, rephrasing once again, do you think that people should interact in the real world or more and more withdraw from it to the virtual one (which is slowly taking over anyway)? Of course, comments went on, there is no clear-cut answer possible. ‘Yes and no. Astrid rules. So-so. Maybe. The right sock is left. Why not? How would I know? Do I care? My Bonnie is over the ocean.’ These are just a few options I had failed to add to my poll to get more people to vote in a straightforward way.

How about if, in addition to the three members who were unable to reply Yes/No to this poll, I keep a manual tally of everyone else who says they absolutely need the option Other? 

Despite all the confusion I find this poll to be an interesting exercise. Maybe if we could get, say, Israelis and Palestinians to completely withdraw from the real life and go all on Facebook instead, where ‘everyone else already is,’ we could at least reduce the loss of lives? Except that would those Facebook lives be so much more valuable than the ones that are being wasted now in the real world? That’s a topic for another poll where, I hope, someone will help me to prepare more appropriate answer options from Astrid Lindgren, Dr. Seuss and Sesame Street.

Despite all the confusion I find this poll to be an interesting exercise.

But of course!

Maybe if we could get, say, Israelis and Palestinians to completely withdraw from the real life and go all on Facebook instead, where ‘everyone else already is,’ we could at least reduce the loss of lives?

That would be really nice.

My continual frustration with the question is the image it creates of this "hundreds or thousands of 'friends".  I would rather talk about what does exist, instead of a narrow portrait of how people might be using the Internet and things like Facebook.

Most people who are on Facebook and who use the Internet have "live" friends first, and sometimes they use these tools to stay in touch with these friends.  In other words, it's not either/or, and they do not need to turn off the computer in order to make the real connections.  They have the real connections, and use the computer to maintain these real connections.

Decades ago when I was at university I was homesick for family and friends.  The connection was a voice over the phone for a few minutes every few months, and some scrawled ink on a piece of paper once in a while.  Now I am in touch with mother, brothers, friends, son at the click of a mouse - and yes, also the phone, the written letter.  Someone at the other end can turn on the camera and show me the new sofa, how funny the cats are when they are playing, click to audio so we can speak, send a URL to show something, or say "just listen to this fantastic music" and we both do.  These are real people whom I know in real connections, and it is a lot more satisfying than the "good old days".

In regards to Facebook, recently someone I know found a relative they didn't know they had, and they will meet in person at some point.  This is also real.

I also have friends whom I have never met, but connect to via the Internet.   Currently I am volunteer teaching a young woman who could be my daughter in age.  I marked her homework yesterday, saw by the shape of the notes pencilled in that the injured hand is better.  Meanwhile I am being volunteer-taught by someone; little sound clips are floating back and forth - a trill that is finally judged decent, samples of how to develop one for me to hear.  Are these things real or fantasy?  If I cut off these connections, have I left a fantasy world and entered a real one?  My own answer is "no".

I think (?) the question addresses an image of people who are cut off from the real world and sit down "talking" to thousands, but never getting close to anyone.  I've seen a portrait of people who cannot handle real life and real people and so retreat into a safer world of imaginary things - the images we can create through avatars and false claims.  Heck, I could manage to be a doctor, a lawyer, and if I am a good enough writer and liar, the Easter Bunny.  That exists too.

I cannot agree or disagree with the above statement because that situation does not exist.  A different situation exists.  It is not an either/or, it is a "both".  This is what a number of people have said: "Where is the third option?"

Sorry for making this a lengthy non-answer.    Perhaps, Jacek, it is because I prefer not to think of you as a figment of my imagination, which you might be for all I know.  You might be a Braniac computer, cleverly programmed to appear human, which would do much to explain how quickly you can find multiple answers to multiple questions with instantaneous links.  Hm, I think I have to get out to live a real life and make real connections .... Is it healthy?    Nah!

I absolutely agree with you Maxi, although I have nothing to do with Facebook.

What a relief to hear that! The reason I launch certain threads is that I need a reality check. How else could I know what a Facebook is? I think I overheard once that some maniacs belong to some e-groups with hundreds of 'friends' and spend time on what I would call voyeurism. Don't spend time spying on others, used to say my grandmother. Live your own life!

Jacek

I am sure that exists, Jacek, and it is sad to hear.  I suppose every tool is only a tool, and its use reflects that state of mind of its user.  If more tools with more power exist, then people's imaginations can lead them to greater good and its opposite in the use of those tools.  Let's opt for the former. 

Maxi  

More than the waste of time on voyeurism what would bother me in such setup would be the uniformity of opinions, the absence of the Other and confrontation of conflicting opinions. I mean, if such groups exist -- of people coming from the same tribe and thinking all alike -- wouldn't that be the epitomy of boredom and a complete denial of what the real world is about? 

Yours, my dear Jacek, is not the only TC poll that was off to a Grim Start as evidenced by Arthur's wonderful prose in  Post #29059

Nanna

Originally written by Nanna Mercer on January 17, 2009 9:17 PM Yours, my dear Jacek, is not the only TC poll that was off to a Grim Start

Grim like in the Brothers Grimm?

* * *

From http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2009/01/16/art_of_conversation/index.html?source=newsletter:

If walking into a party full of strangers makes you long for the comforts of your couch and Facebook, British journalist Catherine Blyth would love to have a chat with you.

Amid the many ways we now have for staying in touch -- from texting to blogging to e-mailing to social networking -- Blyth makes a spirited pitch for old-fashioned talk. Her new book, "The Art of Conversation: A Guided Tour of a Neglected Pleasure," is a breezy field guide to chat, enumerating its many practitioners, pleasures and pitfalls.

More an excuse to highlight Arthur's prose, which often makes me smile and wish that I had his way with words.

Nanna

Originally written by Dodo Kaipdodo on January 16, 2009 10:45 PM why didn`t you ask "Are You On Facebook?"...  I`d have checked the No

Well, maybe http://www.utne.com/Science-Technology/How-Much-Are-Your-Facebook-Friends-Worth.aspx?blogid=36 will make you and me change our mind?

I am sure all those 'innovative efforts' will soon bear a marketable fruit!

Jacek

I actually own this:

and should exchange it for this:

I mean, and I really mean NEVER!

Nanna

As a part of post-poll research I spoke with my daughter who pointed out the ambiguity of the term 'Facebook friend.' You know, not all of them are real friends, she said, referring to two meanings of this English term in Polish: (a) casual friend, i.e., acquaintance, and (b) real friend.

So, if Facebook people shave their casual holdings and monetize (!) them, that could be a smart move in these crisis times, after which I will come back and ask again "Where is the real beef?" and we will take it from there...

Jacek

It is not only friends people manage to get via FaceBook:

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2009/01/23/234403/man-jailed-for-yet-another-facebook-murder.htm

Mortal enemies seem to pop out of the woodwork as well with the rise of FaceBook. Is it just me or does this strike anyone else as a (excuse the pun) sad state of affairs? OK, this is an excess, but it does show an increasing inability to communicate verbally. Her for dropping the bombshell in a very impersonal and public (and therefore fairly humiliating) manner, him for his pretty primitive and very final response. Excesses aside, does anyone feel that the rise of social networks may have a negative impact on the ability to communicate in general? And as an afterthought, is it slowly becoming the norm to abuse people over the internet rather than have a good talk to clear the air?

Youth job prospects have become a particular concern now that employers trawl social networking sites to discover details about whether potential employees are suitable hires. http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/27/technology/facebook.4-417144.php

* * *

Friends, Until I Delete You http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/fashion/29facebook.html?_r=1&em

* * *

Facebook offers up users as marketing tool

If you're among the people to hate the new Facebook design, you're most likely to like it- very shortly:

Stop Whining About Facebook's Redesign

Ann-Christine

And a pro-Facebook one:

Social networks like facebook have revolutionised communication. To deny their existence is like burying your head in the sand. To take them too seriously, however, is silly.

I am on Facebook so I can communicate with my family. Save for three colleagues, all my friends are my family. Last year my daughter subscribed to a very annoying *we're related* proggy that just two days ago sent me an email since, " You're related to Barack Obama (Washington DC)..."

Come on!

Nanna

Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 4:31 PM ..a very annoying *we're related* proggy that just two days ago sent me an email since, " You're related to Barack Obama (Washington DC)..."

Oh, me too! I was just about to post about it. There was even a link to show me the evidence! I'm his fourth generation cousin. ROFL!

On another note, I couldn't live without Facebook now that I know it. It's an excellent tool to communicate with family and relatives, specially when you live abroad, which is my case.

Ann-Christine

My apologies Ann-Christine, (undskyld) I wanted to quote but hit edit instead and did not see it till after I posted.

This rubbish has to meet with some understanding in the States considering that an American friend of mine, an educated man, was excited about a website that promises to trace your lineage 1000 years back based on a DNA sample. What to me sounded obvious, i.e., that they will trace your ancestors geographically (see Post #62987), he interpreted as a promise of a genealogical tree with actual names dating back a thousand years!!!

Jacek

Originally written by Ann-Christine Nassar-Pateffoz on April 3, 2009 4:38 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 4:31 PM ..a very annoying *we're related* proggy that just two days ago sent me an email since, " You're related to Barack Obama (Washington DC)..." Oh, me too! I was just about to post about it. There was even a link to show me the evidence! I'm his fourth generation cousin. ROFL!

Oh noooooo, not me! I am his fourth cousin once removed...nemlig!

Nanna

Originally written by Jacek K. on April 3, 2009 4:54 PM ...a promise of a genealogical tree with actual names dating back a thousand years!!!

OY!

I think he'd do better with the Mormons...

Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 5:16 PM Originally written by Ann-Christine Nassar-Pateffoz on April 3, 2009 4:38 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 4:31 PM ..a very annoying *we're related* proggy that just two days ago sent me an email since, " You're related to Barack Obama (Washington DC)..." Oh, me too! I was just about to post about it. There was even a link to show me the evidence! I'm his fourth generation cousin. ROFL!  Oh noooooo, not me! I am his fourth cousin once removed...nemlig! Nanna

You're right, Nanna. I checked my Inbox and I'm also a once removed thingy. Maybe you and me are cousins, then?

Hälsningar, kusin!

Ann-Christine

Originally written by Ann-Christine Nassar-Pateffoz on April 3, 2009 5:52 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 5:16 PM Originally written by Ann-Christine Nassar-Pateffoz on April 3, 2009 4:38 PM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on April 3, 2009 4:31 PM ..a very annoying *we're related* proggy that just two days ago sent me an email since, " You're related to Barack Obama (Washington DC)..." Oh, me too! I was just about to post about it. There was even a link to show me the evidence! I'm his fourth generation cousin. ROFL!  Oh noooooo, not me! I am his fourth cousin once removed...nemlig! Nanna You're right, Nanna. I checked my Inbox and I'm also a once removed thingy. Maybe you and me are cousins, then?

Lemme weigh in with some more scientific evidence from http://polandian.home.pl/index.php/2009/04/05/polandian-on-sunday-2/:

3. Barack Obama - a descendant of Polish monarchs?

Previous studies proved Barack Obama’s connection to the English house of Plantagenet and Edward I.  A Czech expert explores the connection between the Plantagenets, the Polish house of Piast and the Bohemian house of Przemyślid (cz. Přemyslid).

Descent Table of Barack Obama, King Edward I of England and Mieszko I, Duke of Poland.

Mieszko I, Duke of Poland  ? - 992
Bolesław Chrobry (Boleslas the Brave), King of Poland 967 - 1025
Mieszko II, King of Poland 990 - 1034
Kazimierz Odnowiciel (Casimir the Restorer), Duke of Poland 1016 - 1058
Władysław Herman (Ladislas Herman), Duke of Poland 1043 - 1102
Bolesław Krzywousty (Boleslas III Wrymouth Piast), Duke of Poland 1085-1138
Władysław II, (Ladislas II Piast), Duke of Krakow and Silesia 1105-1159
Rychilda (Richilde Piast), 1135-1198
Sancha of Castille 1154-1208
Alphonse II, Count of Provence ca 1180-1209
Raimond-Bérenger V, Count of Provence & Forcalquier ca 1205-1245
Eléonore of Provence 1223-1291
Edward I Longshanks Plantagenêt, King of England 1239-1307
Elizabeth Plantagenêt 1282-1316
William de Bohun, Earl of Northampton ca 1311-1360
Elisabeth de Bohun ca 1350-1385
Elizabeth Fitzalan 1366-1425
Joan Goushill
Catherine Stanley
Dulcia Savage
Maud Bold
Jennet Gerard
William Eltonhead
Richard Eltonhead
Martha Eltonhead
Eltonhead Conway
Martha Thacker
Edwin Hickman
James Hickman 1723-1816
Susannah Hickman
Annie Browning
George Washington Overall 1820-1871
Susan C Overall 1849
Gabriella Clark 1877
Ruth Lucille Armour 1900-1926
Stanley Armour Dunham 1918-1992
Ann Dunham 1942-1995
Barack Obama 1961-

Mieszko I Piast - probably Barack Obama's forefather.

Since I resemble Barack and Barack resembles Mieszko, it is obvious that we are related.

Q.E.D.

Jacek

I think we are all related. I mean it.

I don't think the world is ready for that discovery yet, Liliana. Although there is no danger of competitors stealing your idea, it's definitely worth patenting one day...

Thank you.

Originally written by Jacek K. on April 6, 2009 9:00 AM I don't think the world is ready for that discovery yet, Liliana. Although there is no danger of competitors stealing your idea, it's definitely worth patenting one day...

 

I thought everyone thought this.  Don't the scientifically minded believe we all ultimately stem from a single single-celled being, and creationists believe we are all descended from Adam and Eve?  Either way, we are all related.

The poll is unclear and poorly designed.  The statement contains multiple propositions and it is not clear what it means when you indicate that you feel it is either "true" or "false."  Is one responding to the claim that  facebook doesn't lead to substantive friendships, or that it is unhealthy?  The former may be true and the latter false, so what is one to do?

David,

The degree of hostility between various human tribes makes me doubt that they even suspect any possible relationship between themselves. While it is true that family members also get involved in feuds, they do not emphasize all the time their distinct ethnic roots, for example, which is what I hear about all the time and which supposedly makes the divide between tribes insuperable. Yes, I also know people who don't buy this idiocy but since I mentioned patents, they were not invented because people were all into a peaceful cooperation but probably because they are confrontational and aggressive (AND GREEDY) by nature.

Jacek

Originally written by David Kallans on April 6, 2009 9:52 AM The poll is unclear and poorly designed.  The statement contains multiple propositions and it is not clear what it means when you indicate that you feel it is either "true" or "false."  Is one responding to the claim that  facebook doesn't lead to substantive friendships, or that it is unhealthy?  The former may be true and the latter false, so what is one to do?

Karlson on the Roof  Situation.

Originally written by Jacek K. The degree of hostility between various human tribes makes me doubt that they even suspect any possible relationship between themselves.

Then again, the bible states that the first murder was an act of fratricide (Cain slaying Abel).  Moreover, it is of note that family violence occurred in the first generation following creation, suggesting that intra-family discord is central to the human condition.

Originally written by David Kallans on April 6, 2009 4:36 PM intra-family discord is central to the human condition.

I knew you would bring that up, David, that's why I focused on being fed up with people saying "I am killing you because you are Palestinian, Tutsi, Armenian, Black, etc." instead of admitting:  "I am killing you because I am an animal who has not evolved and I enjoy the smell and sight of blood." Why that constant hypocritical ethnic fig leaf? It's completely unnecessary considering that the emperor of the jungle is as naked today as he was when he first appeared in Africa 200,000 years ago.

Originally written by David Kallans on April 6, 2009 3:52 PM The poll is unclear and poorly designed.  ...so what is one to do?

Discuss?

I don't remember what I answered when that reservation was brought up for the first time, but I generally tend to think that the black-and-white format is the best when you want to elicit posts rather than simple clicks with no comments...

Could someone translate this for me, please?

Big Pharma Has Added You As a Friend on Facebook

Marketers from some of the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies have begun hyping their drugs on social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook. Pfizer, the company behind Viagra, already has 1,239 fans on Facebook, and AstraZeneca, makers of Prilosec, has 822 followers on Twitter. Kerry Grens of the Scientist dropped in on a conference designed to help big-pharma marketers understand the benefits and pitfalls of social media. 

What I don't understand is why I should care if someone has added me somewhere where I have never been and hopefully never will? I would start worrying if I ever decided to go myself and add myself where I don't want to be in the first place. Add me wherever you want. It is up to me to decide where I want to be. It's certainly not going to be any of the Big Pharma places.

Gotcha!

Excerpts from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/health/02face.html?_r=1&em:

That more and more people in Ms. Rice’s generation are joining networks like Eons, Facebook and MySpace is hardly news. ...

“One of the greatest challenges or losses that we face as older adults, frankly, is not about our health, but it’s actually about our social network deteriorating on us, because our friends get sick, our spouse passes away, friends pass away, or we move,” ...

“The new future of old age is about staying in society, staying in the workplace and staying very connected.... “And technology is going to be a very big part of that, because the new reality is, increasingly, a virtual reality. It provides a way to make new connections, new friends and new senses of purpose.”

About one-third of people 75 and older live alone, according to a 2009 study from AARP. ...

Some research suggests that loneliness can hasten dementia, and Dr. Nicholas A. Christakis, an internist and social scientist at Harvard, says he is considering research on whether online social connections can help delay dementia, as traditional ones have been found to do in some studies.

Well done, fans! Keep up the good work!

Facebook expects $500M this year

Facebook will generate $500 million in revenue this year, said Netscape founder Mark Andreessen, who serves on the social-networking site's board. With its growing user base of 225 million users, Facebook has publicly suggested that its primary focus will be on expanding its community as opposed to figuring out the most ideal models for revenue generation. Andreessen also believes that Facebook has the potential to generate "billions" in revenue in coming years.

Originally written by Jacek K. on April 16, 2009 9:40 AM Does Facebook Make You Dumb?

...don't know if Facebook makes you dumb, but some dumb people are definitely on Facebook:

http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSTRE56403820090705

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/british-spy-chief-outed-on-wifes-facebook-page-20090705-d961.html

http://www.euronews.net/2009/07/05/british-spy-chief-tagged-on-facebook/

how dumb can one be??!! dumb as a spy chief's wife!

Originally written by dominique f. on July 7, 2009 1:25 PM dumb as a spy chief's wife!

In this case, democratization of information is one of the beauties of the Web...

P.S. For the avoidance of doubt, I did not mean to say above that having a dumb wife may suggest that the man is dumb too.

* * *

http://www.utne.com/Science-Technology/What-Would-Jesus-Blog.aspx?utm_source=iPost&utm_medium=email

The Pope wants his flock to get online and start blogging. In a recent announcement, Pope Benedict XVI extolled the virtues of the world wide web saying, “Young people in particular, I appeal to you: bear witness to your faith through the digital world!” A recent article in the Smart Set points out that religion’s embrace of emerging technologies extends back further than the current, blog-loving pontiff. The Gutenberg bible was cutting-edge media for its time, and the clothespin, the wheel-driven washing machine, and the circular saw were all invented by the industrious Shaker Christians. (Though their sex-adverse beliefs, rather than their ingenious inventions, were likely what doomed the sect.) Golberg also shows how the story of Noah’s ark could be considered a parable for the benefits of embracing technology, before it’s too late.

Originally written by Jacek K. on July 7, 2009 6:47 PM P.S. For the avoidance of doubt, I did not mean to say above that having a dumb wife may suggest that the man is dumb too.

well, maybe but... though I wouldn't want to generalize or bad-mouth anyone I don't know, I'm thinking that somehow it also reflects in some way on the man who picked that kind of wife...

Originally written by Jacek K. on July 7, 2009 1:32 PM   dumb as a spy chief's wife! In this case, democratization of information is one of the beauties of the Web...

or maybe.... the democratization of idiocy and air-headedness?!!

df

Originally written by dominique f. on July 7, 2009 7:27 PM or maybe.... the democratization of idiocy?!!

True. Thanks to the Web the so-called upper class can no longer be distinguished from the hoi polloi. They behave the same way.

The Medium: Facebook Exodus

For some people, photos on Facebook of wheelchair users having fun, dating, and living a normal life is enough to dispel stereotypes of people with disability (Utne Reader): http://www.newmobility.com/articleViewIE.cfm?id=11499

Matt Labash's "Down with Facebook" essay:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/256implp.asp

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2009/09/19/better_pencil/index.html?source=newsletter

By now the arguments are familiar: Facebook is ruining our social relationships; Google is making us dumber; texting is destroying the English language as we know it. We're facing a crisis, one that could very well corrode the way humans have communicated since we first evolved from apes. What we need, so say these proud Luddites, is to turn our backs on technology and embrace not the keyboard, but the pencil.

Such sentiments, in the opinion of Dennis Baron, are nostalgic, uninformed hogwash. A professor of English and linguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Baron seeks to provide the historical context that is often missing from debates about the way technology is transforming our lives in his new book, "A Better Pencil." His thesis is clear: Every communication advancement throughout human history, from the pencil to the typewriter to writing itself, has been met with fear, skepticism and a longing for the medium that's been displaced.

[...]

* * *

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/magazine/20FOB-onlanguage-t.html?ref=magazine

“What’s done cannot be undone,” moaned Lady Macbeth in her famous sleepwalking scene. If she woke up in the 21st century, she would be pleased to discover that whatever can be done can be undone, too.

Or perhaps it just seems that way in the new social spaces we are carving for ourselves online. On popular Web sites devoted to social networking, innovative verbs have been springing up to describe equally innovative forms of interaction: you can friend someone on Facebook; follow a fellow user on Twitter; or favorite a video on YouTube. Change your mind? You can just as easily unfriend, unfollow or unfavorite with a click of the mouse. ...

Rewinding the tape of reality is an appealing metaphor in science fiction, unsurprisingly. Nancy Etchemendy’s young-adult novel, “The Power of Un,” features a middle-school student who operates a gizmo called “The Unner” to go back in time and undo past events. ...

It's not all about selling, I hope... Or was Facebook invented to meet the needs described in Post #48416?

A growing number of businesses are making Facebook an indispensible part of hanging out their shingles. Small businesses are using it to find new customers, build online communities of fans and dig into gold mines of demographic information: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/business/smallbusiness/12guide.html?em