WEB 2.0

As we join groups and social networks from affinity sites to Facebook, are we extending and expanding identities, or increasingly conforming to the cookie-cutter profiles demanded of these interfaces? Is the loss of "personal space" and "reflection" so many users complain of merely the necessary surrender of "ego" as we learn to participate as members of a more evolved "collective organism" of "hyper-people?"
(You may want to re-watch "bubby" and "warcraft" sections of digital nation)


It is true that just about everyone is a part of some social networking site in 2011.  People use these sites for many different reasons.  One of the most popular by far is Face book.  What started out as a site specifically for Harvard students then became a site for college students and is now used by just about everyone I know, and most likely everyone you know as well.  It is rather amazing to think about how fast Face book and other social networking sites have grown--face book started just a few years ago and now has over 500 million users.  (That greater than the population of the United States, just to put things into perspective)


The possibilities on face book are endless.  People can meet friends, meet lovers, catch up with old friends, create groups and advertise and promote products and events.  It really opens doors to connection worldwide with others.  People also use face book to create a certain "image" of themselves that they would like to be perceived as.  Especially in the high school generation, teens are exposing so much of themselves through pictures that it is becoming rather risqué.  As we saw in the Web 2.0 video, many are creating a whole sort of "second identity" online on sites such as face book or MySpace.  It is seen as almost separate from real life, which is causing concern for many.  I definitely think social networking sites create the opportunity to change your appearance to the outside world, and many people who are unsure of themselves or have fantasies of being a certain type of person, thrive on this and make it a big part of their lives.  This is why social sites such as World of War Craft where you "become" a player in a magical world, are so popular.  In games such as these, relationships are created.  Time is spent with others for anywhere from 5 to 25 hours a week.  Whether to say these relationships are legitament or not is up to you.  I feel that they are legitament, but definitely have different qualities compared with real-life interaction with others.  Second Life is another site, which allows for this creation of a new identity. 
In the Web2.0 video we saw Bubbie, who LOVED cooking on YouTube with her grandson, and encouraged everyone to try it out.  She loved the connections she was making without even leaving her kitchen.  It was refreshing to see someone using the internet for such enjoyment.  A large question is whether or not the "connections" she was making with people who she couldn’t see were real or not.  In my mind, I feel that if SHE feels the connection and it is making her happy, than that is all that should matter.  However, I think people definitely should keep in mind how much weight they place on their online relationships, compared with their relationships in real life.  I say this because studies have shown (and predicted) that younger generations growing up with so much internet access and ways to "connect" through IM, text and social sites, have much higher levels of social anxiety and underdeveloped social skills.  This is because some kids are relying on texts and e-mail and non face-to-face interaction, as their main interaction.  This is a very big worry, especially when the time comes from jobs and interviews. 
It definitely IS a whole new world depending on what you use the internet for, and I believe that growing up with the internet as part of our lives definitely makes life much different than it ever was previously. Our online identities are definitely different from our true life identities; they can differ slightly, or they can differ greatly. I think our job is to figure out a healthy balance, and figure out how to separate real-life from internet-life.  It always takes time to work our kinks when something is new, especially with technology, but in time I think as humans we are smart enough to figure out the balance between the two. 

Folksonomy and the Folks.
Everybody is, indeed, here now - but should everyone be here? Does the rise of the amateur lead to an unnecessary devaluation of the professional? Do collective online activities promote a new form of participatory democracy and the development of new and accurate folksonomies, or rather to they lead people to overestimate the value of their unconsidered posts and opinions? Do representative democracy, academic disciplines and other seemingly elitist artifacts fall by the wayside?

Speaking briefly on the topic of folksonomy and the fact that EVERYONE is using the internet, which I mentioned early, there sure is ALOT to say.  I feel that the ease of using the internet now has created a lot of loopholes for many people, and created the ability for people to connect much easier.  Today, it is so easy to find old friends by simply searching someone’s name on face book.  10 years ago, it was merely impossible.  Today, meetings can be held with people in New York and people in Tokyo, using Second life or Skype.  10 years ago, thousands would need to be spent on airfare and hotel stays, for meetings like this to occur.  This is definitely an advantage of the new technologies and social sites.  However, along with these advantages, just like everything else, comes disadvantages. The ease of using the internet today has made things a lot easier, that people once had to be trained to do and usually requires a degree and years of experience.  Now, anyone can be a "director" using YouTube or the video on their iPhone.  Anyone can create a music band using things like garage band.  People can also all be journalists through the use of blogs.  Journalism has suffered greatly because of this and News stations and newspapers as well.  Instead of buying a newspaper at the store, they can be purchased online, or you can get extremely updated news on homepages such as yahoo, or by simply googling.  The internet has made it possible for many to "work from home" and basically be in their pajamas if they choose.  To think that someone working at IBM making 6 figures is lounging in pajamas definitely takes away from the professionalism we usually associate with such a position.  Also, the fact that basically anyone can be in the Army or Marines now, because they can sit at a computer and drop bombs in another country, is shocking to me.  I think it is VERY smart that they still make them go through training and wear the uniform to get them in the right mindset, but techniqually none of it is necessary now with the advances in technology.  If someone can play a video shooting game, they can pretty much be a bomber in the military.  These technological advancements have definitely changed my view and many others views of professionalism.  The concept has sort of become diverged with unprofessionals.  Again, I think we just need to find a happy-medium as a society between professionalism and the new advancements in technology, for things to work out for everyone.