http://www.businessinsider.com/why-yo-momma-wont-use-google-and-why-that-thrills-me-to-no-end-2011-7
This guy thinks I won't use Google+ because I'm old enough to be someone's mom, and therefore I'm an "average user" who is "locked into Facebook," as opposed to a member of the club of "geeks, insiders, social media stars, journalists, and other people" or "people who have strong social graphs". He's glad about this because "we geeks and early adopters and social media gurus need a place to talk free of folks who think Justin Bieber is the second coming of Christ." (Huh...I haven't seen a single conversation about Justin Bieber among my friends.)
He thinks that having to use *asterisks* to tag text as bold is "mighty geeky" and so it will keep "normal people" out, the people who "want the system just to bring them fun stuff without doing any work." Because "Normal/average users? They just want to watch TV and drink beer." Which means "Google+ is for the passionate users of tech" and "if you want to really be able to choose who you listen to, then Google+ is much better" than Facebook.
He's also excited about the “'Hangout' videochat feature" because "You can have 10 people call into a room and it lets you all talk to each other." Oooh! People have never been able to do that before! And now we can do it with video. That makes it easy to weed out of our social circles the ugly and different people and the stray "woman old enough to be a mom" who managed to sneak her way in.
Personally, I'm not rushing to join it primarily because Google already has a ton of demographic data on me and I'd rather not give it even more.
This guy thinks I won't use Google+ because I'm old enough to be someone's mom, and therefore I'm an "average user" who is "locked into Facebook," as opposed to a member of the club of "geeks, insiders, social media stars, journalists, and other people" or "people who have strong social graphs". He's glad about this because "we geeks and early adopters and social media gurus need a place to talk free of folks who think Justin Bieber is the second coming of Christ." (Huh...I haven't seen a single conversation about Justin Bieber among my friends.)
He thinks that having to use *asterisks* to tag text as bold is "mighty geeky" and so it will keep "normal people" out, the people who "want the system just to bring them fun stuff without doing any work." Because "Normal/average users? They just want to watch TV and drink beer." Which means "Google+ is for the passionate users of tech" and "if you want to really be able to choose who you listen to, then Google+ is much better" than Facebook.
He's also excited about the “'Hangout' videochat feature" because "You can have 10 people call into a room and it lets you all talk to each other." Oooh! People have never been able to do that before! And now we can do it with video. That makes it easy to weed out of our social circles the ugly and different people and the stray "woman old enough to be a mom" who managed to sneak her way in.
Personally, I'm not rushing to join it primarily because Google already has a ton of demographic data on me and I'd rather not give it even more.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:34 pm (UTC)I emphatically agree with your reason not to join. For myself, I think of that as a geek's reason - I understand the underlying system well enough to want to opt out.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 11:58 pm (UTC)re: At last, with Google+, everyone on the Internet will know you're a dog again.
Date: 2 Jul 2011 12:39 am (UTC)Actually, though, what I'm waiting for is for someone to come up with "mark as read" in one of these social media or another. You wouldn't think that would be so hard.
Re: At last, with Google+, everyone on the Internet will know you're a dog again.
Date: 2 Jul 2011 01:27 am (UTC)Mostly it seems to have a better interface for groups of friends (not designed to maximize sharing for the benefit of advertisers) and better facilities for actually seeing the stuff you want to see and making conversations from it (am I the only person who conducts fb business almost entirely by email?).
But I still get such a strong sense that people are trying to reinvent usenet and threaded newsreaders with a tiny side of IM.
Re: At last, with Google+, everyone on the Internet will know you're a dog again.
Date: 2 Jul 2011 03:51 pm (UTC)Re: At last, with Google+, everyone on the Internet will know you're a dog again.
Date: 5 Jul 2011 12:18 am (UTC)I think what we need (yeah, right) is to create a bunch of virtual uber-personas that can have the friends, interests and other stuff that all the reinventions seem to require. Everything nowadays (for partly-technical, mostly business-model reasons) centers on people and the threads etc that they create -- at least as far as I can see -- and that doesn't really work for oldsters like me.
Re: At last, with Google+, everyone on the Internet will know you're a dog again.
Date: 2 Jul 2011 04:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 12:44 am (UTC)I get the impression, judging by the stuff he's enthusing about there, that he hasn't really been on the internet for very long. He's so pleased with his own cleverness regarding trivialities such as asterisks-mean-bold, after all. Not exactly the mark of someone who's been around the tracks for a while, methinks.
no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 06:33 am (UTC)And many of us have tried to explain to him that not everyone is a white, cis-gendered, hetero guy in the tech industry and maybe can't afford not to be pseudonymous on the internet.
no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 02:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 01:43 am (UTC)LOL. I guess he'd plotz if he did any research on great big social networking sites for five minutes and found out that this huge website, Ravelry, which is for knitters, many of which are middle-aged-and-older females, uses asterisks to bold text.
Oh wait, no, the asterisks are for italics. Yeah, that's so last year. *snort*
no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 04:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 03:15 pm (UTC)I'm sorry you don't like your mother. Maybe if you showed her how to use the Internet like a geek, you'd enjoy having her share your hobby.
I don't like your eagerness to other people, it's so privileged (cis-gendered while male? check). We were using asterisks to mark text bold back in the early 1990s on Usenet (and probably before that--it's just that I've only been using Usenet since then). And I'm a grandmother.
If you don't have the discipline to set boundaries around your use of social media (say, by rejecting friend requests, or remembering who might see that info you just posted), then stay off of them. Take responsibility for your choices, don't expect a business offering you a product to police your social group.
I doubt Google really wants to discriminate against older people. That's actually against federal law, they constitute a protected class.
And really, dude, way to show off your immaturity. If you want to say "no non-geeky people" age isn't how you do it. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. To my kids *you* are old. To my grandkids you are ancient. Even if to me you sound like a whiny teenager.
no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 07:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 3 Jul 2011 04:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 3 Jul 2011 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 08:52 pm (UTC)Because I didn't ever sign on to group chat on PCLink back in 1988.
Heh.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:43 pm (UTC)And I signed on with the last wood-burning modem!
wood burning modem
Date: 2 Jul 2011 07:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:30 pm (UTC)My father, who was born in 1945, would rather beg to differ, as he was one of the technological developers that made that young snot's tools possible.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:34 pm (UTC)According to Wikipedia, he was born in 1965, so he isn't young. He has NO excuse to be that way.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 09:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:07 pm (UTC)Heck,
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:47 pm (UTC)Scoble used to have some interesting things to say about tech. Now he seems just as reactionary as the folks he's supposing won't use Google+.
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 11:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 10:18 pm (UTC)The idea of me being a "digital immigrant" is absurd. I'm a web programmer by profession! I help make the internet!
no subject
Date: 1 Jul 2011 11:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 07:22 am (UTC)fact.
no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 03:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 05:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2 Jul 2011 03:43 pm (UTC)ugh.
also saw an article how it was less than 10% women and that was horrible. which, well, i looked at my circles... i think there are more women than men.
google is my bread and butter and healthcare (my partner works there) so i am a bit biased and it's the only reason i'm such and early adopter, but it's not as "geeky" or offputting to the average user as this man suggests.