So, I’ve talked in the past how I have been working hard on “Show #15″ here at Revision 3. Well, I am happy to say that it has finally launched!
Called Social Brew, the show is all about social networks and the people who use them. It has gone through a lot of modifications, and it still very much is a work in progress. Along with producing parts of the show, I will be your guide to Bay Area meet-ups, and do a weekly segment on new apps and social networking websites.
As you all know, I live and breathe this stuff, so I am really enjoying working on this show. Also, our senior producer, Eileen Rivera has done a smashing job on really refining the idea of Social Brew.
Check it out, and please let me know what you think. Constructive criticism, likes, and suggestions welcome!
While poking around on Twitter, a friend of mine posted this site. Prayabout.com is a different type of social network; more solemn than Myspace and less denominational than Mychurch.
It’s a simple premise really. People submit a prayer about anything that is irking them in life and fellow users can write encouraging comments. When you sign up, you can choose a little avatar or upload your own pic, which is in accordance to the social net code. The part where it gets a little strange is the concept of lighting candles, [from the site]:
“When you light candles for a prayer request, it gets listed higher up on the list…You receive candles when you invite your friends to the site…You can purchase candles with your credit card or checking account via PayPal.”
Working at a startup, I understand the concept of making money from a website. Being a religious person, I am familiar with the idea of a collection tray being passed around. But why does this feel as if it is an elementary school fund raiser, where the more you sell the closer you get to getting that shiny new bike?
It’s obvious that I am on a number of different social networks. I mean, check out the little bar a few clicks down, over there —>
One thing that I have noticed as of late is the development of who I am on these different platforms. With sites like Myspace and Facebook, it is a bit easier to define yourself–you are given prompts with fields, and no essential character limit. Plus you have a giant picture which could make it easy for any fella off the street to recognize you. Even with this WordPress blog, I have a section which tells you all about me [whether you like it or not].
My recent character definition has been burgeoning on my mini-blogs. That is, I feel that I have finally differentiated who I am on Twitter versus Pownce. By just looking at the last 20 posts on Twitter, you would think I was a full-fledged bratty, food-obsessed complainer. And I really would’nt blame you. When it comes to Twitter, I find my posts to be pretty…well…bitter.
This is your brain on social networks.
On Pownce, I have more thoughtful and intellectual posts. I write about cool Web 2.0 tools I discover, music that I love, general epiphanies, seek tech support, all in addition to updating my friends on my current human condition. Why is it that I find that I am two different people on these sites? Is it as simple as being limited by the amount of text I am allowed to jot down?
Sometimes, when I am at home*, I can’t help but want to watch the “All good things…” episode of Star Trek, The Next Generation. As mentioned earlier, I don’t own a DVR; In such situations, there was one place I could always turn– Tvlinks.co.uk.
Like many of you, I discovered that the bloke behind TvLinks was arrested for facilitating the viewership of copyrighted media a few days ago. I instantly clicked on my bookmarked page and was rather disappointed by the loss of a good friend..err..website.
I know that the government insists on raining on every net pirates parade, but why him? He not only had a disclaimer on his site, but he also did not provide videos–just links. It was bloody genius really. I believed this guy was going to make it, but the damn feds always have to persecute people, even if its an individual who is standing by the sidelines of “crime.” I am totally having Seinfeld “good Samaritan” flashbacks. Have no clue what I’m talking about? You’ll probably have to buy the DVD for like $30+ bucks, since the beloved site has been shut down.
Anyway, when I found out the site was gone, I madly searched for other sites that would have similar content. It was the Napster to Morpheus switch all over again. Except this time, I couldn’t seem to find a site that has the clean interface and good connected links as the UK site. I know of Joox, but that site does not have the selection [or the intuitive web page] that I am looking for.
Have any of you come across anything that will fill this void? Or will I have to resort to amateur You Tube videos to entertain me on slow news days? PLZ HALP!
*That actually means work, but I didn’t want to sound like a slacker.
Posted on October 25th, 2007 by neha | 10 Comments »
I recently noticed a new feature on professional networking site Linkedin. Everyone currently has the ability to add a teeny-tiny picture themselves on their public profile.
There already has been some discussion on the photo addition on the Linkedin forum. While I don’t mind it, I question its intention. Linkedin has always been the place that seemed to pride experience, skill and academics over anything else. On the other hand, if you can have interviews over the web it seems to be a natural step for the site. For me, not having the option to post a photo on Linkedin is what set it apart from others. It was purely business and brains, the way the corporate world ideally should be.
Linkedin Santa doesn't want to know if you're naughty or nice.
He just wants to know if you're hot or not.
Regrettably, the real world is not like that. Let’s face it, beauty rules in any society–tangible or not. To their credit, they are trying to retain their street cred by making the pictures ridiculously diminutive. If Linkedin is hopping on the Facbook-esq bandwagon, deliver it all the way; offer members the option of having a visual portfolio of head shots, etc. In my own field, PR, acting, and modeling, I could see how this feature could be used effectively. You don’t necessarily want a troll in front of the camera or reppin’ your company. It matters in any field, whether it is discussed or not.
Just by reading my blog, I am sure you can tell that I heart Lolcats. I have the Facebook app, and have even attempted to create my own Lolcats. Honestly, nothing I could slap together would compare to this stuff.
The cutely called Halolcats is a place where Halo 3 and Lolcat fans can rejoice and share a geeky belly laugh. Built by two gamers, the site was inspired by the much anticipated release of Halo 3 and everyone’s favorite subculture–the Lolcat.
Although I haven’t played Halo 3 yet [or any Halo after the first– FPS aren’t really my thing anymore], I still enjoy this sites simple layout, creativity, and attempt at good old fashioned gamer fun. I must let you know that I know the folks behind this site, and they are just as wonderful in real life as their Lolcats are fiercely funny.
Get in ur internets, and laugh at these Flood blastin’ Lolcats! Don't ferget to Digg meez. Plz.
Posted on October 1st, 2007 by neha | 3 Comments »
While I was out for tea this last weekend, a friend of mine asked me if I had a Friendster account. Ah Friendster, the poor predecessor of Myspace and Facebook that got left in the dust. The site boasts of having “over 50 million profiles,” which is not much compared to Tom on Myspace’s 203 million friends. No offense to Tom, but not even everyone is his friend [some people choose to delete him…I’ve been nice and kept the fellow Cal alum]. After opening their doors to every Tom, Dick and Harry on the planet, I am sure that Facebook has a sizable community as well. For some reason, I think that Friendster might be doing okay overseas, but is really tanking in the States. Even their dorky Jansport backpack backgrounds can’t save them now.
Why all the bitter blood over Friendster, you ask? Well here’s a little story on my recent user experience. I logged on after approximately 3 months to add my aforementioned chai-going pal. I had a number of changes to make as I realized that most of my pictures were outdated, my favorite tastes had changed, and my “about me” section sounded uber-dorky. I also saw that they had swiped the personalized URL idea from Myspace, and the “It’s complicated” relationship status from Facebook. Way to go, wannabe copycats. I submitted my fancy URL like 4 times, and it kept leading back to my old page without the modifications.
After that, I decided to edit the text and photos. After making my grand total of photos on the site a lucky number 13, I was told that I could post 980+ more photos of myself. Do the internets really need like 1,000 pictures of me being a total dumbass? I think not, thus making this an unnecessary feature. Revising the photos and amending the text took several attempts, despite the “changes successful” message that I received after every update. In addition, I checked out their media section with videos from You Tube, and presumably, music. I eventually gave up because of the lack of direction on how to insert a different video on the profile page, or embed a music player. The only item that was really easy to update was the new “Featured friends” section. Think of it as the “Top 8″ on Myspace, but a tad less seamless. Finally, I tried to alter the background to something more me, which for some reason didn’t stick. Most likely because it was an indirect message–Friendster is so NOT me anymore.
When we first met, there were definite sparks. This colorful guy was the type of person that would change his appearance on the drop of a dime, knew my favorite songs, and even got along with most of my friends. But things changed as someone better came along. He was educated, simple, and had some backbone. No matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t change certain things about him. As a constellation, he promised to let me add things to his personality, making him more complete.
The first flashy gentlemen I was referring to is my dear friend Myspace. The second, who swept me off my feet, is none other than Mr. Facebook. I’ve been with Myspace longer than Facebook, but I can’t help but be a little disenchanted by it. This parallel or personification is justified; being with a social network is a type of relationship. In this case, there are two “guys” vying for the users attention.
Good old Yahoo! photos is closing it’s doors in just a few days. All Yahoo users have the option to download all their photos, or migrate to Yahoo! owned Flickr. I may be one of the last users of the traditional Yahoo! photos, but any site that is geriatric approved [note: my mother can understand it] deserves some appreciation. Sure it wasn’t all web 2.0 fantastic, but it was easy to use. As everyone and their dog now has a online photo blog, I am thinking it’s time to join the masses. Not to say that I haven’t been there before…
I still remember the first time I danced around joining Flickr. I was in college, it wasn’t owned by Yahoo, and I was looking for a way to share high res pics with my chums. Flickr seemed to be the only alternative at the time, though the page format seemed confusing to me. After all, it was one of the first sites to use the Web 2.0 module. In any case, I was turned off by it and stuck with what I had;Yahoo!, TextAmerica, and Webshots.
While in college, I stuck up random streams of images on my Textamerica Moblog. I got bored and creeped out by that site [hello stalkers], so I tried out Webshots my last two years at Cal. As a free service for a few pictures, it worked well. After a while, I lost interest in posting pictures, perhaps because of the lack of community and boring interface.
Alas, I never really found a place to settle on photo sharing. Sure there is SmugMug, Zooomr, and a bunch of vowel-lacking photo sharing sites.Somewhere in between creepy TextAmerica and snoozy Webshots, there has to be a happy medium and a place where I feel like I belong. Is Flickr the missing link? Should I give it another shot?
Posted on September 16th, 2007 by neha | 4 Comments »
I’ll admit it. Now that I’m single, I’ve perused Match.com a couple of times, but have never come across anything that peaked my interest. Today, that all changed. I happened to land on a profile of a worldly, Ivy league cutie, who reads The Economist and has a Zen center. The thing is–I refuse to become a member.
I’m not saying there is anything wrong with being on a dating website [I know plenty of people happy as a result of them], but I just feel like Facebook and Myspace should somehow be enough. I know that both are meant to be used as platonic networking sites. I’ve been a Myspacer/Facebooker for years now, and have used both for that purpose successfully. The thing is, if someone who was a potentially good fit was even on those sites, would I approach them? Probably not, as I am kinda old fashioned with the dating scene. What happens when you see a hot person who lives within 25 miles, likes the great outdoors, exceeds your height requirement [6 ft…wowza!]–but is on a dating site? After all, Match.com’s tagline is “It’s okay to look.”
Maybe I should not have looked to begin with…perhaps it’s not really “okay.” I suppose it’s a community just like the other sites and there is always a catch. You always have to join as well; Reciprocate with your profile on the site. I think the idea of being linked to a dating site is also something that isn’t quite accepted in social circles yet. The funny thing is that I have a number of friends who are members, to whom I have sworn secrecy to never tell. Plus, it’s always so random when you see someone you actually know on the dating site of your choice. Their profile with their likes and dislikes in poetic prose–you can’t help but smile and feel a tad bit of an “aww…how sadly dorky.”
