NiaLLLarkin Niall Larkin
Jaikus from NiaLLLarkin
Thursday, 27 March 2008
-
@runningwithbulls I agree with your points. Its a matter of taste and inclination. Everyone gets something different from each tool. The binary argument. The idea that one is better than the other is simply missing the point. They are different.
-
Twitter is for the socially inept. No. Jaiku is for the socially inept.
"Twitter is for the socially inept. You cant carry on any kind of conversation there, and maybe its not designed for that. Thats fine, but to me its just too messy...Twitter love is irrational..."
I totally agree that twitter love is irrational. But irrational love is compelling love. The most compelling kind of love. Its the kind of love you want to experience in your life. Its the kind of love you should seek to cultivate in your life. If you are interested in getting into business, its the kind of love you should hope your offerings inspire. Ask people why they love twitter and they shrug and coyly say 'I dunno...' Which in its own way is charming.
Jaiku love on the other hand is 100% rational. And much less compelling for that. Ask a jaikuist why they love jaiku and they'll rationally assert that it has a rich set of features that make it possible to control the noise and better manage conversations and whereas you can't hear yourself think on twitter.
Its also worth noting that the one complaint people really have about geeks and nerds is their blindness to the fact that considered conversation is inappropriate to a light and fun atmosphere requried for a successful party and should be dropped when we all gather for the purpose of having fun.
The socially inept are those who are considered to be blind to or choose to ignore certain social cues. Those that shy away from messy social situations where they are required to improvise. Those that are uncomfortable in confusing social situations where it is easy and in fact socially necessary to lose the conversational thread.
The socially inept miss the point of Twitter. Twitter is not about considered opinion and considered conversation. Its main feature is that it runs interference against the social instinct to engage in deep and meaningful conversation.
This interference is a social lubricant. People play loud music at parties for precisely the same reason. They want to run interference against the human instinct to sit down and have considered conversation. You know. Considered conversation being the type of conversation that is not conducive to a party atmosphere. Some of the people who go to parties with loud music will naturally gravitate away from the action towards the kitchen. In some ways, Jaiku is the kitchen area at the microblogging party while twitter is the main party room.
Friday, 30 November 2007
-
Nice reminder. I need to do that too.
Friday, 16 November 2007
Wednesday, 31 October 2007
-
I hope this means there'll be a nice precis on currently available info coming :)
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
Friday, 26 October 2007
-
Thanks for pointing that out. Mcuh better
Thursday, 25 October 2007
-
Come back Microsoft. All is forgiven :)
Wednesday, 24 October 2007
-
For fecks sake. I'm almost embarrassed to say that my productivity shot upwards today. Clarify, simplify and focus.
Saturday, 20 October 2007
-
It may be that it comes down to the location issue but if right was right it would have been Flickr-Pixenate. That's for sure.
Friday, 19 October 2007
-
Hi Mike. Certainly. Where should I send it?
-
Woo-hoo! Happy Birthday Lexia
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
Monday, 15 October 2007
-
Great questions Robin. Where is the boundary between close friends and aquaintances? Online social networks have clearly defined boundaries that rarely exist in real world. Even the idea of a network is a poor metaphor for reality, where its social groups are much more dynamic with fuzzy boundaries. More like a social cloud.
-
-
I believe we are especially attracted to those straightforward resources that can also lead a secret double life as convenient social props. These types of objects enable us to subtly negotiate and balance 1) the desire to connect with 2) the need to maintain a comfortable distance. Such resources enable us form social bonds on terms everyone is comfortable with, reducing social friction and helping us reach an end-point where we can say "I came for the 'object' but stayed for the people".
-
Agreed tom. Resources are a better label than social objects. Like a village well or market it attracts people to both the putative resource and the social resource
Sunday, 14 October 2007
Jaikus from NiaLLLarkin