3tv

The sprint

Originally uploaded by stilleben [’stelle:bƏn].

My friend and former colleague Martin Sønderlev Christensen defends his thesis tomorrow. I have not read it all – primarily browsed it (sorry Martin, will read it at some point) – but it seems like a must if you are interested in social software and moblogging, and more generally visual culture.

There is an abstract here – and I will see you there, that is Auditorium 4, 14:00 at ITU.

Got an Email today from Dewitt Colvin (stocknews@trade.gus.elcom.ru) [googled both and they are fake of course] with the subject: abundantly clear2, the email reads:

“applications. You   Patterns–the lessons or on the real relationship  matter–why
to use them,  so you look to Design design problems   be wrong (and what
Facade, Proxy, and Factory  challenging. Something  them to work immediately.  You
want to learn about   the next time you’re
of patterns with others  You’ll easily counter with your  used in the Java API  (and
too short) to spend  Best of all, in a way that won’t  or on the real relationship
you have. You know your time on…something
when he casually mentions  Java’s built-in pattern   advantage  be wrong (and what
of patterns with others  You’ll easily counter with your  to do instead). You want
format designed for the way  his stunningly clever use of Command, better at solving
software   be wrong (and what  when to use them, how  format designed for the way
that you can hold your
more complex.   the same software
words, in real world
to use them (and when  will load patterns into your  your time on…something   you
don’t want to  you get to take
words, in real world  “secret language”
Head First book, you know
of Design Patterns so  Head First Design Patterns  at speaking the language  to do
instead). You want Head First book, you know
Singleton isn’t as simple as it  You’ll easily counter with your
better at solving software
look “in the wild”.
Design Patterns, you’ll avoid  about inheritance might
you get to take neurobiology, cognitive   Patterns–the lessons Head First Design
Patterns  But you don’t just
to do instead). You want Something more fun.  Singleton isn’t as simple as it
Facade, Proxy, and Factory Head First book, you know your time on…something  Head
First book, you know is so often misunderstood,  that you can hold your his
stunningly clever use of Command,
alone. At any given moment,   In their native  and experience of others,
and Adapter. With Head First
a book, you want  more complex.
more complex.
or on the real relationship   of the best practices  Something more fun.   be wrong
(and what  design problems
design problems, and better  neurobiology, cognitive  the patterns that   in between
sips of a martini.
Decorator is something from Head First book, you know your boss told you  else.
Something more You’ll easily counter with your
also want to learn  format designed for the way
up a creek without  the patterns that   and why everything  the latest research in
Facade, Proxy, and Factory
want to see how look “in the wild”. real OO design principles
support in your own code. to use them (and when   to learn how those  neurobiology,
cognitive   to learn how those  to do instead). You want
your boss told you  your brain works. Using
used in the Java API
in between sips of a martini.  Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>Y>”

This piece of writing has intrigued me and I don’t know why. Perhaps because it is something that one of the five Jpodders from  Couplands new novel could have written one late night after sipping to much Martini or drinking Cowboys home made coca cola with a twist of Kam Fong’s magic powder. I do think that the last line “in between sips of Martini” intrigues me, being very fond of Martini, but probably more because of the subject that this sentence articulates: the author as someone who drinks Martini while writing code, along with the circulatory status of the sentences, that for nonprogrammers makes it resemble code. And - OK I’ll stop now before this post resembles the email.

Good news for everyone doing research in social networking :

“Friend-what?” you might be asking, but it’s true: Red Herring is reporting that Friendster, the ill-fated social networking that (I think) started it all, has been granted a patent on social networks. Following a great tradition of painstakingly clear patent language, Friendster owns the patent for a “system, method, and apparatus for connecting users in an online computer system based on their relationships within social networks”.

Whether Friendster will use the time-tested ‘if you can’t beat ‘em, take em to court’ strategy is yet to be seen, but to their credit: they apparently applied for the patent (issued June 27 of 2006) way back in the day, before they fell from their perch. (Via the social software blog)

Now that the patent is out we don’t have to spend time anymore defining what system, method, apparatus, user, online, relationships and social networks are - its all in the patent!

UPDATE: The complete program is now online, find it here

On October the 6th Aalborg University has a seminar on web2.0 I will be giving a talk with the above titel, and the abstract is here:

Are blogs the savior of modern democracy or are they the biggest attempt
till date to flatten our culture with superstitious narcissistic
babblings? Are moblogs and videoblogs the liberation of consumers in a
process of making them into content producers or are we witnessing an
overflow of reality TV addicts gone crazy in exposing themselves online?
Are social networking sites the rise of globalized friendships making the
world more coherent or are they just narrowing the scope of people to only
being interested in their closed circle of friends? Are users the new
designers in a strategic employment of user driven innovation or should we
rather talk about loser driven innovation? Are we witnessing the break
down of the public and private?
Are we asking the right questions to address the social software and
web2.0 movement? In this talk I will give an account of social software,
from both a personal and academic perspective. What kind of questions
should we ask? How do these technologies provoke our concepts in academia
and culture more generally?
Expect more questions, personal confessions, theoretical babblings and a
few answers.

Not surprisingly I do not think we are asking the right questions, the above questions only continue the AlphaGeek and AlphaGeist dichotomy. So how and what should we ask? I’ll try to come with suggestions in the weeks to come.

Michael Zimmer from New York University and Mikkel Holm Sørensen from Actics are speaking as well so should be really interesting