dagblog - Comments for "Dear Dag Boys: Please Don't Make Me Tweet"

Let's snicker at the

quinn esq — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:27:48 +0000

In reply to You're right, elliott.

Let's snicker at the coal-burners for a moment shall we, Acanuck?

Snicker.

It gets worse. Now their Tweeters are coal-fired.

While I'm glad you're aware

DF — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:21:00 +0000

In reply to I disagree with the fad

While I'm glad you're aware of the blog, the popularity of Twitter is hardly a counterpoint to it being a fad. I completely disagree that Twitter represents anything resembling the evolution of how we manage information. In fact, the opposite is true. The reason is this: From a technology standpoint, Twitter does absolutely nothing new. To the contrary, its signature feature is an abritrary limitation placed on a technology, the web, that already far exceeds the technology from which it was adopted, namely SMS. Furthermore, SMS does not even really suffer from this limitation anymore given that every major mobile provider multi-plexes SMS messages.

How does the SMSification of the web evolve how we manage information? I haven't a clue. Twitter does nothing that the web and RSS haven't been doing for quite some time. However, it has been marketed to the extreme and has a rapidly expanding user base for the time being. So did AOL, but their technological offerings ultimately represented a shackling of the full power of the Internet.

A real evolution of the way we manage information would be updating our pitiful wireless infrastructure to match that of Europe or Japan. Then we could have more of the power of the Internet on our mobile devices instead of SMSifying the web.

I already have a strict

Orlando — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:11:58 +0000

In reply to I think that if you ban

I already have a strict no-talking rule in my car. But mostly it's to keep me from chatting with myself.

I think that if you ban

elliottness — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:08:06 +0000

In reply to There's not much point in

I think that if you ban calling on the phone in the car, then you have to ban talking to other passengers while driving. good luck on that.

There's not much point in

acanuck — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:56:17 +0000

In reply to not sure where to go on this

There's not much point in lugging the thing around if you're not going to answer it, is there? I resent being reachable 24/7. Maybe I value solitude more than most.

I don't oppose cells for anyone else; just for me. Though I think phoning while driving is dangerous and should be banned and fined. Above all, motorists who talk on the phone while turning corners should have their cells confiscated, if not their cars. Oh wait, maybe I do really hate cell phones.

You're right, elliott.

acanuck — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:43:35 +0000

In reply to And blog comments are...?

You're right, elliott. Blogging, and all the other e-stuff we do, sucks up energy. Of course, we'd otherwise be cruising around in our cars being bored. Or lighting charcoal fires in our backyards. So it evens out a bit.

I take some comfort that the power I use is is hydroelectric, which is basically renewable solar. So virtually no greenhouse emissions. And I live in a cold climate, so the heat from my computer, TV, etc. serves a dual purpose for much of the year. But yeah, none of us are without eco-sin.

Is this an invitation to Mad

Orlando — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:06:44 +0000

In reply to And blog comments are...?

Is this an invitation to Mad Lib?

No clue. I don't write my own

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:02:30 +0000

In reply to And blog comments are...?

No clue. I don't write my own comments.

not sure where to go on this

elliottness — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:55:09 +0000

In reply to We're using different

not sure where to go on this - you are anti-cell phone because you loose autonomy? Does a ringing phone obligate you?

And blog comments are...?

elliottness — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:53:43 +0000

In reply to My friends just call me No.

And blog comments are...?