I think of technology as the ultimate Enabler, in both the positive as well as the AA sense of that word. If you want to be a shut-in, no problem -- you can shop for groceries, earn a living, even socialize from the comfort of home without uttering a single face-to-face word. If you crave intimacy, but find the psychic price of IRL interaction too steep, there's a (porn) site for you. And if having hundreds of Facebook "friends" truly gives you a sense of connection... well, obviously you're in sync with the masses.
But here's the kind of enabler most of us need: the kind that helps Opportunity find our door, that lets us know when we're actually in the right place at the right time, that nudges us to chat up the adorable stranger on the subway platform now instead of posting to "Missed Connections" later. Everyday another hundred+ people get onto our trains, or walk through our parks, or lounge at our spots. Some of those strangers could offer us a job, produce our screenplay, share our love of Lego art, end our loneliness -- whatever. Not likely, perhaps, but possible. Facebook, et. al, covers the people we do know -- what about all the people we don't but maybe could? With all this GPS tracking and whatnot, technology has the goods to be that enabler, doesn't it?
Well, if location-based social networks/apps like StreetSpark take off, maybe technology will one day meet my high expectations.
Showing posts with label lifestyle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lifestyle. Show all posts
19 February 2010
16 February 2010
The Tao of Twitter
There are 23.7 million tweets per day, on average, mostly human in origin. But that could be changing, if this post on HuffPo is any indication.
Animals, beds, toilets, trees, shoes, chairs and even bathroom scales are increasingly invading the Twitterverse. Apparently oversharing, self-promotion and narcissistic solipsism are not traits exclusive to homo sapiens.
Animals, beds, toilets, trees, shoes, chairs and even bathroom scales are increasingly invading the Twitterverse. Apparently oversharing, self-promotion and narcissistic solipsism are not traits exclusive to homo sapiens.
Labels:
humor,
lifestyle,
pop culture,
social media,
technology,
trends
13 February 2010
Love in the time of 140 characters or less
Will flittering be the new speed dating?
Imagine walking into a dimly lit, swank lounge packed with 300+ singles, everyone wearing a numbered tag and holding a mobile device. A giant Big Brother screen looms, displaying a live-feed stream of the flirty tweets (aka "flitters") pinging about amongst the crowd. You spot an enticing stranger, and with thumbs poised on mobile device you begin to compose in your head the perfect in-140-characters-or-less come-on to #157....
Imagine walking into a dimly lit, swank lounge packed with 300+ singles, everyone wearing a numbered tag and holding a mobile device. A giant Big Brother screen looms, displaying a live-feed stream of the flirty tweets (aka "flitters") pinging about amongst the crowd. You spot an enticing stranger, and with thumbs poised on mobile device you begin to compose in your head the perfect in-140-characters-or-less come-on to #157....
Labels:
lifestyle,
news,
pop culture,
social media,
technology,
trends
10 February 2010
Got Beer?
The key ingredient contained in beer: silicon (who knew?), which increases bone mineral density.
Pale ales contain the most silicon; light lagers, wheat beers and non-alcoholic beers the least.
Sounds about right -- if beer drinking gives you Homer Simpson's belly, your bones are gonna need the extra strength to lug that shit around.
I sense a new beer-lobby ad campaign a-brewing. Paris Hilton sporting a beer 'stache? Seems only a matter of time.... [Reuters]
13 November 2008
What Science Can Teach You About Love
1) Avoid the crowded Speed-Dating events: If you're stronger in substance than surface-appeal, that is. Because the larger the group, the more likely humans are to rely on crude approaches to picking a mate--in other words, they go for looks. Pretty much every time. So the witty-but-plain wallflowers will stay wallflowers, while the "lookers" in the group suck up all the attention--it's like high school, all over again... (sigh). In smaller groups, though, people are more willing to consider and trade-off different qualities in prospective mates--like physical attractiveness for, say, personality.
2) Women: Don't ask your women friends to set you up: Why? Sexual Competition for Mates. Studies show that women of childbearing age hate a pretty face... and will rate you as less attractive than you actually are. If you're of childbearing age, that is. If you're menopausal, they don't give a sh*t, and will rate your looks fairly.
3) Men: Don't be lazy lovers: It pays to woo... if you're a male redback spider anyway. Because female redback spiders kill and eat male suitors that go for the quick-sex instead of an extended courtship. True, the female always starts to eat the male during copulation... but if that male took the time to woo (by plucking her web and beating on her abdomen--??!), she'll let him escape (after a quick nibble) 90% of the time... so that they can have another go at it, maybe, in the future.
4) Beware of singing musicians: For male finches, it's the singing itself to a potential mate that gives them a sense of euphoria... and the kind of high we humans get from drugs and alcohol and, well, sex. Singing solo doesn't do it, either--they need a cute "bird" to sing to (ha). Any bird, probably. (I knew it! No wonder why I've been less than lucky with those heart-breakin' front-men I've known...)
Read the science for yourself here: http://www.newscientist.com/topic/love
2) Women: Don't ask your women friends to set you up: Why? Sexual Competition for Mates. Studies show that women of childbearing age hate a pretty face... and will rate you as less attractive than you actually are. If you're of childbearing age, that is. If you're menopausal, they don't give a sh*t, and will rate your looks fairly.
3) Men: Don't be lazy lovers: It pays to woo... if you're a male redback spider anyway. Because female redback spiders kill and eat male suitors that go for the quick-sex instead of an extended courtship. True, the female always starts to eat the male during copulation... but if that male took the time to woo (by plucking her web and beating on her abdomen--??!), she'll let him escape (after a quick nibble) 90% of the time... so that they can have another go at it, maybe, in the future.
4) Beware of singing musicians: For male finches, it's the singing itself to a potential mate that gives them a sense of euphoria... and the kind of high we humans get from drugs and alcohol and, well, sex. Singing solo doesn't do it, either--they need a cute "bird" to sing to (ha). Any bird, probably. (I knew it! No wonder why I've been less than lucky with those heart-breakin' front-men I've known...)
Read the science for yourself here: http://www.newscientist.com/topic/love
08 November 2008
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
It's no longer just a fantasy from a movie--now it's science. Selective memory erasure is possible... in mice, anyway--which makes me laugh, because right now I'm picturing a mousy mouse dressed like Joel Barish and an orange-dyed mouse dressed like Clementine.
Humans may very well be next. Last year, scientists published findings suggesting that certain drugs may be able to refashion memories when administered shortly after traumatic events. Now they are looking for ways to reshape and/or erase painful memories even years afterwards.
That would be a great scientific breakthrough for, say, people suffering from PTSD. But for traumatic breakups? Ooh... I don't know. I don't think that's a good idea, actually.
I read Charlie Kaufman's original script--not the shooting script--which started with a flash-forward to the future, when an 80-year-old Clementine shows up at the clinic yet again asking to have all memories of one Joel Barish erased... again. I don't know that the movie actually needed that scene. But it illustrates Kaufman's viewpoint on the wisdom of erasing memories of people we once loved. And the tragedy of it is, if Clementine and Joel had just kept their memories of each other, good bad ugly and everything in between... maybe they could have learned from it, and even figured out one day how to make their relationship work in the long-term. Maybe not. But impulsive memory-erasure just kept those two locked in an eternal cycle of the wisdom-less mind. (Sigh)
Here's the article behind this post http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-11-07/the-end-of-bad-memories/
Humans may very well be next. Last year, scientists published findings suggesting that certain drugs may be able to refashion memories when administered shortly after traumatic events. Now they are looking for ways to reshape and/or erase painful memories even years afterwards.
That would be a great scientific breakthrough for, say, people suffering from PTSD. But for traumatic breakups? Ooh... I don't know. I don't think that's a good idea, actually.
I read Charlie Kaufman's original script--not the shooting script--which started with a flash-forward to the future, when an 80-year-old Clementine shows up at the clinic yet again asking to have all memories of one Joel Barish erased... again. I don't know that the movie actually needed that scene. But it illustrates Kaufman's viewpoint on the wisdom of erasing memories of people we once loved. And the tragedy of it is, if Clementine and Joel had just kept their memories of each other, good bad ugly and everything in between... maybe they could have learned from it, and even figured out one day how to make their relationship work in the long-term. Maybe not. But impulsive memory-erasure just kept those two locked in an eternal cycle of the wisdom-less mind. (Sigh)
Here's the article behind this post http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-11-07/the-end-of-bad-memories/
27 October 2008
"Red Sex, Blue Sex"
Or: Why are so many evangelical teens getting knocked up? And why do their parents seem so "unfazed, or even buoyed, by the news"?
Here are some interesting things I just learned from reading the advance copy of a The New Yorker article that officially comes out on November 3rd:
"But the reactions to [Bristol Palin's pregnancy] have exposed a cultural rift that mirrors America’s dominant political divide. Social liberals in the country’s “blue states” tend to support sex education and are not particularly troubled by the idea that many teen-agers have sex before marriage, but would regard a teen-age daughter’s pregnancy as devastating news. And the social conservatives in “red states” generally advocate abstinence-only education and denounce sex before marriage, but are relatively unruffled if a teen-ager becomes pregnant, as long as she doesn’t choose to have an abortion."
And guess what? According to this piece, evangelical teens are a lot "faster", and "coming out" earlier (typically just after turning sixteen) than even I would have ever guessed:
"[A]ccording to Add Health data, evangelical teen-agers are more sexually active than Mormons, mainline Protestants, and Jews. On average, white evangelical Protestants make their “sexual début”—to use the festive term of social-science researchers—shortly after turning sixteen. Among major religious groups, only black Protestants begin having sex earlier."
Once again, I feel a bit like I'm "Through the Looking Glass" here, where black is white and up is down, and "Family Values"... sigh. I just don't know any more...
What I do know, though, is that explosive population growth worldwide is/will be one of the biggest challenges facing the 21st Century. And it makes the call for a "Code Green" in our country, and worldwide, just that much the harder to accomplish.
But listen up, future teenager of mine (if I ever have one), in the event you ever get yourself into such a life-altering predicament. I will first give you a hug... and let you know that I support you 100%. But then... I'm gonna set the kitchen timer at 5 minutes, and my words will fly...
Read the full article here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot
Here are some interesting things I just learned from reading the advance copy of a The New Yorker article that officially comes out on November 3rd:
"But the reactions to [Bristol Palin's pregnancy] have exposed a cultural rift that mirrors America’s dominant political divide. Social liberals in the country’s “blue states” tend to support sex education and are not particularly troubled by the idea that many teen-agers have sex before marriage, but would regard a teen-age daughter’s pregnancy as devastating news. And the social conservatives in “red states” generally advocate abstinence-only education and denounce sex before marriage, but are relatively unruffled if a teen-ager becomes pregnant, as long as she doesn’t choose to have an abortion."
And guess what? According to this piece, evangelical teens are a lot "faster", and "coming out" earlier (typically just after turning sixteen) than even I would have ever guessed:
"[A]ccording to Add Health data, evangelical teen-agers are more sexually active than Mormons, mainline Protestants, and Jews. On average, white evangelical Protestants make their “sexual début”—to use the festive term of social-science researchers—shortly after turning sixteen. Among major religious groups, only black Protestants begin having sex earlier."
Once again, I feel a bit like I'm "Through the Looking Glass" here, where black is white and up is down, and "Family Values"... sigh. I just don't know any more...
What I do know, though, is that explosive population growth worldwide is/will be one of the biggest challenges facing the 21st Century. And it makes the call for a "Code Green" in our country, and worldwide, just that much the harder to accomplish.
But listen up, future teenager of mine (if I ever have one), in the event you ever get yourself into such a life-altering predicament. I will first give you a hug... and let you know that I support you 100%. But then... I'm gonna set the kitchen timer at 5 minutes, and my words will fly...
Read the full article here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot
26 October 2008
Why a Coffee Shop May Be the Place to Win Dates & Make Friends
The Daily Beast calls the syndrome "Hot Coffee Goggles." When a person holds a warm drink in his/her hands, that person is more likely to rate others as "generous" and "caring."
Read this link, then give it a try...
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sciencenow;2008/1023/2
Read this link, then give it a try...
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sciencenow;2008/1023/2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



