Facebook Helps Kick Convention to Honor a Soccer Fan

http://www.courant.com/business/sns-rt-us-germany-grave-facebookbre8ad0t3-20121114,0,7617024.story

Facebook is an absurd, life-corroding disruption that encourages self-obsession and pettiness.  That being said, a miniscule measure of goodness resides in all evil (Yes, I know, this is unnecessarily harsh.  Just follow me for a moment.).

This week, Facebook triumphed by effectively trumpeting the wishes of a boy who no longer lived to vocalize his own passions and preferences.

“A church in western Germany has bowed to public pressure and allowed the parents of a soccer-mad nine-year old boy who died from a brain tumor to erect a gravestone with a ball logo after a Facebook campaign spawned more than 100,000 angry messages.

“The dispute between the boy's parents and their Catholic church made national headlines. Newspapers printed poignant pictures of the dying boy in hospital last Christmas with Juergen Klopp, coach of his favorite club Borussia Dortmund.

“Shortly before his death, Jens Pascal had told his mother he wanted a gravestone that reflected his passion - the club which won Germany's Bundesliga just days before he died in May.

“But the Church of Maria Heimsuchung in Dortmund refused to erect a stone engraved with the club's logo and a soccer ball on top, arguing that it did not conform to rules which ban non-Christian inscriptions and images.”

Generally, I dismiss technologies as homogenizing distractions that extract every gratifyingly unique and hushed human quality from unmindful users.

Generally, my hasty and brutal rejection of internet services and handheld devices is appropriate.

However, this tale is a welcome exception to my doom-and-gloom rule.  Indeed, this is an instance of one boy’s unspeakably touching hope to differentiate himself and his memory.  Among hundreds of standard grey headstones, Jens Pascal sought to spotlight his youthful, pure, and animated enjoyment of soccer.

Though his exact wish was not granted, the resulting compromise will hopefully appeal to the precious boy’s lingering spiritual presence:

“The church issued a statement late on Monday saying it had agreed to a compromise. The gravestone could be erected, but with the ball on the ground rather than on its top and that it would also bear a Christian symbol, probably a dove.”

As an outsider, I contend that the greatest misery of a young death is its many thieveries.  In particular, it robs an individual of the chance to thrust his own meticulously selected identity into this overfull world.  Though, before his death, the young Jens Pascal could not define himself with the painstaking precision of a man of eighty years, Facebook offered him the coveted opportunities to select the qualities and contents of his memory, and to make his cemetery presence a little more remarkable.

Facebook Scrolls Down its Own Timeline

http://www.courant.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-facebook-timeline-20121101,0,2811169.story

Another Facebook redesign.  Gee, that’s surprising!  Actually, the rationale for the redesign is rather unexpected.  Indeed, the social media network sees the folly of its recent ways!

“Facebook is testing a redesign of its Timeline feature that could make reading old posts slightly easier.

“The Menlo Park-based company confirmed that it is testing an experimental version of the redesign on a small number of users.

“The experimental design was discovered by Inside Facebook.

“It is similar to older designs Facebook used when its members had “Walls,” in which status updates showed up in a linear fashion rather than zigzaging from left to right as they do now with the Timeline.”

Though I dependably express my vociferous displeasure with each confounding Facebook adjustment, I would not lament this change.  Why?  The current timeline setup is silly, as users care little about the chronological placement of their postings.  Indeed, the purpose of Facebook is not to track one’s life in an ordered line, but is instead to share the events of one’s life via a comprehensible and maneuverable public page.

I first created a Facebook profile in 2008.  At that time, Facebook features and bonuses were limited and the layout of the website was brilliantly simple.  Statuses remained at the top of a user’s page, posts appeared in the middle of the screen, and everything was gratifyingly straightforward.  No Farmville, no princess quizzes, no memes, and less (unfortunately, I cannot truthfully say “no”) stupidity.

I applaud Facebook for reevaluating past practices.  Often, we label retroactive reanalysis as a disgraceful confirmation of innovational failures.  However, to identify the merits of the past and the shortcomings of the present is to demonstrate focused concern not for appearance, but for performance and utility.

This is wisdom.  Now, let's compel our peers to embrace further practices of the past…like reading, storytelling, and engaging in harmless tomfoolery!

Didn't you know? I own Facebook.

http://www.courant.com/business/technology/chi-ny-businessman-arrested-in-scheme-to-defraud-facebook-20121026,0,3045643.story

On Friday, wood-pellet salesman Paul Ceglia was arrested for forging documents that support his claim of a large ownership stake in Facebook.

“The businessman sued Facebook and its CEO in 2010, claiming a 2003 contract he signed with Zuckerberg, then a Harvard University student, entitled him to a stake in the social media company.  This past March, as part of that case, Facebook released emails sent by Zuckerberg around the time of the contract to show Ceglia's claims were false.”

Forecasting the outcome of these charges, one lawyer notes, “Ceglia used the federal court system to perpetuate his fraud and will now be held accountable for his criminal scheme.”

Can you hear my guffaws?  Truly, I’m confounded by the imprudence of Ceglia.  The man alleges untruthful entitlement to one technology (Facebook) as another technology (email records) simultaneously invalidates his claim.

In and of itself, this scenario confirms Ceglia’s fraudulence.  How could this man, who naively underestimates the might of technology, have contributed to Facebook?

And how will you be paying, sir? With cash or by smartphone?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/19/technology/innovation/isis-mobile-wallet/index.html

On 22 October, Isis, a mobile network founded by Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, will release its mobile wallet app.  Partnerships with such major retailers as Foot Locker, 7-Eleven, McDonald’s, and Sports Authority give Isis "serious firepower.”

The network will support American Express and Capital One credit and debit cards, and will store payment cards, loyalty programs, and merchant offers.  Though the company has yet to reveal which smartphones will be compatible with Isis, we do know that its system functions with near-field communication chips and short-range wireless technology.

Unfortunately for Isis, its lengthy startup process permitted other web payment apps to capture consumers.  eBay, Paypal, Google, Venmo, and Square are a few examples of successful mobile payment applications/ services/ technologies.  However, “if Isis’ carrier partners work with handset makers to pre-install Isis’ software on new phones—a likely scenario—the upstart venture could quickly gain traction.”

A few weeks ago, I wrote of the cultural loss I associate with a coin-less and bill-less society.  Though this application isn’t harmful or silly in any way, it shatters yet another seemingly timeless tradition.  Unless you’re staggeringly wealthy, your on-hand cash and coins likely weigh very little.  That means we’re adopting these technologies to save time…so we can get home to Facebook?

Each day, we approach a Jetson civilization of sleek, colorless, personality-less metal.  Indeed, when I learn of applications like Isis, I begin the wearying process of staking my house to the lawn.

A Birthday Post and Present

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/facebook-lets-users-buy-real-things-for-friends/?ref=technology&pagewanted=print

In an effort to diversify its revenue sources, Facebook is presenting users with an easy gifting process.  Indeed, those who partake of the social network need only select an item and recipient, type a greeting, and pay.  Offerings range from cupcakes to sunglasses and seemingly span from $35 to $95.  If this project is profitable, Facebook intends to launch a full virtual storefront.

 I have yet to decide if Facebook’s expansion to tangible, paid-for items will prosper.  Here’s the debate:

Facebook’s advantage is that it advertises the likely forgotten birthdays of friends.  Providing an immediate and convenient solution to flustered users as they ashamedly and belatedly recall their friends’ special day is a brilliant idea.

But…  Will this gesture look thoughtful or generic?  Will the gift selection ever expand enough to appeal to gift-givers?  To birthday boys and girls?  Will Facebookers who are accustomed to online deals pay retail prices for presents?

The likely outcome:  If one friend utilizes this service, others will imitate and the trend will take.  After all, the procedure offers ease and immediacy, two attributes expected by Americans.  However, that one friend must initiate this new Facebook feature or it will remain a mysterious service that lacks credibility, and that is greeted with snickers by Facebookers who refuse to overpay for unremarkable merchandise that indirectly funds the social network.

Tag! Facebook says you're it!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/technology/facebook-backs-down-on-face-recognition-in-europe.html?ref=technology&_moc.semityn.www

In June of 2012, Facebook acquired facial recognition software developed by an Israeli company.  This software eases the picture tagging process by identifying the individuals featured in images and automatically suggesting each name to rushed photo uploaders.

European nations are vexed, as this software compromises the privacy of Facebookers.  In my opinion, their ruffled feathers are merited.  One need only ponder the looming application of the intrusive technology to understand this European distress.

Imagine the year 2020.  Billboards and televisions are equipped with miniscule cameras that detect the faces (and thus, with this new Facebook technology, the identities) of observers.  You amble past a screen and a sensor jumps to the ready and scans you.  As a positive identification is reached, the devices tailor their programming and advertisements to your preferences, enticing you to purchase items and watch shows that appeal particularly to you.

You will squander money.  You will squander time.  You will grant technology further access to your mind, routine, and home.

Not to mention the surveillance implications of this software.  While few of us actually intend to commit a crime at any point in our lives, we can still find it intimidating and off-putting that, with this technology, storeowners, government agencies, and even wealthy individuals with security systems can review their surveillance footage and obtain the identities of unaware passersby.

Fortunately, United States politicians are finally stirring to offer their grumblings and grievances.  Indeed, ‘At a hearing on Capitol Hill last July, Senator Al Franken, Democrat of Minnesota, described Facebook as the “world’s largest privately held database of face prints — without the explicit consent of its users.”’

While I understand that this system marks a reasonable and natural progression of technology, I must condemn its continued use.  Though I have fewer secrets than a reality star, I cannot reconcile myself to this invasion, even in its mini Facebook form.

The solution?

I know.  Let’s all just spend three extra minutes to manually tag our friends and family.

Or, though this is slightly outrageous, we could even stop snapping pictures for a few moments, look up from our screens, and actually offer full presence to our lives!  How about that?

I saw that profile picture of you jumping off a bridge...so I went and jumped off too!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/us/politics/social-networks-affect-voter-turnout-study-finds.html?_r=1&ref=technology&pagewanted=print

http://www.blitzmediadesign.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/jumping-off-bridge.jpg

The cited article addresses Facebook’s ever-expanding influence on the choices and lifestyles of America’s users.  Indeed, one study found that a specialized Election Day message posted to the social networking site “generated 340,000 additional votes nationwide.”  Apparently, the Election Day message displayed to each user images of friends who had voted earlier that day.  Eager to imitate their friends, hundreds of thousands of Facebookers joined the ranks of voting Americans.

Convinced that this is a pervasive issue, scientists are proposing further studies that link weight loss to social networking as well.  As a professor of medical genetics and political science noted, “What we have shown here is that the online world and the real world affect one another.”

With a bombastic flourish, researchers designate this trend the “social contagion effect.”

Truthfully, I am surprised that such an obvious issue merits a New York Times article, let alone independent research at prestigious institutions.  People imitating people…  Why is this suddenly a novel discovery?  What else is man supposed to imitate if not his neighbor?  His daughter’s hermit crab?

If we didn’t imitate one another, why in the world would parents perpetually parrot that wretched bridge expression?  Of course we mimic the actions of our friends.  Of course our mimicry is surging now that we possess uninterrupted cyber-access to the choices and activities of those friends.  Of course, of course, of course.

 Is this a bad thing?

If social networking motivates people to vote and live healthily, then no.  If, however, it encourages users to abandon their true identities and adopt the behaviors and preferences of their Facebook friends, then yes.  Indubitably, yes.