"Social computing is an umbrella term for technologies and virtual spaces that allow users to create, describe and share content, and for the communities that arise around them. "
Mmmm, it's difficult to challenge the definition when it fits so well. It's like challenging E=Mc2...Uhhhh (cricket noises emanating softly in the background. )
The term social computing relates to:
Online communities: is the perfect example of social computing. Bloggers create a personal space where they can create and share content with a community. Readers have a chance to respond and exchange ideas.
Social networks: "SNSs are primarily organized around people, not interests. social network sites are structured as personal networks, with the individual at the center of their own community."
Web 2.0 : allows users to create and change text and information content openly.
My definition of Social Computing:
Social computing- to actively participate and create a network of one's own making.
Comments to the articles:
Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship
"While SNSs are often designed to be widely accessible, many attract homogeneous populations initially so it is not uncommon to find groups using sites to segregate themselves by nationality, age, educational level, or other factors that typically segment society (Hargittai, this issue), even if that was not the intention of the designers. "
What struck me about this was the humanness that gets translated through the use of technology. No matter if we are in real life or virtual life, we are always looking for ways to categorize and find identity.
Web 2.0 Cultural Downfall:
I had a greater response to web 2.0. Much of the article was about the fear of people abandoning reliable resources and only subscribing to social networks for information. That's a little too broad and a tab ridiculous.
There is no need for this all or nothing thinking. Credible resources have their place and Web 2.0 has it's own purpose and value to bring to the table as well.
"Keen responded that editors and peer reviews make sure that only the most reliable and highest-quality science is published under a journal's good name."
This format can actually keep new ideas at bay. New ideas that may not be accepted into the journal because it does not fit the paradigm or support previous articles. I had an Anthropology professor spend a good portion of the lecture lamenting about his rejected article. The article was rejected and he was told to look at previous articles that differed from his opinion. Poor chum.
Keen contends that all “old media” are in danger of being replaced by widespread social networking sites where “ignorance meets egoism meets bad taste meets mob rule.” He fears we may replace trustworthy old media products with the “digital narcissism” of blogs, YouTube, and MySpace.
Too all or nothing thinking…I believe people know the difference when reading info from myspace and do not take it as professional advice.
Blogging as Social Activity, or, Would You Let 900 Million People Read Your Diary?
This article compared blogs to diaries. It was found that bloggers enjoyed having an audience. Knowing that people are reading motivated bloggers to continue to write. People write blogs to influence others with ideas, possiblities for interaction and personal growth through the blog, stay connected, think things through by writing it out. I liked how they compared blogs to diaries, but differentiated by saying that "blogs are more like radio shows..." Very true and well put…more like a sharing and update for your audience rather than delving into deep personal thoughts.
Hopefully I'll have more to say as we progress and learn more...anybody still hear the cricket noises??
