Responses to this and this
Oh, Hank...
Problem with Hank and John is that they are... optimistic? I'm not saying that the critics of the Green Brothers is pessimistic, but there's a sense of blind optimism?
They are a cheerleader type... a person who encourages the community to do stuff, and being entrepreneurs that's kind of their job...
What I'm saying here is... You know how parents at a cross-country meet sometime cheer their sons/daughters by saying "You've gone so far, keep it up!" even though they have way more distance to travel? It's intended as encouragement but it gets little... misguided.
Yeah, misguided. That's the word. They kind of forget the whole situation and blindly encourage someone and then go... 'I messed up' when it doesn't pan out...
So back in June, Hank made the post (second link) about racism and how it's "Improving"... obviously it lead to some backlash and Hank hastily defended himself... and then Ferguson happens.
Yeah, Hank probably regret that post.
Which is so embarrassing to call out on Hank again because he's doing same thing here, basically.
I mean Lindsey rightly called bull on this optimism, so I won't go into detail here, but Why?
I mean why are Greens keep making that mistake?
My intuition is age difference. I mean Hank was born '80 and John was born in '77... so they had their childhood in the '80s and their adolescence in the '90 and the dot-com bubble was for them early-mid twenties and they are already doing something...
For me, however born in '94, 9/11 happened when I was 7 and the Great Recession happened when I was 14 or 15 and now I'm looking at more stagnant world at age 19, feeling crippled.
The Millennials had this promise growing up... of prosperity and fortune in the '90s... like the internet and marketing and just everything seems to be handed in a platter... Then the dot-com bubble happened, 9/11 and the Iraq War happened, Great Recession happened and we're hurtling toward 2010's feeling so much loss... there's no hope and no prosperity and we didn't even do anything!
I felt as through millennials feel as though they're against the flow of society, got the short end of the stick, having so much promises and seeing it all just go away. There's resentment for past and disdain/anxiety for the future. It's though we're pushing the rock up the hill and parents are cheering?
It's not anti-authoritarianism, it's not like we rule and adults suck, but adults suck and we have to take up the slack... and cheering won't cut it.
Yeah... so, it's more sinister than I thought. Hank and John's cheering is seen as not an encouragement for a better future, but the leave of responsibility, as in we cheer and you do the all the work.
(Maybe the clash feminism and MRA comes down to the same point... hmm, interesting.)
So, perhaps it's rude say, but shut up and do the work, Hank. Don't need to be a cheerleader.
Friday, September 26, 2014
Monday, September 15, 2014
On YouTube
YouTube is a ubiquitous site. It's has an virtual monopoly of web videos, yet it does much more than just storing and distributing videos. It is a classic combination of entertainment and social media. YouTube is excepted to curate, nurture and lead random people into stardom, yet it needs to give a certain attention to massive section who uses it for communication purposes. Or do they?
Most people agree that YouTube is a social media site. Except YouTube apparently, because lately the strategy for YouTube seems to write off most of its social functions. (Not caring about its messaging system, or bringing video responses to back of the shed, and give it some lead.) For some people, it's pretty obvious. For a business standpoint, being a media conglomerate is much more profitable than being an awkward social media, if not, least ent. is more familiar to the system.
But, the strange thing is YouTube still wants to pretend that they want to be a social media site, most obvious sign being that layout have transitioned from being like myspace, with creative control and whatnot, to the one-size fits-all, even though video size certainly doesn't, approach of Facebook. But the veneer wears thin when they get surprised when two 'giant' fans of YouTube creators 'seems to' know each other...
I mean 'fans' are creating communities and are creating contents by themselves? YouTube must be flabbergasted! I mean YT pretending they're a social media site seems to fool a lot of people! YouTube should consider a job in show business...
Well, that aside YouTube is still a major force in the internet, following the reign of Facebook, with the new key player being new 2008ers Twitter and Tumblr and an old friend Reddit.
And they all something that YouTube needs to continue...
Tumblr, I said its superioity many times. Its popularity indicates a swing back to the myspace times, where the freedom is the key and sensibility not a factor. But there's a key synthesis, in that there's a feed and also the features are quite standardized. That means those who want organization could just make a blog and set up the feed and the whole thing becomes simple and elegant. YouTube could benefit from this two prong approach. Having a customized channel will greatly benefit creators and viewers alike. And social media part will be more fluid and robust with Tumblr's design.
Reddit... main thing to get here is the beautiful commenting system and vareity of sub-reddits. The variety of features is limited but enough to create your own style and its natural affinity for community is something YouTube should strive for. By utilizing the machine of YouTube,* the site could tap into the synergy and make the whole thing... work!
And Twitter... to me, they are separate as night and day. But twitter seems to the last refuge to get information from friend without missing information. (Strangest thing in social media: Why you do they think their own secret algorithm is better at finding out what people want to hear, then people telling them what they want to hear? Is this some kind of algorithmic elitism? That they know what's best for you... than you? Sure, your insight might be helpful, but I'll tell you when I need your help.) Until now, when twitter decided to promote content... Dude, you're Twitter! You famously don't make money! You should not try to make money! All attempts will lead to horrible failures, and you will be ashamed for this... and same should go to YouTube. YouTube is a losing service, there's no way they can make money either turning off most consumers. Google should consider YouTube a service, one that leaks but give valuable information.
As much as people think I'm a Google fanboy, I think Google's treatment of YouTube was horrendous. They tried to make YouTube its own thing, while trying to add their own stuff... often unsuccessfully. You cannot have the best of both worlds. Steal a cake and eat it too. Either you should left YouTube, way alone, like Yahoo! does with Tumblr, or fully integrate like GMail or Google maps or whatever.
Making Google+ its own thing were met with obvious boos, and as it feel to wayside, many trolls and 'haters' start appreciating its simplicity... and yes YouTube comments were integrated to Google+ those trolls and 'haters' started to get 'best' comments, and for a while, it was horrible.
Then the policy changes and now YouTube comment is intentionally horrible. The hate breeds faster than love and so comments with the most engagement seems to be the worse as well. Least Reddit got its 'reputation' because it didn't get big enough. This is just... bad. Bad, bad, bad.
So the comment sucks, intentional, and the feed is still terrible, what with that 'elitism', so what now?
* Welcome to the secret asterisk section! Be warned. This is long.
YouTube community, by terms of evolution, have manage a nice, natural system of bringing fame. First, people like other people and form a community. Then some people get viral or get help from famous stars... (well not sexually... well, like consentually yes, but...) Then the community becomes the all-important middle, bringing viewers into making content and rising the stars and promoting new communities.
This is a beautiful system. There's new fame created every day and the whole connected structure means it's easier to jump around places in the community-sphere. Also, having connections and making friends. That's nice, Real Nice.
But the corporate structure made the top... well, removed from everywhere else. Corporate wants to create an aspiring network where the teen fawn and the other teen winks. This is where the 'fangirl' stereotype comes in. The worry here is that those teenagers will just fawn and not create.
SO that Fangirl Planet video... I always thought as source of ridicule, but not to the fangirls. We all have been fangirls. That's been true. But we... 'harnessed' the energy, creating communities and creating their own ideas. Look at the whovians and their culture, or those in the Harry Potter fandom rewriting the flaws into something more inclusive and expansive. There's something to celebrate about fandoms, but mindless screaming shouldn't be it.
In the end the video is a warning; warning to the current fangirls that exert their energy into nefarious purposes, warning to the creators to sway the fangirl into 'useful' prepositions. And the dread that comes with complete corprate control, that these people will be Eternal Teenagers**.
** Sorry for the detours and also this asterisk, but this is important.
Eternal Teenagers come from Eternal September. The term comes that every September, new users of the internet (because most early internet was in colleges) come in and the 'old guard' have to teach the youngins the Way of the Internet. Then AOL became connected to the Usenet and youngins start flooding the forums and eventually the old guard could not keep up with this new-ness. And so became the Eternal September, where the new outweigh the old and the community shifts dramatically, usually for the worse.
Eternal Teenagers is quite similar, YouTube also have a massive influx of youngins... this time quite literal, and the community effectively changed as a result. But the term here emphasizes 'usually for the worse' part, in that I fear, with corporate influence, that the teenagers here might not well... grow up. That they might eternally fangirl some new or even old YouTubers... or least the replacement rate so big that we'll always have those people. At least, if the second option is true, we'll worry 'less' as we evolve and creators will now have the bunt of the stick. Of course, there's the third option, that the fangirls... grow out. That this whole YouTube thing becomes a fad for teenagers, which isn't good for business or the community. No new guards means the whole system halts!
But what's the truth? Well, we can only wait. We're witnessing the first generation of Eternal Teenagers and it's up to them, and the creators (most out of our control), to create their best solution. There's a usage of fangirl as source of energy... and that's partially true considering attention and money is what we're driving the system. And as with all energy, some is useful and other is not. Hopefully this is will turn out to be a boom... in the metaphorical sense.
Most people agree that YouTube is a social media site. Except YouTube apparently, because lately the strategy for YouTube seems to write off most of its social functions. (Not caring about its messaging system, or bringing video responses to back of the shed, and give it some lead.) For some people, it's pretty obvious. For a business standpoint, being a media conglomerate is much more profitable than being an awkward social media, if not, least ent. is more familiar to the system.
But, the strange thing is YouTube still wants to pretend that they want to be a social media site, most obvious sign being that layout have transitioned from being like myspace, with creative control and whatnot, to the one-size fits-all, even though video size certainly doesn't, approach of Facebook. But the veneer wears thin when they get surprised when two 'giant' fans of YouTube creators 'seems to' know each other...
I mean 'fans' are creating communities and are creating contents by themselves? YouTube must be flabbergasted! I mean YT pretending they're a social media site seems to fool a lot of people! YouTube should consider a job in show business...
Well, that aside YouTube is still a major force in the internet, following the reign of Facebook, with the new key player being new 2008ers Twitter and Tumblr and an old friend Reddit.
And they all something that YouTube needs to continue...
Tumblr, I said its superioity many times. Its popularity indicates a swing back to the myspace times, where the freedom is the key and sensibility not a factor. But there's a key synthesis, in that there's a feed and also the features are quite standardized. That means those who want organization could just make a blog and set up the feed and the whole thing becomes simple and elegant. YouTube could benefit from this two prong approach. Having a customized channel will greatly benefit creators and viewers alike. And social media part will be more fluid and robust with Tumblr's design.
Reddit... main thing to get here is the beautiful commenting system and vareity of sub-reddits. The variety of features is limited but enough to create your own style and its natural affinity for community is something YouTube should strive for. By utilizing the machine of YouTube,* the site could tap into the synergy and make the whole thing... work!
And Twitter... to me, they are separate as night and day. But twitter seems to the last refuge to get information from friend without missing information. (Strangest thing in social media: Why you do they think their own secret algorithm is better at finding out what people want to hear, then people telling them what they want to hear? Is this some kind of algorithmic elitism? That they know what's best for you... than you? Sure, your insight might be helpful, but I'll tell you when I need your help.) Until now, when twitter decided to promote content... Dude, you're Twitter! You famously don't make money! You should not try to make money! All attempts will lead to horrible failures, and you will be ashamed for this... and same should go to YouTube. YouTube is a losing service, there's no way they can make money either turning off most consumers. Google should consider YouTube a service, one that leaks but give valuable information.
As much as people think I'm a Google fanboy, I think Google's treatment of YouTube was horrendous. They tried to make YouTube its own thing, while trying to add their own stuff... often unsuccessfully. You cannot have the best of both worlds. Steal a cake and eat it too. Either you should left YouTube, way alone, like Yahoo! does with Tumblr, or fully integrate like GMail or Google maps or whatever.
Making Google+ its own thing were met with obvious boos, and as it feel to wayside, many trolls and 'haters' start appreciating its simplicity... and yes YouTube comments were integrated to Google+ those trolls and 'haters' started to get 'best' comments, and for a while, it was horrible.
Then the policy changes and now YouTube comment is intentionally horrible. The hate breeds faster than love and so comments with the most engagement seems to be the worse as well. Least Reddit got its 'reputation' because it didn't get big enough. This is just... bad. Bad, bad, bad.
So the comment sucks, intentional, and the feed is still terrible, what with that 'elitism', so what now?
* Welcome to the secret asterisk section! Be warned. This is long.
YouTube community, by terms of evolution, have manage a nice, natural system of bringing fame. First, people like other people and form a community. Then some people get viral or get help from famous stars... (well not sexually... well, like consentually yes, but...) Then the community becomes the all-important middle, bringing viewers into making content and rising the stars and promoting new communities.
This is a beautiful system. There's new fame created every day and the whole connected structure means it's easier to jump around places in the community-sphere. Also, having connections and making friends. That's nice, Real Nice.
But the corporate structure made the top... well, removed from everywhere else. Corporate wants to create an aspiring network where the teen fawn and the other teen winks. This is where the 'fangirl' stereotype comes in. The worry here is that those teenagers will just fawn and not create.
SO that Fangirl Planet video... I always thought as source of ridicule, but not to the fangirls. We all have been fangirls. That's been true. But we... 'harnessed' the energy, creating communities and creating their own ideas. Look at the whovians and their culture, or those in the Harry Potter fandom rewriting the flaws into something more inclusive and expansive. There's something to celebrate about fandoms, but mindless screaming shouldn't be it.
In the end the video is a warning; warning to the current fangirls that exert their energy into nefarious purposes, warning to the creators to sway the fangirl into 'useful' prepositions. And the dread that comes with complete corprate control, that these people will be Eternal Teenagers**.
** Sorry for the detours and also this asterisk, but this is important.
Eternal Teenagers come from Eternal September. The term comes that every September, new users of the internet (because most early internet was in colleges) come in and the 'old guard' have to teach the youngins the Way of the Internet. Then AOL became connected to the Usenet and youngins start flooding the forums and eventually the old guard could not keep up with this new-ness. And so became the Eternal September, where the new outweigh the old and the community shifts dramatically, usually for the worse.
Eternal Teenagers is quite similar, YouTube also have a massive influx of youngins... this time quite literal, and the community effectively changed as a result. But the term here emphasizes 'usually for the worse' part, in that I fear, with corporate influence, that the teenagers here might not well... grow up. That they might eternally fangirl some new or even old YouTubers... or least the replacement rate so big that we'll always have those people. At least, if the second option is true, we'll worry 'less' as we evolve and creators will now have the bunt of the stick. Of course, there's the third option, that the fangirls... grow out. That this whole YouTube thing becomes a fad for teenagers, which isn't good for business or the community. No new guards means the whole system halts!
But what's the truth? Well, we can only wait. We're witnessing the first generation of Eternal Teenagers and it's up to them, and the creators (most out of our control), to create their best solution. There's a usage of fangirl as source of energy... and that's partially true considering attention and money is what we're driving the system. And as with all energy, some is useful and other is not. Hopefully this is will turn out to be a boom... in the metaphorical sense.
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Jokes that work too well...
So, Neil Cicierega posted a fake picture of NGram result of 'pokemon' which has an aberrant bump during the mid-late 1800's... except that during mid to late 1800's there was explosion of Cornish dialect which coincidentally included the word pokemon! (I sincerely believe Neil invented time travel and decide to take the joke one step farther... there's even an accent on the o! Like the other pokemon! Okay, that's an e...)
(http://edwardspoonhands.com/post/95679178895/solongasitswords-nullbula-thesylverlining)
I actually remembered this because I was eating Doritos and there's this joke that Nostalgia Critic does which spoof Gummi Bears with Doritos... which is strange, except it's a coincidental callback to another joke which The Critic wondered how does Gummi Bears have to with Disney?
Well, Gummi Bears have nothing to do with Disney... but Doritos were invented in Disneyland, using surplus taco that got stiff and moldy and frying them and with seasoning... voila! Doritos!
So, what I am saying is that Doritos unlike Gummi Bears do have connections to Disney... hence at first you think Doug has wrote a random snack for the spoof, while it's an actual stab at an earlier joke!
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEE53i0wNNA)
(http://edwardspoonhands.com/post/95679178895/solongasitswords-nullbula-thesylverlining)
I actually remembered this because I was eating Doritos and there's this joke that Nostalgia Critic does which spoof Gummi Bears with Doritos... which is strange, except it's a coincidental callback to another joke which The Critic wondered how does Gummi Bears have to with Disney?
Well, Gummi Bears have nothing to do with Disney... but Doritos were invented in Disneyland, using surplus taco that got stiff and moldy and frying them and with seasoning... voila! Doritos!
So, what I am saying is that Doritos unlike Gummi Bears do have connections to Disney... hence at first you think Doug has wrote a random snack for the spoof, while it's an actual stab at an earlier joke!
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEE53i0wNNA)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)