4 ms·
Also, why should a nexus be a 1:1 relationship with your person? Should a person be allowed multiple nexi?
by mountaineer22 10y ago
Also, why should a nexus be a 1:1 relationship with your person?
Should a person be allowed multiple nexi?
- throwanem 10y agoAbsolutely! This is something my prior comment overlooked, so thanks for catching that. It's another good argument for remote hosting, too; correlating identities is easy when they all originate their communications from the same network address, especially if it belongs to a phone or a residential broadband account. When the phone's just a client, such correlation becomes much harder. I would go a bit more general than what you said, though - instead of a given person being allowed multiple nexi, I'd say that ideally there should be no one in a position to grant or revoke such permission. If the fashion in which I manage my identity is not wholly within my control, to what extent can the identity so managed be said to be mine?
- mountaineer22 10y agoI am actually advocating a new form of authorization that is based on AOL, Prodigy, and CompuServe handles.
- throwanem 10y agoThat'd be funny if only it were funny, you know? The names have changed, and the scale, but that's about all - Facebook is a better AOL than AOL ever dreamt of being.
- mountaineer22 10y agoAOL had better non-user generated content, same with Prodigy, and better sense of communities (which I see in Reddit sometimes).
- throwanem 10y agoNote that I didn't say Facebook was better for the people who use it.
- toast0 10y agoI always wanted to be known as two integers separated by a comma, but I was too late.
- matt4077 10y agoThat's actually pretty close to what Google+ tried with "Circles" when it launched: the idea that people exist in several distinct yet fluid social universes and that there should be a way to apply fine-grained yet intuitive rules to your sharing behavior. Turns out most people exist in one social universe, namely Facebook.
- andy_ppp 10y agoMost people over the age of 20...
- bbctol 10y agoI'd say it more turned out that Circles were decidedly unintuitive, and far more of a pain to use than Facebook's single list (which can still be heavily customized, most people just don't bother.)
- throwanem 10y agoDoesn't Facebook also have a nasty habit of surprising people with breaking changes to the way those customizations work? I seem to recall hearing of such things on a fairly regular basis.
- pantalaimon 10y agoI think the circles were fine, the problem g+ had was that it lacked plenty reasonable features (events, anyone? never understood this when google calendar integration would have been a killer feature). That's facebooks main use case for a lot of people and it's absence made g+ pretty useless.