3 ms·

I think you can break it up. After finally getting through the whole thing (which took many installments over the course of two days, due to my schedule actual

I think you can break it up. After finally getting through the whole thing (which took many installments over the course of two days, due to my schedule actually and not my poor attention span) I see how interconnected all of your ideas are and how the missed intimacy between the artist and hacker (and the irony there) only makes complete sense at the very end. Really fascinating stuff, the entire article. However, I think where you really shine here is in your descriptions of what intimacy and signaling are, their connection, the role of play in both, and how because intimacy is so valuable, there can be no direct "signal" for it. That plus your close analysis of the first scene of The Social Network, would make a killer essay (although perhaps more about human psychology than the dystopia you're painting here). I also would have liked to see more examples of places today where (and how and why) intimacy is already being undermined. I think we all have an intuitive sense of, "yeah, now we have lots of really shallow facebook friends instead of a few REAL friends," but that's usually about as far as most people go when making such an argument. Having a face-to-face, one-on-one conversation still feels quite a bit more personal than any computer-mediated communication, and I think most people would agree that it would be nearly impossible to create a real, intimate relationship without some significant personal interaction like that. But why do we feel that way? Now that I've read your article, I think that (contrary to popular belief), it's not just that we can't tell when someone is being sarcastic on instant messenger. I think you've nailed it when you say, "Notice how relaxed and off-the-record exhange and role-play is becoming a more risky enterprise. All your emails, your musings on your blog – even your google searches. It can all be used against you." We NEED to have conversations that are transient, that we know no one else can ever listen in on. Plus, it's important to occasionally have one's full attention, and knowing that they aren't simultaneously having the same conversation with 9 other people (getting back to your whole theme of "intimacy takes time and is expensive"). As someone who has come of age with the internet, I kind of take it for granted that anything I ever type into a computer may be one day used to humiliate me (well, at least ever since it happened the first time, around age 11) -- I'm sure this has deeply affected how I approach trust, play, and intimacy. I probably have lots more thoughts that will surface as soon as I hit "reply," but as I'm trying to keep this short enough that you read it, I'll stop here :)

grovulent 16y ago
Thanks for investing so much time. Sorry - it's a bit hard to keep track of discussions on HN because of a lack of notifications - so my reply has been a bit slow. I agree completely that we need a more concrete understanding of how/why intimate behaviours are in fact under threat (if that is indeed the case). The analysis of the first scene of the Social Network was there to give at least one example of how it is two people can actually be quite involved with one another and yet completely fail to establish an intimate connection. But we need more. It's impossible for me alone to provide that data. I'm not even an empirical researcher. But even more importantly - how could an empirical study be conducted? That's a very difficult question. I think what we need to start by people telling their stories of intimacy - or lack of it. This might at least allow us to begin refining out intuitive understanding - which in turn might allow us to conduct more rigorous investigations. I'm also pleased you enjoyed the "paradox of modern intimacy" section. I have thoughts about an essay on just that topic alone. Your comment has provided me with a nice motivation boost. Cheers! :)

grovulent 16y ago

Thanks for investing so much time. Sorry - it's a bit hard to keep track of discussions on HN because of a lack of notifications - so my reply has been a bit slow. I agree completely that we need a more concrete understanding of how/why intimate behaviours are in fact under threat (if that is indeed the case). The analysis of the first scene of the Social Network was there to give at least one example of how it is two people can actually be quite involved with one another and yet completely fail to establish an intimate connection. But we need more. It's impossible for me alone to provide that data. I'm not even an empirical researcher. But even more importantly - how could an empirical study be conducted? That's a very difficult question. I think what we need to start by people telling their stories of intimacy - or lack of it. This might at least allow us to begin refining out intuitive understanding - which in turn might allow us to conduct more rigorous investigations. I'm also pleased you enjoyed the "paradox of modern intimacy" section. I have thoughts about an essay on just that topic alone. Your comment has provided me with a nice motivation boost. Cheers! :)