RobokkuTue, Jan 13, 2009 These are some very telling real-world stories: food for thought - thanks. I don't know how I failed to spot this post and Xárene's when writing about the informational realm... Would have been useful inspiration.
"The current structure of social networks allows only rudimentary interaction that allows it to be very easy to be superficial (but as read above, can bypass physical barriers as well)."
The current structures make the differences between informational and concrete beings' interactions very clear. Reading your examples, I thought...
(1) that those beings are just different kinds of things - because, (e.g.) to the gangly human, online friendships seem to be "in stasis" - and
(2) that there is not necessarily even a correlation between fleshy and electronic beings - because those two tron-like lovers had something distinct from the chubby hands that fingered them into existence: the long-pigs weren't in love.
The conflation of digital and boney personae led to disappointment in your first story. In the second story, it led to some stress and, perhaps afterwards, to some comfort. It is a powerful confusion and we should be cautious about it.
When technologies improve and attitudes change enough that online and "real-world" beings resemble one another more closely, the incongruences will be less jarring and maybe easy to forget. What then? Will we assume that our models of ourselves are just like the real thing? I suspect they will look the same before they are the same, and we shouldn't forget the underlying differences that are obvious now, even if they get harder to see.
These are some very telling real-world stories: food for thought - thanks. I don't know how I failed to spot this post and Xárene's when writing about the informational realm... Would have been useful inspiration.
The current structures make the differences between informational and concrete beings' interactions very clear. Reading your examples, I thought...
(1) that those beings are just different kinds of things - because, (e.g.) to the gangly human, online friendships seem to be "in stasis" - and
(2) that there is not necessarily even a correlation between fleshy and electronic beings - because those two tron-like lovers had something distinct from the chubby hands that fingered them into existence: the long-pigs weren't in love.
The conflation of digital and boney personae led to disappointment in your first story. In the second story, it led to some stress and, perhaps afterwards, to some comfort. It is a powerful confusion and we should be cautious about it.
When technologies improve and attitudes change enough that online and "real-world" beings resemble one another more closely, the incongruences will be less jarring and maybe easy to forget. What then? Will we assume that our models of ourselves are just like the real thing? I suspect they will look the same before they are the same, and we shouldn't forget the underlying differences that are obvious now, even if they get harder to see.