Drew Toothpaste understands the nuances of internet.

Drew Toothpaste understands the nuances of internet.

1 year ago on May 20th, 2011 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

NetSpeak

I came across an interesting (and huge!) list of acronyms on netlingo.com. I created a list of terms and definitions the site’s definitions that I found:

*Culturally interesting (indicative of cultural phenomena or paradigms)
*Technologically referential (taking certain degree of technological understanding)
*Funny


My comments are (in the parenthesis).


! I have a comment
*$ Starbucks
02 Your (or my) two cents worth
1174 Nude club (not a number abbrv. like leet—made to look like an address so parent’s dont know)
404 I haven’t a clue (i love this one, it’s like a 404 error for a human!)
511 Too much information
8 Oral sex
9 Parent is watching
99 Parent is no longer watching (i hadn’t seen 9 as the signifier for this… maybe you have)
?^ hook up?
A/S/L/P Age/Sex/Location/Picture (picture is new since i was a teen!)
A3 Anyplace, Anywhere, Anytime
AAAAA American Association Against Acronym Abuse
ACD Alt Control Delete
AFZ Acronym Free Zone
ALOL Actually Laughing Out Loud
AOB Abuse Of Bandwidth
ASLMH Age/Sex/Location/Music/Hobbies
AYV Are You Vertical? (as in, are you awake?)
banana code word for penis (not obvious?)
BD Big Deal -or- Baby Dance -or- Brain Drain
BDBI5M Busy Daydreaming Back In 5 Minutes
BDC Big Dumb Company -or- Big Dot Com
BEG Big Evil Grin
beos Nudge
BIBO Beer In, Beer Out
Blkbry Blackberry
BM Byte Me
BOB Battery Operated Boyfriend (vibrator, obvs.)
BOCTAAE But Of Course There Are Always Exceptions
BOFH Bastard Operator From Hell
book it means cool
BOTEC Back Of The Envelope Calculation
BSOD Blue Screen of Death
BTWBO Be There With Bells On (not by the way, body odor?)
BTWITIAILWU By The Way I Think I Am In Love With You
BWL Bursting With Laughter
BWO Black, White or Other (there isn’t a def. for this one, but the see also is for gay/straight male/female so they’ve got to mean race…)
C-P Sleepy
CD9 Code 9 - it means parents are around
CICYHW Can I Copy Your Home Work
CID Consider It Done -or- Crying In Disgrace (this could leave some room for miscommunication…)
Cof$ Church of Scientology
CRBT Crying Real Big Tears
CRTLA Can’t Remember the Three-Letter Acronym
CT Can’t Talk
CTMQ Chuckle To Myself Quietly
CTO Check This Out
CU See You -or- Cracking Up
CUOL See You OnLine
CUWTA Catch Up With The Acronyms (seriously?)
CWYL Chat With You Later
CX Cancelled
CY Calm Yourself
CYA Cover Your Ass -or- See Ya
CYE Check your Email
CYL See You Later
CYM Check Your Mail
CYO See You Online
DAMHIKT Don’t Ask Me How I Know That
DFLA Disenhanced Four-Letter Acronym (that is, a TLA)
DGTG Don’t Go There Girlfriend
DGYF Damn Girl You’re Fine
DINK Double Incomes, No Kids
DIRFT Do It Right the First Time
DISTO Did I Say That Outloud?
DNC Does Not Compute
DRIB Don’t Read If Busy
DWB Don’t Write Back
DWBH Don’t Worry Be Happy
DWPKOTL Deep Wet Passionate Kiss On The Lips
DWS Driving While Stupid
DWWWI Surfing the World Wide Web while intoxicated
DYFM Dude You Fascinate Me
DYHAB Do You Have A Boyfriend?
DYHAG Do You Have A Girlfriend
EMRTW Evil Monkey’s Rule The World (i think they mean the US government?)
EOM End Of Message
EOT End Of Thread (meaning: end of discussion)
EWIE -mailing While Intoxicated
FAWC For Anyone Who Cares
FDGB Fall Down Go Boom
FE Fatal Error
FOAG F*** Off And Google (meaning to go “search the web”)
FOMCL Falling Off My Chair Laughing
FRED F***ing Ridiculous Electronic Device
FWB Friends With Benefits
GAFYK Get Away From Your Keyboard
GAGFI Gives A Gay First Impression
GALHER Get A Load of Her
GALHIM Get A Load of Him
GANB Getting Another Beer
GD&R Grinning, Ducking and Running
GGGG God, God, God, God
GOS Gay Or Straight
HBIB Hot But Inappropriate Boy
HCC Holy Computer Crap
HOHA HOllywood HAcker
IDST I Didn’t Say That
IITYWIMWYBMAD If I Tell You What It Means Will You Buy Me A Drink
IKYABWAI I Know You Are But What Am I?
ILICISCOMK I Laughed, I Cried, I Spat/Spilt Coffee/Crumbs/Coke On My Keyboard
IPN I’m Posting Naked
ITMA It’s That Man Again
ITS Intense Text Sex
IYFEG Insert Your Favorite Ethnic Group
KIBO Knowledge In, Bullsh** Out
KPC Keeping Parents Clueless
LDTTWA Let’s Do The Time Warp Again
LJBF Let’s Just Be Friends
LSV Language, Sex, Violence
LTHTT Laughing Too Hard To Type
LYLAS Love You Like A Sister (finally one i recognize!)
mhhm uh huh -or- yeah (does this need a translation?)
mlm giving the digital middle finger (whoa, it’s visual…)
MMYT Mail Me Your Thoughts
NAB Not A Blonde
NIFOC Nude In Front Of The Computer
NNWW Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink
NWAL Nerd Without A Life
OMB Oh My Buddha
OMIK Open Mouth, Insert Keyboard (open mouth, insert foot?)
RTBM Read The Bloody Manual
RTBS Reason To Be Single
RU/18 Are You Over 18?
RUMCYMHMD Are You on Medication Cause You Must Have Missed a Dose (seriously??)
SM Senior Moment
SMIM Send Me an Instant Message
SMOP Small Matter of Programming
SNAG Sensitive New Age Guy
SNERT Snotty Nosed Egotistical Rotten Teenager
SSEWBA Someday Soon, Everything Will Be Acronyms
SSIA Subject Says It All
STBX Soon To Be Ex
s^ what’s up? (i used to use the analog version of this on notes in middle school—the hand drawn up arrow)
TYCLO Turn Your CAPS LOCK Off
WAK What A Kiss
WAMBAM Web Application Meets Brick And Mortar
WILB Workplace Internet Leisure Browsing
WISP Winning Is So Pleasureable
WIT Wordsmith In Training
WLMIRL Would Like to Meet In Real Life
YAOTM Yet Another Off Topic Message
YAUN Yet Another Unix Nerd
YSAN You’re Such A Nerd
^5 High Five

2 years ago on December 14th, 2009 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

If you haven’t checked it out yet, follow the link! Key Findings

  • From 7 June 2009 until the time of publication (26 June 2009), we have recorded 2,024,166 tweets about the election in Iran.
  • Approximately 480,000 users have contributed to this conversation alone.
  • 59.3% of users tweet just once, and these users contribute 14.1% of the total number.
  • The top 10% of users in our study account for 65.5% of total tweets.
  • 1 in 4 tweets about Iran is a retweet of another user’s content.
2 years ago on June 29th, 2009 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

Networked Reading (first edition)

Editor’s note: this is my first pass at defining networked reading, so I’m open to comments and suggestions, this is in no way final. :)

I define networked reading as the viewing of written or image-based content produced in an online environment wherein the option of user participation is possible and content is saved and recorded in a semi-public or public way. The content produced in these spaces, I read as a unified text from multiple authors, and within this definition I include only static content, excluding video, games and super-interactive websites. Text in this sense includes photos, status updates and threaded, public conversations and can be defined as user-created content. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines user-created content (UCC) as having three elements: A publication requirement that includes only “work that is published in some context, be it on a publicly accessible website or on a page on a social networking site only accessible to a select group of people (i.e. fellow university students)” (p. 8). It also includes creative effort

which implies that a certain amount of creative effort was put into creating the work or adapting existing works to construct a new one; i.e. users must add their own value to the work. The creative effort behind UCC often also has a collaborative element to it, as is the case with websites which users can edit collaboratively. For example, merely copying a portion of a television show and posting it to an online video website (an activity frequently seen on the UCC sites) would not be considered UCC. If a user uploads his/her photographs, however, expresses his/her thoughts in a blog, or creates a new music video this could be considered UCC. Yet the minimum amount of creative effort is hard to define and depends on the context.

The third requirement is that this content is created outside of professional routines and practices.  I will be using user-generated content and user-created content interchangeably.

I include only interactive online spaces that maintain public or semi-public records of interactions (which excludes chat and e-mail, as they are for purposes of this discussion, private) that are archived and accessible to people who enter these networked or public  spaces at any point once they are created (unless they are deleted). These spaces must also place the option of participation in the hands of the user, and at the very core of these types of networks are expectations of readership or audiences.

I’m specifically interested in how the presence of other readers changes the context and interpretation of information for the members of an online community. My hypothesis for the experience of these networked readers is that this experience allows participants to feel included in the community dialogue without necessarily having to participate and this affordance facilitates social learning in ways that could not occur with static text (offline). This type of social learning occurs in both mediated and non-mediated environments, but often participation is either highly expected (traditional social spaces) or not possible (watching a movie or reading a book).

This territory of possible participation or interaction could be divided into content- and user-centric platforms. Content-centric platforms, such as Google reader and interactive news websites allow users to interact with one another through the sharing of, or commentary on, pre-existing content. User-centric platforms such as social networks cumulate users around information published by the users themselves, often about themselves. There are many online tools that sit between community- and user-based tools, such as the microblogging community-driven tool Twitter, or blogging/news communities wherein content is shared among users in a centralized or semi-centralized way, such as citizen journalism websites or Livejournal. For this study I will be predominantly focusing on users of social networking platforms but intend to extend both the research and its implications to other platforms such as news platforms, blogging communities or Twitter.
My relationship to this topic

Most of the reading I do is online—my computer screen is my reading companion and connection to the literate world. As a student at the Ed school I’ve been focusing on how participants in networked learning environments learn socially, both in terms of situated cognition (social learning) and constructivism (tying knowledge to previous knowledge).

I have previously researched the relationship of Facebook users to their image viewing practices online and used these implications as a window into the study of networked interactions.  This study expands this concept further to include all content that is read without user response.

I have a few unanswered puzzles that once solved, will help me further concretize my research question. What is my methodology for large-scale sampling? How exactly do I define “networked reading”? How much should I focus on SNS vas compared to websites within a larger scope (eg. twitter, blog networks, etc.)? Is reading a form of online participation? How do cultural attitudes change reading in practice? How do concepts like skimming, subvocalization and reading comprehension relate to my research question?

I am currently exploring the implications of eye-tracking software for this research. I will also be investigating the web analytics that businesses use to derive online revenue from page views, and looking at reader relationships to text in context of these standards.

Research questions
What do you read online?
Why do you read it?
How do you interpret it?
How does the presence of other readers shape the interpretation of information for the users of online social networking sites?

2 years ago on June 11th, 2009 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

Sweet Valley Twins: Reading to Understand Contemporary Social Networks

Editor’s note: I’m cross-posting this from Henry Jenkins’ blog where it was published today.

I spent most of my youth surrounded by the pages of books. I read a lot of things, Babysitters Club, Anastasia, books about children and teens that loved animals. I tried to get caught up in the boxcar children, but I found it too old fashioned—I couldn’t identify with anything that was going on. I tried reading Tolkien, but became bored, not because I didn’t understand the text, but because of my boredom with an archetypal male power struggle through the singularity of objects and power derived from them, though I wouldn’t have articulated it that way then. After dabbling in other genres I returned to a world that was so wholly my own, yet so alien—the social life of young girls. I grew up reading Sweet Valley Twins books.

These books encompassed much of my life and youth. I would read while walking (much like Belle in Beauty And The Beast, but with awful glasses and braces). I would sneak pages in math class when the teacher would turn around to write on the board. I still to this day can imagine when I laughed aloud in math class at a hilarious passage confusing woks and walks. I still get a smile on my face thinking of the incident (though my math teacher was less than pleased).

I began reading these books at a time in my life where I was hungry to understand social interaction, yet at the same time seeking to hide from it. I was confused and unsure, wanting to learn by watching others yet shield myself from any hurt by covering my face from the world with a book and wrapping myself in the safety of pre-resolved existing plots, the way one finds comfort in familiar foods.

I actually have almost no recollection of doing homework (although I did well in school) but remember very vividly how I would come home and finish reading a book on the stairs directly inside the front door. Social life played a large role in my childhood, as a source of stress, but also as a main interest of mine.

The central draw of the popular clique at my elementary school, of which I was never a part, was their central sense of presence—by standing in a room and saying nothing, they could announce themselves as interesting. Perhaps this was my glorified understanding of their social presence but regardless, whatever they were doing was definitely working. Their popularity was self-affirming and generative.

I hungered for these interactions and the sense of presence that came with them and my need to understand these interactions was satisfied by these books, which had conclusive endings and allowed me as the reader to see into the social interactions, take them apart and live them, without having to actively create interactions myself. Had I been able read on social networks instead of Sweet Valley Twins books would I have been petrified or liberated? Would Elizabeth, the sweet shy romantic have been torn apart by them or Jessica the social butterfly have thrived in the midst of all the action? Whose narrative would I have chosen?

For Turkle, media have become a way for creating inquiries of the self, as both a mirror in as much as a window out (1984, 1995). “The computer creates new occasions for thinking through the fundamental questions to which childhood must give a response, among them the questions ‘What is life?’”(ibid, 1984, 16) Media can then be seen as objects that help us think about ourselves, and reflect what it is to be a thinking human being. Sweet Valley Twins books, like anything that signals meaning, have contained within them their own set of meanings and social structures and like anything mediated, they can be something to hide behind, something with which to escape from the “real.”

I read about a book each day during the school year, and read them all in order (minus, of course, the numbers missing from the public library), I read in free minutes, by the hour, filling weeks, then days and months with stacks of 20 books at a time, the limit from the library. It never occurred to me that I could have purchased the books with my allowance or put them on a birthday wish list. They were too disposable to me; by the time I would have gotten one it would have been one day old almost immediately. Perhaps this set the stage for me to create consumable media to be disposed when it becomes a day old, with my current identity as a blogger and journalist.

I remember how the books smelled and the way they felt; the way I could lie down on the couch and read one, and after a while the words melted away and there were only pictures. I was both identifying as the twins yet also watching them, finally at peace with social interactions I couldn’t seem to figure out at school, while negotiating the confusion between the side of me that could talk all day to strangers and the side that can barley leave the house.

The twins in the series came to be a representation of myself, although
I wouldn’t have articulated it that way then. Elizabeth was introverted, shy, romantic and thoughtful. Jessica was outgoing, social and bold. I often struggle to meld these two aspects of my personality into one person that can interact with the world. How can one be simultaneously sensitive yet bold? Shy and outgoing? The twins in the book seem to balance each other out, causing equilibrium of blonde purpose articulated through action and control.

People use virtual worlds to do these same things—social networks become many faceted representations of ourselves. danah boyd articulates this as a linearity from concepts of self and identity—one’s internal identity and one’s social identity. Within this social identity, identity management and impression management surface at the forefront of these social issues, in portraying many facets of one’s identity one must be careful not to expose too much of oneself (boyd, 21-30, 2002).

Users even use social networks to hold deceptive identities—posing as those that they are not, for reasons from benign to harmful. (boyd, Donath 2004) In a lot of my own personal social network research I’ve come across people that will say “this is a very not me experience.” When they are browsing photographs or profiles they are constructing a space, a universe external to themselves. One could describe this as traversing from fictional universes, such as the twins, to “networked publics.” In reading I got to experiment with fictional identities without an audience. Though online networks have “invisible audiences” (boyd, 2002), that allow for social network users to feel anonymity and perhaps even privacy, they are not truly alone. Social networks have identity performance, and identity performance was everything I was trying to understand, and everything I was trying to avoid.

boyd stresses the importance of impression management, something that is socially learned, signaling intentions, desires and actions (2004).

It never occurred to me to seek out other readers of these books and interact with them: these books were my own personal refuge and it would have been counterintuitive to share this private world with anyone. It was an escape more than a community. I was learning from the young girls in the book. When I was reading, I was no longer myself, I was Elizabeth or Jessica, interchangeably.

I used the books to discover and explore what creates the fabric of a social relationship, binding us next to each other and allowing us to return again to the same place in a relationship. I learned this page by page and was allowed to again return to what I had built in this (novel’s) community and the(se character’s) friendships I had formed.

Social organization and also interaction can be part of this self-regulating behavior. The books functioned in the same way that gossip does—as an extension of observational learning for learning rules and both teaching and affirming social norms behaviors. “On the surface, gossip consists of stories and anecdotes about particular other people, perhaps especially ones that reflect negatively on the target. We readily concede that some of the appeal of gossip is simply learning about other people. However, we think that a second, less obvious function of gossip is to convey information about social norms and other guidelines for behavior” (Baumeister and Zhang, 2004, 13).

Though the books differ from social networks in that there is no two-way interaction, the same social paradigms still exist and social norms are (re- and de-) constructed through the text. My fascination with social networks is similar to reading these books. The social interactions are visible and can be learned from, without having to say anything back. My social network use perhaps mirrors the way that I was able to stick with the series, meeting their lives at the intersection of my own. In online social networks, instead of furthering my relationship with Jessica or Elizabeth, and thus their social connections, I’m able to analyze my own and indulge in social learning without any of the anxiety that comes with it in real space.

In education, situated cognition is the “theory that learning is influenced by context. Cognition exists in the relations among people. Learning and knowing do not exist independently but are structured by interpersonal interactions and attempts to solve real-life problems in everyday settings” (Collins and O’Brien, 2003, 324). What I was experiencing through these books was learning about social interaction. They functioned as a safe reality to understand sociability. I was learning from these girls both to augment and also to replace relationships in my life.

At the end of the day I’m left with a few questions: how can social network “reading” be framed by my understanding of myself from reading Sweet Valley Twins books? What differences and similarities exist between the networked reading that are allowed in social network spaces

My current interest in social networks could be seen as directly related to my reading of these books. I’m interested less in the possibility of participation online and more in the fact that these are real people with real-life relationships. , Their networked relations within these social networks do not require interaction as a prerequisite for the consumption of social information.

Social networks differ from my Sweet Valley Twins books because they allow the possibility for feedback. Social networks are thus a more active space for social learning, yet still not completely social in the way that having a one-on-one conversation or going to a crowded social gathering shapes a social understanding in terms of social feedback mechanisms for situated cognition. They both sit in between realities and fiction, as a safe space to learn sociability without needing to know exactly how yet to interact. Before social networks, the Sweet Valley Twins series was a similar type of safety net, and the relations that were formed and explored throughout the series were, for better or for worse, my training ground for social interactions to this day.


References

Baumeister, R. F., Zhang, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). Gossip as Cultural Learning. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 111-121.

boyd, danah. (2008).”Why Youth Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. David Buckingham. (Ed.). The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 119-142.

Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public Displays of Connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71-82.

Collins, J. W., & O’Brien, N. P. (Eds.). (2003). The Greenwood dictionary of education (p. 431). Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

Gunawardena, C. N., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle, R. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 3.

Turkle, Shery. (1995). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Turkle, Sheery. (1984). The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon & Schuster.

3 years ago on May 29th, 2009 at 11:20 am | Permalink

Thinking through college media at the Center for Future Civic Media…

3 years ago on April 29th, 2009 at 11:28 pm | Permalink

Casual dating in an age of ubiquitous computing

Against my better judgement I’ve decided to document questions I have, in my “real life” here on my blog.

The internet does not lend itself well to “casual” or “intermittent,” it’s a bit opposite to the term ubiquitous computing. I carried my laptop with me my first year in college, far before it was cool to do so—to the point that it became ridiculous, sitting isolated in courses held in computer labs on my beloved laptop. I just couldn’t part with it, or store my documents somewhere else, to retreive and re-archive them later. It seemed so wasteful and useless.

I went on through college, as slowly rooms became more populated with laptops, and my many networks of friends began to populate online communities such as facebook, or my newfound gmail address. I made new connections, rekindled old ones and added everyone (all the way back to friends from elementary school—even preschool) into my network.

My laptop, and thus the network of social individuals that reach out to me through it are always nearby. The computer, and its networks are something I’m always using, and often the people I’ve just met take part in the world of ubiquitous computing too.

Conversations are held over email, email lends to gchat, text messages and facebook wall posts. There is an archive of my life in digital format, that alone is uninteresting, or at least less interesting than the questions it poses.

What to do when an ex shows up as the first person to contact at the type-ing of just thier first letter. Do they really have a monopoly on memories and also that one letter in gmail? It’s hard to try and forget when your gmail keeps a memory for you of what has been important in your life.

The line between professional and personal is becoming more and more blurred. When someone is interested in my work, follows me on twitter or sends a nice email, what are their motives? It is less clear cut than trading business cards implicating work, and trading phone numbers meaning romantic interest or friendship.

The overlap is becoming very confusing in my life. In the days of the telephone’s monopoly on dating life, giving someone space was easy: wait at least three days after the date until calling. No. Matter. What. To evade the game, too was to make a statement, as was following it and playing along. Now the game has too many rules that overlap and contradict each other. When to gchat? What is a date? What is a friendship? How to break up, break off or take a step back? How to connect? Where can anyone draw distinct lines in a digital world defined through evading the absolute truth of bianaries: date/friendship work/personal connected/disconnected?

3 years ago on April 24th, 2009 at 12:10 pm | Permalink
"I’m thinking of getting business cards that say “series-of-tubes theorist"
other ideas include “social media consultant” “new media theorist” “cyborg anthropologist” (this one is already taken) “memetic engineer” “alche’meme’ist” “robot psychologist” “social mediation specialist” “cultural network professional” “post-geek technologist.” But seriously, I don’t know what to call myself. I’m open to suggestions.
3 years ago on April 23rd, 2009 at 10:26 pm | Permalink
3 years ago on April 20th, 2009 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

News roundup

Google introduces Gmail Autopilot by CADIE

Whole Foods introduces new products

Youtube changes their viewing experience

The Guardian to be published exclusivley on Twitter

Bjork and Led Zepplin join forces

Picasa adds additional features

and

Toshiba introduces a new technology for dogs

via mediabistro, Millie and Akwhitacre

3 years ago on April 1st, 2009 at 12:51 pm | Permalink