Tag Archive: relationships


In terms of social networking, there would have to be a comfort in actually engaging with new people. It would facilitate more ‘natural’ interaction. As it currently stands, in the social networking scene, there are three primary possibilities of interaction. One is insignificant crap that has miniscule meaning even on the site, and leads to nothing. Another is interaction with people you already know. Another is awkward attempts at communicating with people you do not know, which has some arbitrary and random possibility of success, usually low. It seems to me that for social networking, in the sense of actually meeting and forming relationships with new people, there MUST BE more depth added to it, and some structure based on interests and the like. Practically the only meaningful relationships I have ever made on the internet have been through forums. It is in this forum setup that people are capable of truly getting to know each other. Social networking is always surface level interaction. A huge part of your feelings about an unknown person on a social networking site are bound to be determined by their pictures, and you’re going to have to say something either awkward, cheesy, or boring to initiate communication. This is not conducive to forming meaningful relationships.

Now I speak here of meaningful relationships, but I am not implying that in-depth intimate relationships are the only ones of value. For instance, let us consider sexual encounters. In this world of sexual repression, the internet is astounding in its possibilities for facilitating sexual encounters. As it is, it is practically laughable how terribly things are set up in this department. In terms of sexuality, the diversity of possibilities is very sparse. You basically have porn, nearly asexual social networking sites, dating sites, and some more sexually-oriented social networking sites. Porn is nice primarily in that it increases your sexual imagination, and thus sexual energies. It does little in the way of real world fulfillment, however. It’s all people you’ll never meet. One may think that social networking would be great for meeting new people for potential romantic/sexual encounters, and there are millions who wish this was the case, but in reality this does not work out very well.

Established social networking sites, such as facebook, work almost entirely through interaction with people you already know. It may be useful for improving an established relationship, but it is highly ineffective at facilitating new relationships. The greatest sexual fulfillment on these sorts of sites, beyond potentially improving an established relationship, is someone you find attractive uploading a semi-revealing picture. No nudity is allowed, and there seems to be a fairly widely accepted taboo against intentionally being sexy in pictures. Generally when people put up these semi-revealing pictures, they do it under a guise of innocence, almost as if they are unaware that the picture is revealing. This is the result of the basic fact that social networking sites are nearly asexual. They are not conducive to direct sexuality. There are dating websites, and some of these are fine for attempting to establish long-lasting monogamous relationships, I’m sure, but I’m equally sure that these are far too ‘serious’ for what many people are looking for. Then you have the ‘adult-oriented’ social networking sites, which are failures to the point that they are hardly worth mentioning. These tend to be explicit in their sexual nature, and you seemingly ALWAYS have to pay to be a part. This amounts to people paying in order to have sexual encounters, and this is not the sort of thing that many people are comfortable with.

So we have here went to two ends of the spectrum. On one hand we have in-depth connections, where you truly get to know and appreciate others. On the other hand we have casual sexuality. Neither of these are being facilitated particularly well on the internet-as-it-is, and I would like to bring this whole spectrum of interaction into one medium. Although they would be a part of one medium, they would not be directly intertwined. There would be the possibility of crossing over between these aspects, but they would be distinct. There would be different ‘sections’ of the site for different sorts of relationships. Looking ahead, from my current point of view, I can break this down into three primary sections. One is where an individual wants to share something SHe has done, and maybe get feedback. With this, it is basically about you. You’re not so much trying to start a dialogue, but rather share. We can tenatively call this ‘blogging.’ Another section would be designed for actual conversation. There would be a whole range of possible depths to these conversations. There could be anything from in-depth philosophic or political discussions/debates to any sort of casual topic of conversation. We can call this the ‘forum’ interface. Next we have the more casual yet personal environment of ‘social networking.’ Here people share any sort of basic things that they may casually share with friends. In the current social networking scene, we would think of this as things like like status’, pictures, etc. As I say, this is both the most personal and casual environment. It would be primarily for use of people you wanted to get to know on a ‘real’ or personal level, but for in-depth interaction you would not want to limit yourself to this environment.

Now, we would attempt to create a system within all of these ‘sections’ where there would be broad categories along with increasingly specific classifications. You would select the broad categories which were of interest, and then proceed to either select more specific classifications or learn over time what specific categories were of primary interest to you. You would be asked to rate things after being shown them, including options like ‘not sure’ or ‘doesn’t fit my interests.’ There could be some sort of tracking system on the site that shows you your most used categories, as well as rating trends within these various categories. This could give you insight into what your favorite categories are, as well as categories that may not be of the level of interest that you had thought. There would be a database of the ratings that all of the various users gave out, as well as each user’s favorite categories. The system would be set up, either through some sort of coding or through human analysis, to track common relationships between various categories. This would be for the purpose of developing a ‘You may also be interested in…’ sort of thing. Potential unknown interests would be recommended to you not only by other categories that other people who share common categories of interest with you are interested in, but it would be further filtered through a process which would favor individuals who have rated things within those categories similarly to you.

Now as I speak of these ‘categories,’ the most natural interpretation may lead you to think of reading/viewing things in the blogging interface, or topics of conversations in the forum interface, due to the impersonal sound of the word. However, I would seek to employ this same basic system with social interacting. It gets quite interesting and unique here, because in some ways it causes us to question the very nature of our humanity and our interactions. Each individual would determine ‘categories’ of interest for people to interact with. This means basic personality types, various physical traits, whatever. You would determine the ‘types’ of people you were interested in meeting, or your basic feelings about these different ‘types.’ Interactions would be faciliated through the ways in which everyone was categorized by others, as well as the ways they were ‘rated’ in terms of these categories. These would be kept anonymous. This is so that people feel comfortable being honest in their assessment of others, and also so that people are comfortable and confident in being themselves, without needing to conform to others standards. This self-confidence and ease of interaction would continuously be improved, because the social setting would be continuously improved as well, by means of facilitating interaction with ideal people.

The internet is the greatest tool mankind has ever invented. Although it is as great as it is, its potential reaches far beyond its current utilization, and even beyond the imagination of the great majority of people. The internet as I imagine it is a completely customized experience, designed to tailor completely to the uniqueness of each individual who uses it. One of the ‘problems’ of the internet as it is is that it is completely standardized across the globe, or at least country. Search engines, and everything else, sort everything according to (inter)national trends. The results of what comes up in your internet experience should be customized to your own personal dispositions and wants. This should be done through complex personal and interpersonal feedback. There would be a database of your search trends, which would further be classified according to a rating system with which you would have the option for giving ratings to everything. Everything on the internet would be classified through certain categories, and then be rated by the individuals who utilized it, and those ratings would be sorted according to the preferences and rating trends of the individuals who rated them. So what you were confronted with on the internet would be based on the trends of what you look for as well as how you rate things, showing you things based on what other people who have similar interests and have similar ratings have also rated good. This would allow you to find more and more material that would be of interest to you, and all the while you would continue to rate things, which would further customize your experience.

There would also be an encouragement to utilize an easy ability for individuals to post their own material. Everything would be put into this database, and so your material would be rated and sorted through in the same way as everything else. There would, then, be two basic rating systems. One would be the way that you rated everything in your internet experience, and the other would be the way others rated you in their internet experience. The preferences of the indiduals who rated you would be sorted through, and so you would have different ratings based on different type of people who had different preferences. This would customize the way in which your material is found, making it easier for people who tend to like the sort of material you are posting to find. The database, or individuals monitoring it, would track overall trends in personality types, and come up with meaningful classifications of personality types/preferences, and note the relationships between different characteristics. Individuals using this system would meet other people in a variety of environments. There would be the basic ‘blog’ like setup, where one individual basically make his/her voice heard, and other people watch/read and leave their thoughts. There would be the ‘forum’ type of setup, where individuals all interact with eachother in regards to topics of shared interest. There would also be the ‘social networking’ aspect, which would be greatly improved through this system. All these different methods of communication would be distinct, yet related.

This ‘database’ I’m speaking of would run through all the different modes of interaction. Individuals who enjoy things you post in a blog-like setup may want to interact with you in a more interactive forum setup. Individuals who you vibe with in a forum setup may be compatible in such a way that it would be appropriate to connect in a more casual social networking setup. It would work in the reverse as well, of course. Individuals who you form casual and somewhat shallow relationships with in the social networking arena may want to interact with you more in-depth, and truly understand who you are as an individual. This relationship would now go into the more in-depth forum and blogging interfaces. Now you could potentially have multiple ‘e-identities,’ each of which would be a basically distinct personality. What is meant here is basically when you have more than one ‘part’ of who you are, that aren’t exactly the same. Say you are very interested in philosophy, and also very interested in sports. These are not exactly overlapping, and so likely these would split into two different e-identities, each of which would group various aspects of who you are and your internet trends and sort them into your different identities in the way that best describes the different identities. Each of your e-identities would be sorted into the larger database, and work its way into the overall seams of the internet as part of whatever larger categories are appropriate. Based on a similar ‘rating’ system, it would then keep track of the different individuals who you got along with best through whatever medium it was that worked best, and whatever e-identity you were using. It would notice the commonalities in terms of what larger personality categories they were a part of, as well as their search and rating trends. The internet would then facilitate further interactions with people who were of similar personality categories that have been found to be compatible, and you would interact through whatever medium was most appropriate.

Another aspect of this, that I alluded to earlier, would be the aspect of locality. Internet experience, particularly the individuals you interact with, would tend towards locality. It would be designed so that it would generally be possible to actually meet the people you interact with. This all depends on personal preferences, of course. You would filter your preferences through things such as locality vs. overall compatibility. Whether or not you were interested in actually meeting certain types of people and so forth. Also, you would determine what types of people, or what specific people, you wanted to share all of the various things you do online with. So people would only have access to whatever you wanted them to see, and that would be entirely determined by your preferences. This would be further aided by the concept of e-identities. Your various identities would be strengthened and clarified through your various interactions and the types of information you chose to share with the people met through the various identities. This would also maximize the benefit of your various relationships, because only compatible information would be shared, unless it was with an individual who you chose to share a broader range of information.