Mike Wesch's Library tagged history →  View Popular

OK, yes, the whole story is extremely convoluted. But it's the sort of thing that I saw in evidence at ROFLCon earlier this year: somebody who is entirely unknown can get picked up for basically doing nothing, but doing it in public.

So when our future digital archaeologists start looking back at our actions, they'll come across Boxxy and look confused. How on earth do you relate that story in a way that makes sense in 100 years, given that it makes basically no sense right now? That's partly what I love about the internet - and partly what makes my brain hurt.

Just looked up Anonymous on Wikipedia. Their 'demotivational logo' has the catchphrase 'Because none of us are as cruel as all of us'.

What an incredible and disturbing concept - frightening because it is both barbaric and intelligent. Fodder for a Neal Stephenson novel, but in the real world. Anybody with an ounce of humanity would think these fascinating aspects of networked society very worthy of discussion.

I just lost the game. Boxxy isn't a meme, AT ALL. EFG is a meme. Boxxy = NOT.

The old Anons will let this pass, new ones will get bored and eventually boxxy will be forgotten

Spears et al. (2002) contrasted the engineering model with the "social science" perspective on the Internet, which assumes instead that personal goals and needs are the sole determinant of its effects. [In the domain of communications research, Blumler & Katz's (1974) "uses and gratifications" theory is an influential version of this approach.] According to this viewpoint, the particular purposes of the individuals within the communication setting determine the outcome of the interaction, regardless of the particular features of the communication channel in which the interaction takes place.

The third and most recent approach has been to focus on the interaction between features of the Internet communication setting and the particular goals and needs of the communicators, as well as the social context of the interaction setting (see Bargh 2002, McKenna & Bargh 2000, Spears et al. 2002). According to this perspective, the special qualities of Internet social interaction do have an impact on the interaction and its outcomes, but this effect can be quite different depending on the social context. With these three guiding models in mind, we turn to a review of the relevant research.

The relative anonymity of the Internet can also contribute to close relationship formation through reducing the risks inherent in self-disclosure. Because selfdisclosure contributes to a sense of intimacy, making self-disclosure easier should facilitate relationship formation. In this regard Internet communication resembles the "strangers on a train" phenomenon described by Rubin (1975; also Derlega & Chaikin 1977). As Kang (2000, p. 1161) noted, "Cyberspace makes talking with strangers easier. The fundamental point of many cyber-realms, such as chat rooms, is to make new acquaintances. By contrast, in most urban settings, few environments encourage us to walk up to strangers and start chatting. In many cities, doing so would amount to a physical threat."

Overall, then, the evidence suggests that rather than being an isolating, personally and socially maladaptive activity, communicating with others over the Internet not only helps to maintain close ties with one's family and friends, but also, if the individual is so inclined, facilitates the formation of close and meaningful new relationships within a relatively safe environment.