3,134 karma · joined February 14, 2008
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/news.ycombinator.com/?metri...
...but that's just a crazy guess on my behalf.
Please remember that Microsoft has been flailing from the beginning when it came to accepting the internet. They need all of the intelligence they can get in order to be ahead of the curve in relation to social impact.
Today technology is commonplace and more widely distributed. I would place danah boyd in the same category as those you have mentioned because of the fact that the computer/tech/internet worlds are so much larger than it was in the 80s. She is a leading intellectual when it comes to social networking and I hope she has some influence at Microsoft in a positive direction. Because of her large amount of knowledge in the technology space as it applies to its social impact, this is indeed a key hire for Microsoft as they struggle to make heads or tails of how companies like Google and Facebook have had such a huge following.
Because her interest is in the academic studies of social networking and how the current and future generations use them (something that is lacking in academia and needs more attention). If her interest were in creating a business around a web application that has a central theme of social networking then I think your question would be more applicable to danah.
You could ask the same question of Duncan Watts as well, but again, he is an academic who now works for Yahoo!
Apple has changed their advertising strategy: Justin Long is now going to call himself Safari and John Hodgman will be referring to himself as Internet Explorer.
You are on the right track if you are comfortable with it. When you are learning something new, there is very little you can do wrong in terms of choosing a path. Many of us are constantly learning on a regular basis...
Good luck!
This notion of course goes against the mainstream interpretation of the hacker persona (the geeky, socially recluse male that is more familiar with computers than he is with his own body). But if you peruse the articles here at Hacker News, it encompasses a very diverse range of subjects (anything from health, math, science, business, charisma, etc.) that are not doubt, interesting to hackers.
I would go a step further and say that what hackers today have in common with Bīrūnī is that the diverse subjects he was most interested in were somehow overlapping with one another.
http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Design-Love-Everyday-Things/...
Designing Interactions
http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Interactions-Bill-Moggridge/...
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Make-Me-Think-Usability/dp/032134...
I'm overwhelmed as it is...ad-blocking really helps turn down the noise. To me the whole approach of blasting users with advertisement is flawed, unless of course I'm actually in the mode of purchasing something, in which case I will gladly jump to Chrome or Safari (on my Mac at home).
I think having the freedom to turn the noise off/on as you see fit is part of a larger trend of the future where you have the option to do as you wish. Afterall, isn't freedom one of the core principles of the internet?
What we need next is a "Google Personal Gateway" so that all of our connections to the internet can be monitored. Google could offer it out as a free virus/spam protection package but then have an even greater view of how people interact with the internet thus giving the consumer an enhanced internet experience.
[please refrain from informing me about how Incognito will protect user information - so called "private browsing" is not a full/rich internet experience]
http://psychologytoday.com/articles/index.php?term=pto-19960...
It's interesting that the pill, which intentionally tampers with a woman's reproductive system, also tampers with what a woman finds attractive in a potential mate, sans the intention of mating for reproduction.
A good solution to this would be to introduce levels of specificity to Wikipedia such that what we currently have is the first level, and then the second level would be catered towards individuals who have more than a lay perspective, and then the next successive level would be for experts and so forth.
Perhaps this would require different levels of editorship as well, but it is definitely an approach that might give a better organization to Wikipedia that is not flat as is exemplified by traditional encyclopedias.
I believe that this flat trend (in a larger exponential curve that has yet to reveal itself) is a lack of initiative/participation for the moment that has zero predictive value of revealing the nature of Wikipedia's future growth rate.