Constant Communication With Your Friends. Nonstop, Everyday.

[Sapphire Harp]

Constant casual communication with all your friends...

This is going to be a bit meandering so, please, bear with me.

I remember at college, many of my friends had their instant messenger programs on constantly. And conversations with friends that never really ended. They'd wander away, go outside, come back, find a few more IMs and respond. You might call it a four hour lull in the conversation, but not actually a different one. And they probably were seeing the friend they were talking to in the time between, anyway.

We also have near total saturation of cell phones / PDAs / whatever now. Nearly everyone has an active communication device with them at all times. Things are still have fairly clear beginnings and endings. You begin a call with someone, and then you hang up and it's over.

But, I can tell you, one of my bosses almost never takes the earphones of his iphone out... he merely turns them off, or switches to music when he's not talking to someone... There are bluetooth earpieces that people rarely bother to take off now, I'm sure...

And we are starting to move in the direction of technologically augmenting people... perhaps in permanent ways.

I was looking at the wikipedia facts about cellphones very briefly... The advent of the current form of cellphones was around 1980. Here we are, three decades later, and it says there are around 4.1 billion cell phone subscriptions active (as of January 2009). Although, honestly, I remember five years ago, I felt like not having a cell phone was greatly harming my social possibilities at college...

Twitter is now three years old... Saturation of text messaging is also rising...

So, I was just wondering - how long do you think we have until it's socially expected of a person to be in constant casual communication with all their friends? Conversations which never really stop. Ever. A world where it would be weird and unexpected for a person to be 'out of touch' for a while, without an explanation?

Seems like we're getting pretty close, but it hasn't truly started to become the norm. Not yet.

And, how do you think people with strong tendencies towards privacy and solitude (INTPs and others) are going to be able to survive and thrive in that kind of world?

* * * * *
​

(This is something of a question towards the future, rather than the now... I was just starting to read Rainbow's End by Vernor Vinge earlier today. He suggested something like this and it aligned the thoughts above for me.)
​

 

[ozzieflipflop]

I love living where I do. We have no mobile reception, so I can switch on the answering machine and "go underground" for as long as I want!

 

[Cogwulf]

I'd hate a world like that, I'm struggling now a bit as everyone uses facebook to arrange meeting each other and I don't use facebook

 

[transformers]

I wouldn't like that at all. Some communication is great and useful, but constant communication would drain me. I don't even own a cell phone, and regularly get weird looks because of it. I think all introverts would feel pressured to assume at least some extroverted tendencies in a world like that, or risk the possibility of being socially ostracized. Extroverts, on the other hand, would love and welcome it.

 

[Firehazard159]

Oddly enough, I seem to be variant from the typical INTP on this subject.

I've already got my phone always on, always connected to IM's. I find myself wishing more people would just leave me messages to get back to responding to.

But, that said, bluetooth is pointless for me, unless it can stream music, because I don't call / vocalize with anyone.

I tend to see IM as more faster paced forums, one on one. I hate group chats, though. So really, I don't think I'm really going that far out of the INTP norm. I really don't want to talk to people idly, I want to have real conversations, my favorite convo's are with my ex-youth leader, because every conversation fully skips small talk and goes straight to theory and debate, but mostly we just leave each other messages, it's rarely a full on non-stop convo.. it's responses every several hours later, kind of thing.

I dunno. It's not like you can't still screen who you talk to you. I won't hate that kind of world, I've been kind of looking forward to it. Maybe it's one of those be careful what you wish for kind of things, and I'll hate it when it comes around... but I don't think so.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

And we are starting to move in the direction of technologically augmenting people... perhaps in permanent ways.

And, how do you think people with strong tendencies towards privacy and solitude (INTPs and others) are going to be able to survive and thrive in that kind of world?

The use of ipods & the like for blocking all but the most persistent from communicating with us is an example, remember augmentations work both ways.

 

[Jennywocky]

For me, I like messaging that I can attend to on my own time, without having someone else interfering with my schedule.

This means I tend not to like cell phones and IMs, while I do like e-mail and twitter and texting.

The issue though in being hooked up all the time is that I tend to get into a "contact rush/craving" mode, I become emotionally dependent upon getting contacted by SOMEONE at all times... so I leap from site to site and utility to utility and it all becomes about short-term gratification. I think this reduces a deeper quality of work on my part, I don't end up giving myself time to focus and dig as deeply as I could into a project or effort. I become a mega-multitasker and never accomplish much, trying to stay "hooked in."

So I love it.
But I don't think it's ultimately all good for me.

I do remember when the first cell phones came out. They were huge devices (big walkie-talkies) and came with a briefcase and cost tons of money. It amazes me to carry one in my pocket or purse that can stream video... and not that expensively.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

I'm hoping text messaging is just a fad and one day soon, people will see how dull and unimportant it is.

I don't have a cell phone or any other messaging device. I refuse to get one. If anyone truly needs me for anything they can leave a message on my home answering machine and just wait. If it ever came to pass where I was expected to participate in such a dystopic future, I would very soon hate my friends.

 

[Kidege]

I'm more concerned about 'friendship' lasting only as much as your messaging.
When I stopped using ICQ, I lost touch with a bunch of people. We all switched to MSN, but didn't always get each other's. Then I stopped using MSN, and I lost touch with another batch of people. The same happened each time I migrated from sites, networks, etc.

Guess only my actual friends take the trouble of composing long emails.

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

I'm hoping text messaging is just a fad and one day soon, people will see how dull and unimportant it is.

I don't have a cell phone or any other messaging device. I refuse to get one. If anyone truly needs me for anything they can leave a message on my home answering machine and just wait. If it ever came to pass where I was expected to participate in such a dystopic future, I would very soon hate my friends.

i text because i dislike the awkwardness of talking on the phone.

 

[Agent Intellect]

I have a cell phone sitting in my car, the prepaid kind, in case my piece of shit car breaks down on the road. I've had it for about two years and could probably count on one hand the number of times I used it.

I find it strange because I consider myself a 'futurist' yet I have such an aversion to cell phones and cell phone related communication. I'm quite convinced it's just that deep down part of me that resists giving in to what's 'mainstream', and sometime in the future I will probably become more of a cell phone advocate, but that's the way it is now.

It helps not to have to maintain constant communication with friends when I only have one friend, and he doesn't own a cell phone, and I've managed to distance myself sufficiently from extended family that I have no contact with them outside of thanksgiving dinner.

 

[ckm]

I dread that day. There is no way I would immerse myself in it. I dislike texting and if I lose interest in a conversation I just don't text back. However usually a conversation that is interesting and engaging to me is too much effort as texting is painfully slow and replies are long. Therefore I don't really bother texting.

I think keeping in "virtual" contact with someone makes meeting them face to face awkward as we have little to talk about.

I rarely sign on to MSN, and when I do I'm set to appear offline. If I don't initiate a conversation with someone, I probably don't want to talk to them in the first place so, why let them bother me by appearing online?

I call my closest friend every couple of nights. We're very close, so if there's nothing to talk about neither of us get awkward. However if I don't call her for a few days, it's not like she gets offended or anything. We both understand that we're not always in the mood to talk.


On another note, as INTPs we don't (at least, I don't) conform to a number of the social standards, so I suppose that this would be just another one to add to the list.

 

[Darby]

I enjoy this post quite a bit, because I have most of these god awful electronic devices, programs, websites, etc.

I use my cellphone, but rarely although I always keep it on me, my mom hates it when I dont tell her where I'm going, so it makes it easier that way, but otherwise it's pointless. I used to text a lot, but it was only because it was one of the only modes of communication my friend used, and I'm terrible at talking about how I feel in person

I have MSN, but there's never anyone on worth talking to, so I gave up, and I have myspace and facebook, but once I got a phone, there was no reason for it. I have a few friends who I enjoy talking to outside of school who don't have phones, but they have the internet, and that's the only thing I use it for.

I would like to point out however, that it took much persuading for me to get a myspace, and even more to get a facebook, and now they sit almost completely unused, somewhere out in internet land

 

[Ermine]

Scary thought, being in casual conversation constantly.

Here's how I deal with that. I have a cell phone, but it's on silent most of the time, since I'm either in class, forget to turn it back on, or just don't want to answer the phone. I just don't bother unless I'm expecting someone to call. I also only give my number to friends, which helps. Luckily, most of my calls are for the sake of business/logistics, and can be kept under a minute.

If I can keep it that way, it's very likely I'll survive the future of communication.

 

[Waterstiller]

This thread reminds me of an Onion article I read.

Anyways.. I'm going to be purchasing a VoIP device (likely ipod touch) along with a text-only plan phone like Virgin Mobile's Texter's Delight. I personally really enjoy the ability to send out texts while I'm out to friends when I'll be in their area. I pretty much dread being called by people and would rather just have them text me requests/directions/schedules/ect.

As for IMing.. I really appreciate the ability to go invisible. Or receive messages while I'm away. Communication on my own schedule and terms (written.) is fantastic. Moving away from real-time communication is ideal for me.

 

[Adymus]

This thread reminds me of an Onion article I read.

Anyways.. I'm going to be purchasing a VoIP device (likely ipod touch) along with a text-only plan phone like Virgin Mobile's Texter's Delight. I personally really enjoy the ability to send out texts while I'm out to friends when I'll be in their area. I pretty much dread being called by people and would rather just have them text me requests/directions/schedules/ect.

As for IMing.. I really appreciate the ability to go invisible. Or receive messages while I'm away. Communication on my own schedule and terms (written.) is fantastic. Moving away from real-time communication is ideal for me.

Finally, someone who sees why texting truly is an Introvert's best friend.

We have things that must be said to people, but we don't want to talk to them; problem solved!

 

[420MuNkEy]

I have a cell phone that I charge and use for a single call every couple of months. After that, I just let it die and charge it back up again when I need to use it. I've never had texting, and have no desire for it. If I wish to communicate a textual message with someone, I can do it with my keyboard. It's much easier.

As for IM's, I leave my messenger clients running 24/7 (as with most of my applications). People who know how to contact me via messenger are generally aware of this fact and realize that I may not be available to respond or I may just not respond at all. To me, an IM is somewhere in between an email and a text message. It's a nice middle ground. It lets you quickly convey a meaningful message and also allows for quick discourse (email responses tend to take longer and a texts best function is simple messages, not discourse).

I despise and refuse to use any of the social cancer sites (Myspace, Twitter, Facebook, etc).

 

[Sapphire Harp]

The use of ipods & the like for blocking all but the most persistent from communicating with us is an example, remember augmentations work both ways.

I guess the point of this is - we might get to a point that turning off people's access to you will be a blatant act. Like two friends leave have IM programs on phones they keep with them, turned on 24/7 for years... - then one suddenly decides to block the other. A lack of connection would be a significant thing in that world.

Of course, the older a person reading this is - the less likely this world will be something they experience... It's culturally allowed for people to lag behind the curve of technology and to let themselves become dated...

There is a potential choice, though, between interconnectivity, convenience, and privacy... So, it's quite possible things won't turn out this way - but the choice that defines the norms and expectations is going by the bulk of society...

* * * * *
​

Honestly, I'm kind of surprised there are so many people here still going without cellphones - even if just leaving them at home most of the time. In college, during my last year without a cellphone - I often found it was a frustration and an annoyance to people who wanted to reach me... Which wasn't often, mind you... But the times they did, it just made it that much harder and less worthwhile to them.

In short, it made the social experiences I wanted to have more difficult. And, really, without even trying I don't get very many calls - I don't think many people on this forum are going to have to worry about that sort of thing.
​

For me, I like messaging that I can attend to on my own time, without having someone else interfering with my schedule. This means I tend not to like cell phones and IMs, while I do like e-mail and twitter and texting.

It's always a little bit convenient for one party of any exchange, isn't it? Either you're caught responding on their time - or they get to wait while you come around to getting back to them... Unless, of course, you both coincidentally find it's a good time.
​

I'm more concerned about 'friendship' lasting only as much as your messaging.

You know, that's actually quite a point, isn't it? I hope things move towards greater interchangeability... Else, I'll probably continue acquiring minimally used avenues of communication...
​

 

[walfin]

The day they invent a battery that can last years is the day I'm in trouble. I've been using "low battery" as an excuse for years now (for the phone).

Thankfully not that many people contact me on facebook. Sometimes it isn't that bad being unpopular I guess.

 

[snowqueen]

This is a fascinating post - thanks Sapphire Harp for raising the issue. You also talked about generations - so yes, I suspect that constant connectivity will be the norm for people aged about 15 and under nowadays in the more affluent countries. I'm currently in Jordan in the Middle East and everyone has at least one mobile phone - most people have two and my cousin told me that they have dual sim phones here so someone with 2 phones may actually have 4 accounts (I can't imagine why).

There is no space in modern life - space to think, to contemplate, to be bored. The constant connectivity will mean certain types of people will struggle more than others and there will probably be a shift in the types of people who hold higher office.

 

[Agent Intellect]

The internet and cell phones seem to be the new 'fire' that humans have been given. One of the popular theories in paleoanthropology is that the discovery of fire is one of the things that allowed humans to become more social than other primates (humans are the only greater apes that will even allow other animals to touch their offspring) because the fire gave humans a central place to gather together and be social. This, of course, lead to strong social bonds between mates and eventually symbolic language (the fire itself must have meant something - I wonder if this is where the idea of 'warmth = comfort' came from?) and even verbal communication.

There seems to be an analogue with the internet/cell phone. This has become to central hub of communication in our world now. I wonder what sort of new communicative adaptations this will create? The constant need for human contact seems to be a by-product of this. The ability to always be in contact with other people has made it almost an addiction (just look at some of the 'forum addiction' posts around here).

I almost wonder if this has spawned the present age of apathy. It's difficult to feel empathy for people when there is no direct conversation - we have enlarged our monkey sphere to how many names we can get on our facebook and how many numbers we can fit in our cell phone. We no longer need our brains to care about other people because our gadgets do it for us.

 

[JUN]

Constant Lack Of Friends. Nonstop, Everyday.

 

[Andrew18651]

People expecting me to be in constant communication? Hmm..... * Shotgun to Head*

 

[Andrew18651]

I despise and refuse to use any of the social cancer sites (Myspace, Twitter, Facebook, etc).

Same

 

[Sapphire Harp]

I almost wonder if this has spawned the present age of apathy. It's difficult to feel empathy for people when there is no direct conversation - we have enlarged our monkey sphere to how many names we can get on our facebook and how many numbers we can fit in our cell phone. We no longer need our brains to care about other people because our gadgets do it for us.

Well, the simplest explanation for the age of apathy that I can think of - quantity has risen over quality. No one has time to forge great connections with people who aren't a part of your family... (or are intended to be added to it.)

But, I don't think indirect communication stunts empathy... It certainly gives room for it to be done that way, but it isn't necessarily so at all. I expect it has much to do with what people can get away with. And what they have the time and inclination to offer.

Also, I remember it suggested somewhere that most modern relationships are casual things compared to the past. Just wait, they said, until you have a relationship with someone that you need to be connected to in order to simply survive. In that time and place, they suggested, you'll find out what it's really like to care about a relationship with someone.

I do like calling the social scene our 'monkey sphere', though.
​

There is no space in modern life - space to think, to contemplate, to be bored. The constant connectivity will mean certain types of people will struggle more than others and there will probably be a shift in the types of people who hold higher office.

I can rather agree with that... It's hard to reach that feeling of being truly directionless... And it's gotten more difficult with every year.

I don't follow what you meant by the shift of people holding higher office, though. Do you mind saying more?
​

 

[sagewolf]

I'm going to join the ranks of those who love texts, IMs, email and twitter. Look, I can say something without having to actually TALK! And I don't have to worry about no-one listening, because it will stay there, until the intended recipient comes along to read it! Communication through those avenues is easier than it was before-- and on IM f you say you're doing something else while you keep an eye on a conversation, that's good too. I don't even have to consider social interaction as time I could spend writing or drawing anymore. Instead, I just do both.

Constant connectvity wouldn't be too hard to work around, though. I don't think so, anyway... you could just say you're on your way to do something/driving/need to sleep/need the bathroom/are already in about four conversations/your pet rabbit bit through your laptop's power cord no, no, he's fine, just wish I could say the same for the computer. The ingenious recluse should be able to find an excuse or two close at hand when he needs them. Those just ran off the top of my head, after all...

 

[snowqueen]

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowqueen
There is no space in modern life - space to think, to contemplate, to be bored. The constant connectivity will mean certain types of people will struggle more than others and there will probably be a shift in the types of people who hold higher office.

I can rather agree with that... It's hard to reach that feeling of being truly directionless... And it's gotten more difficult with every year.

I don't follow what you meant by the shift of people holding higher office, though. Do you mind saying more?

Ah that was one of those ridiculous INTP leaps!

What I was thinking was that in the past, people who hold high office have tended to be those who can think and to do that takes time and mental space. If being able to use constant communication becomes the norm then those who need time etc will become less able to adapt and those who are able to will become the top dogs - the ones who can cope with the needs of the communication era. So those kinds of people will be more likely to become successful heads of state etc. It's probably a flawed hypothesis but what I was thinking was about how wider society would be affected if being able to manage vast input of social data became an essential or desirable characteristic.

 

[Zero]

I do text my friends. Not often compared to most people, but it's more communication than I would keep with them otherwise. I don't mind texting. They're not highly sensitive people, so if it seems like the convo is over I just stop sending stuff and they're like that too.

I can't maintain friendships with attention demanding people. There's a point where my patience kind of snaps and if my family were more observant (or if I explained it to them), they'd realize I'm highly impatient and when I finally say something it's because I'm at the end of my patience, not becoming impatient.

There's always something ticking. I don't know why, it's just always there. It feels like impatience, I'm not sure that's really what it is, but it seems like I keep it to myself and tolerate until I blow up on people. Most of the sensitive types don't do well with that. I burn them off like ... whatever you burn off...

I don't think anything would change for me. There are the people I can get along with and there are the people I can't. There is almost always something about every person I get to know that bothers me (it's my nervous tick or whatever they call it). It's the people who can get that and deal with it that I stay friend with.

 

[Vrecknidj]

I find texting the perfect solution to resolving the problem of needing to communicate with others. If I need to provide information to someone but don't want to get involved in additional conversation topics, I send a text rather than call. It's perfect for me. If others send me texts (somewhat rare), then I can think about how I will respond and don't have the pressure of being asked directly (such as happens while on the phone).

I think that the interface will eventually disappear. I can imagine a time when some chip is stamped onto my arm or something like that, and there is a connection between some part of my brain and that device. Anytime someone "texts" or "calls" me, that device will let me know that there is information at the ready. I will be able to consciously acknowledge it in whatever way I choose (respond now, save for later, etc.). I will be able to think about my response and the device will convert my thoughts into texts or images or sounds or whatever. I will then be able to review what was created and "send" it if I wish, to whomever I wish.

I imagine that I can turn it off, that I can leave it on while I sleep but have it in some mode that doesn't interrupt me. I can imagine that I can leave it on while I sleep with some special instructions (wake me if it's my sister and the incoming message is marked "urgent", for example).

Basically, just a cell phone reduced to the transceiver that it is, and placed into or onto my body or brain.

Dave

 

[Oblivious]

What excites me is the prospect of monitoring this endless flow of communication (Open channels only of course ).

http://www.intpforum.com/member.php?u=110Vreck: Why stop there. You could have a translucent HUD beamed by an eyepiece directly into your retina containing any sort of information that your personal CPU processes. (Basically an ultralight miniaturized PC that can be carried around with you or even be a part of and be powered by your body)

They could call this the Eyetop. It would control all non neural information that would be relevant to you and yet could be controlled by neural commands i.e typing and mouse control by thought. It would also act as an interface between you or any devices you might be operating and carrying. This interface can even be wireless.

Imagine walking to your house and having your front door open with a few mental commands. Or driving your car without having to put your hand on the wheel or even being in the driver's seat (Visual information required for driving could be communicated by wireless to your Eyetop)

Massive possibilities there. I have not heard of a similar device or system out there, but I know someone will make it sometime in the future.

 

[Chimera]

I'm at the computer during almost all of my free time, and can be contacted in a few different ways...MSN, AIM, and facebook are the biggest ones. However, I'm almost always appearing offline (or actually offline), and facebook I only check once a day. Sometimes I want to be in the midst of many conversations, sometimes I don't want to talk to anyone. I appreciate technology for allowing me to regulate how much social exposure I have at a time. ​

The whole "constantly in contact" thing gets to be a problem when my friends expect me to be available and find that I'm not. For example, one friend of mine frequently unloads all of her social drama on me, usually at school during lunch. But if, hell forbid, something happens to her afterschool that she just haaaas to rant to me about, she gets straight online and sends me about 20 IMs (since she knows I appear offline.) And if I don't respond, the next day at school she flips out and is extremely offended that I wasn't "there for her."
(I just kind of tip my head to the side with a "what, seriously?" expression and ask her what she needed to talk about.)​

They could call this the Eyetop. It would control all non neural information that would be relevant to you and yet could be controlled by neural commands i.e typing and mouse control by thought. It would also act as an interface between you or any devices you might be operating and carrying. This interface can even be wireless.

That idea both excites and frightens me. My paranoia is, once scientists figure out how to wire things to our brains, what stops them from mind control? It could start out as something harmless, like a system for enhancing problem solving in childrens' brains to assist them at school, and then graduate into something monsterous.

*shudder*​

 

[Agent Intellect]

Who needs to talk to talk anymore?

 

[Chimera]

Maybe I should get to work on building my underground facility for when the world gets screwed...​

 

[420MuNkEy]

Maybe I should get to work on building my underground facility for when the world gets screwed...​

Burying shipping containers or buses is a good way to start

 

[Oblivious]

That idea both excites and frightens me. My paranoia is, once scientists figure out how to wire things to our brains, what stops them from mind control? It could start out as something harmless, like a system for enhancing problem solving in childrens' brains to assist them at school, and then graduate into something monsterous.

*shudder*​

I believe this the stuff of science fiction! I think this particular idea was used in the second movie of Appleseed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appleseed_(film)

To summarise, an entire city was engulfed in a sort of zombie outbreak scenario in some nefarious a terrorist plot to lay siege to it. Besides this, the film has many other futuristic elements considered by Masamune Shirow, like artificially engineered neo sapiens, giant friggin mecha, flying cars and floating self sustaining cities.

To digress, said problem in fact already exists today in viruses, hacking, identity theft and the like. I think it would be likely that all personal CPUs in the future would have some sort of fail safe device that would activate if certain forbidden conditions are met. Of course that would never ensure full safety, which would always rely on responsible usage. Same as today I reckon.

 

[Chimera]

Munkey:
Good suggestions...I'll definitely stop being a procrastinator and get right on it.

Oblivious:
I'd like to think that potentially harmful technology in the future will have a reasonable amount of safety already in place upon distribution, but what makes me nervous is that new technology always has bugs to work out, no matter how much testing and tweaking it goes through beforehand. It happens today and it will most likely happen in the future as well. And then there are people who would seek to exploit flaws in the technology, and the more reliant we are on the technology, the more damage can be dealt...
Of course, that's just my undercurrent of paranoia. I mean, the average American would be paralyzed without the use of a car, and that hasn't come to kick us in the ass yet. (Unless the price of oil gets out of control before we have enough marketable fuel alternatives and riots start all over the country...) ​

 

[Sapphire Harp]

You could have a translucent HUD beamed by an eyepiece directly into your retina containing any sort of information that your personal CPU processes. They could call this the Eyetop.

Incidentally, this is exactly what's in Rainbow's End - which was the novel making me think about this notion. I started this thread when I was on page 20. I'm done now, so I know about the computers they use now.

Vernor Vinge postulated people wearing eye-contacts which they could see digital overlays on what they view in the world. The lenses communication with circuitry worked into their clothes, which is the computer and has the processing power.

So, I guess the assumption is you'll be available for internet communication anytime you're wearing clothes - and maybe some other time besides. They used silent messaging a lot - which is where a text message from someone else floats into your vision in gold letters. Audio and Visual calls also available, as per your preference.

Of course, if the assumption is you're online at least every moment you're wearing clothes - if they can't talk to you, they know you're hiding from at least them. A sketchy position to be in with some extroverts. I suppose in the world Vinge illustrated it doesn't matter so much, though... because it's pretty much given that you can visually locate anyone in a few minutes without difficulty... so you can always know what a person is up to.
​

What I was thinking was that in the past, people who hold high office have tended to be those who can think and to do that takes time and mental space. If being able to use constant communication becomes the norm then those who need time etc will become less able to adapt and those who are able to will become the top dogs - the ones who can cope with the needs of the communication era.

...So, now that the world is presently moving faster than any previous point... would that imply we have a greater percentage of fast moving, fast acting, low pondering leaders than in the past? A growing percentage of ES types as opposed to IN types leading?
​