Twitter, et al
 

OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.



--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Twitter, et al
 

"hk" wrote in message
m...
OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not
indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional
bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but
those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving
hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect
strangers.



--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Lots of that going on around here.

Twitter, et al
 

On Apr 20, 4:52*pm, hk wrote:
OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Try googling "why do people tweet", moron. Or are you just trying to
stir **** as usual?

Twitter, et al
 

On 4/21/2010 9:11 AM, Loogypicker wrote:
On Apr 20, 4:52 pm, wrote:
OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Try googling "why do people tweet", moron. Or are you just trying to
stir **** as usual?

Don't encourage him. Would you want Krause tweeting with your daughter
or your grand daughter?

Twitter, et al
 

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400, hk
wrote:

OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.

Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads,
savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the
media apparatus. It's text broadcast.

Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for
getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a
collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient,
actually.

Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good
tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids
while they're out in the world.

Twitter, et al
 

On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400,
wrote:

OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.




Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads,
savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the
media apparatus. It's text broadcast.

Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for
getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a
collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient,
actually.

Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good
tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids
while they're out in the world.



"Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K
Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell
phone? Not so much. :)

I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a
savant, or whomever.

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.




--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Twitter, et al
 

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:37:09 -0400, hk wrote:

On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400,
wrote:

OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.




Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads,
savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the
media apparatus. It's text broadcast.

Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for
getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a
collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient,
actually.

Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good
tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids
while they're out in the world.



"Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K
Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell
phone? Not so much. :)

I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a
savant, or whomever.

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

Twitter, et al
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:37:09 -0400, hk wrote:

On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400,
wrote:

OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do
not indulge.

I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the
occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi,
Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day
sending
or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even
perfect strangers.




Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads,
savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the
media apparatus. It's text broadcast.

Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for
getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a
collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient,
actually.

Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good
tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids
while they're out in the world.



"Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K
Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell
phone? Not so much. :)

I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a
savant, or whomever.

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.


Now preserved for ever in the Smithsonian I believe.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Twitter, et al
 

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:59:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:35:16 -0700, jps wrote:

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

It is not really all that new. IBM field techs were carrying an RF
connected portable terminal in 1985 that had peer to peer texting
capability. This was bigger than a blackberry but smaller than a net
book. (about 4 x 6 x 1.5) It also had full connectivity with the IBM
VM network, parts, dispatch and later the internet.
We learned to express our thoughts in 55 byte chunks.
Things like GR8, CUN10min and FKNA were in use long before a cell
phone had a display on it.
Most CEs had a story about texting while driving. This thing would
wedge in most steering wheels. It used a full power 3w cell
transmitter with a decent antenna so you could get fairly well.

Well, this version is widely avaiable and being adopted and
transformed by youth. It's the modern phone call for them but far
more efficient. And when they need to talk about something, they
dial.

It has its problems, mostly related to what Nom touched on, a record
of utterances that would never be collected by a voice phone, unless
recorded. Messages can be saved and passed along at a later date when
personal affiliations have changed.

Kids learn the hazards of digital communication early in life.

Twitter, et al
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:59:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:35:16 -0700, jps wrote:

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

It is not really all that new. IBM field techs were carrying an RF
connected portable terminal in 1985 that had peer to peer texting
capability. This was bigger than a blackberry but smaller than a net
book. (about 4 x 6 x 1.5) It also had full connectivity with the IBM
VM network, parts, dispatch and later the internet.
We learned to express our thoughts in 55 byte chunks.
Things like GR8, CUN10min and FKNA were in use long before a cell
phone had a display on it.
Most CEs had a story about texting while driving. This thing would
wedge in most steering wheels. It used a full power 3w cell
transmitter with a decent antenna so you could get fairly well.

Well, this version is widely avaiable and being adopted and
transformed by youth. It's the modern phone call for them but far
more efficient. And when they need to talk about something, they
dial.

It has its problems, mostly related to what Nom touched on, a record
of utterances that would never be collected by a voice phone, unless
recorded. Messages can be saved and passed along at a later date when
personal affiliations have changed.

Kids learn the hazards of digital communication early in life.


I've cautioned my nephew/niece about this several times. "Don't say anything
and esp. don't post any picture that you wouldn't want on the front page of
the newspaper."

--
Nom=de=Plume

Twitter, et al
 

On 4/22/10 2:14 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:59:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:35:16 -0700, wrote:

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

It is not really all that new. IBM field techs were carrying an RF
connected portable terminal in 1985 that had peer to peer texting
capability. This was bigger than a blackberry but smaller than a net
book. (about 4 x 6 x 1.5) It also had full connectivity with the IBM
VM network, parts, dispatch and later the internet.
We learned to express our thoughts in 55 byte chunks.
Things like GR8, CUN10min and FKNA were in use long before a cell
phone had a display on it.
Most CEs had a story about texting while driving. This thing would
wedge in most steering wheels. It used a full power 3w cell
transmitter with a decent antenna so you could get fairly well.

Well, this version is widely avaiable and being adopted and
transformed by youth. It's the modern phone call for them but far
more efficient. And when they need to talk about something, they
dial.

It has its problems, mostly related to what Nom touched on, a record
of utterances that would never be collected by a voice phone, unless
recorded. Messages can be saved and passed along at a later date when
personal affiliations have changed.

Kids learn the hazards of digital communication early in life.


I've cautioned my nephew/niece about this several times. "Don't say anything
and esp. don't post any picture that you wouldn't want on the front page of
the newspaper."



I'm paying for two cell phones for nephews...they're both in college and
they both IM like crazy. Fortunately, I bought the "unlimited" text
messaging for our family account.


--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Twitter, et al
 

On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 01:52:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:43:16 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:59:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:35:16 -0700, jps wrote:

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

It is not really all that new. IBM field techs were carrying an RF
connected portable terminal in 1985 that had peer to peer texting
capability. This was bigger than a blackberry but smaller than a net
book. (about 4 x 6 x 1.5) It also had full connectivity with the IBM
VM network, parts, dispatch and later the internet.
We learned to express our thoughts in 55 byte chunks.
Things like GR8, CUN10min and FKNA were in use long before a cell
phone had a display on it.
Most CEs had a story about texting while driving. This thing would
wedge in most steering wheels. It used a full power 3w cell
transmitter with a decent antenna so you could get fairly well.

Well, this version is widely avaiable and being adopted and
transformed by youth. It's the modern phone call for them but far
more efficient. And when they need to talk about something, they
dial.

It has its problems, mostly related to what Nom touched on, a record
of utterances that would never be collected by a voice phone, unless
recorded. Messages can be saved and passed along at a later date when
personal affiliations have changed.

Kids learn the hazards of digital communication early in life.


I guess that was the good side of the early technology. The 55 byte
peer to peer message was not saved on the server, there was no
forwarding capability and even with the type of message that went
through the dispatch system and was logged, disk space was so
expensive that they still got purged eventually.
These days nothing ever really goes away and virtually anyone with a
little tech savvy can see it. The other difference is these days there
are search engines powerful enough to find it in the clutter.

I don't know if text messages are saved by anyone other than users.
Can't imagine the phone companies want to be responsible for storing
the millions of messages per second going between teens.

It'd be interesting to know.

Twitter, et al
 

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 02:39:03 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:15:18 -0700, jps wrote:

These days nothing ever really goes away and virtually anyone with a
little tech savvy can see it. The other difference is these days there
are search engines powerful enough to find it in the clutter.

I don't know if text messages are saved by anyone other than users.
Can't imagine the phone companies want to be responsible for storing
the millions of messages per second going between teens.

It'd be interesting to know.

I imagine there is a certain amount of latency in the system so all
the messages are there for a while but I am sure if the government
wants to trap your phone they can have everything.. When you think of
it, text is so small in the grand scheme of saving data, keeping every
byte sent for a year is not really as huge a database as you would
think. I have a terabyte on my file server.

Kids produce a terabyte of data in about 20 seconds. Have you
witnessed this? I watched a college student, serious scholar rip out
10 text messages in 30 seconds. Fingers flying. That x % of kids
with text enabled phones (large majoirty of those with phones) and
you've got a bucketload of data going back and forth, along with all
the instructions necessary to route it to the right phone.

When I look at how many messages each of my kids sends and receives in
a month, it's astounding. Thousands.

I expect you're right in that most data is preserved for some period
and, if you're being tapped they can save everything. But I doubt
that most text messaging is stored.

Like I said, it'd be good to know.

Twitter, et al
 

hk wrote:
On 4/22/10 2:14 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:59:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:35:16 -0700, wrote:

I do understand the occasional Instant Message.

Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of
messages each day.

My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For
them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over
hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life.

New form of communication and language.

It is not really all that new. IBM field techs were carrying an RF
connected portable terminal in 1985 that had peer to peer texting
capability. This was bigger than a blackberry but smaller than a net
book. (about 4 x 6 x 1.5) It also had full connectivity with the IBM
VM network, parts, dispatch and later the internet.
We learned to express our thoughts in 55 byte chunks.
Things like GR8, CUN10min and FKNA were in use long before a cell
phone had a display on it.
Most CEs had a story about texting while driving. This thing would
wedge in most steering wheels. It used a full power 3w cell
transmitter with a decent antenna so you could get fairly well.

Well, this version is widely avaiable and being adopted and
transformed by youth. It's the modern phone call for them but far
more efficient. And when they need to talk about something, they
dial.

It has its problems, mostly related to what Nom touched on, a record
of utterances that would never be collected by a voice phone, unless
recorded. Messages can be saved and passed along at a later date when
personal affiliations have changed.

Kids learn the hazards of digital communication early in life.


I've cautioned my nephew/niece about this several times. "Don't say
anything
and esp. don't post any picture that you wouldn't want on the front
page of
the newspaper."



I'm paying for two cell phones for nephews...they're both in college
and they both IM like crazy. Fortunately, I bought the "unlimited"
text messaging for our family account.


Wow!