公仔箱論壇 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: [時事討論] Facebook的代價林沛理 [打印本頁]

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2010-12-16 08:46 AM 標題: Facebook的代價林沛理

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2010-12-16 08:47 AM 編輯

Facebook的代價 林沛理
半年前效法哲學家羅素一九二七年在倫敦發表《我為什麼不是基督徒？》的演說，在這裏寫了篇文章，解釋為什麼在Facebook上找不到我，到今日仍然不時收到冷嘲熱諷的電郵，說我是不屬於這個世界的史前動物，應該加入Facebook專為我們這些「社交恐龍」(social dinosaurs)而設的群組去跟同類相濡以沫。tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb! \* `9 C& Z3 B' p( Q4 L5 C1 g
罪名成立，guilty as charged。早應該知道跟五億人作對不可能有好下場(Facebook面世只有六年，已經有超過五億個註冊會員)。可是，我還是要模仿王爾德——在史上知名的王爾德訴訟案(The trial of OscarWilde)中，他明知無法逃過牢獄之災，仍堅持在庭上慷慨陳詞，再次扮演魔鬼的代言人——以1.0世代一分子的身份，向Facebook這隻2.0世代的聖牛開刀。
) m- T* z/ B' i; G
Facebook的創始人扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)多次強調，Facebook的存在意義在於為用戶提供一條極之方便但又非常有效的途徑，使他們可以隨心所欲地進行各式各樣的聯繫 (connection)與分享(sharing)。這種聯繫的特性與分享的內容對Facebook來說並不重要，也不是它關心的事情。事實上，Facebook供用戶使用的網絡軟件分明就是要鼓勵他們建立重量不重質、淺薄、脆弱的人際關係。當一個二十歲的女孩在她的Facebook帳戶中列出二千個Facebook朋友，你就知道Facebook怎樣重新界定和稀釋了朋友一詞的含義。
5.39.217.766 v5 i6 F0 X' ^" }) v2 m
最早提出「虛擬現實」(virtual reality)一詞的電腦科學家及軟件設計師拉尼爾 (JaronLanier)在他的新書《汝非小玩意》(You Are Not aGadget)中指出，我們要在網上的虛擬世界存在並擁有一個明確身份，便先把自己縮小、壓平和簡化，以符合計算機一套獨特的描述語言。拉尼爾認為，即使最先進、最聰明的計算機軟件，也無法捕捉到人的個性及彼此間細微的差異。它擅長做的，是把有關各人的資料收集、組織、分類和展示出來。問題是資料——不管多詳細或多瑣碎——永遠無法完全呈現現實(Information under-represents reality)，而生命也絕不止是個數據庫(Life is not a database)。

Facebook畢竟只是一個大學二年級生的發明，雖然這個二年級生聰明絕頂，但他關注的問題與世界觀實在狹隘得令人失笑：你的「關係狀態」(relationship status)是什麼(不可以答「很複雜」或者「一言難盡」)？你的生活有多精采(必須用相片證明)？你喜歡什麼東西(包括電影、音樂、書籍與電視節目，卻不包括建築、見解或者制度)？它千方百計鼓勵你與同輩及朋友聯繫及分享，卻沒有言明你要付出的代價就是你個人的獨特性和自我意識。它兩年前推出的 Open Graph號稱互聯網有史以來最具改造力的發明，最大的功能就是可以讓使用者一覽無遺地知道同輩及朋友最近看過什麼電影、書籍和電視節目，以及光顧過哪一家館子和酒吧；使得他們可以去看同一齣電影、同一本書和同一個電視節目，以及光顧同一家館子和酒吧。換言之，Open Graph要推廣的，是一種盲從附和的羊群心理(pack mentality)；要促進的，是一種人云亦云、隨波逐流的生活方式。

講述扎克伯格發明Facebook過程的好萊塢電影《社交網絡》(The Social Network)最近在香港上映，導演大衛．芬查(David Fincher)借一個角色宣告互聯網在人類進化過程中扮演的關鍵角色。他說：「從前我們棲身於農田，之後我們棲身於城市，現在我們棲身於網上。」但那是什麼樣的一種生活呢？是一千萬互相聯繫的人去看同一齣電影，因為他們知道自己的朋友看過那齣電影嗎？拉尼爾說得對，你首先要有一個完整的自己，才可以與別人分享自己(You have to be somebody before you can share yourself)。

我們每天都在使用Facebook，有沒有想過它的功能除了可以為我們提供種種服務之外，還可以對我們產生潛移默化的影響呢(What its functions can do for us, but also do to us)？

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2010-12-16 08:48 AM

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2010-12-16 08:49 AM 編輯

聯繫 5.5億人　儼如第三大國國王  facebook教主 2010風雲人物
. a+ q* K* Q% l" R. T, O  ?' |2 c
美國《時代》( Time)周刊 2010年風雲人物,昨天(周三)揭曉。《時代》沒選掀起外交大洩密風暴的「維基解密」網站創辦人阿桑奇( Julian Assange),沒選被困 60多天絕地求生的智利礦工,而是選上社交網站facebook創辦人朱克伯格( Mark Zuckerberg)。《時代》指他以 fb聯繫5.5億人,掌握他們的社交網,改變他們的生活,儼如世界第三大國的國王,是個前無古人的成就。- Q& I1 q+ {5 l& t% m/ K' h
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb3 }8 c( t0 q; F( g" v
現年 26歲的朱克伯格,是《時代》歷來第二位最年輕風雲人物,僅次於是 1927年以 25歲之齡開創駕飛機飛越大西洋的林白( Charles Lindbergh)。《時代》指,他跟英女皇伊利沙伯二世 1952年當選風雲人物時同齡,但還年輕兩周,最大分別是英女皇只是繼承王國,他則以科技創立王國。雖然近期風頭被阿桑奇蓋過,朱克伯格今年也夠多頭條新聞: fb用戶人數今年 7月突破 5億里程碑;fb宣佈結合成四合一即時通訊平台,預示電郵末日;揭他創業陰私的電影《社交網絡》上映。TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。7 t+ M5 b7 A6 I4 `7 k

用戶人數日增 70萬
《時代》形容朱克伯格創立的 fb王國,一切數字都是那麼驚人: fb用戶人數每日約增 70萬人,現已達5.5億,在不足七年內, fb成為全球 1/12人聯繫的平台,創造了一個差不多有美國兩倍大的社會實體,整個網絡使用 75種語言,用戶每月共花 7,000億分鐘上 fb,每日有約 10億段新內容在 fb張貼,每分鐘處理 17億次網絡互動。3 l% r5 u: A3 c& I
《時代》指 fb走紅最初或有貪玩趕潮流成份,但現在世界已進入 fb年代,近半美國人與全球 1/12人,社交生活都在 fb進行。《時代》執行總編輯施滕格爾( Richard Stengel)說:「 fb現已是世界第三大國度(僅次於中國和印度),也肯定比世上任何一個政府掌握更多國民的資料。朱克伯格這個哈佛大學輟學生,就是這國度穿 T恤的國家元首。」3 C6 P9 A4 Z& K# |6 U( C" S9 l0 x  S& Z
. ~% m. D% F) y+ S( _
除了朱克伯格,《時代》也公佈其他風雲人物名次,第二是顛覆美國兩黨制傳統秩序的茶黨( Tea Party),第三是阿桑奇,第四是象徵阿富汗戰爭陷入泥沼的總統卡爾扎伊( Hamid Karzai),第五是智利礦工,入圍最後六強的蘋果公司行政總裁喬布斯( Steve Jobs)無名次。
5.39.217.76, B* h" a( d" Q
「他有前無古人的成就」tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb) n, \) a- a% k( u8 W# s% T
阿桑奇在《時代》網上選舉被網民選為風雲人物,《時代》編輯卻選了朱克伯格。施滕格爾解釋,朱克伯格和阿桑奇可說是一體兩面,兩人都主張開放透明,某程度對私隱不屑一顧。阿桑奇透過公開機密來攻擊政府和大機構,目的是剝奪他們的權力;朱克伯格則鼓勵個人自願分享資訊,目的是為他們賦權。阿桑奇認為世界充滿敵人,朱克伯格則認為世界充滿潛在朋友。
$ y. o0 Z1 ~9 x' }) r8 y
施滕格爾列出選朱克伯格的三個理由:第一,他「聯繫了逾 5億人,並掌握了他們之間的社交關係,是個前無古人的成就」;第二,他「創造的交換資訊新系統,已變得不可或缺,有時甚至有點可怕」;第三,他「改變了我
們過生活的方式,以創新甚或樂觀的新方式過生活」。他在 fb網頁留言,對獲選風雲人物感榮幸,又說「我們的小團隊希望全世界更開放和聯繫起來」。

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2010-12-16 08:51 AM

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2010-12-16 09:06 AM 編輯

[attach]1216566[/attach]

tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb' {% Y- s2 k: `: t
2010 Personof the Year Mark Elliot Zuckerberg TIME (Excerpts); _* Z+ L4 a! H/ V" O$ j! X. r+ N
…. In less than seven years, Zuckerberg wired together a twelfth of humanity into a single network, thereby creating a social entity almost twice as large as the U.S. If Facebook were a country it would be the third largest,behind only China and India. It started out as a lark, a diversion, but it has turned into something real, something that has changed the way human beings relate to one another on a species-wide scale. We are now running our social lives through a for-profit network that, on paper at least, has made Zuckerberg a billionaire six times over.

Facebook has merged with the social fabric of American life, and not just American but human life: nearly half of all Americans have a Facebook account, but 70% of Facebook users live outside the U.S. It's a permanent fact of our global social reality. We have entered the Facebook age, and Mark Zuckerberg isthe man who brought us here. ….tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb! b+ |) G! V* w1 _* D
2 J0 y& s6 v# J5 T
… Zuckerberg's life at Harvard and afterward was the subject of a movie released in October called The Social Network, written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by David Fincher. The Social Network is a rich, dramatic portrait of a furious, socially handicapped genius who spits corrosive monologues in a monotone to hide his inner pain. This character bears almost no resemblance to the actual Mark Zuckerberg. The reality is much more complicated.….公仔箱論壇7 z8 L2 T5 ]9 A& A1 G8 t
* H$ h( l, Y% F* o1 F5 T  e8 x
… Zuckerberg has often — possibly always— been described as remote and socially awkward, but that's not quite right.True: holding a conversation with him can be challenging. He approaches conversation as a way of exchanging data as rapidly and efficiently as possible, rather than as a recreational activity undertaken for its own sake. He is formidably quick and talks rapidly and precisely, and if he has no data to transmit, he abruptly falls silent. ("I usually don't like things that are too much about me" was how he began our first interview.) He cannot be relied on to throw the ball back or give you encouraging facial cues. His default expression is a direct and slightly wide-eyed stare that makes you wonder if you've got a spider on your forehead. …..

TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。# ~+ e) U" L0 q5 h
…. Zuckerberg is a warm presence,not a cold one. He has a quick smile and doesn't shy away from eye contact. Hethinks fast and talks fast, but he wants you to keep up. He exudes not anger orsocial anxiety but a weird calm. …

… The Zuckerberg of the movie is a simple creature of clear motivations: he uses his outsize gifts as a programmerto acquire girls, money and party invitations. This is a fiction. In reality, Zuckerberg already had the girl: Priscilla Chan,who is now a third-year med student at University of California, San  Francisco. They met at Harvard seven years ago, before he started Facebook. Now they live together in Palo Alto. …
: P: C0 U; C6 k* u* z+ Y
… As for money, his indifference to it is almost pathological. His lifestyle is modest by most standards but monastic for someone whose personal fortune was estimated by Forbes at $6.9 billion, a number that puts him ahead of his Palo Alto neighbor (and fellow college dropout)Steve Jobs. Zuckerberg lives near his office in a house that he rents. He works constantly; his only current hobby is studying Chinese. He drives a black Acura TSX, which for a billionaire is the automotive equivalent of a hair shirt. For Thanksgiving break, he took his family to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando. He bought a wand at Ollivander's. …公仔箱論壇% B' |) J7 s4 C7 @+ A8 r, s' I

…. The reality is that Zuckerberg isn't alienated, and he isn't a loner. He's the opposite. He's spent his whole life in tight, supportive, intensely connected social environments: first in the bosom of the Zuckerberg family, then in the dorms at Harvard and now at Facebook, where his best friends are his staff, there are no offices and work is awesome. Zuckerberg loves being around people. He didn't build Facebook so he could have a social life like the rest of us. He built it because he wanted the rest of us to have his. ….
5.39.217.76/ c9 K, `+ i+ ~4 {4 h. p' X
… On earlier social networks like Friendster and Myspace, identity was malleable and playful, but Facebook was and is different. "We're trying to map out what exists in the world," he says. "In the world, there's trust. I think as humans we fundamentally parse the world through the people and relationships we have around us. So at its core,what we're trying to do is map out all of those trust relationships, which you can call, colloquially, most of the time, friendships." He callsthis map the social graph, and it's a network of an entirely new kind. …., N2 {- _# E. e) r  T0 u

… It grew because it gave people something they wanted. All that stuff that the Internet enabled you to leave behind, all the trappings of ordinary bourgeois existence— your job, your family, your background? On Facebook, you take it with you.It's who you are. Zuckerberg has retrofitted the Internet's idealistic 1960s-era infrastructure with a more pragmatic millennial sensibility. Anonymity may allow people to reveal their true selves, but may be our true selves aren't our best selves. Facebook makes cyberspace more like the real world: dull but civilized. The masked-ball period of the Internet is ending. Where people led double lives, real and virtual, now they lead single ones again. The fact that people yearned not to be liberated from their daily lives but to be more deeply embedded in them is an extraordinary insight, as basic and era-defining in its way as Jobs' realization that people prefer a graphical desktop to a command line or pretty computers to boring beige ones. …

… This is not, on the face of it, a thunderously radical vision, but it's turning out to be an incredibly powerful one.Consider: in 2005 one of the most competitive markets on the Internet was photosharing. Into this space charged Facebook, and it can truly be said that the company brought a knife to a gunfight. "It was possibly the least functional photos product on the Internet," says Bret Taylor, Facebook'schief technology officer. "The resolution of the photos was not good enough to print. There were no real organizing capabilities." Facebook had only one thing the others didn't: people. If you put up a photo of somebody,you could tag that photo with his or her name. As it turned out, that, more than anything else,was what people wanted. They didn't want to organize their photos by folder; they wanted to organize them by who was in them. As Zuckerberg would say, that's how people parse the world. Facebook launched its crappy photo-sharing service in late October 2005. By 2007 it was getting more traffic than Photobucket, Flickror Picasa. Now Facebook hosts over 15 billion photos on its site, and people upload 100 million more every day.…
公仔箱論壇# j" s+ k/ L0 B; B
… Right now the Internet is like an empty wasteland: you wander from page to page, and no one is there but you. Except where you have the opposite problem:places like Amazon.com product pages and YouTube videos, where everyone's thereat once, reviewing and commenting at the top of their lungs, and it's a howlingmob of strangers. Zuckerberg's vision is that after theFacebookization of the Web, you'll get something in between: wherever you goonline, you'll see your friends. On Amazon, you might see your friends' reviews. On YouTube, you might see what your friends watched or see their comments first. Those reviews and comments will be meaningful because you know who wrote them and what your relationship to those authors is. They have a social context. Not that long ago, a post-Google Web was unimaginable, but if there is one, this is what it will look like: a Web reorganized around people. "It's a shift from the wisdom of crowds to the wisdom of friends," say Sandberg."It doesn't matter if 100,000 people like x. If the three people closest to you like y, you want to see y."…+ N2 u0 `; m, v, f3 o4 E. r
5.39.217.765 S% Z9 f& R$ C( U2 l% ?& O' q* X
… Facebook wants to populate the wilderness, tame the howling mob and turn the lonely, antisocial world of random chance into a friendly world, a serendipitous world. You'll be working and living inside a network of people, and you'll never have to be alone again.The Internet, and the whole world, will feel more like a family, or a college dorm, or an office where your co-workers are also your best friends. ….TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。- e2 o, H/ H7 H% @/ W2 q
公仔箱論壇1 u3 ^* k/ ?5 N, \, n3 l
… Facebook has a dual identity, as both a for-profit business and a medium for our personal lives, and those two identities don't always sit comfortably side by side. Looked at one way, when a friend likes a product, it's just more sharing, more data changing hands. Looked at another way, it's your personal relationships being monetized by a third party. People have to decide for themselves which way is their way. If "liking" an ad the same way you"like" a news article or a photo of your spouse seems creepy to you —it's more or less the definition of what Marx called commodity fetishism — you don't have to do it. Like everything on Facebook — like Facebook itself — it's voluntary. But plenty of people are willing, even eager, to make their social lives part of an advertising pageant staged by a major corporation. When Nike put up an ad last year during the World Cup, 6 million people clicked on it.…tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: s1 [( {% J% Y$ x1 \' z, ^( ^5 x

… Facebook is the way it is because of who Zuckerberg is. The color scheme is blue and white because Zuckerberg is red-green color-blind: there are a lot of colors he can't see,but blue he can see. Likewise, Zuckerberg has a metaphoric vision, a big-picture vision, for Facebook.…
5.39.217.763 V* I3 C5 H+ z" Q& \7 {
… For all its industrial efficiency and scalability, its transhemispheric reach and its grand civil integrity, Facebook is still a painfully blunt instrumen tfor doing the delicate work of transmitting human relationships. It's an excellent utility for sending and receiving data, but we are not data, and relationships cannot be reduced to the exchange of information or making binary decisions between liking and not liking, friending and unfriending. It's as if Zuckerberg read E.M. Forster's famous rallying cry in Howards End,"Only connect," and took it literally: only connect, do nothing else.(There's no chance that this actually happened. I asked Zuckerberg if he'd read Forster and got the spider stare. He'd never heard of him.)…& H' F  x( Z0 F6 d
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。3 B7 \, ~! k( I! _! ~8 I
… However much more authentic the selves we present on Facebook are than they were in the anonymous Internet wilderness that came before it, they still fall far short of our true selves,and confusing our Facebook profiles with who we really are would be a terrible mistake. We are running our social lives over the Internet, an infrastructure that was not designed for that purpose, and we must be aware of the distortion sit creates or we will be distorted by them. The standard cliché for describing viral technology like Facebook has always been, "The genie is out of the bottle." But Facebook inverts that. Now Facebook is the bottle, and we're the genie. How small are we willing to make ourselves to fit inside? …. 5.39.217.76  u8 ~4 C/ h: y4 q6 V9 E
5.39.217.768 v" R! s! y+ t8 h
… Zuckerberg is more cautious. He's noncommittal about how far Facebook can go. (Far, obviously, but to him it hinges on the ultimate extent of Internet penetration in the world, which in turn hinges on the adoption of smart phones in areas where Internet-connected computers are scarce.) Criticize Facebook and Zuck doesn't duck, exactly, though his positivity can be a bit relentless. For example: Isn't it possible that Facebook creates more interpersonal connections but that those connections are of a lower, less satisfying quality? "That's been a criticism that people have had for a while," he says. "But this isn't zero-sum. I think what we're doing is enabling you to stay in touch with people who you otherwise wouldn't. When I'm at home and I want to talk to my girlfriend, I don't IM her.I walk downstairs, and we talk." (Really? You don't IM in the house?"Only when you're in bed at the same time," he says. "Because then it's just ironic." And then he laughs in the easy, natural way he doesn't do much in public.) All technologies come with trade-offs, but for now Zuckerberg just doesn't seem that interested in the other side of the trade,the downside. There are some eloquent, persuasive critiques of life on Facebookout there, including Jaron Lanier's You Are Not a Gadget and MIT psychologist Sherry Turkle's forthcoming Alone Together. But they don't fuss him, particularly. "They're just looking at it through a completely different lens," he says. "And I appreciate that. Because it would be impossible for me to dissociate myself to that extent, to get that perspective.I mean, people write all kinds of different things, from 'It's the greatest thing that's ever existed' to 'It's the worst thing that's ever existed.'"…

… This won't make life any easier for people who aren't on Facebook. The bigger social networks get, the more pressure there is on everybody else to join them, which means that they tend to pick up speed as they grow, and to grow until they saturate their markets. It's going to get harder and harder to say no to Facebook and to the authentically wonderful things it brings, and the authentically awful things too.  But while this happens, Zuckerberg is going to be growing too. The Zuckerberg who built Facebook won't be the same person as the Zuckerberg who runs it. He'll be getting older, traveling, maybe getting married, having kids, and as his life outside Facebook gets more complicated,maybe Facebook, the world he built in his own image, will get more complicated too: more sensitive to the richness that exists outside it, in the real world,and to the richness that passes through it in such enormous volumes every second of every day.
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。2 h+ u( ~# l5 a$ j
But for all its flaws, there was no other way for Facebook to begin. Only someone like Zuckerberg, someone as brilliant and blinkered and self-confident and single-minded and social as he is, could have built it. "The craziest thing to me in all this," he says, "is that I remember having these conversations with my friends when I was in college.We would just sort of take it as an assumption that the world would get to the state where it is now. But, we figured, we're just college kids. Why were we the people who were most qualified to do that? I mean, that's crazy!"# [& e# [7 ?! V! n' v
…

作者: GY3849 時間: 2013-2-16 07:39 PM

林沛理写得好！！！

歡迎光臨公仔箱論壇 (http://5.39.217.76/)