Social software defined as only new things, largely because of a few events – one on social software, then consolidated when E-tech set down a separate group for social software. Left out listserves, email, MOOs, and the many other kinds of pre 2002 collaborative technology.

In this talk, danah’s going to use “social software” in the limited sense that means “things that are new”, things created in the post-web bust era, web 2.0, because she thinks these things are in fact quite different. E.g. blogs, wikis, social network sites.

Significant changes: design, spread of participation, change of behaviour.

Engineering perspective – hone somehting, then release it, tweak it, etc. Social software just hacked stuff and put it out and saw what happened. Friendster one of the first sites to just stay in “beta” – was still in beta after two years with over a million users. Myspace – no spec, no legal, no usability, etc. So maybe they just got lucky? No – they shipped it, kept asking the early adopters what they wanted. Weren’t even going to hire a quality assurance team – they just watch what people do. They launch two-three features a day by directly hacking the webservers (which is utterly horrifying from the perspective of a large company like Yahoo or Google or Microsoft). Cons: Produces horribly unstable code, voodoo magic, not very extensible. Therefore you have people like Tom sitting till four am (she keeps dropping first names of the founders, says everyone knows them, I suspect this is not as true as she thinks – see for instance

Values are built into the software. Tech-centred mentalities. An example of something that went terribly wrong: Orkut. Norms always set by social spaces – we’re socialised.

Example Friendster: originally three core groups – gay men in New York, bloggers or Burning man participants. You took on the role of whichever cultural group you had joined through, and you would tend to think your group was the whole context. As it spread beyond original social context this became a problem. E.g. in MySpace teenagers are just being teenagers – but the thing is they’re being teenagers as teenagers are with other teenagers, not as they are with their parents or teachers –> moral panic. Inversion from MUDs/MOOs to social software – social software started as people centred rather than place/system centred. (Did I get that?) Your friends build the context – used to be your INTERESTS that drew the process/growth, but now it’s your friends. This doesn’t actually scale well – or rather, it does, but when it does, it causes the context to collapse. Monetization causes some of this problem – simply want more more more people. E.g. Facebook, just opened up for everyone – people don’t actually WANT everyone to see their pages.

Blogging’s an exception because they’re based on individuals – unlike with social software, you CAN avoid the people who are not like you. Con: you may not even be aware that there are bloggers of another persuasion than you.

1 Comment

  1. […] jill/txt ¬ª blogtalk: danah boyd on social software social software, blogging, education (tags: thesis blogging) […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Triple book talk: Watch James Dobson, Jussi Parikka and me discuss our 2023 books

Thanks to everyone who came to the triple book talk of three recent books on machine vision by James Dobson, Jussi Parikka and me, and thanks for excellent questions. Several people have emailed to asked if we recorded it, and yes we did! Here you go! James and Jussi’s books […]

Image on a black background of a human hand holding a graphic showing the word AI with a blue circuit board pattern inside surrounded by blurred blue and yellow dots and a concentric circular blue design.
AI and algorithmic culture Machine Vision

Four visual registers for imaginaries of machine vision

I’m thrilled to announce another publication from our European Research Council (ERC)-funded research project on Machine Vision: Gabriele de Setaand Anya Shchetvina‘s paper analysing how Chinese AI companies visually present machine vision technologies. They find that the Chinese machine vision imaginary is global, blue and competitive.  De Seta, Gabriele, and Anya Shchetvina. “Imagining Machine […]

Do people flock to talks about ChatGPT because they are scared?

Whenever I give talks about ChatGPT and LLMs, whether to ninth graders, businesses or journalists, I meet people who are hungry for information, who really want to understand this new technology. I’ve interpreted this as interest and a need to understand – but yesterday, Eirik Solheim said that every time […]