It’s not “Facebook Fatigue”, it’s the price of fame

So in cruising through Techmeme recently, one issue that keeps popping up is “Facebook bankruptcy”. Jason Calcanis has had enough. Om Malik thinks he has a point (although Scoble doesn’t). I think they are asking the wrong questions.

It seems to me the issue is not so much whether or not Facebook sucks — for the record, I don’t think it does — but the nature of celebrity in a connected world, and more specifically, of celebrity in a realm where the downside of fame is less a part of the mental map.

It’s expected that for an actor or a singer or even a sports star, part of fame is that people want to know you, in any way they can. You’ll be accosted by fans looking to shake your hand, get an autograph, or pose for a photo. Your phone number and home address (not to mention your e-mail) will be a guarded secret. I could go on, but this stuff is so widely known and accepted that I really don’t need to belabor the point.

On the other hand, only a tiny number of people in the tech world have ever had to deal with the fame effect on a regular basis. Until social networks came along, that is. Now, people whose day to day lives were previously normal are experiencing the Internet version of the fame effect. And no surprise, they don’t like it.

I suppose I don’t blame them. I’ve only been recognized once, years ago, on Long Beach Island the summer I was doing stock theater there. It was a weird feeling.

About that Obama v Clinton Debate Issue

Kevin Drum has a good post up today about the difference between a potential Obama foreign policy as compared to a Clinton foreign policy. I agree with his take, and even better, he has a nice summation of why all this actually matters:

It’s rare to have a discussion about foreign policy that actually revolves around a concrete point, and by foreign policy standards this one counts as at least a mud brick point. Basically, do you think the United States should, as a routine part of its foreign policy, say that it’s willing to talk to any country that’s willing to talk to us? That the mere act of talking isn’t a tacit capitulation to a rogue regime’s demands?

I sure think so, and not just for the obvious reason that talking can sometimes lead to actual results. The bigger reason is that if you talk routinely, then the mere act of talking isn’t a tacit capitulation to a rogue regime’s demands and can’t possibly be spun that way. It’s just something we do.

Emphasis added. Good one, Kevin.

Tweet!

So I decided to give Twitter a try. I’ve added a badge to my Facebook and to the “Misc” section over on the right-hand column here.

I rather doubt that the world is going to care about the mundane details of my life, but what the heck, let’s give it a shot. Feel free to follow along, or if you Twitter too, let me know!

So, Why San Mateo?

Most people who move to the suburbs do so in order to raise a family in a “good” school district.

Not us. We moved to San Mateo to get more bang for our housing buck, better commuting options, and more walkability. Our address scores 77 out of 100 in the “Walk Score” at this fun mashup site I found tonight.

Our last apartment in San Francisco? It had a Walk Score of 55.

WordCamp Day 2 – Not!

I got home after midnight yesterday and am too pooped to make it back up to the city today for the 2nd half of WordCamp.

I did have a great time, though. Got some stickers to bling out my ancient laptop, a way-too-small t-shirt (Damn you, American Apparel!) and I even got to meet the inimitable Cheezburger, who’s quite a nice guy.

UPDATE: Photos on Flickr.

WordCamp Day 1

I’m settled in at WordCamp and feeling like there’s a big red “L” for loser on my forehead, because I’m using my clunky old Windows laptop instead of a nice sleek Mac, plus of course I’m typing this into MovableType.

Other than that, I’m stoked for the day. I’ll upload some photos later.

UPDATE 10:40 AM: Well, someone else already has photos online. I’m in this one.

UPDATE 11:15AM: Next up, Om Malik and John Dvorak. Funny opening:

Om: I’m a Mac, you’re a PC.
John: Yeah, whatever.

Although to be fair, Dvorak is much less of a ranty old guy in person than he is in his columns.

UPDATE 11:45AM:
This is an interesting discussion. Here’s a few more tidbits:

Om: Comments are what makes blogging. It is the biggest crucial difference from mainstream media. You have to engage (except for the morons). Moderating is the key to success.

(Me: In other words – FU Dave Winer!)

Om: You are responsible for the tone at your site. If you keep the discourse polite the readers will response. You have to go on the assumption that people are inherently nice.

John (to NY Times guy): if you can’t filter out profanity but filter in ‘Dick Cheney’ then your filters suck.

John: Rating comments is useless. unless you’re looking at restaurant reviews.

John: A writing tip – it’s really an old newspaper trick – read your piece out loud before you send it out. Really out loud, not just pretend. You’ll be amazed at the number of errors you’ll catch.

Plus, a really funny discussion of why it’s OK to call someone a douchebag but not a crook.

Update 2:45PM:

I didn’t post any notes from Lorelle VanFossen’s session, and now Jeremy Wright of b5media is up. Jeremy invited some audience members to join him, so now Eric from ICHC is up as well. Neat!

Got to be honest, so far this afternoon I am not hearing anything earth shattering, certainly not to someone who’s been blogging for a while. I’m also in need of more caffeine, which may account for my flagging interest level.

The side conversations have been fun though. I had a nice chat with Stormy of bargaintravel.com.

Update 5:15PM
Robert Hoekman’s presentation was quite good and I took a bunch of notes, but I’m hitting info overload in a big way, and Matt Cutts is talking. I’ll see if I can get some of the notes on later.