"When you go to my Facebook profile, you get the real me. Thats not to say I answer every profile question. I don't. I'm not going to disclose everything about myself. However, the data that is available about me is the most comprehensive, self maintained database record about me on the internet or probably anywhere...."
" the most comprehensive, self maintained database record about me on the internet" is not quite the same thing as "the real me" is it?
The rest of OReilly's article seems to base itself on where the "real me" resides. On facebook vs something else.
"The rest of OReilly's article seems to base itself on where the "real me" resides. On facebook vs something else."
I am not sure if it says where else it resides, I think every part of the real me (in this article Mr. OReilly's real me) resides in different parts, and in order to get complete real me you then have to combine all these graphs (networks)
if phography is my hobby, then I will probably be very active on Flickr and my social graph there is just one angel of what the real me is ... it is the real me in the world of photography, or its the real me when I am playing the role of a photographer, which couldnt necessarily be copied easily with more general sites, like Facebook or Myspace
My point (poorly expressed no doubt) was that searching for the "real me" in any combination of websites sounds bizarre (to me).
There are large chunks of my life and personality my "real me") that fall outside my activities on the web. Even with your photography example, hopefully there are aspects of your photography experience/intent/whatever that are *not* captured on flickr.
I guess i was just responding to the notion of the "realness" of a person being captured/capturable on the web.
" the most comprehensive, self maintained database record about me on the internet" is not quite the same thing as "the real me" is it?
The rest of OReilly's article seems to base itself on where the "real me" resides. On facebook vs something else.
All very bizarre.