Are you? I wouldn't rule it out, but personally I think getting an outside signal into a sealed capsule which is moving so rapidly that it must use battery power rather than a physically connected power source seems more than trivial.
I live in downtown Los Angeles, and I built this site out of my own frustration with not being able to find a cohesive way to learn about and keep up with all of the city projects and developments happening around me. Problem is, I'm not content with the way this first iteration came out, and I could use some help.
My ultimate goal is to build a service that's fully integrated into the city, in such a way that new buildings, businesses, and projects are not only fully documented with everything you would want to know about them, leaving behind a timeline for posterity as they progress, but also so that the purposes of those buildings are well-categorized. New apartment building? Here's when it'll be done, what amenities it will have, and how you can apply to live there. New bar going in in that building across the street? Here's a community where people can discuss its impact on the rest of the neighborhood.
The problem is, I haven't quite managed to settle into a solid structure yet. My initial thought was to have everything be user submitted, but I'm wondering whether things like building information might be better managed by an admin. On the flip side, construction photos are obviously something more suited to come from the public.
In short, to anyone out there that likes urban development, I ask you, would you use something like this? And if not, what can I improve in order to become something that you WOULD use?
Really, all this is doing is updating the notion of a session cookie to account for the fact that tabbed browsing usage patterns mean that the browser process is usually much longer-lived than your visit to any one site. Browsers have long had the option to make cookies expire at the end of a session.
So basically this guy is saying he'd rather remember his life as a distorted story that airbrushes away reality in order to embellish an element of perfection that never actually existed than as the actual real-life moment he experienced. Sounds strikingly similar to:
-Brave new World
-The Truman Show
and all those other "is a fake bliss bliss nonetheless" type stories.
We constantly filter out a lot of noise - auditory and visual. Our memories of events lack that noise. Naive recordings - such as what complete amateurs using smart phones will produce - will have all of that noise. So the recording of the event will not match our memory, partially because it will record things that were not important.
In order for the recording to match our memory, it would need to filter out all of the auditory and visual noise. But that's just the start. There's also the fact that amateur videos tend to not do a good job of showing what a viewer may want to pay attention to. As a participant, you can, without thinking, look around to see exactly what you want to see. This ease of knowing your surroundings will be a part of your memory, and the video will likely not capture it.
A professionally made video could alleviate most of these problems. That's why editing movies is hard, and considered an art. Showing viewers the right shots for the right length of time to give them certain understandings of a scene is crucial to making the viewer feel like they are there.
My point: you're assuming that the video recording is somehow an "objective" view of reality, and your memory is "subjective." Your memory certainly is subjective, but I say the video is, too. Raw videos are not how we experience life, nor are they "reality", so I think it's uncharitable to conclude the author only wants fantasy recordings.
I can partially agree with you here; The way we perceive the present is certainly not the way it comes through on camera. However, I don't believe that adding a filter to an Instagram photo brings the photo any closer to the way we experienced that moment either. People slap filters on photos to give them an artsy touch and to make their lives look like something to be jealous of when the photo shows up on some social network's news feed.
So yes: if someone were able to devise a way of capturing memories that could be played back the way the really felt, that would be ideal. But since we can't, I'd rather see that event as it was than distorted in some mostly random direction.
Having said that, this is not me taking a swing at Instagram. I think it's a great product, and I have a lot of fun with it. I'm just saying that the author's logic train here is rather faulty.
I think it's easier to get a picture that approximates our subjective view of reality. But my point was not an argument in favor of filters. I was explaining that it's not denying reality to say that short videos (or even pictures) are unsatisfying because they don't match our memories.
That's the way life has been up to now. I've noticed that when I look back at my childhood it seems wonderful, but when I ask my parents there are lots of little things I just can't remember (nothing too bad obviously just average kids stuff). With video becoming more and more common it'll be interesting to see how it affects nostalgia and people's perception of the past.
You and a bunch of other "rebels" may disagree, but what people want is precisely that: from Instagram to MMORPGs, people will adopt any and everything that allows them to escape their boring realities and live in something fabricated and that gives them the illusion they are in control.
I'm sure this is the case. They probably keep track of all the accounts that have been logged into from your computer via a cookie, and then suggest friends based on those accounts. Creepy, but understandable.