is this what the world is coming to?

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has argued that his Web site makes human relationships more "efficient."

Sure, he said in a speech last year, two friends "can communicate offline if one of them picks up the phone to call the other, or if they take some time to hang out, or if they randomly bump into each other. But these methods are all synchronous -- they're kind of inefficient. In order for them to work, both people have to be paying attention to each another at the same time.

"There's a better way to do this; and on Facebook, it's simple. These people can read each other's profiles any time they want to see new information about each other. They can look at each other's media, and they can send each other messages. On Facebook these real connections become more efficient. People get more value out of all their relationships."

facebook is lame. that's the common refrain from many of my friends. that aside, my friends and i certainly use it to plan trips and such. i do keep in touch sporadically with 'villains, though i'm finding that i regularly keep in contact with nowhere near the 200 or so friends i claim on the site. are those people still my friends? sure. just because i don't see them doesn't mean they're not friends. the verbal sparring back and forth with my closer friends is more often accompanied by phone calls or long-distance travel plans. facebook users organized a farewell to boozing on the tube party in london this weekend. egypt squashed a possible uprising by students critical of the government, organized on facebook.

and this is what mark zuckerberg has to say about the site? "improving" friendships? horseshit! taking friendships and figuring out how to market them. brilliant in its entrepreneurial spirit, but completely lame when it comes to people who exclusively communicate with their online friends in this manner.

politics + youtube

i heard about these videos a few weeks ago. they're pretty interesting. i can't take credit for finding them though. give that credit to an old gainesville friend living in finland. i too can't wait to see if one for clinton comes out. what say you about them?

misled

misleading advertising, especially from quote unquote respectable sources has always irked me. perhaps moreso now that i need to try to save what i can on travel since it's so darn expensive to get anywhere in florida for a trip.

case in point, last week, i booked my flight home for christmas. more than i expected to spend, of course, but i'd certainly spend that much in gas if i (for some odd reason) decided to drive instead. which would also be nerve-wracking for the simple fact that i'm not so sure how many more epic trips my 168,000 mile-old truck is up to. anyhow, back to my point. i get an email from spirit airlines today advertising travel specials between now and april if you travel on tuesday, thursday or saturday. no big deal, it's christmas break, i can swing that. problem is, they say fares starting at $55. therein lies the rub. it's not deceptive, only misleading. in the circuitous route their website wrung me through, nowhere was i able to find the advertised special. the closest i got was an $89 fare one-way on, you guessed it, christmas morning.

yet another case of don't believe everything you read, especially online. they wanted to get me to their website, they succeeded. luckily, the skeptic in me held off on canceling the prior made reservation until i made the new one. which i was unsuccessful at.

sorry, ma. i tried to extend my trip by a few days. shame on you spirit airlines for getting my hopes up!