Search IconIcon to open search

Digital Commons

Last updated Jul 15, 2021 Edit Source

How might we analogize urban planning to social media and digital spaces? -> https://medium.com/@jasminewsun/jane-jacobs-social-media-83b4265a1d12

# Online Parks

Eli Pariser in Wired

When technologists refer to platforms like Facebook and Twitter as “walled gardens”—environments where the corporate owner has total control—they’re literally referring to those same private pleasure gardens that Whitman was reacting to. And while Facebook and Twitter may be open to all, as in those gardens, their owners determine the rules.

# Internet Studio Gardens

By Jon Borichevskiy

Principles for Internet Spaces

  1. Places where they might drift over to peers in adjacent spaces for the chance – but not the obligation – to respond or otherwise reflect upon, completing the loop at the speed of a lazy river instead of a light circuit (see: friction, pace layers)
  2. There might even be different seasons of play: periods of divergent planting and nurturing followed by collective harvesting and pruning (see: exploit explore)
  3. Just permeable enough to be discovered by those curious enough to add their own drawings and words. Details just hidden enough to be carefully unearthed by the intentional visitor

# Creating Digital Spaces

Can we create digital common spaces like parks and things without everyone online needing to be exceedingly intentioned?

Commons should be safe, low pressure contexts for random interaction. They are public spaces where a lot of people coincidentally share the same space for a short period in time. It has the same energy as commuting – a familiar yet ever-changing context.

The park and the trees may stay the same most times you visit yet the people on the benches and walking on the paved paths are always different. One can sit and observe all the people moving by, wondering what their life is like..

“What would it look like to do that with your favourite internet neighbourhoods?”

This is a small reflection on potential new avenues to explore for digital spaces. Not to say that any existing ones are bad but I am interested to see what new direction we can take to explore how we use technology to further human connection.

# Serendipity in Public Spaces

Serendipity is bumping into new people you otherwise wouldn’t have talked to or sought out. It’s the casual bus or subway chatter, the queue neighbour, or stranger reading on a park bench. It’s the opposite of intentionality.

Are there ways to be less intentional with digital interactions?

If you want to meet with someone you need to schedule it or visit a link, etc. There is no ‘random’ interaction. Even algorithmic experiences are like being carried away by the TikTok or Facebook algorithm rather than something out of the blue. Though these experiences may seem random at times, they are explicitly curated with an end goal in mind.

Are there any spaces that don’t have ulterior motives and are just places of gathering? The only example that comes to mind where ‘coincidental’ interaction happen is within currated interest groups like online network forums around games or technologies or early communities lead by superconnectors like the Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link (WELL). How can we recreate these public ‘watering holes’ for people to gather around?

# Permanence in Private Spaces

Permanence means that the environment reflects that people have been there. A shared garden to tend to, a bookshelf to work through, a guestbook of all the people who have dropped in and out.

So many of our mediums have now tended towards real time in an effort to replicate the fleeting nature of face-to-face conversation; vanishing messages, video chats, and audio rooms. Yet, rarely do any of these platforms leave any indication whether a conversation ever happened between two people.

Is there any way we can create shared artifacts that are permanent and can be grown over time? A digital indication that a space is lived in and occupied?

As of now, most platforms keep a primative chat log or history but thats it. What if there was a way to create digital gardens to foster and maintain existing relationships? A commonspace you could both take care of, share, and contribute to. Completely private common spaces often allow users to put whatever and allow people can construct their own digital nooks and cozy spaces.

Maybe this involves having a shared calendar, todo list, books. Or even just a space to co-live and co-exist in virtual worlds. Most online RPG games (think Animal Crossing, Minecraft, Stardew valley) give the option for users to have a shared space to exist and build together (and where both people don’t necessarily both need to be present for the space to function). Why doesn’t this exist outside of the gaming sphere?

Can we create permanence of artifacts without sacrificing ephemerality in medium?

# Tools for Digital Spaces

Given that there are so many different types of digital spaces, I wanted to explore how different tools are supporting and facilitating different sorts of digital human interaction. Can we use urban planning to help us plan digital spaces?

The hope is to be able to move away from the ‘feed’-based model of browsing the social internet and to create safe spaces to interact at different scales.

The “feed”–an archaic form of content consumption that is effectively just a direct visual manifestation of the data structure that powers it – is a medium that is effectively designed to be consumed alone. – Humphrey Obuobi

# Town Square

Many-to-many relationships like clubs, families, larger interest groups.

# Questions

# Tools

# Parasocial Relationships

One-to-many ‘broadcast’ relationships.

# Questions

# Tools

# Private Channels

Spaces for one-to-one interaction.

# Questions

# Tools