Johanna Blakley explains her hypothesis about how social media will, sometime, put an end to gender, age, and other demographics stereotypes that are used as a base for advertising. The reason for this assumption is a simple addition of variables.

A time ago, industries used a kind of “labels” to define and categorize people, with the belief that this characteristics were predictable; for this reason, labeling people would tell you what they like, what interest them, what they want. Nowadays, advertising works in other direction. Watching what you do online, or what you “click”, they can see what your interests are, and knowing this they can offer you things that you could “probably” buy, without the need of knowing your personal characteristics, like the ones they used for demographic categorization. As she says, it’s “kind if creepy”, but it has been like that for years now, even in our country, and nobody knew it. Chilean laws say nothing about internet, so it’s like a law-free place.

At the same time, global statistics show that women are a major part of social media users, and they spend much more time on social sites than men. From all this, Blakley asks if this would mean that women will dominate global media, and the world would see a lot more women focused shows, games and movies, although right after this she answers that that might not be the case. However, female importance in media is undeniable, so maybe, in not so much time, we will see a real big transformation in media and advertising.

In my opinion... I don't know, and actually don't think it's very important. If there is a change, and they sell more, it'll stay. If they don't, it will be back to how it was. I honestly don't think that industries use of people's interests will have more applications than this...

Picture not related...

Don't say, DO!

The argument between “environmental friendly” and “progress” have been around for a long time now. Industries abuse of the natural resources, destroying forests, mountains, rivers and oceans, affecting all kinds of life. At the same time, a lot of people and organizations have been working for everyone to know what’s happening, and that’s why we talk about this subject now. People have been informed of the problems this causes and the terrible future that will come if this continues, and nowadays it’s an important issue to discuss when a new industry wants to settle in the country.

The problem's root, I think...

However, it seems to be a problem and worries people only before it starts its functions, or when it’s close to houses where people live. When it’s somewhere without people only environmentalists do something, and while they are already working, industries are a problem only when they affect people directly somehow. Apparently, even when most people say that they worry about the planet, they actually think that as long as it doesn’t bother them, it’s ok… and destruction will not come until a very long time, so it will be someone else’s problem.

The thing is, if no one does something now, there may not be a very long time for other people to suffer. Industries are getting bigger every day, using and abusing of the resources. Sustainable development is a need right now, find a way to maintain the ecosystem how it must be. It’s simple, keep on cutting trees and soon there will be no trees to cut.

Well, it’s easier said than done. People still want their iPhones, and pollution is just collateral damage. Sad, isn’t it?

This is a looong post...

    I like internet. I love it, actually: entertainment and information, all you want, when you want it. The new hardware (computers every time smaller and cell phones with more and more functions) give you the power to have access to it from almost any place you are. The new software and websites give you more and more things to do. And as much as some people try to resist, it’s apparently in vain; society changes, adapts to the new technologies, and uses them just like any other “tool”: yesterday, corporations had to make a giant sign with lots of colours and something funny, and that was advertising, while today all those big images are seen in a screen, whether it’s a computer’s, a phone’s, a “tablet’s”, or whatever.

    However, a lot of people don’t seem to see the inconveniences or even dangerous aspects about all this. Some time ago you met people through friends, or friend’s friends, and if you liked each other sometimes you asked for their phone numbers, and after a lot of time you could say you were friends. Now, you can send an application to some unknown person, and after a click, you are “friends”. If you’re not careful, anyone can contact you and/or see everything you write or upload, like photos. And even if you are careful, nothing assures you it won’t happen. It’s like psychopaths paradise.

    I, as an example, always used instant messaging software, like MSN Messenger, but never gave some of the information that it sometimes asked. I never gave my address, of phone number, or any other identification than my name, and sometimes it wasn’t even the real one. I never trusted anyone on the internet, and surely corporations weren’t the exception. When MSN died (R.I.P.) I had to move to facebook to stay in touch with most of that people, and at the same time I found that that was my limit. Never used Twitter, nor Tumblr, or Instagram, or whatever they’re called. Actually, I never used blogs before this English course. Everything else, where I don’t need to identify myself, is welcome.
    On the other hand, talking about hardware, I never worry about new things because I have everything I would need… besides I don’t have money. What I really like are videogames, so the new consoles are something for me to see and, if possible try, but a pair of glasses that project a map while you walk, or show you the face of the person you are talking to? Why would I want that?

Google Glass

Next Google Glass...

A lot of people... or a group?

Daniel Bar-Tal is an Israeli psychologist. His studies and research are part of the social psychology area, from the basic group structure to the particular conflicts that define some of them, like the Israeli-Jewish society. Some of his work focused to the basics of the socio-psychology is so well explained that my Social Psychology teacher uses them as basic bibliography for the class. That’s where I read it for the first time.

The concept of “group beliefs” is used to talk about everything that defines a psychological group. If we want to say that a group of people is a psychological group, they must share a lot of concepts, values, goals, and well, beliefs, about themselves and the world around them. This means they have to see thing in a similar way, if they want to understand each other and live happily ever after, without the group breaking apart.

For example, if they like a soccer team, they must all like the same one; if anyone likes another one, that person should not be part of that psychological group, because his/her beliefs are different and set him apart. Of course, this is only when the group existence is about football. Maybe they don’t like the same music, but that’s not the reason they are together, so, it doesn’t matter.

I like social psychology, and I like simple things that have big implications. The “group beliefs” is a basic concept, but it explains, in my opinion, a big part of how groups are born. I mean, Bar-Tal explains that the most basic belief that must be shared is “we are a group”, what can be more obvious, and a same time, more important?

Yeah...

Happiness?

Great movie.

I have always thought that happiness is something impossible to obtain. Or, if not impossible, it won’t last; humans tend to want things they don’t have, and when they get them, it’s not how they thought it would be. Technology is a very good example: you want the phone that came out a month ago, you buy the phone, and then you start to notice all the downsides it has. Of course, the fact that the industry develops a new, improved version of the same phone every 2 weeks helps a lot.

Our ability to simulate the future, to think about possibilities, is what makes this pursuit of happiness possible. We always try to choose the best option, the one that will give us more pleasure, that we’ll like the most. However, just like Gilbert showed, we are often wrong.

This synthetic happiness that Daniel Gilbert talks about seems like the solution. We create it when we don’t get what we wanted, when our decisions don’t give us what we thought and we lose (or don’t win), basically to make us feel better. It’s good when you didn’t have any option, when circumstances are more than you can handle… but it’s also like nature telling you to stop whining and start to like what you have, or at least that’s what it seem to me. Sure, you can be happy anyway, that’s great, but I think that actually being happy anyway can make you a conformist that stops worrying about the world around you.

It’s an extreme case, I won’t deny it, but it’s not impossible.

I'm a bad person.

Donkey Kong.

It’s difficult for me to think about a guilty pleasure, because I actually don’t think I have any. I like some weird things, and everyone, or at least most of the people who know me, understand that clearly, so there’s no “guilt” in my “pleasures”.

However, there is something that people usually can’t believe until they see me, and after they do, some of them try to bother me using it. So, I decided to stop talking about it.

I like watching shows like Caso Cerrado. The reason is pure entertainment. I think it’s very funny to see people arguing over something stupid, like who takes the dog after de divorce, or two women that have been dating the same guy for months, and thy found out a week before the show, and they both say “HE IS MIIIIIINE!”. Okay, that last thing is not very funny if I say it like that, but it suddenly turns hilarious when the dude is a lazy old man who “works” as a thief and uses all his money to go to bars and strip clubs and looks like Donkey Kong without the tie, and both girls are beautiful twenty year-olds, first of their respective classes in Harvard and heirs of a big, rich family. Or maybe they are even uglier than the man. Or maybe even siamese twins, or whatever.

You know, now that I think about it, maybe there is some guilt in this. Their problems are real, they feel bad about them, they really want help… and I laugh while watching. Even worse, I will be a psychologist.

I’m a bad person.

North of the world

North. That’s what matters to me. The only place I can say I really want to go, is the north of the world. And it’s not because I don’t like Chile being south, the reason is very simple. Greenland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Alaska; there is something there I want to see at least once in my life, and then I could die happy.

Canada would be the perfect place for me. I’d love to go there soon and finish my studies. Then, who knows, maybe I would stay. For what I know, it has beautiful landscapes, nice weather (at least for me haha), and a very rich culture due to the large amount of immigrants. That’s enough for me, being able to get out of town and see a big beautiful prairie, meet people that comes from different places… it’ll be nice to live in Canada. And maybe I could go snowboarding to work!

Most of all, is north, so I could fulfill my wish. The aurora borealis, also known as “northern lights”, are the most beautiful phenomenon I have heard of, and there are places in Canada where you can see them… “easily”.