Log in

No account? Create an account
29 May 2009 @ 05:37 pm
Communication: Waves  
(note: crossposting)

This looks promising:

(There's currently an 80 minute demo there, just so you know - I watched it in bits over a day)

I'm not interested in it for all the bells and whistles, or even for the largely open code and the hope that everyone and their grandmother will write cool programs that interface with it.  Although I'm sure all that will provide an endless amount of amusement, as well as some large bucket-loads of  functionality that I can't even imagine.  I don't have any idea if it will completely change the way we communicate, as they seem to hope/imply.

What I'm most interested in is just the ability to have conversations that aren't owned by one person.  Someone starts a particular 'wave', sure.  But anyone jumps in anywhere, and it seems to thread and branch pretty well.  I'm not sure how easy it will be to keep track of a 500-post conversation, and I didn't see anything specific about "mark as read" or a similar way of keeping track where you've been and where you haven't been (but I have asked them to look into it).  It looks plausible.  

Anyone with more knowledge of these things have comments?
flarenutflarenut on May 30th, 2009 01:11 am (UTC)
Don't know the details either, but it sure did look fairly plausible to me. What's not clear is whether it will be possible to have reduced-function versions, or whether you have to have mail/IM/file transfer all going at the same time to use it at all.
betonicabetonica on May 30th, 2009 01:36 pm (UTC)
re: Communication: Waves
It seemed to me that the entire mode of moving information would be changed, so that mail/IM/file transfer all happens the same way, in the same "channel" or whatever (I think?) and it's much faster. So if we were to have a conversation like this, we'd be able to do it in real-time, with me answering you as you're writing (IM-like)... but the words will also "stay" - so that I can answer next week if I want to. I probably won't care about the instantaneous stuff, but don't object to it being there.

In other words, I don't think (from what I could tell) that there are, at this point, reduced-function versions, but I don't think it really matters too much.

Though it would be nice to have conversations that weren't cluttered with pictures and movies and **flashing**advertising** and stuff.