Why an exclaimation at the end! Really, why did Famebook choose to call it a wall?
It’s not as if one is drawing a grafitti on the walls; writing on walls is like tresspassing and so much unethical. But it is not tresspassing in FB (as we love to shorthand Famebook, rather abbreviating it).
The users allow contacts to share their walls with. It hardly matters whose wall it is, whether one writes on one’s wall, or writes on another. This concept is so much unimportant considering the sharing being done to have a common pool. Alas, so much freedom we have on FB.
To philosophise – for how can one not want to encash on tempting opportunity to philosophise – it is not so much a freedom as would be in a GLOBAL common pool. [Remember, “Common” is not a subset of “global”. What fails to become global, becomes common]. Technically, the shared pools are infact intellectually segregated and operlapping, so that there are numerous pools and all its own kind of gene.
To simplify the concept lets try to see it this way. Imagine walls as canvasses, on which users can write and contacts can see. Each contact has its own canvas (wall) and a different set of canvases as per the network of their contacts [A view for oneself to see and a different one for every contact in network]. All these canvases, because of their visibility across the association with each individual contact, intersect with other canvases. Thus wholly Fakebook is a very very enormous mesh of intersecting canvases. It is also highly interferencing and complex. Also the reason why it can better be a canvas than a concrete wall.
If imagining the actual structure of an atom is impossible to the human brain to perceive (as explained in his book “A brief history of nearly everything” by Bill Bryson), then this mesh is closer to it (tends to infinity in mathematical terms), unlike the electrical mesh in devices. This is probably an example where the emormous opportunity of computer programming example can be compared to the enormity in nature.
This also brings to my thoughts the complexity required in the software to have a data structure to store such meshy information. Thanks to the repetitive and replicative property that it becomes very easy to implement.
Call FB a membrane, for a canvas is material; for a membrane is non-tangible, but conceptual, and without digging deeper in attempt to reach the essence.
Thus, Faithbook wall is not like the Great Wall of China, to limit, but to share. Yet it does limits disparate set of people. But thanks to the affordable airlines that physically mingle these disparate set of people, which can be seen in the FB. Infact its not Internet or airlines that makes us cross boundaries. These are just medium. It’s the human desire, the inquisitiveness, TO EXPLORE WHAT IS BEYOND, beyond our garden, beyond our cities, beyond our mountains and valleys, beyond our nations, and behind the telescope lenses in the very very dark darkness beyond the skies. The FB thus is a dynamic microcosm of the revolution among the people, the harbinger of the lifestyle to immediately follow.
And what is going to be the future of this Fatebook wall. If FB grows really vertical to ONE FINE DAY having a truly GLOBAL WALL, a single wall where everyone writes to everyone’s visibility, the wall would then be a truly concrete wall, an emblem of such a unity that the whole cosmos can be proud of, and only aliens would be alien. Or would it just grow horizontally to survive itself, with new user additions, and centered around family, friends & acquaintances and the unknowns.
Yet to dream the unexpected is truly a dream.
Author NoteNotes"Good writing takes more than just time; it wants your best moments and the best of you."
