In my opinion, taken literally, the core concept of locative interfaces is to provide a reference of where a specific social media post was posted from. But Farman (2012) explains that “Douglas Rushkoff argues: Instead of serving to reconnect us, our technologies now serve to disconnect us further, reducing our contact to virtual prods and pokes.“ I agree with this to a certain extent as far as my assessment results indicate (but that may just be an indicator of my unpreparedness and/or unfamiliarity with the mediums) that I have focused my attention too fixedly on the content of the platforms and paid too little attention to the actual assessment items – which I assume is a natural by-product (side effect) of these mediums and hence must be taken into consideration in assessment of assessments due to the hazardous (time-consuming) nature of these by-products (side-effects).
According to Farman, “corporations are finding online a path toward incarnation: Chase and Coca- Cola build avatars in online environments such as the Second Life “virtual world” that are as real as we are. Sometimes more so, especially as our life and status online dictate or even supersede our life and status in the former real world.” In relation to my experience with social media (limited as that may – starting around 1996/7) I must admit that all of my social media posts to date on any medium have been public and anyone who can be bothered to waste their time to do so can quite easily find me. – if they have the capabilities, time and resources to do so. Which naturally brings me back to Farman’s point that while I may be building 2nd or (32nd) life here at the moment, it is but a continuation of the previous one – which indicates that if corporations can do so anyone can. i would have used “reincarnation” instead of Farman’s use of “incarnation”.
Farman continues to “However, these tensions over the intrusion of media into the social sphere—as that thing which is disconnecting us from each other while simultaneously sending us into a head spin from how fast everything is moving—have been with us throughout history.” As an indicator of how true that is, my performance in this course is a clear indicator of how engrossed I have been in these mediums.
In Farman’s conclusion he explains that the encapsulated space contended is a tactile recorded real space, a space that is comprehended and experienced through observation and the faculties and also through the social engravings that educate our regular lives. One key property he noted about this type of epitomised space is that it is not subject to geological space. We can (and do) unite with one another crosswise over extremely incomprehensible separations, and our gadgets serve to offer us an exemplified and spatial involvement with each other. While this sort of “inaccessible closeness” quite often fabricates and augments our foundational under- standings of typified space in material, eye to eye cooperations, it is essential that we consider developing media as spaces. They are spaces that draw in us, give us a feeling of exemplified collaboration, and foster a feeling of group and home. Utilising our cell phones (from the present cellular telephone/processing gadget to whatever future imaginings of portable interchanges gets to be) creates a social space through our communications with these innovations.
Farman (2012) also notes that “Mobility studies have tended to focus on the processes of movement (of people, information, cultural objects, through transportation, architecture, and urban design) rather than focusing on the production of location” which I agree indicates that portability studies have had a tendency to concentrate on the procedures of development (of individuals, data, social articles, through transportation, building design, and urban configuration) as opposed to concentrating on the creation of area.
Farman, J 2012, Mobile Interface Theory : Embodied Space and Locative Media, Routledge, New York.