taking this a couple of steps further, the article points out that, to many people, facebook’s “frictionless” sharing doesn’t enhance sharing; it makes sharing meaningless. let’s go back to music: it is meaningful if i tell you that i really like the avant-garde music by olivier messiaen. it’s also meaningful to confess that i sometimes relax by listening to pink floyd. but if this kind of communication is replaced by a constant pipeline of what’s queued up in spotify, it all becomes meaningless. there’s no “sharing” at all. frictionless sharing isn’t better sharing; it’s the absence of sharing. there’s something about the friction, the need to work, the one-on-one contact, that makes the sharing real, not just some cyber phenomenon. if you want to tell me what you listen to, i care. but if it’s just a feed in some social application that’s constantly updated without your volition, why do i care? it’s just another form of spam, particularly if i’m also receiving thousands of updates every day from hundreds of other friends.”

- mike loukides | the end of social | via juliangutman: msg [emphasis mine]

amen. when i notice what friends are listening to on facebook it doesn’t encourage me to explore new [to me] music or revisit a forgotten but once loved track or album. i don’t feel compelled to reach out and connect with the music or friend. similar but not the same as walking through the office noticing what coworkers are eating for lunch; it registers but i’m probably not going to take a bite.