I think it’s an interesting question… Do You Want To Be More Connected?
First there was snail mail, then the telephone, then the Internet and email. Unfortunately, spam ruined email (mostly) so people migrated to “closed circuit social websites” such as Facebook and Myspace.
Now there’s Twitter, where people are constantly exchanging notes… it’s much more personal and immediate than email.
Another service that’s immediate is video streaming via sites such as Ustream, where you can continuously broadcast your webcam feed, and if anyone wants to see your empty chair, they can! 
The overall goal seems to be to facilitate quicker, real-time connections to many more people without the drawbacks of spam and other email deliverability problems.
With “live” services such as Twitter and uStream, you have the ability to let millions of people know that you’re available instantly and respond, in real time, to their contact… which helps connect people and build relationships.
They say that people can only maintain a maximum of ten close personal relationships, but how does that apply to social networking? Can you have hundreds, or thousands of social contacts and keep up with the volume of messages such a network will naturally generate?
Do these “live” services scale?
I guess not. Ed Dale says in this movie that he simply can’t follow all the people on Twitter who are following him.
So, services such as Twitter and uStream allow you to reach many, many people… but after a certain number of subscribers is reached, people have to follow, without reciprocation, because otherwise you would drown in the sea of messages.
Using new, “live” technologies to reach as many people as you can, while also limiting the amount of exposure you have to a manageable level, will be the balancing act of the next few years.
What do you think…?
