|
|
|
|
|
by Phileosopher
819 days ago
|
|
I'd say it's a social mechanism more than anything else. While I haven't used the service myself, I expect the UX steers people to generate video-based content themselves, which is an evolution from the Twitter-era "spontaneously text as many tweets as you want" vibe. The "human" value of things versus the "computer" value of those same things are vastly different: 1. Text data may be one of the highest forms of human perception, but computers find storing it as trivial beyond enterprise-scale needs. Of course, it becomes important to a computer as soon as it's interpreted as code.
2. Photos are often on the level with text, but the data takes megabytes of information.
3. Video data typically adds a marginal increase in human value, but is typically data-heavy.
4. Interactive software packages with high-falutin' UX, most notably things like games, are the pinnacle of conveying human meaning, but also cost quite a ton of data. I anticipate the next evolution in 10 years might be the development of shareable game-based experiences, with the deluge of amateurish production values we see in today's videos. |
|