More useful and, hence, probably less exciting, would be the ability to chat with strangers that had a shared interest

I just tried it and found the experience incredibly jarring. I can’t remember being that affected by something in a long, long time. I don’t know how it will evolve but I’m fascinated to see what happens. Remember: all new media types start with porn.For some reason I’m reminded of an old John Hodgman radio piece ( asking which superpower you’d rather have: flight or invisibility. Each has its own potential, and its own temptations. (Also: flight is who you think you want to be, invisibility is who you fear you probably are.) If Twitter gives you the power of flight, Chatroulette gives you the power of invisibility. Which will most people choose?

there’s a quote about art that i don’t think it can get right, but it’s something like if it impacts you, it’s art.

“Any form of art is a form of power; it has impact, it can affect change it can not only move us, it makes us move.” Ossie Davissomething like that?

It’s a very true quote. type of thing that always rings true once you getinvolved in the process of making stuff…

oh, have you seen the “Great hatsby project”. It basically goes through livejournal, finds two random screennames and connects them together with a screenname in the middle.

I have a hard enough time avoiding idiots in day-to-day contact. Why would I actively seek them out?In seriousness, this doesn’t seem like a super healthy concept to me.

my sense is that the amount of unsavory content in any online community is directly proportional to the level of anonymity it allows. if there were a service like this that verified accounts or had a way to rank users as good or bad members of the community, it could go a long way towards eliminating the creepy guy masturbating on couch element.

You got him as well? Got to admire his endurance, I guess. ;-)Seriously though – yes, I agree.I have always believed this – verification/transparency – to be a pre-requisite to commenting in any online community.

Is this not a form of anti-community? Which reminds me of a clever phrase about community that I read on theoildrumThings that grow together work together

It can be “intimate” with an absolute stranger-It’s the Craiglist of the Social Web, minimal and a rejection of all the heavy trappings of social ties that all other networks work to build-It’s frivolous, it’s cheap, it’s deep, it’s all those things and more

This is all tied to the emerging backlash from a younger generation that has grown up staring at their computer screens connecting with people they escort in Inglewood CA already now. These young people will grow up with a visceral desire to connect with strangers and there will be a bevy of tools that allows them to do so. Some in a “disturbing” way and others in a very useful way. The fact that people in middle school could become obsessed with this tool demonstrates where we are heading…

Not just in terms of protection against say, sexual activity or heavy sexual innuendo, but how long until someone inadvertently stumbles upon a crime being committed, a suicide, or something simply purposefully and willfully disturbing?

Here’s why I find Chatroulette a compelling service. -It’s Raw: no authority, control or moderation of the channel-It Promotes Social Serendipity, you never know what you’re going to find. This unknown social exploration is appealing-It’s One Node to Another. Without trying to be something “incredible”.I’m kinda worried about how I’d act on such a social channel. Who am I to a stranger?