The opponent process is a hypothesis of color vision that states that the human visual system interprets information about color by processing signals from the three types of photoreceptor cells in an antagonistic manner. The three types of cones are called L, M, and S. The names stand for "Long wavelength sensitive,” "middle wavelength sensitive," and "short wavelength sensitive." The opponent-process theory implicates three opponent channels: L versus M, S versus (L+M), and a luminance channel (+ versus -). These cone-opponent mechanisms were at one time thought to be the neural substrate for a psychological theory called Hering's Opponent Colors Theory, which calls for three psychologically important opponent color processes: red versus green, blue versus yellow, and black versus white (luminance). The Opponent Colors Theory is named for the German physiologist Ewald Hering who proposed the idea in the late 19th century. However, it has been argued that Hering’s Opponent Colors Theory lacks adequate phenomenological and empirical support, and may not be a necessary feature of normal human color experience. Correspondingly, considerable physiological and behavioral evidence proves that the physiological cone opponent mechanisms do not constitute the neurobiological basis for Hering's Opponent Colors Theory. == Color theory == === Complementary colors === When staring at a bright color for a while (e.g. red), then looking away at a white field, an afterimage is perceived, such that the original color will evoke its complementary color (cyan, in the case of red input). When complementary colors are combined or mixed, they "cancel each other out" and become neutral (white or gray). That is, complementary colors are never perceived as a mixture; there is no "greenish red" or "yellowish blue", despite claims to the contrary. The strongest color contrast that a color can have is its complementary color. Complementary colors may also be called "opposite colors" and they were originally considered the primary evidence in support of Hering's Opponent Colors Theory. There are two fatal problems with this evidence. First, the complement of red is not green, as called for by Hering's theory; it is bluish-green. And second, there exists a complementary color for every color, so there is nothing special about the set of complementary pairs picked out by Hering's theory. === Unique hues === The colors that define the extremes for each opponent channel are called unique hues, as opposed to composite (mixed) hues. Ewald Hering first defined the unique hues as red, green, blue, and yellow, and based them on the concept that these colors could not be simultaneously perceived. For example, a color cannot appear both red and green. These definitions have been experimentally refined and are represented today by average hue angles of 353° (carmine red), 128° (cobalt green), 228° (cobalt blue), 58° (yellow). The unique hues are a defining feature of many psychological color spaces, but there is substantial evidence showing that the unique hues are not hard wired in the nervous system, contrary to the stipulations of Hering's Opponent Colors Theory. Unique hues can differ between individuals and are often used in psychophysical research to measure variations in color perception due to color-vision deficiencies or color adaptation. While there is considerable inter-subject variability when defining unique hues experimentally, an individual's unique hues are very consistent, to within a few nanometers of wavelength. == Physiological basis == === Relation to LMS color space === The trichromatic theory is in conflict with Hering's Opponent Colors Theory, although it is compatible with a physiological opponent process that compares the outputs of the different classes of cone types. The poles of these cone opponent mechanisms do not correspond to the unique hues of Hering's Opponent Colors Theory and unlike the unique hues, have no privilege in color perception. Most humans have three different cone cells in their retinas that facilitate trichromatic color vision. Colors are determined by the proportional excitation of these three cone types, i.e. their quantum catch. The levels of excitation of each cone type are the parameters that define LMS color space. To calculate the opponent process tristimulus values from the LMS color space, the cone excitations must be compared: The luminous (achromatic) opponent channel is a weighted sum of all three cone cells (plus the rod cells in some conditions). The red–green opponent channel is equal to the difference of the L- and M-cones. The blue–yellow opponent channel is equal to the difference of the S-cone and the average/weighted sum of the L- and M-cones. Most mammals have no L cone (the primate L cone arose from a gene duplication of the M cone opsin gene). These mammals still show two kinds of opponent channels in their retinal ganglion cells: the achromatic channel and the blue-yellow opponency channel. === Cone opponent mechanisms are encoded in the retina === The output of different types of cones are compared by cells in the retina including retina bipolar cells (which compare signals from L and M cones) and bistratified retinal ganglion cells (which compare S cone signals with L and M cone signals). The output of bipolar cells is relayed to the visual cortex by the retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) by way of a thalamic relay station called the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) of the thalamus. Much of the scientific knowledge of retinal ganglion cell physiology was obtained by neural recordings of cells in the LGN. The cone-opponent mechanisms in the retina and LGN represent a fundamental physiological opponent process but do not represent the unique hues (or Hering's Opponent Colors Theory). For example, the colors that best elicit responses of the bistratified S-(L+M)-opponent neurons are best described as purplish (or lavender) and lime-green, not "blue" and "yellow". The neurons are sometimes referred to as "blue–yellow" neurons, but this is a historical artifact dating to the time when it was thought that Hering's Opponent Colors Theory was hardwired by the retina and the mismatch between the colors to which they are optimally tuned and Hering's Opponent Colors was overlooked. Cone opponent mechanisms exist in the retinas of many mammals, including monkeys, mice, and cats. In primates, the LGN contains three major classes of layers: Magnocellular layers (M, large-cell) – responsible largely for the luminance channel Parvocellular layers (P, small-cell) – responsible largely for red–green opponency Koniocellular layers (K) – responsible largely for blue–yellow opponency, poor spatial resolution, long latency Other mammals such as cats also have three cell types denoted as X (magno), Y (parvo), and W (konio). The W type is beyond most doubt homologous to the primate K type. There are some subtle differences between the M and X types as well as the Y and P types to make the correspondence unclear. === Advantage === Transmitting information in opponent-channel color space could be advantageous over transmitting it in LMS color space ("raw" signals from each cone type). There is some overlap in the wavelengths of light to which the three types of cones (L for long-wave, M for medium-wave, and S for short-wave light) respond, so it is more efficient for the visual system (from a perspective of dynamic range) to record differences between the responses of cones, rather than each type of cone's individual response. Hurvich and Jameson argued that the use of opponent-channel color space would increase color contrast, making the information easier to process by later stages of vision. === Color blindness === Color blindness can be classified by the cone cell that is affected (protan, deutan, tritan) or by the opponent channel that is affected (red–green or blue–yellow). In either case, the channel can either be inactive (in the case of dichromacy) or have a lower dynamic range (in the case of anomalous trichromacy). For example, individuals with deuteranopia see little difference between the red and green unique hues. == History == Johann Wolfgang von Goethe first studied the physiological effect of opposed colors in his Theory of Colours in 1810. Goethe arranged his color wheel symmetrically "for the colours diametrically opposed to each other in this diagram are those which reciprocally evoke each other in the eye. Thus, yellow demands purple; orange, blue; red, green; and vice versa: Thus again all intermediate gradations reciprocally evoke each other." Ewald Hering proposed opponent color theory in 1892. He thought that the colors red, yellow, green, and blue are special in that any other color can be described as a mix of them, and that they exist in opposite pairs. That is, either red or green is perceived and never greenish-red: Even though yellow is a mixture of red and green in the RGB color theory, humans
Terminology model
A terminology model is a refinement of a concept system. Within a terminology model the concepts (object types) of a specific problem or subject area are defined by subject-matter experts in terms of concept (object type) definitions and definitions of subordinated concepts or characteristics (properties). Besides object types, the terminology model allows defining hierarchical classifications, definitions for object type and property behavior and definition of casual relations. The terminology model is a means for subject-matter experts to express their knowledge about the subject in subject-specific terms. Since the terminology model is structured rather similar to an object-oriented database schema, is can be transformed without loss of information into an object-oriented database schema. Thus, the terminology model is a method for problem analysis on the one side and a mean of defining database schema on the other side. Several terminology models have been developed and published in the field of statistics: Terminology model for classifications Terminology model for statistical variables Reference model for statistical metadata
Locative media
Locative media or location-based media (LBM) is a virtual medium of communication functionally bound to a location. The physical implementation of locative media, however, is not bound to the same location to which the content refers. Location-based media delivers multimedia and other content directly to the user of a mobile device dependent upon their location. Location information determined by means such as mobile phone tracking and other emerging real-time locating system technologies like Wi-Fi or RFID can be used to customize media content presented on the device. Locative media are digital media applied to real places and thus triggering real social interactions. While mobile technologies such as the Global Positioning System (GPS), laptop computers and mobile phones enable locative media, they are not the goal for the development of projects in this field. == Description == Media content is managed and organized externally of the device on a standard desktop, laptop, server, or cloud computing system. The device then downloads this formatted content with GPS or other RTLS coordinate-based triggers applied to each media sequence. As the location-aware device enters the selected area, centralized services trigger the assigned media, designed to be of optimal relevance to the user and their surroundings. Use of locative technologies "includes a range of experimental uses of geo-technologies including location-based games, artistic critique of surveillance technologies, experiential mapping, and spatial annotation." Location based media allows for the enhancement of any given environment offering explanation, analysis and detailed commentary on what the user is looking at through a combination of video, audio, images and text. The location-aware device can deliver interpretation of cities, parklands, heritage sites, sporting events or any other environment where location based media is required. The content production and pre-production are integral to the overall experience that is created and must have been performed with ultimate consideration of the location and the users position within that location. The media offers a depth to the environment beyond that which is immediately apparent, allowing revelations about background, history and current topical feeds. == Locative, ubiquitous and pervasive computing == The term 'locative media' was coined by Karlis Kalnins. Locative media is closely related to augmented reality (reality overlaid with virtual reality) and pervasive computing (computers everywhere, as in ubiquitous computing). Whereas augmented reality strives for technical solutions, and pervasive computing is interested in embedded computers, locative media concentrates on social interaction with a place and with technology. Many locative media projects have a social, critical or personal (memory) background. While strictly spoken, any kind of link to additional information set up in space (together with the information that a specific place supplies) would make up location-dependent media, the term locative media is strictly bound to technical projects. Locative media works on locations and yet many of its applications are still location-independent in a technical sense. As in the case of digital media, where the medium itself is not digital but the content is digital, in locative media the medium itself might not be location-oriented, whereas the content is location-oriented. Japanese mobile phone culture embraces location-dependent information and context-awareness. It is projected that in the near future locative media will develop to a significant factor in everyday life. == Enabling technologies == Locative media projects use technology such as Global Positioning System (GPS), laptop computers, the mobile phone, Geographic Information System (GIS), and web map services such as Mapbox, OpenStreetMap, and Google Maps among others. Whereas GPS allows for the accurate detection of a specific location, mobile computers allow interactive media to be linked to this place. The GIS supplies arbitrary information about the geological, strategic or economic situation of a location. Web maps like Google Maps give a visual representation of a specific place. Another important new technology that links digital data to a specific place is radio-frequency identification (RFID), a successor to barcodes like Semacode. Research that contributes to the field of locative media happens in fields such as pervasive computing, context awareness and mobile technology. The technological background of locative media is sometimes referred to as "location-aware computing". == Creative representation == Place is often seen as central to creativity; in fact, "for some—regional artists, citizen journalists and environmental organizations for example—a sense of place is a particularly important aspect of representation, and the starting point of conversations." Locative media can propel such conversations in its function as a "poetic form of data visualization," as its output often traces how people move in, and by proxy, make sense of, urban environments. Given the dynamism and hybridity of cities and the networks which comprise them, locative media extends the internet landscape to physical environments where people forge social relations and actions which can be "mobile, plural, differentiated, adventurous, innovative, but also estranged, alienated, impersonalized." Moreover, in using locative technologies, users can expand how they communicate and assert themselves in their environment and, in doing so, explore this continuum of urban interactions. Furthermore, users can assume a more active role in constructing the environments they are situated in accordingly. In turn, artists have been intrigued with locative media as a means of "user-led mapping, social networking and artistic interventions in which the fabric of the urban environment and the contours of the earth become a 'canvas.'" Such projects demystify how resident behaviors in a given city contribute to the culture and sense of personality that cities are often perceived to take on. Design scholars Anne Galloway and Matthew Ward state that "various online lists of pervasive computing and locative media projects draw out the breadth of current classification schema: everything from mobile games, place-based storytelling, spatial annotation and networked performances to device-specific applications." A prominent use of locative media is in locative art. A sub-category of interactive art or new media art, locative art explores the relationships between the real world and the virtual or between people, places or objects in the real world. == Examples == Notable locative media projects include Bio Mapping by Christian Nold in 2004, locative art projects such as the SpacePlace ZKM/ZKMax bluecasting and participatory urban media access in Munich in 2005 and Britglyph by Alfie Dennen in 2009, and location-based games such as AR Quake by the Wearable Computer Lab at the University of South Australia and Can You See Me Now? in 2001 by Blast Theory in collaboration with the Mixed Reality Lab at the University of Nottingham. In 2005, the Silicon Valley–based collaborators of C5 first exhibited the C5 Landscape Initiative, a suite of four GPS inspired projects that investigate perception of landscape in light of locative media. In William Gibson's 2007 novel Spook Country, locative art is one of the main themes and set pieces in the story. Narrative projects which engage with locative media are sometimes referred to as Location-Aware Fiction, as explored in "Data and Narrative: Location Aware Fiction" a 2003 essay by Kate Armstrong. This location-aware fiction is also known as locative literature, where locative stories and poems can be experienced via digital portals, apps, QR codes and e-books, as well as via analogue forms such as labelling tape, Scrabble tiles, fridge magnets or Post-It notes, and these are forms often used by the writer and artist Matt Blackwood. The Transborder Immigrant Tool by the Electronic Disturbance Theater is a locative media project aimed at providing life saving directions to water for people trying to cross the US / Mexico border. The project attracted global media attention in 2009 and 2010. Articles included a Los Angeles Times cover story focusing on Ricardo Dominguez and an AP story interviewing Micha Cárdenas and Brett Stalbaum. The articles focused on concerns over the legality of the project and the ensuing investigations of the group, which are still underway. The Transborder Immigrant Tool has recently been included in a number of major exhibitions including Here, Not There at the Museum of Contemporary Art San Diego and the 2010 California Biennial at the Orange County Museum of Art. Invisible Threads by Stephanie Rothenberg and Jeff Crouse is a locative media project aimed at creating embodied awareness of sweatshops and just-in-time production t
Svelte
Svelte is a free and open-source component-based front-end software framework and language created by Rich Harris and maintained by the Svelte core team. Svelte is not a monolithic JavaScript library imported by applications: instead, Svelte compiles HTML templates to specialized code that manipulates the DOM directly, which may reduce the size of transferred files and give better client performance. Application code is also processed by the compiler, inserting calls to automatically recompute data and re-render UI elements when the data they depend on is modified. This also avoids the overhead associated with runtime intermediate representations, such as virtual DOM, unlike traditional frameworks (such as React and Vue) which carry out the bulk of their work at runtime, i.e. in the browser. The compiler itself is written in JavaScript. Its source code is licensed under MIT License and hosted on GitHub. Among comparable frontend libraries, Svelte has one of the smallest bundle footprints at merely 2KB. == History == The predecessor of Svelte is Ractive.js, which Rich Harris created in 2013. Version 1 of Svelte was written in JavaScript and was released on 29 November 2016. The name Svelte was chosen by Rich Harris and his coworkers at The Guardian. Version 2 of Svelte was released on 19 April 2018. It set out to correct what the maintainers viewed as mistakes in the earlier version such as replacing double curly braces with single curly braces. Version 3 of Svelte was written in TypeScript and was released on 21 April 2019. It rethought reactivity by using the compiler to instrument assignments behind the scenes. The SvelteKit web framework was announced in October 2020 and entered beta in March 2021. SvelteKit 1.0 was released in December 2022 after two years in development. Version 4 of Svelte was released on 22 June 2023. It was a maintenance release, smaller and faster than version 3. A part of this release was an internal rewrite from TypeScript back to JavaScript, with JSDoc type annotations. This was met with confusion from the developer community, which was addressed by the creator of Svelte, Rich Harris. Version 5 of Svelte was released on October 19, 2024 at Svelte Summit Fall 2024 with Rich Harris cutting the release live while joined by other Svelte maintainers. Svelte 5 was a ground-up rewrite of Svelte, changing core concepts such as reactivity and reusability. Its primary feature, runes, reworked how reactive state is declared and used. Runes are function-like macros that are used to declare a reactive state, or code that uses reactive states. These runes are used by the compiler to indicate values that may change and are depended on by other states or the DOM. Svelte 5 also introduces Snippets, which are reusable "snippets" of code that are defined once and can be reused anywhere else in the component. Svelte 5 was initially met with controversy due to its many changes, and thus deprecations caused primarily by runes. However, most of this has subsided since the initial announcement of runes, and the further refining of Svelte 5. Also at Svelte Summit Fall 2024, Ben McCann announced the Svelte CLI under the sv package name on npm. In early 2025, the Svelte team announced Asynchronous Svelte, an experimental feature set centered around asynchronous reactivity in Svelte using await expressions. As of August 2025, the feature is available via an experimental compiler option. This coincided with the experimental release of remote functions, an RPC feature in SvelteKit, Svelte's metaframework. Key early contributors to Svelte became involved with Conduitry joining with the release of Svelte 1, Tan Li Hau joining in 2019, and Ben McCann joining in 2020. Rich Harris and Simon Holthausen joined Vercel to work on Svelte fulltime in 2022. Dominic Gannaway joined Vercel from the React core team to work on Svelte fulltime in 2023. == Syntax == Svelte applications and components are defined in .svelte files, which are HTML files extended with templating syntax that is based on JavaScript and is similar to JSX. Svelte's core features are accessed through runes, which syntactically look like functions, but are used as macros by the compiler. These runes include: The $state rune, used for declaring a reactive state value The $derived rune, used for declaring reactive state derived from one or more states The $effect rune, used for declaring code that reruns whenever its dependencies change Starting with Svelte 5, the framework introduced a significant reactivity overhaul that replaces the previous `$:` reactive declarations with new runes such as $state, $derived, and $effect. The $effect rune is now used for post-render operations without modifying state, while $derived is used for computations that depend on other reactive values. This change aims to simplify the mental model of reactivity and make component logic more explicit. Additionally, the { JavaScript code } syntax can be used for templating in HTML elements and components, similar to template literals in JavaScript. This syntax can also be used in element attributes for uses such as two-way data binding, event listeners, and CSS styling. A Todo List example made in Svelte is below: == Associated projects == The Svelte maintainers created SvelteKit as the official way to build projects with Svelte. It is a Next.js/Nuxt-style full-stack framework that dramatically reduces the amount of code that gets sent to the browser. The maintainers had previously created Sapper, which was the predecessor of SvelteKit. The Svelte maintainers also maintain a number of integrations for popular software projects under the Svelte organization including integrations for Vite, Rollup, Webpack, TypeScript, VS Code, Chrome Developer Tools, ESLint, and Prettier. A number of external projects such as Storybook have also created integrations with Svelte and SvelteKit. == Influence == Vue.js modeled its API and single-file components after Ractive.js, the predecessor of Svelte. == Adoption == Svelte is widely praised by developers. Taking the top ranking in multiple large scale developer surveys, it was chosen as the Stack Overflow 2021 most loved web framework and 2020 State of JS frontend framework with the most satisfied developers. Recent surveys continue to show Svelte's strong developer satisfaction, with the 2024 State of JS survey maintaining its position among the most praised frontend frameworks. The 2024 Stack Overflow Developer Survey reported that 73% of developers who used Svelte want to continue working with it, and noted that Stack Overflow's own team used Svelte for building their 2024 Developer Survey results site. Svelte has been adopted by a number of high-profile web companies including The New York Times, Google, Apple, Spotify, Radio France, Square, Yahoo, ByteDance, Rakuten, Bloomberg, Reuters, Ikea, Facebook, Logitech, and Brave. A community group of primarily non-maintainers, known as the Svelte Society, run the Svelte Summit conference, write a Svelte newsletter, host a Svelte podcast, and host a directory of Svelte tooling, components, and templates.
Affordable affluence
Affordable affluence refers to a cultural phenomenon where consumers use accessible luxury goods and lifestyles to project status and align themselves with a higher social class, without requiring substantial wealth. This concept is embodied by brands such as Aritzia and Erewhon, which position themselves as offering high-end, trendy, or health-conscious products that are relatively accessible to the average consumer. A related concept is quiet luxury, where the ultra-wealthy signal wealth through subtle means. Quiet luxury emphasizes the widening gap between the ultra-wealthy and the general public, whereas accessible affluence provides a way for the general public to indulge in the lifestyle of the ultra-wealthy. == Origin of the term == An early use of the phrase in this context in a 2023 article in The Cut called "Meet the People Working 3 Jobs to Afford Erewhon." One of the interviewees used Erewhon as an archetype of affordable affluence. It was described as “a way for regular people to position themselves adjacent to the upper class.” == Background and description == The phenomenon arises due to an individual's desire to showcase status. For years, companies have strategized how to target the average consumers by providing a product that signals an elevated social status. For instance, Aritzia partnered with celebrities and micro-influencers to make it an aspirational brand at an affordable cost. Erewhon similarly has allowed middle class consumers to subtly signal a higher degree of perceived wealth by purchasing higher priced, but still attainable items. It has allowed middle-class individuals to feel as though they are part of an exclusive culture. This phenomenon has been seen particularly with Gen Z and Millennials in the setting of financial hardships in the 2020s. Affordable affluence is an example of the lipstick effect. Because traditional status symbols such as expensive cars became relatively more unattainable, posting clips on social media that showcase affordable affluence become an alternative status symbol. Particularly with food, the perception has evolved from a necessity to a luxury. A McKinsey & Company report demonstrated that these generations place a higher importance on groceries than restaurants, travel, and beauty/fashion.
LemonStand
LemonStand was a Canadian e-commerce company headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia, that developed cloud-based computer software for online retailers. LemonStand was shut down on June 5, 2019. == History == LemonStand Version 1 was launched on July 28, 2001. It is written in the PHP programming language. Version 1 was released as an on-premises proprietary licensed software, and the commercial license was not free. However, there was a free trial license available. June 2012, LemonStand raised seed funding from the BDC Venture Capital, and a group of angel investors. December 20, 2013, a cloud-based SaaS version of the LemonStand eCommerce platform was released publicly. May 9, 2014, LemonStand and Payfirma, a payments processing company, partnered to provide integrated services for online retailers. May 3, 2016, LemonStand raised funding from BDC Venture Capital and Silicon Valley–based angel investors. March 5, 2019, LemonStand announced their intention to shut down on June 5, 2019. LemonStand was quietly acquired by Mailchimp at the end of February. == Pricing == LemonStand offered three levels of service plans. LemonStand did not charge any transaction fees.
Friending and following
Friending is the act of adding someone to a list of "friends" on a social networking service. The notion does not necessarily involve the concept of friendship. It is also distinct from the idea of a "fan"—as employed on the WWW sites of businesses, bands, artists, and others—since it is more than a one-way relationship. A "fan" only receives things. A "friend" can communicate back to the person friending. The act of "friending" someone usually grants that person special privileges (on the service) with respect to oneself. On Facebook, for example, one's "friends" have the privilege of viewing and posting to one's "timeline". Following is a similar concept on other social network services, such as Twitter and Instagram, where a person (follower) chooses to add content from a person or page to their newsfeed. Unlike friending, following is not necessarily mutual, and a person can unfollow (stop following) or block another user at any time without affecting that user's following status. The first scholarly definition and examination of friending and defriending (the act of removing someone from one's friend list, also called unfriending) was David Fono and Kate Raynes-Goldie's "Hyperfriendship and beyond: Friends and Social Norms on LiveJournal" from 2005, which identified the use of the term as both a noun and a verb by users of early social network site and blogging platform LiveJournal, which was originally launched in 1999. == Friend/follower count, friend collecting, and multiple accounts == The addition of people to a friend list without regard to whether one actually is their friend is sometimes known as friend whoring. Matt Jones of Dopplr went so far as to coin the expression "friending considered harmful" to describe the problem of focusing upon the friending of more and more people at the expense of actually making any use of a social network. Friend collecting is the adding of hundreds or thousands of friends/followers, a not uncommon order of magnitude on some social sites. As a result, many teen users feel pressured to heavily curate their posts, posting only carefully posed and edited photographs with well-thought-out captions. Some Instagram users will create a second account, known as a Finsta (short for "Fake Instagram"). A Finsta is typically private, and the owner only allows close friends to follow it. Since the follower count is kept down, the posts can be more candid and silly in nature. Users may also create multiple accounts based on their interests. Someone with a personal social media account might be a photographer and maintain a separate account for that. There is risk associated with following large numbers of people: scholars say that social anxiety could be an effect of managing a large social media network, as users can feel jealous and have a "fear of missing out". == Unfriending and unfollowing == Unfriending is the act of removing someone from a friends list. On Facebook, this means the action is unilateral, meaning, the friendship is terminated on both sides. The act of unfriending is often used when one user was flirting and made the other uncomfortable. Unfollowing is a little different. When a user unfollows someone on Instagram or Twitter, it continues a one-sided relationship. Often, the unfollowed user doesn't realize they were unfollowed, so they continue the following. == Social network friending and friendship == There are distinct groups of "friends" that one can friend on a social networking service. The notion of a social network friend does not necessarily embody the concept of friendship. Although terminology has not yet evolved to distinguish the different types of social networking friends, they can be broken into the following three categories. friends who are actually known These are people that may be one's friends or family in real life, with whom one has regular interaction either on-line or off-line. organizational friends These are companies and other organizations who maintain a "friending" relationship as a contacts list. complete strangers These are social networking "friends" with whom one has no relationship at all. Within these categories "friends" can be made up of strong ties, weak existing ties, weak latent ties, and parasocial ties. Strong ties can be made up of close family members and friends where self-disclosure, intimacy and frequent content occur. Weak existing ties can be made up of acquaintances, co-workers and distance relatives with whom the user has inconsistent contact. Weak latent ties can be made up of people within a similar geographical location or profession that can be used as a potential future bridge to other connections. Parasocial ties can be made up of celebrities, public figures and media personas. Human nature is to reciprocate a friending, marking someone as a friend who has marked oneself as a friend. This is a social norm for social networking services. However, this leads to mixing up who is an actual friend, and who is a contact. Tagging someone as a "contact" who has marked one as a "friend" can be perceived as impolite. Other concerns about this issue are treated in Sherry Turkle's Alone Together which analyses many behavioral dynamics in social media friendships. Turkle defines herself as "cautiously optimistic", but expresses concern that distance communications may undermine genuine face-to-face spoken discourses, lessening people's expectations of one another. One social networking service, FriendFeed, allows one to friend someone as a "fake" friend. The person "fake" friended receives the usual notifications for friending, but that person's updates are not received. Gavin Bell, author of Building Social Web Applications, describes this mechanism as "ludicrous". Results from a 2007 survey the Center for the Digital Future stated that only 23% of internet users have at least one virtual friend whom they have only met online. Ideally the number of virtual friends is directly proportional to the use of the Internet, but the same survey showed 20% of heavy-users (more than 3 hours/day) who claimed an average of 8.7% online friends, reported at least one relationship that started virtually and migrated to in-person contact. This results and other concerning issues are included in the book Networked: The New Social Operating System co-written by Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman in 2012. == Ethical considerations == The act of "friending" someone on a social networking service has particular ethical implications for judges in the United States. Judicial codes of conducts in the various states generally incorporate some form of provision that judges should avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Whether this regulates and even prohibits judges "friending" attorneys that appear before them, and law enforcement personnel, has been the subject of some analysis by the judicial ethics panels of the various states. They haven't all agreed on the guidance that they have given to judges: The New York state Judicial Ethics committee in 2009 simply advised judges to employ caution, noting that the issue of "friending" someone on a social networking service is a publicly observable act that has little difference from other public behavior concerns judges already face. The Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory committee in 2009 noted that, judges being normal human beings, it was unavoidable for judges to form friendships without the responsibilities of their job. It prohibited judges from friending any attorneys that appeared before them, whilst allowing friending of those who do not, on the grounds that it may give the appearance to the general public (even if the substance is otherwise) that those attorneys who are friended hold special sway with the judge. A minority opinion of the committee asserted that there is a substantive difference between "friending" on a social networking service and actual friendship, and that the general public, being aware of the norms of social networking services, was capable of drawing this distinction and would not reasonably conclude either a special degree of influence or a violation of the code of judicial conduct. This minority opinion was outnumbered twice in 2009, both in the Judicial Ethics Advisory and in the Florida Supreme Court Judicial Ethics Advisory committee. The South Carolina judicial conduct committee in 2009 permitted judges to friend attorneys and law enforcement personnel, with the proviso that no judicial business should be conducted upon nor discussed via the social networking service. "... a judge should not become isolated from the community in which the judge lives.", the committee stated. The Kentucky Judicial Ethics committee in 2010 took the same position as the minority opinion in Florida. It urged judges to exercise caution, but recognized that the act of friending "does not, in and of itself, indicate the degree or intensity of a judge's relationship with the person who is the 'friend'