Intimacy is a daunting and cumbersome topic. For most people, intimacy is associated with sexual activities. In a more general sense, intimacy is an abstract measure of proximity — both physical and emotional.We all stratify our intimate connections. The strata vary by the individual, but they are still present — we measure intimacy. Intimacy is taking on new dimensions in the digital age.  Through the magic of the Internet, people are creating new forms of intimacy — for better or for worse. Most people, despite what they may think, are not open books, and unless there is serious coercion involved, people only let others know the information they want them to know.  There are some things certain people just do not need to know.  Why people place an intimate value on personal information is likely to be a twisted knot of social pressure and psychological functions — But nearly everyone does it. The processes we use to measure intimacy, usually a combination of thoughts and feelings, are distinctly human and imperfect, meaning they can occasionally be misled into making decisions based upon an assumed or false intimacy. The easiest examples of this false intimacy are the beloved social networking sites Facebook and MySpace. Through posted profiles and constant status updates users of networking sites broadcast information passively.  Over time, a user’s online friends begin to develop a clear picture of that friend through information that would normally be gained through prolonged exposure — We used  to learn about people when we hung out with them a lot. In this context, passive information is significant because it essentially bypasses the personal bonding that usually goes along with actually being around someone — You can know lots of stuff about someone, but that doesn’t mean you actually know them. Social scientists have recently coined the term “ambient awareness” to describe this passive measure of information exchange.  In a Sept. 5 article in The New York Times, former UC Berkly information sciences professor and current Yahoo scientist Marc Davis likened this ambient awareness to letting other people know that you are aware of them. ”It’s sort of like when you’re sitting with someone and you look over and they smile at you … You just sort of let people know you’re aware of them,” Davis said. The article treats the ambient awareness as a new style of social interaction, but does this also signal a new style of intimacy?These social networking sites, with their ambient awareness, seemingly bypass the traditional methods we use to exchange personal information — People no longer have to spend time together to know things about each other.  In theory, this could mean a false sense of security or a false intimacy in regard to the people we consider our friends.But the idea of ambient awareness may not be completely negative. In 1995’s “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital,” Robert Putnam theorized about the nature of social interactions in the U.S.  Putnam thought social isolation was largely the cause of increased online activities. Putnam’s book was written long before the advent of major social networking Web sites, but it does pose several interesting ideas regarding the information we now gather from passive communications. The general social science opinion on the Internet is still mixed. Some research shows Internet use actually increases community activity, while other research shows it leading to increased social isolation. If increased social isolation is truly the cause of increased online activity, these passive communications represent a burgeoning form of intimacy that occurs primarily through electronic communications. While a person’s favorite movie quotes or status updates may not be the exposition of their personal ethos, they are indicative of it.  The same things happen in our daily lives. When people first meet they exchange information that may or may not be truly meaningful in the conversation, but these communications spell out a person’s core being. In-person interactions, on the other hand, allow for situational clues and body language that can add meaning to the gathered information.So while an ambient awareness infers knowledge of someone, as a form of intimacy, it lacks many of the contextual safeguards of interpersonal communication. Online intimacy may have come a long way since the days of darkened dummy terminals and screeching modems. But technological advancement doesn’t infer safety or depth of character. If anything it demands an even more critical eye in personal relations. – – – -Contact Skylar Gremillion at [email protected]