This topic has 11 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by 
-
Posts
-
-
I wanted to spend some time combing through the iConfidant website because there is some strange stuff on there.
Starting right from the top, “Find your missing piece” is an odd bit of phrasing and fits in more with a partner than a confidant. Not that your partner can’t be a confidant, but they specifically mention that this isn’t a dating site.
In both of the pictures at the top of the page, you can’t see anyone’s eyes. Weird. Is there some uncanny valley stuff going on here?
Then we get to the first use of iConfidant on the site and the first of three different styles of writing it out. Most companies are pretty specific about making sure their brand names are written out consistently. Kind of odd that they don’t care about that.
“Tomorrow’s relationships begin with today’s research, technology and trust.”
Plenty of relationships begin through technology now and trust is important, but I don’t think most relationships begin with outside research.“How does iConfidant work?”
They ask you to just trust them about this twice in this answer, but offer no explanation of why you should trust the company or your iConfidant. It also says that trust and honesty are necessary “in order for your [iConfidant] to work as effectively as possible.” What the hell is this thing? Most friends or companions wouldn’t be referred to as effectively working.“Can anyone sign up for iConfidant?”
Everything is actually pretty normal here.“Is iConfidant like other dating sites?”
Here they explicitly point out that it isn’t a dating site, but instead, a companion site. As others have pointed out, the use of companion is pretty specific. Most of the time when I think of a companion, I think of like, a dog or a cube, or something. The site then suggests that the relationship will transcend physical boundaries. That could mean a deeper mental connection or it could be more literal and have someone or something actually leave their body.“I find people to be needlessly complex and troublesome to deal with. Is there a companion for me?”
C’mon, no dogs?! Is this just because a lot of people here are into cats? Or because dogs could detect something with whatever is going on (thinking along the lines of Terminator here).“I value my privacy, should I be concerned with what I share?”
They claim that all information is confidential and secure and that you should share away. First, if we’ve learned anything over the last several years, most data is not totally secure. Data could be leaked through an attack or just through some poor coding. Second, this is an excellent way to collect a huge amount of information that people would not normally share.They mention that they “employ the leading minds,” which marks the second time we’ve seen a phrase that only mentions minds.
“My family thinks I have lost my mind. Why don’t they understand me like my iConfidant seems to?”
Lost your mind, eh? They suggest that you should sign everyone you know up for an iConfidant. Strange because they’ve mentioned that they’re currently limited on the number of users, but also because I don’t think most people would be happy being signed up for something as intrusive as this without their consent.This section notes that iConfidant has a “unique correspondence.” On its face, that’s just writing back and forth to someone. (Also, the Facebook page mentions that someone met their iConfidant in person, so not sure what’s going on there). Or, pulling straight from the dictionary here, “a relation between sets in which each member of one set is associated with one or more members of the other.” That could just mean that everyone has their own corresponding iConfidant, or it could play into the shadow/alternate versions of people theory that’s been going around since yesterday.
In the About Us section, there’s a third spelling of iConfidant (this time as IConfidant). Here it’s mentioned that Stacey wants iConfidant to be the next step in personalized technology. This is the first suggestion that their companions might not really be people. So again, what the hell is it?
-
Great thoughts on this! Yes, website copy and branding ALWAYS goes through a lot of thinking to make sure the message gets across how they want it to. The wording here is absolutely intentional.
With the companion thing, I can’t help but go to Firefly’s use of “companion”. While sexy times are part of the deal, the “companions” there are also seen as just general good company and some times well respected advisors. While I can’t see any of us having sex with our companions (this ain’t that kind of show, right?) I can totally see them going this route. They may use sexuality and flirting to get our attention, but the goal here is to get us trusting them and get us talking.
-
Definitely the most laughable quote for me is “Through complicated and (trust us) fairly uninteresting research and technology.” A sinister bureaucracy’s (is there any other kind?) first line of defense is shrouding their ill-intent in jargon and procedures so inscrutable and mind-numbing that they expect us to eagerly agree when they say “Just leave it to us and enjoy what comes, don’t worry about the how!” There’s a reason why you can’t proceed if you don’t click Agree on Terms and Conditions. Just like sending our address to Noah, just like friending Otis, whatever we give up is our choice and our risk.
And now that you mention it, the girl with the ice cream’s eyes look very unnatural in terms of how they’re closed. Almost as though those creases and lashes were added in after the fact. The more I stare, the stranger they look.
-
For those unsure what I’m going on about, here’s an article about the Companions in Firefly. http://firefly.wikia.com/wiki/Companion%27s_Guild
-
@nothenrygale Yeah, it definitely seems like that’s what they’re going for. They want people spilling everything to their companion and a little light flirting or open sexuality can help to get past people’s defenses and make them more comfortable. It may sort of create an illusion that they’re being open without the person they’re talking to realizing it. Your Firefly comparison looks pretty apt, they’re able to talk over a wide range of subject along with some training in psychology. Would make them able to make people real comfortable. Wonder if we’ll be seeing something similar with the iConfidant companions?
@macbethinabathtub I hadn’t looked that closely at her eyes, except to realize they were closed, but holy shit, you’re right. Her eyes do look strange, especially zooming in a bit. And who really closes their eyes that tightly?! -
-
@kevin I found the stock image and pulled down a high res for comping – sunglasses are like that in the original. Looks super weird, but it might be a talent payment related thing? I personally don’t wanna get involved with asking getty specifically..
Link to original stock image http://www.gettyimages.com/license/466233129
-
@addisonborn Thanks! That answered my question, don’t think there’s any need to go deeper on it.
-
@addisonborn no sign of the ice cream girl on Getty?
-
@macbethinabathtub I found that on istock, which I unfortunately do not have an account with and can’t download a full res. However, the link is here:
http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/young-couple-eating-ice-cream-and-smiling-gm450252551-29240534
There’s also what seems to be the full res here, though it’s not from the source.. However, this article was published just about a year ago, so it’s likely not altered: https://www.theodysseyonline.com/women-are-crazy-men-are-clueless
Direct link to image from that article: https://az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/responsive/cover/main/desktop/2016/04/11/635960017943417893-1283946707_Newlywed-dating.jpg
and here’s a set from Getty with the same couple in different locations near Santa Monica Pier, which the original photo seems to be taken from: http://www.gettyimages.com/search/photographer?excludenudity=true&family=creative&page=1&phrase=la&photographer=itsskin&sort=best#license
-
Very interesting. Thank you, @addisonborn, I guess I’m satisfied too.
-
Hey guys, let’s not start going into details on characters faces and what have you. Hidden messages are one thing, analyzing a person’s face is another. Thanks!
-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
