his prediction mixes social and
professional networks; the first will not expand
dramatically, the second will; it won't be easier to
"verify" information, on the contrary. -
Louis Pouzin, Internet pioneer: inventor of
"Datagram" networking and designer of the
Cyclades network; a formulator of the groundwork for
contemporary networks
eople will have larger social networks,
but most of the relationships will be low-value,
low-trust relationships. In general, online acquaintances
are generally self-selected for agreement in
ideology/politics/religion/etc., so I think that
we'll actually see more hardening of radical views,
rather than more trust. - Simson Garfinkel, Sandstorm
Enterprises/Technology Review magazine
think this has already happened, and
people's networks have gotten bigger than they want
to handle. We'll be watching how the Internet helps
people restrict their connections now, more than
increases them. - Douglas Rushkoff, author/New York
University Interactive Telecommunications
Program
t seems likely that trust in commercial
services will grow as people increasingly depend on the
Internet. However, though there are spectacular examples
of relationships engendered by Internet communications,
most Internet relationships connect along limited
dimensions. There is still no substitute for dense
personal interactions. - Jorge Reina
Schement
think the first sentence is clearly true,
but the second sentence does not follow. The increasing
size of social networks may not produce increased social
trust, if the Internet also proliferates the circulation
of untrustworthy information and practices. - Peter
M. Shane, author of "The Electronic Federalist: The
Internet and the Electric Institutionalization of
Democratic Legitimacy"
t could expand social networks, but not
"far beyond." People will have a wider range of
sources - but most individuals will settle on a small
number that they will use repeatedly much as they use a
small subset of the large number of TV networks available
already. Impact on trust could go either way (or both) -
more sources could equal more differences of info could
lead to more confusion and skepticism as easily as more
trust. - Ben Compaine, communications technology
expert
he Internet links us to more people, more
frequently, and at greater distances. It allows us to
maintain some sort of contact with weak,latent ties, to
whom we used to only send Christmas cards. The greater
connectivity of the Internet does not come at the expense
of face-to-face or telephone contact. Internet
connectivity adds on to phone and face-to-face contact.
The joint ability to have more ties -- and more contact
with ties -- means that Internet users tend to have the
largest active social networks that the world has ever
seen. Most ties people have on the Internet also take
place offline -- by phone and face-to-face. Although the
media have been fascinated with online virtual worlds, in
practice, this is a small proportion of relationships
that use the Internet.. - Barry Wellman, University
of Toronto
epends on what one means by "social
networks." Acquaintances? Email correspondents?
Advice sources? People one parties with? Maybe our social
networks will have more long-distance connections, but
they may have fewer direct person-person connections. A
person's total number of connections may be a limit
of that person's tolerance for connections or time
available to spend maintaining them, which would be an
inherent limit in how large an individual's social
network might become. - Peter Denning, Naval
Postgraduate School, Monterey, California; columnist for
Communications of the ACM
lthough the evidence is inconclusive - and
the social effects of the Internet will change as the
electronic media change - I read the existing data as
mostly negative. Social networks are weakening, and the
Internet is not helping at all. - Peter Levine, the
University of Maryland
agree with the first part, but I'm not
sure it will enhance trust or widen anything - it may
instead deepen divisions and create silos. The key will
be for the Internet to embrace geography considerably
more than it has thus far. More Friendster, and less
Freeper. More craigslist and less eBay. The Internet
could be a tool for people to connect with each other in
their geographic communities, not withdraw from their
geographic communities into a virtual space where the
horizons are vastly narrower. - Dan Froomkin,
washingtonpost.com/niemanwatchdog.org
think that there has been a
pseudo-expansion of social networks, with people who have
just a superficial connection (chat, picture, etc.). I
don't feel these are lasting connections on the level
of an in-person connection. Witness the use of e-mail in
business as simply a bridge to a face-to-face meeting. We
haven't been able to replace a connection even among
professional colleagues. - Ted Eytan, MD, Group
Health Cooperative
ocial networks are not just about size,
you also have to consider the quality of your
contacts/information. Most people have a limited number
of people that they actually trust. I believe it's
likely that real word experience has taught them to be
careful. The use of the telephone increased the size of
social networks, but I doubt the introduction of the
telephone increased trust in society. Having access to a
wider range of sources is nice, but there is such a thing
as access to "too much information." -
Robert Lunn, FocalPoint Analytics/USC Digital Future
Project
eople's social networks will be richer
and more interesting, but the closest parts of those
networks won't be numerically larger - we can only
take in about 150 people, virtually or in real space.
Trust depends on reciprocity in taking risk, and it's
hard to do that without lots of repeat interactions and
contextual information. So, richer, better, livelier, but
not necessarily bigger. - Susan Crawford, professor,
Cardozo School of Law/Policy Fellow with the Center for
Democracy & Technology/Fellow with the Yale Law
School Information Society Project
he size and diversity of people's
social networks will certainly increase because
technology, and the internet in particular, lowers the
threshold for participation in social activities and
breaks down traditional social barriers (i.e. race and
gender stereotypes are harder to advance online if the
identity of the participants is unknown. But the size of
someone's social network is not necessarily a good
thing. The Internet makes us lazy, it encourages us to
stay home in front of our computer instead of going to
the local watering hole or community center to engage
with people directly. - Brian Reich, Mindshare
Interactive Campaigns/campaignwebreview.com
he benefits will be instrumental - that is
people will have better information in the choices they
make, but they won't trust society as a whole more.
- Mark Rovner, CTSG/Kintera
agree, except for the part about enhanced
trust. The networks will expand, but we will also have to
be more selective in evaluating the information received
through those networks. The 80-20 rule of information
still applies - even if the total amount of information
increases. - Ken Jarboe, Athena Alliance
ocial networks are like telephone numbers.
There are limits to how large they can be, based on time
and personality. Some people have large social networks;
some people don't. I don't think that will
change. However, the Internet may well change the
composition of social networks. For example, college-aged
students have been able to maintain relationships with
high school friends much more easily than was once the
case. So, their social networks are not remade in
college, as was once the case. How such a change might
affect where people choose to live after college, etc.,
will be interesting to track. - Stanley Chodorow,
University of California at San Diego/Council on Library
and Information Resources
agree with this prediction and think it
has already happened. In my life, the Internet has
connected me to many people around the globe, from many
different walks of life, and cultures. I have been able
to use these contacts for research and writing
opportunities, and have been recruited for a variety of
different career opportunities. I believe these contacts
and opportunities for collaboration will only increase as
the electronic connections afforded by the Internet
increase. - Gary Kreps, George Mason
University/National Cancer Institute
generally agree, but would offer these
thoughts: The more ethical an individual is, the less he
or she needs regulations and such. A tiny population of
abusers should not provoke penalties for many, but with
one's own vigilance and a better understanding of
these people, we will keep them and any associated
undesired behavior from such at bay, and focus on the
majority of positive results that come of
technology-assisted social networks. - Victor Rivero,
editor/writer/consultant, former editor of Converge
magazine
t the same time, I think certain
"trusted sources" will not have the
confirmation of the crowd, instead they will be trusted
due to their scarcity or connection only to prime nodes
within the network. - Christine Geith, Michigan State
University
en percent of the world may be on the Net
but so are 10 percent of the world's criminals and
they are using it to automate old crimes and invest in
new ones. Unless and until law enforcement and security
catch up they will undermine and destroy trust. -
Philip Virgo, secretary general, EURIM - UK-based
Parliament Industry Group/IMIS - UK-based professional
body for management of information systems
rust is a human experience - experience
being the key word here - acquired over time. Trust is
instinct-based, for example, we feel repulsed by meat
that smells bad, because we'll get sick, or we feel
apprehensive about the dark, because we may be hurt more
easily. Trust for people will continue to act in the same
way. We experience and assimilate that information. We
will not re-wire millions of years of evolution because
of Friendster. - Lorraine Ross, VP, Sales,
USATODAY.com
verall, this is a key factor of my
Internet vision. However: depending on deployment factors
globally and on control of key nodes, there may be
considerable pushback based on privacy, security and
other social factors unrelated to tech capability.
Governments may crack down on allowing social access to
"undesirables," or personal concerns about
safety or security may restrain some individuals from
full usage of this capability. Moreover, as business
models evolve for social networking, the "price of
admission" may affect acceptance into the
"best" networks. - Gary Arlen, Arlen
Communications
he trick here is that the idea of what
constitutes a social network is changing. In the past, if
I met someone at a conference, and we didn't meet
again all year, I might not consider her to be part of my
social network (a friend, colleague, or acquaintance).
But, if using the Internet I read her blog, or see her in
an IM session, or briefly message her, I consider her a
resource from whom I can draw. I suspect that if the
question is asked "is your social network
larger?" those who are the heaviest users of the
Internet will answer in the affirmative, but it isn't
clear to me that this is a useful measure by itself.
- A. Halavais, State University of New York at
Buffalo
he web is also a great way to spread
disinformation and propaganda. The checks and balances
that exist within nation states don't exist on the
web and market forces may not prevail. Currently, I am
receiving e-mail and links to bank websites which ask for
information or link me to sites that look, for example,
like CitiBank, which are not official Citibank sites.
Verification can be difficult and the tracing down of who
is responsible for such false information is impossible
for the average individual to do. It costs money to send
a false catalogue of products through snail mail, but
costs far less to advertise on the Internet or through
e-mail, so I suspect that we will see a proliferation of
fraud. - F. Hassencahl, Old Dominion
University
agree with the first sentence, but I
don't believe that this will enhance trust in
society. Rather I feel it will transform our notion of
society from that of a group of people brought together
by physical space into a virtual space containing
everyone who shares a common need or business or passion.
As to the matter of trust, I think it is likely that
given the ease with which one can employ deception in
cyberspace, people's general trust in society may
diminish a bit. - Peter W. Van Ness, entrepreneur,
principal The Van Ness Group, a web-solutions
company
n the fall of 1999 I attended the Harvard
Business School Advanced Management Program (AMP). The
class of 170 business executives from around the world
has since been in continual contact thanks to one of our
classmates acting as an e-mail coordinator. He receives
messages from individuals concerning life changes and
promotions, and e-mails that to the whole class, which
spans the globe. Whether Mike is sending a daily joke, or
update on a classmate who has just become a grandmother,
or telling us who is about to arrive in one city or
another seeking a reunion, he and the internet have
brought together a group of people to create a virtual
community, extending the Harvard experience way beyond
the classroom. - Graham Lovelace, Lovelace Media
Ltd.
ocial networks will increase, but not
beyond traditional measures. This is b/c social networks
are not driven by electronics. Electronics can help to
sustain relations. Accordingly, we will have more
interactions w/ existing networks beyond what has
traditionally been the case. New networks will continue
to be a function of where we work, live, worship and
play. The 'Net will enhance these things, not replace
them. - B. Keith Fulton, Verizon
hile people's social networks will
expand in size, those will also take different shapes. A
typical person's social network is likely to become
more geographically diverse. Some relationships will be
purely ''virtual'' - with interaction
occurring purely through online channels. Face to face,
local relationships will also decrease and potentially
become ''shallower'' and less important
in the average person's day-to-day living. - Lyle
Kantrovich, Cargill
e have not yet found good ways to verify
authority in cyberspace. I also think there is a finite
attention space for people. We might get new and better
sources of information, but they will replace some of the
old ones. - Mike Weisman, Reclaim the
Media
he size of social networks are almost
certainly a function of some innate capacity in people.
The Internet can enable them, but not necessarily enlarge
them, nor, necessarily, enhance trust in society. A
better view is that the Internet reshapes and relocates
social networks. By changing the nature of networking and
making it more efficient, it is also changing the mix of
people who are effective at social networking. It allows
finer niche groups, allows the introvert to succeed where
he/she may not have before. - John B. Mahaffie,
co-founder, Leading Futurists LLC
t will decrease trust and create a more
liminal society, a culture of surfaces that are all
suspect, and assumed so, like the hypothetical culture at
the crossroads where everyone lies all the time and
everyone knows it. The cultural effects of the
''lying assumption'' don't
necessarily bode a loss of integrity, but rather, they
unbind integrity from a speaker's ethos, as in the
case where greater truths can be uttered with a pseudonym
than would be uttered with one's real name.
Connection expands, more communication takes place, but
identity and representation, and integrity, are unbound
from the communication. - Christine Boese,
cyberculture researcher, CNN Headline News
y social networks may indeed expand
through the Internet, and I may come to trust people and
society, at least in that milieu. But as I go out
physically into a social environment, will my trust in
society that grew virtually "work" for my in
the physical space? I can see learning to trust and be
engaged with people online, but that is not my personal
space. Please don't get too close to me in the
elevator. - Barbara Smith, technology officer,
Institute of Museum and Library Services (federal
government)
his seems to describe the situation today,
not ten years in the future. The problem is to have a
broad social network that contains people you care about;
an online community of like-minded people (or seemingly
like minded). Presumably in ten years that will be more
common. Online communities might enhance trust in that
online group of people but in society generally - I
don't see it would have that effect; in fact the
opposite seems just as likely. Myriad online interests
with their own communities could easily cause trust to
dissipate. - Michael Neubert, Digital Projects
Coordinator, Library of Congress
e may well know more people superficially,
but we will know far fewer people with any degree of
depth or abiding interest. Rather than inspire greater
trust, our mile-wide, inch-deep approach to relationships
and contacts will engender a growing distrust of others.
The greater accessibility of information on others also
entails a greater access for others to information about
us. The loss of privacy and general intrusion of
information and technology will lead to an interesting
Catch-22 for many people: We will hate the developments,
but find ourselves unable to live without them. And we
will not be happy. - Daniel Weiss, Focus on the
Family
The following responses are from
participants who chose to remain anonymous: [Workplaces
of respondents whose reactions are listed below include
Internet2, RAND, Gartner, Radiance Technologies, IBM, the
Congressional Budget Office, Open Society Institute,
Fidelity Investments, U.S. Census Bureau, Harvard
University, Netcraft, University of Illinois, Microsoft,
Media General, Meetup, U.S. Air Force Materiel Command,
The Institute for the Future, SAS, the Federal Reserve
System, CNET, Moody's, the Congressional Management
Foundation and others.]
Agree: By 2014 use of the internet will increase the
size of people's social networks far beyond what has
traditionally been the case. Disagree: This will enhance
trust in society, as people have a wider range of sources
from which to discover and verify information about job
opportunities, personal services, common interests, and
products.
Two points - first a wider number of contacts does not
mean a social relationship exists, so I'd like to
challenge the use of the phrase "social
network" because it ignores the relations that form
that connection. It is unlikely that people will be able
to build larger strong tie networks - as humans we
haven't changed - our cognitive limits and perhaps
one might say socializing limits have not changed. Sure,
some people may sustain many ties they believe are
strong, but I'm guessing these people would have
maintained them anyway, regardless of the internet.
Second, as people can check up more on others, we can
reasonably expect that many people will object to be
checked up on. Thus, I fail to see how being able to
check up on everyone is related to concept of
trust.
In a cable universe with 400 channels, most people use
only seven. That's because humans do not expand as
possibilities do. The internet may allow for easier
social intercourse, but ease will not equal more. We do
not verify things now with the tools available. There is
no likelihood that because it is on the web we will use
it.
I agree to a degree. But there is also likely to be a
backlash to the "database nation" concept, as
many people seek to protect their personal details.
Identity theft will have a serious chilling effect on
this trend.
The Internet does expand social networks - but it
decreases, not increases trust. While the range of
information sources is increased by the internet, the
number of reliable sources is not. Similarly, while
social networks widen, the number of trustworthy contacts
is not increased by the Internet. However, the Internet
does enable people who already trust each other to keep
in better contact.
I agree with some qualification: trust mechanisms will
need to be much more effective and there will be a rising
number of reasons to NOT trust what people say and do on
the internet. The increase in the size of people's
social networks will happen, but there will also be a
profound surge in mistrust.
Social networks will expand. The propensity to reconnect
with old friends who will be much more accessible is but
one example. See www.legacy.com.
Like any other mass aggregation
of people, peddlers of wares and services, hucksters of
all descriptions, and general riff-raff will make these
larger social networks somewhat less than useful. There
will be (and are) benefits, however, for those who can
tolerate the virtually milling masses. For example, the
Internet is great at aggregating individuals without
regard to distance, for example those who are offering
a good or service and those who wish to buy, or
patients with rare diseases.
First, I believe that the size of social network is
limited by our capacity to interact with much more than
a few 100 people. Second, I observe that the Internet
makes it easy for people to congregate with other
people just like them, rather to seek interaction with
a wide range of sources.
Once you get beyond the reach of what has
traditionally been a social network (15 people you
truly empathize with and maybe 100 who you care about)
the value of these new social connections become
negligible. The fact that someone is tangentially
connected to me does not make them any more valuable of
a contact than someone I don't know.
I agree with most of it. What I challenge is the
"trust" component. Already, there is evidence
of a backlash by some people against the internet, who
would contend it's content and messages are too
easily manipulable.
People are already on overload. Unless better
management and security tools emerge, people may find
themselves withdrawing as well.
By 2014, the elementary children today will be
entering the work arena. Those who have computer access
in their homes will already be so Internet savvy that
the smart ones will have information on the companies,
the people, and the job opportunities in the
marketplace. These same children do now and will
continue to communicate using Internet tools: cell
phone text messages, palm pilots, laptop devices, IM,
etc. Much social activity for the Gen X and Millennial
(GenY)groups is currently being done - meeting on the
net and dating/marrying etc. This will continue
involving foreign country connections as well.
The typical size of a social network of a given person
has been estimated very differently, but it's
generally been within hundreds typically. Enter the
Internet. I am an introverted engineer. I don't
remember people's names very well. I don't go
to parties. I leave any reception drained. I should
have a smaller-than-average social network. Yet, my
address book contains more than 1,200 people, and this
is only a fraction of the people I know and can reach
out to. Whether this will enhance trust in society is
quite questionable.
The capacity of one's social network will remain
the same (the Internet will not change human capacity
for intimacy and trust) as will many aspects of its
diversity. Geographically, it will change, as we are
more able to build relationships with virtual groups
and distant individuals.
I believe that liability concerns and information
security will severely limit the amount of verifiable
information available over public networks. Thus, trust
will continue to be diminished, giving way to a cynical
view of Internet information and social interaction.
Until some paradigm of trust and verifiability is
established, social, political, and financial
interactions will be limited to role-playing,
generalities, and liability-limited transactions.
It has already happened, so I cannot imagine that
using the internet to do everything from search jobs,
find like-minded people, etc. will decrease. In fact,
as wi-fi and mobile devices become more common and are
better made (i.e. easier to use) social networks will
only increase. In fact, I suspect that face-to-face
time will be radically reduced in favor of digital
meetings (with avatars, etc.).
There can be no doubt that the use of contact lists
and bookmarks is enhanced by the ease of collecting and
storing them through PCs on the Net. It's simply
easier and faster to gather and verify information
today, and it will only become more refined by
2014.
I agree with the first statement, but not the
statement on trust. Unfortunately, we are all still
human, and along with the addition of social networks
and information flow will come an increase the amount
of untrustworthy information out there as well. We will
have to become skilled at recognizing the trustworthy
information from the non-trustworthy
information.
Social networks will change in terms of geography but
not that much in terms of size. personal relationships
take time and the internet doesn't change the
amount of time given to relationships. There will be
more information available and more dis- and
misinformation. Trust will not be enhanced. There will
be better information about products and jobs,
however.
It is a given the Internet will provide people with a
wider range of sources from which to discover and
verify information about job opportunities, personal
services, common interests, and products. The question
is if they will use it - or will have the capacity to
use it. Information overload is a problem - however
work with kids has already indicated that hand/eye
coordination, and the ability to take in and process
more information is evolving. That and the fact that
internet search and contextualization continues to
improve makes me think this will be true. Individuals
and the tools they use are evolving to make people more
efficient at taking advantage of access to more people
and more information.
I agree that social networks will be larger, but I do
not believe that trust will be increased, because the
Internet will also bring spam, phishing, worms, and
rumor-mongering which will mitigate against increased
trust.
People will certainly have an opportunity to ask
others their opinions. They can do that now via chat
rooms or message boards. The lack of governance in
these rooms and on these boards leaves substantial
doubt in the value of the information gleaned. As for
the development of social networks, it is difficult to
fathom the notion that notes hastily sent
electronically truly build the bonds required for
socialization. Those that believe they do are either
remarkably optimistic, or believe that the very nature
of socializing will change. If the latter, then there
is no quarrel, but then the prediction is merely an
exercise in semantic gymnastics.
The size of people's social networks is likely to
increase. As some of the existing networks such as
friendster.com show, I can make several thousand new
"friends" just by adding one person to my
network. However, a social network and most certainly
trust associated with it are a matter of quality, not
quantity. Thus, even though we may be able to draw on
even more resources than today, we will still have
selective perception, suffer from information overload,
and stick to whom and what we know, mostly. Today,
compared to ten years ago, there is vastly more
information accessible, but most people do not make use
of it and, if anything, the widening of our networks
and access to everything has decreased trust rather
than increased it.
The cost of sorting through the cheap and rapid
communication allowed by the Internet will be to much
for the individual to incur. As a consequence numerous
errors and deliberate misrepresentations will erode
social trust.
I only partially agree, because lack of Internet
security may result in less rather than more trust. My
guess at probabilities: More trust - 50%; no change -
30%; less trust - 20%.
Increased information flow tends to widen knowledge
gaps; and it seems clear to me that concerns about
privacy, identity theft, and fraud will not diminish
very much.
This is already happening, but there are limits to how
"far beyond" people can manage extended
networks. People use the Internet to get advice, find
information, learn about jobs and travel, find
vacations, etc. In the past, that kind of information
seeking used to be more limited - usually advice from a
few friends or family.
Social networks will make it easier to make and
maintain connections, but this will not enhance
"trust in society." Just as the phone
improved communication, but did not improve trust in
society.
I agree that the Internet will increase the size of
social networks, but I do not think that this will
enhance trust in society generally. I do not think this
follows - I think people will have to become more wary
about what the Internet brings them.
Minor challenge: it will increase the size of SOME
people's social networks SOMEWHAT beyond what has
been the case. There will be a minority with
super-extended social networks that are amplified by
Internet; the majority will use it to maintain social
networks they've made face to face, or with a few
selected friends they've made in online
contexts.
I believe that there is an upper limit on the time
people can spend cultivating their social networks and
maintaining ties, and to the extent people maintain
more connections they will be weaker... which is not to
say that that won't offer some new sorts of value a
la Granovetter and weak ties, but I don't expect it
to lead to enhanced trust or social capital in an of
itself.
The prediction is based on several assumptions that
may not hold true. 1) That a larger social network is a
better social network the number of relationships
individuals can manage is finite, and nothing about the
Internet changes that. 2) That the Internet's main
impact on social networks is to increase the number of
relationships, when it seems to me the greater impact
is on geographic and temporal limits. 3) That more
relationships necessarily lead to more information and
more information necessarily leads to greater trust.
Maybe it just leads to paralysis via information
overload. I don't dispute that some aspects of this
prediction might hold, but without a critical
examination of these underlying assumptions, it's
too optimistic.
I agree with the fact that the Internet allows people
to keep in touch with a much greater number of
contacts. However, I disagree that this change will
automatically enhance ''trust in
society''. More contacts does not mean I will
trust the society in which I live any more than I do
now; it doesn't mean, for instance, that I will
trust the politicians and business leaders of my
society any more than I do now.
People will seek out only sources that confirm their
current views and positions, sources recommended by
those within their current social circles. This will
maintain the status quo.
The Internet is a place where informal communities of
like-minded people can ''meet'' and
share their views. It will allow, in particular,
individuals who felt their views to be isolated ones
... and held them somewhat in anonymity ... to find a
voice with others. This can have dangers, just as in
groups like the Posse Comitatis & suchlike. But it
is also a democratizing force. It is hard to see what
the net result will be overall.
Social networks should not be confused with social
life. People will seek advice from credible
influencers. However this will not necessarily enhance
trust. The Internet is already being blamed as the
cause of scams, crime and other social maladies that
have always existed. This will foster skepticism in
some, as others use it more wisely and build
trust.
Social networks will expand, but not radically: people
only want to know so many people. I agree that people
will share more information about products, etc., and
improve processes like shopping and job changing, but
it won't be revolutionary, just more
convenient.
I think the Internet IS enabling people to meet people
they would not have met otherwise, but I do not think
the size of people's social networks are
increasing. I think they are simply getting more
specialized. People can get in touch with others
throughout the world, but they can easily avoid being
confronted with perspectives and opinions that do not
agree with their own. The information on the Internet
is so vast and so specialized that, although they have
a wider range of resources at their disposal, they can
keep their access to a narrow range of these resources
that meet their specific needs and comply with their
specific viewpoints.
While I agree in general with the prediction, the
increased size of social networks will also lead to
more information having to be processed by any one
person. That will tend to either degrade communication
or increase the consumption burden of
individuals.
The Internet fosters anonymity and self-separatism,
which does not ultimately foster trust.
|