Skip to content →

Category: zettel

scraps of paper

Social Graph: Meme Catch and Release Program

catch and release

Does Dave Winer have the power to squash a meme? The term “Social Graph” recently began an infestation of TechMeme. While tied to the interesting issue about who owns a user’s attention data in the context of social networking, the term itself obscured rather than opened the dialogue. Dave Winer objected to the use of the term, even though it was one he was familiar with given his background in mathematics. After reading Winer, Nick Carr was pleased to find that he understood what the term referred to, even if the signifier was unknown.

Can you capture the meme, remove the “Social Graph” signifier, re-attach the “Social Network” signifier and release the meme back into the wild? Can a meme survive that kind of catch and release? After all, it’s not as though “network” doesn’t have plenty of depth for those interested in going deeper. Network theory has a very interesting emerging literature, and has many ties to the mathematics implied by the use of the word “graph.”

Generally the usage of words to signify concepts is determined by common usage, the marketplace of conversation. In this case, the conversation is really a political negotiation for the right to own one’s attention and social network data. The math is the least of it.

2 Comments

Philosophy Bites

Plato

I’m a big fan of podcasting. More often than not, when I’ve got earbuds jammed in my ears, I’m listening to IT Conversations, or watching Rocketboom. But it’s Philosophy Bites that’s my current favorite.

It’s a podcast about philosophy, just two guys talking to a working philosopher about topics in the field. Some recent shows featured: Sartre’s Existentialism, Moral Relativism and Utilitarianism. They do a great job of keeping it interesting and bringing it alive. Give it a listen.

Comments closed

NY Times Rejoins the Conversation

NY Times

I stopped linking to the NY Times, or even sending their links in email when they put up their wall. The pay-to-view section of the Times was a very poor idea. Today they announced they’ll stop charging. Jeff Jarvis called it a cyncial ploy from the beginning, content wants to free. But that’s not entirely true, online news content wants to be part of the conversation, but it can easily sit in a corner and talk to itself. The Times Select content consisted of the archive and Op-Ed writers, the Times probably learned no one cared enough about reading or linking to Maureen Dowd and Paul Krug. The conversation is quite lively without them. If the Times wants to be part of the debate around the next presidential election, the wall had to come down.

The Internet is making an evolution of democracy and free speech possible. The NY Times can participate in the conversation and stick advertising on the click flow, or they can sit on the sidelines. Welcome back.

Comments closed

A Platform for Broadcast Internet

Old_Televison

Marc Andreessen writes about the three kinds of internet platform. It’s great to see this conversation in the open, it’s a fundamental change to where applications live.To me the interesting thing about ideas like Web OS and applications that live on the network is the assumption of the network. Today the network isn’t everywhere in any broad sense. There are hotspots, some folks have EVDO, but the network doesn’t follow you around. Of course, depending on who wins the new wireless spectrum auction, this could change radically. Broadcast television goes away possibly to be replaced by broadcast internet with a whole new set of applications.

Comments closed