At Last! Technology in the Context of Early History and Psychology!
When I first encountered Linked by Barabasi, I was extremely excited that what Professor Yoo had called a difficult read was engaging and thought-provoking! Then I realized that I had just read 3 chapters of the wrong book. Needless to say, as a history/psych major, I was anxious to get into some reading that had both early history and psychological phenomenon connected with technology.
I first found Barabasi's connection of early Christianity and nodes to be quite interesting, and I was impressed that he brought up the possibility that efficiency of networking is not only to do with the messenger and connections, but with the message itself. With MafiaBoy's simple infiltration of major sites, we might often assume that any message might easily be networked. But when it comes to the basics human interaction, there must be some substance to the messages we are relating.
I was also quite excited to see Milgram's experiment evaluated! Although his study did not detail these things, however, I'd like to know why there are often 6 degrees of separation, and what variables created a closer or further connection between people. After Castells' book, I must ask how demographics play into these connections. Are there different effects on more rural areas? Milgram chose "middle of nowhere" areas-- does this mean that city folk have closer connections (due to citizens knowing more people in general), or further (so many people in a concentrated area might make some hard to find)? How do personal traits play into these connections? Those who did not return these cards might be better at networking like Paul (they're so interconnected that they haven't time for these tasks) or worse (they lose track of their connections)? I would predict that personality type (extrovert vs. introvert) and gender (perhaps females are more apt to recall or value connections) affect distance between connections.
Comments