***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****

(1)    The problem with Wikipedia is that it takes information that could be published by nut cases and treats it the same as something from a Nobel Prize winner (or equivalent).  Even then it becomes about who has the most time to enforce their opinions on the masses.  Consider that out of 100 people that will read a conversations, 10 will ever contribute, and 3 may do so substantially.  Apply a little Internet bullying and this likely even drops below 1.  That is the sad case of Wikipedia.  On the other hand I reference Wikipedia for base facts quite often and do find it useful in that regard.

(2)    Human language is imprecise and definitions are even worse.  I am sure that Moreno, at one time, used the term social graph.  If not him I am sure there have been dozens that saw the relationship between sociology and graph theory and called it a social graph.  So what?  The real question is who uses it now and how it can be tied to a trail of concepts that leveraged what people did before them.  I call this obsession with defining terms “inventaholic”.  Everyone is so fascinated by being an inventor that the whole world seems to have sprung up in a single day of term definition.

(3)    Facebook has a tremendous amount of data.  Outside of privacy issues, again so what?  We can map out every IP address in the world and follow them well beyond what Facebook could ever achieve.  Has that become the ultimate dataset?  After all it is just connections.  Meaningless ones, but connections just the same.  What is the most meaningful list?  How strong are those links?  Why was the link made?  Are they persistent or ghost links?  It is interesting to connect with connectors and watch your 2nd level contact lists grow exponentially, but are they usable?  Maybe that is a connection in an airport terminal in passing. 

 

Mark Goetsch

 

From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John T. Maloney
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 9:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [SOCNET] what the ??

 

***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****

LOL. Thanks.

 

To all you believing, “If it is on the Internet, it must be true,” Here is your ‘definitive’ answer:

 

http://bit.ly/1bUJ7di

 


social graph  

Web definitions

The social graph is a term coined by Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook,
which originally referred to the social network of relationships...


 

Gee whiz, not only was the social graph popularized by Facebook, now it was ‘coined’ by M. Zuckerberg.

 

(Apologies to the late Jacob Moreno.)

 

C’mon, sports fans, not to take anything away from Mark and FB, this is pure hyperbole.

 

Concerning Facebook as the ‘largest social network dataset in the world’

That’s nonsense too. First, it is practically meaningless and shows naivety.

 

The WWW and its web graph are enormous w/almost 4.2M IP address is on IPv4 and 3.4x10^32 on IPv6. As mentioned, so is Stella Wind. So forth and so on.

 

-j

 

 

From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Lockhart
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [SOCNET] what the ??

 

***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****

Bruno - I had the same reaction.  On a bit further thought, I wonder if he may be referring to some of the NSA's datasets, however you may have trouble getting access to them.

I also have been feeling that the reactions to the statements about facebook popularizing the term social graph is overblown.  In fact, I had hoped - my eyes having prematurely saccaded to phrases such as "16th century" and "Francis Bacon" that the phrase "Of course, you all know that" was going to be followed by some data on the actual early uses of the term "social graph".  Not seeing such a thing, I looked it up in google ngrams, which finds the first use in 1922, with spikes in frequency every 10-15 years from 1950 to 2000. In fact, I was initially surprised that the degree of the spikes seem to be going down over time.  However, after a little thought, I suspect this is an artifact of G Ngrams displaying only a percentage of the corpus with hits. So I think the reason there are spikes is because there are 2 books per year instead of 1 that use the word combined with the continually increasing number of books published each year.  With only 1-3 hits per year up to 2000, it is not at all hard to regard that a statement that "popularization" occurred in 2007 in spite of fairly extensive noncommercial use prior to that. People just weren't using it in books or putting those books in ngram. Identifying a point of "popularization" is a bit challenging, and I am not sure that measuring periodiical's frequency of usage is the best way to move forward.  But it's hard to deny that the term sees much greater use than once or twice a year and enough use to remain active.

Ciao,

David

 

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Bruno Goncalves <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****

Hi,

 

At this stage I have neither the temperament, forbearance or the intestinal fortitude to correct claims like this one in Wikipedia:

        "Facebook's social graph is the largest social network dataset in the   world." - Wikipedia

I would be interested in knowing where I can find a larger dataset. Can you point me to it?

 

Best,

 

Bruno


*******************************************
Bruno Miguel Tavares Gonçalves, PhD

Homepage: www.bgoncalves.com
Email: [log in to unmask]
*******************************************

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

 

_____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

_____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

_____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.