RE: size and network value

The question might be what characteristics of a social network give it say,
technologically, a comparative advantage or an absolute advantage, and for
its users, the same kinds of advantages as a result of using it.

It may be a question better asked of its technical components, say OAuth,
OpenID.  It is not a question of network size but component
interoperability.  For example, am I as a consumer more likely to use
Facebook because the ID system is recognized by more network peers (say CNet
postings)?  That would be a reasonable economic question and goes to
Anglade's "information liquidity" notion.  Now Metcalfe's notion of value
applies (it isn't a law; it is an abstract value produced by a function).

len

-----Original Message-----
From: public-xg-socialweb-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-xg-socialweb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Henry Story
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:19 AM
To: Dan Brickley
Cc: Harry Halpin; public-xg-socialweb@w3.org
Subject: Re: size and network value


On 1 Jul 2010, at 18:05, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> Just a thought following todays talk.
>>> 
>>> Why not get some networg graph experts to help us work out what the
value of a global
>>> social web would be? There is a lot of research in the field of network
theory, and there
>>> may be some interesting insights to be had from those areas.
>> 
>> I agree - you think there would be someone who can judge information
>> "liquidity" as Tim Anglade put it and imagine some bright economicst
>> could figure it out.
> 
> I disagree that this is worth our attempting, at least for the report.
> 
> "The value of a global social Web" is a monsterously vague item. It
> would be hard enough to to price something concrete like "two million
> laptops, configured with Ubuntu version x and wired up with XMPP
> accounts". If we can say what it is, we can't reasonably ask someone
> else to slap a price tag on it...
> 
> Not that it isn't worth talking about, and I won't object to seeing
> mail traffic on the topic. But nobody is in a position to answer such
> questions really...

What I am suggesting is not to put a $ amount on it, which would be crazy,
but
to see how much bigger it is, can be, and what types of things it enables
perhaps.

So Metcalf's law is very simple in showing that the possible number of
connections
grows with the square of the telephones. It certainly helps to understand
the value
of having a global telecommunications network.

What kind of simple thing of that sort can we say with social networks? If
everybody can connect
to everybody, then clearly there are a huge number of groups that can exist
that don't or cannot
with the current infrastructure.

How many more are there? Instead of trying to measure the value of each such
group,
which is not of interest here, one could just look at the upper limit, the
outer limit.

Henry


> 
> Dan
> 

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 16:30:42 UTC