11–20 of 61 posts
> Asking computer nerds to design social software is a little bit like hiring a Mormon bartender. exactly.
> Asking computer nerds to design social software is a little bit like hiring a Mormon bartender. exactly.
This is bullshit. "Computer nerds" have plenty of friends. I know factory workers that have very high depression levels due to not having enough social contact or friendship in their lives. Sure, when I was 9 I was beat the fuck up over and over but when you are friendly, smart and successful people like you. They want to be your friend. Let's play devils advocate for a second. Take the most popular person in high sc…
Let's assume they had the technical skills to do it, why do you think it would suck?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is bullshit. "Computer nerds" have plenty of friends. I know factory workers that have very high depression levels due to not having enough social contact or friendship in their lives. Sure, when I was 9 I was beat the fuck up over and over but when you are friendly, smart and successful people like you. They want to be your friend. Let's play devils advocate for a second. Take the most popular person in high sc…
> Take the most popular person in high school and get him to design social software. It would suck. Bad. Let's assume they had the technical skills to do it, why do you think it would suck?
So basically a nerd with social skills?
That's pretty big logical leap.
An imperfect approximation of the social graph still has a lot of value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe Maciej is saying that it's not just an issue with RDF or a technical problem really. He says: "Personally, I think finding an adequate data model for the totality of interpersonal connections is an AI-hard problem. But even if you disagree, it's clear that a plain old graph is not going to cut it."
That depends on your definition of a "plain old graph". If you allow arbitrary numbers of edges between nodes and allow edges to carry data, everything will be ok, right? (...right?)
Social networks aren't really social networks either. If you read Bowling Alone, it should be readily apparent that Facebook et al. fulfill few of the functions of an actual social network.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Take the most popular person in high school and get him to design social software. It would suck. Bad. Let's assume they had the technical skills to do it, why do you think it would suck?
Let's assume they had the technical skills to do it So basically a nerd with social skills?
That's the best quote in the whole post. I can't articulate it, but that resonated strongly with me.
> Asking computer nerds to design social software is a little bit like hiring a Mormon bartender. exactly.
I did like that sentence, but I can't help but think it's wrong. The author of this article is probably as much of a "computer nerd" as any person at Facebook/wherever, but they can identify all sorts of problems with the "social graph", so the problem isn't nerdiness. The problem, as the author also points out, is that real life is very complex, and you can get an 80% solution by dramatically simplifying it. Besides…
Also, there's an unstated assumption that in order to write software that is useful socially, one has to be very social. This sounds like the arguments people used to have in the mid-90s about whether a program could ever replace a librarian. Well, it didn't -- but it didn't need to.
I think it's clear that what we call social networks don't model our friendships well. That doesn't mean they aren't useful in some other way. Perhaps the great shift will come when we stop trying to make social networks be our Advanced Friendship Substitute, and instead make them do something more useful.