Live data from Hacker News

How Stuff Spreads #1: Gangnam Style vs Harlem Shake

facegroup.com

11–14 of 14 posts

Re: How Stuff Spreads #1: Gangnam Style vs Harlem Shake

#12
post #9
post #5

Pretty nice article about how "viral" at all the harlem shake was. http://qz.com/67991/you-didnt-make-the-harlem-shake-go-viral...

Yes! I remember reading this, it is notable that Facegroup failed to mention this, or to even spot that the "viral" nature was being pushed by particular groups. Oh, "Each video was led by an individual or organization with massive reach – YouTube", yeah, real deep analysis. Much more interesting would be to break down into who posted what videos, who was hyping them on twitter, and so on. Could the influencers and t…

it is notable that Facegroup failed to mention this, or to even spot that the "viral" nature was being pushed by particular groups

The first rule of viral marketing club is that you do not talk about viral marketing club.

Re: How Stuff Spreads #1: Gangnam Style vs Harlem Shake

#13
post #7
post #6

Statistics would help us believe this article. Are they quoting 196% variance over the mean? What does it mean to be 4.5 times smaller? Even the basics are amiss here. There are a lot of conclusions from just two examples of highly complex dynamical systems. The authors poked around and thought a lot, and we know that unfortunately isn't enough to say something believable.

They explained what they meant by variation in point #3. We quantified this variation by first calculating the standard deviation of the daily sharing rate (i.e. how much sharing levels varied day by day), then dividing by the mean to give us the coefficient of variation.

Ah, I missed their explanation. The 196% and 338% are still bizarrely high figures, given that the variance of a Poisson distribution equals the mean. 338% variance, and you don't ask what kind of distribution you're measuring?
Post reply on HN