L'Indipendente

Tutto quello che gli altri non vi dicono

Direttore responsabile: Dr. Dario de Judicibus - ISSN 1824-8950


3d internet
3g
aborto
abusi
acqua
afghanistan
africa
alitalia
ambiente
amebe
america
americano
analisi
animali
annuncio
antropologia
ara
archeologia
arte
asteroidi
astronomia
auguri
automobile
avis
banche
bibbia
bioetica
biologia
blog
blogfest 2008
boicottaggio
borsa
browser
burocrazia
business
calcio
cassazione
catastrofi naturali
censura
centralismo
centrodestra
centrosinistra
chiesa
cibo
cina
cinema
citta
classifiche
clima
commercio
comuni
comunicazioni
comunita
concorrenza
conflitto
cosmologia
costume
crm
cronaca
cuba
cultura
danimarca
data
database
definizioni
democrazia
deu
devolution
dialoghi
dibattiti
dio
diritti
diritto
disabili
discriminazione
discussioni
disney
distribuzione
divieti
doriana pannuti
droga
ecologia
economia
editoria
educazione
elezioni
emancipazione
emigrazione
energia
eng
esp
estetica
estremismo
europa
eutanasia
eventi
facebook
falsi abusi
famiglia
fantascienza
fantasy
farmaceutica
federalismo
femminismo
ferrovie
filosofia
finanza
fisco
fisica
flash
fnestola
forze armate
fotografia
fra
freeware
fumetti
garau
gay e lesbo
genetica
giochi
giochi olimpici
giorgio ceccarelli
giornalismo
giustizia
google
gordiano lupi
governo
guerra
guerriglia
help desk
humor
ibl
immigrazione
impresa
inchieste
industria
informatica
informazione
inglese
innovation
innovazione
internet
intervista
iphone
ipotesi
iran
iraq
islamismo
israele
istituzioni
istruzione
ita
italia
italiano
jole rotello
jpn
lavoro
legge
liberalismo
liberalizzazioni
liberta
libri
linguistica
londra 2012
made in china
masalluzzo
matematica
me
media
mediazione
medicina
medio oriente
mercato
metodo
metro
microsoft
minori
moda
mondo
morte
morti bianche
msaiu
musica
musical
narrativa
natura
nobel
nucleare
office 2007
ogm
olimpiadi
open source
opinioni
organizzazione
orientalismo
pace
palestina
parita
pdf
pechino 2008
pedofilia
pensieri
petizione
poesie
politica
por
poste
preistoria
prevenzione
privilegi
proposte
prostituzione
protesta
provocazioni
psicologia
pubblica amministrazione
pubblicita
ragazzi
rapimenti
rating
recensioni
regno unito
religione
resistenza
ricerca
roma
rpoletti
rus
sanita
satira
scienza
scioperi
scoperte
scuola
second life
sentimenti
separazioni
servizi
sessismo
sesso
sicurezza
simboli
sindacati
six-degrees-of-separation
social networking
societa
solidarieta
sostenibilita
sottrazioni internazionali
spazio
spettacolo
splinder
sport
stampa
statistica
stato
storia
strategie
stupefacenti
sturiale
tagging
tassinari
teatro
tecnologia
telecom
telefonia
televisione
tempo libero
terremoto
terrorismo
tifo
traffico
trasporti
trucchi
trusting
umorismo
unioni
universita
urbanistica
usa
viaggi
video
vignette
violenza
vita
volontariato
web
web 20
wii
wikipedia
windows vista
windows xp
youtube
zho
oggi
giugno 2009
maggio 2009
aprile 2009
marzo 2009
febbraio 2009
gennaio 2009
dicembre 2008
novembre 2008
ottobre 2008
settembre 2008
agosto 2008
luglio 2008
giugno 2008
maggio 2008
aprile 2008
marzo 2008
febbraio 2008
gennaio 2008
dicembre 2007
novembre 2007
ottobre 2007
settembre 2007
agosto 2007
luglio 2007
giugno 2007
maggio 2007
aprile 2007
marzo 2007
febbraio 2007
gennaio 2007
dicembre 2006
novembre 2006
ottobre 2006
settembre 2006
agosto 2006
luglio 2006
giugno 2006
maggio 2006
aprile 2006
marzo 2006
febbraio 2006
gennaio 2006
dicembre 2005
novembre 2005
ottobre 2005
settembre 2005
agosto 2005
luglio 2005
giugno 2005
maggio 2005
aprile 2005
marzo 2005
febbraio 2005
gennaio 2005
dicembre 2004
novembre 2004
ottobre 2004

 

SEZIONI

Clicca qui sotto per vedere
il mio mediablog.
Aggiungi a Google
Add to Technorati Favorites
Subscribe to Bloglines
Scrivimi via posta elettronica Lasciami un messaggio su Splinder
Aggiungi un collegamento a questo blog sul tuo blog RSS 2.0 feeds
Iscriviti a «L'Indipendente» Atom 0.3 feeds
View Dario de Judicibus's profile on LinkedIn
View Dario de Judicibus's profile on Facebook
View Dario de Judicibus's fan page on Facebook

Clicca qui sotto per vedere
altri antipixel.

Clicca qui per vedere gli antipixel

Translation
Translation to English by Google

Be aware that automatic translation is usually poorer than human one.

Libri
La Lama Nera
Scacco matto all'assassino Fino alla fine dell'eternità
Le 10 Regole dei Buoni Genitori Le 10 Regole per Viver Sereni
Imparare XML in 6 ore TCP/IP in Pillole
Visitatori

*loading* visite
dal 30 ottobre 2004

Antipixel
L'Indipendente: quello che gli altri non vi dicono

Se lo desideri, puoi mettere l'antipixel de «L'Indipendente» sul tuo blog, prelevando il codice qui sotto:

La Tastiera Estesa Italiana per Windows XP

Valid XHTML Valid CSS

Pagine 

domenica, 19 ottobre 2008

Six degrees of separation

"Six degrees of separation refers to the idea that, if a person is one step away from each person they know and two steps away from each person who is known by one of the people they know, then everyone is an average of six steps away from each person on Earth."

Six degrees of separation, English Wikipedia

This concept is one of the fundamental principles on which are based most digital social networks as LinkedIn or Facebook, for example. The statement itself is mostly true, even if the exact number of steps between people differs depending on the population measured and the types of links used. In any case, it is generally found to be relatively small according to several researches and experiments. But what does it really mean? Which is the difference between having a connection of sort with someone and having real access to that person?

We all have friends, or at least acquaintances. Some of them might know some important people, which in their turn may know some very important people. But does it mean that we have really access to those VIP's? Probably yes, we have if we really need to, and if we are very motivated and resolute, especially if we are introduced by someone who feel indebted towards us. However, the more important is the individual we are trying to contact, the greater is the favor we are asking for, and therefore the obligation we will have to repay.

Let me make a practical example. Just consider my real network, that is, not one of the several social networks I joined, but my real life network: people whom I personally know, who personally know my second degree ring, that in their turn personally know my third degree ring, and so forth.

I really know a person who personally knows very well the Pope. I will not tell you the name, of course. Anyway, Joseph Ratzinger, Papa Benedetto XVI, is two steps away from me. Since the Pope knows very well the Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso is three steps away from me. Isn't it bad, is it? Does it mean that, in case I would need tomorrow to meet Joseph Ratzinger or Tenzin Gyatso, it will be easier for me to obtain a date with respect any other person in the world? I think not, unless I would have a very good and serious reason; but in such a case my opinion is that any person might obtain the same result by simply writing a letter directly to them. Of course, if the reason is really a grave one.

Another example, always related to my own network. I personally know a person who personally knows the current Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, as well as a person who personally knows the current leader of opposition, Walter Veltroni. So they are both two steps away from me. On the other hand, Berlusconi personally knows very well both George Walker Bush, the current President of United States of America, and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the current Prime Minister of Russia as well as chairman of United Russia and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Union of Russia and Belarus. So they are both three steps away from me. However, Bush family had business connections with bin Laden family, so it is very probable that some member of bin Laden family is four steps from me, and therefore that Osama bin Laden himself is probably five steps away from me only! So I do not even need six steps to reach Osama bin Laden, the founder of the jihadist organization Al-Qaeda!

Of course it is also possible that someone that I know be in contact with an immigrant from Iraq or Egypt who is really a terrorist of Al-Qaeda, so that Osama bin Laden might be closer to me in my network that I could imagine. Anyway, let us focus only on people we know very well and their own personal networks. According to the analysis I performed, I would be potentially connected to some of the most important and influencing people of the world within three steps only. Not a bad result, but absolutely useless to me. The point is that we should not only count links, but give a weight to each of them. The more important is the person we are linked to, the higher is the weight of the link itself; the higher is the weight of link, the more difficult it will be to have access to that individual, unless we have a very strong relationship with such a person, of course. So, the difficulty to walk through a connection is balanced by the trusting we have with the person on the other side of it.

Those considerations give a different perspective to social networks and to the six degrees of separation concept. Just representing a social network as a web of nodes and links, it is not only important how far away is an individual in order to estimate how difficult might be to have access to that specific node. We have also to take in consideration other two important parameters: the connection weights and the trusting with respect that node. Each node, in fact, has a different rating depending on the "first step" node it is linked to. The higher is the rating, the easier is to cross the link, even if the connection weight is high.

This perspective is fundamental to better understand digital social networks too. In fact, higher is your reputation in a social network, easier will be for you to increase your network, but harder will be for others to access you. Even if you are willing to easily accept requests of friendship from unknown people, in fact, you will be probably available to accept demanding requests only from a small set of friends, unless the requester has been introduced by someone you really trust.

So, if you have just joined a new social network, your strategy to develop a valuable personal web of connections should be the following:

  • first increase your first and second rings by selecting people with a good reputation, but avoid to try to go directly to the higher ratings: you will be given a refusal and miss an opportunity that you could take later;
  • increase your reputation in network: how, it will depend on network, of course — helping people is a good approach, anyway;
  • carefully select request to connect to you, avoiding people with very low reputation, unless their rating is low because they are new, but do not refuse a request just because the person is not important, since you cannot know whom that person may know in real life.

Social networks can be a valuable tool to improve your ability to make business, to increase your experience, to develop opportunities in any area, both personal and professional, and of course to meet interesting people. A strong network is always a valuable resource, but do not rely only on the number of links: stake on quality.

Pubblicato da: dejudicibus alle 00:16

commenti (2) | Vota l'articolo su Wikio AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Rubriche: societa, web , internet, analisi, eng , social networking, web 20, six-degrees-of-separation


Commenti
#1   19 Ottobre 2008 - 02:49
 
Very thoughtful. All people are important in one manner or another. So the criteria for a quality contact must be defined by each person. Quality may mean the persons they know, their reputation, the knowledge they may have to share, the ability to promote understanding and peace between various cultures, or the sense of support they may give to your projects. A contact may not be a friend or an acquantence, but perhaps they can become a friend upon time and understanding. Care and thought should be given to contacts.
utente anonimo

#2   21 Ottobre 2008 - 22:18
 
Well, of course quality matters when you actually need to activate (use) a connection, but the size of your network might make it possible to reach connections (of quality..) that you would otherwise not get access to.

What services such as LinkedIn do is that they make the degrees of separation more visible, so that you get to know who seperates you and the connection you desire contact with. Although it might still require a lot of effort to actually get into contact with a second or third degree connection, at least you know who you have to go through in order to reach him/her.

As you say in your article, strong ties are more likely to help you, BUT they are also more likely to be in the same social network as you. This also means that you know many of the same people and that the chance of reaching new resources is less than with weak ties - who will usually travel in different social networks. This is also why weak ties are often key connections to professionals.

So I agree that quality matters, but size will in many cases be equally important.

Another thing is that this also depends on the person that is using the network. Very simple and short put (there's a lot more to this): If you already have a well-established network and a professional reputation, a big network can be quite useful because you already have some leverage. If you have just started your professional career or have a relatively small network to start with, the quality of connections might be more important to help you forward.
utente anonimo

Commenti
Pagine 

Licenza Creative Commons
Questa opera è pubblicata sotto una Licenza Creative Commons.

Nel rispetto delle apposite norme di legge si dichiara che questo sito non ha alcun scopo di lucro, non ha una periodicità prestabilita e non viene aggiornato secondo alcuna scadenza prefissata. Pertanto non può essere considerato un prodotto editoriale ai sensi della legge n. 62 del 7.03.2001.