No one will argue the fact that we all live in a networked world. You connected to me, connected to another, and another, and to the whole world. True? Well, not quite. Take a detailed look into this networked world; you will find that it is a chain of islands, with spaces between each other…. It is islands of online communities, groups, niche networks, etc…
You realize that this online world (especially the social networking) is not one big homogeneous society, but a collection of different types of groups. But looking at our past we know that human advancement has been on basis of creating a homogeneous society… From being a small group of hunters and gatherers, to forming large communities, building villages, city states, empires, and to nation states of today… Now that we have the technology and the medium to create this homogeneous society, even if it is online, why do we shy from doing so?
If we look back at the start of the Internet – it was a repository of information that can be accessed from multiple locations. Information that can be de-centralized, shared, and saved so that it can be accessed by people despite not being physically present in the location. Soon with the advent of technology and the coming of emails, Instant Messaging, Chat rooms, real time publishing and sharing of information all added to internet becoming a medium of communication. The growing successes of today’s social media sites are proof that people now prefer Internet as a medium of communication rather than a repository of information.
While the modern science has the tremendous power of accelerating of the mental evolution process of human mind, human beings prefer to have an uncomplicated life. They still are more concerned about their immediate universe than the world at large. While peace and security could be the key drivers for people aspire for homogeneous society, the fear of unknown is much more powerful.
An inherent human predisposition is to relate and identify with ‘your own’. As Humans are ill equipped to live on their own, they commit themselves to a group. Close interactions within a group gives rise to strong cultural and ethnic identity. And to recognize and create a sense of identity one takes the help of symbols and signs. In olden days this was usually done either through the way one dressed, and overt symbols like beads, threads, head gears, etc that one identified the group. As the society became more homogeneous, these were discarded. But till few decades back the growth of society was limited by geography. This limitation is now erased with technology and the all pervasive online world it has created.
Social Media while allowing the ease of connectivity has also increased the chances for fear of unknown to enter your life more easily. This leads to building protective firewalls, and a stronger reason to relate and identify with ‘your own’ in the online space. Hence we fall back on creating identification symbols.
In future, as each social media platforms seamlessly integrate with each other (this trend has already begun, with cross platform integration – Orkut – Twitter – Facebook, etc) humans will tend to closely guard themselves by forming groups… And since the communication is real-time, they will form a strong bonding and will create unique identity for themselves… and similar to the tribalism of the past, the bonding will make it hard for people to either leave a group or to join a group
In today’s online space most of the groups are formed basis common interest, hobbies, religion, alumni, or even a cause. While some of the superficial reasons will not be popular in the future…some like religion (or ideology), sex, and family would be prime motivators for creating groups online
While we talk about a homogeneous society for progression of Humanity…We still mostly live by instincts. Humans are after all social ‘animals’ :)
Cheers
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Orkut. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Orkut. Tampilkan semua postingan
Senin, 01 Februari 2010
Back to tribalism: Future lies in the past
No one will argue the fact that we all live in a networked world. You connected to me, connected to another, and another, and to the whole world. True? Well, not quite. Take a detailed look into this networked world; you will find that it is a chain of islands, with spaces between each other…. It is islands of online communities, groups, niche networks, etc…
You realize that this online world (especially the social networking) is not one big homogeneous society, but a collection of different types of groups. But looking at our past we know that human advancement has been on basis of creating a homogeneous society… From being a small group of hunters and gatherers, to forming large communities, building villages, city states, empires, and to nation states of today… Now that we have the technology and the medium to create this homogeneous society, even if it is online, why do we shy from doing so?
If we look back at the start of the Internet – it was a repository of information that can be accessed from multiple locations. Information that can be de-centralized, shared, and saved so that it can be accessed by people despite not being physically present in the location. Soon with the advent of technology and the coming of emails, Instant Messaging, Chat rooms, real time publishing and sharing of information all added to internet becoming a medium of communication. The growing successes of today’s social media sites are proof that people now prefer Internet as a medium of communication rather than a repository of information.
While the modern science has the tremendous power of accelerating of the mental evolution process of human mind, human beings prefer to have an uncomplicated life. They still are more concerned about their immediate universe than the world at large. While peace and security could be the key drivers for people aspire for homogeneous society, the fear of unknown is much more powerful.
An inherent human predisposition is to relate and identify with ‘your own’. As Humans are ill equipped to live on their own, they commit themselves to a group. Close interactions within a group gives rise to strong cultural and ethnic identity. And to recognize and create a sense of identity one takes the help of symbols and signs. In olden days this was usually done either through the way one dressed, and overt symbols like beads, threads, head gears, etc that one identified the group. As the society became more homogeneous, these were discarded. But till few decades back the growth of society was limited by geography. This limitation is now erased with technology and the all pervasive online world it has created.
Social Media while allowing the ease of connectivity has also increased the chances for fear of unknown to enter your life more easily. This leads to building protective firewalls, and a stronger reason to relate and identify with ‘your own’ in the online space. Hence we fall back on creating identification symbols.
In future, as each social media platforms seamlessly integrate with each other (this trend has already begun, with cross platform integration – Orkut – Twitter – Facebook, etc) humans will tend to closely guard themselves by forming groups… And since the communication is real-time, they will form a strong bonding and will create unique identity for themselves… and similar to the tribalism of the past, the bonding will make it hard for people to either leave a group or to join a group
In today’s online space most of the groups are formed basis common interest, hobbies, religion, alumni, or even a cause. While some of the superficial reasons will not be popular in the future…some like religion (or ideology), sex, and family would be prime motivators for creating groups online
While we talk about a homogeneous society for progression of Humanity…We still mostly live by instincts. Humans are after all social ‘animals’ :)
Cheers
You realize that this online world (especially the social networking) is not one big homogeneous society, but a collection of different types of groups. But looking at our past we know that human advancement has been on basis of creating a homogeneous society… From being a small group of hunters and gatherers, to forming large communities, building villages, city states, empires, and to nation states of today… Now that we have the technology and the medium to create this homogeneous society, even if it is online, why do we shy from doing so?
If we look back at the start of the Internet – it was a repository of information that can be accessed from multiple locations. Information that can be de-centralized, shared, and saved so that it can be accessed by people despite not being physically present in the location. Soon with the advent of technology and the coming of emails, Instant Messaging, Chat rooms, real time publishing and sharing of information all added to internet becoming a medium of communication. The growing successes of today’s social media sites are proof that people now prefer Internet as a medium of communication rather than a repository of information.
While the modern science has the tremendous power of accelerating of the mental evolution process of human mind, human beings prefer to have an uncomplicated life. They still are more concerned about their immediate universe than the world at large. While peace and security could be the key drivers for people aspire for homogeneous society, the fear of unknown is much more powerful.
An inherent human predisposition is to relate and identify with ‘your own’. As Humans are ill equipped to live on their own, they commit themselves to a group. Close interactions within a group gives rise to strong cultural and ethnic identity. And to recognize and create a sense of identity one takes the help of symbols and signs. In olden days this was usually done either through the way one dressed, and overt symbols like beads, threads, head gears, etc that one identified the group. As the society became more homogeneous, these were discarded. But till few decades back the growth of society was limited by geography. This limitation is now erased with technology and the all pervasive online world it has created.
Social Media while allowing the ease of connectivity has also increased the chances for fear of unknown to enter your life more easily. This leads to building protective firewalls, and a stronger reason to relate and identify with ‘your own’ in the online space. Hence we fall back on creating identification symbols.
In future, as each social media platforms seamlessly integrate with each other (this trend has already begun, with cross platform integration – Orkut – Twitter – Facebook, etc) humans will tend to closely guard themselves by forming groups… And since the communication is real-time, they will form a strong bonding and will create unique identity for themselves… and similar to the tribalism of the past, the bonding will make it hard for people to either leave a group or to join a group
In today’s online space most of the groups are formed basis common interest, hobbies, religion, alumni, or even a cause. While some of the superficial reasons will not be popular in the future…some like religion (or ideology), sex, and family would be prime motivators for creating groups online
While we talk about a homogeneous society for progression of Humanity…We still mostly live by instincts. Humans are after all social ‘animals’ :)
Cheers
Back to tribalism: Future lies in the past
No one will argue the fact that we all live in a networked world. You connected to me, connected to another, and another, and to the whole world. True? Well, not quite. Take a detailed look into this networked world; you will find that it is a chain of islands, with spaces between each other…. It is islands of online communities, groups, niche networks, etc…
You realize that this online world (especially the social networking) is not one big homogeneous society, but a collection of different types of groups. But looking at our past we know that human advancement has been on basis of creating a homogeneous society… From being a small group of hunters and gatherers, to forming large communities, building villages, city states, empires, and to nation states of today… Now that we have the technology and the medium to create this homogeneous society, even if it is online, why do we shy from doing so?
If we look back at the start of the Internet – it was a repository of information that can be accessed from multiple locations. Information that can be de-centralized, shared, and saved so that it can be accessed by people despite not being physically present in the location. Soon with the advent of technology and the coming of emails, Instant Messaging, Chat rooms, real time publishing and sharing of information all added to internet becoming a medium of communication. The growing successes of today’s social media sites are proof that people now prefer Internet as a medium of communication rather than a repository of information.
While the modern science has the tremendous power of accelerating of the mental evolution process of human mind, human beings prefer to have an uncomplicated life. They still are more concerned about their immediate universe than the world at large. While peace and security could be the key drivers for people aspire for homogeneous society, the fear of unknown is much more powerful.
An inherent human predisposition is to relate and identify with ‘your own’. As Humans are ill equipped to live on their own, they commit themselves to a group. Close interactions within a group gives rise to strong cultural and ethnic identity. And to recognize and create a sense of identity one takes the help of symbols and signs. In olden days this was usually done either through the way one dressed, and overt symbols like beads, threads, head gears, etc that one identified the group. As the society became more homogeneous, these were discarded. But till few decades back the growth of society was limited by geography. This limitation is now erased with technology and the all pervasive online world it has created.
Social Media while allowing the ease of connectivity has also increased the chances for fear of unknown to enter your life more easily. This leads to building protective firewalls, and a stronger reason to relate and identify with ‘your own’ in the online space. Hence we fall back on creating identification symbols.
In future, as each social media platforms seamlessly integrate with each other (this trend has already begun, with cross platform integration – Orkut – Twitter – Facebook, etc) humans will tend to closely guard themselves by forming groups… And since the communication is real-time, they will form a strong bonding and will create unique identity for themselves… and similar to the tribalism of the past, the bonding will make it hard for people to either leave a group or to join a group
In today’s online space most of the groups are formed basis common interest, hobbies, religion, alumni, or even a cause. While some of the superficial reasons will not be popular in the future…some like religion (or ideology), sex, and family would be prime motivators for creating groups online
While we talk about a homogeneous society for progression of Humanity…We still mostly live by instincts. Humans are after all social ‘animals’ :)
Cheers
You realize that this online world (especially the social networking) is not one big homogeneous society, but a collection of different types of groups. But looking at our past we know that human advancement has been on basis of creating a homogeneous society… From being a small group of hunters and gatherers, to forming large communities, building villages, city states, empires, and to nation states of today… Now that we have the technology and the medium to create this homogeneous society, even if it is online, why do we shy from doing so?
If we look back at the start of the Internet – it was a repository of information that can be accessed from multiple locations. Information that can be de-centralized, shared, and saved so that it can be accessed by people despite not being physically present in the location. Soon with the advent of technology and the coming of emails, Instant Messaging, Chat rooms, real time publishing and sharing of information all added to internet becoming a medium of communication. The growing successes of today’s social media sites are proof that people now prefer Internet as a medium of communication rather than a repository of information.
While the modern science has the tremendous power of accelerating of the mental evolution process of human mind, human beings prefer to have an uncomplicated life. They still are more concerned about their immediate universe than the world at large. While peace and security could be the key drivers for people aspire for homogeneous society, the fear of unknown is much more powerful.
An inherent human predisposition is to relate and identify with ‘your own’. As Humans are ill equipped to live on their own, they commit themselves to a group. Close interactions within a group gives rise to strong cultural and ethnic identity. And to recognize and create a sense of identity one takes the help of symbols and signs. In olden days this was usually done either through the way one dressed, and overt symbols like beads, threads, head gears, etc that one identified the group. As the society became more homogeneous, these were discarded. But till few decades back the growth of society was limited by geography. This limitation is now erased with technology and the all pervasive online world it has created.
Social Media while allowing the ease of connectivity has also increased the chances for fear of unknown to enter your life more easily. This leads to building protective firewalls, and a stronger reason to relate and identify with ‘your own’ in the online space. Hence we fall back on creating identification symbols.
In future, as each social media platforms seamlessly integrate with each other (this trend has already begun, with cross platform integration – Orkut – Twitter – Facebook, etc) humans will tend to closely guard themselves by forming groups… And since the communication is real-time, they will form a strong bonding and will create unique identity for themselves… and similar to the tribalism of the past, the bonding will make it hard for people to either leave a group or to join a group
In today’s online space most of the groups are formed basis common interest, hobbies, religion, alumni, or even a cause. While some of the superficial reasons will not be popular in the future…some like religion (or ideology), sex, and family would be prime motivators for creating groups online
While we talk about a homogeneous society for progression of Humanity…We still mostly live by instincts. Humans are after all social ‘animals’ :)
Cheers
Senin, 21 Desember 2009
What makes social networking sites ‘click’
As we approach the end of another year, there would be multitudes of new people who would have joined some social networking site or other.
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
What makes social networking sites ‘click’
As we approach the end of another year, there would be multitudes of new people who would have joined some social networking site or other.
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
What makes social networking sites ‘click’
As we approach the end of another year, there would be multitudes of new people who would have joined some social networking site or other.
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
Well, there are dime and dozen reasons for the success of Social Networking Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, Orkut, etc…. but is there any common thread or insight that binds the success of these SNS sites?
We humans spend most of our waking hours in building and maintaining ‘relationship’. This behavior is embedded in our genes. The activity of ‘grooming’ in primates, a human child crying for attention, the activities we, as adults, do in our day to day life – like the friendly greeting to colleagues, the discussion over cup of coffee, meeting the client deadlines too :) - All these actions is related to building and maintaining relationships.
One of the core objective of building and maintaining relationships is to create an opinion about oneself in others mind. The way we talk, what we speak, the way we dress, the way we walk, all communicate things about us. We spend our energies ‘branding’ ourselves, so that people form a specific opinion about us.
This exercise of opinion creation and spreading it far and wide is facilitated by the use of technology (Internet). Social Networking sites, thus becomes a platform for people to broadcast their personality, and thus spread the opinion.
The core value proposition these popular SNS sites lies in our day to day behavior of opinion creation and opinion consumption… For example in college campuses across the globe a general way of greeting would be – Wassup?? Or a normal conversation (especially a telephonic conversation) would consist of this question – so, what are you doing?...Now you know where Facebook or Twitter got their Value proposition from :)
How popular these SNS and other Social Media sites are? You can take a look at this link and see the stats for yourself. http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/2009-social-network-analysis-report/
Cheers
Santosh
Rabu, 07 Oktober 2009
Truth about blogging and bloggers in India
A curiosity to know how many ‘active’ bloggers are there in India and a quick Google search gave me stats that are pretty old and seemingly unauthentic.
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
Remember, statistics might be accurate, but they need not be true.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
Truth about blogging and bloggers in India
A curiosity to know how many ‘active’ bloggers are there in India and a quick Google search gave me stats that are pretty old and seemingly unauthentic.
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
Remember, statistics might be accurate, but they need not be true.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
Truth about blogging and bloggers in India
A curiosity to know how many ‘active’ bloggers are there in India and a quick Google search gave me stats that are pretty old and seemingly unauthentic.
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
A WATBlog article has a report dated 2007 mentioning that 14% of Netizens from India are into ‘active’ blogging. Here I’m assuming that by ‘active’ they would mean someone who updates his/her blog at-least once a month. On a safe assumption that we have now about 60 Million Internet users in India and the blogger universe average dropping to 10% - still it talks about 6 Million bloggers in India.
In the same article reference to another and a much more older (2006) Government of India report says that there are about 40K active bloggers and with another 400K ‘not regular’ bloggers. A safe assumption that the number of bloggers being directly proportional to the increase in the net users would mean we would be having a universe of close to 1 Million active bloggers from India.
The most interesting part of this article was the survey conducted by WAT Consult on the number of bloggers in India. The result averages at around 2% (urban and rural Internet users put together) of the Internet users are bloggers. Considering the rapid pace of Internet growth in India, and assuming that the blogger growth is not proportional to it; I would assume that this average would have dropped to 1%... which means we are talking about an active blogger base of almost 600K
While the stats have a point to prove basis their methodology and findings, I beg to differ.
Remember, statistics might be accurate, but they need not be true.
I believe there are 3 truths about blogs and blogging activity. They are:
1) The user truth
2) The culture truth
3) The market truth
The user truth
Most blogs can be divided into 2 categories – personal and knowledge based. Globally, the personal blogs are the epitome of web logs. Most people use blogs as a personal diary in the cyberspace. They keep it as a source to update their near and dear ones about what is happening in their regular life. Some also use it for public consumption where everyone can view their blog updates.
Most of us Indians live a life wherein we are taught that what happens within a family remains inside the house (Ghar ki baat, ghar ke under); as kids, we are conditioned not be overt of what is happening inside our house or our lives to outsiders.
The childhood conditioning of importance of ‘family values’ plays a dominant role in an Indian individual. The consideration is thus on stable, strong, and close relationships. It is a common phenomenon across many Indian households that spouses (especially male) do not ‘share’ his personal experiences (past or current) with his counterpart.
With such conditioning most of us will be averse to put our personal life for consumption in the public space. What most of us would be comfortable in placing on public domain are – happy occasions (especially images/photos), or neutral updates that noway reflects our personal life
The culture truth
Some of the more successful blogs (corporate and Individual) are knowledge based. We will focus on individual ‘knowledge’ bloggers. We all blog about specific topic and subjects and this is usually done to enhance one’s social standing as a ‘knowledgeable person.’ Or there are people who blog out of sheer interest on their subject and want to spread the awareness about what their thought or point of view is.
A quick glance into the Indian culture and history shows that we always ‘treasured’ knowledge. In olden days, only the Brahmans and the royal class had access to education. This education (Vedas, sutras, etc) was imparted under stick secrecy and with code of conduct of not sharing the knowledge with any other class of people
Even during the medieval period the knowledge and education was closely associated with the religion of the day (Hinduism and Islam); It only changed when the British came, and along with them the missionaries who set up schools and freed the knowledge from being in control of a select few.
This control on knowledge has helped a few control over the vast populace, by creating myth and awe for centuries (and in some way even to date). The centuries of knowledge subjugation has left an undeniable mark in our minds on not being comfortable in sharing knowledge, as we feel sharing knowledge would be like sharing power
The market truth
The market truth is that the people have access to limited time, but unlimited options on the Internet. The latest is all about micro-blogging (Twitter) and Facebook updates. This is on the fly updation of ones status. This would make redundant the idea of blogging the classical way.
The newer platforms (SNS) with multiple functions and features have surely eaten into the bloggers time. The growth of Social Networking Sites and the ATS (Average Time Spent) on these sites increases… it would surely impact the blogging activities of the user
Slowly but surely most of so called ‘active’ bloggers too would lose interest in maintaining multiple exposure touch points on the net… and will stick to the one that is ‘cool’, and easily accessible… which currently happens to be Twitters, Facebook, and Orkut
Looking through the lens of these truths, I believe that the number of bloggers from India might not be as high as the stats say… I guess it would be a miniscule population of the Internet users from India. A guesstimate would be around 75K active bloggers from India. A simple dipstick is I look around in my office (a Digital ad agency) and of the 80 odd employees only 2 of us maintain a blog on individual basis (work related there are a lot)
Blogs heralded the arrival of web 2.0; It changed its form, shape and structure as it went along…. Now as we stare into web 3.0…. it is time for the blog (as we know today) to change its avatar
Till then I plan to keep typing, and keep sharing my thoughts and my point of view
Cheers
Santosh
Selasa, 22 September 2009
Social Networking & Dunbar's Number
My Facebook friends list has reached close to 140 (give or take 3 pending requests). One of persistent thought I have been having for past few days is the fact that the number of people in my social network is close to Dunbar’s number (148 appx) – my neocortex limit for maintaining stable relationship
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Social Networking & Dunbar's Number
My Facebook friends list has reached close to 140 (give or take 3 pending requests). One of persistent thought I have been having for past few days is the fact that the number of people in my social network is close to Dunbar’s number (148 appx) – my neocortex limit for maintaining stable relationship
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Social Networking & Dunbar's Number
My Facebook friends list has reached close to 140 (give or take 3 pending requests). One of persistent thought I have been having for past few days is the fact that the number of people in my social network is close to Dunbar’s number (148 appx) – my neocortex limit for maintaining stable relationship
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Dunbar's number (also known as the Dunbar number or the Monkeysphere) is a value significant in sociology and anthropology. Proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, it measures the "cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships". Dunbar theorizes that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained." You could read more about Dunbar’s number at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number)
Here is a personal experience I had. In the early days of the Internet in India, a few of us cousins divided by geography but linked through Internet decided to form an online group in Yahoo! It started with 6 members (all first cousins)… we had the usual banter, funny forwards and the usual ‘do you remember _?’ set of updates. Everyone spread the word about this group and more cousins joined along with internet savvy uncles & aunts. All this happened within the first 3-4 months. The growth of the group was phenomenonal and soon there were members I never heard before, family members who were previously non-existent. Soon the member base of the group was around 100.
The original moderator changed, the responsibilities shifted to newer and more active members. More members joined… the 3rd, 4th, 5th cousins, their friends… networking through the group was getting more confusing… negative comments were floating around, embarrassing updates, and a few enterprising cousins were using the platform for business purpose… the group was now un-recognizable and to us, the original members, we were finding the growing new member base cumbersome – and soon decided to move to newer and better platforms of Orkut.
In hindsight, I realize that somehow the growth of the group and the lack of any system in place to maintain order, led to us move away from the group (or maybe sidelined by the more active members)
However, I have this feeling that with Facebook that the limit of Monkeysphere would not hold true. The reason(s) for the same are:
Not Just a Social Networking Site
First and most important reason is Facebook is ‘not’ just a social networking site… It is a platform, a tool. Social Networking happens to one of the primary services but it has much more to offer, and to interact than just create and maintain social relationship. The apps, games, mash-ups, calendars, etc all in someway help Facebook members to be active and increase their level of interaction and also expand their network. This is unlike the early days of Yahoo! Groups which just had a moderator and event calendar functionality.
SNS and extending the ‘sphere of influence’
Facebook, Twitter and other SNS are not just about social relationships; it is also about ‘broadcast’. It is human nature of extending one’s sphere of influence. Evolutionary psychology studies have shown that people tend to have the behaviour of influencing others in the group or beyond either through their actions or words. Simply put it is all about conquest, and the more people in your network means the more popular you are.
The existing Social networking sites play an important part here too. A quick glance into the status updates of most Facebook members is NOT about what they are doing or thinking at that point of time. Most of updates are about the individual’s ‘status’ upgrade :)…. a generic quotation, story, links to something interesting, update enhancing the role they play, or category you belong to, etc;
Thus, influencing the outer circles (and also inner circles) is another key factor for the increasing number of members in the network. It is this reason why many people accept requests of people they hardly know.
And why people send requests to join someone who is a stranger is mentioned next.
Identification & acceptance into larger (popular) group/network
The core reason for the being of Social Networking Sites is the fact that “man is a social animal.” Even before our evolution into human beings, as primates, we lived in groups. The prime reason for the same is attributed to security and comfort of food gathering.
For many people on the social networking sites after the initial relationship building with people in the intimate and near influence circle; they look out for members within their friends, whom they can relate too. Also they would be looking to join group where most of the ‘action’ happens. These are usually seen in sites like LinkedIN wherein user groups are formed basis interest… and Facebook users joining and commenting on innumerable fan pages that are created.
In case you are popular on Facebook or any other SNS site, you will realize that you get friend request from people completely unknown. The reason for the same I would say is ‘online grooming’
Grooming is the prime way of maintaining relationship in the wild. In the digital world, it is more about whom you follow, and why. Whose update needs to be read and responded too, and invariably you would choose the more popular one… Most of the comments left in my updates are either from people who are in my intimate circle, or guys I hardly know (personally or professionally)… and the later being a classic case of online grooming
While the member base in your online social network would keep increasing. The
Dunbar’s limit will still hold true. Your ‘active’ relationship with members in your group would be limited to the few in your inner circles…. The rest would largely remain as numbers, activated only when necessary
Briefly put, SNS is not just about maintaining social relationship online. It is also about personal advertising.
Maybe your neocortex size may not increase…. But your online social network surely will
"May your network increase :)"
Kamis, 08 Januari 2009
'Satyam' beats 'Orkut'
According to Google Zeitgeist 2008, ‘Orkut’ was the most popular searched keyword. For obvious reasons, the last two days “Satyam” beats Orkut more than 2:1.
Another interesting thing that comes to notice from Google trends is that though ‘Orkut’ is the most popular searched keywords in the top 10 cities… the volume index shows that Satyam is more popular… Safely we can assume that most of the searches for SATYAM are coming in from non-metros and other regions of India.
Considering what is happening in SATYAM, not a great start for the new year… Just imagine a $2 Billion fraud, in a country where the Finance Minister calls a $4 Billion package as economic booster…
Santosh
'Satyam' beats 'Orkut'
According to Google Zeitgeist 2008, ‘Orkut’ was the most popular searched keyword. For obvious reasons, the last two days “Satyam” beats Orkut more than 2:1.
Another interesting thing that comes to notice from Google trends is that though ‘Orkut’ is the most popular searched keywords in the top 10 cities… the volume index shows that Satyam is more popular… Safely we can assume that most of the searches for SATYAM are coming in from non-metros and other regions of India.
Considering what is happening in SATYAM, not a great start for the new year… Just imagine a $2 Billion fraud, in a country where the Finance Minister calls a $4 Billion package as economic booster…
Santosh
'Satyam' beats 'Orkut'
According to Google Zeitgeist 2008, ‘Orkut’ was the most popular searched keyword. For obvious reasons, the last two days “Satyam” beats Orkut more than 2:1.
Another interesting thing that comes to notice from Google trends is that though ‘Orkut’ is the most popular searched keywords in the top 10 cities… the volume index shows that Satyam is more popular… Safely we can assume that most of the searches for SATYAM are coming in from non-metros and other regions of India.
Considering what is happening in SATYAM, not a great start for the new year… Just imagine a $2 Billion fraud, in a country where the Finance Minister calls a $4 Billion package as economic booster…
Santosh
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)