SocialWeb

Certainly getting crowded out there.

Social Networking has certainly progressed over the years. Early text based providers like Compuserve (circa 1979) and Delphi (circa 1980) gave us our first taste of connecting with others "like us". Very soon after BBS's rolled onto the scene; making the propeller-headed sort leap with joy that there was someone out there - someone to connect with. Oh, does anyone remember Prodigy? How about manually typing in connection codes for our 14.4's to connect? I thought I was so knowledgeable and geeky to be able to type in Hayes commands manually.)

Anyway, we progressed out of text line send-refresh-read-reply-refresh into something more real time. But you had to pay for it. Hourly. I am not going to even admit what my Compuserve bill was one month back in the very-early 90s. That was when those sick of paying for it discovered all the different IRC networks. Ahhh IRC.. so many hours of wasted time [clickety clickety]... That was when LOL was born. ROFL. All those. And for those that needed to convey emotion - Emoticons!! @}--'-- ;-) |-) <-- look it's Geordie LaForge. Whoops. Geek moment - back to it.

So with IRC for the connection angle and those discovering that they could make their own web pages - we start to get a feel for the social networking gamut. Identity and Connections were sought and given.

One thing we do have to include here is that humanity needs to belong; we must belong to something. A church, a club, an association. With IRC and our individual Angelfire/Geocities pages, we could show what we were doing and talk to our friends, but we couldn't do those things TOGETHER. Even from a virtual standpoint, it became important.

Now, a Social Network is defined as a social structure made up of nodes tied together by various states of interdependency. These can be kinship, association, sex, values, vision, and many more. Now, we bring all this into the online world of today. What sites pop out at you when thinking about Social Networks?

• Classmates.com (circa 1995) - Social Networking for all those people you hated in high school.
  
• SixDegrees.com (circa 1997) - Social site out to prove that we are all connected.
  
• Friendster (circa 2002) The beginning of all the social networking sites, they actually hold the patent for A Circle of Friends - a method and apparatus for calculating, displaying and acting upon relationships in a social network.
• Myspace (circa 2002) Everyone knows Myspace.
• YouTube was initially a MySpace ap and you know what that is today.
  
• Facebook (circa 2004) Allows the user to join networks based on employment, geographic interest, personal interest, etc. Woohoo instant club. Quick search that address book and find out who else is on Facebook! If they aren't, INVITE THEM! What worked for Facebook was that it allowed externally developed applications. Some of these applications charted one's own personal network hence marrying social network and social networking.
• LinkedIn (circa late 2002) For professionals linking individuals by employment and/or expertise.
  
• The list goes on.

So, now we are inundated with choices. I believe the current trend has been to maintain a few main social networking sites to update our friends and family with events but to extend our reach, most are turning to blogging. By blogging I mean video, microblogging and the typical post of interest.

Discussion of that history is for another time, but I ask you - from a personal or professional standpoint - how has social networking changed your life? Where do you see it going? I look forward to your answer.....

SocioGenesis

I decided to research the relationship of Social Networks to the Dune Series by author Frank Herbert. I found an article called Dune Genesis, by Frank Herbert:
He reveals that the scarcity of water is an analogy for the oil shortage and CHOAM is OPEC. Considering he wrote Dune in the 1960's, that is pretty amazing. Although I have read Dune about 10 times, it is time for a re-read. Also, relating to my previous post, Dune illustrates that our instincts (hunter-gatherer, anyone?) shape behavior and society.

But I digress a bit. What is interesting is what he writes here:

Each limiting descriptive step you take drives your vision outward into a larger universe which is contained in still a larger universe ad infinitum, and in the smaller universes ad infinitum. No matter how finely you subdivide time and space, each tiny division contains infinity.

But this could imply that you can cut across linear time, open it like a ripe fruit, and see consequential connections. You could be prescient, predict accurately. Predestination and paradox once more.

The flaw must lie in our methods of description, in languages, in social networks of meaning, in moral structures, and in philosophies and religions-all of which convey implicit limits where no limits exist.