Archive for the 'Social graph' Category

You say Chipotle, I say smoked jalapeño

Sunday, September 23rd, 2007

While running errands this morning I saw a sign outside a restaurant that said, “Now. Chipotle!” This sign sums up the fundamental problem behind the raging debate on Techmeme over whether “Social Graph” is any better or different from “Social Network.” The criticism ranges from they both mean the same thing, to it’s just more Web 2,0 marketing and VC hype.  Other critics have noted that this concept has been around for years, and anyone who didn’t know that is a “doofus.” All of these complaints betray an underlying distaste for marketing scum who spend their time finding new terms to use in tricking people who know less than serious techies. It also reveals a fundamental belief among all scientists that new ideas are “out there” waiting to be discovered, and once they are invented in the form of some device or software, naming is just an after thought. It is the “original inventor” who deserves all the credit.

The problem is that the world doesn’t work that way. Let’s look at the current food trend behind Chipotle. Wikipedia explains that this spice has been used in Latin America for hundreds of years, and is made from smoked chile pepper, most commonly jalapeño. So the name is just a marketing trick to introduce it now to less knowledgable Americans, right?  It’s not that easy. You have to factor in the growing Hispanic population, and the increased use of condiments like salsa, and the growing shift from a bland American palate to a greater tolerance of spicy food. This may even involve the increased popularity of other spicy cuisines, like Indian and Thai. Do you think that some marketing person could have sold Chipotle seasoned dishes in the Fifties in this country? Sure Chipotle has been around a long time, but it’s current popularity is an example of social construction, where a product’s or idea’s acceptance is embedded within the changing needs and tastes of society. It wasn’t invented, it evolved.

I grew up wanting to be a scientist, like Thomas Edison, who “invented” the lightbulb. I thought an inventor worked day and night until he finally discovered just the right combination of vacuum and tungsten filament. At that moment, the miracle of modern electric lighting came into existence. Then I read books like Thomas Hughes’  excellent Networks of Power, and learned that Edison also had to build commercial generators, and a power transmission network, and coerce and probably bribe municipal officials to change the laws to favor electricity over existing gas distribution, and run publicity campaigns to scare the public about the dangers of lighting with gas. He did this at the time that factories were running night shifts and needed a cheaper and cleaner source of lighting, and factory workers were coming home through crime-ridden city streets, and demanded safer street lights. In other words, the lightbulb wasn’t “invented,” because when Edison first made one there was no market for it, and no understanding of its benefits. It wasn’t a lightbulb as we know it today. It was a parlor trick. Oh, and by the way, Edison didn’t even create the first practical lightbulb. That was a lie propagated by his PR people.

So when Mark Zuckerberg started talking about the Social Graph last May, he didn’t invent anything new. It was a social network, and it had been around for years. Only the time was now right, and the users were there, and the rest of the software industry was paying attention, and there was a perceived need for a way to describe this phenomenon. Have marketing scum latched onto this as a way to hype the public and investors? Of course. That is their job, but they didn’t cause its popularity. Can we just stop saying it, dude? Sorry, it isn’t up to us techies. We don’t run things. We don’t invent things. We are embedded within the social graph just like everyone else. Steve Jobs didn’t invent the personal computer, and Bill Gates didn’t invent the operating system, and Mark Zuckerberg didn’t invent the social network, but try and convince your grandkids of that 30 years from now.

The Internet has always been social

Friday, September 21st, 2007

It looks like Fred Wilson has also drunk the social graph kool-aid. Admitting that you didn’t get something or even mocked it at first, and now grok it is a sign of a healthy skepticism combined with an open mind. I went through a similar transition over the summer with Twitter, starting from my refusing to be a curmudgeon up to my current love of what Twitter has to offer. I now use Twitter’s social graph to work on the beta of Grazr, go to dinner with people, discuss cross-cultural slurs, lose weight, and even to watch TV. I now believe that the social graph will be the long-term contribution of Web 2.0 to society. But is the social graph new? Trebor Scholz has a great set of slideshows that demonstrate the social thread passing through the entire history of the Internet. (via Francis Shepherd) Like any overnight success, the social graph has always been here. It has just crystallized as a concept and a catch phrase now. Trebor’s presentation should give us enough historical perspective to realize that it also has a long way to go.

“Social Graph” has tipped

Saturday, August 18th, 2007

The leaves are starting to turn here in New England, but spring is arriving in the Valley in the form of the Social Graph. While some are calling Web 2.0 a burst bubble, the next new thing is bursting out in all its glory.

The pattern is familiar. First a promising field is identified, then the solution is debated, and the conferences are held.  The first venture fund solely dedicated to the social graph is probably being raised right now. This is one round I want to watch in person. As expected, Palo Alto will be the epicenter.

Using Facebook to understand Facebook

Saturday, July 28th, 2007

I now get Twitter, at least one aspect of it, but I still haven’t found much benefit from using Facebook. So I decided to try it as a discussion group. This week we found a number of oddities in navigating the Twitter friends network using their API, and I’m sure we will find problems with other social network APIs. There are existing groups for Twitter specifically, and for the effects of social networks on society, even for how to get rich on social networks, but none seem to approach it from a developer’s perspective. It would be great to have a place to discuss technical issues with other software developers across a wide range of platforms and tools. The group I started is called Browsing the Social Graph, and it’s open for anyone to join.

I know I’ll get some “Hey, you just started with this stuff” comments, but I learn how to do things by doing them. I’ll learn how to build tools that browse the social graph by building them, and I’ll learn how to use Facebook by using it.

This new group is not meant to conflict with Marc Canter’s related DataSharingSummit. I’m a member of that group and plan on attending in September. That is focused on planning a specific event. What I’d like to see in the group I just created is a place where I can ask anyone else if they have found a way around Twitter’s funky feeds, for example.