As you know, for about as long as I (and you) can remember, I have been working on a technology called Sociocast. From the onset, the premise of the technology was to facilitate passive information delivery to individuals by leveraging the dynamics of social networks and by applying social network analysis. For it is true, or it can be shown, that the natural characteristics and network properties of social networks are ideal for information filtering and acquisition. Such properties as power law distributions, small-world clustering, etc allow for “searchability” in networks and, on the flip-side, “findability” (things can find you just as much as you can find them). In fact, studies show that 98% of what we know is derived from passive information delivery (i.e. monitoring, browsing, or just being aware), of which a significant portion is attained by participation in social contexts. And while Google has captured the search market, they certainly have not tapped the find market which may be far more significant. (more…)

Allow me to bore you with another recklessly unhinged blog entry. But let me bore you real good this time. I can probably bore you pretty terribly if I try, if you allow me to. This time, I can bore you all the way. It is probably no use to leave things partially tedious, as half-in-half-out, semi-partially baked, quasi-indecisively flaky, denim-shorts-wearing, irresolute ennui. No. Let us not go through life innocent of dedicated, decisive actions or free of conclusive choices. Let our actions be known. Let us exit the dark theaters of our minds, untie our raincoats and show our junk to the world. Let’s go all in! Let’s go all out! Let’s get bored all the way and smoke a cigarette after. But when we do so we should not mistaken our boredom for miserably diffident superfluousness. Things are not trivial and non-trivial, simultaneously. Things either are or they aren’t.

Come, get bored with me!

(more…)

Prologue: It is no secret that mathematicians deal in the abstract, or at least the pure ones do. Should we ourselves embark into the realm of the abstract, we will certainly find that the road is a dangerous one, littered with endlessly spiraling alleyways and forever bottomless pitfalls. We must be careful. We must wear high-tops for ankle support or hide behind those weird eye glasses that have the nose-with-mustache attachment. Because in all our day-to-day seriousness, we know the world is pregnant with question-marks, most of which are yet to be stretched. We know that an infinite questioning of our questions’ questions’ questions will most often lead to a state of greater perplexity and opaque, unfamiliar reasoning. It seems that for most of us our consciousness can perhaps withstand its own ridicule. For others, however, those diligent inquirers and contemporaries, much to the demise of their social attractiveness (shaggy beards huddled over mathematical symbols and stains of coffee), have rather gone deep into this abstract realm of questioning, either through abstract philosophical discourse, or more real physical endeavor (physics).

And they have certainly made progress.

So perhaps when we speak of Einstein’s work in a pure abstract sense, we will admit that his revelations led to an interesting comprehension of the nature of the fabric of space and time. To Einstein, space and time are not the stage on which our play is set. Rather, space and time are actors themselves, dynamically changing and merging into each other, warping and twisting in the presence of matter. An intricate dance of enormous proportions. What an amazing (but difficult) thought!

(more…)

It’s not to say that mass market writers don’t serve a purpose. There is certainly something critically advantageous in literatures whose main objective is to decipher obscure areas of scientific research into shapes and forms that are both communicable and applicable to the gen-pop. We can’t hate on this. In fact, the greatest technologies begin as seeds of scientific research, where, an abstract mathematical technique is grounded to solve a (hopefully commerciable) problem in the real world. What is detrimental, then, is when the totality of a particular scientific research is not fully translated or when significant complexities in the research are hidden by generalized and insignificant metaphors that involve Hush Puppies or word-of-mouth marketing. Such is Gladwell’s Tipping Point.

As marketers we can ask whether the Tipping Point a serious toolset for applying social network dynamics to marketing campaigns. In fact, we can probably ask if the book is applicable at all. A recent article in FastCompany titled “Is the Tipping Point Toast?” would answer “F**K NO!”. To Duncan Watts, a social network analysis pioneer, marketing to influencers is a waste of time and money. According to Watts, techniques aimed at “influencers” do not guarantee that a campaign will be successful. His research is certainly not funny or cute to those responsible for the $1 billion spent on word-of-mouth campaigns in 2007. I can only imagine the middle-market, name-tag wearing, catered-lunch eating board room squares that use terms like “alpha-consumers” and come up with concepts that mean absolutely nothing. Perhaps they should hire consultants like this dude:

My point is that human networks are far more complex than the generalized Gladwellian lump-of-dump. The diffusion of innovation and influence cannot be grasped merely by targeting individual network participants that are a priori influential. The immediate question is how are they influential? In what context? How does that influence grow or change over time? Are there individuals that are influencers in one context but are influenced in another? Are relationships multiplex and multi-contextual? Do I ask everyone I know when I have a question or do I ask those I believe more likely to have the answer? Aren’t internal continuous consumer attitudes different than their visible and discrete behaviors? Why do consumers adopt? In what capacity do exogenous variables enter into the equation? Are all consumers susceptible? In all situations? How then do we model the balance between internal attitudes and external pressures? How do we measure influence? Is there an overall measurement or does it depend on the situation? How do the actions of individuals develop into emergent properties in the overall system? How are these emergent properties reflective of viral trends and diffusion that we see in reality?

I will begin to answer these questions in my subsequent postings.

Hopefully some influencer will be listening…