Complexity in Social Networks

If you’re building a technology platform, making it “social” really means figuring out what the nodes, edges, and jumping functions should be. One way to do this is to work backwards. What should the experience feel like at scale? Do users care about what other people are doing on the network, or do they really care about other types of objects, li... See more

One way to think about these technology platforms is to think of any complex network as having four fundamental components:-Nodes (the objects in the graph, e.g., people, things)-Data/content (the thing being shared between the nodes, e.g., tweet)-Edges with rules (e.g., bidirectional “friend”, single-directional “follow”)-Jumping functions, specif... See more

Small tweaks can create a massive macro changes in complex networks, and because of the bidirectional edge, Facebook ended up with a much more private network whereas Twitter looks more like news distribution. Stories from brands can feel forced on Facebook because they don’t truly have a bidirectional arrow, which in the context of Facebook means ... See more

As long as there are new technology platforms, types of media content, and shifting user behaviors, there will continue to be opportunities to build massive networks with complexity at their core. The ones that fundamentally alter some of the core components of a complex network can create really interesting and novel product experiences.

The massive dissemination of information — and I would argue a large contributor to a network’s massive value — comes from the ability of information to jump from one subnetwork of users to another. On Twitter, the jumping function is the retweet. A person who lives and breathes technology tweets about a new streaming music service called Spotify, ... See more