tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19062127.post2210119692197601102..comments2023-11-14T06:47:11.463-08:00Comments on A True History of the Internet: quantity v. quality in social 'science' research + big datajon crowcrofthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05692091803072506710noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19062127.post-57911095054986470852013-04-19T03:16:23.129-07:002013-04-19T03:16:23.129-07:00Brief and predictable remarks:
1. Need to use nuan...Brief and predictable remarks:<br />1. Need to use nuanced or generalised graphs (n-ary rather than binary 'edges' with strength, direction, duration and state-contingency).<br />2. Social graphs are layered - networks of people, personalities, shared identities, etc. so quantities at one layer perceieved in another may change the natural quantification of data.<br />3. Social systems are complex, so aggregation is not just adding up. The 'paradox' is quite natural here; in complex systems aggregation does not reduce individual data to insignificance.<br />4. Strong emergence (in the persistent mutual information sense (http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.3028 or http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0007070.pdf) reminds us of the subjectivity<br />5. Data are what we choose to record, so endogeneity is a problem. This matters differently if we approach data as statisticians (where good models do what data are observed to do) or as social scientists (where data are used to test hypotheses coming from models). Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629059182155669055noreply@blogger.com