Thursday, August 14, 2008

This is what 2.0 means.

32 comments:

Douglas Karr said...

Brilliant! Quite possibly the best explanation I've ever seen!

Bradjward said...

That is pretty awesome. Thanks for sharing.

Michael Sauers said...

Pure genius. I reach Web 2.0 and Social Web applications to librarians around the world. Barring your not wanting me to I'm definitely going to use this in my presentations. Proper credit will be given of course.

Mykl Roventine said...

Yes. That's it! You have such a great knack for hitting these things so perfectly.

anmol said...

now that simply explains what clout means....

Chandoo said...

very simple yet quite effective.

You have a knack for simplifying things that are difficult to express. Love indexed.. :)

Amanda Chapel said...

Do you also believe in the a tooth fairy?

Chris said...

Sorry, but I think the tooth fairy didn't make it into 2.0. Look for an update in the next few months.

Cheryl said...

I'm clearly not smart enough for this site but I keep reading!

Annie said...

Good for you, Cheryl. One will click for you and these will become easier for you.
Additionally, I am intrigued by your perspective. This is the only "blog to check out" listed on my blog asojournofperusal.blogspot.com. And I email your blog address to all my intelligent, logic oriented, humor enthusiast, and mathematical friends. Read your new posts every day. Thanks!!

Amanda Chapel said...

For the record, the more people you know doesn't mean shit. Volume does NOT equal value. If anything, quite the opposite. The more you got means the more you've got to maintain and the less resources there are for any node on the system. The reason why social media is so poor is because so many have bought into the notion that high school vanity means opportunity. It doesn't.

Freiddie said...

And so this is why I get Facebook App invites... :P

Anonymous said...

Jessica, what you've drawn, perhaps unknowingly, is a simplified version of what economists call "network effects" or "network externalities," the concept of which was first brought up about 100 years ago. The curve has actually been shown to be exponential (more upward curving than what you have).

James Burnes said...

Love this. I'm actually blogging a response with a revised graphic based on your ingenious observation.

at said...

Thank you. This is true in every aspect.

jon burg said...

Jessica, I agree with the overall principle, however, I would hesitate to suggest that there is a direct correlation between the number of contacts one has and the value of their network. Value is about more than quantity, it's about aggregate quality.

Link to my response below, looking forward to your feedback - http://jburg.typepad.com/future/2008/08/do-correlations-define-web-20.html

Raison d'ĂȘtre said...

oh i so love this blog..... :-)

tudza said...

I think this graph was true way before 2.0 or 1.0 or even the decimal system. We used to call it the Old Boy Network.

If 2.0 = Facebook, MySpace and their ilk, I totally disagree. These all seem very poor tools for getting anything done.

therapydoc said...

Yeah, it's not what you know, it's who you know.

metakappa said...

And here is the dark side of social networking they usually hide from you: http://is.gd/1uOE

John Haydon said...

Jessica,

I'd like to use this Index card for a future post of mine regarding how Non-Profits use social networking tools. I'll ping you back.

John
www.corporatedollar.org

P.S. I love your Indexed Book.

Jye Smith said...

Beautiful.

Jye
www.jyesmith.com

Stilgherrian said...

Maybe the Y axis should be labelled "Things you THINK you can do". ;)

Lee said...

OMG that is awesome.

Ironically I discovered this via Twitter!!

:)

BOYerchen said...

Awesome. I discovered this via the delicious front page. Congratulations! (;

Tony Searl said...

Luceat Lux Vestra Jessica
Is content King? You betcha.
You clever bricolager, you.

Keck said...

I think this should almost be on log paper :) The 'things you can do' axis should increase wayyy faster than linear with 'people you know' :)

eigenvector said...

Does the vertical axis stop at the Dunbar Number?

Brad Gulliford said...

Where's the z axis: time you can spend on each new incompatible system demanding your attention, to wade through hundreds of inconsequential posts. We all know there's more volume out there (whether it's books or networking contacts or wiki comments); we also have known for years that librarians' job is no longer increasing access, it's filtering and navigating. Preferably not by adding an additional service to have to visit in the multiple stops we expect users to go through to get one item of information. I'm not pooh-poohing, just stating the challenge. :-{)} Okay, you got my 30 seconds. Bye.

Paul Massey said...

Following Brad's comment - a "things you do do" axis would be interesting.

Katie Harris said...

You've captured it PERFECTLY. Thank you!

Katie

ian said...

I agree with this, but would add a second a picture. The horizontal axis would "people you follow" and vertical axis would be "your free time". The result would be line looking a bit like the stock markets now - straight down!

 
(c) 2006, 2007, 2008