Barabasi also explained further the 80/20 theory and the “six degrees of separation” idea, exposing both the weaknesses and where the strengths lie. This was very helpful in a practical way… I had a general idea of what they were but am much more clear now.

I love how Barabasi takes time to go over failed attempts and weak theories used to analyze different networks, linking them to relevant, real-world stories; then takes the time to build up to how he sees the networks, instead. I do, however, think that some of his analyses would be easier to comprehend had I not left calculus in the dust after freshman year…

Great read so far.

Although the book was full of the author’s own experiences working on the topic and ideas borrowed from other people, it did a very good job finding back-up stories from various fields. And it was interesting for me to see how differently writers with liberal arts and science write. Barabasi pretty much concentrated on throwing proof after proof to the readers in order to convince them that he was right. It was also interesting for me to find out how easily I change my mind. When he was explaining Erdos and Renyi’s theories, I agreed. Then when he said they were wrong because he and his graduate students found a new theory that supports what really happens better, I agreed too. The other thing about this book I noticed was that the author gave his statement by starting from the point of view of a culture that is in a developed country. And he did not really talk about the topic from the other direction. Although the book was really trying to examine the internet, I think the book would be more convincing if he could somehow prove that people are linked without so much concentration on science, math and internet.

One thing that captures my attention in the reading is the double usage of the word “link” when describing both human connections and a hyperlink on a webpage. This demonstrates how the Internet has revolutionized the way humans interact and form networks. In the context of the Internet, the word “link” serves as a metaphor for the connection between one entity and another, but it is also quite literally a “link” in the same sense that humans connect to each other. It is fascinating to me how the Internet has re-mastered human interaction and relationships.

I was particularly struck by the Fragmented Web chapter of Linked. Barabasi says “Sustien fears that by limiting access to conflicting viewpoints, the emerging online universe encourages segregation and social fragmentation. Indeed the mechanisms behind social and political isolation on the Web are self-reinforcing. “ (170) This is exactly what Nakamura speaks of regarding the marriage between power in the reality and power in the virtual. All boundaries drawn in reality are directly translated to the virtual. Barabasi goes to on to say “A side effect of our digital life is that our beliefs and affiliations are publicly available.” (170) I (and Nakamura) would say that reducing this to a “side effect” is a bit short sided. Couldn’t it be argued that one’s digital life is entirely comprised of a public display of a belief system and of affiliation? This is not Barabasi’s main gist, but it should be noted.

I’m not sure if the impact of this is something that Barabasi grasps, or is frankly interested in grasping. He believes that as long as individuals have the ultimate control over to what nodes to link, what hubs to use, and what direction is most suitable, the topology and navigability will remain intact. This is sort of the vibe I got throughout the book . . . Barabasi tends to have these little blips of interesting direction, but then leaves it to go back to the presenting his tale of how scaled the great mountain of network theory.

Reading “Linked” I hardly ever found an Ah Ha moment, and instead was faced with lots of duh’s. “Connectors and hubs,” “80/20 rule,” “six-degrees-of-separation,” etc. have been well explored in other books (e.g. The tipping point) making it difficult to find relatively novice ideas in the book. Growing up with Google’s Page Ranking technology and Apple’s iTune’s monopoly, we all know and live with the fact that the rich gets richer and the winner takes all.

Barabasi frequently scares us from the power laws, and alerts us from our vulnerabilities toward network attacks but he doesn’t seem to offer any solutions. Throughout the book, he borrows from many different areas to explain and apply his network theories (and in fact network theories do apply to many areas such as politics, wealth distribution, molecule, internet), but he does so in a very one-sided manner: he never applies his theories to situations that won’t work!

“The mystery of life begins with the intricate web of interactions, integrating the millions of molecules within each organism. The enigma of the society starts with the convoluted structure of the social network… Therefore, networks are the prerequisite for describing any complex system, indicating that complexity theory must inevitably stand on the shoulders of network theory” (238).

This idea of networks works as a lens through which to view our surroundings. While this is interesting in itself as a theoretical paradigm, Barabási goes further than that. Throughout the text, the author demonstrates that this indeed is how the world works by dropping examples of how this occurs. For example, in the discussion of Karinthy, Barabási compares that story to the previous story of Erd?s:

“Almost two decades after Igy irtok ti, in 1929, at about the same time that the seventeen-year-old Erd?s was lecturing about the Pythagorean theorem in the shoe store a few streets away from the Central Café, Karinthy published his forty-sixth book…” (26).

The method of naturally illustrating the principles learned within the explanations themselves really helps support the author’s point, and makes the ideas far more convincing to the reader. There really are links between things in unlikely places! Some of the instances of this may seem a bit contrived, however.

Duncan Watts and Strogatz investigation of the connections within networks like the power grid led to the discovery of “clustering”. Their discovery has caused more investigations into the clustering of other ubiquitous networks.

Although Barabasi, discusses the evolution of the Aids virus through spread of one flight attendance seems to be the flaw in most of Barabasi’s discussion of networks. The Aids virus and the web are very complex networks.

Although Six Degrees of Separation is popular for discussion, the complexity of clusters and networks needs further investigation. Even Watts has published additional material stating the
“Influential’s” of the world have less power over network potential. Watts contend that the randomness of networks remains constant unless “critical mass” is breached. This is similar to the concept of “breaking the threshold” in Linked.

After reading “Linked”, I am interested in the complexity and randomness of networks. Barabasi has great examples of how networks work socially and in nature. He describes the events that shape networks socially and in nature. How can humans be social by nature and be considered random in theory? The question comes from my inexperience with the subject of social networks.

Without Barabasi’s linked, I would not have been able to think of how randomness and complexity relating to social networks in such a short time. I look forward to reading this book several times.

Barabasi’s book is well written and describes how social networks can be used for good as well as how social networks can be used with malicious intent as in the example above. As the book’s title suggests, the author is talking about how everything is linked to everything else. People are connected by a complex network in society as they are on the internet. The first chapter is called “The Random Universe”, which made me start thinking about what really is or isn’t random in the universe.

Euler’s graph theory being the basis of today’s thinking of networks was interesting. I liked the quote on page 17 which asks do you “create mathematics or just discover it”. I think this saying could be related to everything in life. Do we create things or just discover them. The author’s explanation of hubs, nodes and connectors was great as they relate to social networks, yet are similar but work slightly different when referring to web pages on the internet.