Social scaling is generally understood in terms of the number of people in a coordination regime, so a way to get 1200 people working together is more advanced than a way to get 12 people working together, other things being equal.
-
Show this thread
-
But an important way other things are NOT equal is intimacy. 2 people working together in a marriage is more intimate coordination than 2 people paired up for a casual tennis tournament. Let’s call this density rather than intimacy. Social scaling = (size)*(density).
1 reply 3 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
Historically, industrialization monotonically increased size of the coordinating group but for a century actually lowered density. Humans could relate to each other via more cartoonish other-models. This hit a trough around the 1960s with the Organization Man set of archetypes.
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
Since then, to coordinate better has meant developing better mental models of people you’re coordinating with. From “cartoon” to “healthy marriage” levels. Increasing density. Moore’s Law of social scaling: the density of coordination doubles every generation.
1 reply 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Gen X is 2x more densely coordinated than Boomers, Millennials are 2x Gen X and 4x Boomers. Zoomers are 8x Boomers. Size has evolved interestingly in recent decades. It’s gone barbell. As a company, Facebook is 43,000 employees. As a platform it has 2.37b AUs.
4 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
I want to RT this thread but I fear doing so will generate annoying quibbles that elide the interestingness sensei what do?????
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
-
RTs are like alcohol, you don’t *have* to drink 
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.