Best. Email. Ever

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:05:29 -0700

From: Administrator of The University of Chicago
Date: August 17, 2009 4:06:00 PM GMT-07:00
To: eric.hedberg@mac.com
Subject: "KIN NETWORK SIZE, STRUCTURE, AND SOCIAL SUPPORT" has been accepted
Reply-To: phd@lib.uchicago.edu

Dear Eric Hedberg,

Congratulations. Your submission has cleared all of the necessary checks and will soon be delivered to ProQuest/UMI for publishing.

Your dissertation is approved. Best wishes.

Sincerely,
The Dissertation Office
The University of Chicago

neat iphone game

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:31:01 -0700

i just got an iphone game that is pretty cool for those who study networks. its called BridgesManiak by Alexandre Minard. The purpose of the game is to connect the nodes (the circles) in such a way so that there is a path from any node to another, however long. the trick is that each node is labeled with a number and that each node must have exactly that number of links. For example, if a node had a "4", it must have 4 lines connecting it to other nodes. at times, with multiple lines between any two given nodes. sweet game. what i love about this game is that it aligns pretty well with how i like to think of social network analysis. i feel that social network analysis has spent far too much time obsessing about graph theory and the distinction between connected and not connected. This makes us think of social networks as we think of computer or electric networks. people are not power stations. instead, if we take network connections as given, then examining these networks forces us to engage the content (and gets us back to Simmel) of each connection and compare across ties and across independent networks. this is what i do in my dissertation. but i digress, this game is like how i think about social networks in what i have to connect the network in such as way as to create ties of different strengths. the other rule in the game is that nodes can only be connected by horizontal or vertical lines, and can't jump over other nodes, also adds positionally to the game as well. there are defiantly circumstances in which the only way i'm going to get to C is by way of B. and sometimes, B is a pain the ass. anyways, it a cheap $1 game and if you have an iphone and like networks, i suggest you take a look.

social experiment

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:00:25 -0700

dani took me to see batman this weekend. great movie, best batman ever. the 80's and 90's batman movies are adam west drudge compared to this stuff. anyways, there is a cool scene where the joker plays a little social experiment. spoiler alert, but not really. two boats are filled with people. boat A is filled with tourists, boat B is filled with convicts. both boats carry bombs connected to a wireless detonator. however, boat A has the detonator for boat B, and B has the one for A. joker tells the people of each boat that they have 20 minuets to decide whether or not to blow up the other boat. if one boat is destroyed by the other boat, the murderous surviving boat lives. if not, joker threatens to blow up both boats.

i like the new twist on the ol' prisoner's dilemma; especially since one player was a boat filled with actual prisoners. long and short of the prisoner's plight: two actors are involved in a crime, both get caught, each are taken into a room alone for questioning. each actor has a choice: tell the cops that the other guy did it. of course, each will deny their own involvement, but they have a choice to screw the other guy. if one choses to betray, and the other doesn't, then the tattle tail wins and the other looses. if both try to screw the other, they both lose, and if both stay tight lipped, they have a chance. so, what would you do?

but what i really found interesting about the bat boat game was that although newbies generally think of the prisoner dilemma game as played by individuals, this movie presented a corporate version. each boat had one detonator, but a boat load of people. what was also interesting is that each boat had an authority figure who actually had control of the trigger and was dealing with the mob. on the prison ship it was a guard or warden, and on the tourist ship it was a cop or civil official. and so there was a dialogue between the mob and the leader. much like the nuclear stand off: the president has to make a choice whether to attack with is (somewhat) independent of what the american people want.

so each boat had to decide whether to blow up the other boat. of course, the mob was ok with pulling the trigger on both. but when an individual had to enact the mobs will, even when they agreed, they couldn't.

i though about decisions to go to war, etc. one of the nice things about governments with armies is that the government can decide to go to war and send others to actually fight. the soldiers fighting are pretty removed from the decision making process, so they can just follow orders. and those orders are never directly "go shoot as many enemies as you can," they generally are "make them do this, and if they don't, use force." however, what makes glassing another country different is that a leader (or whomever) must decide to do it and must also take responsibility for doing so. they do have the trigger, so to speak. it is a direct action, not a contingency if they enemy doesn't stay back, or whatever.

so what does this say for the nutbag terrorist with nuke vest looking to party? they may support the idea, but they ultimately have to pull the trigger. and it is a direct action. so would they do it? i'm not sure. but the boats made it out alive.

one final thing, prisoner dilemma games are also fun when they are repeated. this was another element added to the joker game. he gave a time limit. but as more time past, each crew did notice they the other boat didn't kill them yet, and that information fed back into their own thinking. cool.