Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AIM Meets Social Network Theory

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the diagram-fever dept.

dan moore writes "A student at Caltech has created a website (BuddyZoo.com) that tracks cliques within groups of peoples' buddylists. It also measures buddy popularity and allows you to do a six-degrees type search for other screen names. An interesting approach to social network theory."

10 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting by Cyclometh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Too bad it's only for AIM; it would be interesting to apply similar principles to blogs.

  2. Buddy collecting by Negatyfus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sheez, some people collect IM buddies as a sport. You'd think someone has no real friends in life with 373 buddies in his contact list.

    1. Re:Buddy collecting by Gsus411 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I had the limit on AIM once (somewhere around 200) because I block everyone not on my list.

      I'm a moderator on a major recording artist's forum, so there are lots of people who want to have me delete or lock threads. Sometimes ban a user.

      So, I added everyone who posted regularly.

      I don't need that quite so much anymore because I begged and pleaded for another mod. Now I'm down to about 50ish because only people I know in real life need to bug me, with the occasional close board friend thrown in for good measure.

      Not everyone with huge buddy lists needs to have no life.

  3. Buddies by nigel.selke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't actually get it. I think instant messaging is great, but only for business purposes (communicating with other branches, overseas contacts, etc).

    To me, a buddies are people that you go to pubs with, go to cricket matches with, etc. I'll never be online after work hours or on the weekends, those time should be reserved for outdoor pursuits or social pursuits. There's nothing like doing 4x4 trails on the weekend, especially in Southern Africa. Or going horse-riding, playing golf, etc. Come on, guys.

    I don't know. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I don't think sitting on PCs for hours a day chatting with MSN/AIM/Yahoo buddies is healthy. The USA is an amazing country with plenty of things to do. Go and check them out. That goes for people in other countries as well - there's more for you to do than just sit on your PC. There's a wealth of recreational activities in any given country that's waiting to be explored. Heck, one of the programmers at work used to be like that, sitting on his PC for hours a day playing games or chatting. We've converted him to an outdoor man by going camping, sky-diving and horse-riding. Now he seems a lot more relaxed and has a wider social circle of people - In real life!

    --

    We hang the petty thieves, but appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop

    1. Re:Buddies by Negatyfus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's still nice to be able to keep contact with someone you'd normally not be able to communicate with without working up an amazing phonebill. You know, like someone living on another continent. That doesn't mean you have to chat whole days (and nights) with them, though. Besides that, you can easily multi-task between instant messaging and some other, more useful computer task. Furthermore, a group chat can be useful for quickly discussing some matter, such as which pub you and your friends will be going to tonight. Finally, instant messaging can lower the threshold for some people in some situations that are too shy in real life (not that this isn't a problem that should be addressed in real life).

      There are some good uses to instant messaging. However, you can certainly get by without it. I truly hate the way instant messaging and technologies such as SMS seems to affect today's youth with the Trash-talk virus: thye wil b typin liek this til u lose ur mind and don't even see a problem with it.

    2. Re:Buddies by nigel.selke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's still nice to be able to keep contact with someone you'd normally not be able to communicate with without working up an amazing phonebill.

      Granted, but I find email a better medium for this. I don't deny that if someone feels more comfortable with IM'ing their relatives or friends overseas, that it would be a very handy tool for that kind of communication, though.

      That doesn't mean you have to chat whole days (and nights) with them, though. Besides that, you can easily multi-task between instant messaging and some other, more useful computer task. Furthermore, a group chat can be useful for quickly discussing some matter, such as which pub you and your friends will be going to tonight. Finally, instant messaging can lower the threshold for some people in some situations that are too shy in real life (not that this isn't a problem that should be addressed in real life).

      Excellent points, and none that I can argue against outright. I just associate IM'ing with business contacts in other branches and contacts overseas, and I don't feel comfortable using IM for social purposes.

      There are some good uses to instant messaging. However, you can certainly get by without it. I truly hate the way instant messaging and technologies such as SMS seems to affect today's youth with the Trash-talk virus: thye wil b typin liek this til u lose ur mind and don't even see a problem with it.

      Ugh. This is so true that it's actually scary. "R U going 2 " is considered formal speech by a lot of youth in South Africa, some that aren't strictly stupid, but have just been caught up in using SMS'ing for communication as a craze, and I agree fully that this could be dangerous, in that it might desensitise some of these people to using language like that in other situations.

      All in all, excellent post. It should be moderated up.

      --

      We hang the petty thieves, but appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop

  4. ironic by scubacuda · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I find it ironic that some of the same people who'd normally have a shit fit over their personal information being centralized (TIA, etc.) actually *volunteer* to disclose their buddy lists (not to mention make it *accessible* to the general public)...

    1. Re:ironic by HopeOS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think that Ben Franklin would be worried if people knew that Thomas Jefferson was on his buddy list. Voluntary disclosure is fine. Involuntary disclosure is not. -Hope

  5. Re:wow by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    YOU ALL ARE RUNNING AOL!

    Note that AOL and AIM are not at all the same service. Screen names share the same namespace, and there is some interoperability (improved dramatically over the last couple years from what I understand), but you can definitely run AIM while hating AOL.

    Unless you hate the company, in which case you'd better also stay away from ICQ and WinAmp and Netscape and CNN and The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings movies and everything else they own.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  6. Re:Six degrees of separation by clarkc3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    in the article it says Milgram stated the average number of the chain was 6 - thats very different than saying anyone can be reached through 6 degrees. Average would mean several required more degrees of sepeartion