Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Javier Luzuriaga's avatar

As always, a very interesting article. Thank you!

However, I have a comment about the type of network that I think has not been

covered in your article.

You do not discuss what I would call the "Hierarchical Network", a system where

the decisions the network takes go in a a "top down" direction. Most companies

follow this approach. In information terms, the data follow one path (in both

directions), but there is another one-directional path of information (orders

or directives) that flows from top management down to lower levels of decision

making.An army is an extreme example of a hierarchical organization.

The other important point is that in a meeting of several people in a room, the

quantity of information that can be exchanged is somehow limited by what in

computing terms may be called the "bandwith" of our speech processes and

inforrmation processing. For conversations where every person can exchange a

meaningful amount of information whith everyone else, the group is limited to

about 10 to 15 people.

The roman army, for example, had their troops divided into groups of ten, with

a Decurion in charge, who in turn formed part of a group of ten Decurions

coordinated by a Centurion, etc.

In many companies there is a board of around 10 people, and countries are

governed in general by a Cabinet of 10 to 15 Ministers. The Ministries are then

subdivided into working units, perhaps not down to the lowest level, but most

organizations follow this hierarchical model.

In a very simplified analysis, taking 10 people in each level (sort of like the

Roman Army), a General (Manager, Prime minister, etc.) commanding 1,000 troops

is three levels removed from a soldier (ten Centurions, 100 Decurions, 1000

common soldiers). We have in this way 4 levels for a big company with 10,000

employees, and 6 or 7 for countries with populations in the millions. We

therefore have a pyramid of decision making, from tactical problems of detail

in the lower levels to the larger, strategy decisions at the top. In a decision process it is a problem, since the different levels tend to move in restricted circles, as far as meaningful information is concerned. Status and wealth also play an important part, so the problems faced by the common folk are not well understood by the leaders. Of course, the more hierarchical

the organization, the problem of asymmetric decision making and information

sharing becomes worse. The king is not so responsive to the lower levels as the

politician and the General can make decisions even disregarding the lives of his soldiers.

Less meaningful information can be exchanged in larger groups. Assemblies of

Citizens, as in ancient Greek City States or Swiss villages can be of several hundred or even thousands, but again the speakers to the assembly are restricted to a few., and the rest are more passive, until, as is ussually done, the decision is taken by a vote. Most Parliaments or the Houses in Congress follow this model, and in most there are Comitties of around ten to 15 people who discuss the proposals in detail.

The above is related more to decision making than to information exchange, and to face to face communication than to the Web, but the "bandwidth" problem of the human brain and speech (or reading speed) remains. In the sharing of information in our networked computer communication, it is true that direct communication with millions is possible, and a few nodes

act as spreaders of information to thousands or millions of receptors. They can talk, but not

really listen to everyone. The exchange of two-way information is still restricted to smaller groups, although hopefully the best ideas will be spread by more people, and the hierarchy effect will be less important in a loose and not hierarchical organization like the WWW. In any case, some hierarchy remains because some outlets are more followed than others.

Of course the above ideas are basically a cartoon of what happens out there, and as the saying goes "God is in the details" but I thought that drawing attention to these limitations of our communication skills as individuals may be worthwhile.

Thanks again for another thought provoking article, abrazo

Expand full comment
Elías's avatar

My guess is you will enjoy a lot Hosftadter's GEB. And probably, also books by his pupil, Melanie Mitchell.

Expand full comment
52 more comments...

No posts