2. Sociological Studies of Network -Community Studies (60’s) Friendship Network, Community Power Structure Development of SNA techniques (L. Freeman, Borgatti, Lincoln, Burt...) -Network of Corporate Governance (ex: interlocking board of Directors) -Inter-organizational Relations -Social Movements -World System Theory (state network) Micro Macro Network Capitalism

3. A’s ParentsB’s Parents Student AStudent BStudent AStudent B A’s ParentsB’s Parents Open NetworkClosed Network Probability of becoming a delinquent boy is higher in ( ) network.

4. Internet revives interest of 60’s  Sociological Issues; Social Impact of Internet  Has the Internet increased, decreased contact?  More on line Friends?  Long distance friends?  Has the Internet support emotional ties?  Contact with Family and old friends  anonymity and invisibility  Privacy  Identity (Multiple selves)...  Yet, N increased from hundreds to millions.

5. Netville Experiment

6.  Does Internet produce Power-dispersion or Power concentration?  Decentralized communication network replace centralized communication, undermining the central power.  As more people are connected, centralized network structure produce a “winner take it all” society.  Two contradictory predictions each with compelling evidences. Macro Issues concerning Inequality

7. 1. Network Army weakens centralized (state) power Candlelight vigil against beef import

8. Orchestration without a conductor; People can make voice!!

10.  Information Asymmetry produces Power  With knowledge & information you can gain power. Centralized Network Decentralized Network Information Asymmetry is reduced due to social technology

11. Minerva; information superhighway Doctor-Patent Relations Professor-Student Relations Mass media / new media

12. Anyone can create by mixing. Ex: creative commons

13. R&D vs. Open Innovation 기존의 혁신 모델 개방혁신 모델 Any Connected Individual can create the value, without means of production.

14. Small world Networks; Path vs. Walk Gene expression Network Food WebPower Grid Romance of the Three Kingdoms Korean Pops Keyword Network New Testament Network

15. Power Concentration: Winner Take all Society # of people affected by power failure caused by lightening Frequency 10 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 1984-1997 Power Law

16. Preferential attachment  Mathew Effect “the rich get richer” Why? Network Externality! The value of a fax depends on the number of faxes inter-connected... Mobile phone, Facebook...  Increasing Return

17. Centralization of Web traffic Network August, 2000 May, 2000 Degree Mean 13.76 Std Dev 18.26 Network Centralization = 51.37% Degree Mean 0.74 Std Dev 1.59 Network Centralization = 3.80% Among top 100 sites If Links create values, inequality increases!

18. Network Externality Zipf Law http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9704b.html

19. Some core group are more connected than the rest on line a small set of webloggers account for a majority of the traffic in the weblog world as more journal issues came online, more of citations were to fewer journals and articles  Network Society may produce extreme inequality!! Links, Friends, traffic, Citations... Are distributed with power law