Group items tagged

COURSE DESCRIPTION Networked Life looks at how our world is connected -- socially, economically, strategically and technologically -- and why it matters. The answers to the questions at the top of this page are related. They have been the subject of a fascinating intersection of disciplines including computer science, physics, psychology, sociology, mathematics, economics and finance. Researchers from these areas all strive to quantify and explain the growing complexity and connectivity of the world around us, and they have begun to develop a rich new science along the way. Networked Life will explore recent scientific efforts to explain social, economic and technological structures -- and the way these structures interact -- on many different scales, from the behavior of individuals or small groups to that of complex networks such as the Internet and the global economy. This course covers computer science topics and other material that is mathematical, but all material will be presented in a way that is accessible to an educated audience with or without a strong technical background. The course is open to all majors and all levels, and is taught accordingly. There will be ample opportunities for those of a quantitative bent to dig deeper into the topics we examine. The majority of the course is grounded in scientific and mathematical findings of the past two decades or less (often much less). Spring 2010 is the seventh offering of Networked Life. You can get a detailed sense for the course by visiting the extensive course web pages from Spring 2009, Spring 2008, Spring 2007, Spring 2006, Spring 2005, and Spring 2004. This year the course will cover many of the same topics, updated in light of new research since the 2007 offering. As has become standard in the course, we plan to include communal experiments in distributed human decision-making on networks.

daviding says: A course on networks in the Arts and Sciences program at the University of Pennsylvania. The recency of references is striking.

The research presented in this volume, developed in the EC-funded Project ISCOM (Information Society as a Complex System), takes off from two fundamental premises: -- to guide innovation policies, taking account of the social, economic and geographic dimensions of innovation processes are at least as critical as the science and technology; and -- complex systems science is essential for understanding these dimensions. Online version (possibly available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/978-1-4020-9662-4 -- Table of contents -- 18 Chapters Front Matter I-IX Part 1 Introduction David Lane, Robert Maxfield, Dwight Read and Sander van der Leeuw 1-7 Part I From Biology to Society Front Matter 9-9 From Population to Organization Thinking David Lane, Robert Maxfield, Dwight Read and Sander van der Leeuw 11-42 The Innovation Innovation Dwight Read, David Lane and Sander van der Leeuw 43-84 The Long-Term Evolution of Social Organization Sander van der Leeuw, David Lane and Dwight Read 85-116 Biological Metaphors in Economics: Natural Selection and Competition Andrea Ginzburg 117-152 Innovation in the Context of Networks, Hierarchies, and Cohesion Douglas R. White 153-194 Part II Innovation and Urban Systems Front Matter 195-195 The Organization of Urban Systems Anne Bretagnolle, Denise Pumain and Cline Vacchiani-Marcuzzo 197-220 The Self Similarity of Human Social Organization and Dynamics in Cities Luis M.A. Bettencourt, Jose Lobo and Geoffrey B. West 221-236 Innovation Cycles and Urban Dynamics Denise Pumain, Fabien Paulus and Cline Vacchiani-Marcuzzo 237-260 Part III Innovation and Market Systems Front Matter 261-261 Building a New Market System: Effective Action, Redirection and Generative Relationships David Lane and Robert Maxfield 263-288 Incorporating a New Technology into Agent-Artifact Space: The Case of Control Syst

daviding says: Although the title says "price", informal ties reduce the cost of client interactions because the effort to transfer information on complex issues is lower.

... they modeled three features: how firms' prices changed with respect to the number of embedded ties they had with clients; the number of the firm's attorneys who sat on the boards of other corporations; and the status of the firm as perceived by peers. The greater the proportion of informal relationships and unwritten arrangements a firm enjoyed with clients, the lower the fee the firm typically charged for complex legal work. Such ties promote clearer understanding of client needs and preferences and lessen the need for rigid oversight structures, allowing for more efficient and timely operation, thus requiring less billable time from a firm. Said one partner: "It's no question that trust enters into [pricing]. I mean, it's very rare that you're going to get the big $500 million transactions-I don't see them with a stranger." Said another: "A relationship allows [the client] to be more nimble with our firm; rather than having a formal engagement in a project, she may call a partner she knows directly-so it's very efficient for her." Besides promoting the flow of private, valuable information between firm and client, network ties can give the firm access to useful information flowing between other parties. In particular, a firm can benefit significantly if its attorneys sit on corporate boards. One attorney described two notable advantages of board membership this way: "You have the benefit of seeing what other law firms are charging if the company that you sit on is using other firms. . . . And you get the benefit of the commentary that your fellow board people have on legal services and what they consider to be important." As a result of this privileged information, firms whose partners sit on corporate boards are able to charge higher rates for both routine and complex legal work. Law firms perceived to have high social status are able to offer image-enhancing benefits to its clients, since the clients will appear knowledgeable

daviding says: This article published in the Rotman Magazine on "Wicked Problems" is available on the Ideo web site. Designing a system for scale is a practical and interesting challenge.

Growing Influential Networks Following are three approaches that specifically deal with the idea of humanizing big problems to influence people to change and grow influential networks. 1. Human-Centered Systems: Design for People, Not the System 2. Sticky Systems: Design for Scale 3. Reciprocal Systems: Connect by Sharing The Five Principles of Systems at Scale 1. Ask how the system feels, not just how it works. 2. Recognize that a good system is often the best influencer. 3. Let the user close the loop. 4. Go micro with the human factors. 5. Start with hope, and take the long view.

daviding says: "A manifesto" isn't what I would usually expect from an academic institution.

The need for a fresh approach to U.S. communities is more urgent than ever because of the biggest global economic crisis since the Great Depression. Through examination of the barriers to solving urban problems (and the ways they reinforce each other), this paper offers a new approach to community transformation which calls for leaders to use technology to inform and connect people. We need to convert the social safety net into a social safety network through the creation of smarter communities that are information-rich, interconnected, and able to provide opportunities to all citizens. This process has already begun through such programs as Harlem Children's Zone, Baltimore's CitiStat, Elevate Miami, and others. And they can be replicated. But technology alone is not the answer. Realization of the vision requires leaders to invest in the tools, guide their use, and pave the way for transformation. Perhaps the urgency of the current economic crisis can provide the impetus to overcome resistance to change and turn problems into an opportunity to reduce costs, improve services to communities, and make our cities smarter.

In a surprise verdict that stunned even the defendant, a justice of the peace has dismissed a slate of raw-milk-related charges against Ontario dairyman Michael Schmidt and simultaneously delivered a boon to Canada's food-rights movement. Mr. Schmidt supplies raw milk to a small network of people with ownership shares in his dairy cattle. He was facing 19 charges related to public health and milk marketing when, looking grim, he took his seat before Justice of the Peace Paul Kowarsky in a Newmarket courtroom yesterday morning. Throughout the three hours it took Mr. Kowarsky to read out his 40-page verdict, the outlook for Mr. Schmidt's cow-sharing operation flip-flopped from promising to doomed and back again. But Mr. Kowarsky ultimately acquitted the farmer, a rising star in the growing international farming and food-rights movement, on the basis that the unique structure of his operation does not violate Ontario's stringent milk-marketing laws. Nor does Mr. Schmidt's provision of unpasteurized milk (which is illegal to sell in Canada) to shareholders endanger public health, Mr. Kowarsky said. The judgment, the culmination of a legal battle that was launched in 2006 after a raid by the Ministry of Natural Resources on Mr. Schmidt's farm in Durham, Ont., does not mean raw milk can be commercially sold in Ontario. The decision also remains open to appeal. However, it gives a boost to the burgeoning sector of creative farm-to-consumer food delivery-programs, including "cow-shares," which have grown in popularity as mistrust in the industrial food system has increased. "What I did foremost was make sure that farmers have the rights to engage in private contracting with consumers who make an informed choice," said Mr. Schmidt, who called the ruling "brilliant" but admitted he "didn't expect such a clear verdict." He has battled with public health officials and government milk regulators since the first crackdown on his raw-milk operation, in 1994. Unpasteurized pro

daviding says: The difference between selling milk and contracting for cow-share memberships can be seen as a shift from the presumptions of industrial production towards a service system. The regulators are trying to protect bulk distribution of raw milk from anonymous sellers to anonymous buyers. In Michael Schmidt's milk house, the cow-share owners not the provider of the product not only as the person who owns the farm, but also the original producer (i.e. the cow).