pholme.bsky.social
Scandinasian professor of network science & computational social science
154 posts
2,980 followers
420 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
"Don't give them more money. They'd just spend it on caffeine."
comment in response to
post
… which refers to a future envisioned by another* systems-thinking Jesuit priest, Dominique Dubarle, in this article: www.piecesetmaindoeuvre.com/IMG/pdf/Vers...
* Pierre Teilhard de Chardin being the other.
Thanks for sending me down that rabbit hole :)
comment in response to
post
(Well, *most* of science . . Earth system analysis and the like shouldn't be accused of oversimplifying.)
comment in response to
post
I'm curious about what contributions you will get. I remember someone somewhere who studied a network of revelations of the Virgin Mary. I expect nothing less of your satellite.
comment in response to
post
That could be subjective. Whatever world/thing you want to understand, if you're a scientist purely for the sake of science, it can't matter if AI or someone else can do it better. Of course, in reality, it's a continuum with the h-index maximizing lab emperor in the other end.
comment in response to
post
The type of idealism described in this Bucky Fuller passage ("Nothing seems to be more ..."
comment in response to
post
If you're an idealist who wants to understand the world, then who obtained the knowledge wouldn't matter, and whether you were redundant or not wouldn't matter either.
comment in response to
post
In other words, I guess, whether you're a scientist for the love of science or to have a career. I guess that all our goats would be just happy (but maybe I'm naive), so I'm trying to convince myself to think likewise.
comment in response to
post
there are more that need to be mentioned than what fits in 300 characters :D But Katz & Lazarsfeld, Granovetter's threshold models, and SIR, feel like a core.
comment in response to
post
There's definitely some kind of Godwin's law that applies to Gödel's incompleteness theorem. In any long enough pseudo-scientific word salad, it is bound to show up.
comment in response to
post
Yes, that's intriguing. Clearly, times were different then. Who'd write that today? But I actually can't even guess what it refers to.
comment in response to
post
Haha, yes, there is a reason. It's the answer to the question of drawing the complement to this graph.