Join us for week III of the [Elements] Expedition! This week is all about Social Graphs
Question:
We talk about ‘who truly owns our data’… And it’s easy to say ‘decentralization will solve it all’, but how can we actually make a difference?
What is one of the first realizations that users will come to when they are thrust into social media platforms free from the echo chambers / realty tunnels they’ve become accustomed to?
Such a beautiful read. Indeed Decentralization has come to set us free from the shackles of capitalism and unauthorized access to user data by the big companies, govts and platforms.
There are two key pieces discussed here 1. Current Structure of Social Graphs 2. Lack of Information transparency
First, social graphs represent the connections we have made with humans across the world, where there are varying levels of interaction and trust.
In the physical world, we maintain relationships by communication. Those a part of our social graph help us navigate the world, the power of this is shown by the effectiveness of word-of-mouth. As we have progressed to a digital age where information flows more freely, the holy grail of recommendations is still word of mouth. Word of mouth has increased in spread in the form of Tweets, Posts and forums just like this but finding signal is harder as it muddled amongst noise.
Our social graphs have expanded exponentially as we interact with an increasing amount of individuals online. The problem today arises when we outgrow a platform and want to bring with our social graphs with us. It becomes apparent we are merely renting space on these platforms and our connections exist within their walls.
Not only is our optionality restricted, we are also interacting with more people than we can possibly have all the context required to have productive, informed interactions.
Decentralized Identity, and resulting Decentralized Social Media begin to reintroduce this level of portability and agency familiar to us in the physical world. While reputation is enables us to have more nuanced understanding of those we interact with across the digital realm.
To the question of echo chambers:
Echo chambers have always existed, realistically, the Information age starts to bring about even a discussion of echo chambers as prior to then. Echo chambers were the norm as you were inherently restricted to the concepts exposed to those you could connect in some physical manner. These physical restrictions meant your ideas were also bound by your physical presence. These echo chambers are still very present in the physical realm and won’t leave any time soon. Online, echo chambers live within the bounds of social graphs within applications.These recommendation algorithms exacerbate echo chambers but without any understanding of the determination of “relevant” (e.g. “For You”) information.
…
The information you consume influences your thoughts, these thoughts influence the actions you take.
A lack of control and understanding in your information streams results in a lack of understanding of your very actions.
Love this topic! Fun fact - I studied social graphs and graph theory as my major in college. It was started by two professors as sort of an experiment to teach computer science and solving problems differently but with the premise that this would be the future. So reading this blog makes me realize it was all WORTH!! If anyone’s curious, check it out hereeee
I recently engaged in a thought-provoking discussion about the impact of social media, and it left a lasting impression on me. We concluded that the sheer volume of available data overwhelms individuals, contributing significantly to the societal divisions we observe today. As you aptly put it, “Not only is our optionality restricted, we are also interacting with more people than we can possibly have all the context required to have productive, informed interactions.”
This notion extends to the information we consume. The abundance of data often prevents people from grasping the full context, leading to the formation of strong opinions without a comprehensive understanding. Reflecting on the concept of echo chambers in the physical world, it seems that, decades ago, communities were more aligned. Could this alignment be attributed to the limited data available, confined to the physical spaces they inhabited?
The deluge of data brought about by the internet, particularly through social media, has overwhelmed our cognitive capacities, triggering reactions on a wide array of topics. When considering social graphs and the curation of content, it becomes unsettling to contemplate the level of control wielded by these companies. The profound influence they exert over the information landscape raises concerns about the potential consequences for societal cohesion and informed discourse.
In contemplating these challenges, I find hope in the potential of decentralized networks, open public social graphs, and algorithms, along with the empowerment of users to own their data. By embracing these principles, we can envision a transformative shift in the way information is disseminated and consumed. Decentralized networks can foster a more diverse and democratic flow of information, mitigating the impact of centralized control. Open social graphs may enable a broader understanding of diverse perspectives, breaking down echo chambers that hinder meaningful discourse. Moreover, when users have ownership of their data, it not only enhances privacy but also disrupts the current narrative where corporations wield disproportionate influence. As we explore these alternatives, there is an opportunity to reshape the digital landscape, promoting a more informed, connected, and harmonious society.
Individual agency is so important in how the future of the internet is shaped. This is more than just a technological advancement, but about a fundamental shift in power dynamics, championing user autonomy and data sovereignty in the face of growing digital monopolies.
In a decentralized setting, users may first realize:
Exposure to Diverse Perspectives: Moving away from echo chambers, users encounter a broader range of opinions and ideas. This shift promotes open-mindedness and meaningful discussions.
The social graph is a digital representation of online relationships, influencing our digital identity and experiences.
Centralized platforms raise concerns about data ownership, privacy, and the potential for misuse of user data.
Internet companies exploit user data, leading to surveillance capitalism and the development of prediction markets.
Social media platforms democratize information but face challenges like algorithmic biases, misinformation, and echo chambers.
I couldn’t agree more with this perspective. We’ve seen that companies that maintain social graphs that are driven purely by profit nearly always develop misaligned incentives which exacerbate the echo-chamber / filter-bubble phenomenon. That being said, we should be weary of the naivety in thinking we can avoid repeating the same mistakes by giving people control of their own data. Don’t get me wrong: I truly believe that people should own and control their data: 100%. This allows for portability, and avoids the lock-in to specific social media platforms, which only serves to give those platforms more control and power.
However, self-sovereign identity technology doesn’t necessarily cure the confirmation bias that we project into the world. As you said yourself: “Echo chambers have always existed”. I’m reminded of the final chapter of the Self Sovereign Identity book by Drumon Reed, called “SSI: our dystopian nightmare”, which was written by Philip Sheldrake, in which he describes how removing the “social friction” from our interactions by giving us complete control over our identity data, can theoretically exacerbate confirmation bias and filter bubbles:
"An acquaintance now quits those ‘old-fashioned’ relationship-building niceties and gets straight to the SSI point. Where do you work? Which college did you go to? Which college did your parents go to? Republican or Democrat? What’s your gender? Your ethnic origins? Do you have this gene or the other one?
If you fail to offer up the requisite verifiable claims then you fail to get to ‘trust building’ first base in the SSI century. . . . You are then ignored or indeed rejected."
I think it is incumbent upon us to think about how we can build social graph systems that help people make real and fulfilling connections, and that will probably require input from experts in the field of social sciences.
I remember joining Lens and getting soooo annoyed at how many NFTs it was minting against my action. And then had a realization that each NFT was a data point that is otherwise harvested beyond my grasp.
I dont think the current solutions solve this problem. On the one hand, I sign it all away to big tech and have no access. On the other hand, it’s all publicly visible. In both scenarios, my data can still be used by others without my consent.
I think the first realization that users might have when drifting away from echo chambers to a wider range of perspectives is curiosity as they have exposure to knowledge which immediately improves their life quality by solving problems and challenges.
How people change their opinions and view points in general, always comes from new experiences which might lead to the realization that their previous experience was somewhat distorted or biased.
Exposure to diverse content has it’s own benefits by exposing people to broader array of opinions but also carries risks. It could cause cognitive dissonance as the information could differ significantly from their previous viewpoint.
To minimize the negative user experiences I think it’s very important to have a good reputation in place on information and opinions. Highly differing opinions with low reputation might cause more discomfort than highly differing opinion with high reputation. The most optimal path is to let people come down to realization on their own.
Another idea to minimize the negative user experiences is to let people see information from the people and entities they already trust, which I think comes down to “contextual” reputation.
Very good point. I think the addition of ‘filters’ for our own unique reality tunnels are indeed important. I could even see the potential for certain ‘pre-set filters’ existing with the sole purpose of helping people better understand and utilize the potential newfound information. This could help to ease the cognitive dissonance that may occur upon integration with a ‘user-controlled algorithm’ social media experience.
Yh agree. I see leveraging AI assistant which would work as an “filter”. First you see the things as it is but if it causes cognitive dissonance it helps to explain context and reasoning why it is most likely true. Or reversed: you see filtered content based on your knowledge and beliefs and AI assistant feeds you more details to complete the learning curve as you gain more knowledge on topics.
Check out the Blog Post Here: The Internet as a Social Network. The Internet’s evolution from a mere… | by Mike | 0xIntuition | Medium