Digital Dunbar Numbers: An apology

Thank you very much for all your comments and queries. I realise from reading the comments that I haven’t been able to articulate the fundamental reason for my even beginning to look at this area.

And that is this:

The original Dunbar number was based on some understanding of the relationship between neocortical volume and group size for nonhuman primates.

Humans seemed to scale differently, and research suggested that from a group size viewpoint, the root cause for this difference was language.

The move from oral to written communication is also meant to have aided this process, as man learnt to store and retrieve observations and learnings about the group.

My contention is that anything that aids and improves group communications may also have the effect of raising the “theoretical” maximum for the size of group.

Maybe what I’m saying is that the Dunbar number is a constant, yes, but only in the context of a specific class of primates, a specific set of languages and linguistic abilities, and a specific set of communications processes and technologies.

Can you feel it coming?

Apologies to Phil Collins, and heartfelt thanks to LaughingSquid, someone I now read regularly.

We’re at the edge of the traditional mid-January reality-distortion field, traditional because it happens before every Steve Jobs keynote at MacWorld. Not that Mr Jobs needs any help, but the distortion tends to be amplified by the rumour mill that precedes the event. This year, it’s been dominated by questions of what the “something in the air” could be.

Some of you may have felt that Fake Steve has the answer, with live blogging of his own speech. But, this time around, I think the prize goes to LaughingSquid for his predictions on the Flying Mac, and for the illustration below:

flying-macbook-pros