> In the end, one way of stating the conclusion of this model is that a social group is a form of tool for economic benefit, and the other tools we create build on the cognitive underpinnings of social interactions. Indeed, in the modern world, we often spend more time working with and getting to know our tools and processes than with friends and family members.
> One important implication of our findings from the Wikipedia editors study is that work groups (sets of individuals collaborating on a task) are strictly limited in size to around four individuals. Larger groups fail to coordinate effectively, are more prone to disagreements and conflicts and consequently shed members rather than recruit new ones. This finding has profound implications for how we organize work groups in order to maximize production of technology.
It would be interesting to validate this with GitHub contribution data.
refset•20h ago
> One important implication of our findings from the Wikipedia editors study is that work groups (sets of individuals collaborating on a task) are strictly limited in size to around four individuals. Larger groups fail to coordinate effectively, are more prone to disagreements and conflicts and consequently shed members rather than recruit new ones. This finding has profound implications for how we organize work groups in order to maximize production of technology.
It would be interesting to validate this with GitHub contribution data.
I came across this paper while skimming through Mark's recent blog post on knowledge graphs and LLMs: https://mark-burgess-oslo-mb.medium.com/the-role-of-intent-a...