Quote Originally Posted by Vicker View Post
Have any of you bothered to read the actual journal article, rather than Slashdot's reaction to it?

The article is in a physics journal. Physicists seek to find general models that fit a wide range of systems. In this case, he chose gangs and online guilds because he viewed them as two very different systems, thus showing that his model is robust.

The mathematical equations that govern a spring are very similar to those for the force exerted between two atoms in a chemical bond. Does this mean that physicists think that atoms are actually held together by little tiny springs? No.

One physical model for electrical current flowing through a metal is the same as a model for a herd of buffalo running through an open plain. Does this mean that physicists think that electrons are the same thing as buffalo? No.

Perhaps you should read the journal article before you start insulting the author.
Yeah, I think people hear the words "guild" and "gang" and they knee jerk in response.

The paper itself seems like it is only available for purchase. It is difficult to gauge exactly what he is modelling from the article only.

Quantifying human group dynamics represents a unique challenge. Unlike animals and other biological systems, humans form groups in both real (offline) and virtual (online) spaces—from potentially dangerous street gangs populated mostly by disaffected male youths to the massive global guilds in online role-playing games for which membership currently exceeds tens of millions of people from all possible backgrounds, age groups, and genders. We have compiled and analyzed data for these two seemingly unrelated offline and online human activities and have uncovered an unexpected quantitative link between them. Although their overall dynamics differ visibly, we find that a common team-based model can accurately reproduce the quantitative features of each simply by adjusting the average tolerance level and attribute range for each population. By contrast, we find no evidence to support a version of the model based on like-seeking-like (i.e., kinship or “homophily”).
So the part I don't really get is:
Code:
a common team-based model can accurately reproduce the quantitative features of each simply by adjusting the average tolerance level and attribute range
What are the quantitative features?
What are the attributes?

The article is too sketchy to really understand anything.

The interesting part is:
By contrast, we find no evidence to support a version of the model based on like-seeking-like (i.e., kinship or “homophily”).
So how do race specific gangs fit into their model then?