Maria Konnikova in her article of the limits of friendship uses Robin Dunbar into exploring the eponymous number that he established almost through accident. Through Oxford University, in particular, the anthropologist department they were looking into the challenges that were dwelt in realizing the difficulty of why primates devoted most of their time into grooming. While analyzing this process, he was able to stumble across a far more intriguing application for his research. At this exact time of his studies, there was a lot of research that had been undertaken concerning the Machiavellian hypothesis, which held that the primates had quite large brains because they dwelt in complex cultural societies (Konnikova).
The basis for this argument lay with the fact that the larger the occupancy group, the larger the brain, and from this, it was realized that the size of the animal's neocortex, with so much evaluation on the frontal lobe, then it was possible to predict the group size of the particular animal socially. With Dunbar's use of the grooming data, this was used as an effort of making the real mental leap to humans, and as he described from this is that they also had humans, and from this, they were pursued into identifying the size group that the relationships might predict for human beings. From there Dunbar was able to able to apply the ration of the neocortical volume with the average group size, and this was with the sole purpose of identifying the number
With proper judgment on the size of an average human brain, it came out clear that on average the actual number of individuals that could participate in the social group was around a hundred and fifty. He also claimed that anything that went beyond this would be entirely complex in handling, and this was mainly at the optimal processing stages. Over the past 24 years, it is claimed that Dunbar has been looking to explore and evaluate what that number means, and on whether the ever-expanding technology has done anything in changing this phenomenon. This number as expressed through Dunbar represents a series of them, and this 150 claims the number of individuals described by the terms casual friends, in actual reality. However, this number represents a hundred at the furthest low end, and this represents the much social individuals. From there was the representation of qualitative interviews that further record the analysis of both experimental and the actual survey data.
The other article of analysis is by Nick Paumgarten, on his description of the fact that we are a camera, which provides a brief report on the story of Chase, which contains the relationship of the deficit brain syndrome of this era, which is explored through his agony of missing a shot trumps on the joy of the actual experience that was worth shooting, from this the adventure athlete then identifies himself as something else, notably a content creator, and this is based on the fact that at first, he was in a position of doing his things, and this was made possible because of the fact that he was able to plan a killer trip and further complete it (Paumgarten). The whole purpose of a trip then lied about the intention of recording it; life had been reduced to the footage.
Woodman, who was the initial inventor of the camera that was used in this case had very proper plans when creating it, and this was to mainly invent a product that would suit the world that he had envisioned from the beginning. The rise of technology that made out his camera just after half a decade of what was seen as tinkering adequately coincided with the fruition that came with the broadband, and in addition to that the emergence of a number of social networks such as Facebook and YouTube, and this was for the purpose of the broad distribution of the video, and GoPro further rode into this wave. A fact that was seen as just another camcorder then became one of the leading connectors, and this was between what goes on in reality which is the real world to what goes on within the virtual world, this then made out the perfect feature of the look at me period.
The primary significance of what was experienced here is that there was the sublimated conveyance of the self, and this goes into explaining the sneaky tolerable narcissism. The GoPro footage was further interconnected to the sensation of the selfie, and this was with the notion based on "Here I am" ethos, with the number of both views and mounts, which would in most circumstances allow the filmmaker to either include his whole self or some of the parts. The main point with this, however, lies with the fact that it typically points on the outward records, and on this basis it forms part of what experiences look like, and this was instead of representing what the individual with the experience looked like, and this was particularly based on when the process stopped and in addition to this arranged all the related features into the actual photo face. The impact of this would not represent much of a selfie but rather a "worldie," and this is a representation of the story that is more likely to be told about a given adventure rather than on the photo that accompanies it.
Works Cited
Konnikova, Maria. www.newyorker.com. 7 October 2014. https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/social-media-affect-mth-dunbar-number-friendships.
Paumgarten, Nick. www.newyorker.com. 22 September 2014. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/22/camera.
