[pixelphantom]

"Our true social graph is what affects every single innate decision and action we make and take, as well as structuring the way we are influenced."

This simply isn't true. If I decide not to go to the beach because it rained, I just based my decision on something that has zero to do with my "true social graph."

I think this might actually be where your deeper mistake in reasoning is - the assertion that relevancy is based solely on your social graph. The fact that this is NOT so is exactly why Facebook does NOT show me content that is most relevant to me - it simply shows me content that was shared or created by my friends and family. That in and of itself doesn't make it relevant to me. It simply means: "hey here is a piece of content and you happen to know the makers of or someone who likes it."

The tricky part is determining what relevancy really means. I think this changes in different contexts.

And finally, I also simply cannot agree with this statement as it stands: "implicit personalization of everything on the web will become reality and nothing will nor should be static content." I really do hope that the latest New York Times article on the conflict in Mali is the same text regardless of whether you are I read it - i.e. that it's static and doesn't change.

I think reality is a bit more nuanced than what sweeping statements allow for.

[tchae]

Yeah, I didn't do a great job conveying my perspective on what makes the true social graph. I don't believe social graph is just people. It's literally everything around you. Everything from TV show or broadcast you're watching or news you're hearing to even the environment and setting around us which is the weather.

Everything in life is connected - and that's the graph.