One could argue though that theories in the social sciences are of greater importance than most mathematical statements, even though they are less predictive.
Rather striking that such a sentiment would find approval here. I'm not sure how you might actually defend such a statement. I would defy you to produce any fruits of sociology that are comparable to those of mathematics (remembering that everything in science and engineering hedges upon math).
I defy you to show me a math book that makes no use of the written word or alternative forms of communication. Clearly linguistics is the most important subject and mathematicians are just a bunch of derivative hacks. :-)
Web 2.0 is one huge sociology experiment. Its scientists are entrepreneurs trying out new ideas and tweaking others with the goal of maximizing traffic.
It is...perhaps...a thing that falls under the rubric of "socialogical phenomena", but that doesn't really regard the science as such. It's just it's self-declared field of study. The science itself could have never existed and people would have still made webpages of various types.
Again, I don't think I need to point out that mathematics are a necessary condition (10,000 times over) for "web 2.0" to even exist.
Again, I don't think I need to point out that mathematics are a necessary condition (10,000 times over) for "web 2.0" to even exist.
I think it's more helpful to consider whether mathematics is at the core of most web 2.0 services or whether it is somewhat removed (e.g., part of an encryption library used by the service, part of building a computer, etc.).
