touchstonelive.com — "At Google we have always thought that computer algorithms should be responsible for indexing and classifying information for people rather than the other way around." Is there a growing philosophical difference between the Google way of doing things and the Digg way of doing things?
Sep 15, 2006 View in Crawl 4
alphaoneSep 15, 2006
In short, yes.
agretSep 15, 2006
"Digg dupes have nothing to do with herd mentality."Yes they do, people only digg stories because they see other people have dugg them. If people actually read the stories they were digging they'd realise they were the same as the story they saw the day before on digg."They come from people who don't spend every waking hour on Digg, or cross examine every single story they digg with the search function."No, they come from submitters who are too lazy to use the search to see if what they are submitting was already submit before.
Closed AccountSep 15, 2006
"Digg Vs. Google - Is Herd Mentality Inferior to Algorithms" ... not accurate - Google and Digg are both largely algorithms. Digg's algorithms are just a bit affected by herd mentaliy, but the algorithms hae a dominant effect. The algorithmically determined threshold between something apearing on the first age or not an make the differene betwen something getting 30 diggs and 3,000 digs.
Closed AccountSep 15, 2006
"digg is bunch of links to "TOP 10 LINUX TIPS" pages"When it's good. More often a bunch "OMFG!!1 AMAZING Video Unlike Anything You've Ever Seen" links to some guy playing with dry ice or falling off a chair or something.
quasipalmSep 15, 2006
Google does use wisdom of crowds. Only, it's heard is the internet, rather than a small set of users. A "digg" on Google is an href to a page on another domain. It's still harvesting the power of the herd, even though it's not directly asking you for feedback.
gnutzuSep 15, 2006
Prediction: There will be a ton of academic papers written on this subject, and all should find this article wanting.WARNING: This article is biased as it is associated with a product "Touchstone".I'm pleased to see that so many Diggers the author's ignorance. Yes, the original academic work for Google focused on gleaning from a link's popularity (and I doubt that they have ever said otherwise). The "philosophical divide" the author describes is about how the social information is gleaned and not a matter of whether on not it is social information. That is, Digg requires active participation, while Google makes every attempt at gathering something that would seem to be rather unconscious (except where companies try to game Google).I'm only digging this because it's a thought provoking subject, but this author is a bit off mark (and may have a conflict of interest).
obkenobiSep 15, 2006
"Perhaps digg stories should be clustered together or show a list of "these are similar stories" ala google news."How is that different from submitting a URL in the comments of the story? You can't give credit to everyone submitting the same story because that could be easily exploited after the fact.
obkenobiSep 15, 2006
A misleading press release. Who would have thought?
obkenobiSep 15, 2006
Peepel!?