What is Digg?99 Comments
- Shizlak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Scary. The submitter, linuxfrancais, is definitely a shill and alot of the comments sound like paid testimonials... still a neat idea. However:
Site Advisor. I am now scared of your product and your company because of your underhanded, shady, marketing. What other distasteful activities does your company take part in?
I'm quickly getting tired of this *****. Keep your PR dogs on YOUR website.
uninstalling. - LoathRevolver, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Uh, my confidence was shaken in this product when I launched the website in Firefox and got this msg on the download page "We've detected that you're using IE." What? No I'm not... I will not be installing this...
- 3recurring, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hmm. So much of the praise for this sounds like the kind of crap testimonials and endorsments you find on the packaging of a rubbish product... makes me a little dubious. However, I'll reserve judgement until I've tested it properly.
- Sawyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just a quick post: This thing is a great extension-especially if your wife, mother, or ANY loved one likes to shop online.
I don't like bloat, but this is almost a necessary extension for any surfer who likes to go venture in new areas of the web.
If I had kids, even though I would never let them on the internet, SiteAdvisor would be a must. - wallclimber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I installed site advisor a few weeks ago. I set the permissions in my firewall that it had to "ask" permission to connect. I always do this to see how any new program behaves, as far as phoning home and "auto updating".
I only received one query for permission whenever I would log onto the Internet. However, after I would close out the browser I was bombarded with message afyer message from my firewall that site advisor was attempting to reconnect. I wrote to ask the good folks at site advisor about this behavior (thought there might be a logical reason), but they never responded. I just don't like any program to feel free to communicate with its homebase for no apparent reason, especially when there could not possibly be a reason once I have disconnected. It seemed odd behavior to me. I uninstalled it and have not recommended it to anyone else.
Can anyone explain why site advisor so insistantly "needs" to continue online after the browser is closed? I can't think of any good reasons myself, but am willing to listen if others have thoughts. - linuxfrancais, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Thanks suprman. I posted the link again because I believe the new site design is notable enough for a separate Digg entry.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"As you use SiteAdvisor's software, it checks our master database in order to display our safety ratings about the sites you visit. "
Sure, that isn't inefficient or anything. - DrEbola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Amazing how easy it is for moms to entertain themselves.
- ericesque, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I noticed that the majority of the positive comments which state 'great for your mom, uncle, aunt and your best friend's dog' have perfect grammar and spelling. Methinks these posts are likely PR folks doing their thing.
No digg. I really don't need some company to tell me if I'm going to get spam from registering my e-mail address. I pretty well KNOW that I will. Therefore, keep a spam account for signing up for anything AND an unrelated account for personal e-mail. If you really want e-mail from the company you signed up with, simply forward their e-mails to your personal account. There are reasons for filters, but it's not to keep spam out, it's to send e-mails you want to your real e-mail addy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The *trial* version is *** 19.0 ***?!?!?!
Jesus christ. What is their dev cycle like?! - linuxfrancais, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I just want to share a quick anecdote about how this software saved my ass from a spam overload recently.
I was at Jackpot.com and was about to sign up with my real e-mail address, which I guess is a little naive, because they have a "NO spam guarantee" on their site. SiteAdvisor's test showed that when they did this with a unique e-mail address, they started receiving 90 something spammy e-mails each week.
I've recommended this download to my friends and family and they like it too. - haxx4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Those family-oriented recommendations are questionable to say the least.
- Greg-J, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1QUESTION:
Do sites pay to be rated:?
ANSWER:
No. SiteAdvisor does not accept payment from sites to be rated or to have their ratings changed, so our ratings are objective and uniformly applied.
The trial version of our software is free of charge. In the future, we will offer paid versions with additional premium features.
...after we have collected enough personal information on your browsing habbits to sell it...
They have a decent gimmick going. Get people to do MA for you. Where have I seen this business model before... *cough* everywhere *cough*. Alexa was successful with it though.
This entire system is still extremely flawed though. This is going to have as much relevancy as an Alexa ranking. - Seafoodplate, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1digg.com gets blocked by my Mcafee SiteAdvisor all the time.
- history1me, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It feels like all of you guys work for these guys.... i dunno, it feels like their blowing their own whistle.
- gamekid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"We've detected that you prefer Firefox. Prefer IE?" *clicks Prefer IE?*
"We've detected that you prefer IE. Prefer Firefox?" *clicks Prefer Firefox?*
"We've detected that you prefer Firefox. Prefer IE?" *clicks Prefer IE?*
"We've detected that you prefer IE. Prefer Firefox?" *clicks Prefer Firefox?*
I wonder if this can be repeated infinitely many times... . - 6strings, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I too have no faith in this product or company.
1. Like the guy above, I was told their site had "detected I was using IE." *****. Opera on the Mac. Bad, bad sign when they can't even identify your browser properly.
2. Their tech contacts the site every time you mouse over a URL. Hello, this is an invitation to performance nightmare. Right now it may be passable because of the low number of users but it will quickly implode once things scale up.
3. SiteAdvisor is on a huge promotional kick right now and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this story was a plant by their PR people and they've hired other people to register digg accounts and click it up.
NO DIGG. - mutant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1everyone realizes that this reports all the websites you are visiting right? How is it these guys get a "holier than thou" pass?
***** this *****. - JMJimmy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Has anyone ever considered that the program itself is a form of spyware? Every link you hover hover, every link you click, all gets reported to them. They currently do not record IP info or anything else, however what happens when this "scale up" happens and their costs start rising - "support" buttons are never enough so they'll revise their privacy policy, throw it in an upgrade where few will read the licence and all of the sudden their tracking all kinds of people and what they do.... all for the sake of advertising... and then the US spooks & government.
Joy Joy! We live in 1984 - the lights are just prettier.
What ever happened to good ole sharing of knowledge and experience for the betterment of mankind? ::sigh:: - Malakin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1To the people getting the "We've detected that you're using IE" message it's because the browser you're using is identifying itself as Internet Explorer to their web server. Some versions of Opera do this by default. If you've messed around with user agent switchers in Firefox you may of set it to IE.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0very cool extension, works very well.
- minitechnik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0*reported as spam
this is a first step with what you install censorship. controlled by one company only. - bigcheez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is weird how things that look like spam often come from someone who recently created a digg account. linuxfrancais - 1st digg was six days before this story posted. I'm sure a lot of the pro-SiteAdvisors on here recently created an account as well.
- vypergts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm my own site advisor; if it looks shady it probably is :)
- CupofDice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I have been using it since download.com reviewed it, but lately I have to restart firefox to get it working. Still a good idea though.
- anonynous2_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Maybe it's not the best thing in the world after all... it rates doubleclick.net and others as "green" sites.
http://digg.com/security/SiteAdvisor_maybe_not_so_good.. - voltagex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.siteadvisor.com/download/ff.html for firefox
- bjhanifin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What about Google Safe Browsing for Firefox? It doesn't cost anything.
http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/safebrowsing/index.html - linuxfrancais, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Hey Sawyer,
I installed this on my mother's computer last week and she's completely in love with the little icon in her IE address bar. This saves me so much time because now I'll have to clean up her computer far less often. She loves downloading screensavers but stopped because she was afraid of spyware. Now she's back downloading screensavers again. SiteAdvisor's little extension lets people get more enjoyment out of surfing. - diggreen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I installed this on Firefox 1.5 and found that it really slowed down my browsing.
- DoubtfulSalmon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I put "ebaumsworld.com" in the 'look up a site report' box, just for ***** and giggles. It got a big fat red X
And the comments... "Word. Site. Evar!"
Yup, this works! - yahoofrom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0SiteAdvisor and disposable e-mail ---> less spam.
It's that simple. - t-readyroc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Netscape has had something like this built into it's browser since the 8.0 release. Being that Netscape has a very similar framework to FF, I'm suprised that an extension like this has taken this long to come out.
http://browser.netscape.com/ns8/security/default.jsp ("Trust Rating System") - wigginz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just a little FYI for the curious. We had our site rated in December 12, 2005 from what I can tell on our profile page. They submitted a comment through our contact form and we responded with an auto reply and an actual human response. Looks like that got us a good rating. I looked back at our ticket system and saw their comment... "Good service" ... uh, thanks?? Their email from was the domain iffsu.com... which is registered by Domains by Proxy.
- anonynous2_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My one complaint is that it added a search extension to Firefox without asking me first. A handy thing to have, but it was done transparent to the user, which I'm always against.
- NiLeS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I almost think this is a plant. Look at the poster's history:
http://digg.com/users/linuxfrancais/submitted
both are to the siteadvisor extension. Maybe he/she/it really likes this extension (which is pretty neat), but if people work for a company, they should say so. Not for sure if they are, just wondering... - jzillan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i'll like this a LOT
- scottt106, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm going to send this to everyone and their moms.
...especially their moms. - algorythm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0do they have somewhere that lists the worst rated sites on there somewhere?
- loudwhisper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nice extension
DIGG+ - rvidal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't know about any PR maneuvers but I happened to find this website through a friend of mine a couple weeks back and it's been a big help. I mean, it keeps regular internet users safe(r) from getting hammered by spam, virus, popups, etc
I had written a short article about it on my portuguese antispam website
http://www.eliminarspam.com/noticias/entrada/29/
Bad PR moves or not, this is a great extension for your girlfriend, mom, uncle, aunt, etc - rm999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/download.com/summary/
this seems like a conflict of interest to me - on the front page they show off how they are a top 5 download.com program, and then they sugarcoat download.com by claiming download.com actively removes adware and spyware (why I don't think they do).
Who even uses download.com anyway? It sucks. - wgchinn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The SiteAdvisor extension is not compatible with BetterSearch 1.9. Multiple checks, x's are displayed and overlayed in the Google display. Choose between safety and displaying the thumbnail; I chose safety (I get tired of cleaning up after unsafe sites or spam sites).
- mutant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm amazed that people are turning a blind eye to this company. They have to make money -- this isn't some altruistic *****.. They have to sell YOUR surfing habits, mabey not "Fred ***** frequents so and so site." but they still have to make money some how.. WAKE UP!
- copernic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It looks like a really good way to force out bad sites.
- sremick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hmm, not sure this is working too well.
I first visited MozillaZine, and it took a while before the button went from gray to green. But I've been on several sites since, and everytime I click on "view site details", I still get the details page for MozillaZine. - jlbraun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm currently looking at the packet trace in Ethereal.
- knight007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0correction....I take it back, go figure that a couple of different sites I needed to go to would be conveniently down when I am testing the app....so I take back my earlier comment...though I wish I knew how to delete it instead.
- Postoasted, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've got enough security for web browsing already. No thanks.
- airship, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Are you sure this thing works? It has Digg flagged as 'green'. :)
-
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is