What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
40 Comments
- iomegaboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I still don't know what Web 2.0 means.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12***** the ChaCha and Ask Jeeves hype. Everyone still uses Google.
- Virak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Web 2.0 = Web 1.0 + rounded corners + shiny logo with gradient + perpetual beta + more JS than page content + allowing users who don't know anything about the subject matter to contribute + some ***** about how you're revolutionizing the Intertubes + more buzzwords than a mere mortal can comprehend.
I probably missed a few things, though, so don't treat it as an exhaustive list. - chrozz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7ChaCha Is terrible. Especially being a guide for them. Its a pyramid scheme to the highest degree.
web 2.0 searching is great thou, it just cannot rely on people power, it needs to be software power. - kenvsryu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You should see the fun that can be had with cha cha guides!!!
You: i'm looking for a non-porn midget pudding, or jello wrestling link. i need pictures to photoshop some bimmerforums members
maryw: Thanks for being patient! Rest assured I'm finding the most relevant results for your search.
You: thanks i appreciate that. if you can, find some with faces exposed, so i can better photoshop their faces on to the midgets
Transfer: You are being transfered to another guide who can help you search even better!
Looking for guide ...
Status: Connected to guide: BrianW
BrianW: Welcome to ChaCha!
BrianW: hello
You: hello, dod maryw tell you what i'm looking for?
BrianW: yep, non porn midget
BrianW: that right?
You: yes, i was hoping for pudding, or jello wrestling. i need them to photoshop some bimmerforums OT members on to the midgets.
BrianW: ahh, photochopper
BrianW: think i gotta good one for ya hang on
You: yes, i recently thought of this after some great pwnage of some socal douche.
BrianW: lol
BrianW: this sight says they have it but i'll keep looking
BrianW: may could come up with something with this
You: i found it on there. i'll just do some screen shots. thanks alot brian.
BrianW: glad i could help man
BrianW: good luck!!!
BrianW: Thanks for using Chacha have a great day!
BrianW: Please RATE ME. Thanks for using ChaCha.
Status: Session ended. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5All in favor for calling websites, WEBSITES, say I!
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Digg needs any kind of search that actually works.
- AcidPhysx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It is a word. Nothing more. The first person to contradict me better explain in full detail with understanding. So if you point me at the pile of ***** "cloud map", explain to me in detail what it means. Show me the standard. What? There is no standard? No RFC? No guidelines? Then Web 2.0 is *****.
- Propapanda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Welcome to the anti-social.
- mweels, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4ok web 2.0 should be banned.
- AcidPhysx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Or just continue to develop and evolve design and technology like we always have been doing without giving it a retarded name people can throw around.
My ***** is usually rounded with a gradient. I call it ***** 2.0, and let me tell you, people without ***** 2.0 are in the dust! - Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, we ran out of short, easy to remember, 3 letter acronyms. That just left us with 4 and 5 letter acronyms. Some were easy to remember (AJAX, JAVA and RUBY for example), but the rest were just to hard. So instead of trying to explain what all the letters mean to every non-webdeveloper, we just decided to roll it up into one big catch-phrase. And we called it Web 2.0.
- foxymcfox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3How is it a pyramid scheme? New guides can only be invited by existing guides, but the existing guides do not get any benefit from recruiting...their pay remains the same. Instead, pay is based on quality of their search and the level of positive feedback they get. Seems fair to me.
- foxymcfox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I doubt this is real, BrianW is breaking a lot of the rules for ChaCha guides. He would have never made it past training if he really behaves like that during a search session.
- foxymcfox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ChaCha Guides can come from anywhere. They are strictly an army of willing searchers. In fact, all of the Guides I know are American.
- Joroth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3So far as I've been able to tell It basically means they spent more time making the title of the page neon and glossy (a must for web 2.0) as well as reflective. That'll bring you up to about web 1.5, to get that extra push you need to add a bunch of sunbursts and for an added effect, make them glossy too...oh and add a gradient. Then sir you can have your very own web 2.0 site as well!
- 3dom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Having some person do the searching for you"
well thats just fine, cos I can sit on my ass and drink beer and be just as unproductive with the added risk of someone else doing my research for me. - JrGhoull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1damnit ken beat me to the cha cha site...
i dont use it too much myself but the one or two times that i have used it, the experience has been good and the results they give me are reasonably decent. the only question i have is: india, phillipines, or both? - andreiknox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's right there in the article.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No, that is what is in my blocklist.
- kungfuice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I don't really see a point to this article. Wink isn't even really a search engine it's more of a people finder, and ChaCha is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever seen. Having some person do the searching for you, when I tried this they still couldn't find what I was looking for, and it took almost 10minutes for the "searcher" to get my none results back.
Plus what added value does web2.0 bring to the search engine anyway? Does anyone remember the Microsoft Live search beta, that was full of amazing web 2.0 technologies that also was a bloated piece of crap?
I mean a search engine is designed to find you relevant information according to what you are looking for, I really don't care what it looks like I just want it to be fast, simple, and get the most relevant information to what I'm looking for. So really what should a good search engine have, amazing algorithms that do their job fast and effectively. This is why Google has done so well at what they do, and why search engines like Microsoft Live Search have failed. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That one of the most incredibly annoying things I have ever seen. Do you realize that clippy was universally annoying? Making it into a woman that mocks you is now not just annoying but also frustrating.
- reticulate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I hate anything with a 2.0 moniker.
It's a buzz word for 'new and interesting things on them there internets' and makes anyone who talks about it look like a tool. - groe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Exactly, and who does the best job of letting users create their own vertical search sites? I've tried Euekster's Swickis and Rollyo's whatevers, but for my money Google Co-op is by far the best, if for no other reason than that it doesn't limit the number of sites you can specify.
- bb112266, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did you know that Google or Yahoo does not show everything that is online? Then who could. With del.icio.us, stumble upon, and others like it, one can find sites that could never be found. Things are changing and it is doing it at an alarming rate. One might have to do search to be able to search in the way of the future.
- jake13jake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2.dennab eb dlouhs 0.2 bew ko.
...Agreed! - godzilla81, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0People would not depend on Google or Yahoo anymore on finding info that they need, vertical search - search that niche to particular field will be popular. People dont mind to go to particular niche site and do search there to find what they need, compare with in the old days people only go to google and then spend a long time to find the relevant answer.
- godzilla81, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The future of search rely on getting all the source of info that we need integrated together in one search result page, including text, audio, video, interactive, blog, and any other relevant material. This what Google do with http://www.searchmash.com/, although what lack of it is they use the same algorithm with the google.com.
Wikis type of search would also will boom in the future since people couldnt really found relevant info from google result fast enough. Since people can do black hat SEO to trick Google, the user cannot find enough relevant info from Google result page. - gfxblit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you haven't already, check out msdewey (http://www.msdewey.com/), a search engine that shows results through a sexy-looking video woman. Kinda reminds me of a sexy version of the Microsoft paper-clip......
- kewlceo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Buried for lame content.
- duzbin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1or uncyclopedia
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0 - duzbin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Have a look at wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0 - maoru, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Digg needs search 2.0
- swift, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I use http://www.msdewey.com/ for all of my needs!
But for real searching needs I use Google.... - 3dom, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1if that's truly for real, that's some ***** 2.0 right there lol
- JohnnyHuh, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1The future of search isn't a portal, the future of search is contextual automatic results delivered to you.
Check out www.intellext.com. - DiggChainey, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2http://scoopvid.com already a web 2.0 search interface lets you search across thousands of mainstream video sites.
- DiggChainey, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1I use it everyday
- Acko, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1done . continue with this.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -27/+4Will it blend? :)
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is