What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history - the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
144 Comments
- stealthboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Combine Slashdot's comment moderation system with Digg's story promotion, and THEN you're done. But right now Digg's comment system is no good.
- Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Digg is NOT /.'s death. Not unless changes are made to the commenting section of digg...
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I don't mind digg, but it's definitely not the end of slashdot. the fact is, Digg makes slashdot a better place by digging up articles for slashdot to talk about.
Of course, the community is polarized; if you just want to read the effin news now, you read digg. If you want to talk with others about the news, Slashdot's your friend.
And I agree with the comments here; the engine is terrible, trolls don't get modded away, and the signal to noise is virtually 50/50. Until the comment engine grows up (and for that matter, a great deal of the audience), Digg will just augment slashdot and fark. - spiderland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"Digg is NOT /.'s death. Not unless changes are made to the commenting section of digg..."
Agreed. I'm sick of one liner comments that only serve to spam a user's blog URL. - Scarblac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I don't agree. They're too different.
Slashdot doesn't have great stories. They have a lot of stupid ones, they have bad links to the good stories, the submission text usually sucks. But they do get most of the stories that all these sites get; sometimes /. is first, sometimes Digg is first, sometimes some other site... who cares.
Where Slashdot shines is the comments. Yes, seriously. Tweak the way you want to have comments moderated, browse at +3, and it rocks. There is no site out there that have so many reasonably good experts posting on such a wide range of topics. Pretty regularly, the people the article is about show up in the comments. It's stupid since the site isn't good, the editors aren't good, but the community is there and it's not anywhere else. There's a reason why people say nobody reads the articles on Slashdot...
Bruce Perens tried to start a better Slashdot with Technocrat.org, it has good stories, actual editors, and nobody posting. And a lot of tech problems. It's not so easy.
Digg has users modding stories and it looks slick. That's about it. But the stories are sooo full of _old_ stuff (links to things that are just nerd cliches, e.g. the "Wow!" signal, as if they're something new). And dupes. And random stuff that just isn't good, but some people liked the headline. And no serious discussion.
Digg is just another blog I visit to pick up some fun links to procrastinate a bit; there are lots of them. Slashdot I only click on the comments. - zeroreality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Where is all this hateraide coming from? Why can't both site co-exist? I don't get all this down with /. or down with digg. They both have their place and they both do somethings better than the other and some things worse.
No digg. This is a rant that has been and I am sure will be going on for a while. And a needless rant at that. - zeroreality, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Hmmm just reading through the comments here, it's very hard to try and find "discussion". A lot of people post (including myself sometimes) without even reading anything previously and it shows. Try it, read the posts in order and see if you can find a conversation taking place . . . I can't. Digg needs to address this issue.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I used Slashdot since just about the beginning. When I finally signed up for an account, there were only about six thousand members. Eight years later, I still go there occasionally, but I've switched over to Digg mostly.
I hardly thing Digg is Slashdot's dethknell. See, Slashdot's biggest problem is that it relies on a handful of editors who do their job very poorly. But if you compare it to Digg, all of the same problems exist here, too. Duplicates. Spam (even spam articles). Trolls. Lame stories. Poorly edited stories. The only difference is that on Slashdot the ***** editing and article selection is due to a handful of editors. Digg suffers all the same problems, but its' the fault of the stupid users.
At least I could trust that I would never see a frontpage article on Slashdot about a single nifty CSS trick or how to make a ***** crossover patch cable or a link to some guy's blog where he links to a lame ass "funny" video clip. - spiderland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5There we go - 5m0k3's comment is EXACTLY why Digg's comments section sucks. Pointless one-liner, only serving to spam his blog URL.
- DarkSideofMoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I use Digg for the stories.
I use Slashdot for the insightful* commentary.
*Relatively insightful, compared to Digg. (Ex. "No Digg!", "Dupe!!", "Fanboy!!!" ) - crizo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I like slashdot. Dig can be entertaining, but I rarely bother with the comments because it's full of "me too" and "that sucks" and not much insightful information. They're really for two different audiences. Slashdot says right on the home page "News for Nerds". I don't see digg claiming to have any niche like that. Maybe Digg's motto should be "News for Lemmings"
- databasecowboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Because of the flat commenting, there is less of a community being built. Conversations are discouraged so bad comments get nuked rather than discussed encouraging people to just keep their crazy ideas rather than discuss them.
Digg is okay at being slightly faster than /. with some news, but if you have a healthy diet of news sites(NYTimes, theregister, chicagotribune, boingboing, fark), it's not ahead of the curve. Check out http://diggvsdot.com/... the score is widening, but I still prefer Slashdot's comments on the story. I read other sites to keep up on what's happening and one of those sites is digg, but I read the comments on slashdot to get a more rounded interpretation of the news and better insight.
There's two ways to get attention: be cool like a wolf or be cheeky like a chimp. Digg is still pretty chimp like and will remain like that until conversations and community can be built. Unfortunately the architecture isn't built for community.
The features I like of digg are the spell check (although it should be able to handle tech words) and the fact that anyone can mod... however it's nice to be able to read a -1 on slashdot and see everything, even the gayniggers; it makes you feel less paranoid to know that the site is only moderated and not censored. If Digg adopted those slashdot qualities, I could see it burying the /., but for now it's apples and oranges. Digg is a decent news site, slashdot is a great community that is more than just a news site. - scottatdrake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4As far as the site itself goes, I like Digg better.
The only problem with Digg are the QUALITY of the comments. Slashdot appears to have fewer morons posting (present comany excluded) and, thus, more interesting and higher-quality comments. - Pxtl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4THe fact is that Digg isn't Slashdot.
Digg is like a mishmash - the threaded conversations and frequent headlines of Fark, the user-drivenness of Kuro5hin, the techieness of Slashdot, and the young politeness and prettiness of Livejournal. As it ages, the prettiness will be antiquated and the politeness will give way to trolls, spammers, political flamewars, and crapflooders. The imageless /.-style comments will never allow the kind of community artistry of Fark (which is a good or bad thing, depending on your perspective), and the user-drivenness will become a backlash once the spammers figure out how to exploit it for pagerank (beatles-beatles anyone?). - teece, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well, the quality of *posts* at Slashdot is light years ahead of Digg (although they spend way too much time on pissant gaming any more).
A good 50% of the crap on Digg is outright ***** or spam (that is, a web post somewhere whose only purpose was to get Dugg). Digg really needs a no self linking policy, a la MetaFilter, and it probably needs to be extended to no friend linking. A ban hammer should be brought out for violators. That right there would do a lot to up the quality of the posts on the front page.
And the comments at Digg suck. But so do the comments at Slashdot. There once was a time, in the 90s, when reading the comments on Slashdot was fun and informative. That time is long gone. Considering that, right from the beginning, the comments at Digg more or less suck, that's not a good sign.
And yet, I'm here. Why? I guess I'm a news junkie. - panique, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4lol digg kill slashdot? gimme some of what y'all been smokin.
Sure, I like that I get access to more stories via digg. This is the definite, perhaps lone benefit of digg, from my perspective. I also believe (whether factual or perceived) the digg effect is much more hellatious than the /. effect.
I'll tell you what though, in the past weeks I have seen so many many stories that use dubious methods, or are completely lame or just plain false that have made the front page. And usually with 800 ++diggs to go with it.
My most recent example from yesterday is the use of Alexa to proclaim digg has "arrived" in the top-1000 sites. What a crock. I know if real geeks were hitting the digg/problem widgets that would never have made it to the front page, and if it did by some fluke, it would not have stayed long. Instead of that, most everyone just went digg-happy clicking the digg link probably without even reading the article.
And this is the big problem with digg. It encourages this sheep mentality. People are so busy digg-whoring they aren't even reading what has been posted. Do you guys really think PriceRitePhoto changed a damn thing as a result of the digg effect? You are deluded if you think so. My family owns a clicks-and-mortar in New York...let me tell you we have "fired" (lol) plenty of people just to get some of the whiniest people to stfu. That is part of the culture of New York, if someone doesn't like what you're saying on the phone, tell them what they want to hear. And if you don't believe me, just try to get a door hung or a window replaced (in NYC) and see how many "it'll be in tomorrows" you get before it is installed.
Slashdot has it's noise, that's for sure. But it has signal too. IMO a lot more signal than digg. For one thing, just threading the comments makes it possible to weed out the noise. Seeing who is replying to my posts enables me to converse with other geeks about topics, sharing and learning in the process. That is cool. That is something you cannot get on digg.
I'll still read digg. I'll still post on digg. When I just want a blast of news (which is not digg's hallmark lately), I'll come surf the mob mentality over here and get my links. I will attempt to empart some outside ideas (like this post) onto a deaf mass.
When I want a mob that gives me tools to sift the wheat from the chaffe, and provides connections for meaningful discourse, I'll go to /.
[/endofrant] - TheRealStyro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The author must be kidding. Excepting some moderation mistakes (such as an article appearing two or three times), slashdot is considerably better than Digg. Slashdot has a threaded comment section where actual discussion could take place (& frequently, fanboi/troll bs). Digg has an open article promotion (that appears to be frequently abused), and a spell checker (that needs technical words to be added).
Both systems seem to complement each other. It is a Coke v. Pepsi type of thing. Visit both regularly (along with Ars Technica) and you will be keeping as up-to-date as reasonably possible. - solodigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Digg has short comments, sometimes by complete idiots; Slashdot has some very in-depth discussion by extremely knowledgeable folks. Sometimes...
- mboverload, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3*****.
Slashdot has real discussions. The Digg comment system is nothing compared to the community over there. - monolith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have to agree on the comments. I think the slashdot commenting gets abused by introspective neardowells staring deep into thier own navels... sheesh get a blog already! The digg comments tend to be a lot more compact... I like that.
- Luftwaffle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah right. What a fanboy. Look at all the goofy-ass submissions that make it to the front page here. They're ridiculously editorialized, have all kinds of spelling and grammar mistakes, and often have nothing to do with technology.
Digg has a long way to go before it reaches Slashdot's level. - miscoco, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5What the above people said about comment moderation. The quality around here is more on par with Fark, unfortunately.
- empty01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Okay, every time I hear /. sucks I can see a little 15 year old script kiddy at home with no life. Look, /. has it's flaws but so does digg. I like the aspect of digg that allows one to refresh the main page and see 5 new stories and the ability to sort through all the stories. I frequent /. once a day though, quite often there is quite a bit more quality and maturity to the posts. This story gets a lame just because it's inflammatory and bashing something that I can see no major flaws. Really, grow up. I for one don't see the point behind the perceived competition between the two. I guess these stories illustrate the lack of maturity on digg which is it's core problem. I have yet to see Slashdot take anything but the high road.
- dayquil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"+digg anyway" is the dumbest thing ever. don't digg it just cuz you were dumb enough to read it. this is why digg will NOT damage slashdot the way some people seem to want it to. Human editors are a very powerful thing and you simply cannot trust mass mind to make the cream rise to the top. There are good stories that hit the front page on digg, but there's alot of asinine crap too. Any ***** can take a dump on their keyboard and spread a rumor about Apple. And it'll be dugg, you better believe it.
There will always be room for slashdot, because there will always be people who don't have time to deal with the drivel that seeps through Digg. The idea that the two can't or won't coexist is for 12 year olds. - Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Deathknell? Maybe not; it's just siphoning off users who are less suited to Slashdot's style.
- AbsentLight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Slashdot has never been that great. Just a bunch of whiny people bitching about Microsoft most of the time."
Digg has never been that great. Just a bunch of whiny people bitching about Slashdot most of the time. - tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Because god forbid two popular tech sites coexist, each filling a different niche...
- rolypolyman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've never been happy with slashdot, but digg is already growing far too much... 15 minutes after a story appears, the comments are completely flooded and the comments take considerable time to load. As others have pointed out, comment quality is lower than Slashdot, and I feel futility in even commenting, much less going through 300 comments and rating them. Bigger is not better -- it's the Achilles heel of this empire.
- imav, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It'd be nice if you could set a filter for dig to filter stories containing both the words "digg" and "slashdot"
- wysiwia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Slashdot live off its comments and Digg will only take fully over when it has a better comment system. But Slashdot will finally break its neck because of its moderation system, it simply drives off anyone with a no conformant opinion.
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is total BS. Digg and Slashdot cater to two completely different groups. If I want (at least some) intelligent, thoughtful information, I'll read Slashdot. If I want to see the reaction of every h4x0r wannabe to the latest posts of whatever type, I'll read Digg. Two different flavors of ice cream, both good at the appropriate time and place.
- Torin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I read /. every day till they ran the story about Digg. Now I read Digg every day. Thanks /.
- metamongrel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yeah ok enough of this *****. this story appears on the front page about once a month. it's tired. what--there can't be two sites with tech/news info and comments?
- errer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Digg is proof that democracy does not work. Slashdot has a big problem with dupes, but other than that, they are superior to Digg in story quality. Also, the non-threaded commenting system makes the commenting tedious and annoying.
Digg does tend to be more current than Slashdot, however, which is its primary advantage.
So in short, Digg has to get a hell of a lot better before it supplants Slashdot. - Cthalupa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I like both sites.... But claims like this are ridiculous.
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://digg.com
Site Rank: 1111
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=slashdot.org
Site Rank: 65
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=digg.com
Site Rank: 970
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=slashdot.org
Site Rank: 460
Plus, the same people that own Slashdot own Sourceforge, which is another extremely popular site. Even if digg surpassed Slashdot in terms of visits (Which it hasn't yet), it would hardly be 'dying'.
Sourceforge links -
(Site Rank: 127) http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=sourceforge.net
(Site Rank: 226) http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://sourceforge.net - shakin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If Slashdot begins allowing members with Excellent karma promote stories then it'll have everything Digg has and more. It'll still be different and both sites will be worth visiting.
I find that on Digg I read the articles and on Slashdot I read the comments. There are some incredibly smart people on Slashdot who offer really great insight to science and tech-related stories. I guess tech knowledge is quite common, but some of the physics and other science knowledge on Slashdot is quite unique to that site. - SuperFarStucker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Digg is an interesting concept but I see two fundamental flaws in the design. The biggest is the comment system, it just sucks, almost every other news aggregators commenting system is lightyears ahead, /. included. Second, is the lack of any gatekeepers at all is a huge miscalculation. Somebody needs to be doing story filtering, though perhaps they could be more liberal with what they accept and *then* let the users moderate the good and bad stories. I think the two tier approach would combine the advantages of both.
- NuclearWhale, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I dont understand why everyone thinks that its /. vs. Digg...dont people realize that you can use more than one website! i promise no one will call you a web-whore if you look at both /. and digg...
not to mention people who actually know what they are talking about post on /. instead of just the random fanboy bull that largely makes up digg's comments - panique, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2sorry, I forgot part of my rant.
One of the things that cracks me up the most, and I think is absolutely the lamest thing about digg is all these guys that say "no digg". 1) who gives a *****? 2) it's a digg, not some hot young pussy you're withholding. 3) get a life. - Chango_Family, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Enough!!! This sizing up your pecker thing is getting really old.
If I want mass quantity of everything, Digg is the place.
Slashdot still has some amazing threads which are often more informative than the story itself.
This extremist mentality that for one to thrive another has to fail is idiotic, unhealthy and childish.
Someones failure will not make "your" success feel better
.
As for the dweeb who posted on the site where the story (its too short to be anythin more than a note) appeared was priceless. He thought that Slashdot was too pro-Linux and Open Source. No ***** Sherlock...really?
This of course is the same subspecies that will go on a Mac site and complain that they write about Apple too much.
No digg.
And we should - wastern, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
digg and /. are 2 different site, stop with all the hate posts.....its NOT tech news. its petty and stupid. DO NOT digg this stuff
i'm not a /. user, i could care less about them. why clutter this site with them. you do know all that does is give them more traffic. people that don't know about them or don't go there are going to start checking them out. you are doing a disservice to your whole cause
STOP. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Great, Not another Digg vs /. crap article.
When last you've heard Slashdot say anything negative about Digg? - theWaterboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Although I love digg.com, they have some work to do. There are far too many articles getting dug up to the front page that are kinda lame.
Maybe a system needs to be added like; 'digg', 'double-digg', or the best rating being 'triple-dog-digg'. The stories that get more double, and triple diggs get promoted faster.
Another idea is to give us users a userpoints system (ie. points for articles and comments submitted), and people with higher userpoints 'diggs' count more than people with lower, or no userpoints.
Just my 2ยข - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The comment system on slashdot is far superior to digg's and it keeps me going back. Because damnit, those conversations are interesting.
- mizzoucat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Slashdot = Good Information (what I use when I want reliable information)
Digg = A bunch of useless crap (what I use at work when I'm bored) - hexix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This story pretty much explains for itself why Digg is not the death of slashdot. Far too many stories on digg are short blog posts that are pushing an agenda. Whether it's that xbox sucks, ps3 sucks, or slashdot sucks.
Then the other half of the time the stories are completely misleading and wrong. But diggers digg based on the headline, so they get to the frontpage anyway.
I enjoy Digg and the idea behind it. However, let's get realistic. Even though slashdot has its problems, at least there is some effort to make sure a story is credible. - theendlessnow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21. Many senseless articles (makes /. look fantastic in comparison).
2. A GAZILLION duplicate submissions (makes searching WORTHLESS).
3. No easy way to search comments (I didn't figure it out anyhow).
I'm not saying digg.com is bad... but I do get more out of /. than digg. There's just a LOT more BAD (erroneous, misinformation, FUD) stuff in digg than there EVER/IS with /. digg is a wide open blog with no rules... /. moderation is not perfect, but at least it's something. - Gyga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2HAHAHA, I read both and can say I love /. a lot more. First comments, second less boring topics, third I find the good articles get on /. faster (unless you include the back section were you have to wade through badly worded submissions).
Slashdot is here to stay. - tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Quoth Seaumas: "At least I could trust that I would never see a frontpage article on Slashdot about a single nifty CSS trick or how to make a ***** crossover patch cable or a link to some guy's blog where he links to a lame ass "funny" video clip."
But see, to me that's why I still find both Digg AND Slashdot worthwhile. Slashdot has "heavier hitting" stories and great discussion ... but Digg has tons of things that I'd not have found otherwise. Like nifty CSS tricks. With the amount (and the nature) of users on Digg I wouldn't expect only "heavier hitting" stories (with proper discussion to match) to be promoted to the Front Page. - jcnnghm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The problem with Digg is the comment system is pathetic. The overall article quality isn't very good, and the audience isn't technical enough. Geek tests don't make the front page of Slashdot. Slashdot isn't going anywhere, especially if story moderation ever gets implemented.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 144 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is