What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
152 Comments
- maxyRO, on 12/14/2007, -2/+40Google will become slowly but surely #1 in everything.
- xirtap, on 12/14/2007, -2/+29No, but I do get nervous when I think about how dependent on google we are becoming.
- kidvitacus, on 12/14/2007, -6/+33Is anyone else getting nervous when they think of how encompassing the big G has become and will continue to become?
- fkr3, on 12/14/2007, -2/+19I doubt it. Google hasn't managed to create anything that dislodged any established players since their initial / ongoing success with search/ads. The only way they can 'beat' wikipedia is if they 'buy' wikipedia.
- WordsnCollision, on 12/14/2007, -0/+15"Knol"?? I guess "Deep Thought" is copyrighted by the Douglas Adams estate...
- breckinshire, on 12/14/2007, -0/+11I had to look up Squidoo on Wikipedia. I don't think the big Wik's going anywhere.
- ebarras, on 12/14/2007, -0/+11Look it up on Wikipedia...?
- TangentThought, on 12/14/2007, -0/+11Could someone explain how or why the name "Knol" was chosen?
- GreenGrassyNoel, on 12/14/2007, -0/+9I'm a big fan of google, but am not excited about this product. I think wikipedia is great and isn't going away any time soon.
- eean, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8It seems like a very different project then Wikipedia. Basically its a way for people to get paid for putting up informative things on the Internet.
However Wikipedia is a collaborative effect. I do wish it wasn't pseudonymous though, thats the only advantage Knoll will have over Wikipedia (Knoll contributors will use their real names apparently). - CaptMonkey, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8Because cyber-squatters had already taken all of the names that made sense.
- mstoneburner, on 12/14/2007, -2/+10Wikipedia users have exactly zero ***** say as to whether or not it gets sold.
- requinox, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8Probably because wikipedia's search function is so awful that people use google to find wikipedia articles.
- Nichiren, on 12/14/2007, -2/+10Meh... let them. Before Google, no one seemed to be actively trying to improve the webspace to the extent that they're attempting and the monopoly we mostly had to deal with was Microsoft who was getting much too arrogant for their own good. If Google ever got as arrogant as Microsoft did and starts mistreating its users, then I could see how another company in the future would try to take them down. For now though, Google treats its users well so I don't see anything wrong with their current growth.
- hollowex, on 12/14/2007, -1/+8Google reminds me of the of the flying spaghetti monster.
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -3/+10Already tried by Wikinfo, Citizendium, Conservapedia, ...
- angers, on 12/14/2007, -0/+7knowledge perhaps
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+7Pseudonymous is better for writing about things without being harassed by scientologists, the FBI, etc.
In the early years of Wikipedia, it was thought that all the pseudonymous edits would tend towards truth over time.
Now the emphasis is on references, and edits are supposed to be judged by their references, not by the people who make them. I'm not sure which is better, but the Wikipedia approach seems to work pretty well regardless. - wendelgee2, on 12/14/2007, -2/+8Some day we will look back on some of these Google undertakings (comprehensive book scanning and streetview, in particular) as the "pyramids" of our times--great and ambitious works made possible only by a great empire.
- Bridea, on 12/14/2007, -0/+6Google continues on its relentless march to know everything in the world.
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -3/+9Google has the market no doubt, thanks!
- ShootTheCore, on 12/14/2007, -2/+7No Users = No Website
- ebarras, on 12/14/2007, -2/+7Why are so many people so worried about "unfair competition". What is that? "-Monopolies are bad for the little guys." Sounds like crap to me, if the little guys would be innovative, then they would have value. Want proof? A few years ago Google was the little guy...
- Godlike, on 12/14/2007, -2/+7I only use Google maps now, and I don't have any office software on my home machine because I just use Google docs. Gchat has replaced all of my IM clients since the addition of AIM to it... I think they have plenty of products that have dislodged other products.
- nallelcm, on 12/14/2007, -1/+6yeah, you're right... And everyone knows that it's easier for a small no name site to start up than it is for Google to start and push one.
- wendelgee2, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4Mr. Delusional Boy?
How much marketshare did the pyramids have? None, because that wasn't the point. - ajnandrew, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4Yeah, I'll agree to that.
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4Because Wikipedia users won't let them.
"Why don't they just take Wikipedia's open source content and wrap a decent user interface around it?"
VERY good question, self. - ymmy, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4Why wouldn't Google compete with Wikipedia. Look at top 10 google searches:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist2007/
All of these have Wikipedia in the top 10 results. I am sure the trend continues from 11 on. - myFriendDerrik, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4They could call integrate it into Android and call it "The Guide"
- goffy59, on 12/14/2007, -0/+4sounds like you hate google, and from your other comments you hate freedom too.
- hollowex, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3i's a unit of knowledge.
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3???
- magnusdopus, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3There's a big difference between Wikipedia and Knol. The former is collaborative and the latter is not.
- manfrin, on 12/14/2007, -1/+4And you represent a small percentage.
- windyridge, on 12/14/2007, -7/+10Google has to get it's tentacles in every pie and with every bite they become a little bit more like an evil monster. Soon they will own the internet if we aren't careful. Monopolies are bad for the little guys.
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3Wikipedia needs competition. Even if it doesn't "choke" them (which it won't), it will at least give them a nice wake-up slap.
- abran1984, on 12/14/2007, -3/+6We don't need another Wikipedia Google...
- Alkivar, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3I say your wrong because Wikipedia's managing board the Wikimedia Foundation has a track record of screwing the pooch on stuff as simple as a hiring of a staff member. See the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essjay_controversy ... or more recently: http://digg.com/world_news/Wikipedia_COO_was_convi ...
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3Seriously. MapQuest sat around stagnant for years until Google Maps came along. Finally they were forced to innovate or die.
- UrlorJkron, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3Looks like something that should just stay in labs to me. Gone too far? It's not even out yet.How can one tell?
- GreyICE, on 12/14/2007, -2/+5Remember Mapquest? Yahoo Mail/Hotmail? They might not be dead, but Google is walking all over them.
- HonestAbe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3I wish I could digg that 500 times. I love Wikipedia and contribute to it regularly, but the software, interface, developers, and conflict resolution politics suck so much ass. Please compete with Wikipedia, if only to force them to adopt realistic, user-friendly policies and procedures.
- willemmulder, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3what's MapQuest?
- NinjaBoy, on 12/14/2007, -2/+512/18/07 the day google skynet became self aware.
- NathanielJ, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3I'll repeat what others have said re: Mapquest, and Hotmail.
And AdSense is monumentally successful, regardless of whether or not it's #1. - waterlog777, on 12/14/2007, -1/+4I've been using Gmail since being invited during the beta. This has replaced all of my other email accts. The newest Google Maps on mobile devices add a basic GPS functionality. The Google book search is also a nice replacement of a card catalog and a copier if you ask me. Oh, and the google customized hompage is a great time saver/waster. Google calendar is pretty helpful. And.... and .... and
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -1/+4Just to point out how ***** stupid you really are...if Gmail is walking all over Hotmail and Yahoo Mail, then Yahoo search and Live Search are DESTORYING Google search. Because Yahoo and Live search are FAR closer to Google in search than Google is to Yahoo Mail and Hotmail
- sandanista, on 12/14/2007, -1/+4Great, I can't wait for google's own pages to rank in the top 10 of its own search results for everything. Might as well just have a site search at google.com...
...At least they are still do....erm....no....what was the last one...evil? - streak, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3Now we'll have Google's droids, who think they're experts but aren't, expanding their shenanigans from the current web site descriptions to an entire knowledge base.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 155 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is