What is Digg?55 Comments
- Cobainy, on 10/11/2007, -13/+121You were doing so well, my cursor was hovering over the 'digg it' icon, and then I read "LOL!".
Shame, eh? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+48"you could be the next Kevin Rose"
^^ The amount of Kevin Rose Fanboyism on this site is getting pretty pathetic. - dantidote, on 10/11/2007, -11/+40Thought the same thing, This isn't funny at all. Has LOL lost all meaning!? Personally, I'd support a ban of LOL, I can't ***** stand it anymore.
- inspecality, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22"- LOL!"
- willis77, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24Buried for "LOL" in description.
- santaliqueur, on 10/11/2007, -4/+21Equally pathetic is the extreme overuse of "fanboy".
- newstart, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20How did this make it to the front page????
People now simply go to alexa.com get data add web2.0, kevin rose,lol and post it on digg - GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15Alexa only gets data from people with Alexa toolbars, and from sites that use Alexa tracking systems. You could get two or three people to visit your site once a day with an Alexa toolbar, and it'll jump significantly in rank. Not many people use Alexa.
- HalBSure, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15Maybe they don't want to become millionaires.
- anitab83, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13So you must be a web 2.0 millionaire already! =)
- ArchieAndrews, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12The only thing Alexa is good for is helping you identify people who don't know how the internet works.
It's easy: If they think Alexa site rankings are statistically meaningful, they don't have a clue about the internet! - gamebittk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11"BLOCK ME!"
Sure thing! - gamebittk, on 10/11/2007, -6/+11Well, if can manage to get a post to your site on Digg every day *cough* Engadget *cough*... Your definately rich!
- snakesonasam, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8site down
obviously wont be the next WEB 2.0 site - LOL - Stochio, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7Day 1) "LOL" in a headline
Day 2) Civilization ends
(buried) - Downtime, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3bingo. page views are where the money is at.
- resta6, on 01/12/2009, -1/+4the big thing here, is that those unique visitors come back to those sites over and over and over again. Look at facebook, a typical user will go there 4 times during the day, and go look through 100s of pages with ads
- Radan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. What really defines a Web 2.0 today? At first, I thought it was a way to describe sites that in one way or another works like a normal application on the Web (like for example all the Google Web Applications). But then, it came clear to me that as soon as a page had some shiny buttons with lots of reflection and *****, it was declared as a Web 2.0 page. Though, I have a very hard time seeing where Wikipedia or Myspace falls into any of those categories.
- mattcampbell, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Can you even call Myspace Web 2.0?
- phalcon, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7amazing how elitist everyone can be. OMG'z you used "LOL" in your post. You must be a newb or a lam0rz! No wonder everyone over 40 thinks the internet is a bastion of clicky, self-supporting, high-fiving, circle jerk parties. ::end rant::
- Yez70, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5I once took a site from an Alexa rank of about 520,000 to 32,000 with the 3 computers in my house. I installed their toolbar on IE for each PC and visited one of my sites twice a day, surfing about 5 pages each time. It only took about six weeks to get my ranking up that high.
The site only got about 500-1000 visitors a day.
Alexa is a joke. It doesn't even support Firefox, which is 25% of all net users now. Tech heavy sites like Digg are showing 50-75% Firefox users. - tektalk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3But kevin rose admitted it himself that he's not even close to 1 million bucks
- bitcloud, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2not to mention it's ***** dangerous:
http://www.richgentlemenhide.com/comic/recurse-words/ - Rice, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4"LOL"
Bury. - r69er87, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2buried
- chuckpenzone, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Just because you add some Web 2.0 features to your stagnant old site I don't think we should define it as Web 2.0. Digg me down all you want - you probably work for Netscape.
- morriske, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2mirror??
- brundlefly76, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1wait a minute, i thought digg.com was still unprofitable and rose wasnt a millionaire.
- RG13, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2actually
dont block him
its kinda fun to watch the comment zoom in and out by clicking the show comment button - iamdexter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You think that any one can be a web 2.0 millionaire ?
http://www.diesel-shoes.org/ - RickBreslin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1CafePress.com is Web 2.0? I guess all it takes is a re-design with rounded corners and gradients.
- papile, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Netscape does do some web 2.0 features by emulating del.icio.us. I am shocked to see craigs list! That is like web .01. Good site, but not modern by any means.
- Chillibeans, on 01/10/2008, -0/+0I think theres an add-on for Firefox called Search Status. It's got some pretty useful web developer tools and if memory serves me correctly I'm pretty sure it updates Alexa the same as their own toolbar does.
- kilworth, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2piczo is even worse than myspace :(
- Kranklin, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Yeah... I hate fanboys of the word 'fanboy' Pshhh! - LOL!
- MrLunar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Just the one.
Although you'll be extremely lucky if that terribly rich visitor decides to click 'Donate'. - chuckpenzone, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Netscape Web 2.0?
- hflemings, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Very helpful!!!
- Rimu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0IMO web 2.0 isn't so much about the technologies used (eg ajax), but more about social-ness. tagging of content, blogging, commenting and linking up with other users of the site are all social activities and they are the kinds of things you'd expect from a web 2.0 site.
previously, the flow of information was was publisher -> user, in 2.0 it's more user user - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Sorry, thats just not posible...
- patkirkrick, on 10/11/2007, -1/+01) Page views and Alexa rankings
2) ?
3) Profit
So what is #2 again? - meat30, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6digg me down
- Datrio, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Burried. Who the hell diggs this up, even when the site is down?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5I have hard time believing these numbers. I compared these stats to my site. I have about 250K+ US only (850K+ total) uniques a month and I'm nowhere near to any of these sites in Alexa. Either my Alexa is extremely skewed or the numbers in the list are listed much lower than in reality.
- digboy99, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Maybe you guys hate "fanboy" because it describes many of you so well. Instead of viewing things with a critical eye, many have blind loyalty of someone that they don't really know. This is something I would expect of a non-educated person, so I have to assume that the most vocal users on digg never went to college, or are of high school age or younger.
- krumel, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Yes they did.
- Ran2004, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2OMG U MEEN EYE CUD B THA NEXT KEVIN ROSE??? LOLZ!
- Kranklin, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3Buried you for '"LOL"' in your comment
- djg38, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Next will be http://www.w3counter.com
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Looks like they took off the page??
-
Show 51 - 53 of 53 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