What is Digg?339 Comments
- ckSubs, on 10/12/2007, -47/+735WALL OF TEXT
- Konrad9, on 10/12/2007, -18/+398The enter button is your friend.
(See what I did here? It makes it readable.) - Sp4nk, on 10/12/2007, -31/+205"They exercised their first amendment right to stage a protest and in the process garnished a lot of media attention."
Do you even know what the hell you're talking about? - slightlyoffbeat, on 10/12/2007, -18/+129@ Scottylist
I'm burying your comment for your complete ignorance to the realities of this world. Laws and politics may suck, but that's life. Your Utopian "digg like" website would post hacks, cracks, and cd keys without shame and it would only take a week until some big company calls your host and has you shut down for good. If you're lucky they will stop there, otherwise you could be sued and your entire life could suddenly get a lot more complicated. "FIGHT BACK" you'll say but you find that you have next to no money for courts and lawyers but the big companies seem to have no problem laying down wads of cash to protect their interests.
Everyone is looking at Kevin to be the 'ol Dark Tipper, but he's running a respectable, well known website now and if he wants to keep digg online for us, the community, he needs to let go of some of his old "tech rebel" tendencies and begin respecting the law (however lame it might be). THAT is what is going to keep digg online, and THAT is what is going to ensure that we are still able to come to digg every day and get our daily dose of awesome stories. We can all claim victory that we the community won, but all we did is force kevin to go down a road that could bring unnecessary harm to both digg and the people running it.
I hope that the digg community can grow up and try and view this whole issue from both sides. - slightlyoffbeat, on 10/12/2007, -12/+106@ scotty list
from your website:
* No pornography that would be considered illegal within the EU.
* NO INFRINGING COPYRIGHT. This includes warez sites and listing sites that index copyrighted material.
* No SPAM or unsolicited advertising, including opt-out e-mail lists.
* No hacking including port scans or network vulnerability testing, distributing viruses, phishing sites.
* No material that is obscene, threatening, abusive, libelous, or encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense.
OMG! Censorship! I should be able to post anything I want! Who are they to tell me I can't post my porn and bomb threats on my sealand hosted sight? What will they do if I put my obscene materials on their hosting space? Just take it down w/out asking me? THE NERVE! I should be allowed to do whatever I want. I shouldn't have to live within the confines of rules and limits.
/sarcasm - MrVW, on 10/12/2007, -4/+83alexland your my hero!
- str3ama, on 10/12/2007, -16/+83what is mentioned on the site true, yes we have no real sense of entitlement to Digg since we don't invest money in it..but then again we invest time and our own user content to it (to which they make money - remember Digg is a portal to other sites and content, it doesn't hold the content itself). But also remember that Digg constantly promotes itself as being a beacon of free speech and democracy - democracy is always used (including by Kevin Rose himself) when describing Digg, and democracy entails a certain level of free speech and respect for those that take part in it. Digg's censorship that day, while they were allowed to do so, was unjust and upsetting to most Diggers as a result.
- Turbosc, on 10/12/2007, -31/+92paragraphs and indent would have helped your statement as far as readability
As much as I agree with you, I'm proud to be part of Digg because of the revolt. We know the government has the power, but we have rights as well.
It wasn't luck that kept Digg from going under, it was the community. - blaze03, on 10/12/2007, -14/+68Wrong.
At first, Kevin and Co thought that obeying the cease and desist would be the source of survival for Digg, thus the first post by Jay.
After they saw a true revolt on their website first hand, they discovered that the real source of survival for Digg was in its loyal users. Thus the damage control post by Kevin hours later.
Please don't buy into the "Kevin loves us" hype like an easily influenced sheep. The bottom line is that they'll do whatever it takes to survive, and will take actions accordingly to ensure it, especially if it means appeasing the public. - AlexLand, on 11/14/2007, -16/+65Kevin Rose is not a superhero. Why do digg users have to idolize everyone?
- Rooster99, on 10/12/2007, -4/+47OK, so earlier this week there were hundreds ready to start burning symbols of the digg guys for 'breaching your freedom of speech". And now we are all back on the bandwagon. The word flip-flopper comes to mind.........
Im not saying everyone was in on it, its just there seems to be quite a turn around from calling Kevin Rose a "***** douchebag", to revering him as a god once again. Im not saying he doesent deserve support, but he certainly didnt deserve the majority of the Digg community coming down on him like a ton of bricks. Even to this day he is (legally speaking) sticking his neck out so you can all have your 'unaltered' content. If anything, the community needs to formally apologise to him and Digg for the childish way things were handled the other day. Yeah, Kevin made a judgement error, but he rectified it relitivly quickly, yet after everything this guy has done for this place, everyone was more than ready and willing to take up arms and wage war against him.......For one simple mistake.
Some people around here need to grow up. This is a free site, with a free content and the admins must bust their asses on a daily basis, cleaning up our *****. Cut them some slack! - madcreator, on 10/12/2007, -9/+46Right, pulling the plug on the site for a day would have allowed everything to blow over and once they brought it back up again it would be like nothing had ever happened. That sort of logic might work in the mind of someone who has little grasp of reality, but in the real world it would be a giant F YOU to the very people who are needed to make the site function. Digg isn't the only site of it's kind, and if people feel like they are disrespected they will go somewhere else. Kevin did what needed to be done to keep the site going, and you can argue about whether or not he was being heroic or just doing what he had to do, but one thing that can't be argued about is whether or not it was the right move. It was the only choice that made sense, and to say otherwise is just plain ignorant.
- oskite, on 10/12/2007, -28/+60I'll digg what I want to digg, thank you very much. And as if that's bad enough you had the nerve to tell me what to My#1?
I know you must have the best of intentions, but kind sir: please shut up. - kappuru, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35yeah, to be honest, the community spoke out, loud and clear. Only when the website was in the throes of anarchy did Kevin and Co. back down. It was part calculated PR move just as much as genuine sentiment for the community. Perhaps more. But at that time, it was the only way to save face. There was no going back. You're kidding yourself if you think Kevin's "oh, we hear you loud and clear, digg community, and we stand with you" sentiment was completely altruistic. That said, I'm glad digg didn't COMPLETELY kowtow to the MPAA and corporate interests. Kevin isn't an idiot. He knows what he needs to do to keep this website going, and he very nearly lost all credibility.
Close call for the former "Dark Tipper." - flap, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Digg is all about the community, of course Kevin was going to try and appeal to all the diggers once it got completely out of control.
No community no digg. - noots, on 10/12/2007, -14/+37this guy is way off the mark, the whole up-roar wasn't about the HDDVD key and weather it should be posted or not, the protest was all about the censorship of users on a site that claims not to do such a thing.
It could have been anything that sparked this not just a HDDVD key, it would have happened sooner or later. - Karuzikan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23@oskite
Awww, you might have had a point there if he was actually demanding something. Too bad he was only encouraging, and many diggers automatically think "OMG, HE IS FORCING ME TO DO SOMETHING! QUICK, BECOME ENRAGED"
;x - Shizlanski, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25OK. But only because you told me to. -1
- RogueX, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24I really don't understand why everyone is giving Keven et al so much credit for changing their policy after such a mess, I mean, what choice did they have? I know it comes as a surprise to many of you, but Digg is a business out to make money, and if digg fell into a state of chaos like it did that night for an extended period, that would be much worse for the bottom line that possibly getting sued. They had to reverse their stance or lose everything.
I personally thought Kevin's reply was pretty lame actually. The whole "we're gonna stand up for you guys now, and if we go down at least we went down fighting" didn't come of so genuinely to me. "If we go down, oh well" doesn't make sense for someone who's trying to make money. But the masses were fed what they were wanting to hear, so now Kevin is super cool again.
just my $.02 - slightlyoffbeat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21the site he refers to suggest a "digg like website" that is (quote)
"100% FREE OF CENSORSHIP AND MODERATION." - aywwts4, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22Indeed, Not to mention that many people weren't even protesting about the number or DMCA, they were protesting against digg, for wrongfully banning people and artificially burying stories that spoke against digg or the censorship of the original two "number" stories. In the beginning of may 1st if people didn't start spamming other posts you could easily have read digg without noticing what was going on in those stories with 600 diggs that were mysteriously off the front page.
Kevin never acknowledged that, and has never said anything about that issue. The real issue. The numbers were always irrelevant, old news at best.
Digg needs to come clean, post an explanation when they delete something, and promise not to artificially affect the vote counts or buried status of stories. Thats the real issue here.
Also, nothing really changed with digg's status towords the DMCA either, these numbers are in the clear, but they are already obsolete, the CEO of digg has publicly stated in many of his interviews digg's terms of use and thoughts to the DMCA remain the same. So what happens when the new "Numbers" start making the rounds? - kahrn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20@scottylist
It's perfectly fine to attempt to build an uncensored digg, but what do we have here? A god damn blogspot page. If you are going to make something and spam it all over the god damn internet, then at least provide a decent amount of content.
So far you havn't even attempted to build anything.. you have just set up a blog, which any 12 year old could do.
Maybe if you show us something admirable, and some decent work and something that we can all work on, then maybe people would help. I think it's obviously clear that you don't have a god damn clue.
Come back when you have some decent work to show off.
@bmatherlyjr
I'm not even going to try and read that wall of text. Don't use a wall of text! - pathy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I'm still laughing about it all.
All that fuss, all the mayhem. For what? Spreading a code that barely 1/10th of people that found out about it through this will use? Almost everyone that wanted that code would have found it easily anyway.
I actually thought the 'revolt' was more to do with Diggs banning and censoring of users, and the like. Then Kevin said 'sry', and all was well. - Sharkee, on 10/12/2007, -11/+25"Should the AACS come for counterattack, with power, precedent and the law on their side, it is Kevin who will face them. It is Kevin who put his company and his job on the line. As you gather in the schoolyard to chant, “fight, fight, fight!”, remember who with be taking the punches for you. "
I will stand by and defend Digg and Kevin as he has stood by and defended us and our freedoms in the face of corporate doom. I will devote financially and spread the word should any hard come Digg's way. - hematochezia, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19I still find it humorous that people are voicing their displeasure with mob rule on a site that is powered by... mob rule.
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Make no mistake about it, seeing it in the longest way possible, DRM is the ultimate issue of our time. If this kind of restrictive DRM becomes omnipresent, our civilization is headed for the junkheap. I mean that in the most serious way possible.
Our culture is the culture of cheap books. That's what created what we have as a society. The computer and the internet, and what comes after it, are the most stunning distribution mechanism for information that has ever existed. This is far more than a question of cracking movies. This is a struggle over who owns the information pipes and who controls the access.
We mustn't think that the future will look like the past only with the Internet. The Internet changes everything. Some social institutions are as dead as dodos, and they are very well symbolized by the film studios.
If they don't want to have their content cracked, they have one choice: keep it in the theaters. When it's finished with the movies, put it on the net and sell it cheap. It will be cracked. Studios? Open up p2p sites for your movies. Charge a range of (low) prices for torrents, with lower prices available for those who seed extensively.
It's your business model that sucks. - venom8599, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Someone's got a man-crush.
- DisposableRob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"How did this reach the front page, submitted 1 day 6 hours ago? I thought the cut off was 1 day"
It leaves the upcoming queue after 1 day, but I don't think there is a time limit on how long before it cannot reach the front. It's just very unlikely a story will be dugg by enough people once it gets old. In one case a story two weeks old reached the front ( http://www.digg.com/tech_news/Web_2.0_or_Star_Wars_Character_ ) though that was awhile ago, I'm sure it's still occassionally possible for older stories to hit the front. - BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Supporting Kevin Rose and Digg, is supporting the community. Supporting the community is supporting the protest it made and the way that Kevin changed his position on the basis of how the community felt.
I refuse to see Kevin as weak in some way for doing that - that's an idiot's perspective.
Leaders' fear of u-turns kills a lot of people in this day and age - if only political leaders were like Kevin and listened to what people wanted.
As for the legal issues, yes, we're adults thanks - if anything, a culture of silliness on this sort of thing is a GOOD thing, maybe tone day in the distant future hese legal bullies might treat sites like Digg, /. for what they are again, instead of treating them all as potential lawsuits. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17I support Kevin Rose, even though I don't like the guy too much after the other day. I still have lost quite a huge amount of trust for him and everyone else behind digg simply for the fact that how do we know that won't pull this again if it's on a worse subject? It's Kevin, and I thought he would have been behind us the moment the encryption key showed up on here, but they all were at first against us. That's not right because digg has always been a place where it's about us, the users, and it's a user driven site, and without the users it wouldn't be much of anything. Digg isn't the only place the key has been posted, and it won't ever be the place it originated, so digg can't be blamed for anything, even if HD-DVD is digg's sponsor.
- ptsd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13buried as lame
- ryanmm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11@robotsu
maybe it was just funny and true - cptn_cardboard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Hmmmm...
I wonder how this whole fiasco will impact the hd-dvd vs blueray battle?
Would you buy a product that sued digg out of existence? - TigerX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I do have to question the notion of courage in light of the fact that Kevin practically bent over at the behest of "the mob". Regardless of your view on the matter of the code, how is it ever courageous to bend to people on imposing their view? I will admit that I have a lot of respect for Kevin since he's about my age and millions of times more successful than I could ever hope to me, but I have to disagree with Dr. Tiki that such action is courageous.
In addition, I find it amusing that the common denominator digger is someone who finds authority and abuse of power to be bad things that should be removed from society. Yet, the same digger is more than willing to jump on a bandwagon to impose their own opinion. I understand the desire to keep information free, but that cannot come through the suppression of opposing opinion. - venom8599, on 10/12/2007, -12/+20No. It was against Digg and the blatant censorship that took place not only about the original articles, but on articles discussing that censorship. Don't make a try at revisionist history just because your millionaire idol reversed course after it was clear that the moderators had lost control of the site. He's not for standing up for free speech, at least not until the cries of the user base become larger than the advertiser's buck.
- venom8599, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The worst thing about this whole mess is this statement:
"Jay Adelson: We did receive a legal notice, just not specific to that posting. We received it about a month ago."
So they were being pro-active in censorship, which is a big deal, unlike if it was just a simple DMCA request about the page. (Even if there was a DMCA request/C&D letter, censoring posts about that censorship is still a big deal and is the real cause behind the revolt IMHO.)
Jay Adelson is Digg's CEO for those who don't know.
Source:http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/05/exclusive_the_d.html - venom8599, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I'm not buying either, because of the crappy DRM. If one does finally establish itself as the new standard, I do hope it's the one with the least DRM (HD-DVD has AACS, Blu-ray has AACS and more). Ideally I'd rather see them either remove the DRM or have both formats fail.
- andyrobo60, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Why is everyone being so cryptic??
"A user posted a link on Digg.com to a line of code on a blog. That line of code allows one to unlock certain copy protection features on an HD DVD."
Will people get sued if they said the line of code was a decryption key for the AACS protection on HD DVDs. - reticulate, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13I Support You Whiny Tards Shutting The Hell Up.
Seriously.
You posted the goddamned encryption key for an entire movie format. You basically popularised a great way to rip ***** off.
Well ***** done. The internet wins again or some such *****. More free stuff for everyone, and ***** anyone getting paid.
I dislike DRM. I'm not a fan of locking people into formats to maintain a bottom line. Hell, I've downloaded plenty myself. But I sure as ***** don't get emotional about people restricting my ability not to pay for *****, which is, in the end, what you all got worked up about.
Let's be honest, you didn't really worry about Kevin doing exactly what his lawyers told him to. You got worked up because it might ultimately impede on your ability to get stuff for free.
The hardcore minority of school-agers that actually care about this ***** should go and study or something. Can the rest of us actually just find stuff we're interested in, thanks? - teeheehee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@stable
I agree with some of your sentiments, but the terms of use were violated and to my knowledge all of the deleted accounts were abusers. (* Terms of Use, User Conduct: "By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree not to use the Services: 6. to violate any laws in your jurisdiction (including but not limited to copyright laws)").
I don't know Kevin personally, but I can empathise what he went through. I don't think that having even a large contingent of people up and leave digg because of this would actually be the downfall of the site. I don't think Kevin was really worried about complete failure if he upheld the lawyer's wishes. It would have caused some sufferance, sure, but not downfall. More, he's probably worried now about digg falling down because of legal issues, which are real, enforcable, and complete.
I liked how slashdot was laissez-faire, and wish digg had been as well, but everything being what it is I still think digg deserves some support. Many of the sites that reported on the digg users' revolt failed to post the key, or if they did chose to use an image version so it couldn't be easily searched for. If there's anything I could ask for, it would be two things:
1) user accounts not deleted, but suspended (and later unsuspended)
2) users to have be more sympathetic to the site, and had linked to pages that contain an image version of subversive content
It's hard to have expectations on a large, diverse community. There were smarter ways of sharing the content which would have been less of a legal hassle, and might have gone unnoticed. To those who say we saw Kevin's true colors that day, I say we also saw much of the community's true colors as well.
We can do better.
(Yes, I expect I'll get dugg down for suggesting we all better ourselves and temper our nerves for the greater good of the community. Reply if you feel I am out of line. I am not trying to be hypocritical by pointing out the ToU line and later explain how better to have broken it, just that digg owners were within their agreed-to rights to perform the activities they did. And, later, didn't do.) - cyn0sure, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10My god you people are naive. The only reason Kevin Rose became a "stand up" guy in this little "revolt" was AFTER consulting his attorneys, who assured him that because the key was so widely disseminated that a lawsuit against digg would not really be viable.
Grow up people, in the real world digg doesn't matter. - overbyte, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10hahah this comments thread has the most amount of 'i'm special' i've ever read
get over yourself - kevins website, kevins rules - if you leave there are about 20,000 people that will fill in for you - manvsmonster, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18All the responses I'm hearing about from various people who have some sort of friendship/partnership with Kevin & Co. is making me sick. The same with all the people who try to criticize what happened--who are all essentially oversimplifying and imposing some false notion as to what it was about to serve their invalid, emotional, and biased ***** stance ("it's just code!"). In Wil Wheaton's responses to people in his latest submission, he goes on some BS rant about his opinion, and at that point, I was already repulsed.
For a while, I keep getting sicker and sicker about Kevin & Co--with Digg, Revision3, and any geek thing that has sprung from these roots that has turned into nothing but desperation for identity in calling oneself a part of this "scene of geek".
Supposedly Posh and Wil and this guy thinks everyone is dumb for what they did and asserting that people should babysit their choices. Altogether, it seems to me like the rancid air from average hipster asses. All of them together look no different than a bunch of scenester kids backing each other up with their toolish rationalizations for their disposition; trying to justify the pursuit of what is to their shortsighted benefit. Nobody wants to babysit anybody in any kind of relationship, and it's the same here.
Look at this *****, insulting oversimplification:
"They had found something cool to do and an instant cause had been created."
"I would have pretended to be a brave warrior standing up for the rights of the oppressed. Eagerly telling the schoolyard the next day about my heroics and subsequent Cafepress souvenir shirt."
"But the thing is, courage has no home in anonymity. The only courage we saw displayed yesterday was when Kevin Rose, founder of the company, stood up to be counted with the revolt."
How ***** condescending. People can make themselves heard however the ***** they want, and go ***** yourself with that inherent victim attitude. Nobody has to prove themselves to your isolated standards with Kevin & Co., who you'll all go complain to each other to validate your resistance like a bunch of little 14 year old girls who just got in a fight at the mall with their boyfriends. At best, Kevin committed to authenticity. God damn...
Having to listen to Wil's inherently elite tone as he spouts off in his constipated know-it-all demeanor... BLEH! They all have an internalized sense of esoteric justification in their belligerent judgments.
I don't want to Digg anymore, or watch these retards drunkenly fart around on their couches every week (they don't even try to relate it to some level of intellect like in the start; now they just go: "Uh... this is cool! Huh-huh! That's funny."), or listen to Wil's love of himself in everything he does--all the way to InDigital. Digg is still a source for information, but I don't hold any value to Digg just because all you people behind it are asses.
Maybe nobody else agrees because usually somebody is saying something more eloquently than I have patience for, and all I have to do is vote up their comment to support it. I crush people who behave and express this level of thought for lunch. It feels like nobody else really sees it this way and is just sort of bumbling through the discussions that are floating around. --But that's just my sensibility that is offended as someone who has been around since before TSS went to L.A. I didn't take part in the code digging extravaganza (also some people who support it throw in some conspiracy style logic for it, I know), and I never had a problem with Wesley Crusher, but things have been amounting, and it is in the ripples after the event that show how all you guys don't deserve any of the loyalty. --Not that any of you weren't doing something good before, and not that you feel you need anyone's approval (as Wil would surely chime in to preemptively save ego like he did in his recent submission comments to anyone that confronted him), but I think your quality has been degrading and now you're all complacent and conceited. Way to all talk down...
I'm not going to participate anymore unless something catches my attention that validates it. Right now it's all advertisements for politicians and internet gems anyway... - Gunnyman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Kevin did nothing more than give into mob rule. I hope I'm wrong, but it's the end of Digg.
- br0ken1128, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I hear such odd arguments about this whole situation about what Rose should and should not have done.
First of all, Rose has a responsibility to obey the law first and foremost, if he doesn't agree with the law then he has a responsibility to act accordingly to take steps in changing the laws, there is a process to do that folks, and the process is not to whine and yell and demand that the site owner violate the DMCA because you disapprove of the law. And yes, it's been discussed in detail already that the hex code is a violation and yes digg now faces some potential consequences.
What the digg community did in response to the stories being deleted was very irresponsible and very childish, a few people yelled out and many decided to jump on the bandwagon and it got out of hand, was it the right thing to do? absolutely not.
DIGG was correct for deleting the offending content, but rather than delete it silently, he should very well have made a statement earlier on about WHY it was being deleted and stuck to his guns.. but you know what's sad? I don't think that even if Kevin had clearly stated why it was being deleted, that it would have mattered one bit.. the digg community would still have ranted, whined and held it's breath in protest. Mob rule may be effective, but it's not always correct.
As a community, do your part to change the law .. don't do your part to break the law simply because you don't like it.. democracy works if you get off your lazy asses to make it function.. clearly we have power to influence, channel it appropriately, keep calling your representatives! - Zzyw, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13God I hope it is. If what you mean by "unite" is what happened the other day: loudmouth punks spamming digg to the point where it became unusable to prove a minor point. I sure as hell wasn't part of it, lots of users weren't.
Unfortunately, this will happen again. And Kevin has only himself to blame for it. In stead of keeping a cool head and endure some childish behaviour, he caved, rewarding those who were openly out to destroy the site. - Juroujin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I'm feeling ambivalent about digg right now. I think it's cool how Kevin posted the numbers but on the other hand, is it just for the money?
It doesn't take back the fact that digg has been banning and censoring, either.. meh. - hockey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5ignore digg down.
- Demitaka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You cant possibly expect the younger more immature digg-sters to cease the spam. However as a mature user of Digg, the last thing I want would be to see this site taken down by its own denizens. I have tremendous respect for Kevin and his attempt to stop this stupidity. Ive supported him on Tech Tv's "The Screen Savers" and when he continued to other endevors. And because of this we might see the "Dark tipper" actually go down...
Some say, " He doesn't care ! He's just protecting his money". Well you couldn't be more wrong. If you look back at Kevin's career and his humble beginnings then you'll see hes no more than anyone of us tech-savy internet beings.
On an even more serious note, what exactly are we protecting? Our right to pirate. Need I remind you that pirating is illegal? I'm not trying to be a hypocrite, however just keep in mind that this is something that if made public could result in not just Digg going down put may snowball into another napster/kazaa ordeal. We need to tolerate Kevin's decision and forget about the code before this gets any worse. Grow up Digg... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Now if only people would take the revolt to congress and demand the law at the heart of this, the DMCA, be repealed.
If you want free speech you can't depend on some else's site to provide a medium for it, especially if the site is for profit.
Personally, I don't think I would post my own content to Digg just because the notice at the bottom and part 4 of TOS says:
"User-posted content, unless source quoted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Public Domain License". -
Show 51 - 100 of 323 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is