What is Digg?97 Comments
- kevinrose, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51I have tremendous respect for Rob Malda. I don't think he should be on this list.
- SnapETom, on 10/12/2007, -9/+46Awesome. This just reinforces what we know. I read both Digg and Slashdot. Slashdot and fanboys on both sides can argue quality of stories, quality of comments, etc. However, the truth is, Digg gives me more at a faster rate, and that's what I want. It's just that simple.
- wolkengrau, on 10/12/2007, -9/+38I got exactly the same thoughts.
Browsing Slashdot often feels like Groudhog Day.
edit: I see first guys are modding me down. Why? Prove me, that I'm wrong. - thedove, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24unless you're actively reporting duplicates as you see them, you CANNOT complain about duplicates. as a user on digg, the content is YOUR responsibility.
- gameboyhippo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26Not only that, but Digg gives more at a faster rate than the paid version of /.
- Paktu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Each site serves a different purpose, I don't see why they can't coexist. Personally, I go to digg for the news, and slashdot for the discussion.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16I don't like this list - I feel like they don't give great reasons for saying these people don't matter. For example, their reason for including Linus Torvalds is:
"Torvalds's project has matured to such an extent that it's largely outgrown its illustrious creator."
That doesn't mean much - he's still the most influencial single person to Linux and is the name everyone associates wiht it. Of course other people will be working on a project that large. That's like saying Bill Gates doesn't matter because he doesn't work on Windows.
I feel like a lot of these other ones are just predictions based on short-term sucess. They would have put steve jobs on this list 8 years ago just because he was having a slump. They claim the CEO of netflix doesn't matter because DVDs are going to be replaced with video on demand. This is a very strong statement for such a long-term prediction.
I agree that Rob Malda doesn't matter, but did that even need to be said? He's just the editor for slashdot, not a CEO that changes the way the industry works. The only influence he ever had was giving more traffic (temporarily) to some websites. - JaredRR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Digg lets me browse story ~submissions~ and it lets me vote, not just wait around for The Editors to approve a story. Slashdot was great for it's time, but Digg has a better model.
Of course, there's no reason Slashdot couldn't incorporate some elements.... - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"For years we have been complaing of dupes, gramatical errors"
oh the irony.. - Vitaliy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Considering the fact that Rob Malda was mentioned amongst Linus Torvalds, Jonathan Schwartz, and Ken Kutaragi is quite an accomplishment.
In reality, ***** online journalists are the ones who do not matter. - heinousjay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14It's a shame that reading the comments on Digg contributes to brain damage. That's where Slashdot still wins the race.
- ctbfourone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10That was a totally lame article stub.
Let's ***** on two of the biggest things in tech circles of the last 10 years: Slashdot and Linus Torvalds.
Screw you Business 2.0. Your magazine sucks. - wolkengrau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@rm999:
That's true: There are unfortunately quite some dupes - don't want to argue with you about that.
I rather wanted to point out, that the stories are mostly are found on digg first. So when I find them on Slashdot, I have already read about them on digg. - RandomPrecision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think the previous comment in this thread really answers the question of what site has better discussion.
Oh, did I say "thread"? Silly me. Digg only supports one level down... - rm999, on 10/12/2007, -14/+23"Browsing Slashdot often feels like Groudhog Day."
How is that different than Digg? I think something like half the stories on here are dupes, and when someone points it out his comment gets buried instead of the duped story. - cklol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This is rediculous. Sure, Digg has a lot more stories but Slashdots are a helluva lot more worthwhile.
Sure, Digg has discussion, but the discussions here are complete and absolute trash and ***** compared to the stuff on Slashdot. You could write a paper off some of the comments I've seen on Slashdot. Here? Prepubescent kids flaming each other...or maybe just idiots flaming each other. Who can tell?
Edit:
This will probably get buried because I'm just kinda blowing off about how much I hate the immaturity on Digg. - vostok4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5aoe2bug... Have you read the comments on ./? The majority of those people are industry players, they know what they are talking about. Other than the odd joke here and there, there are actual insightful comments written by professionals with an opinion backed up by relevant facts.
On digg yourt average comment is 1 line... and contributes absolutely nothing to the story. Everyone and their grandma thinks they are a pro here. I've yet to see one knowledgable comment on digg that tells me more than I knew.
./ For the discussions, digg for the volume of news (even though half of it is stupid, the other half still outnumbers what ./ puts out). - MrHolla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well, he's in good company at least. And I agree with Paktu - both sites serve a different purpose.
- RandomPrecision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So no one else is just getting a blank page?
- interiot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Now if Digg could just get a full comments system, and an externally visible karma system (digg already has a complicated karma system under the hood), and a full friends system. What's that you say? Digg v3?
- stable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Personally I prefer Slashdot. Not for the stories, but for the comments and the mature moderation system that Digg lacks. On Slashdot there isn't as much bias in comment moderation as here. Unlike in here, I rarely feel unfairly moderated on slashdot, and I've been there for much much longer.
Slash (the content management system used on Slashdot) is also available as free software while digg's isn't. - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4it was buried: http://digg.com/search?search=slashdot&submit=Search&area=promoted&type=both&age=7&search-buried=on
- Vladek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6If only Rob Malda had the same respect for his website's readers. For years we have been complaing of dupes, gramatical errors, and plain bad journalism on the site, but he doesn't listen. Since it's "his" website, "he" can do anything he wants in it. No wonder he's so despised -- he doesn't care the about the audience he serves.
- el73, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Digg give more at a fast rate, and slashdot give a good sample for those that don't have to "digg" through the rest. All about preference. I use both- but mostly slashdot oddly enough.
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Kevin, was this removed from the site? I can't find it anywhere (searching, front page, etc...)
I think that site is kinda harsh- While I'm no fan of Slashdot (especially after finding Digg), I dont think its fair to say Rob doesn't matter.. - scott1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've been digg fan for a long time but I have one very stupid question that could possibly be burried for:
What's slashdot? - Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Agreed. Even when movie stores online start getting into it, you'll still be hard pressed downloading a high def. movie in less than a day, and that's with it tieing up all your bandwidth. Netflix ships within 24 hours in some cases, and as i assume they'll switch to shipping high def. movies, Netflix isn't going anywhere soon.
- dmron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What a joke. Why do we need articles like this... ya know, I was starting to have a bit of hope for digg... I think it's been at least a few weeks since I've seen a "we're better than slashdot" story... and then this troll-a-rific story comes along. I *hate* reading about this kind of stuff. Why does everyone here like stroking their own ego so much? Why does digg have to be the best? Does it really matter? I come to this site because it's updated so much and usually has up to date news and whatever, but then there's crap like this that pisses me off and makes me want to never come back.
And don't even get me started about the difference in quality of discussion between here and slashdot. Digg is a ***** joke when it comes to discussions. Slashdot has its share of trolls of course, but their moderation system tends to work well and the people there actually try to have conversations and dont sound like they're 7 years old on their daddy's computer. - scott1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3After looking at slashdot I have to agree with you.
It looks like that you got the idea to start form digg(no idea is orginal). - badfeng, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Disrespectful.
- HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm curious. When you post comments like that, don't you realize that you're going to get buried? Seems like a waste of time to post obvious attempts at trolling like that when noone is going to see it after a couple of minutes of being modded down.
- Jozer99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ok lets not be obnoxious and gloaty. Then you are not better than slashdot. Accept slashdot for the way it contributed to the evolution of internet news, and how it continues to be relivant after over 10 years.
- el73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Let it be known that as the article link submitter, I prefer slashdot over dig. digg is information overload.
I submitted the same article to slashdot with a "Does slashdot matter?" type of discussion post asking questions of the slashdot community. It got rejected.
My headline is inflamitory and troll like. I hastily submitted it since I thought I would take advantage of the best feature of digg- the quick responsiveness of the community. Bring to the people quick.
Had I been less urgent in my submittal- I would have phrased it:
"Does slashdot matter? Are sites like digg more relevant now?"
But in fairness to me- I think I summarize the point of the article. The No.1 on the Main article on who *does* matter (my submission is a companion to it) is "You!" meaning- "social" sites like digg and the ilk are clearly the "winners" -hence the "digg wins" part.
But again- just because I submitted the story doesn't mean it's my choice. I just thought it was newsworthy and relevant.
IMO- slashdot is better, digg is quicker, and business2.0 is wack. - packetguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Digg is a news site. Slashdot is also a news site, but more importantly, slashdot is a subculture. There is no way digg can come up to that level in less than 3-4 years. Till then there is no contest.
Offtopic, Business 2.0 does not render properly in Firefox. Is it in the list of 10 websites which don't matter? LOL - valour, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Maybe because the new way of doing online tech news is to have readers promote/demote stories, and Slashdot is still stuck in the previous era where paid editors picked them. Malda should not be blamed for Slashdot's failure to adapt, I think, because he only has limited control over it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You make good points man and Digg is not the end of the line here. There are still several ways to make this system work better but just like over at slash no one will listen. The thing just has to evolve on its own. Eventually someone is going to realize these are primarily social networking engines (slash got that with their mod system). Problem is where do you find programmers who not only get it but are grounded in the research as well? It will happen eventually.
I still think you could combine slash and digg and have one awesome site. It isn't as hard as it sounds. One small example: if a story keeps getting dugg at a certain rate it stays higher up on the frontpage. - tek1024, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree. Slashdot's maturity and complex threaded/moderation model lends a greater feel of community.
That said, having been a long time (since about '99) lurker at Slashdot, I've hardly ever posted a comment, because I feel so underqualified. There ARE many more industry players there, and experts in every field. This means that "me too" posts get modded to oblivion, and you REALLY have to say something insightful, informative, funny, or what have you, in order to not be picked apart. And even then, you'll say something from an expert voice and get +5 Insightful; the guy that comes up after you will counterpoint and make +5 Insightful himself, from an opposite point of view. The dregs, you don't even see if you put your view level at +1 or +2.
That makes it more intimidating for lesser geeks like myself to post comments there--but it's also wonderful, because the comments are so good that you come away from Slashdot discussion feeling more informed on the issue.
At Digg, it's a little different. I feel qualified to post here. You do, too. My experiences in comp sci, programming, psychology, and philosophy all combine to make me feel qualified to whatever extent to post on something like, for instance, this. The community itself is younger, more raw, less refined, and that's a good thing for n00bs and even intermediates who want to climb the ladder of knowledge to expert level.
The difference is like that between a good Scotch on the rocks and a fruity mixed drink. Not everyone has a taste for the Scotch, and why wait? The refinement of Slashdot means deja vu, having to wait for articles that Digg sometimes picks up, but it also means getting the inside track on expert opinions along with a smattering of inside jokes and community feel. The quick, democratic pace and tone of Digg means that there are duplicate stories, lots of "me too" comments, lots of misinformation, but that's the cost of having more news, more quickly.
Hence, both Digg and Slashdot feeds remain in my RSS aggregator!
That said, an article declaring Linus Torvalds and Rob Malda obsolete is, IMHO, undiggable. - gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1haha nevermind ignore my last comment.. Basically I have a grease monkey script on my other computer that automatically clicks the "Include Buried Stories" thing, and I forgot to check it when I was searching for it, and assumed it was deleted since it didn't show up
- TimEllis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If Digg has truly "supplanted" Slashdot, as the article summary supposes, why is it that by some metrics Slashdot is still utterly crushing Digg in popularity? For instance, Bloglines indicates that Digg has 6,235 subscribers, while Slashdot has almost 12 times as many at 73,719! That sure doesn't look like a "supplanting" to me.
Just sayin'. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1slashdot is so beat.
- el73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually- "supplanted" was used in the article itself in refrence to sites "like digg." Don't knock the summary- knock the article.
Just sayin' - Jarrod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can't wait to read about this on Slashdot tomorrow.
And therein lies both sides of the entire Digg vs. Slashdot debate. - Juano11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For those that are complaining that their comments about duplicate stories get modded down:
You get modded down for "reporting" the duplicate story incorrectly. Duplicates should be reported with the "problem?" option that accompanies every story. Adding a comment about it being a dupe doesn't go anywhere.
Adding a comment that the story is a dupe in the middle of other people's discussion of the article adds nothing to that discussion. The people discussing it either don't know, don't care, or both. Report the story as a dupe appropriately and move on with your life.
Why do you bother to check back and see if your "This story is a duplicate" comment gets modded up or down anyway??? Really, that's pretty sad and pathetic. - drwiii, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Some would say Time Warner (Business 2.0, CNN, etc.) doesn't matter. Bill Gates said as much in a 1995 interview with TIME magazine --
TIME: "Are you betting the company on Windows 95?"
Gates: "I don't know what 'bet the company' means. We're a company with $4 billion in the bank. I don't think we'll disappear. We're not like Time Warner, with $15 billion in debt."
And for the last time, Digg and Slashdot aren't in competition. Digg is good for zero-day time-critical information and Slashdot is good for long-term in-depth discussion. Why can't they coexist? Any list that includes Reed Hastings and Linus Torvalds isn't worth the hard drive space it occupies. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The /. guys found a strategy that worked and they ran with it. They kept running with it even as users became more and more vocal about how much the editors sucked. For a while there really was not a good alternative but now that there is we see the shift happening. I never check /. anymore because it makes me angry. It makes me angry when I see some stupid story that is an obvious slashvertisement; it pisses me off when I see another Roland story; and just the word "Zonk" is enough to make me not want to read / for a week.
The writing was on the wall for a long time and users were itching to get out from under the yolk of editors (especially dimwitted ones). - Greenfday6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2there are alot of people that shouldn't be on this list, this list is crap
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personally, I've left Slashdot for Digg. Seems so much more *alive*, dunno.
It's like Slashdot is the farm, and Digg NYC. That's the feel I get, anyways.
I like busy. :P - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I use digg because I'm lazy and while slashdot is eight letters, digg is only four.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Slashdot was wack before digg and continues to be wack now.
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not just buried.. more like deleted...
-
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is