What is Digg?70 Comments
- retawd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+37Whats wrong with making money? Its a free service, I use it, I find stuff, and if people get paid, great.
- MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25Don't click on ads.
- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Nothing wrong with it. People tend to think too much whenever someone does really well. Buy some Google stock and call it a day.
- brownspank, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8^ Two words: TRANSITIVE VERBS.
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I think people need to take a step back here and look at Google for what it really is: a business. Sure, it's probably the most entrepreneurial web business out there, but still: the primary function of a business is to make money.
If Google wants to put advertisements on the pages that would have shown up as simply "page cannot be displayed", then fine by me. What difference does it make? Most people will realize that they didn't reach the page they were looking for, and correct their error - and if they don't realize this, then they shouldn't be allowed to access the Internet. In some cases, people may even find something useful.
And if it wasn't google providing the advertisements, it would be some shady, no-name business who would probably be more prone to ad-ware and spy-ware. I trust Google Ads more than any other advertisements. They're more accurate.
Besides, if I had to choose who would be providing the ad's in the first place, It'd be Google anyway. - MichalDvorak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5When touch-typing, both I and E are pushed by your middle finger, only one of them by the left middle finger and one of them by the right one. So this kind of symmetric typo is actually not that unusual among touch-typists.
- lordthor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I don't see a problem with this at all. It seems like a good idea for an otherwise free company to make some dough, so they can keep providing the awesome services like IG, GT, Google Earth, Google Maps, and Gmail.
Do you pay for it? No.
Do I? Hell no.
How do they make their money? Through ad campaigns like this. just because they profit doesn't mean they're doing something wrong. If they can profit without charging me a penny for all the great services I use from them each day, then more power to them.
Viva La Google. - Doggpound, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Add/Drop is the major problem. People registering millions of domains, putting up ad's, then dropping them right before the 5 day grace period. There are more than 3,500,000 .COM names tied up in the add/drop scheme on any one day.
Front Page Story:
http://digg.com/technology/How_millions_of_.COM_names_are_used_but_never_paid_for. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Verisign tried to push it even further and gave an answer section with their web servers ip address in it when a .com query failed. What would've resulted in an error (like goohoogle.com) would give you their website instead. Fortunately I had dnsmasq in place blocking such bogus answers.
- traherom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"Google specifically bars Web addresses that infringe on trademarks from using its ad network, but a review of placeholder Web sites that result from misspelled domain names of well-known companies found many of the ads on those pages come directly from Google.
'It seems very hard to reconcile Google's support of this activity with their "Do No Evil" motto,' said Ben Edelman..."
I hate when people say things like that. It's hardly like Google is "supporting" this activity. I don't know the numbers, but I'm willing to bet there are _billions_ of websites out there which use Google ads. They can hardly screen every single one. - JamesGlover, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I make a point on not clicking ads on 'mistyped domain' websites. I also never click links on those 'search result' results. Having said that, some companies have such stupidly named websites that they deserve to have the odd few customers clicking ads to link to the site because they can't actually spell the company name.
- t0dd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Want no ads?
To take care of Google get Firefox + Customize Google extension.
For all other ads get Adblock + Filterset.g updater.
Yeah yeah, I am sure most of you have heard it before. - cphuntington97, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Better headline:
Drunk? Google profits from your typo. - insidesource, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Good luck to them. Someone should benefit from my incompetence.
- drlog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Competition is a good thing.
- Pigglesworth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3My point was, that for a massive corporation that claims to be based around a morally perfect ethos, this is contradictory. Google were given an ultimatum, "Do what we say or get out" by the government. Now as a business when your two options are to a) Censor a few search results and bringing in billions of dollars of extra revenue or b) Take the moral high ground and make a political statement that doesn't really make much money; obviously Google took option A. I'm not saying there is anything surprising about that, rather it contradicts everything they stand for. On a side note, I've got nothing against communism but China is not a real communist state; their "Communism" is an excuse for the government to avoid elections. Succumbing to the government of China's ridiculous request is evil; but from a business point of view it's very wise. But don't ever think that Google had anything other than money on their minds when they made that decision. Oh, and we're talking about Google here; MSN and Yahoo are irrelevant, it's Google's would be high standards that are in the question.
- dusingaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I advertise a lot on google, and the typos are the most profitable, cause they cost the least to run. So I guess I make money off typos too.
- thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3rofl exactly.
the media is biased against google right now, probably every media company is owned by a company that wants google out. there will always be sites google hasn't caught yet. by the way, if you think that it is google's job to stop websites that are created that infringe on copyrights, you are wrong. in fact, google isn't even allowed to make a judgement call on something like that. - evirus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2id rather have google do it then those basterds who put five million popups, spyware, and hijack scripts on their "screw you imperfect one" sites
- accidental, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I feel like sometimes the reporters who write this stuff don't even know what they are reporting on. Advertisers bid on those mispellings, not Google.
- Pigglesworth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I think Google's censorship alliance with the Chinese government is evil. The people of China have a right to know about the evil things that their government have done, and Google just can't stand to miss out on a couple of billion dollars profit. I would however like to welcome our new Google overlords.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You know... The "Greasemonkey"-extension has a userscript called "Butler" which also removes the ads.
- MrGeneric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why do people always mention the "Do No Evil" motto? Did anyone at Google ever define what evil is, in their eyes? I haven't seen any such clarification, so the motto has very little meaning in a global sense.
- Snyder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2How does someone misspell BestBuy as BistBuy like the article suggests? Seriosuly. That's nowhere near the E key.
- Kailash.Nadh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Cybersquatting. Ad filled type domains are really annoying. And again, this has been on for years, nothingnew.
- harr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Has google sold your loyalty down the river? Sure they have, but not half as much as they have done to millions of truth-seeking Chinese Internet users."
It seems to me that google can either have the chinese only find limited results on google or have them not allowed to search google at all. Surely being able to search on it is better than not being able to search on it, even if the results are limited. Plus it's not like other search engines don't do exactly the same thing - it's just the most popular one that does it. - MrGeneric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is a blatant lie, "It's subjective when you look at domain names to decide how many letters off does it have to be to form a trademark or conjure up that trademark," or evidence of a level of ignorance that would disqualify a person from commenting on the subject.
- zeabrid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2http://i3.tinypic.com/wtgk5z.jpg = Gamil typing suggestions.
Since when is this article a new thing? Companies, ad retailers, search engines and the average Joe Schmo who can buy a domain has been profiting from misspellings for a decade, why bring it up now? I just don't understand.
Just don't click the ads. - j10s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ok so if i buy google stocks then i should make extra typos?
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3It's kind of hard for your average user to avoid the ads when they are indistinguishable from content.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I know the date on the article says it's fresh but this is very, very old news. Doesn't even warrant being on a tech site it's so old. Maybe on a newbies site but I thought digg was for geeks?!
>The more money Google makes, the more taxes it pays. Thats good for all you socialists and communists.
But only for AMERICAN socialists and communists. - PaulOwen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5"It's hardly like Google is "supporting" this activity"
Maybe that's true, but I'm more inclined to believe FiddyCent's comment.
Anyway, I wish we could say the same about google's censorship of certain search terms, particularly the differences in searching for certain exercise cults and a certain large plaza in central Beijing on google.com and google.cn.
That "do not evil" mantra was google's way of getting you on their side (at least until the IPO).
Has google sold your loyalty down the river? Sure they have, but not half as much as they have done to millions of truth-seeking Chinese Internet users. - logicnazi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4This article reads like a ***** yahoo PR release. I suspect yahoo had something to do with getting this story run even if nothing else then sending out faxes to news companies about the story. Even if not it is horribly one sided and biased not mentioning a single person who doesn't seem to think this is the Internet equivalent of selling babies.
I mean I can't figure out who is harmed by typo sites. They never look anything like the real site and the typo site even makes your query resolve faster than if no one had registered that domain. So for the most part typo sites provide a SERVICE by letting you know that you made a typo faster than you might otherwise. Some typo sites even have links to the real site and that is incredibly helpful.
I mean a typo site is really the Internet equivalent of putting your billboard or store next to some extremely popular retail outlet. No one confuses your store for the popular store, even though they may end up at your store when they take a wrong turn. These greedy businesses that complain about obviously different webpages parked at typo sites are like a real world business whining that someone bought the store next to their store thus was using their name recognition to make money even though obviously no one would confuse them. Sure in some sense they are but it isn't the sort of thing that ought to be discouraged and it provides the consumer a valuable service. In both cases it would seem that only amazing greed could make one bitch about this (cases where the typo site is genuinely confusing with the real site are a different matter). The only thing I would like to see done is for every typo site to provide a link to the real site.
All these digs at google's don't be evil policy piss me off as well. None of the acts google has done, including the Chinese stuff, are indefensible and the founders at google seem to genuinely believe they are not doing evil (I tend to agree with them as far as the china stuff goes...if they didn't enter china people would just use censored yahoo and perhaps have a greater risk of being betrayed to the authorities). You would never expect your friend to agree with you about every political matter or even moral issue but you wouldn't call him evil because he genuinely thought the Iraq war was worthwhile or did/didn't believe in assisted suicide. So why is it that every time google does something some people disagree with people swallow this line about them being hypocritical with respect to their 'Don't Be Evil' policy.
I mean if google never did anything that their focus groups said might be viewed negatively *then* they would be violating their 'Don't Be Evil' policy. You might disagree with the founders moral analysis but that's no reason to think they are insincere about not being evil.
On the other hand Captchas are evil. - CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Do no evil. Er, I mean, do no evil as long as it doesn't affect search ad millions. Gotcha.
- alceria, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1While you guys make some good points about these kind of sites being relatively harmless, doesn't it rub anyone the wrong way when they come across one? It bugs me. I don't have a good reason for being put off by it, but I am.
I agree with tylerl's comment above - it seems like this is more of an issue of 3rd party squatters and not Google. I tried a couple of the misspelled domains mentioned in the article and none of them would load for me, so I couldn't do a whois search. - psyon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2People did not like it because VeriSign did not pay for any of the domains they were using, they just tried to redirect ALL unregistered domains to their own revenue generating pages. Google is not technically the one banking on the errors, its the domain owners that are.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hard to believe someone smart enough to be a Harvard researcher doesn't realize that "do no evil" is a MARKETING statement, and NOT a business strategy.
- volcompimp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're a dumbass... Why don't you look up the word 'secure' and slap yourself in the chest.
- Fritzed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As a Seattle resident, I'll tell you that it's hard to go a day without seeing the Seattle Times talk about some absolutely fantastic, incredible thing that Microsoft has done. Don't take any computing article by them too seriously.
- merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I touch type and don't strike those keys with my middle fingers. Who's touch typing are you comparing it to?"
Just about everyone's -- especially those of us who were 'taught' touch typing. Put your hands on the "home keys". Try to reach I and E with anything _other_ than your middle fingers, without moving the rest of your hand -- it's physically impossible.
So, if you touch type the way they teach you to in school, you use your middle fingers for I and E. If you don't, you're either using different "home keys", or your technique is crappy.
That being said, I'm not sure I've ever typoed by getting my right and left hand confused, but then again, I play guitar, so I may know right from left a little better than some people -- I'd look a damn fool if I accidentally tried to fret with my right hand instead of my left. - cyclotron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2What's the issue? Google is doing nothing wrong. The more money Google makes, the more taxes it pays. Thats good for all you socialists and communists.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here's an example:
http://tresurtrooper.com - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Haha, that's a good one :)
- tylerl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Story is false.
Gooogle doesn't run those typo-squatting sites: independant users do and display ads using Google Adsense. Google does make money of those sites, but they also acklowledge that it lowers the quality of their adwords program, hurting their bottom line in the long run. Google therefore will often disable the accounts of those users who participate in that sort of thing when it is brought to their attention. - libbydib, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I just love it when one of those parked domain pages full of ads has a link to "Make this your homepage!"
- Uberdoer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Had to laugh recently when I mistyped Gmail one day to find a design company called Gamil. At the bottom of the page the google adwords were something like "learn to type in 24 hours" or "typing-pal" or "typing teachers". Incidentally I ended up buying one of their excellent tea-sticks.
- volcompimp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Google comes up w/ a great search feature which makes them money but more importantly helps you search for what you're actually looking for (and acts as a spell checker on the fly) and this guys is bitching about it? "Do no evil"? What evil? Google is a business and they're doing a damn good job at keeping their customers and share holders happy, what's to bitch about?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Yeah, and if Microsoft did it, you would be ALL over them saying how horrible it is that they are doing this.
It isn't. Not for Google either. But if ANY of you say that you wouldn't be blasting Bill Gates if Microsoft did it, you are all liars.
And there is nothing wrong with the VeriSign technique either. OK, so they don't pay for most of hte domains they sign up for. Well, if you signed up for a bunch, and some weren't profitable, wouldn't you drop them too? They keep the addresses that get teh most traffic. (The ones that are mistyped the most apparently.)
Nothing wrong with that...except it isn't Google so all you hypocrites bitch like little girls about it. - jack878, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0yep, that makes a lot of sense ;)
-
Show 51 - 70 of 70 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 