"Why can’t we have the best of both worlds?"
Scott, I don't think that's the question. Of course we can - someday. Sites like Digg and Reedit show some promise, but are far from ideal. People are still learning and tools are still evolving. So I think the question would be better asked - when?
Scott Karp
· 3 years ago
Karl, I don't see why we can't pursue the best of both world NOW (the product remix example I gave may not be the best idea, but it's one we could do right now).
And I disagree that Digg and Reddit are examples of the best of both worlds. They rely almost entirely on human intelligence, with a technology enabler -- and they display all the randomness of unfocused human intelligence.
A mashup of Digg and memeorandum -- now that would be interesting.
Karl
· 3 years ago
That's my point :) I didn't mean to imply that Digg and Reedit are the best of both worlds - but they do show a major part of it.
I'm a terrible writer.
To be accurate about a service I would personally like to see - and one that would meet you are looking for (I think): A Memeorandum (algorithmically filtered) + Digg/Newsvine (user filtered) + Slashdot (editor filtered) mashup.
The thing about this is I am positively sure people are already pursuing this now - the fact that we can see the pieces - is what leads me to believe its just a matter of time.
But which way would the articles flow? From algo to userbase to editors? The reverse? Userbase at an end point, either end?
Karl
· 3 years ago
David, the simplest form of this, true mashup style, is a page of three lists - "these are the stories the web says are important" (algorithm), "these are the stories your community says are important" (user filtered), and "these are the stories the hosts think are important" (editor filtered).
However, I think the flow you've mentioned - algorithm to community to editor has promise - and is in fact - something I want to personally pursue. The simplest form of algorithm can be a hand picked list of trusted feeds that fit a particular subject matter. In fact, that's what we have already at Philly Future.
Karl
· 3 years ago
Another place to look for where ideas like this are germinating is where Dave Winer is going with his reading list/OPML work. He's talking about obscure plumbing - sure - but I expect ideas to be bootstrapped on that plumbing that will provide some glimmers soon: http://www.reallysimplesyndication.com/2005/10/13
somaking
· 3 years ago
Recommender systems will evolve into a blending of high-tech and "high-touch". High-touch recommender systems are social networks.
Bridging these types of systems will create much more effective recommendations.
David Utter
· 3 years ago
@Karl: Digg, Slashdot, del.icio.us/popular (via diggdot.us) and tech.memeorandum, all in one RSS feed:
An interesting approach to the feed management issue, for those who want a feed of multiple sources organized by time, like email. YMMV
David Utter
· 3 years ago
...and naturally as soon as I posted that above it quit working properly. Grrr.
Scott Karp
· 3 years ago
Karl, I think there's huge promise in a technology-enhanced human editing function, which is where I was trying to go in the original post. I think that's one way that all of the editorial talent being laid off from Old Media can find a new outlet. And thanks for pointing out Dave Winer's site -- I hope someone hurries up and rolls out these reading lists and other cool apps before too many people tune out RSS. (Also loved his Browse. Search. Subscribe.)
David, thanks for pointing out feedblendr.com -- only problem is there's not enough hours in the day to experiment with all these new apps.
All Comments
Scott, I don't think that's the question. Of course we can - someday. Sites like Digg and Reedit show some promise, but are far from ideal. People are still learning and tools are still evolving. So I think the question would be better asked - when?
And I disagree that Digg and Reddit are examples of the best of both worlds. They rely almost entirely on human intelligence, with a technology enabler -- and they display all the randomness of unfocused human intelligence.
A mashup of Digg and memeorandum -- now that would be interesting.
I'm a terrible writer.
To be accurate about a service I would personally like to see - and one that would meet you are looking for (I think): A Memeorandum (algorithmically filtered) + Digg/Newsvine (user filtered) + Slashdot (editor filtered) mashup.
The thing about this is I am positively sure people are already pursuing this now - the fact that we can see the pieces - is what leads me to believe its just a matter of time.
But which way would the articles flow? From algo to userbase to editors? The reverse? Userbase at an end point, either end?
However, I think the flow you've mentioned - algorithm to community to editor has promise - and is in fact - something I want to personally pursue. The simplest form of algorithm can be a hand picked list of trusted feeds that fit a particular subject matter. In fact, that's what we have already at Philly Future.
Bridging these types of systems will create much more effective recommendations.
http://feedblendr.com/rss/70
Can't do anything with Newsvine until it's out of private beta, I think. But Feedblendr can put those sources together into one feed, sorted by time.
http://feedblendr.com/tips/
An interesting approach to the feed management issue, for those who want a feed of multiple sources organized by time, like email. YMMV
David, thanks for pointing out feedblendr.com -- only problem is there's not enough hours in the day to experiment with all these new apps.