| 6:47 pm on Jul 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I took a look at some articles and many were spams for the author's travel/medical/AdSense site.
| 6:58 pm on Jul 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I am curious if at first this is going to get flooded with spam type content. It may be hard regulate copyright issues as well. But since there is a name/author attached to each Knol it will help keep copyright issues down.
Also over time the spam posts should move down in the list as more "authorities" come into the picture.
I expect to see certain sectors have more spam than others.
But time will tell if this is a positive tool/resource.
| 7:26 pm on Jul 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Wow, this is the first time I've heard of Knol. It's a great idea. I'm not going to worry about spam. It could be a small problem at first, but like you said, it'll all settle down and the authorities will come through. Google does things right and I'm fairly positive they came up with some way of preventing spam posts on this.
It does seem to be mostly medical at this point.
What bugs me is that only the original author can share his/her knowledge. Knol users cannot edit to add their knowledge, fix mistakes, etc. as they can on sites like WikiHow.
| 5:17 am on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
You knol, I was all excited about this at first. And then I started browsing around and reading all the disclaimers and such. I see the entire SEM community jumping on board, everyone has established their Knols and they are going hog wild with them, Google, you better get some Cowboys in there! Heck, some are even giving away prizes if you help build their Knols, how cool is that?
Nope! I'll stick to my own little node that has taken me an untold number of hours to create. I'm not giving that away to anyone else. Google already have it in their index. I'm not going to organize it for them and then let others abuse my Knol. Ya, I knol, you can mod and all that neat stuff but I can see the writing on the wall now. I'll let it catch on first and then come in and "upset" the Knol community. :)
Knol? For some reason, I keep thinking Troll. Why? The two just sound too much alike. And now you are going to have people Trolling your Knols. Yee-haa!
| 6:20 am on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
It's a good idea... like Google Answers.
Both will end dead and well buried. I told you.
Or even better, did you use Froogle recently? Where is the GTalk icon on your desktop?
[edited by: Lexur at 6:24 am (utc) on July 24, 2008]
| 6:21 am on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I can see it now. Knol results are #1 for any keyword, Wikipedia moves to #2. And nothing else matters LOL.
| 11:55 am on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
For the record, here are some earlier threads on the subject.
Will Google Knol kill off Wikipedia (and many webmasters)? [webmasterworld.com]
Google's Knol making information easier to find [webmasterworld.com]
| 12:03 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|It does seem to be mostly medical at this point. |
And how to repair your toilets and fix your flush :)
I have already flushed knol, I hope it will not block my toilets.
Their browsing page are so ugly, links, links and links...
Well, not for me !
| 12:16 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm hesitant to contribute to a commercial entity when my return is speculative at best.
At least with squidoo type stuff I was getting backlinks and some measure of control. Knol however looks more like a combination of all the drawbacks of squidoo, combined with all the drawbacks of wikipedia.
I think I'm going to let someone else line Google's pockets under the premise of 'enriching the internet'.
| 12:52 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Yep, another shockingly bad design coming from that Californian company known as "Google" today. I presume they will be pushing KNOL articles to the top of every search query, making it a dream-come-true for spammers. Users will be annoyed.
I wonder when Matt C. will put a stop to this and un-edit the changes?
| 12:53 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Who needs a search engine? Ctrl+F |
| 12:57 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Comment links don't have rel=nofollow. That's a nice giveaway for some spamm... entrepreneurs.
| 5:05 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I found a very useful medical article on Knol, but it's early days yet, and it remains to be seen how well Google can defend Knol from the get-rich-quick crowd. (I like the idea of Knol, but--like AdSense--it's a concept that seems wide open for abuse.)
| 5:22 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Just went through the whole signing up process and looks like you have the option of either creating an adsense account or linking any articles you write to your own adsense account.
| 5:26 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Knol results are #1 for any keyword, Wikipedia moves to #2. And nothing else matters LOL. |
just did some tests and they are already closing in, most of the medical terms are above or below the wikipedia entry. ROTFL, too!
| 5:32 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Wow! Is this thing viral or what? The Internet is flooded with topics about The Knol!
I'm paranoid, I really am! So much so, I'm staying away from The Knol for now. The Gorg continues to "seep" into the very "fabric" of our lives and this platform is a way to fully assimilate you. I'm not ready to be assimilated!
Can anyone see the future of Google Search? I can see it from "my perspective" and I'm not real comfortable with the thought.
This is a blatant Wiki ripoff and I'm guessing that the Wiki is soon to be history. Maybe Google just decided that all the "user-generated" content would be best if "they" had control over it. I mean, they are buying Digg, they launch The Knol, how many more times am I going to let them smack me upside the head before I see the forest through the trees?
They are still one of my favorite search engines. If I start finding "too many" Google properties taking up those first 10 results, I'm outta there!
| 5:37 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Knol results are #1 for any keyword, Wikipedia moves to #2. |
Wikipedia ranks so well for a reason - that domain has got well over 1 mln external domains pointing to it, with more than 670 mln external backlinks, often very good ones quality wise.
| 5:41 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Wikipedia ranks so well for a reason - that domain has got well over 1 mln external domains pointing to it, with more than 670 mln external backlinks, often very good ones quality wise. |
Guess what? Me thinks that is changing at this very moment. I'm sure Google Engineers and Marketing are watching this huge graph and they can see the "changes taking place". Give it 6 months and that number is going to change considerably. Google is "splitting" the authority right now. In time, that authority will shift to The Knol and the Wiki will slowly pass. History has shown us the progression of technology and this would be natural in most intances. Google is just going to speed the process along a bit. Remember that Directory? What was it called? Oh, the ODP? ;)
| 5:54 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Just finished submitting my first knol. We'll see how it goes. I wonder if the knols are pre-moderated. According to what they say, they shouldn't be moderated at all:
|We don't edit knols nor do we try to enforce any particular viewpoint |
Also found this statement in their help section interesting. Almost like their are spammer baiting to see what kind of info they can gather.
|Knols are indexed by the big search engines, of course. And well-written knols become popular the same as regular web pages. |
Both quotes from [knol.google.com ]
| 5:55 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Well, I am not so sure - Google created many things that compete with other ventures, for example Google Video vs YouTube, but in the end they had to buy YouTube. The moment Google starts manipulating index like this would be the end of them and they know it, so I doubt they will do it anytime soon.
| 6:19 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Knols are indexed by the big search engines, of course. And well-written knols become popular the same as regular web pages. |
I've followed Google's acquisitions over the years. They got to the point where it was becoming a task in itself. I think they buy something everyday. They have a special Google Shopping Cart with a list of Technologies that they want. Once a day, someone goes shopping. ;)
Think real hard about this before establishing your Knol. Also, give careful consideration in how you offer that information. I'd be copyrighting everything to start, that which falls under copyright.
If this takes off like I think it will, this will have a dramatic impact on Google's bottom line. Their search audience should increase by default. Both Yahoo! and MSN users "may" gravitate to the Knol as that is where "everyone" will be.
If I were the Wiki right now, I'd be shaking in me boots!
I'm going to guess that those contributing to the Knol have a vested interest in seeing Google continue to succeed. I do too, but I'm keeping my stuff for now, they already have it anyway. And on top of that, I'm sure there will be Knol references somewhere. :)
It would be interesting to see a map of Wiki Editors prior to the Knol going live. I'd like to see just how many of them gravitate to the Knol. :)
Hey, what do you Knol?
Looks like the domain buying frenzy is on too! Yo Webwork, I've already got about 20 really good ones!
<added> Its definitely going viral. In just the past 24 hours...
Results 1 - 10 of about 26,300 over the past 24 hours for "google knol". (0.21 seconds)
If we take into consideration how Google's algo "may" work, the Knollers Network should see top spots here very, very soon!
<added more> It appears that tests are already coming out on first Knol experiments and 33% of the keywords tested had pageoneresults. Go figure... ;)
| 6:49 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
P1R, your comments about wikipedia are bang on. This could very easily bring about their irrelevance.
And if wikipedia can disappear, Google can to. Peculiar to think about - they seem like they've been dominant forever and that nothing can knock them down. But we are still very much in the infancy of the web here. Really, it's been like less than 10 years that the web has been a common presence in the general community? Google could be gone in 5-10 years. And something like what's noted above where they populate their serps with their own stuf (making them basically a Yahoo portal clone) could do it for users.
Still, the idea of knol dominating the serps makes me very nervous. I don't want to delve in (for reasons noted above, and I don't want to be exposed as an SEO'er) but I'm half afraid not to.
I know! I'll grab my old gmail account ID and start spamming knol with one of my decent throw away domains!
| 7:02 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Interesting that the Knol settings default to a Creative Commons license instead of All Rights Reserved. Obviously Google isn't too concerned with protecting an author's work, or it would be the other way around.
| 7:07 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The only reason Knol exists is for the ads, rite?
So, if Google were honest, then they better ban themselves for making MFA sites!
| 7:10 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|The moment Google starts manipulating index like this would be the end of them and they know it, so I doubt they will do it anytime soon. |
They don't need to. Just like you get News results when you search for Iraq or Image results when you search for 'Angelina Jolie', now we will also have Knol results showing even higher than Wikipedia even if Wiki is the legitimate topper..
| 10:33 pm on Jul 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|This is a blatant Wiki ripoff and I'm guessing that the Wiki is soon to be history. |
Actually, they're quite different:
- Wikipedia is team-oriented, with multiple community members contributing to a collaborative article on each topic.
- Knol is author-oriented, with individual writers contributing many different (and competing) articles on each topic.
If I were looking up widget disease or somewhereville for an overview of that topic, I'd use Wikipedia. If I wanted to browse a whole bunch of different articles on widget disease or somewhereville, with the confidence that at least some of those articles are written by academics or other experts, I might spend some time clicking around Knol.
- In terms of quality control, Wikipedia relies on community members, and Knol will rely on reader ratings.
- Unlike Wikipedia, which is an editorial free-for-all, Knol should be appealing to academics who want to disseminate information or establish credentials with articles that carry their bylines and are fully under their control. (On the other hand, it remains to be seen if academics and experts will want to share a stage with every Tom, Dick, and Harry who's trying to sell or promote something to to make a quick AdSense buck.)
Finally, those who have felt threatened by Wikipedia will also feel threatened by Knol, but history shows that individuals who create valuable, authoritative sites on their topics can compete very well with the megasites (including Wikipedia) in Google Search.
| 12:29 am on Jul 25, 2008 (gmt 0)|
don't see a resemblance to wikipedia here.
it's more like some academic about.com
an article site by the elite.
there's another thing - related to collaboration - that is missing here, and which is THE thing that makes Wikipedia a great experience for me ( even with its so-so content ) something that allows you to learn about things fast and without the need to dig up even further pages/sites.
...and that thing is cross-referencing
taking full advantage of all wiki features.
authority sites / university pages / archives... uncollaborative, closed-circuit, niche, hobby, mom'n'pop sites. that's where Knol will suck away traffic from.
| 3:05 am on Jul 25, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Like I've said so often, GOOGLE IS TAKING OVER THE WORLD!
| 4:53 am on Jul 25, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Wikipedia is a flawed system as it relies on people not being paid to contribute to it, leading to many articles on popular culture topics with a higher word count than serious academic articles. There's no real authorship either so there is no responsibility from the authors to make sure they take pride in their work. Knol isn't any different.
Clay tablets from the ancient Sumerians have survived from 5000BC, I personally have a book published in the 19th century, I can't see any of the online formats lasting event a fraction of that time.
| This 51 message thread spans 2 pages: 51 (  2 ) > > |