Comments on: Sidewiki: What Google should do

By: YuccaTree Post + » Blogger formieren Widerstand gegen Google-Sidewiki. Google-was?

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:14:53 +0000

[...] lässt deswegen in einem Beitrag von gestern einige Web-Gurus zu Wort kommen, neben Keen und Jarvis auch Nick Holmes und Andrew [...]

By: BusinessWeek seems confused => #Fail re: “In Defense of Godin, Google, and Open Systems” « Status Updates — Just Random Stuff

Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:06:36 +0000

[...] professor who has urged newspapers to loosen restrictions on content, seemed stunned. Sidewiki, Jarvis blogged, “is not adding value to the conversation by organizing it but instead trying to hijack [...]

By: Google Sidewiki een zegen? « Slimmer Samen Werken

Google Sidewiki een zegen? « Slimmer Samen Werken — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:30:36 +0000

[...] heeft Huwa een goed punt, vergelijkbaar met het punt dat Jeff Jarvis maakt op BuzzMachine, of David Sleigth in Paving the Road. Ik mag graag roepen dat organisaties en [...]

By: Jon Awbrey

Jon Awbrey — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:16:58 +0000

It’s not about you, J² …

If it weren’t for Google + Sidewiki, there’s little chance I would have ever run across your site.

Google is simply responding to a felt information-societal need, a crying social-information need that is long past needing someone to address it.

That need arises from the Pwnership Model of the Command And Control Communication that those Raving Hawk Militant DOS Kapitalists at DARPA foisted on us when they invented the Internet in the foist place.

That’s why they set up an Information Market with owners who own and just can’t stop themselves from having to dominate domains.

That market-cornering ownership model has led to the increasing impoverishment of information — Why, because information gets controlled — one more time — by the Biggest Bullies on the Block.

By: Andy Freeman

Andy Freeman — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 18:37:07 +0000

I’m not serving content. I’m requesting content.

You have neither the right nor the ability to say that I can’t see other content if I request your content.

You clearly disagree, so I’ll ask for the relevant details. How do you stop me from requesting content from sidewiki, content that isn hosted on a site that you do not control?

As to the “right”, how does that work, exactly. What other sources get to say “if you see our content, we get to tell you what content from other people you can’t see.”

How is my screen different from my bookshelf?

By: John

John — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 21:16:57 +0000

I have both the right and the ability to block you serving content served in association with my domain.

By: Andy Freeman

Andy Freeman — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:28:09 +0000

> It’s my content and I have a right to chose what is served over my page on my domain.

It’s my screen/display. My decision to show some of your content on my screen does not give you any rights wrt what else is shown to me on said screen.

You only have rights wrt what is sent from your servers. You have no rights wrt what is sent from someone else’s servers.

By: This week in media musings: Shirky speaks, and three new projects to watch | Mark Coddington

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:23:33 +0000

[...] divides the conversation and moves responsibility for it from the site owner to Google. (Later, he said Google should work to organize conversation, rather than start its own.) David Sleight says now [...]

By: Is Google evil? | www.amusingourselves.com

Is Google evil? | www.amusingourselves.com — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:29:33 +0000

[...] if you think I’m getting a little worked up over this, then you might want to read what Jeff Jarvis, writer of the What Would Google Do and self-confessed Google fanboy, has to say about S… (he’s not at all keen). These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can [...]

By: John

John — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:52:10 +0000

Google hasn’t always been an advertising company, they started as a purepaly tech/search company with a licensing model, and indeed they almost sold the company before deciding to go with an ad-supported model.

And it’s only relatively recently that they started to act like a bully, stealing the rights of content owners without permission – Booksearch, You Tube, Sidewiki all have this common feature.

The company hides behind the rhetoric of enpowerment, but all it’s interested in is profit. I sort of bought the idea when they were sticking it to the big content companies, but I didn’t really reckon on them coming after us little guys.

Also, you’re wrong about sidewiki. It’s my content and I have a right to chose what is served over my page on my domain.

Which is why I’ll be using one of the growing number of scripts to block GTB user agents.

I reckon this accounts for about 0.03 of my visitors, so it’s no great loss, particularly as toolbars are only used by the lower wattage bulbs.

By: Andy Freeman

Andy Freeman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:42:31 +0000

> Sorry to say it, but Google has turned into a big evil advertising company.

“turned into”? Google has always been an advertising company.

However, you’re wrong about sidewiki. It isn’t “hijacking” anything. It gives users another choice in where to hold conversations about content.

Yes, it’s displayed on my screen next to said content if I so choose. Since it is my screen, that’s my choice to make.

By: John

John — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:41:42 +0000

You Tube, Book Search, Sidewiki all share the same essential features, i.e. hijacking other people’s content without permission, riding roughshod over complaints and using their deep pockets to bully people with lawyers.

And the reason they do it is not altruism, as some posters here seem to think. It’s because they’re the biggest advertising company in the world and they need more more real estate one which to serve their ads. And they will do anything they can to get it.

Sorry to say it, but Google has turned into a big evil advertising company.

By: Footprints (29.09.09) | Chris Deary

Footprints (29.09.09) | Chris Deary — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:47:29 +0000

[...] Sidewiki: What Google should do [...]

By: cs1380

cs1380 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:19:24 +0000

There is now a free script that blocks SideWiki comments without blocking or redirecting all GTB users. The site below is the only one I know of that currently has it available. There are others working on additional scripts that may be even more transparent to visitors.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-internet-marketing-discussion-forum/128256-if-you-want-take-stand-against-google-encroaching-your-rights-sidewiki-now-time-5.html

By: Google adjusts to life with trustbusters | Mac Bargains

Google adjusts to life with trustbusters | Mac Bargains — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:47:18 +0000

[...] However, Jeff Jarvis, author of the book “What Would Google Do?”, believes there is a disconnect between how Google sees itself and how a growing portion of the public sees Google. “Google thinks (it’s) Snuffleupagus–big but cuddly and good–and just doesn’t realize that some people see it as a potential bully and so it has to act accordingly. With size comes responsibility,” he wrote in a blog post last week. [...]

By: Getting Started with Google Sidewiki « Social Media Musings by Tom Humbarger

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:01:43 +0000

[...] Sidewiki: What Google Should Do by Jeff Jarvis [...]

By: The Ramifications of Google’s Sidewiki « Imprudent Loquatiousness: The Blog of Derek DeVries

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:29:35 +0000

[...] this going on at Jeff Jarvis’ blog (Buzzmachine.com). [Update: The discussion continues - "Sidewiki: What Google Should do"] Jarvis is seriously concerned (and he’s a huge proponent of Google – having authored [...]

By: Ken

Ken — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:43:09 +0000

Jeff,

Fractured conversations are just the law of nature. Let’s take for example the new show Flash Forward. (Awesome show by the way). There are conversations by reviewers, by the NY Times, and a great discussion by my favorite Detroit morning radio hosts. The writers of Flash Forward have no control or responsibility over the content I just heard, right? Why should internet content be any different?

By: Learning Aloud - Sidewiki from Google – Cool, but beyond my control

Learning Aloud - Sidewiki from Google – Cool, but beyond my control — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:53:50 +0000

[...] bit of code within the HTML of a page, this approach might have solved the lack of control issue. (Follow-up post from [...]

By: What Does Google SideWiki Mean for Businesses, Publishers and the Social Web? | Gauravonomics Blog on Social Media and Social Change

Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:58:34 +0000

[...] who have interesting perspectives on Google SideWiki: Jason Falls, Jeremiah Owyang, Jeff Jarvis 1, Jeff Jarvis 2, Valeria Maltoni, Andrew Keen, Louis Gray, Danny Sullivan, John Batelle, David Sleight, Andy Beard, [...]

By: Ben Davies

Ben Davies — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 13:38:13 +0000

Hi Bob,

I provide more of my thinking on this on my blog at http://www.doom-and-gloom.net/2009/09/open-protocol-for-conversations.html

Briefly, I think a Conversations Protocol and Service should allow us to:

-Identify a given element (or potential element) of a conversation
-Identify new elements of conversation
-Find and examine the full-text or full version of the contribution
-Understand the direct antecedent, subsequent and possibly sibling contributions. Be able to reconstruct all contributions that led to a specific element, back to the original contribution. Effectively we should able to crawl the conversation in the same way that search engines spider web pages.
-Facilitate a distribution and/or federated tracking and maintenance of elements that maintains the metadata required to identify the antecedent of each contribution.
-Allow cross domain and cross media contributions
-Allow a new element of conversation to register what antecedents it has.
-Reliably identify the author of each contribution in a non-ambiguous fashion.
-Allow contribution domains to control contributions on their own domain, but not others.

By: Barney Lerten

Barney Lerten — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:15:05 +0000

I’ve commented on this and many sites’ Sidewiki since installing this afternoon, and definitely see both sides. Also listened to him talk to Leo on This Week in Google at TWiT, where I new it’d be center stage.
I too would have preferred some sort of uber-conversations/forum system from Google that could be part of, rather than beside the site itself.
That could create a truly global forum/conversation network, bigger than any that’s come before. Sidewiki also seems wedded to one’s Google Profile, which surely is more expansive than I recall and could be another conversation topic. It’s gathering of one’s comments on Sidewikis around the Web reminds me of things like the Ning networks.
To see more of my thoughts, check my sidewiki post (hmmm, did I just help Jeff make his points?;-)

By: Brinn Thedell

Brinn Thedell — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:29:11 +0000

I agree with Dan. Sidewiki will be short lived. The technology of the Internet will solve the problem that Jeff has pointed out. I’m Looking forward to see how this conversation progresses on Buzzmachine and other blogs, but not on the side.

By: Dan Hanegan

Dan Hanegan — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:37:05 +0000

It seems to me that the negative reaction of many site owners to sidewiki is that they feel Google is taking ownership of their site away from them. It seems to me the simplest response to their fears would be for Google to allow site owners to opt out of sidewiki. Simply create an HTML or XML tag site owners can add to their site, and modify the Google sidewiki code to check for that tag. Sidewiki would not operate for sites with the tag. The tag might be structured so the site owners could include a comment about why they choose to opt out that would show in the sidewiki browser pane, but sidewiki comments could not be added.

By: Jeff Jarvis

Jeff Jarvis — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:47:55 +0000

It can be both. They’ll attract some number away from the comments into a separate conversation. they’ll also attract trolls i’d kill to leave droppings associated with the page using sidewiki.