Knol doesn’t rely on just anybody to create its collection of knowledgeable articles. You get to be the author, the buck stops here byline on a contribution, and if you write it, you kind of own it. Unlike Wikipedia, which it is compared to, Knol has a commercial bent. You get to run ads, too, and, in theory, make some money off of your expertise. It’s not a new concept, but it is a Google concept, and that’s about all it takes for the world domination theorists to come out of the woodwork. But, does it have legs?
After months of teasing and internal testing, Google officially launched its eagerly-anticipated online encyclopedia announced in December . The service dubbed Knol aims to organize the collective knowledge of Internet users into a searchable, browsable service that has been compared to Wikipedia. However, this is where similarity with world's famous online encyclopedia stops. At first glance, Knol feels more inviting and Web 2.0-like, which may attract those put off by the academic appeal of Wikipedia. But, ultimately, it will come down to content and Google thinks it got it right with Knol.
"Knols are authoritative articles about specific topics, written by people who know about those subjects," explained Knol product manager Cedric Dupont and software engineer Michael McNally in a Google blog post Wednesday. You will not have to be a rocket scientist to post a knol because everyone can become an author. And you also get a chance to earn some money on content you post, if you opt to run.
Similarly to the Facebook culture, Google will try to persuade authors to use their real names (although this will not be a requirement) and to stand behind their work, unlike Wikipedia where mostly anonymous authors post articles. Google says it will provide optional author identity confirmation via telephone or credit card verification. Verified authors will have a "verified" stamp added to their knols.
With Knol, multiple authors will be able to write about the same topic. "The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an author (or group of authors) who put their name behind their content. It's their knol, their voice, their opinion. “We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good," said Google.
It remains to be seen if Knol will have more fact-checked content than stuff on Wikipedia, where entries are sometimes gamed for nefarious purposes, limiting its efficacy at times. Readers can suggest edits to a knol but its author always remains in charge able to accept, reject or modify a reader's suggestions before their contribution becomes visible. Google thinks this fact alone can mean a world of difference to the authority of its offerings. Readers will also have the opportunity to submit comments, rate or write a review of a knol.
Google didn't forget about the fun factor either so it inked an agreement with the New Yorker magazine to allow an author to add one cartoon per knol from the magazine's cartoon repository. Another interesting features allows knol authors to choose between two licensing methods for their work: the ubiquitous, and open Creative Commons or a full copyright license which reserves all rights to the author.
Analysts think that Knol's success will be determined by its ability to achieve a critical mass of contributors and readers. "It's a long shot, if you had to give it odds on whether this will change the world or not," said Gartner analyst Andrew Frank. The analyst explains that there are not many companies that have the resources and courage to challenge Wikipedia. "It's interesting and certainly shows how Google is one of the few companies with the scale to be able to do an experiment like this without being intimidated by Wikipedia," he said.
Most of the content on Knol at launch iwas medical articles. Interestingly enough, on the same day, Harvard Medical School, the Stanford School of Medicine, the University of Michigan Medical School and the University of California Berkeley School of Public Health were all supporting the launch of The Medpedia Project . It's kind of bizarre that Google does a lot of things that are passive-aggressive acts of competition. Or maybe they just get fed up of sending all that traffic to Wikipedia, and not seeing any ad money coming back. Damn those world domination theorists!
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Facebook's portal for the masses
This week, Facebook took a number of strategic steps toward its goal of giving people the "power to share and make the world more open and connected." That's how founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg described the mission statement for Facebook.
With that mission statement, similar to Google's mission to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," Facebook is highlighting its noble aspirations, but underneath the "make the world a better place" is the fact that both Facebook and Google, as well as Yahoo, Microsoft, MySpace, and others want to be the portal for the masses.
(Credit: (CC) Brian Solis )
By portal, I mean more than just a place to share content with friends, search or wire up a social graph. If the Web is becoming social at its core, Facebook (90 million and growing at hundreds of thousands per day) and its competitors want to be the center of their members' lives in the same way that MyYahoo became a personalized home base for millions of users over the last decade.
As evidence of Facebook's portal ambitions, the company introduced Facebook Connect, which will let users access and feed their Facebook profiles and friends on any Web site. Facebook is the identity system and portal through which the content from other sites flows--all roads leading to Facebook, which is distinct from what Google's more open and distributed approach with Friend Connect. Facebook Connect is not yet generally available, but demos from Digg and Six Apart, among others, indicate that it has substance.
Om Malik extrapolates from Facebook Connect that Facebook is building a money machine:
You are essentially telling Facebook's proverbial brain what topics -- blogs or specific posts -- with which you like to engage. In other words, you just told the system a little bit about yourself. Now imagine such information coming from dozens of Facebook Connect partners.
Each service adds a few more data points about you inside the Facebook brain, which is quite aware of your activities inside the Facebook ecosystem. The brain can then crunch all that information and build a fairly accurate image of who you are, what you like and what might interest you. With all that information at its disposal, Facebook can build a fairly large cash register.
The cash register is an advertising platform, a follow on to Beacon, that leverages the social graph and each member as a potential marketing engine. With all the data and user permissions, ad targeting could be more precise. Zuckerberg has also talked about a payments system, a la PayPal, for the platform. After getting Chat launched, Facebook is likely working on making its e-mail application more robust as part of building out the portal.
Microsoft is poised to bring its Web search and paid search results into Facebook's U.S. site.
With 400,000 developers, according to Facebook, working on the platform, thousands of applications--from e-commerce to games--and widgets with any kind of feed will be available for each user's Facebook portal.
Facebook also has more than 10 million users of its mobile services, which is the next major frontier for building user portals. For example, Facebook Connect for Mobile, due for release in the fall, will allow members to hook up with friends over mobile devices to play games with friends and learn which friends downloaded applications of shared interest.
Challenges for Facebook are scaling to support the increased amount of data pouring into its servers and adapting to different geographies. More than two-thirds of Facebook users are outside of the U.S., but all of Facebook's servers are inside the U.S. Decreasing latency, which leads to increased page views, will be a key to Facebook's ability to keep up with demand.
If Facebook can continue to roll out new features, maintain its growth pace and improve site performance, it will be on a collision course with the Web portal giants who were born in the 20th century. Of course, one of those Web giants may pay mega-billions to consolidate the market, but it's unlikely that Facebook will give up its independence any time soon.
With that mission statement, similar to Google's mission to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," Facebook is highlighting its noble aspirations, but underneath the "make the world a better place" is the fact that both Facebook and Google, as well as Yahoo, Microsoft, MySpace, and others want to be the portal for the masses.
(Credit: (CC) Brian Solis )
By portal, I mean more than just a place to share content with friends, search or wire up a social graph. If the Web is becoming social at its core, Facebook (90 million and growing at hundreds of thousands per day) and its competitors want to be the center of their members' lives in the same way that MyYahoo became a personalized home base for millions of users over the last decade.
As evidence of Facebook's portal ambitions, the company introduced Facebook Connect, which will let users access and feed their Facebook profiles and friends on any Web site. Facebook is the identity system and portal through which the content from other sites flows--all roads leading to Facebook, which is distinct from what Google's more open and distributed approach with Friend Connect. Facebook Connect is not yet generally available, but demos from Digg and Six Apart, among others, indicate that it has substance.
Om Malik extrapolates from Facebook Connect that Facebook is building a money machine:
You are essentially telling Facebook's proverbial brain what topics -- blogs or specific posts -- with which you like to engage. In other words, you just told the system a little bit about yourself. Now imagine such information coming from dozens of Facebook Connect partners.
Each service adds a few more data points about you inside the Facebook brain, which is quite aware of your activities inside the Facebook ecosystem. The brain can then crunch all that information and build a fairly accurate image of who you are, what you like and what might interest you. With all that information at its disposal, Facebook can build a fairly large cash register.
The cash register is an advertising platform, a follow on to Beacon, that leverages the social graph and each member as a potential marketing engine. With all the data and user permissions, ad targeting could be more precise. Zuckerberg has also talked about a payments system, a la PayPal, for the platform. After getting Chat launched, Facebook is likely working on making its e-mail application more robust as part of building out the portal.
Microsoft is poised to bring its Web search and paid search results into Facebook's U.S. site.
With 400,000 developers, according to Facebook, working on the platform, thousands of applications--from e-commerce to games--and widgets with any kind of feed will be available for each user's Facebook portal.
Facebook also has more than 10 million users of its mobile services, which is the next major frontier for building user portals. For example, Facebook Connect for Mobile, due for release in the fall, will allow members to hook up with friends over mobile devices to play games with friends and learn which friends downloaded applications of shared interest.
Challenges for Facebook are scaling to support the increased amount of data pouring into its servers and adapting to different geographies. More than two-thirds of Facebook users are outside of the U.S., but all of Facebook's servers are inside the U.S. Decreasing latency, which leads to increased page views, will be a key to Facebook's ability to keep up with demand.
If Facebook can continue to roll out new features, maintain its growth pace and improve site performance, it will be on a collision course with the Web portal giants who were born in the 20th century. Of course, one of those Web giants may pay mega-billions to consolidate the market, but it's unlikely that Facebook will give up its independence any time soon.
Nuclear pact: India does its part
Washington Post commented on Indo-US nuclear deal yesterday. Excerpts:
Until recently, it seemed that an ambitious Bush administration bid to restore nuclear cooperation between the United States and India might be dead, a victim of domestic Indian politics. Anti-American Communist parties that support Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s centrist government were blocking the deal. But Singh took a bold risk to salvage the pact, trading Communist support for that of a smaller regional party in hopes of assembling a new majority. This week the gamble paid off, as Singh’s government survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote. Now, the question is whether the pact can survive the American political process.
There isn’t much time; under US law, Congress must be in session continuously for 30 days to consider the deal. Before that clock can start, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must give India a green light. While those approvals are likely, they won’t happen instantaneously. And because of the long August recess, there may not be more than 30 “legislative days” left before Congress adjourns on Sept. 26. The deal raises many legitimate questions. But, on balance, it is in the United States’ interest, and Congress should find the time to say yes — in a lame-duck session after the November election, if necessary. US nuclear cooperation with India ceased when India, which had refused to sign the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, exploded a nuclear “device” in 1974.
Until recently, it seemed that an ambitious Bush administration bid to restore nuclear cooperation between the United States and India might be dead, a victim of domestic Indian politics. Anti-American Communist parties that support Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s centrist government were blocking the deal. But Singh took a bold risk to salvage the pact, trading Communist support for that of a smaller regional party in hopes of assembling a new majority. This week the gamble paid off, as Singh’s government survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote. Now, the question is whether the pact can survive the American political process.
There isn’t much time; under US law, Congress must be in session continuously for 30 days to consider the deal. Before that clock can start, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must give India a green light. While those approvals are likely, they won’t happen instantaneously. And because of the long August recess, there may not be more than 30 “legislative days” left before Congress adjourns on Sept. 26. The deal raises many legitimate questions. But, on balance, it is in the United States’ interest, and Congress should find the time to say yes — in a lame-duck session after the November election, if necessary. US nuclear cooperation with India ceased when India, which had refused to sign the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, exploded a nuclear “device” in 1974.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)