My 2 cents: 1) Wouldn't using the weblogs.com interface limit the use of it too much? A change in an open data set could be just as interesting. 2) Does weblogs' protocol facilitate subscribing (or following)? If not, i would opt for a different protocol.
dave
· 7 months ago
1. No because I said they could do more than #1, I just wanted at a minimum what #1 did.
2. No but that's what the OPML is for. Again if they want to provide a web service that allows you to tweak OPML that they're hosting for users, fine -- no problem. But I want to be able to provide any interface on any other server anywhere on the Internet without having to flow subscriptions through any single company's server.
The whole point of this architecture is to make any element of it subject to competition and thereby give users choice oever every aspect of it.
dave
· 7 months ago
Hopefully by now everyone, including Google, understands the problems with relying on a single central server. We have Feedburner to thank for that. At least its problems haven't taken the whole community with it. We must never rely on a single vendor like that again.
eelcoh
· 7 months ago
I'm not sure what that single server has got to do with by comments. Limiting pub/sub to a single server would be a bad idea indeed.
dave
· 7 months ago
Perhaps I misunderstood. If so, my apologies.
F. Andy Seidl
· 7 months ago
Dave, are #1 & #2 independent of #3? Is #3 really just a masher of a collection of feeds into a single feed? Or is #3 somehow dependent on #1 and/or #2?
dave
· 7 months ago
It's independent.
Small Pieces Loosely Joined.
Any component can be replaced.
Choice everywhere.
F. Andy Seidl
· 7 months ago
Thanks; that makes perfect sense. I guess I was thrown off track by the singular "killer app" ;-)
Brett Glass
· 7 months ago
Dave, I'm glad to see that you've published those ideas, lest Google try to claim and patent them. (Despite its motto, GoogleClick has become at least as evil as any other large corporation and might well do such a thing.) Perhaps those ideas could become part of an effort to compete with Google, which now has more than 75% market share in search advertising -- a monopoly.
dave
· 7 months ago
Thanks Brett. Your words of encouragement mean a lot! Hope all is well in Laramie. :-)
gbattle
· 7 months ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that your #1 and #2 are being done within Google News already. Granted, Google News is a much more limited universe, but it appears to work exactly as you've detailed. On these two points, it seems as if all you are suggesting is low latency aggregated RSS. Where I disagree is with your #3, especially when using Google. Aggregating blogs that have been indexed offers a much bigger opportunity than low latency delivery. The point should be to offer users what Google News or TechMeme does; empower them with an aggregated RSS stream where the order isn't via a simple time series, but via some indexing algorithm. By adding reputation, diversity, popularity, references as an overlay and breaking away from freshness alone as the organizer of RSS or even Twitter is probably the most value that a search engine can provide. Again, just my $.02.
gbattle
· 7 months ago
The point is that each search engine uses it's own "magic" as the organizing overlay (they could even be combined). Given that time, in this real-time universe, now becomes a driver affecting the factors for each search engine overlay (decay, aggregation, etc.), the complexity of this delivery would require something beyond real simple syndication. Again, I'll defer to you in this arena.
Seems like an issue that deserves more than 140 characters, mate. ;)
Brett Slatkin
· 6 months ago
Hey Dave, this still suffers from the problem with polling, right? But the low-latency goals here are similar to PubSubHubbub (http://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub/) and SUP. However, SUP still uses polling. Why do sites have to poll each other? Why can't we push content to subscribers (and their aggregators) and eliminate the minute delay? I want posts to RSS feeds to propagate in less than 500ms.
dave
· 6 months ago
Great. I was talking about "at a minimum" features. Add all the extras you want. I need these core features, and I don't need updates any more frequently than once a minute.
Nerdisterrogator
· 6 months ago
Thanks me for sharing your blog.
Nerdisterrogator
· 6 months ago
Best of luck for the Internet!
mackieb
· 6 months ago
Dave, #1 and #2, isn't that basically weblogs.com ? Or are you saying go straight to the source where people get the content from (i.e. google et al) and cut out the middle ping server man? Which sounds like you think has an issue as a single central vendor/server (or maybe I'm reading that wrong)
dave
· 6 months ago
#1 is straight from weblogs.com but #2 is what Google does. A little thing called a search engine. :-)
Ah yeah, quite! Low profile boys, those search engines, always forgetting about them :) btw nice to see good ol' AltaVista holding on to the top spot there for 'search engine' - so technically I guess that makes them the nr 1 search engine on the web...
All Comments
1) Wouldn't using the weblogs.com interface limit the use of it too much? A change in an open data set could be just as interesting.
2) Does weblogs' protocol facilitate subscribing (or following)? If not, i would opt for a different protocol.
what #1 did.
2. No but that's what the OPML is for. Again if they want to provide a web
service that allows you to tweak OPML that they're hosting for users, fine
-- no problem. But I want to be able to provide any interface on any other
server anywhere on the Internet without having to flow subscriptions through
any single company's server.
The whole point of this architecture is to make any element of it subject to
competition and thereby give users choice oever every aspect of it.
relying on a single central server. We have Feedburner to thank for that. At
least its problems haven't taken the whole community with it. We must never
rely on a single vendor like that again.
Small Pieces Loosely Joined.
Any component can be replaced.
Choice everywhere.
Laramie. :-)
want. I need these core features, and I don't need updates any more
frequently than once a minute.
http://www.google.com/search?q="search+engine"