|
Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Google's Answer to WikipediaGoogle's Knol project aims to make online information easier to find and more authoritative. By Andrew Schrock
Google recently announced Knol, a new experimental website that puts information online in a way that encourages authorial attribution. Unlike articles for the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, which anyone is free to revise, Knol articles will have individual authors, whose pictures and credentials will be prominently displayed alongside their work. Currently, participation in the project is by invitation only, but Google will eventually open up Knol to the public. At that point, a given topic may end up with multiple articles by different authors. Readers will be able to rate the articles, and the better an article's rating, the higher it will rank in Google's search results. Google coined the term "knol" to denote a unit of knowledge but also uses it to refer to an authoritative Web-based article on a particular subject. At present, Google will not describe the project in detail, but Udi Manber, one of the company's vice presidents of engineering, provided a cursory sketch on the company's blog site. "A knol on a particular topic is meant to be the first thing someone who searches for this topic for the first time will want to read," Manber writes. And in a departure from Wikipedia's model of community authorship, he adds that "the key idea behind the Knol project is to highlight authors." Noah Kagan, founder of the premier conference about online communities, Community Next, sees an increase in authorial attribution as a change for the better. He notes the success of the review site Yelp, which has risen to popularity in the relatively short span of three years. "Yelp's success is based on people getting attribution for the reviews that they are posting," Kagan says. "Because users have their reputation on the line, they are more likely to leave legitimate answers." Knol also has features intended to establish an article's credibility, such as references to its sources and a listing of the title, job history, and institutional affiliation of the author. Knol may thus attract experts who are turned off by group editing and prefer the style of attribution common in journalistic and academic publications. Manber writes that "for many topics, there will likely be competing knols on the same subject. Competition of ideas is a good thing." But Mark Pellegrini, administrator and featured-article director at Wikipedia and a member of its press committee, sees two problems with this plan. "I think what will happen is that you'll end up with five or ten articles," he says, "none of which is as comprehensive as if the people who wrote them had worked together on a single article." These articles may be redundant or even contradictory, he says. Knol authors may also have less incentive to link keywords to competitors' articles, creating "walled gardens." Pellegrini describes the effect thus: "Knol authors will tend to link from their articles to other articles they've written, but not to articles written by others." |
Wikipedians Promise New Search Engine
03/16/2007



Comments
blunney on 01/15/2008 at 10:32 AM
15
Note the most successful recently created websites on the web (MySpace, Facebook, Wikipedia, Craigslist, etc) enable and encourage their viewers to participate. I don't see how Knol does this.
Or is it just a ploy by the company that will "Do no evil" to sell more ads?
gregus80 on 01/17/2008 at 3:49 AM
2
gregus80 on 01/17/2008 at 3:49 AM
2
1) They have already huge database of articles
2) They have already working community
3) They have something unique ( look at Intelligent Suggestions )
Gaetano Marano on 01/21/2008 at 10:11 AM
55
gregus80,
please explain me how you have hyperlinked your texts here
all my attempts (HTML, BBcode, etc.) failed
thanks
.
danielrluke on 01/18/2008 at 6:29 PM
1
Content creation should be picking up your phone and sharing your desk top. It would be so easy to create a Knowledge Market. Instead of facilitating the transfer of tangible products the way EBay does, it would facilitate the transfer of Knowlege from one person to another.
Want to learn Flash? Instead of reading an online tutorial, with a Knowlege Market you could efficiently find someone to teach you. The Knowlege Worker's expertise would be self-described, but it would also be rated by past users. The Knowlege Market could allow anyone to be both teacher and learner. That is, you could learn from anyone on any subject, or you could to teach to anyone on any subject. The point of the market itself, of course would be to bring the two together and to provide a technical means whereby this transfer could take place. All of the technology exists for this to work. Surprisingly no one has put it together yet. I guess everyone is trying to promote their Squidoo Lens to have too much time to think about such obvious things.
Have a problem with PHP at 3 a.m.? Call (text, whatever) someone on the Knowledge Market for help. Want to take a cooking class? Do it online with other people from an expert instructor anywhere in the world.
Most of the information on the internet is a set of meta information which leads you to the information that you ultimately seek. Why not create an application which allows you to directly access the far more valuable knowledge and information that exists only in people's heads?
Why is the internet so practically useless and becoming more useless by the day as it is overtaken by the kudzu of millions of people building sites meant to promote hair tonic? It is because it was created by soical phobes--mostly male computer scientists, male mathematicians, people with high IQs, etc. who preferred their computers over people for companionship. These people have really created the internet in their own image which basically limits human interaction but what we've seen in recent years is the most humans actually do want to connect with each other, and this is actually where the power of the internet resides. It's not about better algorithms, folks. It's about connecting human beings. It's about overcoming the barrier that technology represents.
It's great that sites like Squidoo, Wikipedia, HubPages, and Ezines, Helium, Scripd, et al exist to give people a form of self-expression, but ultimately they all fall way short of what people migh ultimately want. Who wants to be stuck behind a computer monitor all day long typing out messages and contributing to someone else's dream in complete solitude when they could be interacting with actual human beings in a much richer, much more textured and meaningful way?
A Knoledge Market would change that by facilitating the transfer of knowledge that people actually want. And as a market, it would bring the price of knowlege down dramatically.
Go on the internet and try to find a private tutor for Adobe Photoshop who is competing with other private photoshop tutors from all over the world for your business in real time--one moreover who has an established curriculum, ratings from past users, a desk-top sharing interface, and a library of past tutorials. Why doesn't this exist? Am I stupid? Why isn't this obvious?
Try to find someone who is willing to show you how to trouble shoot your Epson printer that you bought 4 years ago, or someone who can show you how to operate a new digital camera you just bought. The interent still does a very poor job of helping people find the granular information they need. Unfortunately, it's still mostly about dating, porn, entertainment and shopping.
All Knowlege Market sessions could be captured, then described and tagged. This would be the content. It would be the ultimate social networking tool, internet application, and marketing vehicle. It would change work and so much else. This idea assumes the use of something like WebEx. If you asked the right questions ("how to adjust margins in Word"?) you could get paid for asking them.
I've talked to VC's about it but they don't get it. Hopefully someone will eventuall see the light. Maybe I'm just not very good at describing things because no one else seems to get it either. I dunno.
If by some miracle some MIT genius reads this and wants to contanct me about it, write to dan[at]beyondquotes[dot]com I have the whole thing worked out. Or better yet, just do it. You would be making the internet, and the world a much better place. Maybe you wouldn't have to work for the Pentagon making bombs.
Gaetano Marano on 01/21/2008 at 9:30 AM
55
you review very good articles and ideas from the web, however, I'm sure, there are many other interesting things found (or invented) by Technology Review users but not posted since off-topic
so, why don't put FIVE "mailboxes" (not a generic "contact us") on your site ("INFOTECH", "BIOTECH", etc.) where the T.R. readers could send things that may become full articles?
I've now (and post here) the first "mail" for the "BIZTECH" mailbox about a new web-idea I've had these days:
I'm trying to start a "New.Space" company on the web raising the funds to do that on eBay!
this is the (temporary) home page of my New.Space Agency:
http://www.newspaceagency.com/
and this is the NewSpaceAgency's eBay auction:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=ADME%3AL%3ALCA%3AIT%3A31&viewitem=&item=280194182637
.
REG-CROWDER on 07/09/2008 at 7:13 AM
1
Google could be on to a good thing. I certainly like their e-mail service, and most of the other services that come with a Google account. Free.
So what's the problem?
Lighten up.
REG CROWDER
Freelance Business Journalist
London, UK & Brittany, France
http://www.journalistdirectory.com/journalist/TgTQ/REG-CROWDER