[FoRK] NewTube VS OldTube

Albert S. < albert.scherbinsky at rogers.com > on > Tue Oct 10 13:49:00 PDT 2006

I like that you have started working both sides of the
argument. It makes my job a whole lot easier.

You suggest that perhaps integrating utility with
community might limit market penetration. That's an
interesting hypothesis. I wonder if this can be
overcome by providing sufficient flexibility for
numerous sub-communities to flourish?

Albert

--- Luis Villa <luis at tieguy.org> wrote:

> [Tangentially, I'm also not clear how large
> YouTube's community really
> is- sure, it is large, but what percentage of their
> traffic is from
> the 'community', and how much from just random
> people who link to it
> or email their links around? I'm guessing that
> second group of casual
> users is at least an order of magnitude larger,
> probably two orders.]
> 
> [Of course, nothing precludes Google from doing
> something like Google
> Talk and transitioning YouTube over to a more open,
> indexable
> standard, and pushing that standard more broadly,
> with YouTube less
> the central hub and more a leading light. But I
> guess I'm skeptical
> about that route.]
> 
> Luis
> 
> 
> >
> > --- Luis Villa <luis at tieguy.org> wrote:
> >
> > > More relevantly, standing in Google's corporate
> > > shoes, they could have
> > > avoided the whole thing by working on tools
> which
> > > allow others to
> > > easily host video. If they hosted the whole
> textual
> > > internet they'd
> > > get sued left and right; as it is their legal
> burden
> > > is low and they
> > > profit off virtually *everyone's* pages, not
> just
> > > the stuff hosted on
> > > google pages (which appears to be the route they
> are
> > > going with video,
> > > for some reason I don't grok.)
> > >
> > > Luis
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Albert S. wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Good example. Although, I sympathize with
> the
> > > > > situation YouTube is up against when
> deciding
> > > whether
> > > > > to remove content which may be offensive to
> some
> > > > > religeous group. It would be difficult to
> defend
> > > the
> > > > > removal and even the non-removal without
> > > decending
> > > > > into an unproductive religeous argument,
> which
> > > may be
> > > > > what they are trying to avoid.
> > > > >
> > > > > Albert
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > FoRK mailing list
> > > > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FoRK mailing list
> > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> >
> 


More information about the FoRK mailing list