[FoRK] NewTube VS OldTube

Luis Villa < luis at tieguy.org > on > Tue Oct 10 13:53:28 PDT 2006

On 10/10/06, Albert S. <albert.scherbinsky at rogers.com> wrote:
>
> I like that you have started working both sides of the
> argument. It makes my job a whole lot easier.

s/working/exploring/ :)

> 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?

Many communities (sub- or otherwise) will want their own identity,
outside of/distinct from the primary community*, so I don't see
encouraging sub-communities as really solving the problem.

* Unless there is some kind of platform lockin, but I don't see how
that can happen here.

Luis

> 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
> > >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>

More information about the FoRK mailing list