
Exclusive Video And Screenshots Of Digg Version 4 - daniel_levine
http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/28/exclusive-video-and-screenshots-of-digg-version-4/
======
gkoberger
I don't understand the reasoning behind this move. Sure, I get that it's
'cool'- Digg just has Twitter/Facebook/etc envy.

Digg used to be a place for finding crowd sourced news (or, more recently,
lolcats). Now, it will be merely yet another way to share links with your
friends. I get that enough on other sites (Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, Buzz,
etc). In order to get any value, you will need to be following a large number
of diverse and interesting people who post cool and relevant links. Prior to
the changes, you merely had to type in digg.com in order to see what the
"world" found interesting.

Digg had a brilliant concept- make the users the editors. When it started, it
was great- it had relevant and timely tech and political news. As it grew,
they found themselves victims of catering to the lowest common denominator
(which equates to funny pictures, it seems). Rather than use v4 to figure out
a way to change this (maybe similar to Reddits' subreddits?), they created a
Digg-styled Facebook clone.

Yes, Top News is still there. However, it's been relegated to a tab.

I wish Digg the best, however I don't see myself using it if I need to follow
and share in order to derive value from the site. It's unfortunately- Digg has
always been a quality site (in terms of software and vision, if not content).

~~~
IanMikutel
1\. Digg is still a place for finding crowd sourced news. It simply is
recognizing user demand seen across the web for social features and adding
that into its product.

2\. You say you get enough sharing on Facebook, etc. but what's funny is every
time a new sharing/social site launches, over time, we've all grown to begin
using it anyway. First we had Delicious (2003), then we added Facebook (2004),
then we added Twitter (2006), then we added Google Buzz (2010). Clearly folks
ARENT getting enough of it on any one of those sites, since each site has been
able to build sufficient user bases. The Internet's a huge world, and
different products will appeal to different groups; many can survive. Besides,
if we only had one platform, all the privacy folks would be up in arms (as
they get from time to time about Google or more recently Facebook) that X
company controls too much of our information. Ultimately, competition/multiple
platforms is a good thing. Digg entering this space only adds to that.

3\. You can still type in Digg.com and see what the "world" finds interesting,
however now you'll get to see what your friends/followers/"tastemakers" find
interesting too. Think of it as a USA Today adding a "local" section.

4\. At first, I agreed with your point that v4 does not appear to show a
solution to Digg's lowest common denominator problem. However, upon further
thought, it does. Digg has given the power to the user. During the "onboarding
process" you select who you follow, friend, etc. and decide what your stream
of "My News" will look like. Follow all brilliant people and you'll get
interesting, valuable content. Follow idiots and you'll get great funny
pictures of cats. Follow a mix and you'll get both.

5\. Ultimately I can see myself using the new Digg, but it will take time to
see how it fits into my arsenal of social websites. If it doesn't do enough to
differentiate itself, it'll go by the wayside. However, as history has shown
us, we seem to have no problem adding another site to the mix.

~~~
abossy
Re: 2. Two social sites are clear winners: Facebook and Twitter. Delicious
initially had strong adoption, hence they were acquired, but it's been
downhill since then. Google Buzz can be considered a failure; Google forced
their social graph upon users and they weren't happy.

For the two successful sharing sites out there, hundreds are struggling (Digg
included) or dead.

In regards to the rest of your points, there's no telling how the product will
exactly play out until we have access to play with it for ourselves.

------
blehn
It's rather telling that they're marketing Digg as a way to get traffic. Yes,
it's good for that that, but that's not what it's _for_. It's (well, used to
be) for finding interesting news, articles, links, etc. Getting more people to
post their own blogspam probably won't help the site much. And for the actual
users, I think it'd be a little disheartening to see Rose trying to appeal to
publishers rather than the community.

~~~
nostromo
Well, he does start the video saying this preview is for publishers -- just as
Google has done outreach to advertisers -- that's fine.

When you compare this to FaceBook who wants publishers to put stupid like
buttons on everything everywhere, I like this new Digg approach better. It's
easier for publishers, and keeps the web from being overridden with "like me
follow me save me" spam.

However, FaceBook's strategy is much more conniving because by spreading
widgets all over the web, they're collecting a lot of data about your browsing
habits on third party sites. Digg won't get that from simple RSS feeds.

------
ErrantX
Hmm, so the idea is basically a mashup of current Digg, plus some ideas from
Twitter and Delicious

Not all that shoddy, though it strikes me that finding people to follow might
be difficult if you don't have a Twitter or Facebook presence.

------
jfarmer
I'm going to toot my own horn, here. Almost three years ago to the day I wrote
an article outlining what Digg should do in light of the launch of the
Facebook Platform:

1\. Digg should become the default way people like and share things on the web
and, in particular, Facebook.

2\. Digg should reflect shared content through the social graph, vs. showing
me an aggregate view of all activity in the world. The former is social, the
latter is not.

3\. Digg should have a concerted Facebook strategy to accelerate their growth,
focusing particularly on the Facebook feed (which was less than a year old at
the time).

Three years later Digg is just getting around to this, but Facebook has
already gotten to (1) and (2) with their "like" button and their new connect
implementation.

Ho hum. To little too late? Sites like <http://likebutton.me/> are in many
ways more compelling than digg, which is still dominated by stories that
appeal to a very narrow demographic.

<http://20bits.com/articles/5-ways-to-improve-the-digg-app/>

Also, FWIW, Eli White from Digg responded to my article noting the technical
difficulty in implementing some of my suggestions -- difficulties which were
shortly eliminated by changes to the Facebook platform. So I know at least
someone at Digg read it.

------
abossy
If I'm understanding the video correctly, I'll have the same problem that I
have with Facebook and Twitter: interesting things are either getting drowned
out or not being posted at all. I agree with a few of the other posts; this
feels like more of a half-hearted attempt to mimic existing sites, instead of
delivering something completely new, the way Digg did in December 2004.

------
marcamillion
Regardless of what the haters are saying, this looks cool.

I was an early digg user, and have stopped using it recently because I
migrated to other communities like HN.

But this could get me interested again.

This could potentially be very major.

It could almost replace twitter for me, because the #1 reason I use it is for
link discovery and propagation. This looks like it is built to handle it that
very function from the ground-up.

As a publisher, I am really excited about that.

Edit: As an aside, I am glad that Digg kinda lost it's way - otherwise I
wouldn't have migrated to HN (which I am glad I did). But now it would be cool
to have both.

------
AmericanOP
I see the value in forcing users to self-curate since it allows you to
disconnect from the chaff, and it's an interesting play to capture the value
of interest-based link sharing in theory. However, like TC, I don't even need
to say why it will fail.

------
ojbyrne
I hope there's more, because this just looks like minor refinements. Hardly
worth the 2 years and umpteen millions of dollars that went into it. "My News"
isn't all that different from the existing user profile.

------
lzimm
fuck, who cares?! hasn't twitter made digg completely irrelevant? (well, i
guess all the idiots posting consistently useless bullshit helped too... yay
mob voting!)

democracy works, unless half the country is texan.

