<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google and newspapers:  the false choice of opting out</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:28:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-5758</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-5758</guid>
		<description>Their continued innovation of the implementation of search was the killer app.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Look at the data warehouses they have created to consistently support massive web archiving and ordering. Pretty fascinating designs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Their continued innovation of the implementation of search was the killer app.</p>
<p>Look at the data warehouses they have created to consistently support massive web archiving and ordering. Pretty fascinating designs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-5757</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-5757</guid>
		<description>Some interesting ideas Josh, I certainly liked the option to only allow comments for folks that buy in. But I&#039;d like to ad, comments are as valuable to other readers (or moreso). Perhaps prioritize the showing of comments based on user crowd sourcing (votes) and large sorts by whether or not they support the media channel (special avatar, or they show up all together up top).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some interesting ideas Josh, I certainly liked the option to only allow comments for folks that buy in. But I&#39;d like to ad, comments are as valuable to other readers (or moreso). Perhaps prioritize the showing of comments based on user crowd sourcing (votes) and large sorts by whether or not they support the media channel (special avatar, or they show up all together up top).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-5759</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-5759</guid>
		<description>Great perspective, well defended and described assumptions and points-&gt; on my 8th popular post (of the 13 you listed today) I score this one 8/10.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Capitalism absolutely depends on competition, hence our keen observation for potential abuse by monopolies. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There is little doubt in my mind that Google isn&#039;t approaching a search and information controlling monopoly in practice. He who gathers all the data owns it. They own our clicks/searches and click scoring.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Yes there is competition, but hands down they are the best and own search. I have used Bing, and others and have found them lacking. But even in the face of this powerful search monopoly real time search, and social search as evolved. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Perhaps monopolies can be bypassed in the space of the net, due to its very nature. User needs evolve, and that need drives innovation. Entrepreneurs feed off of that gap between need and availability. No one else is more empathetic to a users real needs than the relentless attention of startups. We&#039;ll fulfill what users most need because we won&#039;t even consider what they don&#039;t need. Big businesses have to deal with the cost of momentum shift within their large structures, and therefore roll onward unable to change course as fast emerging markets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great perspective, well defended and described assumptions and points-&gt; on my 8th popular post (of the 13 you listed today) I score this one 8/10.</p>
<p>Capitalism absolutely depends on competition, hence our keen observation for potential abuse by monopolies. </p>
<p>There is little doubt in my mind that Google isn&#39;t approaching a search and information controlling monopoly in practice. He who gathers all the data owns it. They own our clicks/searches and click scoring.</p>
<p>Yes there is competition, but hands down they are the best and own search. I have used Bing, and others and have found them lacking. But even in the face of this powerful search monopoly real time search, and social search as evolved. </p>
<p>Perhaps monopolies can be bypassed in the space of the net, due to its very nature. User needs evolve, and that need drives innovation. Entrepreneurs feed off of that gap between need and availability. No one else is more empathetic to a users real needs than the relentless attention of startups. We&#39;ll fulfill what users most need because we won&#39;t even consider what they don&#39;t need. Big businesses have to deal with the cost of momentum shift within their large structures, and therefore roll onward unable to change course as fast emerging markets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4892</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4892</guid>
		<description>Their continued innovation of the implementation of search was the killer app.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Look at the data warehouses they have created to consistently support massive web archiving and ordering. Pretty fascinating designs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Their continued innovation of the implementation of search was the killer app.</p>
<p>Look at the data warehouses they have created to consistently support massive web archiving and ordering. Pretty fascinating designs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4891</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4891</guid>
		<description>Some interesting ideas Josh, I certainly liked the option to only allow comments for folks that buy in. But I&#039;d like to ad, comments are as valuable to other readers (or moreso). Perhaps prioritize the showing of comments based on user crowd sourcing (votes) and large sorts by whether or not they support the media channel (special avatar, or they show up all together up top).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some interesting ideas Josh, I certainly liked the option to only allow comments for folks that buy in. But I&#39;d like to ad, comments are as valuable to other readers (or moreso). Perhaps prioritize the showing of comments based on user crowd sourcing (votes) and large sorts by whether or not they support the media channel (special avatar, or they show up all together up top).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Essel</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4893</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Essel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4893</guid>
		<description>Great perspective, well defended and described assumptions and points-&gt; on my 8th popular post (of the 13 you listed today) I score this one 8/10.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Capitalism absolutely depends on competition, hence our keen observation for potential abuse by monopolies. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There is little doubt in my mind that Google isn&#039;t approaching a search and information controlling monopoly in practice. He who gathers all the data owns it. They own our clicks/searches and click scoring.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Yes there is competition, but hands down they are the best and own search. I have used Bing, and others and have found them lacking. But even in the face of this powerful search monopoly real time search, and social search as evolved. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Perhaps monopolies can be bypassed in the space of the net, due to its very nature. User needs evolve, and that need drives innovation. Entrepreneurs feed off of that gap between need and availability. No one else is more empathetic to a users real needs than the relentless attention of startups. We&#039;ll fulfill what users most need because we won&#039;t even consider what they don&#039;t need. Big businesses have to deal with the cost of momentum shift within their large structures, and therefore roll onward unable to change course as fast emerging markets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great perspective, well defended and described assumptions and points-&gt; on my 8th popular post (of the 13 you listed today) I score this one 8/10.</p>
<p>Capitalism absolutely depends on competition, hence our keen observation for potential abuse by monopolies. </p>
<p>There is little doubt in my mind that Google isn&#39;t approaching a search and information controlling monopoly in practice. He who gathers all the data owns it. They own our clicks/searches and click scoring.</p>
<p>Yes there is competition, but hands down they are the best and own search. I have used Bing, and others and have found them lacking. But even in the face of this powerful search monopoly real time search, and social search as evolved. </p>
<p>Perhaps monopolies can be bypassed in the space of the net, due to its very nature. User needs evolve, and that need drives innovation. Entrepreneurs feed off of that gap between need and availability. No one else is more empathetic to a users real needs than the relentless attention of startups. We&#39;ll fulfill what users most need because we won&#39;t even consider what they don&#39;t need. Big businesses have to deal with the cost of momentum shift within their large structures, and therefore roll onward unable to change course as fast emerging markets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4832</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 02:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4832</guid>
		<description>Now I will delete my post from your listings if you don&#039;t pay me $5 :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now I will delete my post from your listings if you don&#39;t pay me $5 <img src='http://cdixon.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris dixon</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4831</link>
		<dc:creator>chris dixon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:05:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4831</guid>
		<description>ha, i was thinking the same thing but didn&#039;t want to say so myself :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ha, i was thinking the same thing but didn&#39;t want to say so myself <img src='http://cdixon.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4830</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:41:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-4830</guid>
		<description>This post looks awfully prescient in light of the last week&#039;s brouhaha about The Wall Street Journal and it&#039;s theoretical deal with Bing.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;While you&#039;re not advocating it, you are the first (I&#039;ve seen) to point out how search competition could be explicitly monetized by the newspapers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This post looks awfully prescient in light of the last week&#39;s brouhaha about The Wall Street Journal and it&#39;s theoretical deal with Bing.</p>
<p>While you&#39;re not advocating it, you are the first (I&#39;ve seen) to point out how search competition could be explicitly monetized by the newspapers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris dixon</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/09/12/google-and-newspapers-the-false-choice-of-opting-out/comment-page-1/#comment-2950</link>
		<dc:creator>chris dixon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:56:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdixon.org/?p=191#comment-2950</guid>
		<description>Interesting argument.  Not sure I disagree.  I was really just mainly trying to argue against that fallacy - or throw some actual microeconomics into the debate as you say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting argument.  Not sure I disagree.  I was really just mainly trying to argue against that fallacy &#8211; or throw some actual microeconomics into the debate as you say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.167 seconds -->
