Somebody on a blog reporting about his Google talk experience being popularized via digg, presented by expose and displayed via flickr.
What of those things did exist two years ago?
Category: internet
Paul Graham writes about open source and business.
It’s interesting. And long, so I post it here when having read only 20%.
In the background sings Dawn Upshaw, found without effort and within 5 seconds via Yahoo audio. Nice.
BlogsNow Version 2 started with a clean and new database. During it’s one year of operation Version 1 had seen close to 7 Million weblogs. BlogsNow follows ping lists like most other tools. These list became more and more a resource for spammers to inject their content. BlogsNow Version 2 jumped from three to almost four Million weblogs within one week. It turned out that two IP addresses alone had created 600,000 new ‘blogs’. All of them made just to spam whomever they can.
Many websites tracking weblogs will claim how many weblogs they track. It appears as if those 11 Million you find right now are actually an accumulation of all weblogs seen, regardless if active or not. And, at least a certain amount, of bogus blogs only created for spam should be takn into account.
Those inflated numbers are being used wherever people like to put an extra boost on the blog phenomen. There are definitely millions of blogs.
But the active blogging community may be just a few hundred thousand people.
OK, it’s a myth that Mr G. claimed that. But a nice myth.
Next stop for Al: reinventing TV, by prooving that viewers are not needed.
Next stop for George: Breaking the net, by brute forcing the control of the DNS root servers and then messing it all up. Finally we will have those internets that he has been talking about. Some
that work and others that don’t.
this year it is a falling chick
disturbing use of flash technology if you ask me.
blogpulse reading along those key phrases and you get an idea what th average Joe did yesterday.
are worth linking to even one week after they came out.
who is cloaking: nothing less than the financial times.
As usual Wikipedia explains best what
a certain term stands for.