Facebook Billionaire Eduardo Saverin Leads Qwiki’s $8 Million Round | Hacker News Reader

Facebook Billionaire Eduardo Saverin Leads Qwiki’s $8 Million Round

techcrunch.com

32 pointsbjonathan23 comments

I'm a bit underwhelmed. It looks like the basic formula for initial research on the web. A quick wikipedia first paragraph overview, followed by google images if relevant.

Plus voice. But most of us read faster than voice communication so that's not an improvement for efficient search.

Also, when reading we can skim or jump to the wikipedia index if desired to get right to the portion of interest.

I suppose I'm missing the big picture, but combining wikipedia, google images, and voiceover doesn't blow me away. I do think that the presentation of the pictures is really nice. But again, probably less efficient than simply looking at google's image results.

The qwiki experience provides a more entertaining experience at the expense of efficient and effective searching.

Admittedly, I wouldn't be surprised if that is a tradeoff that many people are excited to embrace.

I suspect most people will find Qwiki cool for the novelty, but when it comes down to brass tacks and actually trying to learn something, I think Wikipedia's going to win out for everyone over the age of 13.

But that is still valuable!

Imagine a curated syllabus using Qwiki for K-5th grade topics that can be shown to children ALL OVER THE WORLD and effectively provide a basic level of education to every single kid on the planet.

Pipe a data feed to some location, build a syllabus of information and let may kids get a ton of information.

Sure, the depth that you would want them to have will require more affort - but there is nothing wrong with that.

I just dont think that too many people are looking at technologies like Qwiki with much vision. They are still thinking in the past.

Edit: Also - imagine if there was a "depth slider" on a qwiki - you could have it give a cursory overview of what algebra is, slide it to the right - and have it give more info and some examples - further still and you get actual lessons - further still and you get lectures from OpenCourseware etc..etc...

People in the third world can't afford the bandwidth to watch videos like this, especially when it's so anemic on actual information.

Like I said - you're thinking in the past. Have some vision.

We can pipe that content via satellite, dump it to a DVD even if needed.

It is "anemic" on information becuase THEY JUST FREAKING LAUNCHED.

Wait 5 years.

>Like I said - you're thinking in the past. Have some vision.

I was recently told that by someone trying to convince me the future of education was schools buying Android tablets with no actual prompt or reason for doing so. Let alone a budget justification to the BoE. Good luck.

>We can pipe that content via satellite, dump it to a DVD even if needed.

Do you have any idea how much satellite connections cost relative to third world incomes?

I don't think you understand what third world living is like. We're talking about people with no reliable access to electricity, dirty water at best, that live in slums, and can't afford to even pay for an internet cafe.

It's not something that time is going to solve, either. The quality of life of the third world has gotten worse over the past 40-60 years and more of the world's poor lives in filthy slums than at any other time in history.

Urbanization has actually served to ghettoize and disenfranchise the third world, as they can't even grow the food necessary for subsistence, let alone growth.

But no, I lack vision and clearly these people need a fucking flash widget telling them about Natalie Portman.

>It is "anemic" on information

No it's anemic on information because video and audio aren't nearly as information dense or economical as text. AV is an affectation designed to be a sweetener in education, not an actual vehicle that can improve anything.

>Wait 5 years.

You're a fool.

What the world needs is another agricultural innovator like Norman Borlaug, not a yuppie wet dream that does nothing for billions of starving brown people.

Education that focuses on food production and not a "service economy" would go much further towards enabling them to help themselves rather than being dependent on the desires of the West for luxury.

A lot of the problems in Africa stem from that they've literally forgotten how to properly grow food.

But no, I lack vision. Of course all their problems are going to disappear in 5 years and they'll have macbooks and be sipping coffee in a Starbucks while they download their qwiki lessons on Calculus.

Because, you know, you can learn calculus so much easier from a synth voice saying d/dx(x^2)=2x out loud.

Pedantic much, christ - I in no way was inferring that the qwiki would or should supersede food production.

Get off your high horse - youre an asshole.

To say that you lack vision because you are focused on all the reasons why something doesnt work is acurate.

Additionally, I fully agree with you about agricultural innovators being needed - but simply because there are still many many other issues, entirely unrelated to my point, you dismiss the value of what this could also be used for.

You must fucking hate yourself every day you go home to your comfy pad and open the fridge and gorge on ben and jerry's ice cream because millions upon millions of starving brown people dont have access to such delicacies from the warmth, safety and comfort of your living room.

I guess we should all just give up on anything else as a possibility.

We can spend trillions of dollars on wars, which BTW are predominately run, managed and monitored by satellite coverage, yet youre telling me I am a fool for suggesting that we could deliver pre-packaged video to Africa (your choice of location) is trivial.

I am a fool for telling you that the current incarnation of Qwiki doesn't have the depth of text which you suggest - yet I never once discounted any other medium in any of my posts.

Also, Mr. Internet Asshole, in which K to 5th grade syllabus have you seen calculus lessons?

Jesus, take a step back from your ego for one second.

That's my feeling as well, but I wonder if it could be targeted at younger children effectively and sold as an education tool.

This is a technology and not a solution. What you have to do is apply it to an array of problems and see if it solves one of them.

For example they could combine the technology with augmented reality software. In this case I could point my mobile phone to a painting at a foreign museum and instead of reading about it, I get to still have my face up (not down), enjoy the art and listen to its description/history.

Like most reporters during the bubble, in my early startup-focused writing, I lavished too much attention on the investors. My then-editor David Churbuck would call me into his office, sit me down and tell me that investors are a good way to judge if a company is worthy of a story. He would tell me that investment dollars and investors help you define a story, but they are never the story.

http://gigaom.com/2010/11/09/repeat-after-me-investors-are-n...

To techcrunch's defense, their writers really don't have any idea what technology is. They actually think when a company receives money it is technology. Just like they think blogging a rumor or opinion is journalism. So, to techcrunch when they hear a juicy blog-worthy rumor about somebody receiving money, they truly believe it is technology news.

At least Techcrunch is able to identify his religion in the bio box at the bottom.

</sarcasm>

[edit] This guy's religion is not mentioned... http://eu.techcrunch.com/2011/01/19/former-nokia-guru-turns-...

Qwiki seems mostly to me like an attempt to "multimedia-ize" the information on the web. This seems the wrong way to go. What the web is lacking isn't breadth or engagement capacity. Hell, Wikipedia has engagement capacity. What the web lacks is information with the depth, quality and low entry barrier of textbooks. You can have depth and quality with stuff like Google Scholar, but the barrier of entry is absurd, and you can have breadth with a plethora of other sites, but without expertise on the matter at hand you'll only find shallow information directed at the general public. WikiBooks and OpenCourseWare are probably good examples of things which are helping alleviate with lack.

I disagree.

Eventually, Qwiki can provide a very very good lesson on varied topics in a very consumable manner.

Ever see the movie 'Dune'? Where Paul is learning about Arakis on the video terminal?

That is what Qwiki is doing - as a platform.

Eventually - it will be able to take the deeper, more broad content and do the same thing. Providing an hour long info-mentary on a subject based on widely dispersed information across the web. Video from varied sources, pics, wikipedia articles etc...

Dont lok at what Qwiki may be today -- think about what Qwiki will be in 5 years.

Imagine if qwiki also incorporates WordLens technology as well - in 5 years - it will be able to translate and read to you PDFs in multiple languages.

Good for Qwiki! That site blew my mind when I first went to it. I've showed it to a bunch of non-techies and they all have the same "woah!" reaction as well.

This is the first I've heard of the site so I just had a look. It is very polished. But is there anything to it beyond the "woah!" factor? I checked out the Goya page and it provided a fairly shallow flash montage about him.

I see it won award from TechCrunch, which describes the site as disruptive. The interface, while slick, seems like it would be an interference to any practical usage.

Is there more to it? Genuinely curious.

I think it's just a different way to absorb information that is already out there.

An analogy could be: A student watching a video lesson in the classroom verses (or in addition to) reading a book.

People are different in the ways they consume information and learn things.

Yes, I had the same "whoa!" reaction, then never went back because it's a terribly ineffective way to acquire information.

So Qwiki is search for the illiterate?

Search with voice, pictures and interaction.

"a drastically improved information experience provided via interactive video"

I saw these guys at TC disrupt last year. I really don't get it. I had a bigger "woah" moment when I saw Flipboard (and I've hardly used that after the initial playing-around phase). Is there great value here that I just can't see?

I think Qwiki's main website should have been linked here, not the story on TC.

I would vote up that one.

Qwiktard: A term in the future for clowns who grok a qwiki page in a desperate attempt to appear smart by spewing facts in the exact same sequence as a qwikvid they watched the same morning...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com