The World According to Cuil
blogoscoped.com
blogoscoped.com
How long are we going to beat this dead horse? For three days it seems like there has been at least one link to some random jackass blog with screenshots of crappy search results on the front page of HN. They're not even funny like the screenshots of questionably placed Google ads that you see on Fark sometimes. They're just inaccurate results.
I'm beginning to think Cuil is going to be the CueCat of this millenium... The hyped up startup that fails miserably and everyone talks about for years afterward. Is anyone else tired of this?
Rare is the person who offers some insight into what could or should be done to compete with Google. Even rarer are the people who are busy hacking together their own ideas for how to do it right. That's the very best way to say something else is wrong: demonstrate how you think it ought to be done.
Roger Ebert has an excellent book called "Your Movie Sucks," it contains nothing but zero, one-half, and one star reviews. It's an excellent book because it shows the challenge of writing something more informative and/or entertaining than "Your Movie Sucks."
And of course, Roger has to write those reviews, because it's his job to review movies as they're released. Bloggers are under no such pressure, they can write what they choose, when they choose. Therefore, I hold bloggers to an even higher standard of writing "Lookit! _____ sucks!!"
Since bloggers have the option of saying nothing, they shouldn't say anything unless it is worthy of being read.
Great comment!
Perhaps this should be part of the hn guidelines :-)
Bloggers (including ones here) like writing to the masses. If it will get them readers, they'll write about it. Few writers really hold themselves to standards online, which is a shame.
Still awaiting the Cuil article in Wired magazine with bated breath.