This is only one data point. But at least the Wikipedia entry on TechCrunch doesn’t state that we sell corn and oat cereal, and it wasn’t written by someone whose bio simply reads “Troll“. Other than that, it’s pretty accurate.
So much for units of knowledge.
Update: Googler Matt Cutts weighs in on the discussion of Knol’s quality, saying that the service is doing fine and that it’s still aspiring to “contain high-quality, authoritative, very informative articles”. Ok then.
holy crap!!! I am glad there is nothing more of a “ghghmmmghgh” in there….
Didn’t wikipedia have A LOT of those same issues when they first started and didn’t it take them a long time to fix that?
Just because it’s Google doesn’t mean they can stop everything.
I don’t know where you got that idea, Wikipedia has always been high qualityBRIAN IS GAY
Hahah yeah he is!
Arschloch beeinträchtigt.
Como você sabe disso? Já deu o fiofó para o dona da Wikipédia?
Você Isso é uma bichona, isso sim…
This post would be 10X better if it embedded a CrunchBase page for Cap’N Crunch.
Any information regarding that new cereal project of ours is highly classified atm, sorry.
Google should just shut Knol down. It’s a huge embarrassment to them and a badly conceived idea.
Google should also get out of content business so they’re not competing with their customers who actually bring in revenue to them.
Knol has worse traction than Jaiku and Lively combined and yet it managed to survive the cut. Why is that? Could it be because it’s Udi Manber’s baby and he’s a VP at Google? Seriously, they just need to kill this spam pit off.
How is it a huge embarrassment to them at all?
Google will have to get into the content business if they plan to make any more revenue streams for there investors.
Jaiku was private beta so comparing Jaiku’s traction is ridiculous and I agree lively was pretty much a crash and burn idea.
Content on this site is going to take a while for it to become as valuable as it is on wikipedia, Google knows that and they pay people big bucks to figure that out.
“How is it a huge embarrassment to them at all?”
When a company like google, which is in the top 3 most visited sites in the World, cannot create a site that generates more than 200K uniques a month, it is an embarrassment! Blogs which are run by one person get more than that!
As for figuring it out.. lol.. it’s been out for many months and in dev for over a year and it’s still a gigantic failure.
How is it an embarrassment? It’s a failure, and Google doesn’t like to be second rate. Knol is not something to be proud of…hence the embarrassment.
By the way, Google makes ALL their money off advertising, not content. Why exactly do they *have to* get into the content business? It’s not like they are hurting for more cash…. And even if they did want to make another revenue stream for their investors, why does it have to be content? I agree with Daves; alienating your investors and customers is never a good idea.
So, if content on Knol is going to take a while to get better…Wikipedia is only going to be that much more relevant by the time Google is done deleting garbage. Wikipedia is already a leader in the market, so why try to reinvent the wheel? What Google needs to do with Knol is differentiate it, and in the process hopefully create demand in a niche market.
It survived the cut because it’s not a loss leader like Lively or Jaiku. It makes money directly from the adsense on the knols.
have you looked at their traffic numbers? LOL… they’re making less than $1000 a month from it. How much do you think they’ve spent so far and how much they’ll spend on it before they shut it down?
I’d say they’re in red by at least a million.
That made me smile. You guys should consider some synergy though. I would love to get Cruchatized by one of my favorite tech blogs.
People who use the word ’synergy’ deserve to be put in a vat of boiling tar.
I like it. That’s what the Internet’s supposed to be. Slander mixed with a healthy dose of manic conjecture. In fact, I’d go so far as to call it the perfect companion to the Twitter News Service.
Heck, as soon as I’m done with this comment I’m going to show my support by signing up with an alias and creating an article that makes me the 41st President of the United States. I mean that was a long time ago and people don’t have really long attention spans anyway. Plus, what’s more likely? I was President or ANOTHER guy named “Bush” was President. Be logical
(sure I was only 9 but I was gifted for my age).
Thanks for this article…I’ve been trying to figure out the point of Google Knol for a while now, I get now that it’s basically worthless.
It was actually a smart idea from Google that didn’t work out (yet).
They’re trying to build a website filled with content written by its users. Hence little work by the Googlers…they just need to put the system in place. Then put on Adsense from which both Google and the writer of the article split the proceeds. Thus possibly creating another huge advertising income stream for Google. Just think of the amount of pageviews on Wikipedia that are not monetized. Why do you think Google bought Blogger? Exactly…content that can be matched with advertising. The advertising money that would be given to Knol authors is also an incentive for people to write Knols.
It seems like Knol hasn’t made much of a dent yet. And in fact I am very happy about that because I love Wikipedia which is high-quality and ad-free. But don’t count Google out just yet…
Knol is not only a smart idea, it is a rational idea. Google maintains blogger platform. A wiki platform like knol is a natural extension.
It is surprising that many bloggers have not yet used knol even though for some of their articles knol is more appropriate platform.
In due course of time many bloggers will use knol also for writing. I noticed knol from blogger dash board only and started writing on knol. I get relatively good number of page views on knol compared to my blogs. And on knol I have some advantages as a faculty member as I am able to make for each knol separate coauthors and hence able to develop online assignments for my students.
You Dork. I am sure that someone from TC wrote the wikipedia entry. DO THE SAME FOR KNOL, Doorknob.
Don’t worry, I just updated Wikipedia to mention CapnCrunch. Problem solved.
people mostly clik to wikipeda because it normally appears near the top of G’s search results. the name knol combined with a corny subsite of knol.Googl.com was the reason for the lack of traction. if G went out and bought the domain “my wiki” dot com and formed a similar site they could put wipedia to sleep overnight. prediction-knol will either be renamed or canned before this year is over.
Hehe, I will say you occasionally see those things on Wikipedia also. Some so clearly fake that I’ve literally laughed out loud. But Knol is a waste and should get shutdown.
that’s a great adjacency for TC — next, nestle crunch, credit crunch, etc…
Thanks for sharing this great article…I’ve been trying to figure out the point of Google Knol for a while now, I get now that it’s basically worthless.
I have no motivation to use Google Knoll… sorry Larry and Sergey… just not feeling it… can anybody tell me why I should use it over Wikipedia… respond to me here… http://www.Goth...mTechMinute.com
Oh and crunch credit would be awesome
I feel so stupid! I’ve been calling you “Capt’n” all these years!
To all of you who think that Google Knol is a fail
http://cli.gs/b61z7v
You guys should sell corn and oat cereal.
Google should do “SEO” on its own site.
LOL, maybe some at google is taking the piss!
When I look, I see the wikipedia techcrunch site was created by Computerjoe, not Troll.
http://en.wikip...;oldid=52675375
We’re referring to the Knol entry.
This is hilarious. I tried writing for Knoll, but never ended up. I find Wikipedia definitely more reliable.
Lol! Techcunch selling corn!!! I guess imagination has to be stopped at some point of time!!
http://stuckinf...es.blogspot.com
132123123
Oh…. that’s funny stuff!
I agree – Knol is a little too less, and a little too late…
lol, this reminds me of this nice Cap’n Crunch / Techcrunch easter egg
http://www.yout...iav3F70#t=0m15s
I’d love to see Knol succeed, but I fear it’ll just be another “half done” project for google. There’s not any structure/categorization to the content like you have on wikipedia.
I don’t have deep love for wikipedia myself
if you wonder how that could be possible, just google wikipedia criticism and check out a few of the links.
structure and categorization will certainly come in knol.
Wikipedia is a much better!
And ‘written by ordinary people.
The author of this article Knol seems to be a fake …
See you later.
Bye.
yes, i remeber the cap’s crunch…
Google Knol could never come close to Wikipedia. Wikipedia focuses strictly on building quality, authoritative content. Google worries about advertising, google checkout, google finance, google docs, gmail, etc, etc.. they can’t devote all their sweat and energy into Knol… so it’ll always be half-assed.
And since ppl will see that, they will continue to add to the quality of wikipedia instead and ignore knol.
Baaaah…. /me did never understand what was the whole point of creating yet another Wikipedia apart of Google’s strong desire to have it’s own online encyclopedia with blackjack and whores … Wikipedia isn’t perfect, but Google is totally commercial company so I see no way Knol may come even close to competing with Wikipedia.
Started Jan 23rd, Google is organizing a contest to write quality Knol’s. Sponsor: Dummies.com.
The winner will be featured on the dummies.com page and wins $1000.
But at the same time will give up all the rights for the content. Oh, and also the losers will give up such rights and the right to ask for compensation.
Now that is a good deal…
I also love the description of TechCrunch France: “TC Fwance covers Web 2.0 companies in Fwench.” Apparently written by the priest from the “mawwage” scene in The Princess Bride.
Wikipedia contributors are academic types who care more about knowledge than $. No wonder they’re so committed to accuracy. With Knol, it’s more like making a quick buck.
Ugh, Knol, just more Ivory Tower fuddy duddery.
Lets also not forget poor old musty Britannicas attempt at rising from the dead. Same thing over and over, these poor companies are so future shocked they can’t tell who is the bigger fish any more.
Hybridize or perish, that’s my feeling, don’t unseat wikipedia, it’s impossible, 2.7 million articles in english alone, all you can hope to become is an extension of it.
Imagine a Knol browser add-on, gives you a knol version of the wikipedia pages you visit, their authorized version of the truth. Same could go for Britannica, subscription based annotation of wikipedia articles.
It’s that or become nothing more than a poorly maintained wikipedia article in 5 years.
Wikipedia is garbage. Its run by fascist pigs to only care about their OWN thoughts and opinions and NOT for the FACTS.
RT
http://www.total-privacy.us.tc
“Wikipedia is garbage. Its run by fascist pigs to only care about their OWN thoughts and opinions and NOT for the FACTS.”
Sadly, this is true.
Alternatives are welcome and NEEDED.
Wait, Tech Crunch ISN’T a cereal?
I see a lot of “wiki defenders” converged here to chime in. I just encourage people to google –> wikipedia review blog <— for some informative reading.
As far as Britannica, I hope they studied the problem well. They could learn a lot from former wikipedia editors to avoid the problems some see with it. I fear it’ll just be a half-baked attempt on their part though.
Please send me 5 boxes of delicious Tech Crunch Cereal.
I’m amazed you credit or discredit a website based on ONE example…
He’s not. Try reading this:
http://en.wikip.../Sense_of_humor
We’ve been tracking the Knol entries from Day 1 at http://www.ontheknol.com to see what kind of articles get posted there. Feel free to check out the archives and Knol RSS feed.
It certainly doesn’t seem to be a WPedia killer by any means
.
Wikipedia isn’t exactly some sort of revolutionary thing either. Vandalism and errors can still take months to correct. Inter-editor/admin feuds and politics bog a lot of things down.
I stopped caring about wiki when I realized it would never, ever, ever be a legitimate reference source at any time.
What is your legitimate reference source then? Not being sarcastic, really curious to see if you know something better. Online that is, hope you don’t say college texts.
So much for ‘the wikipedia rival’! Is anyone really using knol?
http://www.prog...ing-google-knol
Dismissing google Knol as a Wikipedia knockoff is sort of missing the point.
Wikipedia focused on creating individual and unique pages about everything in a massive heirarchy that are subject to changes by anyone who cares. Their crowdsourcing model requires many compulsive “experts” in pure egoless collaboration mode. Additionally the broader site requires heavy moderation to prevent people looking to game the system from being successful. It’s also noteworthy that having canonical items dramatically simplifies site search for Wikipedia.
When considering Knol’s approach, it seems based on the fact that Google is not subject to the same limitations when it comes to search. Additionally, trying to lure committed Wikipedia users over to a redundant service is a slow, and unproven process. So, Google Knol adds a bit of ownership over both the entry and how it gets edited and likely expects the cream to rise to the top eventually. This creates more of a small-picture payoff for individual contributors, which may prove out to be more attractive to a broader user-base. (An additional, narcissistic note: contrary to the terms of service on Wikipedia, it looks like there’s no rule against creating one about oneself.) Eventually if google continues to resource it, I think Knol could be a powerful opinion-centric alternative to Wikipedia’s encyclopedic approach, and ultimately the two will complement each other.
One complaint: i did a quick search in Knol and the results seem to sort exclusively based on most recently edited knols (completely ignoring quality of content or user ratings). This is a failure that they should probably address. Can’t Knol afford google sitesearch?
Knol is a platform for user generated content. Just as blogger is successful knol will also be successful. May be blog is successful quickly because some journalists as well as tech enthusiasts could start good blogs immediately. But in the field of knowledge they are not many people who are waiting for jumping into this platform. Most of the reputed institutes have their own websites where the professors can write.
But there are committed persons already putting in efforts. And more experts will register in the coming days. As knol is a technical platform, there is no reason for google feeling ashamed of providing a platform to experts to write on. They can feel proud that they are investing because they feel such an opportunity will prove useful to the society in the long run. Even if it takes some more time for more reputed institute professors, scientists and consultants to write on knol, many of us have to advocate google to invest in the platform.
Wiki will never be a credible site. not as long as a 12 year old post a page about quantum physics and 80% of teh pop would accept it as fact bc he/she put a pic of an old guy up as a author. At least google is trying to get a put a site together that could have a chance of being credible.
Oh…. that’s funny
http://twitter.com/dekhome