Knol

Hard to tell Google hasn't released any reliable information, and they are showing signs of some financial fatigue coming in the near future which might shelf this. But that still remains to be seen.

DB, Knol has to beat WIKIPEDIA! And that's dang near impossible, no matter how much money Google pours into it.

Well, I do have a small concern with the wording of the prop itself. Does Knol have to beat Wikipedia by December 2009, or must it beat Wikipedia DURING December 2009?

During the complete month of December. If Wikipedia gets a better Alexa page-ranking one day, the prop pays at $0.

(I think. Rabbit, what say you?)

This proposition will pay out at POP$100 if Google's Knol site surpasses Wikipedia for the month of December 2009.

It did say for one month(meaning one whole month) of Dec.

I wish I had read that prop more closely and shorted from the beginning. I didn't buy in because I figured Knol might come out on top at least once, but for the entire month? That sounds like a pretty definite short.

It is, but the price is all over the place, so shorting it is not for the faint of heart.

Well, if you had shorted from the beginning, you'd still be on a bit of a nest egg, because it's been wavering between $20 and $30.

I have shorted it from the beginning, but the wavering is driving me nuts!

Heh. It is pretty "nutty" I guess. Up $2 one day, down $2 the next...

So why this sudden spike of $ 2.5 so far today? There is no way that Knol will ever surpass Wikipedia at least not for the whole month of December 2009.

==========================================
Du ska få en dag i mårå som rein og ubrukt står,og med blanke ark og farjestifter tel
(You shall get another day tomorrow that clean and unused stands, and with blank paper and crayons too)
- Alf Prøysen
====

Would I be incorrect in assuming that the majority of people who find their way to Wikipedia do so as a result of a Google search? If I were a mad scientist @ Google, and my stock options were sitting there needing to be fed, I'd certainly rig the search results to highlight my offerings above all others. OR, less insidously, I'd just place my content above the search results ala Froogal or Google news...

That being said, is 20 months enough time to generate an amount of content anywhere near as vast as Wikipedia's? I don't think so.

So even if the dark overlords from Google do secretly skew the search results, they simply would not have an alternative to many entries on Wikipedia...

"Go Short Young Man."

...We've had troops in Japan and Germany for over 60 years. Does that mean we LOST WWII ?!?!?...

there are 2 ways i find my way to wikipedia: 1) on firefox one of my search engines on the top right is wikipedia or 2) if not using firefox, i google wikipedia then from wikipedia search for what i want

i do agree that theres a very slim chance of generating enough content on their site to compete with wikipedia

LOL, this stock isnt even out publicly yet and no way is it possibly going to have enough info (millions of posts) and be out for long enough that people possibly think that it's good enough to prefer over wikipedia. WIKIPEDIA's article on KNOL is extremely short to say the least. LOL

Then again since no schools or classes even begin to accept wikipedia as a viable source to be cited maybe this will make a larger start with the academic highschoolers who need an easy encyclopedia to cite. But probably not, mostly cause it's not even out yet and i'd never even heard of it until a few days ago.... it's gonna need a lot more PR.

at 15.75 its a cheap stock and there are a few reasons i think it may pay off.

1. Google is one of if not the most visited web site daily so there is a major possibility that ease of access could be better in that sence
2. If Google designs it well then it is possible for it to gain popularity just to be associated with Google
3. Simplicity. Google is associated with this one word. if they can make a simplified version of Wikipedia then it has a major chance

I wont lose much if it does not pay off but if it does... wow. Id say buy when it is low and give it a chance.

o and who knows if they already have been developing content. if that is the case then they may already have a bunch of articles at launch. this could take out one of wikipedia's advantages.

GO GOOGLE

Young person, it isn't a very good idea to have your birth year as part of your username. With that, before we even read your post, we know you are 14 and are less likely to take you seriously.

Also, it's a security problem. So, it isn't recommended.

are you talking about 1992 person? Last time I checked they would be at least 15 maybe 16 so we have to take them a little more seriously.

But maybe 1992 is the year the person goes back in time to take over the world.

Mike, I'M 14... but then again, you never did take me seriously.

Oops, yeah...it's still 2007 in my mind. And Milk, I always take you seriously, that's why I bust on you sometimes.

(I don't know if that makes any sense, but there it is...)

No, that makes sense. My father sometimes says that he is a hardass (my words, not his) to me because he loves me. And I understand that. I'm just wondering if every day my laptop is in their hands means they love me a little more.

Google's blog site on Knol says that authors may opt to allow advertising on their page. If they do -- they get a substantial share of the revenues. That will provide a powerful incentive for contributors. Knol could add content very rapidly.

Another incentive is having your name attached to the article. This will attract academics, who should be able to count a Knol article as one of their required publications -- they will certainly be able to list the article in their CV.

Knol also should enjoy more credibility than Wikipedia -- especially regarding controversial topics in the political or social domains. The articles will be signed. They will be "peer reviewed", and they will be page-ranked by Google (an indication of the popularity of the article with the general public).

I'm not betting against Google on this one.

At $12.50, I couldn't resist. Come on, Google!!!!!
:)

Google is batting 1.000 when they enter into a new area in which they can make money. Until they do otherwise I'm not betting against them and even if they fail this time (within the prop parameters) the most I could be out is 12k. Count me in.

Well, did they "enter a new area" of surpassing Wikipedia by the end of 2009? Sorry, but I keep it short.