41–50 of 67 posts
Google recommends the latter to protect against duplicate content penalties when you use some external content to enrich your site (for example a short section from Wikipedia, imdb actor info, etc).
Google doesn't have a good way to establish provenance, and has trouble distinguishing copies from originals. It's a common complaint of blog operators that some bigger blog copied their stuff and got a higher ranking on Google. Google could check when it saw something, but that won't work against fast scrapers. For that, you need trusted timestamps. One solution to this would be to have a few time-stamping services.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We use that license because it protects the content from us. No matter who comes along to run Stack Overflow in the future, Stack Overflow can't do something like put up a paywall and lock it up. Someone else'll just be able to host a copy.
As an end user, I don't care about that at all. If StackOverflow does something like put up a paywall and lock it up, then it will die off and some other site will arise that will replace it, just like some other sites that came before StackOverflow which put up a paywall and faded away. Also, StackOverflow can always change the policy if they want (which probably won't happen for the reason I mentioned), so the lice…
So if they weren't open then they wouldn't be getting my answers (or a bunch of other people's).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We use that license because it protects the content from us. No matter who comes along to run Stack Overflow in the future, Stack Overflow can't do something like put up a paywall and lock it up. Someone else'll just be able to host a copy.
As an end user, I don't care about that at all. If StackOverflow does something like put up a paywall and lock it up, then it will die off and some other site will arise that will replace it, just like some other sites that came before StackOverflow which put up a paywall and faded away. Also, StackOverflow can always change the policy if they want (which probably won't happen for the reason I mentioned), so the lice…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since establishing provenance is such a big problem for Google, perhaps it might be a good idea for Google to offer a time-stamping service itself?
It's not directly a problem for Google — it's primarily a problem for sites that create original content.
We don't have that. We could.
Universal content syndication + broadband tax.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1uotb3/a_modes...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We use that license because it protects the content from us. No matter who comes along to run Stack Overflow in the future, Stack Overflow can't do something like put up a paywall and lock it up. Someone else'll just be able to host a copy.
As an end user, I don't care about that at all. If StackOverflow does something like put up a paywall and lock it up, then it will die off and some other site will arise that will replace it, just like some other sites that came before StackOverflow which put up a paywall and faded away. Also, StackOverflow can always change the policy if they want (which probably won't happen for the reason I mentioned), so the lice…
This means that even if SO puts a paywall, the knowledge gathered there is not lost. And this, IMO, is a very, VERY important aspect of StackOverflow.
As far as search goes, I didn't even know SO had a search function. I see nothing wrong with letting google handle it. Adding a search engine to your website is hard and takes time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an end user, I don't care about that at all. If StackOverflow does something like put up a paywall and lock it up, then it will die off and some other site will arise that will replace it, just like some other sites that came before StackOverflow which put up a paywall and faded away. Also, StackOverflow can always change the policy if they want (which probably won't happen for the reason I mentioned), so the lice…
Wow i'm getting downvoted like crazy. I don't think I said anything that's not factual. At least explain why you think I am wrong if you're gonna downvote. To be clear, I love Stackoverflow and I don't know what the world would have been like if it wasn't around, but I do think there are things that are broken and I just mentioned them. Am I supposed to keep quiet because that's how it's been?
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
(NB: I didn't, and tend to agree it's excessive here.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an end user, I don't care about that at all. If StackOverflow does something like put up a paywall and lock it up, then it will die off and some other site will arise that will replace it, just like some other sites that came before StackOverflow which put up a paywall and faded away. Also, StackOverflow can always change the policy if they want (which probably won't happen for the reason I mentioned), so the lice…
A new site may come to replace it, but what of the 10MM+ questions and scads more answers created by the Stack Overflow community over the last 7 years? Without the CC license all that hard work gets lost in the case SO goes rogue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since establishing provenance is such a big problem for Google, perhaps it might be a good idea for Google to offer a time-stamping service itself?
The problem is how one prevents the bad-actors from taking advantage of such a service.
That's not a "they aren't", but a request for "what do you consider to be acting badly?"
Conversely, is content scraping-and-publication possible by good actors?
How?