Comments on: A response to Dave Winer about Google AutoLink

By: Fortyseven

Fortyseven — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 04:13:20 +0000

Mousky:
That’s the best idea yet. They’ve already got the ‘LiveBookmarks’ gimmick. Couldn’t hurt.

By: Mousky

Mousky — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 01:18:21 +0000

Fortyseven:
I totally support your suggestion about letting the user specify the URL. In fact, I could see the situation where a bookseller or map provider or whomever has a “Add us to AutoLink” link on their web site. Clicking that link would automatically add that web site to the list of search sites or Toolbar would bring up a requester asking the user if they wish to make that web site their default search site for that type of information (ISBN, maps, etc). Lots of opportunites here.

By: Mousky

Mousky — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 01:09:50 +0000

Peta states “If a bookseller provides the ISBN number, it is done to provide more information to the user in order to help make a sale. It isn’t placed there to help make a sale for a competitor.”
Peta, are you saying that the user cannot copy and paste the ISBN into Amazon.com, Chapters.com, other bookseller web sites or online library catalogs? If no, then all AutoLink does is automate that process. What is wrong with that?
Actually, the ISBN is placed there to uniquely identify the publication. From the International ISBN Agency web site:
“The purpose of the international standard is to coordinate and standardize the international use of ISBNs to uniquely identify one title or edition of a title, published by one specific publisher.”
If you are using the ISBN to facilitate a sale, why wouldn’t you create a link from the ISBN to an automated order page or to the very least a printable order form or a page with ordering information?

By: Fortyseven

Fortyseven — Tue, 22 Mar 2005 22:25:07 +0000

Mmm…a closed minded viewpoint colored entirely by financial profit. You go, Peta. A true American. (Or if not, it’s a damn good imitation.)
One would think AutoLink’s *only* feature was linking ISBN numbers judging by peoples behavior.
That makes me wonder, too, why are you supposedly going through the effort to use this magical javascript mojo to redirect AutoLink users if simply making an ISBN number a link defeats the process? Remember? AutoLink only adjusts NON-LINKED text. Curious…
Anyways, I have yet to hear anyone bring up the idea that the toolbar is in BETA: it’s possible that linking to Amazon was a safe initial bet for them BECAUSE of the minor corporate connections you mentioned. Perhaps they thought linking to other book services (which they don’t have connections to) might give them legal headaches?
This idea is further encouraged by the fact that they let you choose a map service to use. Those services might be ad supported, but it’s just not the same as linking to Barnes & Noble and friends.
I’m betting it’s a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
Perhaps, even, when the toolbar comes out of beta, they’ll have had time to put alternatives put in. It hasn’t been released yet. It’s in beta for a reason. Let them know what you want: as a retailer you want more choices. Suggest the idea of the comparison shopping site. Whatever. But don’t disguise your own insecurities as a retailer under the flag of defending the rights of the “content provider”.
Ultimately the most awesome route, that I’d love to see, would be to let you specify a GET request URL. But I tend to doubt we’d see that. At least not from Google.

By: PackCat

PackCat — Tue, 22 Mar 2005 02:41:09 +0000

“Just because you have to click the shiny button doesn’t mean it’s not adware. Why? Because it’s presented as an informational tool, not a advertising (who would download it if it was presented as advertising?) plugin for your browser.”
Dave – that argument goes for most spyware and adware. Fraud is fraud because it’s fraudulent, not because it incorporates any specific method thereof. Spyware and adware can advertise themselves as ANY program – the ONLY sure way of banning spyware and adware is to ban all software! To a lesser degree, if spyware and adware began advertising themselves as text-reading programs, would we have a move to disallow ALL text-reading software just to catch the nasty spyware and adware? We need to wait until a specific program demonstrates spyware or adware behaviors, THEN we can blacklist it – anything sooner is stereotyping.
I realize this does not address your exact point. But it does address earlier points. To your point – what Peta first suggested, the comparison-shopping link, IS ADWARE: it advertises for several companies, simultaneously. It is, in fact, adware to a greater degree than links to a single company. What you are all talking about here, is adware – what Peta appears to be complaining about is the FAIRNESS of Google’s adware.
Peta – you also seem to be fixated on the Defaults of their Toolbar. Did you download the standard version, or did you receive a corporate special? They may have designed a custom version, with non-standard defaults, for their management-type users. Have you tried asking a user outside your company, to download the software, and tell you what the defaults were? Also, are you sure you did not change your own defaults while setting up the Toolbar? Could the ORIGINAL setting have been opt-in?

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:02:08 +0000

Wow, can’t people try to empathise just a little with Peta? They’re trying to run a legit business, and Google is providing an easy way for one of its partners – a direct competitor to her business – to get its links appear as if they’re ON HER PAGE.
Just because you have to click the shiny button doesn’t mean it’s not adware. Why? Because it’s presented as an informational tool, not a advertising (who would download it if it was presented as advertising?) plugin for your browser.

By: wu wei

wu wei — Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:51:05 +0000

“Get Google to say they will not extend this to cover other terms and I’d be more than happy to eat my words.”
I totally concur. I’m personally not going to use the Google Toolbar until Google come out and actually state that it won’t rifle through my magazines and drink the milk straight out of the bottle.

By: Roberto

Roberto — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:35:00 +0000

This is just getting laughable: http://trenchant.org/daily/2005/2/28/ Resorting to name calling? Humph... So much for intelligent debate.

By: nick

nick — Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:04:17 +0000

“As we’ll do for any future instances of mass-market adware.”
Do your apple turnovers have a citrus taste, I wonder?
Anyway, you are Bernard Black, and I claim my ten shillings.

By: Dee

Dee — Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:40:01 +0000

Peta, is Amazon generally cheaper and/or more reliable than your site?