PodShow.com’s behaviour is unnacceptable!

PodShow.com is continuing to “pull a Veoh” as we say.

Update: I emailed adam curry about linking to feeds. He wrote: “Yes, those show [the ones that link to xxx.podshow.com instead of their own url] are now on our network and also have a xxxx.podshow.com url” I will have to eat my words, that’s actually acceptable. It’s not great behavior, but it’s not sneaky either.

Update: it seems many of the podcasters are also very angry with this. The story is being investigated by a number of people, and I’ll post updates later.

Update: on Michael Verdi’s page, they do link to Verdi’s site. So what’s going on?

They list rss feeds and entries surrounded by ads, with very little or no attribution – I can’t for the life of me find links to the original show.

I’m having a hard time finding links on the site, but for example on this page, I see a link “Check out the show’s site”, but it goes to another PODSHOW page! Jeeses!

Now I happen to know that Dummycast can be found at http://dummycast.com/, and Podshow knows that too (the information is in the feed).

I looked at both Dummycast pages on Podshow, I even searched the sourcecode, and there is NO reference to dummycast.com anywhere.

As the nanny would say: this behaviour is unnacceptable!

And I’m not kidding. I’m getting tired of this. And so are a lot of the videobloggers and podcasters.

Why is this unacceptable? A directory should link back to the original site. Bloggers, Podcasters and Videobloggers put a lot of work in their shows and posts, and don’t want them stolen.

Do I have to spell it out?

There are a lot of “splogs” these days, sites that just take RSS feeds, copy the text and surround it with ads with little or no attribution to the source.

Splogs are scum. They are websites with no purpose except stealing content and making a quick buck of it.

I am sure podshow doesn’t want to be associated with those practices.

But at the same time, I’m sure podshow knows what they’re doing. Don’t tell me this highly funded startup doesn’t know that they’re trying to keep users on their site, looking at their ads, instead of sending traffic to the vloggers and podcasters.

I’ve tried to find contact info on the podshow site, but no such luck.

Disclaimer: I run Mefeedia.com, a videoblog directory.

gfs-sosp2003.pdf (application/pdf Object)

The Google Filesystem (pdf):

“First, component failures are the norm rather than the exception. The file system consists of hundreds or even thousands of storage machines

Second, files are huge by traditional standards. Multi-GB files are common. Each file typically contains many application objects such as web documents. When we are regularly working with fast growing data sets of many TBs comprising billions of objects, it is unwieldy to manage billions of approximately KB-sized files even when the file system could support it. As a result, design assumptions and parameters such as I/O operation and blocksizes have to be revisited.

Third, most files are mutated by appending new data rather than overwriting existing data. Random writes within
a file are practically non-existent.”

Fascinating stuff.

Limitations of the Google OS

The Google OS probably has features like Amazon’s S3 for distributed storage, distributed cpu features and all that.

But at the same time, to make that distributed stuff work, they must have sacrificed certain features that regular developers take for granted.

I ran into this problem when creating a distributed architecture for mefeedia. It’s an aggregator, so the thing has to scale. Classic database approaches stop working beyond a certain point. So you need a distributed architecture.

But building that architecture comes with limitations compared with a classic relational database – I can no longer sort my entries by any field, like I could in a database, for example.

You can see similar limitations in Gmail. For example, you can’t get a view of all your unread messages (did I miss it?). I don’t believe this is because the Google engineers believe it’s not an important feature, I think it’s because they’re limited by the Google OS.

The GoogleReader has similar problems.

In a message from the engineers, they explain why you can’t just “mark all items as read”: “Architectural limitations prevent us from offering these features immediately, but rest assured that we are investigating our options.”

In other words, the GoogleOS datastructure let us scale large easily, but it’s stopping us from doing certain things that you might expect to be easy.

The tradeoff is worth it, of course, and I’m sure the GoogleOS will incorporate more and more features and workarounds as it gets used by more Google products.

Microsoft’s challenge to the iPod | CNET News.com

Microsoft’s challenge to the iPod | CNET News.com: “Microsoft’s digital device would be equipped with at least one feature the iPod lacks…”

It’s not the features!

I’m not a branding expert, but, so it seems, neither is Microsoft.

You can’t beat ipod on its own turf. You can’t say: “We’re like ipod, but better”. Because everyone knows the ipod is the best.

Look at the Sony PSP. It’s is, clearly, not an ipod. But it’s a winner. And Sony could (if they would be organizationally capable) beat some serious ipod butt with it.

The only way for M$ to build an ipod killer is to, yep, not build an ipod killer. Create a new category. Build something else.

If the press writes “it’s quite unlike the ipod”, you’ll be on to something. If they write: “Microsoft’s new ipod killer has att least 1 feature the ipod doesn’t have”, you’re a lost cause.

Now Microsoft have a lot of selling muscle to sell this thing. But they won’t get it right as long as they try to be ipod.

David H on the videoblogging list:

“Videoblogging is about exploding a lie. The lie goes like this:

“You’re not good enough, you’re not pretty enough, you’re not smart enough, your equipment isn’t good enough, your lighting isn’t sweet enough, your audio isn’t controlled enough, you don’t have the proper training or knowledge of the right production conventions for your voice to have a place at the table. Media making is for professionals, the rest of the riff-raff is just too low-tech and ignorant of ‘proper staging’ techniques to be taken seriously.”


Call me for information architecture consulting

I am experimenting with a new service called ether. It lets you charge for your time on the phone.

I am providing information architecture services and reviews at a (low! one time!) rate of 15$ for 15 minutes. (The rate is so low because this is an experiment.)

So how it works is: you call me at the number below, you are asked to enter your credit card, and you are charged in increments of 15 minutes. I’ll do my damn best to provide high value for your time.

So if you are a startup, or an established company with information architecture questions (“how can I best organize this large amount of information?”), give me a call.

My professional site is here, by the way, if you’re not sure what kind of services I provide.

You can call me toll-free 1-888-MY-ETHER ext. 01672761 (you will be asked to enter your credit card).

Or click this button to call me: