Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks The Internet

Digg Backs Down On DiggBar 180

Barence writes "Social news website Digg.com has made key changes to its recently introduced DiggBar. The browser add-on had been much criticised for its use of frames to 'host' third-party websites within the digg.com domain using an obfuscating short URL, thereby boosting its own traffic figures to the detriment of those third parties. After many major sites ran negative articles on the DiggBar, and even changed their code to block it, Digg has relented and announced two changes to ease concerns."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Digg Backs Down On DiggBar

Comments Filter:
  • Facebook (Score:5, Interesting)

    by slashkitty ( 21637 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:12AM (#27597185) Homepage
    They do the same thing, I'm wondering why there isn't similar backlash. I hate them both, framing is such a 90's thing.
  • I'm really just getting sick of Browser Bars and add ins to "help your browser". I think it is very ironic that Google Chrome's excellent interface is just one souped up text box that you type stuff into, with a smattering of buttons for favorites. Browser bars are just stupid.... unless someone pays me to write one.

  • by jalefkowit ( 101585 ) <jason.jasonlefkowitz@com> on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:16AM (#27597249) Homepage

    ... why is nobody screaming at Facebook about this, since they do the exact same thing that Digg was doing?

    Seriously -- use the "Share" feature in Facebook to share a URL with your friends. Then click the link to read the shared story. The link will be framed with an obnoxious Facebook bar under a Facebook URL, just like stories shared via Digg were defaced, and with all the negative consequences that were associated with the DiggBar.

    And yet while bloggers and SEO experts were up in arms over the DiggBar, I have yet to see a single story calling Facebook to account for this.

    So if it's not OK for Digg to do this stuff, why is it ok for Facebook? Why the double standard?

  • The People's Voice (Score:5, Interesting)

    by iamhigh ( 1252742 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:18AM (#27597277)
    This, the Facebook TOS, and I am sure there are several other examples of how new technology, (ironically) such as Twitter and Facebook, have allowed people and companies to voice their concerns with a product and produce results. I am willing to bet that 10 years ago if some company wanted to screw you over (even if they sent a letter to all customers) there would not have been a way to get that info out to the world in a quick and efficient manner as to get said company to change it's policy.

    There were no marches, no organized rallies; just a bunch of people complaining in a way that is heard by millions, including those they are complaining about and other users/customers of that company. This is the power of information.
  • by coryking ( 104614 ) * on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:25AM (#27597383) Homepage Journal

    Didn't about.com or somebody like them try this stunt back in the .com days? Remember having to add that "break out of some assholes frame" javascript on every page? I guess nobody does that anymore, but back then it used to be standard issue. Course, back in those days people used frames, so it was probably easy to break out. Looks like digg is using an iframe to host the content. This begs a couple questions:

    1) What does something like AdSense think about pages served in iframes? Will it throw off their targeting?
    2) What does this mean in terms of SEO? Will google get pissy about you being in some jerk's iframe?
    3) How the hell do you break out of an iframe in a cross-browser way?

    I gotta say one thing though--how they have the comments "fold down" from the "Diggbar" is pretty neat. Course, the posters on Digg are all 12 year olds who find poo-poo, pee-pee jokes funny thus negating everything.

    Digg is a weird place, it is like some kind of flash-crowd groupthink that is enabled by the unlimited ability to vote anything down. Slashdot's moderation system may have its faults, but it is the best damn system I've seen for a website with lots of traffic. Here, you can make a post that goes against the general "view" of the site and still get "+5 insightful" provided you are eloquent. On Digg, you could write the most insightful damn thing in the world but if it goes even a tiny bit against the bias of the article you will be buried into the floor with zero chance of getting read.

  • by coryking ( 104614 ) * on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:34AM (#27597515) Homepage Journal

    Why the double standard?

    I'll take a stab at this. There is a whole cottage industry built around gaming Digg. It was a sweetheart deal, the "news sites" provided top-10 lists, tin-foil-hat opinion articles and short summaries of real news articles on real news sites mixed with a heap of ads. In exchange, Digg would give these sites enough traffic to make a living. Digg just violated the rules of this little deal and tried to take more than its fair share. Of course these guys are pissed--they had a deal, blackheart!

    Nobody counts on Facebook traffic, so nobody gives a shit what Facebook does. But lots of these joints *do care* what Digg does cause if Digg shuts off their traffic, the party is over and the site folds.

  • by eln ( 21727 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @10:47AM (#27597697)

    Okay, I'll start:

    Requirement #1: Don't even think about releasing yet another stupid toolbar.

  • by tedgyz ( 515156 ) * on Thursday April 16, 2009 @11:04AM (#27597963) Homepage

    Uh - try 43. Isn't it the 18 yos that are flocking to all these stupid sites? They can wire their cellphone up to tweet, fb, etc., but they can't code to save their lives.

    Apart from having an apparent large group of virtual friends, what exactly does fb prove?

    To be fair, linkedin is the exception to the rule. It has proven to be a good way to keep connected with old co-workers.

  • Re:Facebook (Score:4, Interesting)

    by AmaDaden ( 794446 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @11:15AM (#27598117)
    The URL shortening is what was causing the issue. They offered to drop if for sites that ask. For example the new york times.

    Personally I like the digg bar. It's as unobtrusive as it can be, gives me a link back to the comments, and lets me digg a page when I'm reading it. I tend to browse diggs main page and open up a bunch of links all at once. Before the digg bar it was pain if I liked anything enough to digg it. Everyone should remember that it can be turned off on a user by user basis. Besides the fact that having it on is the default they are doing everything they can to not be jerks about it.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2009 @11:23AM (#27598217)
    I quite looking at Digg when they wouldn't let the Pifts.exe story reach the front page. Norton had a possible back door into their software for big brother and it phoned home to a server in Africa. Pretty important story if you ask me. All accounts that questioned the Pifts.exe file on Norton's site were deleted. A back door can be exploited by all not just the one who puts it in their software!!
  • But I LIKED the bar! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by superbus1929 ( 1069292 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @11:35AM (#27598405) Homepage
    I work behind a content filter, so the Digg bar was handy for reading sites that are filtered, so I didn't have to RDP onto a separate server to read blocked URLs. So this is kinda sad news for me, but c'est la vie, big picture and all that.
  • by jDeepbeep ( 913892 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @02:37PM (#27600797)

    It has given me a new appreciation for slashdot moderation!

    I acquired a new appreciation of /. moderation a couple days back when I replied to a very very helpful post and stated 'Mod parent informative'. I figured that having karma of excellent would make theirs (a 1 default) more visible and useful. People did so and that post was boosted to a 5 Later in the day, someone saw my reply, and it got modded -2 redundant.

  • Common Pattern (Score:2, Interesting)

    by derGoldstein ( 1494129 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @04:47PM (#27603123) Homepage

    This is a common pattern. A comment arguing that its parent should be modded up will often achieve the desired effect, at the cost of whomever posted the "mod parent up" comment.

    I had a similar thing happen when I posted a comment that initially got modded "redundant". I had then replied to my own comment, elaborating on what I meant, and claiming that the original post was making a valid point. This achieved two things:
    A) the original post got upped to 5
    B) the reply to the post got modded -1 offtopic

    In its own funny way it works, but you need to keep in mind that the system has its quirks.

  • by derGoldstein ( 1494129 ) on Thursday April 16, 2009 @05:07PM (#27603485) Homepage

    I hate to use this phrase, but "who's we?"... I don't completely agree with every design/structural decision on the site, but I think that if there was an outcry of enough volume, it would lead to eventual change.
    Slash 2.0 has its upsides, though it's still quite buggy (and I mean technical, obviously-an-error-and-not-the-designer's-intention bugs).
    Idle? Ignore them if you dislike them so much.
    I don't really have a strong opinion about the user pages one way or the other.

    I very much doubt, however, that "they don't care". If you want to see "don't care", check out digg, and the topic of this thread.

    Possibly one thing that could be done is polling that takes into account the user's karma, but that too would have its problems.

    Also, for better or worse, the website isn't a democracy (though arguably the comments are). This site is "private property" and anyone's free to leave if they so choose. Clearly, anyone posting here hasn't chosen to leave yet.

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...