usablecontent

alarm:clock has broke the story: http://www.thealarmclock.com/mt/archives/2007/05/google_negotiat.html

And everyone is reporting on it: http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/05/04/google-in-talks-to-acquire-simplyhired/ http://mashable.com/2007/05/04/google-simplyhired/

However Joshua Jaffe at VC ratings think this is non-sense. Why would the search giant buy search. http://vcratings.thedealblogs.com/2007/05/google_buying_a_vertical_searc.php

I wish I could take sides and call one thing reasonable over other. what you guys think Does it makes sense ?

And Adam is a gifted writer, or lets say he has a neck of picking the top N things built on top of an API. Also check http://mashable.com/2007/04/29/7-awesome-things-built-on-the-digg-api/

It would be nice if we could search for previously posted stories on news.yc

I came across the metrolive article when pg submitted it here, but to find it again had to search Google and then fetch the link from Google's cache. Too much work.

A lot has already been said, but I want to participate as well:

For those who think Arrington likely didnt took money from MSFT, for the past couple of months I was seeing MIX ads on the top banner, below the first post and on the sidebar. Is this not giving money albeit more subtly ?

For PG If you were in his position, having an exclusive interview with Ray Ozzie, a high profile lunch and ten hours of selling to go with months long ad campaigns on TC, I am not sure you would have done something different.

But I havent said here that you would have wanted to be in this position, that's a totally different thing.

I cant really understand this statement of Arrington "it blows away native Javascript routines - without exaggeration, Ajax looks like a bicycle next to a Ferrari when compared to Silverlight"

The other reason for writing this post I guess is that the previous post from Nik didnt got enough page views "Nik wrote a very long post yesterday afternoon on Silverlight, long after the initial news broke. From a pageview standpoint, the post was a loser for us. We would have been far better off doing a one-paragraph post at 10 am announcing the news, and by the time we wrote in the late afternoon the buzz had worn off somewhat."

Totally agreed, I think Kevin Rose made the right choice. Banning the stories at this juncture would have been a suicide.

The users threatened to move on to Reddit, but this does not mean Reddit would have been a beneficiary, it would have to either allow this or show the users door once again.

Check out techmeme http://www.techmeme.com/070502/p5#a070502p5

cant help imagining how much press coverage Digg has got on this issue

It should be "Thats how the rumor mill works" :)

really nice

Didn't knew New York Post has such a great reputation, but alot of people are jumping on it http://www.techmeme.com/070501/p26#a070501p26

The point that you are making was explained in detail by some fellow in a post titled "Maybe Google Wanted to be Sued: YouTube and Plan B" http://www.michiknows.com/2007/03/14/maybe-google-wanted-to-be-sued-youtube-and-plan-b/

The post is really thought provoking and got Digged, slashdotted and reddited.

Do give it a look

Do check out this http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=18237

Philipp Lenssen is blogging live about the Google personalization workshop held at Googleplex, where all these news announcements were made by Marissa Meyers.