3 ms·

You do realize 'Google' is a corruption of 'googol', right? :) Besides, no: you don't have to optimize for the unwashed masses. But if you're making something

You do realize 'Google' is a corruption of 'googol', right? :) Besides, no: you don't have to optimize for the unwashed masses. But if you're making something to compete with Facebook, the most Unwashed Masses site since MySpace, you probably should if you want to be successful.

acgourley 17y ago
Any data to support this? I've always been skeptical this mattered much. Google does a good job guiding people past spelling mistakes for popular services.
- glhaynes 17y ago
  Nope, no data. But I'd rather own "super.com" than "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.com"! :) I think your argument may be increasingly good as more browsers merge their search field with their URL field like Chrome does. On that note, it'd be interesting to see numbers on how often people enter URL-like strings into their browser's search field and then click the first link that comes back.
anigbrowl 17y ago
I do, and I was enough of a nerd to appreciate the inference when they first launched, too :) It's true that the value of membership in something like Facebook depends heavily on the network effect (allowing you to easily find all your friends there), and without a large community a project like Diaspora is unlikely to acquire sufficient utility to be more than a curiosity. But I really don't think the name will be a major barrier, either to ease of communication or due to semantic association. I stopped worrying about this after we got past questions like 'shouldn't it be W-W-W period com?' and 'what about people who are afraid of spiders?' etc.
- glhaynes 17y ago
  Hehheh :) I do think names are very important. There's a naturalness with which Normals say "do you have a Facebook?" that they don't seem likely (to me) to have with "Diaspora". I think that an admirable trait of nerds/geeks/whatever is that many can easily separate symbols from their cultural meanings/connotations. We can treat "diaspora" independently, understanding its subtly ironic meaning (most of us don't think the Facebook diaspora is nearly as significant as other historical diasporas, but we don't take a site's usage of this name to diminish this history, either) but many would interpret such a 'flippant' use as mocking their cultural heritage and the struggles of their forebears. One has to know one's customers. And ain't nothin' offensive about "Facebook".
froo 17y ago
>You do realize 'Google' is a corruption of 'googol', right? :) ... to go even more meta, "googol" is a corruption of "google" - as the name was suggested by Kasner's (the mathematician) nephew. It was the last name of Kasner's newphew's favourite comic character, Barney Google.

acgourley 17y ago

Any data to support this? I've always been skeptical this mattered much. Google does a good job guiding people past spelling mistakes for popular services.

glhaynes 17y ago
Nope, no data. But I'd rather own "super.com" than "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.com"! :) I think your argument may be increasingly good as more browsers merge their search field with their URL field like Chrome does. On that note, it'd be interesting to see numbers on how often people enter URL-like strings into their browser's search field and then click the first link that comes back.

anigbrowl 17y ago

I do, and I was enough of a nerd to appreciate the inference when they first launched, too :) It's true that the value of membership in something like Facebook depends heavily on the network effect (allowing you to easily find all your friends there), and without a large community a project like Diaspora is unlikely to acquire sufficient utility to be more than a curiosity. But I really don't think the name will be a major barrier, either to ease of communication or due to semantic association. I stopped worrying about this after we got past questions like 'shouldn't it be W-W-W period com?' and 'what about people who are afraid of spiders?' etc.

glhaynes 17y ago
Hehheh :) I do think names are very important. There's a naturalness with which Normals say "do you have a Facebook?" that they don't seem likely (to me) to have with "Diaspora". I think that an admirable trait of nerds/geeks/whatever is that many can easily separate symbols from their cultural meanings/connotations. We can treat "diaspora" independently, understanding its subtly ironic meaning (most of us don't think the Facebook diaspora is nearly as significant as other historical diasporas, but we don't take a site's usage of this name to diminish this history, either) but many would interpret such a 'flippant' use as mocking their cultural heritage and the struggles of their forebears. One has to know one's customers. And ain't nothin' offensive about "Facebook".

froo 17y ago

>You do realize 'Google' is a corruption of 'googol', right? :) ... to go even more meta, "googol" is a corruption of "google" - as the name was suggested by Kasner's (the mathematician) nephew. It was the last name of Kasner's newphew's favourite comic character, Barney Google.