Quora seems to me like a low quality mechanical turk. It's very cool for the SV elite who like to give out advice to fellow entrepreneurs. That's all, for most

Quora seems to me like a low quality mechanical turk. It's very cool for the SV elite who like to give out advice to fellow entrepreneurs. That's all, for most else it's neither useful nor interesting. Example: I follow the neuroscience topic. Almost all of the answered questions are google/wikipedia-able. Many of the "best questions/answers" are no better than what any respectable newspaper has already written. The unanswered ones are either: a) Also easily googleable b) Idiotic / funny (How many hobbies does motor cortex allow?) c) Popsci /media trivialities that nobody will ever answer (Can StarCraft II help with working memory in the same way that Dual-N-Back helps with it?) d) Impossible to answer open questions, sometimes even rhetorical. I don't see at this level how it is different from yahoo answers. Answers are not constructed by review; having multiple answers is a mistake. If you're a famous entrepreneur, your answer is "more right" than others. Google is better at this: it provides an objective measure of authority that indirectly relies on the impact of your contribution (the number of links is still a signal). For most subjects, wikipedia has more up-to-date, succinct and accurate information, while quora requires that you search among a sizeable number of answers sometimes. And lastly, how could quora ever solve the spam problem when it becomes big enough? At this point, from my observations, googlebots beat humans.