3 ms·
This is Sterling's basic mode of blogging: the original, plus commentary. Granted, usually it's a lot more commentary. A lot of people lately are being prodiga
by misuba 17y ago
This is Sterling's basic mode of blogging: the original, plus commentary. Granted, usually it's a lot more commentary.
A lot of people lately are being prodigal with the P word (the other P word, I mean: "plagiarism") in referring to blogs that quote at length. The blogs in question almost always make it clear that the quote is a quote. Sterling is less good at this, but his regular readers have no trouble and PageRank is not his goal. Can we please reserve our ire for the real plagiarists, which are plentiful?
- paulgb 17y agoYeah, if anything it would be copyright infringement, not plagiarism.
- zck 17y agoI looked over Sterling's other posts before submitting a "this guy's stealing from pg" post, and came to a similar conclusion. I thought about it, and came to the conclusion that I don't like it, but it wasn't worth raising the alarm over. I still think this is a Bad Thing to do. His post didn't quote the whole thing, and links to the source, which are good. However, here are some of the things that bother me: He doesn't make it obvious that it is a quote -- the link doesn't have any helpful text; it's just a link. It doesn't say "from pg". He adds nothing of value. (This is arguably similar to reddit, boingboing, or, indeed, hacker news itself, but differs in that on those sites either a very small amount is quoted, or the quoting is obvious (see boingboing's quotes)). So you're right -- this isn't plagarism, but I still think it's unethical, especially for someone at Wired.