Google develops Wikipedia rival

Search and advertising giant Google is developing a user-generated online encyclopaedia that could rival Wikipedia.

Google has named the scheme the “knol project”, a knol being a “unit of knowledge”, according to a blog post by Google engineering vice president Udi Manber. The company aims to tie strong identities to contributing authors and those seeking to edit knols.

“Our goal is to encourage people who know a particular subject to write an authoritative article about it,” wrote Manber. “The goal is for knols to cover all topics, from scientific concepts, to medical information, from geographical and historical, to entertainment, from product information, to how-to-fix-it instructions.”

Google will host and provide tools to produce and edit knol web pages, but will not edit or advocate any of the content. However, entries that Google judges to be of higher quality will be given a higher page ranking in Google search.

Entries will be rated by the community and will be able to be reviewed after the unspecified testing period. The project is currently in beta and has been sent to a small group of testers. Once the knol tool goes live, contributors will be able to monetise their pages by including Google ads.

MP3 blogs offer file sharing even the RIAA could love

Although the term “file sharing” has all sorts of ugly connotations, it’s not necessarily a bad thing. In some cases, it’s even a win-win-win situation for the recording industry, music lovers — and Google.

There are countless MP3 file-sharing sites that don’t look anything like BitTorrent or Lime Wire. They’re low-key, homegrown blogs that don’t host illicitly copied music, but do provide links to third-party sites, or storage lockers, such as Megashare, where pirated music is stored. These bloggers do it for the love of the music, they say, but it doesn’t hurt that they make a little money from advertising along the way.

The low-profile success of MP3 blogs, and the apparent unconcern of the music industry, is in stark contrast to the aggressive anti-piracy actions taken by the Recording Industry Association of America in other spheres. For instance, the RIAA recently won a $222,000 judgment against a single mother of two for using file-sharing software Kazaa to trade copyright files. No similar action has been taken against MP3 bloggers.

Many of these sites, like Hangover Heart Attack and It’s Coming Out of Your Speaker, run ads through Google’s AdSense program, which means that Google, too, makes money from sites that direct people to bootleg MP3 files.

Anyone can sign up for AdSense — bloggers, publishers, nonprofit groups or even aspiring poets — although Google’s terms-of-service agreement prohibits websites that promote illegal activity or infringe on others’ rights. Google sells ad space on members’ sites, and it splits the revenue with the publishers.

Technically, these blogs could be considered illegal. The RIAA could make a claim that bloggers who direct people to pirated music may be committing “contributory copyright infringement.” And a claim could even be made against Google for profiting from the sites, says attorney Eric Custer, a partner at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips.

But who wants to put a stop to it? The RIAA declined to comment for this story, but the publisher of one MP3 aggregator, who asked to remain anonymous, says music labels have been extremely cooperative. This blogger monitors more than 3,000 music blogs daily, providing links to files that have been uploaded to various music lockers. And no, the blogger has never been asked by a label to take a link down.

“Actually, we’ve been contacted by labels, promo agencies and even musicians and bands to help promote them. Which we’ve done, free of charge,” the blogger wrote by email. The blogger also has the impression that the site has helped expose people to music they wouldn’t otherwise hear, and may even help drive CD sales, although there’s no hard evidence of this.

A major moneymaking operation it is not. The blog, which generates thousands of pageviews daily from thousands of unique visitors, makes its creator just 75 cents for each hour put into it.

Google keeps the AdSense revenue split confidential, so it’s unknown exactly how much the company makes from each publisher in the program. In a recent SEC filing, Google said it pays “most” of the fees it makes from advertisers to publishers. A 2006 New York Times report suggested one publisher, Digital Point Solutions, took home 78.5 percent of the revenue, presumably leaving 21.5 percent to Google.

Whatever the split, AdSense is an incredibly profitable operation for the company, generating billions in revenue each year. In the third quarter of 2007 alone, Google made $1.45 billion, or one-third of its revenue, from AdSense. The amount of money generated by music bloggers, though, could be fairly marginal.

“Proportionately, I think (blogs) probably represent a very small percentage of the file-sharing market,” says Eric Garland, co-founder and CEO of BigChampagne, a Beverly Hills, California, market research firm that follows the file-sharing universe. “There are always going to be different mechanisms or vehicles for exchanging files, but ultimately, people go to a search-driven environment that you find in file-sharing applications.”

For its part, Google denies responsibility for content on the AdSense network and says it acts fast when it identifies publishers who violate its terms of service. And to enforce this policy, Google reviews participating sites to weed out content that violates the AdSense terms-of-service contract.

“In the same way we crawl websites (for our search service), we crawl publisher websites to flag information that may violate our policy,” says Google spokesman Brandon McCormick. “Every site at some point goes through a manual review. It’s something we take very seriously.”

Spammers giving up? Google thinks so…

Bill Gates was wildly optimistic when he said in 2004 that the problem of spam would be “solved” by 2006. The volume of junk e-mail transmitted worldwide is still enormous. But a remarkable trend is underfoot, according to Brad Taylor, a staff software engineer at Google: The number of spam attempts — that is, the number of junk messages sent out by spammers — is flat, and may even be declining for the first time in years.

Google won’t disclose numbers, but the company says that spam attempts, as a percentage of e-mail that’s transmitted through its Gmail system, have waned over the last year. That could indicate that some spammers have gotten discouraged and have stopped trying to get through Google’s spam filters.

Other experts disagree with Google, pointing out that overall spam attempts continue to rise. By most estimates, tens of billions of spam messages are sent daily. Yet for most users, the amount of spam arriving in their inboxes has remained relatively flat, thanks to improved filtering.

Brad Taylor is on the front lines of the war on spam. He has served as the chief watchdog of Google’s spam filter since 2004, when Gmail first launched. His history with spam goes back much further, though: He’s been fascinated with it since 1994, when he received his first spam e-mail at a work account. Before he joined Google, he worked at an anti-spam startup.

Taylor denies he’s obsessed with junk mail, but his actions speak otherwise: For his own amusement, he Googles the gobbledygook at the bottom of spam messages to see where the text comes from. (Some are from Harry Potter books, he says. He also found one that was an English translation of a Russian science-fiction novel).

“It’s fun,” he says of catching spammers. “Sometimes I think, ‘Oh, wow, that guy’s really clever.’”

The chase may be exciting, but Taylor’s real dream is to return e-mail to the “pristine experience it used to be.”

Chenxi Wang, an analyst at Forrester Research, scoffs at the idea that spam attempts could be on the decline.

“I’m seeing that the overall trend is up,” Wang says. “We’re not seeing a drastic increase, though. And we’re also seeing an increase of targeted spam instead of blanket spam that hits everybody in a large population. Today, for instance, you see spam messages on saving (on) prescription drugs targeted to seniors.”

For its part, Yahoo, too, says the overall amount of spam transmitted is on the rise, but the percentage of spam that reaches its users’ inboxes is down. (Yahoo would not disclose specific numbers.)

Regardless of the overall spam attempts, David Daniels, vice president of Jupiter Research, predicts the number of spam messages that actually reach a typical inbox will remain roughly flat over the next three years. And for most people, that’s what really matters.

“We’re forecasting that the number of spam messages that annually reach the average inbox will hit 4,351 in 2007. For 2010, we think that number will essentially be flat at 4,403. The growth will be very, very small,” Daniels says.

There are a couple of reasons for the lack of growth in spam deliveries. For one, e-mail providers like Google, Yahoo, AOL and Microsoft’s Hotmail use sophisticated filtering algorithms that are constantly updated based on spam reports from individual users. Google says it can delete all instances of a single spam message across the Gmail network in seconds.

New anti-spam technologies are also always under development, and there are already countless anti-spam services and technologies available to consumers, including disposable e-mail addresses.

It’s by no means a perfect system, though. And spammers are, if nothing else, persistent.

In a bizarre twist, Daniels thinks that instead of receiving spam offers from penny-stock pushers, mailboxes will increasingly be filled with marketing messages that we choose to receive, such as promotional e-mails from a favorite clothing store or a bank. He thinks the average number of messages from marketers that individuals receive annually will grow from 2,715 in 2007 to 3,335 in 2010.

“We expect people to spend as much time on e-mail as they have, but we think people will receive more e-mail from legitimate marketers. So there will be more competition to get consumers’ attention in the inbox, but it will be more like competition between The Gap and J.C. Penney as opposed to The Gap and a Viagra salesman.”

Gmail 2.0 gets thumbs down from users

A major upgrade to Gmail is getting the thumbs down from users who complain that the new version is extremely slow, often fails to load pages and even crashes their browsers.

People have flooded discussion forums with complaints since Google began “upgrading” users about two weeks ago to the new version, popularly referred to in the blogosphere as Gmail 2.0.

Ironically, Gmail 2.0, which features an upgraded contacts manager, is designed to be faster and more stable. Gmail 2.0 is based on what a Google spokesman calls “a major structural code change” upon which new features will be launched in coming months.

“Most users should see a marked improvement in performance. We recommend using IE7 and Firefox 2 to take full advantage of Gmail’s speedier interface,” said spokesman Jason Freidenfelds via e-mail.

Asked about the problems users are reporting, Freidenfelds didn’t address the complaints specifically but said that Google appreciates the feedback it’s getting. “The new code underlying Gmail should allow us to roll out performance improvements more frequently,” he said.

Users interviewed via e-mail for this article report a variety of performance problems with Gmail 2.0.

The most common complaint is that it is generally very slow, with delays of a minute or more when attempting to display the inbox upon logging on, to record keystrokes when typing text and to respond to mouse clicks. Often the tasks time out. Others report that Gmail 2.0 repeatedly crashes or freezes their browsers, in particular Firefox.

If these users switch to the “old” Gmail version, the problems go away. However, these users say they have to switch manually every time they log on, because Gmail 2.0 automatically became their default version once they got upgraded to it.

When Google upgraded his account last week, Jim Sellers, a software programmer based in Ottawa, Canada, was eager to try Gmail 2.0’s improved contacts manager, but his Firefox 2.0 browser kept crashing both on Windows 2000 and Mac OS X 10.4.

“These problems were very disruptive. I spend at least 25 percent of my day using my browser as one of my main working tools. To have it crash like that made the new version of Gmail a non-option,” said Sellers, an otherwise satisfied Gmail user since June 2004.

As a workaround, Sellers has bookmarked the URL for the “old” Gmail version. However, others expressed worry that Google at some point will phase out access to the “old” Gmail without having fully resolved problems.

Some users interviewed also complained that Google didn’t notify them that they would be moved to Gmail 2.0, or give them an option to decline the upgrade.

Others, on the other hand, trust Google will soon solve the issues. That’s the case of Jack Freeman, a retiree in Oklahoma who, for lack of broadband options in his area, has learned to live with, and make the best of, his relatively slow dial-up connection.

For example, he enjoys posting answers in Google discussion forums, and in recent days has been addressing a lot of questions about the slowness of Gmail 2.0. Freeman’s solution to the delays has been to toggle between the two versions of the service. “It is still my favorite e-mail program,” Freeman said.

Google is moving people progressively to Gmail 2.0, so some users have it and others don’t.

Google didn’t immediately reply to a series of follow-up questions, so it’s not clear what percentage of people have access to the new version and how many are experiencing problems with it. It’s also unclear when Google expects to have everyone on the new version and when the performance problems be solved.

What’s clear is that the problems have unleashed a storm of complaints. A search, sorted by date, for “Gmail slow” in the Gmail Help Discussion forum returns about 35 pages of results related to problems with Gmail 2.0.

Google’s Android not an iPhone

The only real thing that the iPhone and the Gphone have in common at the moment are five letters.

Google’s plans for the mobile phone market have caused quite the stir Monday, even though the company’s press conference Monday morning didn’t add much to what we already knew about Android, a collection of software that could be a catalyst for Linux on mobile phones over the next few years. Still, when any company the size of Google makes noise about steering its ship in a certain direction, people take notice.

One nice development is that we can stop calling the damn thing the Gphone, which stopped being cute awhile ago in the fine tradition of J-Lo, A-Rod, and K-Fed. But while both Apple and Google will be selling mobile phone software in late 2008, the companies seem determined to walk a fine line in their new dual relationship as trusted partner and wary competitor.

Android is a nice idea; take the promise of Linux as a mobile operating system and finally give it a backer with some legs. This could set Google up nicely for the future if mobile phones continue to turn into little computers, since companies like Symbian and Microsoft are far from entrenched in this market.

Apple is also eying that future. Much of what Google said about Android during its press conference–such as the desire for a better Internet experience on mobile phones–was uttered by Apple CEO Steve Jobs in January during the presentation of the iPhone. And it’s already sold 1.4 million iPhones in three months.

So this time next year, are we going to be talking about the looming showdown between Google and Apple in mobile computing, or the surprising resignation of Google’s Eric Schmidt from Apple’s board of directors?