Fragmented thoughts on readworthiness
- Ultragleeper, by the guy who made Beautiful Soup. A “Recommendation Engine”. Ultragleeper takes group data from technorati, del, google, and personal recommendations regarding readworthiness of web pages. This is a neat subset of what I’m looking at for a good feedreader. I need to browse his source (python, yay) to take a look at how he implements ranking algorithms. I like that he bootstraps recommendations from the user’s OMPL feed list and delicious links… what a neat idea!
- Statistical analysis of “Front Page” Digg entries aggregated over time shows that while a small percent of users are responsible for a high percentage of the posts that make it to the front page, these prolific users are only responsible for posts that are in the mediocre-to-good range (they easily break the 50+ diggs requirement to hit the front page, but usually end up with a final rating in the < 500 range by the time they scroll off the page). The real high-scoring entries are typically submitted by relative unknowns. I need to think more about how this relates to personal recommendations.
- (off that last note… I need to consider if group recommendation sites (digg, delicious’s front page) have different demands/qualities/characteristics compared to personal recommendation requirements. Wider vs denser range of interests (a homogenous group would have much denser interest fields than an individual–this is why the delicious popular page is filled with ajax and css links), different tolerance of signal vs noise (is this true?), …
— Trackbacks closed
This entry (permalink) was posted on Saturday, August 12, 2006, at 19:08 by mote. Filed in General.