Speculation, with a ring of truth about it.

“Calacanis, we hear, has already hired about 20 engineers to work on the project. Roelof Botha, Calacanis’ patron at Sequoia, has already committed the funds. Former associates of Calacanis, such as Mark Cuban and Jonathan Miller, his former boss at AOL, are also backing the venture. So what’s the idea? It’s a cross between Wikipedia and Google. Calacanis’ new site will create more digestible search results for popular queries such as the names of Hollywood stars, and tech products. The pages will be seeded, initially, with content gathered automatically from the web and other sources. But they will be open to contributions by readers. Sounds like Wikipedia? Yes: except Calacanis will employ paid editors to oversee the pages“.

As commentators point out, that’s very Web 1.0.

Calacanis denies it…

  “I deny it 100%… it’s absurd. I do have a pool house however. “

…which will only serve to make the story more credible.

• What is Diggs true growth rate? All may not be what it seems.
• Such a great quote: “The problem with the global village is all the global village idiots”. Reddit gets swamped.
• Ask denounce paid inclusion. No surprises how Yahoo will respond, if they respond at all.
• Are dating sites in decline? Interesting snapshot by PlentyOfFish.
• Are Google showing actual search numbers in Adwords now? Would be great if they did.
• Three people think Google is over-rated. Quite possibly, but what else are we going to use? MSN?
• Why Google Optimizer is a Win-Win. It’s not magic, it’s not science, it’s…
• Does spelling matter in SEO? GrayWolf runs a test.
  

• Microsoft calls foul against Google over copyright. Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of this case, many feel it is a bit rich coming from Microsoft.
• Why personalized search will be great. SEOBlackhat makes some good points. Relevance is defined by the searcher, and - privacy issues aside - the more relevance, the better.
• Microsoft hands out too much money. Surely a first.
• Ex-Google Answers erm…answerers go out on their own. To answer questions.
• Google doesn’t know how to spend it’s cash. I can’t say I’ve ever had a similar problem.
• Seth Godin: Business Rules Of Thumb Wiki.
• A Google Earth for the body. One could fly up one’s own…
• Googoth. I’m feeling depressed.

Interesting article about the future of search, in particular:

“Virginia Tech computer science professor Naren Ramakrishnan and his colleagues have developed a “creative discovery” search engine that also emphasizes the connections in data that a user might not know to ask about initially. Called “Storyteller,” it discovers connections between information that at first appear dissimilar — a sequence of events or relationships to create a chain of concepts between specified start and end points“

Sounds good, but the challenge involves scaling these systems. Unless they get sold to Google, of course.

• People didn’t like the new interface, because it left out picture data. So the old Google Image format is back.
• New search blog at Search Engine Land focusing on small business. Small businesses now face a big job to get a big reputation in Google.
• Using blogs to boost the bottom line: “A lot of marketing people seem to be hoping for a proven blogging method that is (A) invented by somebody else, (B) easy to replicate, (C) easy to implement, and (D) easy to sell to their boss. Good luck”
• 140 online niches. Unfortunately, stuff you’re really interested in probably doesn’t make any money.
• Why blog networks failed: They were rubbish.

Top search stories of the past week.

• SEO on retainer will bite the dust. Astute observation, or PPC pitch? Probably both.
• Google black box may soon think for itself. Larry blue sky(net)ing again.
• StartUpping - cool advice for startups from Bloglines founder
• Three proven steps for getting on Diggs home page. Expect a flood of 12 year-olds a few seconds later. Then your server crashes.
• Not another search engine news blog. What is the sound of a thousand echo chambers clapping?
• One good link is enough Scroll down to the comments for some good tips. It’s more than a few good links, though. Existing domain reputation has a lot to do with it.
• How to peel a boiled egg perfectly. You know ya wanna.
• Doc Searls doesn’t believe in Social Media. Web 2.0 is the name we’ll give the next crash.
• Glad to see Nick back to his usual amusing self.
• Google may have bought Adscape, an in-game advertising system. Shoot off-topic ads for a bonus 100 points. Discover hidden Viagra level.
• Google Reader (finally) showing subscriber numbers - although why they don’t put the number within easy reach is beyond me. What use is it in the server logs?
• Froogle and Local are dying while Video and Blog are surging - there’s a lesson in there somewhere, I’m sure.

• Click fraud claimed to be rampant at around 20%. Expect heavy back-spin from Google next week.
• Google revenues up 67%. Stock price drops in response.
• Google TV Hoax - master (link) baiters
• Adsense Placement Packs Emails - some advertisers are encouraged to add video-friendly ad units

Actually, it’s been a quiet week in search.

I’m off on holiday for a week or so. John may be posting a bit while I’m gone

There’s an article on Read/WriteWeb about the “Top 100 Search Engines“.

The article suggests:

“each one of these search engines has that standard “About Us” link at the bottom of the homepage. I call it the “why we’re better than Google” page. And after reading dozens and dozens of these pages, I have come to the conclusion that, taken as a whole, they are right!”

Better than Google? In reality, building a slightly better mousetrap isn’t going to get any of them anywhere.

Most people’s search engine problem - think of something, type it into the search box, get list - is pretty much solved by existing services. The only thing that will make people migrate is a substantially better offering, offered in the right way, at the right time. And Google would need to simultaneously turn into a pile of crap.

It’s a long shot.

AltaVista didn’t lose the game simply because of inferior technology. Not initially, anyway. AltaVista lost the game because they liked nothing better than to repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot, thus alienating their user-base in the process. Even then, it took years for most people to switch to the technologically superior, and audience friendly, upstart - Google.

Also, scale is important. Search in 2007 is largely an infrastructure question. Can these little engines cope if they are asked to process millions of queries per minute? The resources required to do that, both human and machine, are enormous. The question isn’t so much “are you a better search engine?”. The question is “can you scale”?

That’s not to say the search wars are over. In many ways, they’re just beginning. It is possible to say some of the smaller engines might be better than Google or Yahoo at doing certain things (vertical and/or local search, for example). However, I suspect the next mega-company in search won’t just provide a new cute feature here, a flashy feature there - they’ll redefine what it means to search. And get answers. And they’ll be able to deliver, on a massive scale.

And don’t think Google, Yahoo, MSN and Ask haven’t thought about providing just that. They probably do. Every day.

• Google’s strategy for YouTube and Google Video - Search for the world’s online video content, irrespective of where it may be hosted.
• Link Bait - the debate widens. And gets a little silly.
• Paid links - what is a paid link? What isn’t a paid link? The old debate reignites.
• All Wikipedia links go NoFollow - Wikipedia outbounds can’t be trusted?
• Yahoo announce new ranking model - Ads will now have a quality component

• What it is like being interviewed by Google
• Adsense update their policies - be careful when displaying competitor ads
• Monitor your search ranking via RSS
• Google leaves internal memo in terms of service
• Is Google deleting iPhone related domains?