digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Digg.com created for only $200.00

elance.com — In 2003, Kevin Rose had a big idea. He went to Elance.com to post a project and look for a PHP programmer, he selected Owen Byrne (Elance username: permafrost) and worked with him to build Digg.com for $10 hr. Listen to Kevin's presentation

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mercurysquad, on 10/12/2007, -91/+53And I know this story is getting to the frontpage.
    • Avili, on 10/24/2007, -16/+163* containing "Digg" or * containing "Kevin Rose" = Frontpage

      That picture of him on businessweek makes him look really stupid.
    • gregs2500, on 10/12/2007, -26/+92Well, he is our creator and overlord. I, for one, wouldn't say anything bad about him. (Please don't smite me Kevin Rose!)
    • shyguy01, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Original down / very slow

      Duggmirror sort of works for me: http://duggmirror.com/programming/Digg_com_created_for_only_200_00/
    • knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -17/+7A terrific example of why you work by the project and not by the hour.
    • Jaymoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20@shyguy01

      Don't forget, you can always use the plain version of duggmirror....

      http://duggmirror.com/programming/Digg_com_created_for_only_200_00/plain.html

      For those sites that are CSS/JS heavy...
    • Mootabolife, on 10/12/2007, -12/+28$200? Did they count the associated mountain dew tax?
    • phej, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17"Kevin Rose, founder of Digg.com, presented at The Future of Web Apps Summit in San Francisco last month, giving a demo and sharing the story behind Digg's launch.

      In 2003, Kevin had a big idea. He came to Elance to post a project and look for a PHP programmer, selected Owen Byrne (Elance username: permafrost) and worked with him to build the initial product. Eventually, Owen joined Digg full-time.

      Today, Digg is one of the most successful and visited websites, Owen Byrne is Digg's Senior Software Engineer, and Kevin is a high flyer recently featured on the cover of BusinessWeek."
    • willis77, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Hindsight is 20/20, my friends.
    • mporcheron, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1no he doesn't - he's worth £60 million, according to BusinessWeek.
    • surfing, on 10/12/2007, -1/+52Thanks for adding the new "Digg" section:
      http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c240/becda289/digg.jpg
    • rodrigo74, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6knightblade: and then when someone show a story about a poor guy who worked on a fixed price and ended up earning 2000 dollars for 6 months of hard work, you would say "A terrific example of why you work by the hour and not by the project", right?

      Working by the hour is much safer, considering that none of us can view the future. Sure, it could have been a bad deal in this specific case (not sure though, since the guy ended up working full time at digg and is the big boss of the development team now) but you're during an a-posteriori analysis, no one makes mistakes when it's about stuff that already happened, right?
    • turpenine, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2I for one bow down to our Kevin Rose overlord.
    • knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6rodrigo741:

      if someone continued coding for 6 months to make $2000 then I have no pity for them; they're retarded.
    • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4How come noone has said...

      "...and it shows!" ba-dump-dump-da!
    • jazbek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@ knightblade2oo4

      Actually, I've been coding heavily for the past 4 months on a project that I'm getting a flat rate of $8000 for, and I've had to hire people to help me because the project has run way over time estimation. I'm estimating by the end of it I'm going to average about $15/hour instead of my normal $75. I wish I could just "quit", but it'd be completely unprofessional. And guess, what there's this little thing called a "contract". Working by the hour is definitely much safer than working by a flat rate, at least you know what you'll be getting paid for your time.
      • zen6ox, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Thats your own fault for either:
        A) Not controlling the scope or
        B) Poorly estimating the project.
    • firepowered, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1and i know he dresses like the kid from the tv show Heroes. lol . sterotypical nerd? lol
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Oh, so this is where this Diggspace idea came from?

      Dugg down as Pipe Dream.
    • Janahan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0link to entire speech
      http://img669.libsyn.com/img669/ea21058054a403fd006d8188387ffa8a/45babe6d/7751/5032/Kevin_Rose.mp3 (MP3)
  • groperdude, on 10/24/2007, -36/+53It's easy i think to go back and rebuild history. Almost everyone here knows that making php (or asp) script to produce what digg does, is really not tough at all. Most programmers here can do it in less than 10 hours from all the functionality i can see. It is ultimately the idea that counts, and not really the time it took to make it.

    A site like myspace.com can be put together in 3-4 hours too. Ditto for del.icio.us and a lot of the other high priced ones.

    So, the value is in the idea, and not necessarily in the time it takes to execute it.
    • mercurysquad, on 10/12/2007, -7/+111Site like digg in 10 hours: maybe yes if you have EVERYTHING planned beforehand, the server running already, and only count actual coding time excluding testing time. But MySpace like site in 3-4 hours: that's just one big understatement.
    • paulmdx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18What mercurysquad said. Sites like MySpace may seem easy but from my experience there's a lot more considerations than there first seems.
    • malavalla, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2yeah and he still hasn't paid me back
    • GTPilot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+653-4 hours to re-create myspace? .. i'll hire ya.. we need a super hero who can design and develop a couple entire web apps per day.
    • tribality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26MySpace is a giant mess, but has lots of hours put into it. Hell, tons of people have spent 4 hours just making their own MySpace pages.
    • r2700, on 10/12/2007, -2/+31Anyone want to collaborate on creating a new MySpace to see if we can do it in a day or two? You know it'd constantly be on the Digg homepage b/c it was conceived here..
    • radicaldementia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7make a website in 10 hours? Yeah it could be done, but you'd probably end up with a horribly written and unmaintainable site. If you want to make a well-written and organized site, it usually takes some time. It's often the case in software engineering where you begin building your system, and then at some point you completely start over, but this time you have a much better idea of how to do things, so you end up with better quality code.
    • greatclare, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10A better MySpace made by diggers can happen. It MUST happen! MySpace is the worst place on the internet, I'm sure a couple of diggers with a couple hours can make a better MySpace.
    • Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I think that's a common, basic misconception. Everyone has ideas. The devil is in the details. Is Friendster, Facebook, and MySpace all that different in concept? No. They're slightly different in many ways. Friendster even had an advantage in being one of the first but ultimately failed. Somehow, we've been taught that inventions and innovations are heroic deeds, a monumental idea by a single genius. Those do exist but are very, very rare, especially this day and age when technology is so complex. Nobels are often awarded to more than one person for the same discovery. We have research teams and labs. For an idea to become more than just that you need a team of people who are skilled in various aspects of implementation. This is why I question the role and relative worth of CEOs (check out "Fooled by Randomness").

      I think some of people who dream of starting the next Google or next Digg are making this basic mistake. You don't need some crazy good idea. You need to do something almost trivial but do it very well. Then you can build on top of that. Look at Unix/Linux, Google, or Digg.
    • groperdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Of course, anyone here is welcome to collaborate on creating the next billion-dollar web space. Nothing stopping the people here from creating some more magic. If anything, this article proves that if an idea is executed and marketed correctly, you don't need millions of dollars to start. I am not filthy rich yet, but 6 years ago i quit my job one day in a sudden wave of a brainstorm, and thankfully to that small idea i can make about 1.5 million per year now. This is not some bragging point, except that yes i also started with a few hundred dollars and parlayed that into a million-dollar property in a short time. Bigger ideas of course go on to make hundreds of millions. So yeah, who wants to collaborate on the next big thing?

      By the way, there really is a super idea about the next Myspace.com out there (and it is being done by the person who sold myspace to Rupert Murdoch). We can beat him to the punch, can't we?
    • sputnike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9We shall call it Diggspace (or digspace due to tm issues mind you apple does it and they dont care) and if your not a member of digg, your not allowed in - it's our cooler, more of a treehouse club version of myspace and it will be better than myspace :)
    • r2700, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Ok, let's do it. I grabbed DuggSpace.com (please don't kill me, Digg, that's not the final name and I promise not to make any money off of it while it's being used as a placeholder). I've created a Digg submission for it. Let's see what happens.

      http://digg.com/programming/Can_Digg_Users_Create_the_Next_MySpace
    • MatttK, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Huh.. I'm pretty sure this is all the code there is for myspace...

      editpage.php:

      include_once "dbtools.php"; // left out to save room





    • MatttK, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2arg.. nm.. was making a coding joke but it exploded (can't edit my comment... the submission thing has no button) instead of displaying it plaintext. :/ Digg down above (and this?) please.
    • sputnike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Haha I was looking on godaddy just after I made my last post as www.diggspace.com didn't actually load anything for me, Give me a shout or something and I can sort out some hosting (decent dedicated server) and no doubt we can get a myspace cms or use Drupal or something. Maybe merge it by using the digg's database somehow. Anywho email me: sascha.lopez (at) googlemail.com and I'll try and sort something out. Duggspace.com would be cool, possibly a place for all people who have had things dugg to come and make friends with others :)
    • laughable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sure, it's an exaggeration, but groperdude is basically right in what he is saying.

      There are a lot of internet enigmas right now. YouTube, MySpace, Digg....they are all such incredibly simple ideas that have done incredibly well financially. As a big fan of the now defunct TechTV and Screen Savers, I'm happy for Kevin and company. But at the same time, I think we're all a little jealous. How can you not be? These concepts are so simple, so basic, most people wouldn't even consider them real "ideas" if you were sitting around a table brainstorming for concepts on a web site to build. And yet, they have been tremendously successful. And out of respect for Kevin, I won't even comment on the quality of content in the diggnation podcast (when you consider how many downloads it's getting).

      As Master Yoda might say, jealousy breeds fear and fear breeds hatred and hatred breeds...

      I will continue to support and visit Digg for a long time, and I wish these guys nothing but great success :)
  • groperdude, on 10/12/2007, -14/+6@mercurysquad

    Well once a person has decided to launch a site, they do not start with 100 dedicated servers in a personal datacenter. Hosting can be bought in less than 10 minutes. I said 10 hours including testing of initial launch. Of course you understand that if and when the site takes off, then it's a different ballgame. I'm sure there are quite a few programmers here who can build digg-like site in a few hours and then test it for a couple more. In the EVERYTHING planned before part, i don't know of any future million-dollar site which is being built right now who actually has EVERYTHING planned out right now. There is some simple idea out there right now which can be coded in a few hours and will be the next big thing in our lifetimes.
  • ewcost, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4I think this is going to the front page!
  • geekest, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0That was the cost of programming. The original UI of Ajax was very simple. It was more like a simple listing.
  • dermandarin, on 10/12/2007, -27/+2I agree. It's all about the idea. I remember when there was no service like this available on the Internet, then digg started and 5 hours later there were 20+ similar sites online. ;)
    • TonyCubed, on 10/12/2007, -4/+37Digg didn't become famous within 5 hours..
    • JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12"I remember when there was no service like this available on the Internet..."

      Kuro5hin ( http://www.kuro5hin.org/ ), pretty much the exact same concept as Digg as far as users voting up other submissions and commetning on them, has been around for approximately 5 years.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5It looks like a few of you haven't heard of hyperbole.
    • Hootyea, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I remember the 5 hours between Al Gore blessing us with the Internet, and then having Crysis made in Shockwave.
  • spyker, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6its only small but in case it goes down here is the mp3 of his presentation
    http://www.yourfilelink.com/get.php?fid=266370
  • Zzyw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16"It was one of these things, where..."
  • JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4The only important thing I've learned from this article is that that cover of Business Week tells me there's another tech stock crash on its way. I haven't seen a cover like that in about 5 years. Time to start short selling.
  • bostonvoip, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3The idea is the key!
  • lifendeath, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1I had read an article somewhere, in it, it said he put all the money he was saving for his house and cause of that his girlfriend left him too, so only 200$ is hard for me to believe
    • cjmal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Maybe the only had $200 saved up at the time?
  • neiltc13, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5Do other sites constantly have "how this site was created" on the front page? Can you imagine if CNN did it, or Yahoo or Google?

    I'm sick of seeing this story. Buried as the first thing my mouse hits.
    • asdfrewq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11No, but digg is the sort of site where stories of the origins of sites such as google and yahoo would be (and are) featured. It's only makes sense the the users are interested in the origins of digg itself.
    • Agret, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I can see Yahoo or CNN doing it, under their tech news stuff but not on the front page. But since digg is a tech news site primarily....

      I can't see Google putting it on the front page seeing as how they don't really frontpage anything, maybe under the google labs section though. I'm pretty sure they've gone through the making and such on their blog as well.
  • tribality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Here is a quote from way back then...
    "I wrote a scoping document to a friend, who is a developer. The friend said it would take two or three weeks to create and cost 700 bucks, so I said, 'Let's go for it.'" - Kevin Rose
    from http://quotiki.com/quote.aspx?id=6526
  • keylime314159, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12It's not the idea that counts; there are a lot of ideas out there.

    It's not the difficulty of development that counts; many "valuable" sites would not be hard to replicate.

    It is the luck, marketing, and personal connections that are behind creating a "valuable" site that count.
    • Anteros, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I agree, I love the digg idea but it's importance in the success of the site is often overstated. I think these events had the most impact on it's success :

      1. Mention on the Screensavers brought in initial users.
      2. Launch of the diggnation podcast just as the podcasting was taking off, got to #1 in itunes (partly due to Kevins existing fame) and digging became the cool thing to do.
      3. Release of digg version 3 brought in a more mainstream design and media coverage of the new release.
    • bkorte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yes, anybody can code for a few days... It's all about the marketing!
  • solarpowered, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12This information is hardly a ringing endorsement of what you can earn using ELance.
    • mouthster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah that's the only thing I could think about reading this headline description.. coding for 10 dollars an hour!? I sure hope Owen got a raise!
    • blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4No he just moved to India.
  • RyanOC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11It realy helped that he had techtv to promote the site all the tiome too. When I first herd him takling about it it was likd he was talking about some cool site he found, not one he created. Free advertisement helps a lot

    • groperdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have never seen that show, but of course if someone is capable of putting up a site name in front of even 5000 people and they can buy into the idea, from then on it is a viral effect for many sites. A site could have cost $10 to make and still will get users if the "cool" factor can be pitched in front of a captive audience. I don't really buy into this "oh this idea was so cool and new and it took only $200 to make.. i'm a genius".

      It's the "buzz factor" that thousands of sites cannot generate.
    • beotch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Don't forget spamming slashdot, digg was real good at that.
  • Twango, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Yeah, right ... and the raw materials in my car only cost $200 too.
  • groperdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yup free advertising, angel investor connections, VC backing, professional buzz machines, inductry connections, rich uncles, free advertising, plugged-in tv show, and a little bit of luck cannot be bought for $200. But a site like digg.com can still have been made for $200, no doubt about it. There may have been sites like it before (not voting per se, but listing "news"), but it is still now run by about 2000-3000 enthusiastic submitters i think. And that enthusiasm is difficult for other sites to capture.

    Myspace also tweaks because of issues today, but to put up a site which would have 3 tables in a database and one page of 10 forms to fill in user profile data gets made once every 30 seconds somewhere in the world.
  • avasol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Will work for WLAN access.....
  • HeavyDose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Digg crashed elance.com... nice
  • farksucks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Digg will probably be sold for 200 dollars after the Web 2.0 bubble bursts.

    The problem with digg is that Google's text ads simply don't work here. Half the users are running firefox with adblock and don't even see them, and the rest of the crowd have been on the internet long enough to "tune out" the ads and not even look at them.

    A site like digg, getting 20 million unique visitors per month, should be making 20 or 30 million dollars a year in adsense profits. Yet Kevin himself admitted they only made 3 million last year, which wasn't even enough to cover their server farm, office rent, and employee payroll.

    Google's ads depend on stupid people who can't distinguish text ads from actual content links on a website. Digg users simply aren't stupid enough for adsense to work here.
    • groperdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Exactly right. I keep wondering about the buzz of this site and how this idea is not making any money. It's like Amazon.com for the first 5 years was the big deal but lost money. At least google makes a ton of money. So yeah, digg.com can be cool and everything, but how long will this last if money does not start to flow in big time? And if digg is sold to another bigger company, will it have the same edge?
    • HeavyDose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very true... I'm sure they have a different advertising strategy in development.
    • succubuskiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Relying only on AdSense to make money/profit is suicide. People assume that Google will always be the top king and everything will be great. But what goes up must come down. There are so many companies nipping at Google's feet and the cost of switching from Google for search is approximately 5 secs and 0$. Why, since I can type in ask.com, yahoo.com and do pretty much the same thing Google.com does.

      Right now the others do not do such a great job so people stick with Google. But if it were the case new ones slowly start taking bigger bites from their market share what really sustainable alternative income does Google have? When their income goes, where does yours?

    • 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2last time I checked the TV industry did ok on Ad money

      but I skip the commercials, just like everyone else
    • laughable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'll never understand all the success of Google. Yeah, I love google maps and google earth. But, I've had Yahoo set as my home page since 1997. I've never tried doing a search from yahoo, and NOT found good results. People always say google is better and I just don't get it. using yahoo has zero cool factor, but it has done the job for me quite well for 9 years and counting...
  • deltahat02, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I'm glad to see the programmer got to come on board full time. It would truly blow to build digg for $200 and watch someone else run away with the fat stacks of cash.
    • solarpowered, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's why ya makes a DEAL first.
  • Ludm11, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Good idea.
  • pcgaminguide, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It's amazing how all you need is creativity to succeed in life.
    He had an idea, and now he's got one of the most popular sites around
  • jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4has anyone mentioned recently how the quality of digg has declined significantly? im starting to go back more and more to slashdot
    • graemee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Actually I find the slashdot has benefited from digg as a filter for good stories.
    • noddyxoi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3In digg other people will read your comments, in slashdot they are buried the moment they are posted.
      I hate slashdot for that.
      Digg is democratic, slash is republican.
    • stelriah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2republican is not an adjective. i think you're thinking of republic.
    • ZachPruckowski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've found the reverse. My digg comments, when rational, well-thought-out and unpopular, get buried, while my slashdot comments tend to get modded up.
    • laughable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Seriously.....it's only a matter of time before sites like digg and slashdot divide up the user poulation amongst realm servers similar to how World of Warcraft does it! All people really want is to be able to post their opinions, and have them be read by at least a few people (as opposed to getting buried). Or, become a respected contributor a la wikipedia.

      When it happens, I want to be placed in a PvP realm!
  • andrewry, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm pretty sure that it cost more than $200 for him to start up digg. Factor in the price of the domain, hosting (probably started off cheap), and all of the other overhead costs.
  • digitalArtform, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Digg is neat and all, but isn't it just a somewhat tweaked Fark for News?
  • Daisama, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I guess you could say its a good investment.
  • jackwills, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Any details on the domain name? Was he the first to register or did he buy it?
    • andrewry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3He bought it, and if my memory is correct, for $1,000+.
    • LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It was originally owned by Digg Records... Check the way back machine.
  • lorenhatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I thought i read somewhere that digg cost way more than $200, that Rose and Sarah Lane wanted to buy a house together, yet Kevin wanted to make digg. So Kevin used his part of the money to make digg instead of buying a house with Sarah.
    • tribality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is tough to image that they broke up over $200 or even $700 (http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=191). Maybe it was was the next round of cash that was the end of things... and we should all get a life and not worry about this :)
    • laughable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that's a good question.....weren't all 4-letter domain names that remotely resembled an english word (aka digg), like, crazy expensive? even several years ago?
  • nobogeys217, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was looking at the Alexa.com rankings yesterday and it shows digg.com was launched in 2000. Did he purchase the domain from somebody that already was using it or is Alexa just wrong?

    http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?q=digg.com&url=digg.com
    • celeb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Go to the internet archive, Digg.com used to be a bands site.
  • flarn2006, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"Only $200"? Since when is $200 a small amount of money?
    • covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Er, since about 20 years ago when it became less than a day's wages for most professional workers.
  • celeb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Pretty damn good ROI if you ask me.
  • momegao, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0http://www.agloco.com/r/BBBP4748
  • Soldan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3and then Digg expanded beyond tech and the royal tard fest ensued

    you sheep will digg anything..

  • halbe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Anyone notice he says... "It's one of those things when..." in the mp3 on that page?
  • NorthStateGonzo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Anyone have a working backhoe they want to sell for about $200.00 ?
    Baaaaa Baaaaa
  • OmazingOrange, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1he said it cost $1200 for the domain in one interview ... and that one of his friends bought it so that the website would be independent of his work on techtv at the time.

    I don't think Kevin Rose has $60 million dollars in the bank, I'm really confident that he doesn't. Business Week was speculating that if he sold Digg, the company would be worth at least $200 million, and he would get about 40% of that. The $200 million valuation is probably generous considering that business week also said that Digg makes about $3 million per year. The valuation was before the YouTube deal as well.

    Still the company does not really have a value unless its public, or its for sale. Digg is neither, so right now all its worth is its earnings in advertising revenue, or around $3 million per year, if Kevin Rose gets about 40% of that he's still doing really good and thats still a damn fine return on the initial investment of a developer and a domain. But at the same time, 3 million less costs, probably isn't that much money.
  • doushanes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4his full presentation

    http://img669.libsyn.com/img669/1aba4b31654896ab62b6c07546622fa7/45b27180/7751/5032/Kevin_Rose.mp3
  • TheLinux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I wish he would have explained why he chose php over Java. Maybe that's why digg is unbearably slow sometimes.

    /edit Like right now, or on any page with over 10 comments.
    • zephc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Or maybe its your connection, because I've never had speed problems with digg except when getting in the 400+ comments on a page, and part of that is browser speed limitations.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The page loading isn't nearly as slow as Digg itself is slow. Sometimes it takes 20 seconds for Digg to respond, let alone load a page. I start browsing other pages waiting for it to update.
  • kdehead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it doesnt really matter what the language is - the devil is in the code design and hardware configuration (identifying where the bottlenecks are and dealing with them in the most efficient manner)
  • SpongeBrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12000th digg! Wooh!
  • InfamousX241, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Man, I was kind of hoping Kevin would at least know PHP... meh.
  • jayadelson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Kevin did use eLance to find Owen Byrne...confirmed. What we spent on him, however, has far exceeded $200 over the years, as Owen will tell his grandchildren and heirs to the Owen Byrne Foundation. ;)
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Please ask Mr. Byrne if he can add more requested Digg features in between his foundation activities.

      1. Quotes in bold or italic. [quote]This should be bold or italics, Mr. Byrne.[/quote]
      2. A delete button for comments. Timed like the edit button so there is no abuse.
      3. Expanded profiles so we can list our interests and maybe even other info.
      4. More user ratings and more stats! At least the users' comment ratings, not just how many comments.
      5. Some sort of comment rating besides just thumbs up/down. Or something to minimize fanboyishness.
      6. A Report Spam button.
      7. Optionally, pic attachment features, so we can permanently attach pics to stories and comments instead of using hyperlinks that might die.
    • skell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2OBKenob:

      Why not ask yourself? feedback@digg.com

      Kind of ironic that you talk about comment abuse, when you *should* know that requesting features in the comments isn't the right way to go about it. ;]
  • djphatjive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Kevin Rose = Next Steve Jobs?
    • malavalla, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4don't insult him like that
    • Beelzebub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4who?
    • treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Kevin definitely looked like a young Jobs in the MacWorld Diggnation... scarily similar with the hair.
  • vfault, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Wow, what a turnover - $200 to $60,000,000 - Can I have some?
  • scattass, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't even read cause I know I will be jealous. Smart (wo)men deserve the rewards for what they built.
  • jakster4u, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I always wondered how does digg.com make money?
    • mmkassem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Do not you see the Google ADs ?
    • LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Adblock Plus + Filterset G = Clean, Ad-Free Digg.
  • sirjimbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0DiggSpace doesn't have a hope of competing with Myspace if it is selective of who it lets in. This is why Facebook opened the flood gates to everyone.
  • sark666, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Kicking myself in the head.

    I don't want to sound like someone going "I thought of this!'

    But...

    Way back when, when I first started going to /. I submitted a story and it got rejected. It somewhat frustrated me that one user decided if my story was good enough or not. I pondered a moment and thought, 'hmm... there should be a way to let the users decide whats news worthy or not'. Which is basically digg. I thought about it a moment, and I thought neat idea but just let it go and never thought of it again, that is until I saw digg.

    Oh well live and regret. :)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.