Today, Flickr has interestingness, which is a measure of some combination of how many times a picture has been viewed, how many comments it has, how many times it's been tagged or marked as a favorite, and some other special sauce. I suppose revealing the exact mix would encourage even more people to game the system, but the fact that it's not disclosed has led to a number of attempts to reverse-engineer the system. I doubt any of them are/will be successful (Flickr can update/evolve fast enough to change the algorithm if they figure it out) but that's probably going to be an ongoing dialogue.
When I think of things getting gamed, I think of Clay Shirky saying "social software is stuff that gets spammed". So maybe economies are things that get gamed.
What I'm wondering is, how is Flickr's interestingness different than the economy in Game Neverending? Than Second Life? (Or in Evercrack or Neverwinter or any of the other gaming platforms.) Is interestingness its own reward? Why don't I get to level up or power up when I create something interesting?
More to the point, the in-game economies of these games translate pretty cleanly into real-world cash, with eBay amplifying the efficiency of the currency conversion. And interestingness in other online media (like blogs) is rewarded by cash in a pretty straightforward way; I can sign up for TypePad, check a box to enable text ads, and pay for my account or point the proceeds to my PayPal account when I start getting lots of visitors.
But interestingness in Flickr doesn't pay. At least not yet. Non-pro users are seeing ads around my photos, but Yahoo's not sharing the wealth with me, even though I've created a draw. Flickr's plenty open, they're doing the right thing by any measure of the web as we saw it a year ago, or two years ago. Today, though, openness around value exchange is as important as openness around data exchange.
So does that mean the right answer for cashing in on my interesting work is to ask for a penny from Yahoo? Or does it mean I should just make an automated script that grabs my interesting photos and posts them to my TypePad blog so that I can put ads on them?
]]>You know, with attention being the new currency and all that.
]]>Interestingness is probably the least interesting feature of Flickr.
Oh, and of course, if you're just interested in making money from your photos, you won't have them on a public photo sharing site in the first place.
]]>It pays in "props" which sometimes is more powerful than a dollar.
Quote: A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon
]]>I actually wrote something about almost this exact thing just the other day:
http://weblog.scifihifi.com/2005/10/17/recombinant-podcasting/
]]>And to be clear, I think it's perfectly fine to put ads around there to support the service for non-paying users. I'm just trying to understand the balance of the economics.
]]>More on the point, doesn't having your blog linked from your profile help drive a little traffic your way? At least their scratching your back a little bit there.
]]>Thanks Stewart and Caterina and keep up the good work.
http://thomashawk.com/2005/10/flickr-caterina-fake-anil-dash-wealth.html
]]>e.g. http://www.myraklarman.com , murn's photo business.
]]>What I'm trying to say is that they DON'T see ads around your photos, so no more emphasis was required ;)
]]>What I'm trying to say is that they DON'T see ads around your photos, so no more emphasis was required ;)
]]>There is an overwhleming number of web-based technical solutions that small businesses can use to advertise/sell and provide customer service ... Blogs, IMs, web-based IVR, podcasts, autoresponders ... too much cool stuff ....
(I know Flickr aint it, but got me thinking)
I find it hard to keep track of and rank/trust these solutions, which can actually yield competitive advantage for a small business ...
(Currently, it is thrilling for me to be able to run a small business out of a garage with just a ThinkPad, broadband, and a cellphone. My suppliers ship directly to a 3PL provider in New York, from where merchandise is redirected to end-buyers. I just manage the online shopfront.)
I wish there were one site or blog that could track all these cool tools ... (how do i send multiple SMSs using a PC?) .. and suggest how small businesses can use them and what's the best software to use.
Someone? Anyone?
E.g. it would be cool if someone could actually endorse PayPal as the best, so tech newbies can trust and trudge on ....
(For now I am very grateful to Debbie Weil for the good work she is doing)
]]>Personally I look at the "interesting" photos on flickr everyday but if my favorite photographers said, "sorry, I'm moving to a pay-based site but it's really, really cheap so it's ok" I'd more than likely just say forget-about-it, regardless of how cheap the service was.
Professional photographers are paid for their work, but then again usually for something more than a 800x600 snap on a page. Either something you can mount on your wall or they are taking pictures for you, i.e. a wedding.
Flickr is fun because of it's community, open feeling. Anyone looking to make cash from their photos should setup shop somewhere else and actually present themselves as a pro photographer. I'd rather pay money to Flickr to *prevent them* from going into meglocorporate bottom-line hungery mode of setting up multiple pay-structures.
I browse Flickr to catch a personal glimpse into other people's lives and to view things through their perspecitive, not to buy something.
]]>"If you like this photo, I'm putting it on Cafepress posters here: http://blah."
Also, could a cross-site reputation system keep track of someone's interestingness and display it with other data like their ebay rating and number of technorati links?
]]>Guess this is one is meant to be read only in the RSS reader.
]]>I have been thrilled when my photos on Flickr have been admired and reposted around the web. The day I feel my photos have monetary value is when I’ll put them up on my own site along with that C with a circle around it, we all have that choice.
]]>My site is an extension of a Flickr API, and isn't web 2.0 (which includes Flickr and social networking) all about using the sites beyond what they were intentioned thru API's?
Flickr has yet to comment on the reason behind blocking my site.
http://www.nickstarr.com/2005/10/27/flickr-doesnt-believe-in-web-20/
]]>Simple. If Google's Blogger can survive as the most favorite free blogGER without ads, so should Flickr.
At the very least, there should be some kind of a Popularity Cloud where promising photographers get visitor counters, tag clouds based on visits, and maybe some incentive like free Pro accounts if a rookie gets nuff visitors...
My two layman cents.
]]>Typically, people get paid according to demand or difficulty of the work, etc. As you well understand: writing easy-to-use software is hard, and gathering an audience of readers is hard. Generating content you wish other people would look at is easy.
That's why you, and advertisers, pay Flickr rather than the other way 'round. (It's also why I'm commenting on your blog rather than the other way 'round.)
]]>This may be wrong (law class was a long time ago), but the professor said, yes, technically the law has been broken. He said it's because of the notion of utility. I have gained in status by rebroadcasting the football game. If I had watched it by myself, I haven't gained any status, so that's legal.
It seems the same concept applies here. No money exchanged, but a popular Flickr user gains status by using the Flickr service.
Utility doesn't always have to be about money.
]]>Personally I feel it's ridiculous to expect Flickr to pay you for giving you a service. To me it's like saying you should get paid to watch TV... you're viewing ads and making the station money, you might even recommend the show to your friends, yet you don't expect them to send you a check. The only difference is that instead of giving TV networks content, you're giving them market share--something that is equally valuable to them.
]]>http://singpolyma.blog.com/377345/
]]>It is nice to offer a way for poorer people to get pro benefits, and award people who try to make great pictures. But I had not thought about the bigger picture as you have pointed out...
]]>I never got around to reading this whole topic fully but you hit a point I have always believed.
I think this opens up a critical point - user’s content and his right to own it, and everything associated with it - its usage, display, and its application. Just because each of can’t sell ads for our content, it doesn’t mean that we allow anyone else (Google, Yahoo, Flickr, whoever) to take that content and generate recurring income from it. With the evolution of the Internet, I am sure a solution will come along that will return power to the user who generated the content to govern what happens to his content.
Your usage of the Flickr example may have led the discussions in different directions, but I hope people realize the value of content that they are generating and rally to gain control over its usage. I just posted a note on this subject on my blog here: http://www.webvapors.com/?p=19
Let me know what you think.
Best,
-Vaibhav