Google Answers
from the interesting dept
For many years I've been a big fan of business ideas that involve the human brain as part of the competitive advantage. Admittedly, it might not be as scalable as some automated web-based widget, but it certainly adds some real value... if done correctly. That's the basis behind Techdirt Corporate Intelligence - it's the human intelligence on top of the technology that makes it valuable over whatever automated solution. So, I remember around 1997 or so being really impressed with the idea behind HumanSearch.com (out of business for quite a while) which had real people who would try to answer questions you sent them by searching the web for you. Basically, web-based reference librarians. HumanSearch had a business model problem (they didn't charge). Now, Google is trying to revive the same idea with Google Answers. It's apparently still in beta, but people can submit questions, including how much they're willing to pay for the answer. Google is looking for "researchers" who answer the questions. There's an application process and the researcher gets 75% of the fee. It doesn't cost Google very much since they only pay researchers based on questions answered. The big question is how Google will do quality control. That's the one big downside to human-based businesses. Quality is everything, and if you can't control it, the business will suffer. The other question, of course, is whether or not enough people have questions that they're willing to pay others to answer on such a random basis. Update: News.com has more details about the program, which they compare with the various "expert" sites that were popular a few years ago.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
The cost structure appears to be questionable. The user with plenty of time on his hands can just use Google himself. Someone who really needs a quality answer should be willing and able to pay a bit more than the $4 - $50 that was suggested.
On the same note, a professional researcher knows the value of his or her time, and at those prices, there would have to be some really high volume to keep a researcher engaged.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
Sure they did. It was go IPO (or get bought out by an IPO flush firm) and retire. Never was meant to make money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]