Comments on: Youtube Stock Market

By: Twitter Bot

Twitter Bot — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:20:10 +0000

Twitter is 100% the way to go for advertising

By: Jesus Scafuri

Jesus Scafuri — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:36:18 +0000

it should be an actor.

By: hot latinas video amor

hot latinas video amor — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:04:58 +0000

Please tell me it worked right? I dont want to sumit it again if i do not have to! Either the blog glitced out or i am an idiot, the second option doesnt surprise me lol. thanks for a great blog!

By: cake decorating ideas pictures

cake decorating ideas pictures — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:02:56 +0000

Dear admin, thnx for sharing this blog post. I found it wonderful. Best regards, Victoria…

By: bennett

bennett — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:38:06 +0000

There is a difference between “digg” style voting and a stock market type game. In digg you are voting stories you like. With a market, things are completely different. You vote/pay for things that you perceive have value. You not only have incentive to pick whatever has the most value, you are also being punished if you don’t. They seem to measure two different things.

The point which I getting at was that the value for such a service like a youtube stock thing isn’t really in the product itself, but the data that it provides. Thats where you can make money, if that is your goal.

By: Logan

Logan — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 21:18:05 +0000

@Bennett
I’ve heard several times that the collective intelligence of a group of people is much, much greater than the intelligence of any single person, but then again – there will always be the role of how smart the group is and such. (As in a group of 5 year olds probably won’t out smart a Jeopardy contestant, but who knows?)

@Luke
It would really be a game they play, not just a rating. But then again, wouldn’t a high valued stock mean a good video?

I guess it would be similar to your digg reference, but not exactly (unless I misunderstood). They would have X digg points, and could “invest” them into digging an article. If the article got a lot of digg’s, then they get more digg points. If the article flopped, then they would lose their digg points that they invested.

It would be a very fun game… the “Digg Market”! (Man I wish I had time to work on something like that!)

By: Luke Hoersten

Luke Hoersten — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 21:54:39 +0000

I guess I’m missing the point. Are you suggesting this is a game which people play or a way of actually “rating” online media? If it is for rating, it reminds me of two ways of weighting a graph. One way to represent the cost of an edge is to just have a “cost” value for each edge (say 5). The other way is to allow each edge count only as cost 1, and then 5 edges would be used to represent a cost of 5 between two nodes.

So, most voting systems (like Digg) allow each person to have a vote of cost one. But if people were allowed to raise the value of their diggs and buries at some cost to the user, it’s really the same thing as a stock market.

By: Bennett Andrews

Bennett Andrews — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 21:39:34 +0000

Interesting that you happen to post this now. Over break I have been reading “The Wisdom of Crowds” (which I would totally suggest reading sometime). If you haven’t seen it, it is basically about the power of collective intelligence when harnessed properly.

I bring this up because in the book, Surowiecki talks about the power of virtual prediction markets like the idea you are talking about. It turns out that these markets are often extremely successful at predicting things, more so than any one person. The one I am most familiar with is the hollywood stock exchange . I know it has been around for a bit and is pretty popular. Surowiecki thesis also points out some specific characteristics, such as diversity, independence, decentralization, and aggregation in order to make the most successful use of prediction markets, which is definitly worth a look if you are thinking about something like a Youtube stock market.

I think this idea of collective intelligence is becoming more and more popular. There is still plenty of room for innovation both in terms of products and in money making.