<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Interestingness Applied to Blog Posts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/</link>
	<description>Tech, Entrepreneurship, and Venture Capital in New York City</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 02:40:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: me</title>
		<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:37:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Techmeme would be a great start I agree.  I certainly don&#039;t think techmeme captures interestingness right now; I think they capture a combination of activity and chronological ordering, and that would be one component of interestingness.  I hope interestingness is more than that, and I think it is.  If Flickr&#039;s interestingness algorithm were just activity and chronological ordering, then we&#039;d probably see more photos from the latest celebrity bash; but instead we see genuinely eye-popping, interesting photos.  There&#039;s gotta be a way to translate this to blog posts when the inputs into the algorithm are the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Techmeme would be a great start I agree.  I certainly don&#8217;t think techmeme captures interestingness right now; I think they capture a combination of activity and chronological ordering, and that would be one component of interestingness.  I hope interestingness is more than that, and I think it is.  If Flickr&#8217;s interestingness algorithm were just activity and chronological ordering, then we&#8217;d probably see more photos from the latest celebrity bash; but instead we see genuinely eye-popping, interesting photos.  There&#8217;s gotta be a way to translate this to blog posts when the inputs into the algorithm are the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Barchak</title>
		<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Barchak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:04:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.andrewparker.net/2006/08/17/interestingness-applied-to-blog-posts/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Memeorandum seems to use &quot;interestingness&quot; to determine what they post and how they structure the posts. You could cache what Memeorandum (plus techmeme and the rest) thinks to start and search that to start?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Memeorandum seems to use &#8220;interestingness&#8221; to determine what they post and how they structure the posts. You could cache what Memeorandum (plus techmeme and the rest) thinks to start and search that to start?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
