Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Golden: Mapping human knowledge

golden.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 176 posts

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#21

Post by all2 »

judegomila wrote: post #4

Jude CEO and Founder of Golden here. Super excited to take this live. We are out to build the next place for canonical knowledge on the Internet. It has been a long-term mission for me to open up the knowledge coverage of billions of niche topics, companies, technologies and new concepts. Our aim is to cover in excess of 10bn topics in high detail over time. Although we all love Wikipedia, there have been various iss…

How will you be handling "soft" topics like history?

What about the handling/records of/provenance of artifacts?

Who is the arbiter of Truth? Will this wind up like Snopes or Wikipedia with an entrenched viewpoint that is dogma and defended at all costs? How will you avoid this?

Will alternative views/paths of inquiry be considered seriously? For example; vaccination efficacy research? I understand this is a hot-button issue, but that's exactly why I picked it. How you handle it will be a litmus test of how other issues will be handled.

How will you avoid the apathy and dogmatic approaches of many scientific journals?

What about scientific verification (or lack-there-of)?

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#22

Post by Cynddl »

> The arbitrary threshold of what is notable and what is not doesn't cut it in the Knowledge Age. There are currently 5.8 million English language articles in Wikipedia, and Google had 1 billion objects (200x Wikipedia's size) in its Knowledge Graph when it launched in 2015. We estimate internally that there are 1000x the entities to cover than what Wikipedia has today. It’s an exciting challenge!

This is a very weird comparison. Why not helping Wikipedia and contributing to this huge open knowledge base? The rules set by the WP community for acceptability clearly do not imply that “actual technologies, projects, products, theoretical electrical components and academic ideas” might be removed if written there, as the author suggests.

That articles, or even drafts, for specific American VC-funded projects did not reach WP's acceptability threshold does not mean that there is something fundamentally wrong in Wikimedia's approach. I'd love to see a better comparison.

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#23

Post by riordan »

judegomila wrote: post #5
qnsi wrote: post #3

[deleted]

The content is on CC4.0 and not going to be paywalled.

It seems like you're putting the text out under CC-4.0-BY-SA [1] (Attribution, Share-Alike), which is great (the updated version of the same copyright for Wikipedia content). However, you're also collecting a TON of structured and relational data, which seems to be the value generated by your editor. Are you planning on keeping that locked up?

[1]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#24

Post by sgrove »

judegomila wrote: post #16
herogreen wrote: post #10

I hope it will not be registration walled like Quora but more open like stackexchange websites or hn. I refuse to participate to registration-ponzi-scheme. What will the content licence be ?

Jude from Golden here. We won't do the reg wall - hold me to it :>. We want the information to be open and EASY to access, thus no reg screen. CC4.0

How about API access and textual dumps for the other kinds of analysis?

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#25

Post by judegomila »

aznpwnzor wrote: post #15

Love the modern take and long tail focus! Do you think the paid features for enterprise use is enough to support a VC model? (How do you avoid this becoming Quora (which also had an enterprise proposed use case)?) What was the decision process around taking this a VC route vs not?

Jude from Golden here. Yes, I believe we can have the top 50k companies of the world as paying clients and help power open knowledge for the world. We have paying customers today on that front.

The decision for VC includes the following reasons:

1. Making this happen at scale / quicker.

2. Having people like Marc from a16z, FF and Gigafund adding valuable insight in order to pull this off.

3. Derisking the mission with $$$

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#26

Post by msla »

Will you have an API, or will the information only be available through the heavy Web interface?

How will you handle inherently contentious topics, like vaccine safety, the existence of Morgellons as a disease distinct from delusional parasitosis, and the existence and current territorial extent of Israel and Palestine?

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#27

Post by teddyh »

> Today, we have a great opportunity to use new technologies to solve the problems: […] real identity […]

> Join Golden

> First Name Last Name

Yeah, no. A “real names” policy is a really terrible idea, for reasons outlined here:

https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Re...

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#28

Post by mrdoops »

judegomila wrote: post #4

Jude CEO and Founder of Golden here. Super excited to take this live. We are out to build the next place for canonical knowledge on the Internet. It has been a long-term mission for me to open up the knowledge coverage of billions of niche topics, companies, technologies and new concepts. Our aim is to cover in excess of 10bn topics in high detail over time. Although we all love Wikipedia, there have been various iss…

How to you intend to account for merit and credibility across data sources?

The way I see it we've scaled our communication of information far beyond are ability to scale our assessment of credibility and merit of said information. This problem of merit is where I see the big gap in our tools. Are you planning on doing some kind of credibility assessments per-user based on content written/consumed?

Golden's feature-set is similar in many ways to app's I've prototyped towards this problem; I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject.

Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge

#30

Post by troymc »

The blog post says, "Public topic pages will be free to access and the text available on CC 4.0."

What does "CC 4.0" mean? There are many version 4 Creative Commons licenses. I looked at an actual Golden article and the bottom of the page says, "Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0; additional terms apply. By using this site, you agree to our Terms & Conditions."

Okay, so CC-BY-SA-4.0... similar to Wikipedia.

Post reply on HN