The cynic in me sees an attempt to crowd source a knowledge base for a IMDB style business model...
What is IMDB business model?
Golden: Mapping human knowledge
141–150 of 176 posts
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#142Is it Wikipedia - but with a modern editor?
And "socialized" like Github with followers & favs, but without the forks or personalized pages.
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#143Jude 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…
The missing pages you speak of are mostly VC/company names, and you just gloss over useful knowledge as "others." As I look into DNA sequencing[0] for example, there is little information while the bulk of it seems to be about companies. Care to explain if this is the direction Golden is taking?
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#144"navigating the cacophony of formats, designs, sources and standards is challenging. Google, Wikipedia, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Quora, StackExchange, Github, etc" Makes me think of standards, all we need is one universal one. https://xkcd.com/927/
Thought the same! Haha
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#145In my opinion, you should include "POWERFUL QUERY TOOL" into the community edition, and then sell the ability to have private spaces including support in the priced plan.
Right now, it doesn't seem very fair or legit given the headline "The intelligent, open knowledge base". If the raw data is accessible but the tool to query it is not accessible to most web users, it doesn't make it "open".
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#146Jude 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…
Is there a tension in designing a knowledge database for amateurs vs experts, and how do you mitigate or address it? Wikipedia has such a tension for a lot of topics.
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#147So Wikipedia with better UI and a sprinkle of AI "magic"?
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#148I don't get it, in what scenario would someone pay $99 per user per month?
Could someone please give an example where this makes sense?
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#149Cynical self: They raised a $5mil round just to re-do wikipedia with more self-referential VC pats on the back. Intrigued self: If there is anything worth raising money for, it is building out a collective knowledge base for all of humanity. Angry self: Wikipedia is quite literally one of the most amazing things that the internet and millions of strangers have ever produced together, and lives as a vital proof of con…
To angry self: I dont entirely trust Wikipedia to give an objective/apolitical view of things all the time: there've been times where articles have been noticably influenced by a defacto, anachronistic political (progressive) position. I wouldnt mind having a redundant source of information where the possibility exists of current politics corrupting its articles' integrity
> articles have been noticably influenced by a defacto, anachronistic political (progressive) position
I hate it when the right pretends that everyone is biasing everything in terms of a progressive agenda, when that's just not the case, even in Wikipedia's case.
There was the case of Cross doing absolutely right-wing, biased, pro right-wing Israeli governments entries and edits and being protected by Wikipedia editors to do so.
I think what's often gets conflated is that munch of Western society and organizations are socially progressive, sure, but they're very much economically right-leaning, something that rarely gets acknowledged and which makes it difficult for me to have a honest conversation with the other side.
I'd also note that Wikipedia's founder is very much right-leaning, regularly attacking the likes of Corbyn and certainly not holding progressive economics dear.
Re: Golden: Mapping human knowledge
#150Cynical self: They raised a $5mil round just to re-do wikipedia with more self-referential VC pats on the back. Intrigued self: If there is anything worth raising money for, it is building out a collective knowledge base for all of humanity. Angry self: Wikipedia is quite literally one of the most amazing things that the internet and millions of strangers have ever produced together, and lives as a vital proof of con…
To angry self: I dont entirely trust Wikipedia to give an objective/apolitical view of things all the time: there've been times where articles have been noticably influenced by a defacto, anachronistic political (progressive) position. I wouldnt mind having a redundant source of information where the possibility exists of current politics corrupting its articles' integrity
Examples?