For you age you've made a nice project. Keep it up!
Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
141–150 of 163 posts
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#142Your first meta-problem to solve is to get people to care about the facts, and to accept them when they’re wrong. There is an astonishing gap between knowing the truth and acting accordingly.
People, who really care about facts would not trust AI as reliable source.
How AI can observe events in real life?
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you! We are working on our own LLM that is based of a multitude of data, we also will double check or even triple check all the information through our DB and the internet. We are working to make it as reliable as possible.
Your enthusiasm is great! People don't want to quash your enthusiasm, and I'm in the same boat. But while enthusiasm is great, delusion is not. Since you're striving to be a founder and not a hobbyist, you have to be realistic about what you're trying to build. What you're describing is fundamentally not possible to provide assurances on without some kind of legititmate AGI, which you lack the resources to build your…
This is the only wise response in the entire thread. OP please listen to this very valid criticism it is extremely valid. Misinformation just general is not a solvable problem, nor do I believe you could ever approach a good solution.
You are tackling an extremely broad, nuanced, unsolvable problem.
You and your friends are obviously incredibly bright, pivot to something more narrow focused. Maybe you can fact check for some sub genre of information that is solvable?
Think sports scores, building heights and structural engineering. Hard, concrete fact.
As soon as you get into anything with any degree of subjectivity misinformation is impossible to solve.
I honestly thought hackernews of all places would have given you better advice in-line with the above commenter, but what’s actually happening is people are filling you with false hope because you are young.
I was in a similar position as you when I was younger, and as I’ve gotten older and had some successes I’ve learnt to listen for valid criticisms.
Block out the noise, both positive and negative. Listen to the wise ones
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes I hear about nutrition/food studies done in academia which were funded by big food corporations. It's probably also common in the medical field to have big pharma doing the sponsoring. I don't disagree with you. Lack of trust is a problem in some ways. But I've also become used to the idea that determining truth includes scrutinizing the source. It really is a lot of work.
It absolutely can be a lot of work, but sometimes the statement or stance is self-disproving. I once worked with a conspiracy theory believer who thought that the Earth was simultaneously a flat disk and a hollow sphere. This person wasn't obviously a fool in normal conversation. They had no trouble writing C++, they had a master's degree in math, they recently purchased a second house and we're doing the repairs the…
Sounds like mental health issues tbh
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP's project aside, even a flawed solution is progress towards a good solution.
Yes, I could have been more positive. Though I worry about overpromising with technology, especially on this topic.
Your take is one of the only grounded takes I’ve seen. I’m sorry but are the majority of posters here delusional? I thought hacker news was meant to be intelligent people who would give good actual grounded advice to people, not just blindly tell people their very flawed ideas/goals are great
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#146Awesome work!
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#147A tiny feedback:
I tested it with 'The founder of factful.io is John F. Kennedy', but it responded with nothing.
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#148How do you evaluate “factuality” without knowing all the facts, though? That’s the downfall of all such services - eventually (or even immediately) they begin to just push their preferred agenda because it’s easier and more profitable. That said, at 16 you’re just learning, and literally whatever you accomplish will be a great achievement, so go down these paths and learn your lessons
Hi there, thank you for your feedback! I think we could potentially go down the route of a web3 approach where we get the public consensus on the facts.
Sadly consensus != fact
For example: "Which country contributed the most to the demise of Germany during ww2 ?"
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f7f98c319f4d9ace2079a...
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#149The "AI based startup" scene is flooded with many of these. What makes you different? I tried to gauge quality using chatgpt-3.5, 4.0, and your tool. chatgpt produced better results. Appreciate the hustle, but the hype around AI is fizzing out tbh.
It's not fizzing, you're going to be able to say: render 40 hours of Harry Potter film based on every detail of all books or: create a sequel to Titanic where Leo DiCap comes back from the dead and rezzes Godzilla and you'll be able to watch that. Imagine that in every content vertical, we haven't even scratched the surface.
I fail to see how that example is supposed to be a good thing for humanity. Everybody watching/listening to what _they_ want to watch/hear is already polarising the masses like never before
Re: Show HN: I'm 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends
#150You really have to believe in facts in total sensory isolation for a fact-checker service to be of use to you. Conveying messages has no scientific microscope or atom analogy.
Facts are sacks, it is what puffs them up and surrounds them that gives them their veracity which causes so much ire. You can't capture or deflate veracity so easily, but many think they can get around this by certifying lone facts to a minimum level of approved "veracity" thus amplifying the veracity of any claims made with them. Wink-wink. It's more crucial to be rid of centrally-informed favoritism than hot takes.