judegomila

We built it from scratch.

JG: I hope not :>

JG here. Will look into this.

JG here. No, just a damn good website for you all.

True, very hard problem. But combinatorial opinion free form comments phase space >> than phase space of canonical knowledge thus number of patterns of things that can go wrong for them much larger. Still keeping our shields up and not discounting this issue.

Thanks so much, in terms of the hard questions after todays madness of launch comes down a little I'll tackle the hardest comments/questions here. In the coming months we will do some technical blog posts to explain how we will tackle the problem space. Many of the problems we have not figured out yet and welcome the community to contact us with new ideas. I 100% agree some of the problems are very hard. In terms of giving a glimpse into some problems we have solved so far, please test out the AI assisted editor, the magic table cells in the editor for auto filling tables, the citation tool by pasting a academic paper in the citation UI, the event detection on the timeline UI and the AI suggestions as well to get to some of the early results we have on automating the problem. Topic prediction, taxonomic detection, claim validation, structured data extraction, auto field detection/suggestions, crosslinking, spelling/grammar checking, sentiment checking, event detection, tense detection, quality on human edit feedbacks and ultimately prose writing (see recent open AI auto writing research) [non exhaustive list] - some we have solved and some not yet, but we will keep working on it. Generally speaking, keen to work on something difficult for the next 10 years...

Thanks, glad you like it.

Jude from Golden here. Yes we will work very hard to keep to scientific consensus and reach that level of quality or higher. Please bear in mind this is not only crowdsourcing but there is automation in the collection of the information, that too will have its fair share of issues as well no doubt :> There is likely opportunity to auto detect cranky/racist/gaming behavior and we have some plans in that area. Feel free to shoot over ideas as well if you have further thoughts.

Jude from Golden here.

We attribute to wikipedia in general which is inline with their TOS. Did we miss a place? We say when needed "Text adapted from the Wikipedia page "Product Hunt": https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Produc...

FYI as well the copyright doesn't apply to the actual fact only the text and we give attribution as per their TOS in those cases.

Jude from Golden here. Agreed that WP is one of the most amazing things ever built and interesting to see your various lenses on our mission.

To the cynical self: see dropbox launch on HN back in the day. PS I’m no way claiming we are dropbox :>

To the angry self: There are various constraints that we want to release ourselves from in working on this problem by starting fresh. We believe the constraint space is too high to not build something new here. There are things that can be reused to build on what has been done already (linking out to WP, WP linking back to us when appropriate, the name space being similar/forked, various policies being built on/forked or rewritten, lessons learnt, content summarization with AI, fact cross checking etc).

To the academic self: we want to cover 10bn+ topics, google knowledge graph is around 3bn+ entities. We are not attempting to map all lamp posts in san francisco which would make a useful data set for a self driving car company but we do want to map all businesses, concepts, science topics, people of interest, species, products, services, etc etc. Instead of notability, we are aiming more at a validation model ie ‘does this entity exist’. There is also a difference between ‘article’ of WP and ‘entity’ of Golden for our model. So I believe there is space for positive coexistence between Golden and WP. We will still want discussion around the validation and ‘what next after 10bn entities are done’ debate.

In terms of the morality part, we wish to be at a more open standard than WP. The trade being for the common user: we open up all the pages on CC-4.0-BY-SA, go hopefully 1000x more entity cardinality, open source useful queries in exchange for less work per topic than alternatives (due to the leverage of the automation on alternatives). So I think we are on strong moral ground here, otherwise I would not work on it. We also have paid helpers as well to fill in gaps on our side to increase content and using part of our revenue to increase content at an ever faster speed. We reviewed the micropayments model and we don’t think it will work (see lunyr failure and others on that front).

Jude from Golden. Beyond the blog post in terms of more learning content - video and extensive further reading links can help in this area but at the core much deeper pages eg https://golden.com/wiki/Cryobacterium vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryobacterium

In terms of numbers of contributors we believe Golden is at the stage where 1 hour editing on Golden produces more content/data than alternatives and the friction to edit is much lower. Are you looking for more depth on comparisons beyond the blog post?

Jude from Golden here. I'd love to get your feedback on the editor and fix any bugs you come across / comparisons of previous experiences and why you gave up. You can email me at jude [at] golden [dot] com or post it here...

Jude from Golden here. Good question. We are opening up useful queries over time for users eg https://golden.com/y-combinator-w19-companies/ Future paid/business tools will include using our AI assisted editor for private companies, private storage of their knowledge so we can continue to open up more queries to the public. Our north star is to get to a more open knowledge base than what is currently available. Also here are all the cryptocurrency projects that have whitepapers https://golden.com/cryptocurrency-whitepapers/

Jude from Golden here. This knowledge base is for all of humanity as well. I think the important part here is that we are putting out the content on CC-BY-SA-4.0.

There is also risk factor to a donations model for WP and to not having enough revenue to invest in the tools needed to go 1000x on the topics + other features that are important to build. If it means anything, I worked on my last co (Heyzap) for 9 years and its still running today. I can see the worry but there are many options on creating backups and dumps to the text, so we are agreement that more knowledge is better and thanks for the support.

Jude from Golden here. Great question. We are actively monitoring all the changes right now, building up the community with a scientific/industrial focused seed and building out UI and AI to track the flat earth type changes that might come up in future. I think if we can get transparency on their best arguments/evidence and see the best counters it is going to become clear that the earth is round in that example. Let us get overun with people that want the best known information on the topics.

CC-BY-SA-4.0 correct, we are correcting the blog post.

Jude from Golden here. Unfortunately, there are many more topics other than US companies being removed eg right now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soda_Popinski is up for removal. This notability issue spans almost all entity types. Additionally, many topics just simply don't make it onto there soon enough https://golden.com/wiki/Morphogenetic_Engineering Another example, Lisk was removed https://golden.com/wiki/Lisk SV Angel https://golden.com/wiki/SV_Angel

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 $$$

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

Jude from Golden here. TLDR answer on this important question and I’m interested in the community ideas on this problem set:

1. High visual transparency and open edit logs eg golden.com/wiki/Morphogenetic_Engineering/activity

2. Using real profiles so we can prevent bots / multi accounts etc.

3. Cross checking SPO/fact triples in the prose against our structured data to validate information.

4. Cross checking against multiple sources

5. Using high resolution citations where we actually highlight the claim (please test our highlighting of a claim and citation tool to see this in action).

6. Having source trust ranked citation URLs.

7. Opening up primary sources eg articles of incorporation as evidence for claims.

8. Having a strong audit log of where information comes from.

9. Using a github style ‘issues’ rather than wiki talk in order to discuss content issues.

10. Giving UI affordances to argue out points and give evidence to claims made in these arguments.

We are still working on this UI / AI and general community to really dig into this core challenge.

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

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 issues in the last 18 years, from constant deletion of data (product hunt was almost removed a few months back) to fact validation and automation of processes/work and UI/ease of user. We also believe there are many more features that users want, like a knowledge feed, keyboard commands, AI assisted feedback on editor contributions and tables that can automatically update.

We have set out to:

1. Cover all topics that exist over time rather than just notable topics.

2. Go into greater depth around a topic, from its timeline to videos and other useful resources surrounding the topic (eg learning videos, further reading, blog posts, Q&A, podcasts etc).

3. Support a larger population of people trying to learn about topics.

4. Make knowledge more accessible, richer and fun to read about.

5. Allow you to track topics of interest and be updated when new information is available on the subject.

6. Save time making the knowledge in the first place by using design, UI and AI to aid construction of the information. Especially by automating repetitive tasks and bring smart editor features.

Initially we have kicked off with various areas from cell and plant based meat to synthetic biology to cryptocurrency consensus mechanisms to artificial intelligence, microbiome, stem cell technology and startup topics. We expect these areas to increase in scope over time covering space, medical food, clean technology, robotics and many more exciting fields.

We are still early on our journey to delivering our vision and very much looking forward to product feedback and help with building up the content. Our team is hard at work making the product easier to use, we are up for taking every flow to its simplest form and removing every bug. If there is a feature you have been dying for on Wikipedia but could not get it, please also let us know. We look forward to seeing you in our community and covering topics especially under represented elsewhere.

Based on Penrose's work there may be non randomness in the CMB, with better imaging tech we may find that this is not a good source of randomness: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.5162v1.pdf

Great news!

So I tested the board without me standing on it uphill and it goes up. I estimate around 35lbs+ for my configuration for a slight incline.

Using Zesty at Heyzap and loving it. They seemed to have solved some of the key problems with corporate lunch delivery. 1. Getting the food in hot. 2. Reliable delivery. 3. Fair sized portions. 4. Healthy options. 5. Employee customization / feedback.

So this is the ornithological version of Gravity

Oh, seems more fun if it would not possible to goto continuous orbit and just count the complete loops you can make.

Luckily the grid tends to infinite resistance in the limit.

Also interesting ->

Infinite grid of capacitors (tends to 0 at infinity):

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0054.pdf

Infinite sphere resistance (tends to infinity):

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/48439/resistance-...

A few years ago, a US border official didn't even know about my visa type (O1) and put me through secondary because he didn't know that the visa existed.

This also happened on the US/CA border to me - the official told me I had the wrong visa to which I responded I had the correct visa. We went round 15 times in a row back and forth, with me stating it was the correct visa until he gave up and let me go.

A close friend of mine also had a gun put on the table to intimidate him in a secondary screening when coming from the UK to the US.

So much for wanting to be an "immigration magnet" like the Google hangout tomorrow with the CTO of the US.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/08/21/we-immigrant-geeks...