all 13 comments

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

I will try to write a complete response during shabbat when I have more time. Anyone interested in this topic should subscribe to this sub and come back to this thread over the next few days.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

You're not allowed to write during Shabbat.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I reject Judaism and the crazy rabbis. In fact I hate Judaism. I follow the Old Testament.

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Start with a " graph database".. you will be amazed what it can do.

This allows to build hierarchies based on all kinds of relationships. Normal databases just allow the predefined relationships (kind of).

With a graph you can add bridging very easily, metatags, categories, archiving, monetization/rewards, etc.

Strong search:
Strong search needs its own graph database, so you can have relationships between similar words.
One step further you need trained neural networks (AI). I think google uses a combination of both.

I think it would be good to start with monetization, but starting as a small donation. And this gives you tokens that you can spend to give support. should be different from votes so Bill Gates does not dominate the forum. A money barrier prevents most trolls and other attackers.

Some ideas about money:
And the tokens can be used to buy small stuff from other people, so it can become trading money. This small stuff can be: t-shirts, books, photographs/posters, CDs, seeds, vitamins, food, advice, training etc. (only legal stuff) Things can easily be traded with people like money. This money does not even need to leave the platform. If I got 400 tokens, I can buy a t-shirt from you or get advice from a lawyer student.
If the money leaves the platform, there can be a " fee" to support the site.

How to organize information:
1. Clear keywords (like subs?)
2. Categories organized like a tree (with some overlap)
3. People can vote for keywords and categories (where does the post fit the best?).
Only upvotes with funny/love/nice/insightful/ ... etc.
4. People (in librarian role) can organize related information, bring it together like a summary.
They create a channel of organized information, like a library.
5. Information is marked as short-time (news), medium-time (events), long-time (history, news,

You can subscribe to both the creators and the librarians.
And to keywords, and to categories.

People can manage a certain category, like a librarian.
And this is very similar to a moderator of a sub-saidit.

Admins can help to promote certain librarians so they can dominate the mood and information on the site.
They can also help to organize the categories and keywords better.
Information with the wrong categories or keywords can be moved / altered.

I also think that there can be "view-points" instead of " key-words"
If people come with very different/weird ideas (qanon?), they can join a certain "view-point" .
You can have more view-points, switch the view-point or ever create a new one.
This is to help people to filter if they want to. Or to see that discussions are not worth the time.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Never heard of a "graph database" before. This sounds like it may be perfect to drive my MetaVote™ concept that would replace/integrate votes, subs, metatags, emojis, status, ranking, etc etc etc.

Is "bridging" a real term? I just made it up for lack of a better term.

I don't know enough about databases or A.I. to know which should be employed for this, but I would expect that natural divisions and echo chambers would evolve, whether it's the left vs right, trolls or shills or bots vs others, or whatever - I would hope that if these relationships could be openly analyzed and the relationships exposed I might hope that developed tools and people might be able to sort it out, root out infiltrators, and have their preferences and statistics protect them. Especially with MetaVote™.

MetaVote™ could bring in VASTLY more qualitative information regarding users habits - information that's hidden from us all. I would LOVE to have all the statistics be completely open and transparent as a whole, yet have individuals stats be private except available only to them. We should have control of our own info and profiles - not the Technocracy.

With this open information and relationships we could see the swarms including the inevitable shills. Any shills that build up "authenticity" and trust will have to behave properly - thus doing no damage. When they activate they'll be sorted with among like minds and thus expose themselves through their patterns of behaviour. SaidIt may have pattern recognition that I'm unaware of, but it's certainly not open, nor can it be very complex with only 2 votes.

Because they're exposed their money and numbers can't save them.

Love the token ideas. One of my pitch proposals is for a community-based webstore. I don't even have a moderatly catchy working-title for it yet. Not just for SaidIt but it might include WikiSpooks, content creators, and users. I've already seen content creators team up with their stores and it might be wonderful to have a federation of cooperating stores that aren't just determined to only make a profit so much as bring awareness and options. In addition to your great ideas, I think 3D printing, CNC machining, DIY, etc. I hadn't thought of it as a classifieds/Craigslist/Kijiji thing but I suppose that might be good too.

IMO, just as the forum content would be separate from the MetaVote™ that would organize it, I would expect that the tokens would be in a separate module, and further removed the store would be on a different website with bridging to it like WikiSpooks and PeerTube sites - separate but bridged.

For my MetaVote™ concept, regarding each post and comment, I would have 2 categories. On the left would be a content qualitative assessment with dozens (or hundreds) of options rather that just 2 vote options - but you only get a single click. On the right would be a content topical assessment with the same special GUI offering dozens (or hundreds) of options, like metatags and/or subs - with numerous clicks to better categorize the content. There's MUCH more to this categorizing side and GUI too, including another concept already in wide use, yet not on forums.

Importantly the MetaVote™ concept and GUI could be applied to MANY other aspects of this forum (including your preferences, "tribes"/viewpoints, subs, friends, sets, faves, authors/creators/sources, dates, etc) and applications beyond.

I would LOVE for people to be rewarded for curating content and organizing everything. Pattern recognition would be critical here to separate the shills from others, and just as people could choose what topics (like subs) they wish to view, they could also choose to turn on/off certain topics and patterns. Imagine a toggle switch to see what everyone thought to seeing what people "like me" thought - and then comparing. You could then see the divisions, comparable to Amazon ratings with extreme love/hate sometimes or other "normal" spreads or clear opinions on the qualities and topics.

Yes, "library" is a great term and analogy. I should employ it. IMO librarians would not be necessary as the pattern divisions should distinguish the "good" from others (a simplistic description of complexity) and with decentralized sites and owners' trusted teams (as I've outlined elsewhere) the unwanted could be marginalized (or even ejected) to promote quality content. "Librarian category organizers" or GUI template makers could also present their best efforts to be used by the many.

I also have a specific simple GUI idea about how to "correct" topic labels which ties into the pattern divisions.

Viewpoints is part of the "topics" side if you mean labeling the type of political content or whatever. I'll have to show you for it to make sense. Plus there are many variations and combinations on my ideas to be narrowed down - or maybe include them all and let the users set their own GUI preferences.

I need sleep so consider this rambling potential for a rough draft of something. I know I was often vague and kept many things mysterious. The simplicity is in the GUI.

[–]zyxzevn 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Librarians are analysts or information collectors

Everyone can be a librarians. The idea is that they keep track of information and order it.
I realize that the concept of a librarian is much more complex.

Almost all people are shifting information around, and not really adding new information.
How many people are really witnesses themselves?
And how many are changing/selecting the information to push their own opinion/agenda.

A lot of people are analyzing the information (like James Corbett). Most people are not so good at it. I think I should look better at the different roles.

What about crazy people?

I have now a FlatEarther posting nonsense to me.
Out of context.(It is called forum sliding).
Where do I place him?
Personally I think that he is a troll/agent, but you never know.

In similar sense we have: Qanon sheep, Antifa-fascists,
NeoNazi-Trolls, Men pretending to be female, activists, etc.


With viewpoints, I mean that you have some assertions in one viewpoint that you keep in the articles or replies.
People often have ideas that are hard to talk about, like religious dogmas or scientism blindness.
So instead of letting them discuss with each other, I thought it would be nice to have them each build their own logical basis.
And you can add replies or questions "in the viewpoint" of the original poster.
(Or add a different viewpoint in a different branch.)

The idea is that people can have discussions within their own logic system.
And can switch from one logic system to the other.

If a person's logic system becomes too complex or too weird, the person can change his mind. And go for a better logic system.
My idea is that people can go from dogmatic to a bit more open minded.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Getting down to brass tacks, isn't the heart of a decentralized system that multiple, sometimes untrusted nodes are in the network. Blockchain deals with this by creating a cost to do transactions, and assuming at least 51% of all nodes will be benevolent.

If you go a different route the issue becomes how to send what amounts to database updates through an untrusted network. Different method, same problem.

Hmmm, posts could unconfirmed at first until a consensus can verify them, as the individual hubs aggregate the db diffs.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

In the sidebox I added the 6 aspects I felt were different enough, though ultimately they're all interrelated. I could have added many more categories, including decentralization and security, but I figure most of that is under Software Development - way out of my league. I know what I'd like but I don't know the first thing about making it happen, the options, the pros/cons of them, various tactics, history of tech, various languages, etc.

IMO, database updates should be shared with IPFS, torrents, shards, and/or blockchain. Everything costs. Nothing is free. I would like to see next-gen forums have rewards for various interactions - but not overly complicated and rigged like Steemit is/was.

unconfirmed at first until a consensus can verify them

YES! I was thinking about this for my MetaVote™ idea. Though not the "verify" part exactly so much as a combo of soft statistics rather than a hard yes/no on/off kind of binary thing. With MUCH more metadata we can actually see more accurately what the content actually reflects - even if shills are artificially manipulating it. Maybe I just need to take a week of to whip up some illustrations to show folks what the fuck I'm talking about, then another week or few to animate it, with feedback for a first version of a virtual demo.

Also, I really need a patent lawyer badly. I've been too lazy and procrastinating, and I have no money.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Everything costs. Nothing is free

Not the original point, but this got me thinking. There's infrastructure in place with bandwidth available that's already paid for you can use, namely people's phones. We're all carrying around little computers with modems.

The app you download would also be the server, propagating a network that keeps growing. It wouldn't even necessarily need a network connection, depending on what sort of common access you can get to a phone's modem or if you'd need to go on top of another protocol. I mean fuck, even SMS could work. Better have unlimited messaging tho. Lol.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I love it!

I think phones and all WIFI devices should be employed for B.A.T.M.A.N. (Better Approach To Mobile Adhoc Networking - multi-hop routing protocol decentralizing knowledge about the best route through the network. A network of collective intelligence is created - without central, singular, or globalized data (eliminating a need to share info to every node).)

Another thing I'd love to see, assuming blockchain and/or crypto is employed: browser-based crypto-mining. My computer, though not the latest nor greatest, is not doing much today, and it's on 24/7 for sharing. It might as well also be mining. Naturally this would have to be 100% open, transparent, and opt-in - with invite + donate links in the banner there should be no shortage of volunteers.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child) is a browser with a miner built in. No idea about it, just got an ad for it yesterday.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. Not a new concept. Thanks. I think I'll try it out.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Having relocated this discussion (cc /u/d3rr, /u/fschmidt), I'm responding to this new OP's second comment...

I don't think I really have much more profound to contribute on the what's covered in this OP.

I've briefly outlined in my first Phoenix Forum post about planning for the future - all of which can certainly be dissected in detail, but I have some other pitches to compile and present too. I'm not a programmer at all - but I can speak more on the other 5 of its 6 vectors and I could animate a previsualization to inspire folks and leave those capable to actually build it.

I don't demand a blockchain, especially if impractical or pointless, but I do have certain criteria that a next-gen forum MUST include or I'm simply not interested in working on anything that isn't striving for it's maximum potential considering all of our freedom is at stake against the corporatocracy and their inevitable strong A.I. Obviously not all "modules" need be immediately active, but we should try to anticipate things in framing the architecture - plumbing, electrical, HVAC, fiber, etc.

  • Decentralization (and "bridging" to other non-forums like WikiSpooks, PeerTube, etc)
  • Open full archiving/backup/sharing (download, torrent, etc)
  • Strong search
  • Strong categorization (metatags, categories, etc)
  • Crypto/rewards
  • Many more I've forgotten (I need sleep, didn't get much last night)