I have recently launched Wikifreedia, which is a different take on how Wikipedia-style systems can work.
Yes, it's built on nostr, but that's not the most interesting part.
The fascinating aspect is that there is no "official" entry on any topic. Anyone can create or edit any entry and build their own take about what they care about.
Think the entry about Mao is missing something? Go ahead and edit it, you don't need to ask for permission from anyone.
Stuart Bowman put it best on a #SovEng hike:
> The path to truth is in the integration of opposites.
Since launching Wikifreedia, less than a week ago, quite a few people asked me if it would be possible to import ALL of wikipedia into it.
Yes. Yes it would.
I initially started looking into it to make it happen as I am often quick to jump into action.
But, after thinking about it, *I am not convinced importing all of Wikipedia is the way to go*.
The magical thing about building an encyclopedia with no canonical entry on any topic is that each individual can bring to light the part they are interested the most about a certain topic, it can be dozens or hundreds, or perhaps more, entries that focus on the edges of a topic.
Whereas, Wikipedia, in their Quijotean approach to truth, have focused on the impossible path of seeking neutrality.
Humans can't be neutral, we have biases.
Show me an unbiased human and I'll show you a lifeless human.
*Biases are good*. Having an opinion is good. Seeking neutrality is seeking to devoid our views and opinions of humanity.
Importing Wikipedia would mean importing a massive amount of colorless trivia, a few interesting tidbits, but, more important than anything, a vast amount of watered-down useless information.
All edges of the truth having been neutered by a democratic process that searches for a single truth via consensus.
# "What's the worst that could happen?"
Sure, importing wikipedia would simply be *one* more entry on each topic.
Yes.
But culture has incredibly strong momentum.
And if the culture that develops in this type of media is that of exclusively watered-down comfortable truths, then some magic could be lost.
If people who are passionate or have a unique perspective about a topic feel like the "right approach" is to use the wikipedia-based article then I would see this as an extremely negative action.
### An alternative
An idea we discussed on the #SovEng hike was, what if the wikipedia entry is processed by different "AI agents" with different perspectives.
Perhaps instead of blankly importing the "Napoleon" article, an LLM trained to behave as a 1850s russian peasant could be asked to write a wiki about Napoleon. And then an agent tried to behave like Margaret Thatcher could write one.
Etc, etc.
Embrace the chaos. Embrace the bias.
God, just correcting all of the damage done by 10 years of woke clowns is reason enough to start fresh.
Well. I’m not a techie but you should be able to put them in different colors & then when reviewers change you know who did it as POW. Right?
Sure, that's possible, but is it desirable?
as more move to phones I can see it being beneficial. But I’m a reader. Not everyone is. Not sure 🤔
Any chance of importing everything2.com into it instead? It's usually more accurate than Wikipedia, plus it includes stuff that isn't 'appropriate' for an encyclopedia.
nostr:nevent1qyghwumn8ghj7vf5xqhxvdm69e5k7tcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgnwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxvdm69e5k7tcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezumtfd3hh2tnvdakz7qg6waehxw309ac8junpd45kgtnxd9shg6npvchxxmmd9uq3xamnwvaz7tmsw4e8qmr9wpskwtn9wvhsqg8as5xaa4rs0ufcfka9hz8tap4p5ft2l8ey83fc05xg6jkgfh7lgsu83put
The public will do it if they feel inclined to do so.
I like the alternative. I also like ditch the old to start fresh, even if it takes more time.
It would be duplicating work not to import all the entries. There are subjects that haven’t been politicized that are still worth while to
import.
I don’t think embracing bias is helpful when furthering the collective knowledge of humanity. Wikipedia’s problem isn’t that they stuck to a steadfast neutral position, is that they failed to do so.
Shedding of bias in pursuit of objective truth led to the Enlightenment and our ability to understand nature and manipulate it.
Also couldn’t wikipedia imports be tagged as such?
I understand what you mean, but we need a jumping off point. Some things in life really are just boring old FACTS. Like the title of a movie and when it was released
testing
nostr:naddr1qqd4wefdvdskut2zw46z6umgda6kcepdwajj6wp389krvuczyrafsj7hmweg9ur7zmn6apajdg48hxuskujx53rhrux0ttjcqx84yqcyqqq823c7q5n7c
http:://localhost/f7z.io/We-can-But-should-we-819l6s
testing
nostr:naddr1qqd4wefdvdskut2zw46z6umgda6kcepdwajj6wp389krvuczyrafsj7hmweg9ur7zmn6apajdg48hxuskujx53rhrux0ttjcqx84yqcyqqq823c7q5n7c
http:://localhost/f7z.io/We-can-But-should-we-819l6s
oh my God I've been missing some good quality stuff
I never knew you guys write articles
I just installed a new client freerse so I can read articles now
thanks for sharing this
I've made a goal I'll bring 10 new users to nostr every week
we must learn the truth and be guided by it
Freerse can also publish long articles. You can choose to publish long articles on the posting page. Welcome to use Freerse and give feedback. 🫂
I'm still checking out it's a great app but I don't like that I can't use wallet of satoshi in the app and all my previous sats are held there
Thank you for your feedback, noted. You can add your Wallet of Satoshi Lightning address to your profile's Lightning address field. This way, you can receive zaps.
yea it's awesome that it can publish long articles but it is such of a pain that you need to upload your image somewhere else before you can use them in the article.
a simple note taking app like notion can do all these without stress..
if the interface for publishing articles can look like that of notion it will be awesome.
Yes, this will be included in future development plans.
Oddbean new post about login | logout