I am looking for a nice wiki platform using (or about to start using) federation. My initial search brought http://fed.wiki.org, but it seems to come from a parallel universe…
I am looking for a nice wiki platform using (or about to start using) federation. My initial search brought http://fed.wiki.org, but it seems to come from a parallel universe…
Yes, that would be quite a challenge. A member of Humane Tech Community has created a solution to determine credibility of content. It has many interesting concepts, but also many pitfalls and points for improvement. Another one of our members is involved with the highly interesting Underlay project, part of the Knowledge Futures Group spin-off from MIT Media Lab.
It’s a good idea. But it looks like it’s more likely to create a groupthink than a diversity of ideas. A single way of thinking becomes dominant and all others are labelled low-credibility by the algorithm.
I was thinking of the opposite. All ideas have equal status. You can read the left-wing encyclopedia or the right-wing one, or any other one. A lot of the content will be the same but some will be different. You won’t get filter-bubbled so easily, because you can always link to the other one.
You could even have an agregator, where you can see which parts of a certain article are disputed by different instances, and click between different versions.
Another good thing would be a comment section - like a reddit-style discussion under each article - not like the discussion pages wiki has today. Something that’s not hard to find, and where the “best” comments/criticisms of the article are at the top.
That credibility solution will probably work best for types of content where objective truth can be determined based on fact. Fields of knowledge, expertise, hard science. Opinion pieces… not so much.
Yes. I think today’s wikipedia is fine for those areas already. The tricky part is dealing with all the rest of human knowledge, outside the tiny bit that is “hard science”.