That is good news to me. I think I have the solution to this issue. I think the very thing I am attempting to boot load will do a great deal to solve this issue.
That is a bold announcement! So, how does this magic work?
Well the first step is to ditch the keyboard and go to visual presentations. The second is modeling that must be demonstrated, so I figure I will kill three birds with one stone.
I am pushing to make a video that will demonstrate my idea in itās form and posting, however in the content it will be about Cenkās presidential run. The third bird will be that it will become the widget that will allow me to show you such magic in a larger context.
Crude proof of concept is found here:
Notice:
As you can see there is a poll up top.
Under is a video response meant to lobby others related to contents of the poll.
This video weights pros, cons, and adds perspective.
This is the form the rest of the idea will come in another team lobby video posted over here in the forums. This video will go into more details.
1 Like
I am in the Orlando, FL area and I LOVE this idea! (Maxwell Frostās district)
FL House Rep. Anna Eskamani has been very involved in the community and organizing voter registration events and Abortion Marches.
1 Like
Exactly. And the āAIā that we have now is a game changer. Mostly in terms of summarizing large caches of datum or compare/contrast or a section in this eventual āappā called something like āThings We (collectively) Knowā as a giant reference base sort of like encyclopedias once were but of course will be searchable words/tags/keywords.
I actually basically had this idea a long time ago (surely have writings on it somewhere, that Iāll never find) but it was more about profiles for politicians (someone else here literally also said that but at the time I saw it today or yesterday, I completely forgot that I too had that idea but for me ideas ALWAYS come constantly, so I donāt dwell too long, and usually forget about it quickly) but also a ripoff of the āKreeā āCentral Intelligenceā for US.
Point is, if everyone besides republicans end up using this, as you say, (free?) knowledge base for practical and even financial things, eventually I think even republicans/conservatives will start to, as they would be forced due to competition; will be funny to watch as they twist and turn to come up with new rationales for the ignorant beliefs they manage to finagle out of cognitive dissonance (low bar). Or they become terrorists. (More so than now). Weāll see.
And I know youāre a coder (?) which will also be a boon to us. The more things we have that are IN HOUSE the better. Let me know if I can help in any way as you get to know me you might see something I can do. For one, Iām so outside the box I canāt see the box anymore (like using such obscure references lol); to say, that, problem solving is one of my talents. Iām enpassioned by this project; have not felt this in a while. Ok.
Epidaius Momentum
1 Like
Me too. I love your optimism. And itās great you think the miscpaha can evolve, mine canāt. Thereās a basicā¦mosaicā¦of āformative (seed + cognitive effort + brutal honesty + years of it <but not needed to be too specific necessarily, just that effort in honesty must take place for a while>) to get nuance. Really get it. Barring that, even just simple cognitive effort could POSSIBLY (with serendipitous fortuitous ness) does happen SOMETIMESā¦I think itās rare but I donāt have ANY statistics to back ANY of this up. Just my thoughts take it or leave it: that MINE, LITERALLY, lack the capacity/many other things, to ever leave MAGA/ ācave thought level feedback loop // arrogance of ignorance feedback loopā etc etc
Okay guys, I think I somehow lost the thread here, might also be due to the fact that I am not a native english speakerā¦
What I had in mind when posting here was to find out whether there are other people here that see the potential for a progressive knowledge database and who are willing and capable to start an initiative in this direction. Since I am a software engineer myself I do very well understand that such a project is no rush job but will require long-term effort of multiple talented and devoted people to develop such a product or even prototype. I read some strong statements here and there, but I am still missing a serious engagement to go ahead and maybe gather some requirements or use cases or something like thatā¦
So this is the awkward thing is that everyone will use this for sure. If you look around many tech companies and even government agencies see this writing on the wall so to speak.
What I am saying is how it happens is REALLY important and the philosophy behind it. The fact is systems are very cold, brutal, and if you donāt build accordingly you will likely see fragility. Systems tend to concentrate power and scrutinize control. This by its nature isnāt inherently foul however almost always becomes that way over time. Unless the system knows this and is built around dissolving itself and reforming itself to thwart this as much as possible. This was largely the idea of checks and balances in my opinion.
Is a goal worth pursuing. The problem becomes what is knowledge? When you answer that it becomes a question of how does information meet framing to become knowledge to someone. The first part has to do with seeking so knowledge has to be perceived. The second is information being discovered by a seeker. This part is the part you are talking about. This is the part most find fascinating. It is because it is very difficult to parse the distinction between applied knowledge and theoretical knowledge. In fact acquiring knowledge is a practice of art marrying applied and theoretical information. This is what I consider to be the head water of understanding knowledge.
You would like to create a repository for information. This is only a very small part of what I see that must be built.
The collaborative decision making is a much higher priority in my opinion. Not that it isnāt part in parcel of a knowledge database. My video is coming along and will be posted likely tomorrow.
In fact for many of us to pull one direction we must all know which way that is.
Hi all, okay, so there does not seem to be sufficient agreement on the necessity to organize knowledge in a systematic way by using IT technology like a knowledge database. It was worth trying, however.
Bye!
Sorry to hear that you are frustrated. I have had some higher priority issues crop up the last few days. I know many are frustrated with speed things develope. I am in the process of shooting the video still, but more importantly I am no longer burdened by my time crunch.
I think a systematic knowledge database is a great idea, however I think it is a longer term goal.
Of course it is frustrating not to find sufficient support for an idea I strongly believe in, but, hey, in the end this is how life is. And yes, this would absolutely be a long-term endeavour! I do believe that progressive change needs both: high attention and deep understanding. I do admit that personally I tend to lean to the latterā¦
Part of why I am seemingly inspired is actually tons of work. You are seeing final iterations of decades of argumentation with a group of me and my close friends. I think people some may disbelieve this because the lack of monetization.
They collaborated through my efforts and vision of a the long-term multi generational idea. The strategy was to have many ideas cultivated reformed combined and divided. Many of these posts are hundreds of days of dialogue and inspiration compounded through conversations of pertinent subjects lasting decades. This was all done with the mind of something built far in the future.
Cultivate what you have it will likely come into play in ways you donāt expect.
Love your in depth-ness. Ive much to say, but Iāll just say: when a civilization can rise to a level where all are in agreement of the facts; AND that these āfactsā, in the first place, will, going forward, (with continued scrutiny as science is humble to change as we here know) always only be measured for inherent veracity by the current BEST (in all the most catagories) hypotheses for attaining predictability and unifying characteristics; only then can we do things like leave the planet. As I see it, unless thereās a major cascade of happenings (that HAVE to kind of happen altogether/within striking distance from each other), all our advancements mean ZERO; ignorance as we here know is the easiest course, especially unified ignorance, is perhaps in a way a sort of glorification/worship of entropy, unironically, so shows like the 100 are more predictive then we give them credit for (due to our lifespan constrained perspective): meaning this will at some point all go away again. Path of least resistance (by society at large. This IS gonna happen, question is WHEN. WE ourselves could perhaps form a solid group like the āmasonsā or even Jews (antithesis, but I mean the staying power), and hope it can survive (Iām even down with the possible gene pool problems, itād regulated in line with scientific understanding, since that would be a literal divergent evolution and I have no problem leaving the rest behind (Iād feel bad for a day and then see the fruit and be fine again). I got too specific with possible scenarios just there, but basically it only chance for posterity into a time when opportunity again arises.))).
(Wrote too much to send in one message but next paragraph was written together with above)
1 Like
All this to say: peopleās brains explode when confronted with this challenge of sort of CODIFYING fact as who will be the arbiter. Answer is so simple: NO ONE, just nature. No egos no interpretation. And when room for interpretation that thing is given special āmost likelyā status until more and new info is garnered. For example: that all of our āconstitutionalādna (non epi) is but 2% and only superficially different is fact that the law should and in some places somewhat DOES express/reflect; and that commingling of groups is best course of action to strengthen us etc, but forcing this would still be wrong. Better example: I personally do believe there should be science based (methodology but I mean CONtENT) tests one would need to pass in order to vote. Person always has the RIGHT to vote, but on a technicality of being Iāll-informed, things like practicing medicine would be off the table (I also think procreating us further into Idiocracy is counter a good egalitarian society with a gov that actaully belongs to the peopleā¦nuance as Cenk says but I was saying before I knew that). But on the voting, I would never just leave it at that, cause THAT would be tyrannical rather than progressive (making hard choices for overall good, even if temporary sometimes). If a person knows they have failed or even WILL fail these civics/science/etc exams, well all they have to do is not throw their mail in the garbage and theyād already have seen that the gov is eager to āfootā the bill for classes that will help them pass on next go. (Bothers me not that people will say thatās indoctrination. My answer would be: if your religious group has a better class that would help this person pass said class (divorced from everything but observable predictable SCIENTIFICALLY proven information information curated for simply being informed about things like positions of candidates (my comment on our previous thread about that got too long so I deleted it, but I had a politician PROFILE idea years ago). (I also want to say that if youāve read this far, I commend you, you deserve an award). This example just to say: nature/the coherent observation of nature (including the ways in which we as a species are able to make nature our bitch in most cases as a direct result of the instruments we make and meticulous record of the tests, is simply another way of saying SCIENCE and the scientific method we use to navigate those two things (imperfect as it still is, itās the best chance weāve got and my WHOLE POINT HERE IS TO SAY: we can no longer apologize for being rational and fair and we should not let simple arguments stop nuanced answers).
I hope I posted this to the right comment, I am not good with tech.
1 Like
This will probably sound crazy but Iām gonna drop it anyway. I have been having conversations with ChatGPT3.5 because I canāt always have them with my peeps. Partly because of my own inability to conduct civil discourse, but Iām learning, and partly because of otherās inability. I use the version that is only updated to 2021 on purpose because I ask it to articulate trajectories into the future based on such things as hypothetical changes in policies, laws, and societal perceptions and the such. So recently I had this idea for an app on my cell phone to use when in conversation and confronted with false claims or misinformation. I envision being able to input a boiled down version of the false claim to the app to have it generate a response of some sort. I asked ChatGPT what such an app my look like, how it might work. Interestingly the response was detailed, about what sources would be used to fact check the claim, the genarated response might score the validity, or give a thumbs up/down, list facts for and against, and even generate a script that could be read by the user to question and/or refute the false claim. Keep in mind that emotions play a big part in peoples perceptions, so one might be canceled for using an app to refute a claim. The app would have to take this into consideration in producing useful responses. So here is how I think it might be useful in creating new Progressive and Social Democratic Think Tanks. An app that is essentially an open source of critical thinking and critical responses guided and boiled down by both AI, open source moderation, and experts to produce a short list of important and relative topics central to the Progressive Social Democratic Ideology, discussion of, and dissemination of. Now I am not a computer/technology geek, so donāt even know if something like that is possible. But because the younger generations are all tuning into and conducting life through forms of social apps, it seems essential for todays Think Tanks to be in the public domain via engaging user friendly and fun apps. I am not a strategist for the affective deployment of a Progressive Think Tank but it seems important to use and or create similar technologies that people are using. At the least I hope this is food for thought regarding Think Tank transparency and exposure to the masses. Thank You.
4 Likes
I want to believe that the bigger the voting block, regardless of its number of impressionable, ignorant, and angry, will still produce positions more closely aligned with universally accepted ethics and morality. Therefore all citizens of a state or nation or country must have the right to vote, and the popular vote should dictate the outcome of elections and policies. This is one of the truely righteous cross bars civilization must get over, that all have a say. Additionally when a society wants to become merit based, and wants to make everyone test for a sufficient level of intelligence to participate in voting and shaping policy, it is just a step or two shy of more devious, detructive, and cruel systems of governance. Humanity has proven it cannot stop falling into corruptions. Here we are today still aspiring for Democracy to justifiably regulate capitalism into something that works for all, but yet we are falling deep into authoritarian capitalism, Capitalism is becoming the method of governance instead of being controlled by governance. Merit and intelligance based requirements have brought us to this point in time again and again. Respectfully.
2 Likes
Brilliant thread. A few thoughts:
-
Seems some confusion about the concept. There are some progressive think tanks already - like the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Institute for New Economic Thinking, the Institute for Policy Studies, just to name a few economic centered ones. I worked for the Heritage Foundation back in my libertarian days. I am a programmer & policy wonk / historian (published). I ran the individual income tax model for Heritage. I support the idea of a new progressive think tank - or something - but not just another think tank replicating what already exists. There are some pro-democracy institutes around the world that are excellent, and much needed. But what TYT can do I think is bring people together - and, I have been advocating, stand for truth. The āthink tankā could do both of these, and it could be very worthwhile and hopefully not too costly either & get up & running quickly.
-
Someone wrote above (in part):
"So recently I had this idea for an app ā¦[to handle] misinformation. I envision being able to input a boiled down version of the false claim to the app to have it generate a response of some sort. I asked ChatGPT what such an app my look likeā¦ "
I have been discussing an app to supplement the (non-profit, academic created) Pro Truth Pledge, using chatGPT & Bing AI for recent info, it could hold signers of the pledge accountable - and we could pressure politicians & media to take the pledge.
-
The think tank could be (in part) a forum for discussing the outcomes of this accountability - the automated fact-check & context the app posts in reply to the pledge takers should deepen the conversation, and though depending on where that takes place (e.g. Twitter/X) it could easily descend into chaos, however by auto- grabbing the original post by the pledge-signatory, our auto-reply (with context & fact-check) and the further comments but hopefully it could be designed to filter out all trolling comments, whether by people or bots, bringing only useful and respectful discussion back to us. Discussion could then continue in this friendly and productive environment.
-
Pod Save America & Crooked Media tour and meet & interview candidates in a respectful and fun way, helping to excite the base and also get the good news flowing, encourage voter turnout. TYT could do something similar but bring together all kinds of Democratic and progressive groups, candidates, elected officialsā¦and even extend to groups like the Lincoln Project ā if they sign the pledge & are willing to face the fact checking & context provision like everyone else. Anyone like āNo Labelsā (maybe āNo Honorā is better fit?) tries to pull a fast one ā we expose them. ā¦ yeah, that about sums it up!
1 Like
Hi all, I would like to add some short remarks on the posts above:
AI alone wonāt cut it; I tried it out for very specific tasks in software engineering, but it turned out not to be reliable nor helpful once you need more than shallow samples. Currently, there are initiatives to check stated facts by semantic data from knowledge graphs like WikiData. But this is just beginning. AI as it is used currently is more or less a monopoly-striving endeavour.
Maybe it is a bit overambitious to immediately challenge existing social media products and aim for immediate broad impact. Personally, I am quite impressed by the work of ICIJ. But instead of investigating particular persons, institutions and connections, a progressive knowledge graph could try to abstract from these concrete instances and reveal the recurring patterns behind these occurences in a systematic way in order to develop a toolkit that can be used collectively to detect āfishyā coincidences. A toolset to improve corruption detection competencesā¦
2 Likes
A tool kit that defines Neo-liberal ideology, ways it works in governance and economics, its destructive an devastating consequences, and the methodogy of resolution mechanisms.
I find that AI can be very good at identifying possible causes of fermenting bad ideology and hypothetical trajectories, if the questions/inquiries are framed as analysis of ethics, morality, and psychological dynamics. It is good at identifying types of situations and social dynamics that ferment dysfunction such as echo chambers, bias confirmation, peer pressure, and other corruptive scenarios. My AI inquiries have produced several good item lists that inform me on how to better engage others in difficult conversations, item lists that help me to understand and recognize potentially corrupting scanarios/dynamics. I want to believe that it is not a stretch to have an app that makes you a member of pledged Truth Tellers, that fact checks and scores contentious positions, that list why, and even how to counter false positions with suggested script and/or an item list, can be created. I know, an AI for good sounds counterintuitive. In my limited understanding, I think creating a app/tool that fits right in with popular communication and information technology tools of the day would be impactful for the Progressive movement. The data collection from the app has big implications as well. Utilizing AI to sift through the data collection to recognize and articulate think-tank talking points based in reality and not just hypothetical could lead to new understandings potentially useful in identifying, prioritizing issues and making strategy.
I have visited the Truth Pledge Webpage and am going to pledge with the anticipation that the organization could produce such a cell phone app/tool for us here on the street and for intellectuals and policy makers to glean information and gain direction from.