11k sats \ 2 replies \ @elvismercury 7 Jul 2023 \ parent \ on: Daily discussion thread
One more question:
Reading through the change log, I followed a link to the SN post about web of trust. This made me think of something I've been thinking about a bunch lately, from using PKM tools (Logseq is my current one) where making it easy to talk about things is a design goal. Making it easy to talk about things through links, search, and automatic back links, causes a densely structured graph to emerge, a very useful kind of semantic knowledge store. It's pretty remarkable how it all pops out.
This is relevant bc at first SN looks like Hacker News, with the familiar features; but the more I dig into it, the more it seems like you're playing around with hybrid ideas about how communication should work online -- you alluded to some, above, wrt Zaps. I'm curious if this, too, is something you've thought about playing with: other ways to structure conversations, make them findable, referenceable, etc., beyond the familiar message board paradigm?
Don't get me wrong, doing the familiar thing well is a substantial contribution, and there's enough experimentation w/ btc integration to keep anyone busy. Just wondering how far your experimental aspirations go :)
I do want the board to be atypical, e.g. recursive sub-boards (subs have subs), a variety of economic ranking algorithms (there are so many different auction algorithms), marketplaces, financial incentives and economy management tools for running sub-boards, etc.
We've talked about internal linking shortcuts like #205407 would reference the comment I'm replying to. Comments or posts could accumulate references kind of like github issues and context could cascade. We could do the same with mentions.
I've also been encouraged to read about Project Xanadu (I'm a sucker for tech history) but I have an embarrassingly deep book queue atm.
Other than that, I haven't thought a whole lot about conversation structure yet. I've focused primarily on the game theory/incentives because I find most people are bored by it, it's under explored, yet it's probably the single most powerful tool for generically skewing behavior.
Thanks for bringing this up. You've convinced me I'm not thinking about it enough!
reply
This comment was featured on This Day in Stacker News.
reply