paper

Exactly! And the problem is way more difficult than it sounds. I'm working with a group of interested people on this. Here is an intro: https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper If you're interested, please get in touch.

I use some of my limited free time to work on different scalable collective intelligence approaches: - https://felix.unote.io/collective-intelligence - https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper - https://www.societylibrary.org/ - https://felix.unote.io/hacker-news-scores We need radical changes right now. But every potential solution seems so far away in the future, that it's difficult to believe in them. I'd like to get inspired and see what you're doing about the situation.

Are you looking for something like this? https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper/blob/master/RE...

A "Wikipedia of Arguments", one can refer to in public discussions. Relevant links: https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper/blob/master/RE.... https://www.societylibrary.org/

Creating a "Wikipedia of Arguments", one can refer to in public discussions. It turns out that this is a way harder problem than I thought. I'm in this space for some time now and am happy to talk about it. Relevant links: https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper/blob/master/RE... https://www.societylibrary.org/

A 'Wikipedia of Arguments' as a base for large-scale decision making. This is important for huge problems like climate change, where one person alone cannot have all the knowledge to make the right decision. If I had the time or money, I would work full-time on this project. I think it's one of the most important problems of our time. There is a group of researchers and developers having a weekly zoom call about it. But the whole project lacks funding. Read more details here: https://github.com/canonical-debate-lab/paper https://www.societylibrary.org/