5 ms·

This sounds like a great idea if implemented well, but I just see the potential for a gigantic amount of noise. I mean the set of all topics is mostly highly-sp

by yan 17y ago

This sounds like a great idea if implemented well, but I just see the potential for a gigantic amount of noise. I mean the set of all topics is mostly highly-specific and uninteresting. If you would subdivide everything into clusters and nominate a small set to represent that cluster, and only then suggest things that are highly dissimilar (but not opposites), this might be extremely useful. If one already feels strongly about a topic (health, politics, religion, etc) I'm sure that person would know where to seek to get opposing points of view. If I am interested in programming or math material online, getting recommendations about conflicting problems or programming methodologies would not be very useful. However, getting info about topics like flying gliders, rock climbing or philosophy would be great.. (I'm picking things I'm familiar with, but I would have loved to find out about similar interests and hobbies through suggestion)

steerpike 17y ago
I totally agree with you about the potential for noise and I very much take on board your issues with getting competing philosophical entities, not simply conflicting things within the same sphere (you actually articulated the issue that was hazy but apparent in my head perfectly). I guess the first step is probably to try and articulate a few appropriate 'spheres' for people to register an interest in and then try and figure out what opposing sphere would consist of.
- jeromec 17y ago
  I had the same thought as yan: simply find the opposing side of whatever your belief/comfort. However, I guess you really want things that are dissimilar rather than opposite. That's tough, but I see what you mean. For example, I recently learned a great deal about economics, which can be fascinating to understand, and how it's connected to governance/politics. Yet few politicians truly know economics, as even President Obama admitted to knowing little about (but learning) in an interview. I guess for an algorithm my approach would be to start amassing pages on different topics like Google, then look for commonalities for alternative subject matter. It would still be tough to make certain connections, though, like the example of economics and politics (during times of non-crisis).

by yan 17y ago

steerpike 17y ago

I totally agree with you about the potential for noise and I very much take on board your issues with getting competing philosophical entities, not simply conflicting things within the same sphere (you actually articulated the issue that was hazy but apparent in my head perfectly). I guess the first step is probably to try and articulate a few appropriate 'spheres' for people to register an interest in and then try and figure out what opposing sphere would consist of.

jeromec 17y ago
I had the same thought as yan: simply find the opposing side of whatever your belief/comfort. However, I guess you really want things that are dissimilar rather than opposite. That's tough, but I see what you mean. For example, I recently learned a great deal about economics, which can be fascinating to understand, and how it's connected to governance/politics. Yet few politicians truly know economics, as even President Obama admitted to knowing little about (but learning) in an interview. I guess for an algorithm my approach would be to start amassing pages on different topics like Google, then look for commonalities for alternative subject matter. It would still be tough to make certain connections, though, like the example of economics and politics (during times of non-crisis).