alt Hacker Newshttps://concludia.org/ - I've mentioned it here before, it's a site to help people reason through and understand arguments together. No real business purpose for it yet, it's more an idea I've had for years and have been wanting to see it through to something actually usable. You can graphically explore arguments, track their logical sufficiency/necessity, and make counterpoints. It's different than other types of argument theory that just have points "in favor" and "against" because of how it tries to propagate logical truth and provability.
Replies
We would have saved so many wasted hours in the last company I worked for if we had this... you have no idea, to give you a sense, the decision to move from a Neo4J db to MySQL (the service was failing, the DB was failing, it was a bad architecture decision) took 6 months, when it should have been at most a couple days discussion.
Nurture this, it will become a great tool in the belt for a lot of people
This is pretty cool! I'm not sure how you'd make a business out of it, but I can definitely see myself using it to justify some decisions on my day to day stuff.
I'm also a sucker for serif fonts so points for that.
I like this. It reminds me of the interesting type of experimentation that was done with LLMs before agentic coding took over as the primary use case.
I am interested in seeing a personal version of this. Help people work out their own brain knots to make decision-making easier. I'm actually decent at mending fences with others. Put making decisions myself? Impossible.
Cool idea, I think graphs (what you’re doing) are a better way of modeling arguments because it captures nuance often lost in 1 v 1 model of debate
I’ve had a concept like this in the back of my mind for years. Happy to see someone executing it so well.
For me, it started when I spent a year and a half reading and digesting books for and against young earth creationism, then eventually for Christianity itself (its historical truth claims). It struck me that the books were just a serialization of some knowledge structure that existed in the authors’ heads, and by reading I was trying to recreate that structure in my own head. And that’s a super inefficient way to go about this business. So there must be a shortcut, some more powerful intermediate representation than just text (text is too general and powerful, and you can’t compute over it… until now with LLMs?)
That graph felt a lot like code to me: there’s no unique representation of knowledge in a graph, but there are some that are much more useful than others; building a well-factored graph takes time and taste; graphs are composable and reusable in a way that feels like it could help you discover layers of abstraction in your arguments.