Show HN: Discourse – Wikipedia for Sensitive Topics | Hacker News Reader

Show HN: Discourse – Wikipedia for Sensitive Topics

indiscourse.com

30 pointsUpTheDiscourse15 comments

We just launched our open beta of Discourse and would love feedback.

We’re a group of professionals from across technology & journalism who all have a shared experience working with sensitive topics and misinformation online. We built Discourse as a way to fill a gap we continued to see in our day jobs: a trustworthy and simple way to understand challenging topics. Discourse is unique in that it (a) combines multiple viewpoints into one place and (b) allows for Wiki-style crowd suggestions. While other sources try to be 'fair and balanced' off the bat, our belief is that it takes time, feedback, and iteration to get there - and the team has built the site around this.

We’d love your feedback about how we’re presenting and summarizing the full picture to present a more balanced view of complex topics like the Future of AI, the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Climate Change, Defunding the Police, and more. Is the formatting easy to follow? Is the wiki component clear? Are opposing viewpoints being presented fairly? We want to hear it all.

For more on Discourse check out indiscourse.com/about – thanks for your feedback!

Open articleView on HN

Do you have to pick the same name as the forum software?

Given they had to settle for indiscourse.com, I'd guess they would say yes.

yeah that's unfortunate. They need an original name. It can be direct or weird or funny.

AtIssue. FlipFlop. MassDebater. HotTopic (wait...). TheySay. inDivide.

MassDebater is a good one, y'know since there'll be a lot of debating

"The Issue" or Tissue for short.

It is very high quality. The explanation of climate change is the best I have seen in terms of clear communication of the facts. There is also balance in there too.

I would like to see if you can tackle more controversial topics. For example Gaza war (and history). Abortion. Taiwan. Good luck!

They do have a '23 Gaza war mention in their Israel Palestine conflict article, although it's not calling that incident out for a specific historical significance ... It's still playing out I don't know that we know what it's going to mean for the future.

They instead blend that in with the rest of the discussion of the Israel Palestine conflict.

Thanks so much for the kind feedback on our climate change article and suggestions for future articles. It looks like another user pointed this out, but we do have an article on the history/context behind the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict you can check out: https://indiscourse.com/t/israel-palestine

Checked the AI page, and it's very frustrating to see this Yann LeCun quote:

> Humans will always have the ability to pull the plug on AI. Yann LeCun, one of the 'godfathers of AI', explained that AI doesn't pose a threat to "taking over the world" because "it's still going to run on a data centre somewhere with an off switch [...] And if you realize it's not safe, you just don't built it".

This is just hand waving and demonstrates a basic lack of imagination. It's like arguing a hundred years ago that the humanity will never become dependent on electricity and fossil fuels, because we still have horses. If we see a problem, we just go back to horses. How simple!

If AI controls most everything in the world (since it's better at it while being cheaper), the AI itself will run the data centers, will control the data center building security, will control the transportation mechanisms to get to the data centers. Even if the data center has a physical off switch, you won't be able to get there to press it. And then you have thousands of other data centers ...

...

But back to the original topic. Originally I was skeptical, but looking at the page more I like the format, even if I don't like some specific quotes / points. I think it's a good way to present two opposing opinions on a specific question, basically each side can make the best argument possible. It will never be perfect, e.g. choosing specific questions is also a difficult problem (agenda setting).

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this! Part of what makes Discourse unique is that it allows for Wiki-style crowd suggestions. While other sources try to be 'fair and balanced' off the bat, our belief is that it takes time, feedback, and iteration to get there. We've passed your suggestion along to our content team, and there's also the ability for anyone to suggest edits through the site to help us continue to edit and get things right. We hope people take advantage of that feature!

The screen time for kids one caught my attention.. although I found it lacking. Most of the detail doesn't specify any age group. Towards the end it has the only mention of infants on the page:

"Focus on incrementally introducing technology, with a focus on more productive use cases early on: In infants, screen time should be limited to video calls with loved ones. At 18 months, educational apps may be introduced. Other use cases can be introduced on top of this at 24 months."

But there's nothing to back up the "should be limited to video calls with loves ones" - which I've seen before but isn't logical at all.

This is a heavy lift, and a commendable effort. I doubt it will work because the "problem" here lies beyond the reach of deliberate solutions, but good on you for trying.

Anyways, I think you need some kind of ELI5 or walk-through example of a toy addition or suggestion on a fake topic. I tried to find nuts and bolts about how suggestions were vetted, etc, and what I saw on the site seemed a bit hand-wavy.

Who is your content committee? Couldn't find that, maybe I am an idiot. Is it the same committee for everything?

Completely understand the feedback around better explaining how suggestions work, as well as more details about the content committee. We are actually building this content out and will have more to share on the website soon!

The site doesn’t want you to open its links in new tabs on mobile Safari. When you long press on a link, it opens the link in the current tab.

When I see a list of links, I always make a pass of opening interesting links in new tabs for later review. This site design choice makes that a funky PITA. Does anyone except grandma still use a single browser tab and back button?

Thanks for sharing this feedback! Passed along to our eng team to address.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com