How it works (MVP): • Users submit a conjecture (e.g. “UBI reduces non-violent crime”). • Each conjecture must include clear falsification criteria — what would prove it wrong. • Others post refutations: counterexamples, critiques, or better hypotheses. • Conjectures can be revised in response to valid criticism. • Future features: prediction markets, citation formats, version histories.
Why I’m experimenting with this: • Most online platforms reward persuasion, not falsifiability. • Forecasting platforms (like Metaculus or Manifold) focus on probabilities, not explanations. • This is meant to support idea evolution, not just outcome prediction.
Early stage: Built with Rails 8 and TailwindCSS. Still private, just validating whether this concept is useful or pointless.
Looking for feedback on: • Would you use something like this? Why or why not? • Is this meaningfully different from a smart blog comment section? • What is the smallest useful version of this? • What would make this fail completely?
If you’re interested in trying it or think it’s a terrible idea, I’d genuinely appreciate your thoughts.
