Here's how I understand this project at this time.<p>1. There exists a set of files, or nodes, contained in GIT repositories, that sum up to a personal wiki, of sorts. These files, in the case of <a href="http://anagora.org" rel="nofollow">http://anagora.org</a>, are copied from <a href="https://github.com/flancian/agora" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/flancian/agora</a><p>2. In those files are links in a specified format to other such wikis.<p>3. A server (Agora Server) renders a the files in a manner far more useful for interaction. <a href="http://anagora.org" rel="nofollow">http://anagora.org</a> is running said server. The actual data being served is (for performance reasons, I assume) a copy of the reference wiki it can them push changes back up to.<p>4. The server also has a daemon that is polling other such sites (presumably the source, not the other servers) looking for more content to add to its repository.<p>Question: <i>Do those other sources get added back to the primary repository?</i><p>5. If we want to add our own, we clone a starter kit, and host our own server. It could be local, or on the internet. The data needs to be public, the server itself doesn't. If this is true, this makes hosting things much easier, as there is no need to maintain a server on the internet, just have a valid GITHUB or other such account in good standing, and valid email for the signup process.<p>Do I have that right?
Hi there! I'm the founder.<p>This is my "hobby project". I work at Google as an SRE.<p>One of the ideas here is to integrate the Agora with existing social networks:<p><a href="https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1343979536434798598" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1343979536434798598</a><p>The Agora is an overlay to the internet (semantic web) controlled by users. It is part of the open source ecosystem.
For those who use systems like this or bubble graphs or roam, where you seek to loosely "relate" items with other items:<p>Doesn't it just get messy and overwhelming after a while? I visualize it as nodes and edges, but where the edges don't really mean anything specific other than "this makes me think of that".<p>I feel like a system that supported a lot of different types of edges that each had clear meaning would be more useful. "this requires that" and "this supports that" and "this needs to happen after that" or "this blocks that", etc.
Interesting idea but extra confusing layout. I'm still not totally sure what it is or does, even after reading.. It seems just a collection of random notes, which isn't that interesting to be honest. Perhaps a few accounts showing some interesting content could help us realize your vision.
There is a "distributed knowledge network" we use called the "World Wide Web." It has an "experimental social network" powered by RSS, WebMention, and ActivityPub.
This is excellent, however I think that discussion of implementation details is obscuring the real glory of this project. Allow me to explain.<p>Once upon a time, I spent a whole lot of time in physical libraries. To this day, I remain enamored with the 'stacks', those 'endless' rows of roughly categorized text that allowed for discovery of knowledge new to an individual in a manner that the post usenet internet seems to be unable to emulate.<p>Why, when we have the 'sum of all human knowledge in our pocket' does an interface similar to library stacks not exist? Search engines in their modern forms were probably unavoidable, just as librarians and card catalogues are necessary to help patrons quickly access specific information, but a library without public access to the stacks is hardly worth visiting. In fact, libraries were like this during a particularly dark period in western history and only though the work of a handful of forward thinking librarians did public access become the norm.<p>The agora 'nodes' listing is possibly the closest I have seen to a 'stacks' like structure for the modern internet. To me, regardless of implementation, this is a momentous achievement. Also, if anyone knows of a similar structure, please let me know.
The description sounded like it'd be an RDF schema, and then it even mentions semantic web, but judging by the specification, it doesn't involve those technologies, and rather about hyperlinks (i.e., regular WWW). Which is indeed a bit confusing: I wonder whether I've missed something, and if so, whether integration with wider semantic web is possible and/or planned.
Looks interesting but could do with a lot of UX work etc. You're not going to get the average FB/Twitter user using this if you're confusing even HN'ers.
I've been working on something like this too (knowledge graph research).<p><a href="https://github.com/altilunium/Note" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/altilunium/Note</a> : Forked from PmWiki
<a href="https://github.com/altilunium/rtnF" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/altilunium/rtnF</a> : Re-written from scratch<p>I'm still struggling to differentiate this from a wiki, since its main feature is still the [[WikiLink]]. The best thing i could think up for now is to modify the wiki's UI and UX for personal note taking usage. To create "networked-notetaking application". Pivoting my research goal from "organization-knowledge-management" to "personal-knowledge-management".<p>The idea of "knowledge-graph-based social networks" is cool, but dont you think that the "post + comment thread" pattern, the "interest group" pattern and the "one-to-one direct communication" pattern are irreplaceable in a social network ?<p>Even the wiki itself is using a rudimentary system to simulate those pattern on top of its knowledge graph structure. Lot of people, communicating together by editing the same single page, just like using a single blackboard together. (For example, see the "Talk" page on wikipedia)
I don't know how invested you are in the name, but there are several projects in bordering scope with the same name (I personally confused it at first):<p><pre><code> https://www.agora.vote/
https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/865.pdf
https://www.idni.org/agoras/</code></pre>
Unless I'm reading this wrong: is this a search engine that indexes everything Google doesn't?
I can see this being valuable for closed groups that define their own objectives i.e. a SubReddit-esque set-up where one can search for information on a theme say finance. The quality of results on the meta level risks to be lower.
On second thought, the idea of Google now indexing my personal info because I hooked onto the graph? Not sure how comfortable I am with that. Intriguing if Google does not index it.
Cool idea though, good luck with it!