I’m building a small web app where users post falsifiable conjectures and others respond with refutations, inspired by Karl Popper’s idea that knowledge grows through bold claims and critical testing.<p>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.<p>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.<p>Early stage:
Built with Rails 8 and TailwindCSS. Still private, just validating whether this concept is useful or pointless.<p>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?<p>If you’re interested in trying it or think it’s a terrible idea, I’d genuinely appreciate your thoughts.