I admit that I could have been more explicit and comprehensive on the political issues, but it was already too long. But I think we agree on the overall premise. LLMs are a neutral weapon (as all weapons are) but the current landscape of corporatist acquisition of this quite powerful weaponry is a severe disadvantage to the disenfranchised, even at a (as you rightfully noted) geopolitical level, with the colonisation and exploitation of the global South. But my point was that, the only viable response to this, is to seize the weapons, not to flee the battlefield. The criticism of AI usage because its coopts the enemy, is as naive as “you hate capitalism, but still use things made in capitalism”.

Well they did say they don’t use the information 🤣

Noted!

You can view the code today as well, on the public repo where it is licensed under GPL 3.0, and will always remain open-sourced.

While I appreciate your opinion, we do NOT intend to follow on the corporate footsteps of showing professionalism with formal uniformity at the expense of personal expression. When a rocket scientist can be openly “furry”, when a researcher can be pink-haired, we can not let ourselves be limited to tasteless formal names. The names are edgy because we are. The project is professional because we are. If those two things cannot coexist for you, then you, my friend, are stuck in the old world.

If you’re interested to know, we are working very hard to make it open-access by June

Yes, we do value ideas immensely. Even greater, we value our goals, which will not sway much, the practical implementations may vary as our experience increases. And we do not overwhelm the audience with minute details. However if you’re interested, some of it can be found in the official documents

We do NOT value linguistic constructivism. Words mean what we want them to mean. While I understand where you’re coming from, we can always retort that the best way to “reclaim” a name is to use it in a radically different scenario - a sort of deconstruction, if you will.

We have a very small team and the website is not polished as much as we want it to be. This the need to keep it invite-only for now. However, we are working hard to make it open-access ASAP.

We are NOT at all opposed to AI usage. And we solemnly believe (not all of us, however), that the fact that an automation tool (which is all it really is) hurts the labour force is a shameful showcase of our underwhelming social contract. I will make a post dedicated to this issue soon.

It seems you have misunderstood the premise a bit. So I’ll explain.

1. It is not “better” than Wikipedia in the sense that it is competing. In fact it will work alongside Wikipedia. If Wikipedia is a heap of all information loosely linked with each other, the Skill Graph is the key to navigate the heap. It’s the section of library that tells you how the library is itself arranged.

2. You will use those free resources itself when you use the Skill Graph. We will NOT make documents. The internet already contains adeqaute sources, we simply chain them together in a way that makes learning make sense as it does in a curriculum. The trick is to do it in such a way as to not kill pluralism, hence the modular “Graph” format.

3. We will not write documents, but if you mean who validates the source linking - no one. There will be many many sources linked for a topic and you will be able to filter it by popularity, type, media format, author etc. By making comparisons between sources easy, learners will be able to judge the best while choosing what suits them best.

Finally, this is NOT perfect, We simply believe that it is a good start by utilising the vast swathes of educational content on the internet. And a lot of other ideas are being brainstormed right now. To know our progress or to contribute your ideas as well, reach out and keep in touch.

Very true, it has to be more than a software implementation. It has to be sustainable on its own and lucrative for workers and companies alike. If you’re interested, we’re working on that exact problem. You can visit our website

Anytime ❤

It was not written by any LLM. I do use Claude to write some lengthy material because it transforms my incoherent rants into structured documents which are easier to communicate with other people. However this was purely me. Not even a draft. I wrote this straight on my phone. I made the community to be professional and not too personal, maybe that’s what gives the vibe. Thanks for reading anyways and we do not really care about AI usage, as long as the job is done well.

I am from India actually, but I’d love to hear your critique and why you think it sounds like “white supremacist”