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.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43626409

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42310417

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

I’ve identified a few such funds:

• OpenSky Ventures: An early-stage VC firm investing in category-disrupting companies, led by experienced entrepreneurs with a track record of successful exits.[0]

• D2 Fund: Focuses on funding capital-efficient B2B software businesses in the UK and Europe, emphasizing efficient entrepreneurship and mission-critical products.[1]

• TinySeed: A remote accelerator designed for early-stage SaaS companies, offering funding and mentorship to help founders grow sustainably without the pressure of traditional VC expectations.[2]

• Indie.vc: Known for its unconventional approach, funding startups with a focus on profitability and sustainability.[3]

For context, Anu Atluru’s essay, “One-Round Wonder”[4], explores the concept of startups achieving success with a single funding round.

Are there other funds or investment models that align with this “seedstrapping” philosophy? Insights or experiences with such funds would be greatly appreciated.

[0]opensky.vc

[1]https://www.d2.fund/

[2]tinyseed.com

[3]businessofbusiness.com

[4]https://www.workingtheorys.com/p/one-round-wonder

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42068454

Points: 9

# Comments: 3

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41542124

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

This open letter, addressed to European political leaders, builds upon an earlier article, ["European Accelerationism"](https://www.santiago-martins.com/european-accelerationism-eu...), which garnered positive feedback from both entrepreneurial and political stakeholders, and was notably mentioned in FT Alphaville and Marginal Revolution. Additionally, this petition aligns with the spirit of blog-driven policy making, which has seen recent successes, as detailed in an article from The Economist: [How to Change the Policy of the British Government](https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/11/30/how-to-change-t...).

Given the recent European elections, these proposals are particularly pertinent as they offer a timely opportunity to shape policy agendas that can drive significant and meaningful progress across the continent. These proposals are selected based on their robust evidence base, their capacity to garner cross-ideological support, their foundation on successful precedents, and the existing political momentum behind them.

To add your name to the list of signatories please fill in [this form](https://forms.gle/DGtASNPqh8RWk3Dt8).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41369503

Points: 6

# Comments: 3

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41104266

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264897

Points: 13

# Comments: 0

> Second, we reveal the “Where’s Daddy?” system, which tracked these targets and signaled to the army when they entered their family homes.

This sounds immoral at first, but if proportionality is taken into consideration, the long term effects of this might be positive, ie fewer deaths long term due to the elimination of Hamas staff. The devil is in the details however, as there is clearly a point beyond which this becomes unacceptable. Sadly collective punishment is unavoidable in war, and one could argue that between future Israeli victims and current Palestinian ones, the IDF has a moral obligation to choose the latter.

> Fourth, we explain how the army loosened the permitted number of civilians who could be killed during the bombing of a target.

This article below states the civilian to militant death ratio in Gaza is 1:1, and for comparison the usual figure in modern war is 9:1, such as during the Battle of Mosul against ISIS. They may still be within the realm of moral action here, but the fog of war makes it very difficult to assess.

https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urb...

I’m unsure why the UN + Arab Nations don’t take control of the situation, get rid of Hamas, provide peacekeeping, integrate Palestine into Israel, and enforce property rights. All this bloodshed is revolting.

The great thing about free markets however is that companies that offer remote working have a great competitive advantage by virtue of that alone.