Mapping all human knowledge

#2 Product of the MonthMay 2019
The next place for canonical knowledge on the Internet that will eventually cover 10bn+ topics. Golden, among other features, has a WYSIWYG AI assisted editor that accelerates the process of extracting information, applying citations, filling tables and more.
Would you recommend this product?
51 Reviews3.2/5
Jude CEO and Founder of Golden here. Super excited to take this live. We are out to build the next place for canonical knowledge on the Internet. It has been a long-term mission for me to open up the knowledge coverage of billions of niche topics, companies, technologies and new concepts. Our aim is to cover in excess of 10bn topics in high detail over time. Although we all love Wikipedia, there have been various issues in the last 18 years, from constant deletion of data (product hunt was almost removed a few months back) to fact validation and automation of processes/work and UI/ease of user. We also believe there are many more features that users want, like a knowledge feed, keyboard commands, AI assisted feedback on editor contributions and tables that can automatically update. We have set out to: 1. Cover all topics that exist over time rather than just ‘notable’ topics. 2. Go into greater depth around a topic, from its timeline to videos and other useful resources surrounding the topic (eg learning videos, further reading, blog posts, Q&A, podcasts etc). 3. Support a larger population of people trying to learn about topics. 4. Make knowledge more accessible, richer and fun to read about. 5. Allow you to track topics of interest and be updated when new information is available on the subject. 6. Save time making the knowledge in the first place by using design, UI and AI to aid construction of the information. Especially by automating repetitive tasks and bring smart editor features. Initially we have kicked off with various areas from ‘cell and plant based meat’ to synthetic biology to cryptocurrency consensus mechanisms to artificial intelligence, microbiome, stem cell technology and startup topics. We expect these areas to increase in scope over time covering space, medical food, clean technology, robotics and many more exciting fields. We are still early on our journey to delivering our vision and very much looking forward to product feedback and help with building up the content. Our team is hard at work making the product easier to use, we are up for taking every flow to its simplest form and removing every bug. If there is a feature you have been dying for on Wikipedia but could not get it, please also let us know. We look forward to seeing you in our community and covering topics especially under represented elsewhere. You can find out more about what are making in this blog post here:
@judegomila is it a non profit? How can you be impartial with VCs behind you? How do you make money? Is the content open source? I like the idea, but don't see the point at all... There are problems with wikipedia for sure, maybe give wikipedia your 5 million dollars funding to help them instead?
@imromains Good questions. The topic pages are put out on CC-4.0-BY-SA ie open for the world. We make money by charging companies to do advanced queries and use our AI tools on their own data. The more correct and neutral we are, the better our product is to both the public and the paying customers. Thus we can be impartial as there is a product and financial incentive to do so. Additionally, by working with companies we believe we will be able to get more information open sourced quicker - just like github does. Giving WP that funding won't solve the issues discussed in the blog post here
@judegomila Congrats on the launch. Looking forward to seeing great things!
@judegomila @imromains Impartial to Golden atm, but most people don't know that Wikimedia, the parent company of Wikipedia, makes $100 million in annual revenue. They don't really need more money from a tiny startup. Source:
@kirillzubovsky does Wikipedia breakdown where that $100mil is earned from? I know Google and Mozilla sometimes donate money etc

Not sure why would anyone come up with one more idea for one more way of organizing knowledge that isn't intuitive, or needed for that matter. Humans have already shown that all they need is a clean & simple search engine, not a busy cluster of things to navigate through. It actually reminds me the old AOL and Yahoo, which couldn't succeed for variety of reasons, and aren't used anymore.


Organized knowledge


Busy, gadgety, gimmicky, unclear, "unfree", unintuitive, unnecessary.

couldn't agree more!
@konrad_lv That precise form of reasoning is behind lack of innovation. Why do we need what is already working?
@ma_cris_cordova I am all about innovation, as long as it's improving and optimizing something. You can't just create more complex GUI and call it "innovation". For example I never understood why someone invented Word Clouds and now they're distant past. And why Google or Craigslist haven't changed much in 10+ years? Because their usability is pretty optimal for their respective target audiences (CL is targeted towards people who prefer that 'oldish' type of UI). Though I think CL leaves room to be replaced with something nicer :-)
This is one of the more ambitious startups I've come across. Wikipedia is an amazing resource with deep defensibility. What's been the biggest learning or surprise so far, @judegomila?
@rrhoover Jude from Golden here. Agreed that Wikipedia is one of the best things that has been created so far by humans - I use it all the time. The biggest learning surprise so far was the scale of lack of information compiled out there. When I started digging deeper the cardinality of entities we want to map came out to be approx 10bn which is around 1000x the article count on WP. I just kept running up against pages like this when it could be like this or this when it could be this Too many topics were being deleted or not being covered fast enough or in enough depth. In terms of non product learning, building a company the second time around was just as hard as the first time round. The first time around the naivety is actually useful in that you take high risk, the second time around you have a couple of scars that make you want to feel more risk adverse. Building products that people use daily is a very very hard thing to do. Another major learning part is, your team is everything, so hire the best (which doesn't mean most experienced necessarily but more so motivated by the mission and faster learners).
@rrhoover @judegomila But also this when it could be this How do you plan to solve the problem of scale? Wikipedia has millions of contributors motivated by it's non-profit nature. How do you expect to get 1000x more contributions in while keeping profits for yourself?
@rrhoover @judegomila @freediver "Wikipedia has millions of contributors motivated by it's non-profit nature" - that said, some moderators do take advantage of it with a behind the scenes black market economy (which I'd be interested to learn the size of), see:
@rrhoover @freediver Jude from Golden here. I think the motivation is more around openness of the topic pages and Golden is running on CC4.0 which is the important part of the core motivation - to get everyone access to the pages and knowledge. I don't expect to get 1000x more contributions, we are writing software for leverage so that 1 unit of time spent on Golden can produce 100-1000x more. There are some tasks as well that can be fully automated, over time we see this automation increasing. Additionally, we actually have been reinvesting the $$ into building a better product and collecting more information to open source. Github has done a great job in allowing company $$ to be reinvested back into the product so that more code can be open sourced ultimately. To solve the problem of scale we wrote up a blog post above to describe how we will automate and semi automate much of the process.

The Golden team is grappling with all the right questions. Wikipedia covers 6 million articles, there's entire industries that are missing, how to go about that in the right way, how to balance AI and human contributions. Excited to continue using Golden as a user and contributor.


- Golden's AI-assisted editor makes contributing easy - Deep coverage of synthetic biology - Golden team gets the knowledge industry


- AI-assisted editor is still being built out. However the team is super responsive to feedback, both in my own experience and others online

Thanks Tito, yes lots of work to do to make the AI assisted editor really polished. More to come on this.
I'd love to know more about what kind of improvements we can make to the AI assisted editor so we can start working on them btw.
Wikipedia is a non-profit which has democratized knowledge for millions of people - why would you want to compete with that?
@nicholasoneill1 If no one competed with each other just because an idea already existed the world would still be in the stone-ages. Wikipedia could be the next "Myspace"
@nicholasoneill1 Hi Nick, Jude from Golden here. Keen to supplement rather than purely compete. There is a 1000x content gap we want to fill and we are covering 'entities' rather than 'articles'. In this blog post I outline why, I'd love to get your feedback on it - Also to Nick Sarro's point below it surely can't be the end to building systems/products around knowledge, we have to test new products and models.
@nicholasoneill1 wikipedia has massive gaps in knowledge and prominent posts there get deleted for BS reasons due to politics between moderators
@nicholasoneill1 @_jacksmith MediaWiki can be used by anyone wanting to fill those gaps and avoid WikiPedia editors.
@chuckkahn but that doesn't have the same domain authority as wikipedia from what I understand?