Ingest

A work-in-progress graph-knowledge base. It's main goal is to allow for personal archeology in a way that uncovers patterns and meaning.

Ingest is mainly focused on getting information in to the graph. It's interface is purely superficial while in progress as other tools will be built in time to show information to the public, and to allow user interaction.

The overall knowledge graph

is based on many inspirations, and was sparked from the work on the-codex which I feel is the most 'human' way to lay out history that a computer system is capable of, and also from Neo4j. Iian Neill's work, in one spark both shed my ideas of how computers 'have' to do things and gave voice to the system that I hope to uncover through my own work.

The structure of the system follows these general principles

1. Everything is perspective
2. Perspective can only be stated at a certain time
3. As much as possible, allow others to make thier own judgements

• Artefacts hold perspective, and can document the understanding of relationships
• Agents are any entity which is capable of affecting change (a person, a family, a political movement, and so-on)
• Time is the common thread that connects everything together, and it can only be precise for our current era (and even then, much of it is not precise)

Additionally, it's helpful to add these requirements to any scrap of information that will be ingested:

• Some content (for example, a thought or with a name and value; a measurement)
• Metadata that connects it to other content

For example: making a measurement of your weight.

it's important to know when that measurement was made, and who it was for. If you wrote that on a sticky-note and put it in a box with a dozen other measurements, a year later you'd still be able to ingest them and see the trend.

What is True with a capital T? Philosophers, scientists, and other great thinkers have talked about this at length, and still don't have an answer. Are we in an 11-dimension reality that's right next to other realities that contain other laws of nature? Are we simulations in a highly complex video game? Even if we constrain ourselves to the theory that we are 3-dimensional beings who occupy a measurable amount of space and can prove thier existence because of the ability to ask the question; is what you see the truth, or when it differs with what someone else sees, is what they see the truth? Maybe it's both. Or neither.

Even measurements can change through thousands of processes (a meaurement of your weight; what time of day was it, were you wearing heavy clothes? Was the scale calibrated?). And, our understanding of those measurements can change the conclusion they arrived at.

It's easier if we let go of the idea that there is A Truth, and open the doors to understanding what's really going on. Then, each time we ask the question, we can learn more.