I'm Dawid, the Founder and CEO of Bootstrap Shuffle during the day and a reader interested in science at any other time.
According to the study, emotional people (I am one of them) overestimate the knowledge they acquire by reading just the titles of articles shared on Facebook.
Bullets.tech is a response to it. This is a place where we publish summaries of articles for science enthusiasts. Five bullet points or less. The very essence of the article.
If you ever happened to share or like a science-related article after reading just the title, you will like our website :)
If the title of an article says that "a cure for cancer has been found", our summary will allow you to find out that the article is referring to one of the hundreds of tumor types and not in humans but in mice.
You can browse Bullets.tech:
1/ via the https://bullets.tech website
2/ By signing up to the weekly newsletter on the website
3/ Using the terminal https://www.npmjs.com/package/bullets-tech-cli
4/ on Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/bullets.tech/
5/ and the RSS feed: https://bullets.tech/rss/latest.xml
I am willing to collaborate with people with similar interests (science, technology, psychology, cosmos, history, medicine, nature) who would like to take part in developing this project as non-technical co-founders.
PS. I copied my post from Product Hunt because it explain a lot (i think)
Any questions? Maybe suggestions?
Also, who are the summarizers? Hand picked? Volunteers?
I'm not assuming any kind of ill-will or mal-intent, but how do I know that the bullet points will be any more useful that the title in terms of bias, other than goodwill?
I really really like the idea, and even the execution, so these are definitely just kind of nit-picks.
In some subreddits, users receive a lot of karma to do things similar to what you are doing. Usually making:
- a summary of the finding (the abstract in one sentence)
- a summary of the methodology (which often tells if a study is solid or not)
- context to understand if this is a breakthrough, an interesting but unpractical effect, a potentially misleading discovery
These are especially precious in environmental or medical research where one study may seem to say totally different things based on the overall context.
The scary thing is this works no matter what the number is. I've had a few projects where I was 99% done... And 99% to go.
It's of course based on Bootstrap. I like to use an online builder to experiment with fonts/colors. I found fonts here: https://fontpair.co/
Probably, I changed only the primary color from the default Bootstrap palette. I used one from this palette: https://flatuicolors.com/palette/ca
I'm mostly backend developer like you. I experiment a lot to find something looking good!