Launched this week
Capybara Court
Tiny disputes, gently settled by a capybara judge
79 followers
Tiny disputes, gently settled by a capybara judge
79 followers
Two people answer the same four questions about a small dispute. Each side is sealed; only Judge Cappy, a capybara, reads both. The ruling opens on both phones at once, fault never 100 to 0. Alone? Post to the gallery, names covered. It all shreds in 30 days.
@jungsik_byun Liked that you said plainly he's a cartoon capybara, not a counsellor .And the 30-day shred with no accounts or trackers makes it easy to try with a partner without worrying.
@mariya_valeva Thank you, Mariya. That line mattered to me. Cappy can settle who left the fan on, but he shouldn't sound like a counsellor, so the app says so and points to real help when a story is bigger than the court. And the 30 days is a scheduled delete on the server, so nothing waits around afterwards.
Love the idea, does it support long context arguments? 😂
@zuhairnaqvi Ha, within reason. Each of you gets four answers of up to 500 characters, so about a page per side, and Cappy reads both in full. If it doesn't fit on a page, it's probably not a small argument anymore.
I want but it's not compatible with my OnePlus 9 5G :(
Either way congrats on the launch, I think this is an great idea and the product vid is very good!
@dlo Thank you, Daniel, and sorry about that. It isn't your phone: the Android version had only been released in Korea on Google Play. I've just opened it to every country, and it should show up for you once Google finishes reviewing the change. And thank you for the kind words about the film.
the part I'd push back on is forcing the split between 25 and 75. some arguments really are closer to 90/10 and I think couples know it when they're in one - the dishes thing is never actually 50/50, someone just didn't do them. an AI capybara that refuses to ever say "yeah, this one's mostly on you" might feel fair in the abstract but dishonest in the specific case, and the person who was actually right might trust the verdict less the next time precisely because they remember it never fully sided with them even when they were clearly right last time. have you thought about letting the split go further toward the edges when the inputs clearly point that way, or is the floor/ceiling a deliberate design choice to stop it from ever feeling like it's taking sides?
@galdayan honestly yeah it's deliberate. 75/25 already means "this one's mostly on you" and the ruling says that out loud. the only thing the cap takes away is the clean sweep.
the other thing is Cappy isn't really judging the dishes it's judging the fight. someone didn't do them sure but how that turned into an argument is almost never just one person
and the judge only gets two people's own versions of what happened. calling that 90/10 would be pretending to know more than it does
your trust point is fair though. if people who were clearly right start feeling shortchanged I would widen the range before I'd drop it. appreciate your insightful feedback and thank you for taking the time to provide it