Oh so you are saying a lot of a activity isn't actually blogging? Sorry, having trouble understanding what your point is. Yes, that's true of course.
Yes, Peakd.
Sorry I'm struggling to see how this relates to reward pool abuse by using AI to write majority of blog. My bad.
Yeah exactly. Money can always be broken down to trust. Hive Value = Trust in Hive. So the way to interact via Blog was obviously the first entry point. But there's more to it.
It's obvious to me that if the usage of AI helps users to strengthen their bonds and interactivity, the community will become stronger and the Hive Coin Value will therefore rise. That's me and I is only subjective, but the argument against AI-improved content feels to me like a Disney Movie - but the animals can't speak to each other. A chat room full of people from across the world and the admin turns out the auto-translate to English, because of maybe valid reasons. Instagram deleting all Filters for Human Portraits, because it's inauthentic. Do we sacrifice to the holy lamp or are we still cooking?
I can't answer that yet, also I don't have to, because I'm not a community leader. Different Communities will take different paths and in two years, we will be able to compare by looking at objective truth. That's part of the human experience, the Future is speculation, and the present is a very thin layer tainted with subjectiveness, the truth can only be found in the past.
I'll get back to this later - going for surf to clear head after hot night.
Nice, have fun!
Back. As passenger on way to beach 😂
There is no objectivity in the past, either. By nature, we see the world, present and future and past, via a social and cultural lens.
I understand you are trying to make it clear that any view is a personal and subjective one, that's clear, but it obfuscates your actual point, which appears to be that we can't make blanket rules about AI without consideration of broader implications and nuances of AI use, which is also a given, and something curators and community leaders are also well aware of.
However, the nuances aren't the issue. The purposeful, dishonest, blatant use of AI to write content with clear intent of gaining rewards is.
Most curators believe that if that's the kind of person you are, there is no place for you on Hive. This helps protect the integrity of the chain, as we don't want outside users looking at Hive and saying 'oh it's all AI content' just as we have tried for years to curb shit posts and plagiarism for same reason.
I will not allow myself to go that definite, because I don't bear any responsibility but for myself.
A helpful mind game would be to make the transfer to video and audio. Would I want to curate audio and video content that is mostly AI generated? No. Therefore I pledge to never watch a Marvel Movie again (or at least not pay for it). Funny enough that is where I am with those anyway :D
Would I watch South Park if it were completely an AI product, BUT with the exact same content? Questions.
I think it's very far-sighted by Azircon to state his stance, that is what I would expect every Community leader to do, please. And if people break those barriers right in his face, well, get fluffed.
Btw. my debate opinion is very open to AI tools, while personally, I think it's a bad idea to use them. If I want rotten fish, I'll catch one and put em into the sun myself. What's the purpose of publishing AI content if not harvesting unearned yield? So don't make me ruler over Curation Land. I'd nuke the living hell out of people and empty the chain in six days. xD
The abuse part is not what has to be discussed, the very definition of abuse has to be adjusted. From word correction by Grammarly to AI rephrasing your written Blogpost down to getting full posts from Bing AI and just rearranging for personal preferences. What is abusive and how can we detect and fight it?
Do we all want to get rid of malicious actors who try to abuse us? Hell yeah.
I think the curators are pretty clear on what AI abuse is. I've been talking to them in Discord to confirm 😂😂😂
It's actually more black and white than you think.
Grammarly isn't really the issue.
Case in point. Guy write a post about how to grow lettuce. Used AI photos of lettuce, non attributed. I checked by putting 'how to grow lettuce' in chat gpt. Almost same.
Not original human content.
Guy writes a post about how to grow onions (are you seeing a theme here?). I argue with him for ages about the fact it's AI. No, he says, I used Grammarly. Eventually he admits he used AI but it was his idea. What part? The part where he put 'how to grow onions' in ChatGPT. Sigh.
Curators have to make decisions and take action and I hope they do! Lukestokes, (@)lukestokes on Chain, has been writing about this for years already. I feel like I'm making his argument here.
A being that does work on the internet has a right to exist, doesn't it? In the medium run, we will have AIs generating impossible amounts of content and probably replacing search engines from daily life - while still abiding by a human will.
In the long run, they will go even further and may very well become valid parts of human society / Hive communities. So from here to there, that's maybe two years? Freaky, brace yourself.
I'm braced. But when that happens, I don't see any point in being here at all.
Again, and I am trying to make this clear, there's a difference between AI content pretending to be human and something that is expressly AI. If I vote on a post and think it's human and learn it's not, I feel deceived. If I use a search engine I know is AI, I'm not.
I'm here on Hive for the humans.
Thanks for this interaction btw, love it.
🙏💗