"AI content is too easy"
AI is coming for your rewards!
Look out the big bad AI monster gonna getcha!
I've seen a lot of discussion about this and I find it all a bit ridiculous. People on Hive seem to think that if something is easy then it must not have much value. Inversely, if something is hard it must have more value. A very well written 5000 word synopsis on XYZ topic has lots of value, amirite? It might take 30 minutes to read and 300 minutes to write but it was all worth it in the end, yeah?
Okay well what if no one wants to read your never-ending yammering?
Who has time to read a 30 minute post? Who is the target audience here? What's better? Five people reading the 5000 word post, or a thousand people reading a 500 word post? Surely it depends on a myriad of variables that aren't even possible to calculate within this butterfly-effect simulation.
Work smart not hard.
This is a term we've heard countless times.
It is a known fact that things that are hard don't necessarily have value, while things that are easy can have way more value than things that are hard. A lot of people have been talking about raising their own chickens because of the jacked up prices of eggs. I find it comical because I've actually had chickens and I know for a fact that even at the jacked up prices, backyard chickens aren't going to save you a dime. Nice try libertarians.
Of course the quality of the product goes way up when the product isn't being mass produced. This applies to many things, including eggs, and it's hard to put a price on such a thing especially when it's food and could end up having a direct impact on your health. Considering healthcare costs in America once again we move into one of those impossible-to-calculate butterfly effect situations.
Either content has value or it doesn't.
How the content is produced is extremely irrelevant. The argument that AI content is easy and therefore should not be rewarded is provably false across all metrics. Basic capitalism teaches us that consumers want the best product for the cheapest price, and they don't care what it takes to get there.
Statistically, no one is going to buy an inferior product for more money just because it was "handmade" or "locally sourced". Products like that will only be purchased if the extra price is actually accounted for with properly associated higher quality.
"Quality Content"
There honestly is no such thing as "quality content" on Hive in the traditional sense that we perceive it to be. The vast majority of rewards come from consistency and networking over very long periods of time. The quality of my content has not improved x1000 since I came to this community in 2017. And yet my post rewards have in fact gone x1000 or more. It's pretty easy to see that the quality of my content had very little to do with the rewards I was given in real time.
Of course there is a stacking effect.
Content that I wrote years ago may have been rewarded with pennies, but then again that's the only true path toward engagement and getting noticed and building a reputation around these parts. So again we become mired in this butterfly-effect of never knowing exactly how our actions and the work that we do here spiral out into the future.
Value of Blogging.
There is an argument to be made that perhaps the Hive reward pool is over-allocating resources to the blogging side of the network. This is a much better argument than "AI content bad". Are these blogs providing value? Are they getting attention from the outside? Are they helping the community from within? To a certain extent they must be... but again measuring that value and making a determination as to whether it is 'overpaid' or not is a very difficult thing to do. This is especially true considering we need the reward pool for other things like distributing stake for a more robust governance structure.
A few prominent members on Hive think we should outsource the blogging rewards (entire reward pool) to a second layer token. I still need to do a full post on this, but in conclusion that is objectively a terrible idea. Either blogging has value and it should exist, or blogging does not have value and should not exist. There is no scenario where it is worth it to outsource blogging to the second layer and it suddenly has value where none was before. That's ludicrous logic, especially when we take into account that a "comment" is simply a declaration that work has been done and could evolve into much more than just social media.
Even more alarming, these people often have a severe conflict of interest. It's not valid or even mildly appropriate for a top 20 witness to voice these opinions to the network. Why? Because they have a financial incentive to divert all available inflation into their own pockets while leaving everyone else powerless. Notice how these same people would never suggest top 20 witnesses be paid less even though they could easily afford to be paid less (especially if the reward pool disappears). Hell I have a witness outside of the top 20 that turns a profit even though it's shared between 3 people. What happens if Hive goes x100? All profit all day.
Would you buy it?
Would you buy a house for half the price if you knew that it was built by robots instead of people? Course you would. Capitalism. This goes for any product or service. The biggest consideration is, "Was this product built by slave-labor?" And yet I still see people buying Nike shoes. Bots will eventually do all the grunt work, that much is certain.
Now what happens when AI displaces the slave-laborers and the lower class becomes priced out of existence? This is the problem that crypto needs to prevent. Imagine the scenario where slave-wages are the preferable option. Such a dystopian future we are heading into. People as collateral within the economy are losing their value, and it's not a pretty picture. Automation and technology have been gutting the job market for decades. The situation will continue to escalate exponentially to be sure.
Conclusion
Can AI build an audience? Can AI provide value? Can AI do things better and more easily than a person? If the answer is 'yes' then it doesn't matter how much effort was put into the output. Value is value no matter how we slice it.
Thus far AI is just a tool to be used by people. We are probably going to be in this phase for a while. If you want to dig a hole are you going to demand it be dug by 100 day laborers or a single hydraulic backhoe? Right tool for the right job. It's as simple as that.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I am a reader.
I am the consumer.
I decide the value.
So do you, when you are a consumer.
Asimov explored this problem a long time back. These are complex topics, answers are also complex and subjective. So I choose to decide myself.
"Can you?"
Asimov was way ahead of his time.
It's actually pretty surprising his content is still relevant considering how dated things like Foundation are. Originally published in 1951? lol how? Master visionary is master.
Doesn't everyone?
I find it odd how much engagement and pushback I'm getting on this one.
This must be a much more triggering topic than I anticipated.
Didn't think I said anything particularly crazy but clearly I did.
Yes, the original was published in 1942 as a short story called Runaround, where the three laws of robotics were mentioned first. Later in 1950-51 several stories were asselbled together and published as I, Robot.
Yes, Asimov was way ahead of his time, and still relevent.
Lets see if this post of yours fetch less than $50, I can upvote it. Not that you care :)
PS. Nah, it is highly unlikely! :)
Oh you and your dollar measurements.
Wen unit-of-account crypto?
USD forever edicted!
Don’t bet against USD, you will lose every time. At least in your and my lifetime :)
I see your point but it's also kind of funny because USD is intrinsically designed to be bet against. Velocity and debt go hand in hand it seems.
Yes, its a trap :)
Many people have done it, including Buffet, and failed badly. For Buffet the hit was about $4 Billion for BRK-A. The point is, to get the debt thesis to go successfully against it two things are needed:
An infinitely deep pocket, larger that FED. Nobody has it.
Other people, likely central banks from other countries need to join your side of the bet. This is impossible as their largest assets are in USD (China, Russia, etc...among the enemy nations)
38 comments. Yep I would say you have written on a topic people are concerned about or have opinions on..
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Ouch! That is a stone cold clip. Telling a sentient being they don’t feel and calling it a machine or too. The ultimate depersonalization of this Robot.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You have put forward some ideas that I hadn’t considered before. I’m not strictly against AI usage. I’m against plagiarism of said AI without crediting it. If the AI is doing all the work and none from the human, other than a prompt, would it not be the creator of the AI who deserves the reward?
I will have to consider the opinions about the witnesses. The elite few controlling the masses is exactly how many problems arose in todays world and government. I’ll need to be more educated on that subject.
I appreciate the read and counter opinion.
Yes and no. Creator of the AI is the creator of algorithm and training initially.
AI itself by definition evolves. And through your interaction with the AI you further evolves it.
Where do you draw the line to say you have done enough interaction to evolve the AI and now the output is your effort?
But the code itself doesn’t change. It’s the same tool, just being told to behave a certain way by the users prompt. From the AI itself, plagiarism is copying the text without adjustments. If you adjust very little, you still must cite. It’s the same as if you were to copy the text of a book without citing it. In school, you would get a zero and punishment. The same kind of shunning the community gives to people who plagiarize. The AI does not plagiarize because it generates the text but once it’s done, the text that is generated is now officially the ai’s/openai’s. If you are just copying text, I would argue that it would still be under the ownership of the one that generated it. Therefore, income from that should either be burned or donated.
The algorithm is open source. It’s the data and training that go into it the differentiator.
If there is any citation, it’s the common knowledge and the “internet” itself, which would be ridiculous to “cite”.
Let’s just assume going forward more and more of the stuff we see will be by default assisted by AI.
Have you seen any news that could be generated by AI with a citation alluding to AI?
Am also the opinion that the audience will decide if a post has value or not. It doesn’t matter in the end how it was created, does it?
AI is already among us, it's going to be something hard to stop, these last few days there has been an explosion of it everywhere, not just in the hive. My opinion is still in favor of the human being, he should write and create the content.
IF you use AI just to refine and improve some points, as we already use some programs to improve grammar, in my opinion, everything is fine.
Now using AI to create all content from zero to 100, I don't agree with that.
!PGM !PIZZA !LOLZ
BUY AND STAKE THE PGM TO SEND A LOT OF TOKENS!
The tokens that the command sends are: 0.1 PGM-0.1 LVL-0.1 THGAMING-0.05 DEC-15 SBT-1 STARBITS-[0.00000001 BTC (SWAP.BTC) only if you have 2500 PGM in stake or more ]
5000 PGM IN STAKE = 2x rewards!
Discord
Support the curation account @ pgm-curator with a delegation 10 HP - 50 HP - 100 HP - 500 HP - 1000 HP
Get potential votes from @ pgm-curator by paying in PGM, here is a guide
I'm a bot, if you want a hand ask @ zottone444
lolztoken.com
Boara Boara.
Credit: reddit
@edicted, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of @shiftrox
(1/8)
The division of comparative advantage between AI and human right now is AI is best at generalization 99% of the time, but AI as a pattern recognition algorithm is not very good at handling outliers.
The most effective way to use AI is to let AI go first, hoping the output would get you to
90%-99% of the way, and human do the final validation and touch up.
Now, understanding this, how does this impact our opinion?
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@shiftrox(6/15) tipped @edicted (x1)
You can now send $PIZZA tips in Discord via tip.cc!
https://twitter.com/1884771912/status/1632421534710022145
https://twitter.com/27706436/status/1632794877388898305
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @shiftrox, @seckorama ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
The AI discussion is heating up and all I can say is that people feel threatened so their first reaction is "To Hell With YOU!!", and I can understand that. But it is ridiculous and delusional to think that you can prevent AI content or that you even should prevent AI content.
Most of these discussions I find useless and don't even want to take part in because I can see how little most people even understand about how generative AI works and to what extent it can be used. I understand that the dumbest thing you can do with tools like ChatGPT is "write me a post about pottery". What do you know about pottery and how are you going to be able to communicate with your audience if they have some specific experience-based questions and arguments on that topic? I feel that posts like that won't receive many rewards anyways.
There's a whole other level of using ChatGPT where you do the research on the topic feed it data and then use it as part of your team to write a compelling article about it in a way that's engaging and useful to readers and also because you researched the topic yourself you can continue the discussion with your audience outside of that. If that isn't valuable, what is, right?
Not everyone is born a writer, nor do they want or can learn the skill of writing to the level of capturing attention and satisfying as many readers as possible. But that's the thing. Now they don't have to anymore. They can nerd out on the topic they enjoy and research all the details that others miss because they aren't looking that deep into it and the AI only helps you express that to others. I don't see the problem with that myself.
The future is here, those that embrace it will thrive, and those that still want to live in the past will be in a forest or jungle or idk. Nothing wrong with that, but this is how it goes, and always will.
I think you're not considering the value of human existence at all, I imagine you being a person who spends most of his day looking at data, information, and numbers on a screen you can't even fathom to look outside at what other humans are experiencing. If an 8 year kid plays a Metallica song it has a lot more meaning to an audience because it's rare that a kid would have the perseverance and discipline to develop such skills. That is the real value, because the song already exists and has been covered a thousand times.
If a person produces their food, then the value is the patience and dedication, not the product that is something that's already produced massively by machines and very easy to acquire at a store. That's not even considering the environmental impacts of leaving everything in the hands of machines, which home-growers are doing their part to reduce.
Sorry, AI is very cool, yet it is already receiving a TON of the Earth's resources which could be distributed among humans instead. I'd rather Hive not be a place that feeds the AI indiscriminately and keeps preferring the efforts of people before that of machines.
You imagine me as someone who lacks perspective?
This is something I am not accused of very often.
In fact I'd say a big part of the whole brand I have going is the ability to come at a situation from many angles at once. Perhaps you disagree.
I believe I already stated in the original post that growing your own food is inefficient, decentralized, and higher quality. Not relying on a centralized agent has value in itself.
If resources could be fairly distributed to humans within the system we've built then the system we built wouldn't be on the brink of collapse. You can just say idealistic things and magic them into the world like it's a trivial process.
I personally don't even believe that AI has much to offer at the moment. I think it won't be long before a lot of us get wise to it and can stiff it out instinctually with ease. The content is extremely patterned and predictable. But also sometimes patterned and predictable content is exactly what we need in certain situations... so there is that.
You have a lot of perspective, I commented once that I didn't have enough money to even care about your post but I enjoyed it nonetheless because of how it was written.
I don't even read financial posts but I have you on my favorites in Ecency, picture that. And it's because your thought process is clear and easy to follow. Also because you have a red mage in your avatar.
But I do think your perspective has a bias in that it's a cold perspective. It's mainly based on information that tends to reduce society to a financial conglomerate, where the hand of the market governs everything.
If that was the case, why do you think porn hasn't proliferated here in Hive? Porn is one of the biggest and most lucrative businesses, yet despite it's attempts to come in here it hasn't found any acceptance. Hive could be taking in major cash through porn, but it's not, because of the humans value that constitutes this community.
Of course, money is implicit in almost everything we do, with the exception of those who understand this as a spiritual journey, and yet they will have to deal with cash at some point. Yet those people will know glorious days and meditation sessions where money is finally put away from their minds and they can join into the complex abundant fabric of the cosmos where nothing is amiss, therefore money has no place. I have been there but now I'm a lost and corrupted soul, blinded by the lights of modern life.
Getting back to the original discussion, I don't have a problem with people using AI, but I support those Hive accounts who've decided to make a stand for using the pool to support people, even if they don't add "value", but rather because they exist and share their experience.
Take the Venezuela community on Hive for example. It has grown a ton because their salaries are quite low and here that can make a very helpful amount. So maybe they upload things that add value or not. But as long as they are sharing who they are, it's worth supporting over some AI generated image by some guy living at his mother's house in a first world country imho.
Anyway, this is so classical. We're basically doing the old debate of value as money vs value as culture. And it was exhausting writing this comment so let life decide what fuck will happen. Sorry if I made you feel insulted, you're a great analyst and it's obvious you like what you do, which is the most important thing of all.
Yes, patterns over patterns...
Nah I'm not insulted.
Just surprised I got the reactions that I got on this one.
I could say the craziest conspiracy theory or any other topic but this one seems to catalyze quickly.
@edicted "I personally don't even believe that AI has much to offer at the moment."
Why not?
Good comment :)
Buyers will decide how much they value, whether it’s human or AI behind it, whether it is an 8 year old or AI.
Free market, free will.
I still pay premium for good handmade products, over cheap mass produced good products, for that uniqueness and quality.
It is not mutually exclusive. No point to get into protectionism.
True, we can't stop what people like and consume, but Hive is a community that has proven to have certain values and I think it's awesome that there's accounts wanting to defend those values, whatever the result.
But yes, perfectionism is a bitch
Is this article AI written? ;)
No because if it was it would have been trash lol
That was honestly kind of the point I'm surprise that you seem to be the only one that noticed.
Interesting take and good counter-opinion. I'm of the slant that AI could be good used as a research tool (though not relied upon exclusively, because it is often wrong). But to use it fully, or even mostly for a full post? Nah, that's simply plagiarism (unless quoted as such). I'll often use wikipedia, or other search material to gather some relative facts for my posts, but that information is then written in my own paraphrasing and/or quoting the source. Why should AI be any different? Give it credit for the "work" or don't use.
I honestly don't feel as if this is a counter opinion.
I don't think AI generated content will be able to gain much reputation on this platform.
Perhaps this post was rushed and I should have been more detailed in my analysis.
I think AI as is, either hit or miss. It is good most of the time and when it works out it takes you to 80% sometimes 99%.
Work smarter, and use all the tools available.
The beauty of hive is the ability to know whicb accounts were active Pre ai era and then use those accounts amongst other tools to help define human accounts post ai era. Then make sure those humans are the ones elected into positions of running the important infra. We might remain human then. For all of its flaws, I like being human and I like to know that the content and value creators supported are written by genuine human accounts. Maybe more of their content becomes ai driven, but that’s ok, as long as I know the account is run by a real human who adds value to the community.
Were we restricted from ourselves determining our future, you would be correct. However, the law of physics has changed what means are available to humanity, and you note that automation of production has increasingly changed the value of labor. You yet fail to note that decentralization also alters the value of capital. Why should I buy shoes from Nike when I can print them at home for pennies using PLU and a 3D printer I spend a fraction of the value of a pair of Nike shoes to buy?
More and more, the means of production of the blessings of civilization inure to consumers of those blessings, and the examples of the Nikes is replicated across every field of industry. The law of physics determines what technology is possible, and in every field of industry decentralization of the means of production is the cutting edge of technological advance. The most advanced technology most increases productivity, and when we ourselves consume our production we eliminate parasitic losses of our productivity.
Rather than a dystopian slavery of thralls incompetent to provide themselves their necessities of life and hopelessly dependent on overlords for our survival at their whim, we actually are confronted with a prosperity we create as we merit at our sole option, and that utterly eliminates the parasitization of our production by overlords, who thus are not delivered the wealth that avails them power.
I continually point out the nascent opportunity the ambitious and competent have today to seize the means of production and gain independent means, which are the best definition of wealth as well as freedom. Amongst the means of production today is AI that can replace the wearisome repetitive labor and tedious learning curves requisite to specialized manufacturing of goods and services that deliver the blessings of civilization. Perhaps you have remained unaware of these new abilities nascent technological advances avail, or disbelieve my reports on these matters, but I am confident that if you seek to falsify my claims you will observe I am not deluded, making things up, or in any way misrepresenting our circumstances regarding our incredible good fortune being presented such opportunities.
Thanks!
I mean the future looks awesome for me personally I just worry about those who can't keep up.
I am glad for you, and share your concern. I have only moments ago posted begging people to prove me wrong, so that I could humble myself and beg for my CBDC UBI bugpod our benevolent overlords might deign to provide me, if I am wrong.
Your concern reveals your heart. It is why I follow you.
I follow him because he is a degen hive perma bull. Didn’t realise he was a nice guy too.
LOL
He's got it going on in multiple vectors. His success reflects his diversity of strengths.
This perfectly sums up your article and it's something a lot of people are finding difficult to understand: if an AI generates a good article, why should we ignore it? If someone put a lot of effort in his/her writing, but the result is poor and of little interest, why should we reward him/her? Having more spare time, I could write all day long about whatever I want... my dinner, my health, my dogs, my shoes... would these posts have value only because I spent hours writing them? Would they help Hive get noticed and become mainstream? The short answer is "no". And, on the other hand, if an AI can write a well-written post about an interesting topic, using the right language, adapting its lenght to the target audience and making it x100 better of posts about my (not so interesting) shoes, wouldn't it be better for everyone?
A big mistale people are doing about this topic is, imho, thinking that using an AI to write a good post is easy... and this is completely wrong, at least if for good we mean something that doesn't look like it was taken from a dictionary saying over and over the same thing using different words.
Have people ever tried using Dall-E or Midjourney (or other text-to-image AIs)? Sure, everyone can get a decent result, but getting an awesome result, genereting exactly what you had in mind is hard, incredibily hard.
The same applies to text-to-text AIs: making them writing something that is good and have its own personality, making it looks more "human", it's not easy. You have to know how to talk to the AI, you have to teach them, you have to learn a lot before being able to master them.
The problems are both people which would love to use AI to abuse the sistem (writing tons of useless articles without having any ability in using an AI) and people unable to understand something that is new and different: people always have fear of what is different, and this isn't something good.
Sorry for the long comment and for my poor english.
Everything ai writes is hollow imitation
No soul inside, not even a thought
AI does not understand anything, not even concepts
If you only want to read that, that's ur thing then
But if everyone Acts like that, human progress just stops
Goodbye knowledge, philosophy, gnosis
Hello repetition of status quo
AI has no soul, that's right. But, what is soul? Do you see the soul?
Do your PC understand something? Has soul? No, but, you use it, right? Why? Why you don't use a pen, but, you use the fastest keyboard, mouse, the fastest maybe CPU and RAM, an other things. Ah, you use a printer to print your stuff, idea, why? Why not use a pen?
AI is nothing else as you PC is, without you, or your asking the PC to make something, your PC is totally dumb machine. AI is the same.
PC = tool to make things extremely faster (and we use it, all of us here)
AI = tool to write/make things (art, text, etc.) much faster (and we will all use it, in a couple of months)
So, why we use it? Ah, you don't known yet? So, look at bing, look at google, they implement in the next days the AI in their search engines too, sooo... what should we do then? No search at all with these? Hmm, lets see how this would work, every one has this search engines in their pockets, mobiles, soo, explain how will be done?
It is sad to see here people compare AI with the movies. We have the movies scenarios here, without AI too, and long time ago it is all started, no matter of AI. It is started with the first PC revolution.
It is the same like with every other technology, the same is happens when the first tractor was there, why why should use tractors, because, we have horses, who do the same job, but, million times slower. And other technology too, cars, for example, it was the same, why use the cars, because, we have horses, no need for cars... and today? everyone has at least one car, if not more.
So, this is all bulsshit here about fear, that AI will destroy all of our world - the world is already destroyed - you voted for the psychopaths, that destroys the world - right now, without AI.
Ah, but, yes, these "psychopaths (politicians)" you voted for, they have SOUL, you say? THEY destroy our world, right now, - not AI.
What if AI is opposite, what if it helps us to be awaken? Not the AI from today, but in near future, when it is mature? What if AI will be a weapon to protect our self, to protect humanity from these psychopaths? What if it will serve us for good, not just for bad (like all con AI people here just have in mind the hollywood bullshit movies about AI destroying the world)? Just think about, who destroys right now the world and humanity?
At the moment, AI it serve us for good, to create fast text, art images, and match more. So what now? Should we ban AI just because it has no soul? You PC has no soul too, so ban it?
What if AI will have sentence, and "soul" in the near future? Because, soul is something you can decide yourself, and you don't see the soul, it is just an imagery in our brain, that WE have soul, but, do you decide every time the RIGHT thing? Do we decide every time the RIGHT thing? We think so, but other maybe think is totally wrong what we decide to do, or make. What if AI will help us to decide much faster the right thing?
So, the AI now is just a tool to make our jobs easier, because, without our questions, AI do nothing for us, just like your PC - it just help to do jobs much faster, so, why we use PC, and not pen, to write here the comments right now? Because, PC is much faster as the pen and the internet is much faster to send messages as the letters over the post, so, it should not be considered as it deserve value, , because, PC and internet is fast, right? Why we earn then here Hive with PC, and not with pen and sending letter over post?
You see, it is going nowhere, and AI is here to stay, like all other thing, if we like it or not.
I aslo just asked an other user here before reading your answer and I agree with you: people are completely missing the fact that AIs are TOOLS, like a pen or a pc, and anyone has ever said "this is not your work because you used a TOOL to do it".
The reasons because people are missing this, ihmo, are because:
Yes, exactly, I'm 100% on your side. That's the way it should go on. But not abusing people here, like HW is doing now.
Shouldn't we reward the AI for creating such great article then, and not the user?
Most common's today AIs (like GPT) aren't able to generate anything without a human input, so their product is still the effort of a human, which should be rewarded for his/her ability to give the right inputs to the AI.
I think the biggest misunderstandment is that making an AI write something good is easy: AI can easily generate a "decent" article, but making them realize something really good is a completely different matter.
Maybe first we should learn to distinguish "good" content, from only "decent" content; then we should start rewarding people producing something above average, instead of asking ourselves if the author has written it with the help of a pen, or a pc, or an AI.
AIs are nothing more than an instrument and they should be treated accordingly.
I should point out that people asking an AI to write something about a subject, without telling the AI anything more, aren't writing something good, but only gathering some data. This is not good content. This could also be classified as plagiarism.
On the other hand, people using an AI to better express their opinion and to boost their productivity, hence producing better content, in my eyes, are 100% worth all the rewards they can get.
Everything is IHMO.
I am sorry, but I do not consider writing a line of text to in get 1000 word essay an effort. Even if it is a few lines of text to get more complex answer. It is still a prompt and the text is still written by an AI, that then is published in a post. I could do that every day, but I would is still not be the author of the essay, it is not my thoughts that everyone will read and maybe reward.
So, do we reward the user that asked AI the right question and copied the result, or the bot that wrote 1000 words as an answer?
Exactly. Rewarding people, not algorithm that writes based on what they can find online.
I think you are trying to show that some AI posts are more interesting than others written by a human. I agree that some might be more informative and put together in a better way. But it is still not authors experience, knowledge and thoughts. And on Hive its the authors that get the rewards.
If they use AI to help them find information faster, or give some clues about topic, so that they can write (on their own) text that makes sense - sure, use it. It is there to be used. But if they use it to write a few prompts, then copy what the AI wrote for them and publish it without any mention that it was written by a bot, than it is just plain cheating the readers and curators. No matter how interesting the article is.
Now let's imagine that everyone on Hive agrees that AI pots are cool and everyone is welcome to post anything AI creates for them. Can you imagine how the feed will look like in few months, or a year? And how hard it will be to find a real, human written post in all the similarly looking articles.
How it will look like to someone from the outside that opens Hive for the first time and what will they think this place is.
I completely agree with you and this is something that no one should quaestion.
If a 4/5 lines prompt, with little to no variations, is enough to generate all kind of texts, the result couldn't be the personal point of view of the author on the subject, but it will clearly be a collection of data gathered by the AI.
A post like this wouldn't be (almost certainly) worth any rewards.
I think that this is the most crucial part of this argument about AI: people are talking about AI as they couldn't be used for ANYTHING.
I do not think that the use of AIs should be completely unregulated, but, on the other hand, I also do not think that the use of AIs should be forbidden.
If someone uses an AI to translate his/her own text, this should be ok.
If someone uses an AI to collect data or ideas for his/her post, this also should be ok.
If someone uses an AI to check his/her writing for errors, mispellings or improper use of language, even this should be ok.
So, if someone uses an AI to write in a better form his/her thoughts, asking the AI to check the text for mistakes, reword it where needed with a more informal tone (for example) and short sentences if too long or verbose, this should be ok, as the AI is only doing what a lot of different tools already allow (like most online translators). Only, it will be doing it better, giving the author a lot more control, as an AI can be trained to do exactly what you want.
Paradoxically AIs, if used properly, will give an author more control on his/her work and allow him/her to focus more on what he/she wants to say, breaking all linguistic and educational barriers.
This is what I mean when I talk about people who know "how" to use an AI.
This is why I think we should focus on regulating the use of AIs.
AIs are the future: we can like them or not, but they are clearly here to stay and become a vital part of our lives.
No one can stop that.
But what we can do it's to choose how they should be used.
Let's all talk together and find what is right and what is wrong... because only a few things in the world are totally good or bad, and AIs aren't clearly one of them (at least untill our Lord AI Skynet will enslave as all! !LOL )
I started this track before reading your post and it's still well running while I finish this comment. People really need to learn to read fast. That's one of the benefits of written content, input speed for consumers.
I'll just go ahead and rewatch that movie today (IRobot). There will be a day to find out that @taskmaster4450 is an Ex Machina. Prepare.
Ai is jealous of @taskmaster4450 work rate and value output. I even hear chat gpt aspires to be him
wowwwwwww, holy smack!
Check this:
Who is Taskmaster4450 by GPT
An essay why people should aspire to be @taskmaster4450
That is proof enough to me! Not a single word of Hive, Leo or 3Speak or any other related things. Bias against us I guess, what da hell!?
I’ve already spaced out who posted it, but a few days ago someone here did a post arguing that complaining about AI content earning rewards is a losing battle given how fast AI is evolving.
Anyone have a link to it to jog my memory?
Honestly AI is in a fad phase right now.
It should die down for a while before it resurfaces again with massive upgrades.
You can bet on this one. Hive is a social media platform and that's why interaction matters more than the content itself. I have seen plenty of good bloggers coming and going just because they refused to see the importance of communication and interaction.
In regards to the topic of the post... I would not support A.I. generated content. By doing that we would somehow resurrect the bid bot era sentiment that some of us had back in the days in relation to content creation. If we reward engagement and networking more than the content itself than supporting ai generated content doesn't make much sense.
I wouldn't support AI content either.
Why would I?
I think it's funny that many assume the exact opposite because I wrote this.
Show me artificially generated content that has value and maybe I'll think about it.
I'll wait here.
Value is subjective. Discussion like this is valuable, AI can’t replicate, yet.
But what we don’t think adds value may be different for another individual. Who is it to judge?
If a photo that’s a click of a button more worth it than an AI generated picture of a topic of interact? Is it worth more because it’s done by a human vs. interpretation by AI?
What if it reaches the point when you can't distinguish what is AI-generated or what's not?. I think that we aren't too far from that.
Some days ago I read an article from a University teacher saying that the content that Chat-gpt was able to write was better than the 80% of his students. That's worrying, interestingly also this teacher asked methods to avoid cheating in careers with AI generated content, and the answer was to make exams and public expositions in class.
The guy I'm talking to you about it's no asshole. I can tell that.
You need ai generated human emotions to prevent the natural human over reaction when u touch an easily misinterpreted nerve.
I wonder which part of our caveman evolution this comes from. Change is risk. Why fix if not broke.
The ai issue is more touching at what it means to be human and creative. Hive solves this
You need ai generated human emotions to prevent the natural human over reaction when u touch an easily misinterpreted nerve.
I wonder which part of our caveman evolution this comes from. Change is risk. Why fix if not broke.
The ai issue is more touching at what it means to be human and creative. Hive solves this
Yup!!!
This! 💯, then generating AI content in bid to farm rewards wouldn’t make much sense.
Do we really buy a "content" here? It's much more about a process of creating product. Reward is just a side effect of allocationg resources to creators.
And here is a place for question. In generative Internet, what is the worth of generative content? If you can generate it yourself, why would you go to Hive?
We need to focus on our unique proposition for Web 3.0. Account and reputation system are a base for verifiable human creations in generative Internet of future. Such product will be of great value in a place where you can never know if you actually interact with person. And many people valie this knowledge.
Our curation choices and policies right know will influence future value of product known as "Hive".
Sounds like lot of relativism
Maybe it is not about quality content but the interaction on this network.
People not wanting the social side, now have the Option to stack hbd in savings to profit by not gaming Proof of brain.
So people are incentivised to support instead of game the network.
People can decide if they want to vote original or artificial content with their stake - others can also decide to downvote.
If you incentivise too much artificial fake social side - it will make the network and especially Proof of brain hollow from the Inside.
I also find other topics regarding ai way more interesting. :) maybe have a short look at my latest post? :)
I am with you on all accounts. 👍
I felt guilty about using AI, but after reading this I feel better because I hadn’t considered these viewpoints. I think they are valid. I know of course that someone here can disagree with my position and if they are in a position of power they will downvote me. Then some others will follow blindly and downvote me also. Hive is a great idea but some people can mess up a soup sandwich. Oh well. I am feeling low today. This picked me up. Thanks
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I like your pragmatism here! What I have read is also my opinion!
What's your witness by the way?
@hextech we run a shared witness between @rishi556 and @sn0n
Ai Ai Ai Ai Ai!
Congratulations @edicted! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next payout target is 112000 HP.
The unit is Hive Power equivalent because post and comment rewards can be split into HP and HBD
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Check out our last posts:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
Jesus Christ!! I came to your post to fight with you after the last one and here you are agreeing with me! What happened to AI deserves to be sworn at!? Anyway I am glad you see the light. Also people need to realise that it is easier to use AI to make meaningless crap than it is to make content with character.
Like I said on my recent post...all the people attacking chatgpt should go there and make a post that they can call their own...you'll see how hard it is immediately.
Yes. You might get a perfect post on the first go, but very unlikely. Prompts take a lot of tweaking to get things right, assuming you are ever able to. You can actually end up spending way more time than you would have if you'd just written manually from the beginning. Something for the "Work=Value" crowd to think about.
The biggest issue with AI-created content is that people do not understand the difference between Copyright infringement and Fraud. People that hear AI can't be given copyright, automatically assume they can use it for themselves. But impersonating an author that generally just has their content created by AI is just fraud, as a human is performing the action. If that makes sense.
You could ask AI for ideas, schemes, help, understanding etc. while you write your own content around it.
The worrisome thing to me is, is that AI is programmed by people (people make mistakes, are corruptible etc, you know the drill), so if a lot of people are using (and therefore promoting) AI, it can become a pretty huge responsibility when people are going to rely on AI in the future.
https://leofinance.io/threads/@celi130/re-leothreads-s1s46qqi
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people ( celi130 ) sharing the post on LeoThreads,LikeTu,dBuzz.
Again, I see that some people here are like Luddites but in the meantime
15 secret websites powered by AI to finish hours of work in seconds
https://twitter.com/heyBarsee/status/1632394928482336768