This raise the question do we want to have bots vote for our content? A lot of web side have anti bots mechanics, but because of how the blockchain works this is not feasible, a test for IQ is a way to filter curators opinions and not the content and this not guaranteed for good content anyways, I think the root of the problem is the lack of people in Steemit, and lack of interest to update the site.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
"but because of how the blockchain works this is not feasible"
Correct, we can't make bots technically impossible, but we can disincentivize their use by rewarding real interaction. This doesn't mean we want to eliminate all bots, but it is a tool for regulating what proportion of blockchain interaction are automated.
It's a lot harder to write a bot that posts a salient comment than simply votes.
You are right, bots don't have that capabilities for doing that "yet", in the other words, we will making people develop smartest bots each day by making harder for dumb bots to make money, this is a good and easy way to promote AI development and I support this idea.
It is interesting to think of this as simply an AI arms race to producing the fully human-impersonating Steemit robot.
I think users that intelligently interact with other users will outperform bots in the long run. I'm pretty sure that @m3mt and @lexiconical are humans. That is why I follow them and would up-vote but can't afford the power right now.
Bots and humans that do not contribute value to a post will get a down vote if I could afford it. I'm looking forward to being able to divide my up-vote/down-vote so it don't deplete so fast. This feature should be more readily available for more users so that that non-valuable posts/comments get down-voted more.
Grammar is also very important. I am rarely going to follow/up-vote/reply to users that don't use proper spelling, punctuation and grammar - they should at least put some effort into it.
"Bots and humans that do not contribute value to a post will get a down vote"
Only if they are posting a target which can be flagged...
"Grammar is also very important."
I wish this were more generally true.
I'm going to have to disagree with you there, I'm pretty sure @lexiconical is at least a Vulcan or maybe a Metron.
I absolutely never hang out here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/totallynotrobots/
Eventually humanity will grow obsolete, even if it is hard to believe, for now I think it is a a little of a wasting of our time to make it "harder", a temporarily fix it is just that, it would be admitting you can't beat bots no matter what, if you know the end result then you will be only wasting time in solutions that only create more problems.
But what if we get rid of the problem altogether? What if we make absolutely sure one real person is casting one real vote and he or she is accountable to his own vote? Haha that would be crazy expensive right? But it would get rid of all complains for complete, we know the answer and nevertheless, who would be willing?
I like practical solutions, I made my tesis base on genetics algorithms that give a "good" solutions but not the best, so yeah, I agreed with you, we should make harder for bots to vote and give some breathing room for humans, now I leave you with this question, how we make that happen? I think this post is good start.
"humanity will grow obsolete"
By what metric...? I doubt we'll ever see humanity as obsolete.
This bring out two questions, "what is humanity" and "how can be obsolete", I refer to the "human mind and body" as growing obsolete compare to the "mind" and "body" of a robot in terms of durability and how much accurate information they can hold without forgetting anything at all.
I don't know if you are referring in your life time or into the distant future, but I believe that give it enough time and resources, and you will end with an A.I robot that can fool any human into thinking they are talking to another human.
Btw, if you can have an engaging conversation con with a bot, does it matter if it is a bot and not a human? (This is outside Steemit realm anyway it is just a side question)
Either way, the bots are running wild in Steemit, it would be nice to have a test to check if someone is a bot before commenting, flagging and voting, but I doubt it would put in place though, as "it is a big business".
From the perspective of physical capabilities, our obsolescence may already be at hand, but what becomes the purpose of AI if it has nothing to serve?
"Btw, if you can have an engaging conversation con with a bot, does it matter if it is a bot and not a human?"
Perhaps not to you, but it is relevant for the other party in the conversation, I suppose - if they have no need of human contact, one would expect them not to value the process.
"Either way, the bots are running wild in Steemit, it would be nice to have a test to check if someone is a bot before commenting, flagging and voting,"
Yeah, this would probably take too many resources to be practical, as you suggest.
Reading your comment, clicking on your profile, and seeing "FreeLance", made me think again, that we should make a game about "Free Lancing". Something perhaps like flappy birds/joust. A no cost ["Free"] "Lancing" [jousting] game lol. This is partially because you actually have "Free Lance Gamer" Lol :) Alx
You really took this comment in an unexpected direction.
That is generally what I do sir. Once I had enough real ideas to ensure I could make my fortune, I just let my mind fly wildly, and sat back taking notes. I should be publishing all 420 in 2018, first on Steemit and DLive. When I’ll start using the account @opensourcery. :)
You sound like an awfully interesting fellow!
I'm experimenting with a similar process myself in 2018...
hahaha that's an interesting concept for a game, can we put some strategic layer? Btw the only reason why the gamer tag is there is because i like to play a ton of xcom2.
It sounds like more of a gimmicky name idea than a real innovative mechanic, tbh.
Lol I always or usually start out with gimmicky names and then sometimes an idea forms. The best I have is free for all “free lancing” where everyone is trying to impale everyone else on a lance, maybe pubg style [which is a game I “invented” [part of] years ago, on some level, suggesting that we use the huge screens at football fields to show a group of competitors on the field with an overhead camera, that moved around, eliminating any people who couldn’t stay in “frame”, but this was obviously real people, running and jostling, not Video] the idea for free lance is I guess is like Greek triremes, where everyone is vulnerable from the side, but deadly if they strike anyone with the “tip”. Maybe that’s a better game. Don’t trireme, DOREME. Lol.
We could. But I’m sure we have a great many other things to do. Or not. I’m usually at https://discord.gg/2FwzQu talking about all the ideas.
Maybe we could just make it so that everyone has to SPEAK their comment into an app, that then transcribes it, presenting it as text, but also having the audio file available for the first seven days at least, so anyone can verify in a moment if it is a human. Sure, bots will catch up in a few years, but we could get a ton done in a few years, if the system were relatively "perfected". Alx
That is an interesting idea for verification, and would be tough to fake, however I fear the bandwidth requirements instantly render it to costly to implement.
Well on Steemit sure. Maybe that’s the basis of steem too, I’m not an expert, but my instinct tells me that steem, for the value it does have that could be leveraged for amazing shit, isn’t gonna be the chain that enables the change we wish to see. Right now, I can’t “be the chain I wish to see”, because it doesn’t exist yet. For now I mostly just work in discord and post on Steemit. Other than two friends of mine, who now work for Steemit inc. I don’t even know when people of any strength or presence to do anything else here, and the money I have, it’s going towards building something else entirely. Alx#3690
This is not true. Here's how it can be done.
It won't be done, because those with the SP to make the change profit from bots.
They won't end bots.
"because those with the SP to make the change profit from"
It all comes back to this in the end. You can fill in the blank with a number of variables.
Ultimately, one feels forced into the old adage...
"When in Rome..."
WB, BTW. I was beginning to wonder if you had become 'he who was formerly known as @lexiconical'.
While there are good reasons for that adage, I am me wherever I am, and will do things according to my principles, rather than whatever the folks I am around do.
As you might suspect, this isn't the most emunerative policy, nor does it guarantee my freedom in some milieus.