Hi @hivewatchers, the post was actually generated by AI. I am just showing with the post what is possible with AI today. But it also shows me that my idea of generating articles for a wiki in which I discuss a problem from my daily work with AI is not a good idea. Why is that? Don't you also want to make Hive a good port?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hi.
As explained in our guide, could you please set rewards to be declined and clearly inform in that content that it is AI-generated.
Thanks for your feedback @hivewatchers. I have created several articles with AI. Unfortunately, I only remembered to decline the rewards for two publications. Unfortunately, this is no longer possible in retrospect. Another mistake was that I didn't clearly declare it as AI, which I have now made up for afterwards. I certainly didn't want to violate any guidelines. Rather, I wanted to test the extent to which AI is able to create simple structured content for wiki articles. It's not about creativity, but about emotionless content without personal opinions. I think AI can be used wonderfully for such things today. If you like, you can read my post on my main account @vanje. There I described what test I did and with what intention. I would also like to mention that I support their action and will continue to do so, even though I am regularly downvoted by endhivewatchers. I hope I didn't end up on the blacklist.
Edit: I have given it some more thought. First of all, I adapted the prompt for creating wiki articles so that a note appears at the end of a post to indicate that the wiki article was created with AI and checked manually. However, I see a problem in the motivation of potential article creators. If I tell them that they should refuse a reward, they probably won't make the effort. Perhaps it would actually be better not to pursue the project any further?
I would recommend clearly mentioning that the post is AI-generated in the title of the post.