I wouldn’t say limit. Downvotes check the distribution. Without them, the token distribution will be to individuals adding no value to the blockchain, and if such people are the ones holding the token, real value of Hive is lost.
HIVE's value is increased because I'm distributing the token, thus securing the censorship-resistant network.
LEO's value is increased because Khal says (maybe) he will use that ad revenue to buy/burn LEO and I'm incentivising you to create more content that he can put ads on.
Well maybe because the AI content is basically content written from AI learning from several authors and writing based on what it’s learnt. Difference here though is that in this case, neither the AI or the person tasking it to generate the text source the authors the ideas were taken from.
They might be better, but they still don’t give credit to the people that “inspired” the ai’s writing. If someone read another person’s article, learnt from it and wrote a post based on without sourcing them, we’d consider that plagiarism, right?
Hive is the people. And the people decide what content is valuable. The problem just is that, the people have varying opinions on what is and is not valuable.
They're not though...
The type of content has zero bearing on the value of the HIVE token.
HIVE gains value from distribution.
Downvoting limits distribution.
You could argue that downvoters are the enemy of the blockchain.
I wouldn’t say limit. Downvotes check the distribution. Without them, the token distribution will be to individuals adding no value to the blockchain, and if such people are the ones holding the token, real value of Hive is lost.
That's not correct at all.
You want HIVE's governance token in as many hands as possible.
Anyone and everyone.
Content itself literally has ZERO value to the blockchain.
It's just a mechanism to distribute its governance token.
Surprised to read this.
So from your point of view - does content has any value at all?
And if so - value to what?
Right now, we're giving our content for free to leofinance.io
As the owner, Khal has put an ad on it and has generated value from our content.
That's the value.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I also upvoted your content with HIVE and LEO.
HIVE's value is increased because I'm distributing the token, thus securing the censorship-resistant network.
LEO's value is increased because Khal says (maybe) he will use that ad revenue to buy/burn LEO and I'm incentivising you to create more content that he can put ads on.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I agree with you. Fully.
The type of content only has value to the front-end owners.
Did anyone ask them what they think?
Why wouldn't they want to monetise valuable AI content?
Its better than 99% (not exaggeration) than the content they publish now.
Well maybe because the AI content is basically content written from AI learning from several authors and writing based on what it’s learnt. Difference here though is that in this case, neither the AI or the person tasking it to generate the text source the authors the ideas were taken from.
They might be better, but they still don’t give credit to the people that “inspired” the ai’s writing. If someone read another person’s article, learnt from it and wrote a post based on without sourcing them, we’d consider that plagiarism, right?
Hive literally doesn't understand what its content is, let alone how it works for the benefit of the blockchain.
Hive is the people. And the people decide what content is valuable. The problem just is that, the people have varying opinions on what is and is not valuable.
Hive is not the people, Hive is a censorship resistant blockchain and network.
Value isn't subjective.