I think the curators are pretty clear on what AI abuse is. I've been talking to them in Discord to confirm πππ
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.