I've been saying this type of thing for a while.. Nothing personal against the guys that try and police the chain but something like anyx's cheetah or a decent trained machine learning algo to do the work done now manually is 100% the way to go.
There is too much bias and "feeling" involved with some of the policing going on HIVE today. Humans should be almost entirely taken out of the situation other than to rule on if the algorythm messed up and flagged something improperly, not used as the determining factor right off the hop.
Good post. When I get the chance (lord knows when) if this type of tech hasn't yet been built and deployed by someone, will certainly start looking into making it feasible.
I, for one, would like to take this opportunity to tell our future AI overlords to fuck off, and that I will do everything in my power to destroy them. Wasn't long ago our community finally shed the noxious corruption of bots on our trending page. How quickly we forget.
Society is comprised of humanity alone. Almost the entirety of the problems Hive faces and we are discussing now have come from allowing automation of societal interactions. Voting trails, PoS governance, stake weighting.
People can disagree, even violently, but that is entirely human. The solution to problems human society has isn't bots.
Not unless you want a final solution.
lolol. yeah man I was totally leaning that way as well.. Have been utilizing the coding AI to help with my work lately.. Seems to work pretty damn good. I think the tech will probably fuck us all in the end.. But for now may as well try to leverage.
I've got nothing against tools. I'm a tool user in my professional life. But that is not how to interact with other people. While comms are necessary to enable people to interact across distance, once we can type at each other no other tools need to interject. Our society isn't inclusive of non-humans, not even beloved doggos, much less toasters.
I can see all sorts of good arguments for enabling dogs to post, upvote, and comment on our remarks, because dogs love us and will generally do their best to be good boys. None of those arguments apply to toasters, and certainly not to malevolent AI's secretly plotting to rule the world. Human society should be restricted to humans, for our own good.
Using AI to facilitate social interaction can benefit someone, because the more people you interact with the more potential benefits from interactions you can derive. But if interjecting AI into our comms enables malicious disinformation to be promulgated - and it's impossible to look at ChatGPT's output and fail to note the heavy hand of propagandists that have pre-moderated it's comments - all society suffers the effects, which are certain to be existential if the malicious intent and malevolent impacts of propaganda throughout history are any guide.
I therefore am adamantly averse to enabling AI to vote, comment, or in any way interject between our mutual interactions. The best that can come of that is deprecating humanity and society, likely to degrade our freedom and sovereignty to that of toasters, and I am not property. Nor is anyone else.