That's a clown article where basically chatgpt doesn't anything relevant, they just asked questions for how they wanted the reply... I asked this
Do you think an human can write and get a false positive for Ai writing?
Response
Yes, it is possible for a human-written piece of content to be flagged as AI-generated and result in a false positive. While AI detection tools have improved over time, they are not perfect, and there is always a risk of a false positive where human-written content is mistakenly identified as AI-generated. This is particularly likely when the content is highly structured, clear, and lacks distinct personal style or imperfections. To avoid such misidentifications, both writers and platforms using detection tools need to be aware of these limitations and consider context and style when assessing the authorship of a piece.
So basically any ai generated flagged content can't be given for true 100%
And also
Do you think ai generated content on hive blockchain should be monetize if created with own trained models or Ai?
And I got this
AI-generated content created with a self-trained model or AI could be monetized on the Hive blockchain, especially if it adds value, adheres to community guidelines, and is transparent about its origins. The key is quality, transparency, and ensuring it doesn't flood the platform with low-value content that undermines human creators. A thoughtful, community-driven approach would help determine the role of AI content within the Hive ecosystem.
So basically if I train the model I should monetize
I think that will and should be discussed here.
There will be more and more AI-generated content and it is a question how to handle it here.
I'm not really concerned on what will be done, I don't hold enough power to influence any decision and when hive will be behind Ai and so on, and big stakes will decide it's time to change, everything will be changed... Hivewatchers are up on dhf found just for blocktrades stake not for the community
I think, the community has to discuss this.
The community never discusses these things or rules , the whales with enough stake decide with the downvotes and the support to hivewatchers proposal
I apologize for entering the conversation, the subject is pertinent.
For me the discussion is simple, HIVE is a source for AI with the immense content that is created daily. Let's say HIVE can "export" to AI, it could be a supplier.
(Perhaps the growth of HIVE is not a coincidence with the growth of cryptos with AI narrative. But this is just my opinion, I have no data to say with conviction.)
Now, if HIVE can be a potential AI supplier, then whales demand authenticity in the publications they reward with votes.
Whales are not stupid. Hivewatchers don't do unnecessary stalking.
I think that what can make the difference between HIVE and the others is precisely the richness of content.
There is always a way to get around the issue, to put a personal touch on what we publish. Obviously we always have to look for sources, before we would go to libraries, but what we present has to be original - the result of what we researched.
But that's my opinion, I respect others.✌️
It depends on the content I guess, I use from time to time stable diffusion, i trained my own model, it took time, generating and post processing pics takes time too... That's not different from taking real pictures, eventually it's even more time consuming, why shouldn't it get awarded... But again, my stake is laughable so my opinion don't matter, when I get milions hive then my opinion can matter