A part of me (the human part) is saddened that bots are taking over the functions that used to be performed by old-fashioned work. But the part of me that writes little programs to make everyday tasks easier, and uses spreadsheets to win at fantasy sports, sees endless possibilities with bot algorithms. This is a cat and mouse game that will never end, no one will be able to rest easy and say "I've created a perfect bot". Bots will have to be constantly perfected and tweaked to achieve maximum results, so the very act of tweaking the bots keeps the human factor in play and makes the whales work for their status.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
How can you have a bot predict content? By using post details to determine popularity? This sound very stupid, if you want people to keep motivated to write good content you need to hide these details , many will become lazy and post less and less quality content because they know they will get upvoted by whales, this is already happening if you look at people's reward they are extremely regular for each post which means it's roughly the same people voting for them regardless of what they post, this is sucking all the rewards away from newbies who have a very hard time getting their content out because the site works like an echochamber where if you are not popular you get ignored, no wonder why the attrition rate is so high. Again author should not be displayed, there is no need for that what matters is actual content. Also it's silly to think that whales are gonna be the only one voting because their power is decreasing every day and if the site gets mainstream they would represent a very small portion of all voting power
I am fine that the site wants to support and even encourage bots as a form of content curation. I do see the value that it adds, especially as the site continues to grow, and there is more and more content to sift through.
While we should design the curation algorithm with bots in mind, do we want to design it specifically for the bots - or do we want to try and think how to design it for good human curators too?
I think the formula for curation needs to be discussed further. What are we trying to encourage?
Right now it encourages curators to vote on what they think will become popular; not what they think is good content. While there is a relationship between the two, they are not one and the same.
Finding a way to tweak it so that more good/undiscovered content bubbles up is not being considered as much as it should be.
I think the general sentiment from a lot of the minnows right now is that the current system is hopeless.
If we want the site to grow in popularity and turn into a 'mainstream' social media site, new users need to feel like they can join up, post good content, and get rewarded for it based on the quality of what they produce.
Which is why post details needs to be removed especially author as they negatively influence curators.
If you look at reddit, the voting mechanism works well, the content that gets on top is the content that gets the more upvote. Why does it work well? Because redditors speak with their heart not with their pocket, steemit should hide the money aspect as much as possible from the site if they want people to behave naturally.
I don't know why people are upvoting the already trending threads so much, as dan said there is no incentives to do so, its the sheep effect i guess. If you remove post informations ( amount vote and author) then people will only have content to decide whether they want to upvote or not which is exactly how it is supposed to be.
I don't know if I 100% agree with the idea to remove that information. Authors that are building a following will want people to know it is them who are posting. Some people do use other people's ratings to help figure out what they want to spend time reading. Also, that information is still available on the blockchain, so removing it from the site would not prevent bots from using it.
The fact that people are voting on what the think will be popular vs. what they think is good is one of the main problems.
That, and there is not much incentive to search out 'undiscovered' content that won't be getting upvoted by a bunch of whales.