You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Building Better Bots: Ranking the Top Curators
This post is superb. I haven't really thought about the bots using the humans' actions to create future trends. I'm already thinking a bit more forward. Thanks.
Thanks! Yes I think more sophisticated bots will begin to use human actions as indicators to affect their voting trends. Forward thinking indeed :)
First, thanks for taking the time to create this informative and valuable post. However, I see a very real problem in all of the post like yours. The info is presented to an audience of people who are very advanced in their understanding of what is going on "behind the scenes" on Steemit and with how the system works.
I believe that , from what I have read in the White Paper, this platform has the potential to quickly grow past even Facebook and its more than a billion users. This will definitely not happen if Stemmit continues to be an "programmers or hackers only" elitist oriented platform. People like yourself have a very real opportunity to profit beyond your wildest dreams by providing information in a manner that is useful to people outside of your inner circle.
For example, I have yet to see a post that clearly shows a clear path for a newcomer to Steemit who consistently posts quality content to garner attention by virtue of the quality of their posts.
Why? What are the guidelines and or parameters for quantifying quality on Steemit and how does that quantification system work?
For example, if the majority of current participants on Steemit love the art of Picasso but throw up at the sight of anything from Van Gogh, then that would mean that Van Gogh as an artist would be deemed to be of no value as an artist on the Steemit platform.
In my humble opinion, the incredibly explosive potential for Steemit and everything "Steem" requires a mandatory ability for all "art lovers " to have the opportunity to experience the artist/style/content that they find pleasing and inspiring thereby opening up the platform as a source of the widest range of content from the "lowest" to the highest" quality as determined by the people interacting with the content. I use "art" here only as a means of establishing context. This would apply to any kind of content....or category of information.
I understand that funding a massive truly open repository with the kind of technical resources required to execute it would be a major challenge. Steem. in my opinion, has enough critical mass already to mount an aggressive funding initiative to realize the lofty concepts and goals outlined in the White Paper.
Thanks for your comment. You've got a lot of good questions, and the truth is, some of them might not have answers. For example, "What are the guidelines... for quantifying quality on Steemit...?" That's a really good question, but you could apply it more broadly to the internet in general. It's often the case that popularity and 'value' are found in unexpected (possibly undeserved) places on the internet. It's incredibly hard to predict what will or will not go viral on any platform. Remember, Van Gogh wasn't even discovered until after his death. As far as Steem serving as a platform for intellectual property like art, I know that there are still new ideas in the works as far as ways to reward people for storing their intellectual property long term on Steem. It will be interesting to see how everything evolves. Thanks again for posting.
I am new to the platform, I did a lot of research before joining steemit, if we are to dream big, and looking to compete with Facebook, and the rest, bots up voting and bots wars need to stop, also new comers like me will need to be supported.
Interesting ideas and helps with concepts I've been mulling over myself. My initial thought coming to Steem from Bitcoin and seeing value in both got me wondering about the strategies to benefit for someone who sees value and potential in the Steem platform but lacks the skills, abilities or inclination to participate in content creation or curation. If that potential investor were to power up and passively hold SP, they may still benefit from growth of the overall system, but dilution would mean they would miss out relative to active participants. Curation bots could give the potential investor without the skill, ability or inclination to curate the opportunity to "employ" curators to help them increase the yield on their investment.
The current reward system is heavily weighted towards material whose value is instantly recognised. I would like to see a system that also recognises and rewards posts and information that is useful over time, but not necessarily viral (e.g. reference material and detailed how to guides). I would be interested to hear of the ideas being put forward for "ways to reward people for storing their intellectual property long term on Steem".