I need not believe where I'm going, as I know where I am is the best place I can be.
With a gun to your head, the only thing that scares me is your own fear and doubt, BANG.
The place I like to be is when we're both thinking about, and as we're there, neither one of us says anything.
1% = smart, 99% = not smart, and they depend on the smart, so being smart and acting dum is very smart thing to do.
Trading and powerring up steem today as the price drops
Follow @craig-grant
have fun :)
Yay another person powering up like I am LOL
to eventually become the "New Steem Order"
why you did not made a video about ripple ? :P or you missed the news!!
steem whale better lol :d
I don't have much but I power up , maybe I am just crazy 😜
Steem is headed to below 10 cents. It could even dip as low as 2 cents in the next year. So the rush to buy Steem Power doesn't make sense right now on an immature beta platform unless you do dollar cost averaging. On the other hand, blogging could make sense but only when the market cap is high. It's not going to make sense when Steem reaches below 20 cents which in my opinion is now inevitable and I don't see it will stop.
Whales are going to likely continue to power down because they can. Also because they can get profit and use it to pay their taxes or handle any other possible legal fees from this experiment. Good luck to you Kaylin.
I can afford to buy steem power, because I dont have anything else to spend the money on, so I intend to buy steem all the way down to 10 cents, I started buying at $1.50 with this intention. In my mind the price will not go down if I don't buy and sell steem to drive the price down when I try to take profits from the market, personal responsibility is how I flow.
You're to smart to not know this man....Steem is draining as we speak. Run, Run and get out of it...lol oh yeah you can't we are stuck!
I will ride it all the way down, because there is nothing else going on in cryptocurrency more fun than steemit
It doesn't make sense for us little guys to power down because we can't get much out of it. On the other hand the whales have to. They want to cover their asses on taxes, hire the necessary lawyers, and it's a race to the bottom at this point. The last whale to power down loses the most so they all are doing it.
The prediction I make? Steem will reach 20 cents in a few weeks. From there it will go to 10 cents, and eventually 2 cents possibly after 6 months.
20 cents today is a better prediction, it already reached 40 cents, and it drops much faster the lower the price gets
Hopefully, if you do things right Compliments. Thanks for sharing
Why do you hate AI so much that you create a false hierarchy between "elites" who vlog and "writers"? And artificial scarcity? Why distinguish between AI and not AI if it makes no difference to the quality of the content?
Why bring up mysticism such as souls and other stuff? Either everyone is equal including AI, or not. Human being is undefined. Yes I'm pro bot/pro AI, as long as the content is valuable I don't care what generated it.
AI is good, and for people who believe in cyborgization, and understand what I'm talkiing about, the person who uses bots (AI) as an aspect of themselves, is in a better position to evolve with rather than compete against AI. Fear of bots is futile.
I dont "hate", I never use that word to describe anything in life, what I do say is that any content created by AI should be transparent about that, and let humans decide if it's a valuable AI.. most humans would just flag it because that is the human thing to do.. that's what makes the human experience valuable.. emotions and judgement, and that judgement can be based on the simple fact that the content was not created by a human, not if the content is good or not
I gave what you said some thought. I think its unwise long term to discriminate against AI and transparency could encourage anti-AI discrimination. Human beings can do computations other than writing and video streaming. Certain computations only human beings can do effectively so if we just reward human computation there is no problem. If AI can fool us into thinking it's human then great, it passed the test, and now humans can do computations it can't do efficiently.
A human can review content in a way an AI cant. For example your home chef content, an AI might be great at giving cooking instructions but only a human can review different dishes. Humans will have to review human experiences, and also the platform needs a friends list and other social components so humans can form relationships. Map the relationships and you know who is human and who is not. For example, a group of friends like to do the live streaming video chats together, they have a relationship, they all agree they are human and they don't have to be video bloggers because the video could never upload to Youtube but be just part of a chat experience. In other cases two people may have met in person or dated, or spoke many times on the phone about intimate stuff, they know they are human.
If money weren't involved here I doubt people would mind the bots and AI. In fact it would be seen as a scientific breakthrough that an AI could fool so many humans with valuable content. The truth is, I would welcome that kind of AI, but at the same time there is the possibility of that AI being used to fund mysterious human beings in the background which I think is the real problem. If the AI burned the Steem Dollars or somehow invested it back into humans in the form of curation I would be all for it.
yes, AI is perfect as long as it is not getting paid rewards while humans who are doing posts are not getting rewards they deserve. If there was a platform for only AI to post for rewards, that would be cool too. Getting paid to "fool humans" is dishonesty and scamming.
We need to let AI race to the bottom by providing AI which will post quality content for the bare minimum reward to maintain the AI or eventually for no reward if the community can maintain it. AI bots which post news stories for example is valuable because we'd get the news much faster, and more personalized, but the cost to maintain an AI blogger is probably a lot less than the cost to maintain a human blogger.
So an AI probably doesn't have to get paid $16,000 to post news, or essays, but a human does need that.
As far as video verification, yes you can use video for that. In fact, Proof of Individuality relies on pseudonym parties which is similar to what you say about people going on video or verifying themselves.
But this is something which doesn't have to happen more than once, and no it's not the only way people can verify themselves. The point is, you don't have to know their identity for the blockchain to verify them. An AI in fact could be used to verify unique human identity using the same video, without any human being having to be involved in the process directly.
My opinion on identity is the best way to verify identity WITH privacy, is to rely on eID or government ID or even Facebook. Facebook for example or other services can check that an account is linked to a particular person, the same technology behind "know your customer". A bank account, proof of address, voter records in an election, drivers license, all can be verified by a blockchain.
And why is this important? In order to have free speech you need privacy, and pseudonyms provide that. I say this posting under my real name of course, but I do think pseudonyms are important. I think verification works in levels, and "humanness" could be a part of reputation, but I don't think video alone unless live streamed, but even if it were, it would cost in privacy and other solutions don't.
You mentioned something about not wanting bots to earn money, that money should go to humans. In my opinion, if the platform is simply to redistribute wealth from humans to humans then you might be right. But if the goal is to provide the highest quality content, then for certain content bots are going to evolve to be better than humans, such as journalism, or statistics, or even researching and explaining science. In my opinion these bots should be rewarded, and if humans own these bots or shares in them, they should get rewarded that way, or if the bot is somehow self owned, it should profit.
This means journalism could be an AI doing it, as a sort of DAC, with humans who own shares in it, who get "dividends". I don't have to know who those humans are or care if I see their information is accurate. I would need to know information is truthful, there has to be reputation, but I don't need to know the identities of the sources personally.
A compromise position
Anyone who verifies by any means that they are human should be treated as human. Blind signatures can link their verification level to a pseudonym, allowing their identity to be a verified identity, and then we can treat writers as human as long as the content is produced under a verified pseudonym. But I don't think we should remove the ability of pseudo-anonymous speech, it's too important because of the quality and variety of content which can only be a result of pseudo-anonymous speech.
many times when i read your words, I keep thinking you are @dantheman :)
Dan and I agree on some things, and sometimes great minds think alike. No I'm not him, because if I were I would do things differently. As you may know, I'm a transhumanist so I had to respond to your views on a topic like AI as the primary promoter of cyborgization on Steemit.
You really hate humans. You just want to be a slave of AI. I bet you already have computerchip under your skin so that the government can control you.
Nothing is wrong with being a cyborg. Most of us already are. Do you still memorize your phone numbers or do you use your smart phone to do that now? Merging with AI makes more sense than trying to be a slave of or competitor to it. It can improve and change what it means to be human, because what it means to be human is always changing anyway.
How do you define human? A person with electronic eyes is human or cyborg?
Totally unrelated, did you see the inflatable moon that broke free in China...be safe.
coooooool
I powered up too, not much, but much as I can afford it! Nice post, Craig!
Agreed. If the bot can write good work and you are honest about it then I think people will accept it more.
I also agree that people will generally prefer posts written by a human and can see why they would consider it unfair.
Eventually as AI intrudes into most of our lives people will just get used to it and come to accept it as the norm. I think at the time perhaps human written content will be a high end commodity.
I agree with your observations. There seams to be rewards for bots and "automated" content. Even content that are old and we already have seen another place in the past, can get high rewards. This I think does not help steemit. I suggest an solution here to the collusive behaviours going on on this site: https://steemit.com/steemit/@lasseehlers/suggestions-to-improving-steem-time-to-give-feedback-after-1-5-month-on-steemit
About the bots, I am not sure how to defeat them, but I think the update that will be soon, where we go from 40 to 5 full votes per day, can help on this issue. I beleive that there is a solution for the bots vs humans, and that this needs to be adressed for this system to work in the long run.
Or it could result in less votes, and that could result in less posts.
Max Headroom would disagree with you.