RE: 🚩 Tips For Spotting AI Generated Content
In a lot of ways, I think those groups would be ideal, because they all know each other so they have common interests and it's easier for them to know whether each other's content is organic. That stops being true when they're relying on upvotes from outside the group, though.
Harsh truth - people who can't string a sentence together, inviting more people like them, all on the promise of earning a living. They're not here to interact, they're here to earn. Leeches.
I definitely think there are many ways that AI can enhance the ecosystem here, though, as long as it's not used deceptively.
I like its use after an article has been written. "Hey ChatGPT, how can I make this better?" I'll often use that approach in Coding where I'll feel like I've finished, highlight a block of code and say improve this. More often than not, it destroys what I've done into an incomprehensible, not working mess but sometimes it gives some good tips for refactoring, readaibility and performance.
I have often thought about this in the context of Dunbar's Number. I think curation initiatives become less effective when they try to scale beyond 148 accounts per curator (or probably far fewer). Steemit tries to address this scale problem with curation teams, but I think the volume is still overwhelming for them. @o1eh has suggested an increase in the curation reward percentage, and I think such a change might improve the scaling.
I have also wondered if things might be better if top-tier curators would hyperfocus on a very small group of rock-solid accounts to make sure that group succeeds and dominates the trending page, then let "trickle down economics" carry things from there. This would depend heavily on the curators' definition of "rock-solid", though. Coupling this with the blogging teems suggestion might be interesting😉.
150?! I struggle to maintain 10!!
I know @xeldal doesn’t post but I like some of the accounts he curates. Very few of these authors venture outside of their own blogs but they write consistently enjoyable content. A good example of “hyper-focus” on the better authors.
For many though, they perceive the hyper-focus as unfair… as seen when I first joined. Steemcurator, you haven’t visited me “ad nauseum”. Even with this focus, it would require all of the steemcurator accounts to exceed the likes of @trafalgar’s shit-posting. Only downvotes would help in this regard (which you could garner by reading his old blog / comments). And the larger stakeholders would be too scared that he’d power down and leave. But until people like him leave, or start trying again, we’re destined to have a product that more investors can’t get excited about.
I wonder what @berniesanders is up to these days.
I have wondered this many times.
Last time I checked, it looked like (s)he had left Hive, too... that was a while ago, though.
It's interesting that you raised these two names. Both of them went through several "personality changes" during Steem's lifetime. My impression is that @trafalgar might start playing nice if there were widespread support for cleaning things up (coupled with consistent downvoting of other polluters). @berniesanders was more volatile and less predictable (IMO), but there were phases when (s)he was a positive influence here, too. I never really understood the dynamics at play there.
Many of the other "polluter" accounts are more consistently problematic. Of course, for all I know, any number of the accounts that I think are unrelated could be controlled by the same person...
That was the case with previous curation initiatives, too. This strategy would definitely not be popular, at least at first. Still, you focus on 10 high quality blogging accounts, each shared by 7-14 authors along with an editor or two - all of whom also participate in discussions using their personal accounts, and you can probably guarantee decent daily content (with a Steemit sized curation stake).
At first, they might have to compete with trash for the top of trending, but as they build organic audiences, they might gain the advantage. I'd argue for the inclusion of downvoting, but you don't need to downvote the clutter to 0, maybe just 10 or 20% of total rewards would be enough to change the web site profile. And yeah, probably none of it works without Steemit, unfortunately. Relatively, there's not very much SP that's held by minnows & dolphins.
I made that point before, about being here to earn and not participating. It's a cruel reality that people will always try to follow the easy path.
Unfortunately, most newcomers on Steemit have been sold the simple idea of "making money", rather than joining a community. And often, those that have come to joing a community don't always see where the real community is.
This comment has been voted to compensate you for the downvote by @bullionstackers on this comment.
For more detail and how to support this initiative, please read this post.
Well... In that respect, neither does the family or friends, so, it's quite a challenge to be here. Especially because there are realy no visible gains in being here for whoever is on the outside.