You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Exploring The Idea of: Automating Steem's Distribution, Inspired By @kevinwong Article
Automation with choice works to a degree. Across the board automation would not work. This essentially creates a governing body of high stake holders and increases dependence on them drastically. This would lead to massive coruption. Curation projects would stop existing since individual content evaluation would stop.
Personal choice as a member of a curation project of what you think deserves or does not support would stop existing.
Not to say that this would eliminate individual contributions to projects, create conflicts on what is and what is not value.
An algo cannot determine value, only people can. And they have to do that individually.
This already exist in the offline world as regular jobs, moderators becomes like job managers. Automation happens after a human have seen a source of consistency in quality.
The key is that most content and theme the future creation can be predicted. For example I know @silentscreamer will do a specific thing in same level of quality. So automation of value happens in that direction. Freeing up Humans to focus on other areas.
Automation shows sources in a network trust each other to automate power. So yes the need for people with high moral standards needs to be pushed forward to lead the way.
I don't need to for example evaluate a source if I have months of proven track record. This means Humans can truly focus on just creating more value in the network. Only have to oversee once a month to see things are running fine.
So the interface scan a screen will not be needed anymore. This way a Human can have 10x more time to do what they love and improve stuff. Making Steem just 1% of their life.
Exponential cost efficiency. Humans getting more value and abundance over can create a positive feedback loop of more awesomeness. But it's not ready at the moment for this. Would need 5 more years of empowerment to see where things are heading.
But thats not really the automation Kevin talks about. If you have moderators adjusting the system then youre really just improved on the current system of "automated choice curation."
I agree that things should get more automated, but a individual choice needs to continue to exist. You cant base everything on an algorithm across the board and hope for a consensus on value prior to content creation.
What i think youre proposing is a more efficient and advanced "steem-voter" type use... The proposal as i understood it from Kevin is based on creating an algo to determine whats value, quality, etc... That wont work imo.
Future Technology will be exponentially better so eventually that will probably work too, but I get what you are saying
...
I'm open minded to see various systems be tested out. I may also be wrong for sure. But I think a big beauty of humans is to be able to trust them and love them. And I seen that it can work amazing. I think humans are geniuses when they come together and empower each other
...
Thanks for your input, always a joy to take in