Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Here's another way to look at the spam filtering problem. Consider this hypothetical? 1. Let's say you have a new account on the network (Account A) at they reply 100 times to the same account (Account B) with no engagement back. 2. It doesn't actually matter if Account A is run by a human or a bot with AI. 3. If you have 1000 accounts like Account B, Account A will just stop using the app. They'll move to another network or a messaging app. 4. Ideally, Account B would reply thoughtfully a few times and Account A engages with them, and then it increases over time as they build a relationship. 5. If you say "well 100 times is too much, but 50 times is fine", then you're admitting humans can be spammy and we're now arguing over the definition. 6. Side note: I don't think anyone is ready for a world where bots powered by AI are as interesting—or even more interesting—than humans.
20 replies
0 recast
69 reactions
elle
@riotgoools
if we get to the top left quadrant, then accounts a & b will both be bots and humans will be relegated to being spectators of machine generated high level content. that is until the novelty wears off and we get bored and move onto something else bc humans are fickle like that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (some ppl may become addicted tho)
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
yeah, going to get sci fi pretty quick
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
FarcasterMarketing
@quillingqualia.eth
/icebreaker solves this to some extent right?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
elle
@riotgoools
i think it will be interesting to see how human/human interaction will evolve alongside this. most of the time ppl talk about bots becoming more human like reaching a static point but it's more like a constantly moving target bc of how adaptive we are
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions