The bots will never be this easy to detect again.

co founder of @metamask . Making computers behave for us.

I've been working on a blockchain prototype for about a year now (still very conceptual - real part time) that uses every single feature as a PoH (proof of human) criteria that will constantly inform the PoH score based on long term human like behavior (playing games (each game, each turn each shot is unique, etc), paying for things, commenting, etc) so that the cost of faking a personal account is prohibitively high given the time and complexity of raising that score vs the potential payoff of doing so - I foresee a blockchain that represents identity aside any number of applications that could, bit by bit, verify a real human is behind it through normal usage activity over time - I think that's the way to beat the bots in the long run, make them too expensive and difficult to bother developing - what do you think?

But AI will develop itself and imitate human behavior

PhD student - politics of crypto 
Just a mushroom talking about politics, cryptocurrencies and mushrooms

The other thing is the variation in applications - if the ecosystem were to explode, a high score would very expensive to produce - you need it playing games, listening to music, buying things online, commenting on social media, storing files on cloud, etc etc etc. Things that represent incidental effort to an actual human - but a serious cost barrier to bots/AI attempting to make fake "people". Hopefully that drastically reduces if not eliminates the number of fake accounts as the cost benefit analysis will rarely warrant the necessary effort...

Some good points - to the first, it shouldn't, again, we would draw updated criteria from the common user data itself, so the game you play already has these relationships in it - it is the fact that a regular user behaves that way ALREADY that makes it a useful check against bots - an actual human shouldn't have to change their behavior at all to satisfy the updated criteria since it's defined BY the user's already existing behavior to begin with, its the bots that will have to update since they don't naturally behave that way as their input is designed specifically to pass the checks while the user passing the checks should be incidental to normal human behavior/user inputs.

As for the security concerns I share those 100% and yeah, that's a major issue to anonymize that data. The idea I'm working with will require series of hashes to be generated from the data so as to never even possess the user data to begin with - don't have to anonymize data if it's never actually collected! Remember hashing algorithms destroy the data input - they can only be matched against other hashed values, but never decrypted since the original data is actually gone. So you hash the shot data - has it been recorded before? Does it match any patterns of behavior? If not, perfect, hash with user ID and timestamp and you have a totally unique hash value - all the original data is completely gone, but we do a reverse check, normally you want to make sure hashes DO match, in our case we want to verify they DON'T match. If bots start replicating that, complexify the data being hashed. Again this is still a concept - but that's the idea...

However that scenario, while providing comprehensive certainty against bots would also provide a huge hurdle for new users and also require legitimate users to “prove” their legitimacy in ways that are questionable from a data security standpoint