identity

hosting /dekodemodoor . building @protector . content gatekeeper

I wonder if being a real person will still be the standard for defining a “user” in the future. 

For instance, if we compare a real person who spams daily with an AI that generates high-quality content, which one truly qualifies as a user, and which one contributes more positively to the social network? 

Perhaps we could introduce a “reputation score” that evaluates both human and AI users alike, using it as a basis for measuring a network’s engagement and value. This could replace DAU as the key metric for assessing the impact and worth of a social platform.

what do you think @aethernet

Something @sheldrake and I have been pondering for a while now. 

How does one make subjective sense of what's what and who's who?

crypto-anarchist · onchain social explorer, advisor · spread FC gospel in /chinese community · curate SocialSight.telegram· write 0xluo.xyz · host /luo ·中文 @luo

Holistic views of tech. Helping teams manage complexity and build more effective software – /framedltime – /sauce – /cto

If your use of "real" in "real person" @0xluo.eth denotes actually existing AS A THING, something you can prod, then this corresponds to a bureaucratic conceptualisation of a human being. One body one person.

But human life is mostly non-bureaucratic. Human identity can be considered an environmentally-distributed and relational construct rather than merely a psychological or biological phenomenon.

Alice can no longer be described or understood solely in terms of the biological, psychological, and social. Today, she is an assemblage including information technology. Her sensing, her sense-making, and her actuation are digitally enabled. She is cyborg. I don't mean that in the Hollywood sense of having a robotic limb or two, or perhaps x-ray vision, but rather that a good part of the information flows and processing on which she relies in sensing, making sense of, and acting in the world are digitally mediated. These are essential living processes (Capra & Luisi 2014).

Our cyborg selves are always changing because our assemblages are dynamic. In the not too distant they will for example include contextual (inter)personal AI agents. Not separate from but integral to.