Dan Romero pfp
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.
26 replies
1 recast
61 reactions

Law❦︎ pfp
Law❦︎
@traguy.eth
This makes perfect sense But why is being labeled as spam centered only around engagements Nothing like repetitive use of sentences, replying too fast, stuff like that Just engagement(and I’m not saying it’s a bad thing) I’m just wondering if we are focusing on one thing, when there are other possible reasons too.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction