17 sats \ 2 replies \ @clr 28 Apr 2023 \ parent \ on: SN feature bounty: chatgpt summaries of articles meta
Then do rate limit the posts one can make. The more often a user creates new posts, the more sats per post they have to pay (it could increase exponentially). That could encourage people to focus on posting quality content rather than posting willy-nilly to try and see what sticks.
But no EvilGPT, please, for the love of God.
write
preview
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @ek 28 Apr 2023
Then do rate limit the posts one can make. The more often a user creates new posts, the more sats per post they have to pay (it could increase exponentially).
Afaik, this is already the case
reply
3 sats \ 0 replies \ @clr 28 Apr 2023
Thanks, I didn't know this was already the case.
But my stance on AI still stands: personally I'd rather avoid it as much as possible and prominently disclose when a particular piece of content has been generated by AI. And absolutely avoid the CrapGPT mainstream- and woke-biased AI. If a service I love is going to use AI regardless, at least use AI created and trained by bitcoiners and for bitcoiners, so that it generally shares my values (of course, that still doesn't guarantee a good outcome).
In this case, solving such a minor problem doesn't grant using AI, in my opinion.
reply