My reply to @matthew1 .....'First principle's are a good start.

in blurtpolitics •  9 months ago  (edited)

While I agree - 100%- on your post (I have written about many many times)...I think you're missing a fundamental point.

Post here - (https://blurtlatam.intinte.org/blurt/@matthew1/ai-content-spam)

DPoS structures does not, will not and can not - ever (imo) - allow for a hierarchy of meritocracy and hard work.

Nepotism, social approval, and sycophancy is built into the system.

The product is NOT the content - it's tokens.

'Medium', for example, has around (In august 2021, 7250k PAYING customers)
I.E - the content IS the product and people will pay for quality.

(even though much of medium content is libtarded bullshit).

DPoS is a culture that rewards 'the race to bottom', conformity, and all the low quality content that along goes with this ethos.

As long as this is the case - it can NEVER be any other way (with the current set up)...Content is totally and utterly, irrelevant.

Unfortunate yes- but lets not delude ourselves into thinking this is not the case.

Also very unfortunately, is the fact that 'those in power'/large stakeholders posses little to no business acumen (you'd need to have a philosophical perspective that values merit based systems and non sycophantic free markets).
I don't blame them anymore tbh.
It's an IQ, and ego, thing.

Try asking a blind man to describe 'the color read', and you'll discover why this is an unsolvable problem.
DPoS as an experiment created by social engineers (who are not that bright at all) .

At this point - and after 5 (6?) years on DPoS hitting my head against a brick wall, thinking you can discuss logic, reason, ethics and morals to a system that is designed, and run, by people lacking the commensurate IQ required ( plus personal insecurities - weak ego )....

...I have absolutely no doubt at all at this point - that it will fail (in it's current form).

I hope it continues for some time, as I will be linking to posts on here that illustrate the current 'feel good at all costs, over romanticized culture' (you can blame bronte, eyre, shelley and byron et all for that).
It's Intellectual abuse if you ask me, and it does nothing but create a cycle of shame for those already burdened with such deep psychological issues as they get 'upvotes' to temporarily satiate the chasm of the soul which is looking for authentic connection, not wafer thin 'social approval.
(my website will be offering a course and insights, on how to go about exorcising those shame demons).

Obviously I will not be encouraging people to gamble on DPoS crypto tokens.
It's not ammoral - its immoral (and so many levels)

tyra mic drop.gif


Posted from https://blurtlatam.intinte.org

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
Sort Order:  
  ·  9 months ago  ·  

Giga bruh

I have read this text 2 times and what does it have to do with my post? You would have at least tagged me, I found the post by accident. the post dwells on who writes by AI. Whether someone gives an upvote is up to them. The product of a post is "who?" information. The creators of blurtbooster, after all, don't want a bot to upvote Ai's content. And that is their choice. Some people don't mind. and that's their business. Don't misunderstand my answer. I'm responding to something that is pointless. Where did I bring up the topic of Delegated Proof of Stake. The post says just who use AI. You would probably like me to answer you more sharply. So I'll do it for you :). Subjectively your answers all look similar touching on one topic. It looks like you have read about something and by force you have to show what you know. This is ridiculous to me and what is worse pathetic. your answer is straw man fallacy and nothing more...

Loading...