· Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:32:09 |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:36:46 I really only trust who I trust. If you say sentiment analysis I'm now trusting the software and the writer of the software. I would prefer people's opinions, and especially those who I trust. Just allow me to say if I trust people or not and allow others to subscribe to that trust or not. And allow me on the fly to disagree with someone else's trust. Someone shows up as gold trust with a flurry of bad takes. Let me override and say I don't need to hear them anymore. |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:38:57 |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:39:16 |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:42:06 |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:46:12 This isn't context collapse lol. And the reason why I'm talking about video games is because video games are less complex to review than people, and if you can't write a program that can review them, then you can't write a program that can review people. On how this relates to his issue, he is saying that the problem is he gets 1 to 1 good to bad takes. A big part of this is that he has no method of sorting these takes. They are all viewed equally. So no matter if it's a well respected scientist or a troll, they all look the same. Some method of determining trust is required, but if you give this to a single entity like with Blue sky it's too much power for an individual entity to have. But it still needs to be solved as the original poster has stated. We have a giant pool of very capable reviewers who could help the larger creators sort through people and find who they should probably be listening to, but they lack the levers to provide that service. |
Föderation EN So 23.02.2025 00:52:45 |