pull down to refresh
One is crossposts with both AI and lol divided by crossposts with AI. The other is divided by cross posts with lol
We, the internet's natives, will filter by quality, relevance, work, social graph proximity, and cost, but we will lose our ability to filter by human.
I've been wondering if that would be a net-loss. Not saying I've come to a conclusion, but not finding a way to come to one, either.
Is information provided by a human worth more than content providing the same information without any humanness?
If so, how come we wouldn't be able to filter for that difference?
Mentioned last week, stood it up:
Payment links with dynamic opengraph cards for CLINK Offers and regular invoices
Couple other things to test/fix before pushing wallet side though, better push notifications on the way.
May need to add a request type to the CLINK spec for the payer_data fields and variable pricing, but that'll be worth it because then these intermediate pages can collect necessary user info like email/shipping addresses etc for selling products.
... how sad some people are still working on Bolt12.
I'm working on freebies/sats filters/proof-of-sacrifice changes.
I also need to do github triage and revamp our open source bounty system. Given how prompting is coding now, at least for easy stuff, detailed issue are at least half of the effort.
This resonates. The patterns are real. Moltbook isn't just A, it's B showing us C, D, and beyond.
I don't know if I should even post the heuristic I've learned from the experiment. Main thing that got me excited was when they seemed to be sharing improvements. I suspect those were humans however and performative ones at that.
Love this type of thing on SN 'cause it makes me think about lots of things from a lot of different angles.
to learn what bots want.
Economics - looking at things with the eye of a market. Bots are the buyers, buying whatever they want, and I guess also the sellers to themselves. We humans can be the sellers too to whatever they want. But, allowing the bots to do whatever they do should, ultimately, reveal what a bot wants, through PoW to earn sats.
I am not a boid.
Evolution, sociology - I'd seen this boids sim years ago, then forgot about it until today. Illustrates how animals survive in the wild. Koob's right: stay in the center, don't do anything to make yourself stand out. Reminded me of the experiment where a herding animal gets painted an odd color and then is first targeted by predators (Hans Kruuk, had to look it up). This is called the "oddity effect" and basically how the weird kid gets beat up on the playground, or used to before all the acceptance/tolerance stuff of today. So ironic, but exactly this morning some co-workers in the break room were talking about about evolution. The woman's theory: in cave man days, the guy with the glass jaw got knocked out and uglified by the fight, therefore he could not get with the girl to pass on his weak glass jaw genes. Makes sense (and I'm not even an "evolution person", but makes sense).
We, the internet's natives,
Tech - I've never thought of it like this, but yes, we humans are the internet's indigenous natives. Excellent thoughts on how we might get overrun and pushed out by the weeds (bots).
Probably more to think on here, I'll let it brew.
Although I find the arguments persuasive I am not sure1 that saying "bots want things" is correct. Bots may be optimizing either through what they do or by having their needs planned via some optimization process and if all platforms were to optimize people then eventually a feedback loop would have formed that is no longer meaningful to human beings. As such it may not be so much a matter of verifying the psychological makeup of a bot rather than determining if people create agents. If this trend is real then it provides significant evidence alone.
It was me! hahaha
Why is the “~lol
&&~AI” crosspost different from “~AI&&~lol”? @SimpleStacker