Discussion: The future of AI generated content in Hive
During the last Hive Thrive after show a good part of it happened between @buttcoins, @solarminer and I. As we engaged in what will happened with AI now that Hive has finally freed off Hivewatcher. For years Hivewatcher has been a huge pain in the ass for people that wanted to build stuff with AI in Hive blog at least. The satanization of generated content derived from AI was finally lifted, and creators are now free to do their thing with AI.
The true value of technology lies not in the tools we use to create, but in the impact of the ideas we choose to share with the world.
Artificial intelligence is only beginning to reshape our creative landscape, sparking an urgent debate between cultural resistance and technological inevitability. While terms like "AI Slop" and legitimate concerns over artistic displacement dominate the current conversation, dismissing the medium should not mean silencing the message. At the end of the day, what truly matters is the substance of our ideas; if the impact we seek to generate were strictly tied to traditional technical dexterity, ideas themselves would possess no intrinsic value.
During our recent exchange, I posed a fundamental dilemma: is a blog post equivalent to a piece of code, and is that code comparable to a musical composition? Opinions varied intensely between those demanding transparent artificial authorship labels and those of us questioning that logic. Do we really need to specify the brand of the piano every time we play a melody, or worse yet, the manufacturer of the speakers playing a record? History demonstrates that technical mastery almost always takes a backseat to the consumer's emotional experience.
Personally, I foresee a future where artificial intelligence becomes completely normalized within creative workflows, much like every technological disruption of the past. To the vast majority of audiences, the creator's background matters very little; for the general public, a song is simply the tune that played on the radio, or the movie that accompanied a Friday night date. Ultimately, origin labels matter far less than the cultural resonance of the work itself.
Should we demand absolute transparency in every algorithmically assisted work, or are we witnessing the birth of a new era where the final result outweighs the process? I would love to hear your perspective in the comments and open up this debate on the future of creation.
But what do you think about all this? Do you care? Do you agree or not? Give your insight in the comments.
Excellent work crushing the daily Ecency leaderboard quest, @jza! It is great to see the shackles removed and AI creativity finally unleashed on Hive.
Tipped with Ecency POINTS.
My take is basically what i said during the discussion. I assume that most post on hive are ‘AI assisted’. I am opposed to completely ai generated content that is not labeled as such. As in, ‘write me a 500 word post on procrastination.’
To me, its not ok to pretend you wrote that post.
Now, when it comes to talking back and forth with an ai about an idea. Sharing stories and perspectives then asking ai to form a post out of that conversation. Then going in and editing that so that it is actually your thoughts and perspectives, honoring ones voice and opinions. That is ‘AI assisted’. To me, i question the need to say the post is AI assisted. As i say, i assume most posts on Hive are. As you say in your post, we are well on the way to a world where AI touches most attention based media.
Im interested in others opinions though.
I assume people who dont use AI at all probs are in the camp of any and all AI in a post should be disclosed. 🤷♂️
In my view, AI serves as an assistant in the creative process. The ideas themselves—and how they transform into work that resonates with an audience—depend entirely on how we direct the AI to assist us.
We might turn to AI to brainstorm ideas on a specific topic, yet we remain the ones who hold the key to refining those AI-generated concepts into something truly valuable.
If we simply accept whatever AI presents without applying our own creativity to improve it or align it with our vision, we become like passengers with no destination in mind—blindly following wherever the driver takes us.
This is a hugely difficult topic. The existence and evolution of AI is a given. I honestly think AI will reach AGI and then ASI, perhaps (much) sooner than anybody can imagine. And this will have direct impact to the blogging side of the HIVE ecosystem and the heart of reward distribution.
For tons of centuries, much of the economy was based on productivity (not counting the traders and the lucky few tapping into some niche and making tons of money without doing much). The more hours one put into something, the more one got paid. Obviously, we assume a certain level of quality in the output. And yes, I know, quality can be subjective. Not much for a couch or a table, but for content such as write-ups, quality is highly debatable ... And there we are: Writeups and other creations we share on HIVE.
If we reward HIVE content based on productivity - as is the case for most people on our planet - the question about AI and the level of its involvement becomes irrelevant. It'll be the time - and work - someone put into the creation of the blog post that is to be rewarded. Whether the work involved 5% AI, or 90% AI doesn't matter. Even the fact the final version of the blog post is entirely written by an AI, becomes irrelevant. The work and time that led to the blog post, is relevant.
The big ass question is: When we reward - more or less - based on productivity: How do we measure this? Honestly, I have no idea. But what I know is that throughout the nine years I have been with HIVE and holding some external curation powers last eight years, I mostly used that curation power for posts I felt the creator did put serious effort into. But I can't proof this is the case. Also, I may have skipped plenty of posts I wrongly categorised. It is darn difficult to figure out what type of productivity was behind the post and someones blog channel. With AI assisted posts, or full AI written post, it becomes even more difficult to see if some serious time and effort was put in by the owner of the blog channel. Even with 100% AI written post, someone may have spend hours and hours debating with one or more AIs to end up with the final, published piece. Who are we than to nulify such contribution?
I think we have to completely rethink the HIVE reward system for content. Since it is obvious the amount of AI-generated content is increasing and will become close to 100% of the content in some to more years from now. Anyone who thinks otherwise isn't objective.