Last week, we ran a community vote regarding how we would treat AI within the FreeCompliments Community.
The results were rather broad, and they definitely made me think a little bit further into this issue; in particular, the innovation of how AI can be used and its relevance to freedom of speech.
One particular thought came to me: are we truly exercising our free speech if we’re using AI to convey thoughts on our behalf? Is suppressing this actually suppressing someone’s freedom of speech, or simply the analysis of AI? Are we actually attacking freedom of speech if we’re asking for the person using AI to use their own thoughts rather than that of an external entity? Are we suppressing freedom of speech if they’re using AI to enhance their own thoughts?
Before we get to the decisions, I’d like to reiterate our policy on plagiarism. Then, we’ll get to the 8 questions that were posed in the community vote last week, and the ultimate decisions – which, by the way, I will mention are subject to change as the technology evolves.
Our Policy on Plagiarism
We 100% will not support direct plagiarism of content. If you copy someone's work, whether it be text, images, art, etc., it must come with a source. If you do not do this, then you are effectively earning money off of someone else's work without providing them credit, which is equivalent to theft, and theft is illegal. This will not be tolerated and will not be curated.
We've already dealt with a case of plagiarism. Our approach was one of teaching and forgiveness. We strongly believe that it is possible for someone to make changes to their behavior without resorting to harsh measures and processes to redeem themselves. I believe that the ability to forgive someone is a virtue, as it is not easy to do and requires genuine effort - but that it can also have lasting positive effects if implemented with proper teaching.
Our New Rules on AI-Based Content Based on 8 Questions
- The first question: should we allow content fully and obviously generated by AI to be posted in the FreeCompliments Community without author attribution of AI usage (regardless or rewards or curation)?
No. This was a nearly unanimous decision among our community members. From now on, we will consider this to be spam. Note that this will apply primarily to content that is obviously AI-generated; where there is doubt, we won’t intervene unless it is pointed out to us.
- The second question: if we allow this content within the community, should we curate it (with minimal votes from our curation account and curation trail)?
Since the first answer was “No,” this question is invalidated.
- The third question: should we allow content fully and obviously generated by AI to be posted in the FreeCompliments Community, provided the author is honest about AI usage (regardless or rewards or curation)?
Yes. This was a rather split vote, so I took the reigns on this decision. If someone wants to post AI-generated content, then that’s their right, as long as we’re aware that it’s AI-generated. Integrity is appreciate and important, and it only takes a single sentence for us to know that there’s a human behind the account. Note that this will apply primarily to content that is obviously AI-generated; where there is doubt, we won’t intervene unless it is pointed out to us.
- The fourth question: if we allow this content within the community, should we curate it (with minimal or regular votes from our curation account and curation trail)?
No – with some caveats. 1) HSBI will still be rewarded with minimum amounts (i.e. 1 HBSI), in line with @josephsavage’s approval of using HSBI for such content. 2) However, we will not curate it with our account and trail as per the wishes of the community members. 3) If someone can demonstrate a way to use solely AI-generated content to create effective satire, we will gladly reward it, because that takes some creativity!
- The fifth question: should we allow content enhanced by AI, inclusive of some content creation, to be posted in the FreeCompliments Community (regardless or rewards or curation)?
Yes. There are many use cases where AI can enhance someone’s thought process and help them come up with new ideas. Using AI in such a way can be educational for both the writer and the reader.
- The sixth question: if we allow this content within the community, should we curate it (with minimal or regular votes from our curation account and curation trail)?
Yes – with the important caveat that a significant portion of the content must contain original thought. If we see that a couple of phrases out of an entire article are original, then it falls closer into the category of questions 3 and 4. To make a very dirty analogy, that’s like covering a pile of poop with sprinkles – it’s not going to taste much better!
- The seventh question: should we allow content enhanced by AI, only for the purpose of fixing grammar/spelling or for translation, to be posted in the FreeCompliments Community (regardless or rewards or curation)?
Yes. In such cases, the content is still original, just much easier to read and allows access to greater audiences in various languages. I’d expect professionals to use AI this way when writing documents and proofreading.
- The eighth question: if we allow this content within the community, should we curate it (with minimal or regular votes from our curation account and curation trail)?
Yes. We’ll place this content on par with all other original content, since it’s using AI purely as a tool for readability.
Conclusion
This was a tricky set of decisions to make, but I hope that our new approach will provide an optimal balance of freedom of speech, spam reduction measures, and satisfy our community. There will always be room to evolve and grow, and I’m certain that we’ll be posing similar questions to these in the future as long as AI and the way we use it continue to evolve.
One thing that I will mention is that we’re not going to aim to punish people and chase them away; if someone messes up, or we think that someone messed up, we’ll talk to them. We won’t go on the offensive, now will we act defensive. We can always learn from alternate points of view, and if they make a good point, we can adjust our ways. Alternatively, the person to whom we talk may also be able to adjust how they do things so they fall closer in line with generally accepted community standards.
Let me know what you think!
Disclaimer: FreeCompliments will be a beneficiary for this post, and I will attempt to boost it via Ecency points as well.
Here’s a permanent invite link to the FreeCompliments Discord!
Follow our curation trail and earn 1 HSBI per month!
Posted Using InLeo Alpha