How do i prove that i am human?

[Lucius]

~snip~
I undestand the fact that BitcoinTalk isn't against AI, the forum is against the abuse. If we let the AI write our post then we will be Nucked, but we can always get good ideas from AI and write a post with our own words and style, and that will be fine because the post wasn't just a copy paste. Even some promotional Threads are fully made with AI looking for the best design.

You fall from one trap into another completely pointlessly, because if the AI ​​created your problem, then why do you think it should give you an idea for your next post? In other words, do you think it's okay for AI to generate content for you that you will then refine a bit and present as your idea?

No matter how much you look for a justification for what you described, you cannot find it - if you need AI to create something on the forum, then it makes no sense to present yourself as a human.

[seoincorporation]

@OP: here's a challenge for you: how about you report 42 chatbot verbal diarrhae spammers and get them banned? And not just newbies, that's easy. Find and report the Member+ Ranks who do this. It will give you some understanding of the effort put into cleaning the spam from Bitcointalk.
If you can list 42 "AI" spammers that you got banned, I'll add another neutral tag saying you made amends in my opinion

Challenge accepted, not sure if i will be able to do it, but u will try it. 

~snip~
I undestand the fact that BitcoinTalk isn't against AI, the forum is against the abuse. If we let the AI write our post then we will be Nucked, but we can always get good ideas from AI and write a post with our own words and style, and that will be fine because the post wasn't just a copy paste. Even some promotional Threads are fully made with AI looking for the best design.

You fall from one trap into another completely pointlessly, because if the AI ​​created your problem, then why do you think it should give you an idea for your next post? In other words, do you think it's okay for AI to generate content for you that you will then refine a bit and present as your idea?

No matter how much you look for a justification for what you described, you cannot find it - if you need AI to create something on the forum, then it makes no sense to present yourself as a human.

Is not about always using the AI backup to generate ideas, but we can use AI to understand complex topics or to get more context on our original idea.

AI is a really powerful tool, personally i use it for business automation and vive coding. We can build crazy stuff and we can do it fast. I'm not saying AI is good or bad, is just another tech tool, and we must learn to use it wisely.

By the way, i see some cool names like notocactus yahoo62278 NotATether examplens, and i want to say thanks for your comments guys.

[Lucius]

~snip~
Is not about always using the AI backup to generate ideas, but we can use AI to understand complex topics or to get more context on our original idea.

I don't know if it's just me, but before AI appeared, people were more creative, more social, more responsible - today things are starting to come down to who uses which AI model, who can do something faster, and who will ultimately present themselves to the world as more intelligent than others. I'm still on the method of using my brain, and when (if) it stops working I won't bother replacing it with an artificial one.

[PrivacyG]

I'm just curious how you (or any AI transcriber) came to the conclusion that others might find your transmission of an AI-generated point of view interesting. At the same time, keep in mind that all, but absolutely all, members of this forum have equal or perhaps even more advanced access to the same AI tools.
So, what kind of unique idea will AI give you, but not me or anyone else?
I'm pretty sure that most people come here to exchange opinions with real humans because we all have bot thinking at our fingertips.

I am guessing that most people believe Artificial Intelligence is the closest thing we get to an All Knowing Entity.  Which if it was true would make things even more dubious.  Imagine I knew nothing about some subjects and all of a sudden I can speak all languages on this Forum, I can answer any question about any thing in detail et cetera.

If this was possible, we would probably not have much human interaction any more.  Every body would be addicted to this 'All Knowing' thing.  It is scary that we can clearly see people would be very excited to use it, even if it could lead to the worst change in human social behavior.

-----

I don't know if it's just me, but before AI appeared, people were more creative, more social, more responsible - today things are starting to come down to who uses which AI model, who can do something faster, and who will ultimately present themselves to the world as more intelligent than others. I'm still on the method of using my brain, and when (if) it stops working I won't bother replacing it with an artificial one.

I have seen some people using Artificial Intelligence for very serious Law information they should have never asked any body else other than a real lawyer.  People are becoming REALLY stupid and are accepting another 'brain' to tell them what to think.  It is not just you.

And when you think about it.  The effort they put in finding a good enough Artificial Intelligence tool to create a good looking answer.  In taking the reply and arranging it to look closer to a human response.  It probably takes about the same time it would have taken to write their own thoughts instead.  Hell.  There are ways you can use Artificial Intelligence to even improve the quality of your Posts by finding more information, making sure it is real and pretty much increasing your knowledge with the help of it.  Although I would argue you could do the exact same thing and probably much better by 'asking' a Search Engine what ever doubts, questions and thoughts you may have.

[examplens]

I am guessing that most people believe Artificial Intelligence is the closest thing we get to an All Knowing Entity.  Which if it was true would make things even more dubious.  Imagine I knew nothing about some subjects and all of a sudden I can speak all languages on this Forum, I can answer any question about any thing in detail et cetera.

If this was possible, we would probably not have much human interaction any more.  Every body would be addicted to this 'All Knowing' thing.  It is scary that we can clearly see people would be very excited to use it, even if it could lead to the worst change in human social behavior.

Many forget that AI collects information written by humans.
I was recently researching a topic, and at some point, I was looking for more specific information from @Grok. He gave me some of his results, and one of the sources, among others, is an article I wrote on a similar topic a long time ago. 

[Free Market Capitalist]

I don't know if it's just me, but before AI appeared, people were more creative, more social, more responsible - today things are starting to come down to who uses which AI model, who can do something faster, and who will ultimately present themselves to the world as more intelligent than others.

That doesn't happen to me; the people I hang out with act just the same as before. The only thing I've noticed is that they mention looking up certain information using AI instead of Googling it (though these days, Google also shows AI-generated results as the top result).

What you're saying sounds to me like a never-ending loop of that “the good old days were better” sentiment.

I'm still on the method of using my brain, and when (if) it stops working I won't bother replacing it with an artificial one.

That’s another false dilemma. The question isn’t whether I use AI or my brain; you can use AI to be more productive, but if you equate any use of AI with the copy-pasting that goes on in the forum—or as the OP did—then I’m not surprised you have that view.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Oh, I guess I missed out on what happened to you last year, but since we are now in the present, all I can say is just get back to your old ways of posting and contributing. That's enough, and maybe with time the feedback on your profile can be revised.

Such experimentation can be very dangerous, as there is a lot of paranoia in the forum. If you can, please keep away from it. I think I so far remember two other accounts that completely burned their reputation because of experimentation (one was related to AI just like yours, and the other was something to do with account security/hacking accounts)

I would also like to commend you for trying to turn what was negative into something positive for the forum. Cheers

[PrivacyG]

Many forget that AI collects information written by humans.

The really large majority thinks it collects the information and 'thinks' which is good and legitimate and which is not.  I could be an incredibly smart scientist and create a blog to share every provable intelligent thing that contradicts most of the rest of the Internet and Artificial Intelligence will probably not pick it up as legitimate because my author name is 'Anonymous Scientist' and because the blog is not 'Fact Checked'.

Or.  You get Artificial Intelligence like Grok who often seems to me at least that it takes way too much information as credible.  It almost takes opinions as facts a lot of times.

Artificial Intelligence is for most things incredibly stupid.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Artificial Intelligence is for most things incredibly stupid.

Sure.

Artificial intelligence in healthcare: transforming the practice of medicine

How Artificial Intelligence is Disrupting Medicine and What it Means for Physicians

Pentagon Used Anthropic’s Claude in Maduro Venezuela Raid

Artificial Intelligence Courses | Harvard University

The power of AI in space exploration

Surely the most prestigious medical journal, the Ivy League universities, the Pentagon, the European Space Agency, and a whole bunch of other organizations I could link to are stupid.

[examplens]

Artificial Intelligence is for most things incredibly stupid.

Sure.

Artificial intelligence in healthcare: transforming the practice of medicine

How Artificial Intelligence is Disrupting Medicine and What it Means for Physicians

Pentagon Used Anthropic’s Claude in Maduro Venezuela Raid

Artificial Intelligence Courses | Harvard University

The power of AI in space exploration

Surely the most prestigious medical journal, the Ivy League universities, the Pentagon, the European Space Agency, and a whole bunch of other organizations I could link to are stupid.

It depends on how you look at the whole thing.
If you look at AI usage, the closest to what ordinary people or forum users like the OP rely on, artificial intelligence has a lot of flaws. When you mention the use in medicine, perhaps you should refer to
OpenAI’s New Rules for Legal and Health Queries
Modular Safety Middleware For Health-Adjacent AI Assistants
UnitedHealthcare's broken AI denied seniors' medical claims, lawsuit alleges
There are many lawsuits against AI chatbots, because they gave wrong medical diagnoses.

Maybe they're not as stupid as the users who use them for nonsense and stupid prompts.

[Ambatman]

I have seen some people using Artificial Intelligence for very serious Law information they should have never asked any body else other than a real lawyer.  People are becoming REALLY stupid and are accepting another 'brain' to tell them what to think.  It is not just you.

This reminded me of a video I came across about if a partner ask for either their insta or other media
They would freely give them
But would throwaway their phone if it's ChatGpt.

It shows how much people rely on it and amount of personal information they have shared.
The amount of datas Ai would have gathered from majority of the planet is staggering
You can't see a post on X without Grok is this true?

[OgNasty]

I undestand the fact that BitcoinTalk isn't against AI, the forum is against the abuse. If we let the AI write our post then we will be Nucked, but we can always get good ideas from AI and write a post with our own words and style, and that will be fine because the post wasn't just a copy paste.

I'm just curious how you (or any AI transcriber) came to the conclusion that others might find your transmission of an AI-generated point of view interesting. At the same time, keep in mind that all, but absolutely all, members of this forum have equal or perhaps even more advanced access to the same AI tools.
So, what kind of unique idea will AI give you, but not me or anyone else?
I'm pretty sure that most people come here to exchange opinions with real humans because we all have bot thinking at our fingertips.

I find an AI-generated point of view interesting. I’m not familiar with this user’s specific history, but I think it is a good general question that I had hoped to read some thought provoking answers about. Unfortunately I was left a bit disappointed on that front but will ponder the question internally regardless. 

[BigBadBitBaron]

Honestly the best proof is just time and activity on the forum. Bots don't usually stick around for years posting consistently about stuff they actually care about. That said tbh there's no perfect answer here. You can have a high post count and still look sus if all your posts are low effort or copy paste nonsense. Seen plenty of accounts with 500+ posts that read like they were generated lol. What actually helps imo:

• posting opinions that are specific to a thread, not generic
• having a trade history or mining setup you can reference
• old account age with consistent activity gaps (bots tend to post in bursts)

But if someone's already made up their mind you're a bot, good luck convincing them otherwise. Some people just want a reason to dismiss you. Best you can do is keep posting authentically and let your history speak for itself over time.

[seoincorporation]

It depends on how you look at the whole thing.
If you look at AI usage, the closest to what ordinary people or forum users like the OP rely on, artificial intelligence has a lot of flaws. When you mention the use in medicine, perhaps you should refer to
OpenAI’s New Rules for Legal and Health Queries
Modular Safety Middleware For Health-Adjacent AI Assistants
UnitedHealthcare's broken AI denied seniors' medical claims, lawsuit alleges
There are many lawsuits against AI chatbots, because they gave wrong medical diagnoses.

Maybe they're not as stupid as the users who use them for nonsense and stupid prompts.

Those who decide to follow medical instructions from the AI are just crazy people, i wouldn't say they deserve to die, but c'mon, that's what Darwin used to call "Natural selection". We can't trust the AI answers, all of them should be verified by a human.

And i believe the IA should have harder terms of service. It shouldn't answer about medical things or other topics that could put in risk human life.

[DireWolfM14]

Surely the most prestigious medical journal, the Ivy League universities, the Pentagon, the European Space Agency, and a whole bunch of other organizations I could link to are stupid.

Lol, everything is a lie, and it's absolutely insane that so many people still willingly choose the blue pill.

The "Health Industry" doesn't sell health, they sell cures for disease they and their partners created, in some cases, using AI.
The "Educational Institutions" don't provide education, they indoctrinate and filter the useful ones from the useless and dangerous.

Seeing through the lie is easy, it's the opposite of what they've named themselves.  Some of the same text books that are used at Harvard and are also used at Alabama State, and they're all published two major publishing houses...  Owned by BlackRock.  Medical journals are notorious for "not rocking the boat."  They're also mostly owned by two publishers... who are also owned by BlackRock.  Care to take a guess who's the largest institutional holder of AI stock?  It rhymes with BlackRock.

They're not going to hand you the keys to your own freedom, that's not what AI will be used for.  They'll only make your slavery more addictive and sedated.

[Free Market Capitalist]

It depends on how you look at the whole thing.

No, it doesn’t depend on that. What’s happening here is that there’s a kind of ‘AI-bashing’ culture on the forum that’s reinforced by merits: if you say that AI is stupid, or that the world was better before chatbots, or that the forum has gone to the dogs because of AI, your opinion is reinforced by people who share your prejudices because they give you a bunch of merits.

If you look at AI usage, the closest to what ordinary people or forum users like the OP rely on, artificial intelligence has a lot of flaws. When you mention the use in medicine, perhaps you should refer to
OpenAI’s New Rules for Legal and Health Queries
Modular Safety Middleware For Health-Adjacent AI Assistants
UnitedHealthcare's broken AI denied seniors' medical claims, lawsuit alleges
There are many lawsuits against AI chatbots, because they gave wrong medical diagnoses.

That's like if you'd told me back in 1996 that the internet was a piece of crap that would never amount to anything because it was so slow, and that you couldn't use your home phone while you were on it. Quote from The Register article:

The complaint, brought by Clarkson Law Firm, alleges UnitedHealthcare unlawfully deployed an AI system with a 90 percent error rate that improperly overrode the recommendations of physicians regarding medically necessary post-acute care for the elderly, i.e. treatment following discharge from a hospital.

So, you have a new technology, and just because we have a few cases like this, are we going to rule out that new technology instead of focusing on the ones that have a negligible error rate—and one that’s getting even lower?

Maybe they're not as stupid as the users who use them for nonsense and stupid prompts.

We agree on this.

Lol, everything is a lie, and it's absolutely insane that so many people still willingly choose the blue pill.

The "Health Industry" doesn't sell health, they sell cures for disease they and their partners created, in some cases, using AI.
The "Educational Institutions" don't provide education, they indoctrinate and filter the useful ones from the useless and dangerous.

Seeing through the lie is easy, it's the opposite of what they've named themselves.  Some of the same text books that are used at Harvard and are also used at Alabama State, and they're all published two major publishing houses...  Owned by BlackRock.  Medical journals are notorious for "not rocking the boat."  They're also mostly owned by two publishers... who are also owned by BlackRock.  Care to take a guess who's the largest institutional holder of AI stock?  It rhymes with BlackRock.

They're not going to hand you the keys to your own freedom, that's not what AI will be used for.  They'll only make your slavery more addictive and sedated.

Sure, sure. PubMed, the Ivy League universities, the European Space Agency, etc., aren't reliable sources of knowledge. The best source of knowledge is an anonymous internet forum and especially what anti-AI users say.

I agree, in part, that the pharmaceutical industry has a greater interest in keeping diseases chronic rather than curing them. But despite the shortcomings of the pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, BlackRock, and all the other examples you might cite, humanity has achieved levels of development and well-being that were unthinkable just two centuries ago, let alone two millennia. Two centuries ago, Malthus formulated his thesis that since food production grew arithmetically while the human population grew geometrically, humanity was headed for collapse, which shares a similar spirit with the apocalyptic visions surrounding AI.