Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

REPORT: Roblox is rolling out a terrifying AI system that rewrites what users say before their message ever reaches another player. The move signals a new phase of online moderation, one where platforms don’t just block words, they replace them. Roblox has begun deploying AI that alters chat messages...

221,214 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

At the BNB Chain hackathon, CZ 🔶 BNB made several very important points about AI trading (Everything in parentheses is my own view and judgment.) He first said that AI will be involved in trading everywhere. Trading itself is already a huge market: there are 300 million users on Binance alone, and if you add the decentralized ecosystems, that number is not small either. In such a mass-market environment, many different trading strategies can work, with countless different coins, different projects, and different ways to play. But there is a big problem here: building commercial AI trading platforms for retail users is actually very hard. If a trading strategy works very well for one person, once a billion people start using the same strategy, that strategy “might still work, or might stop working.” Take copy trading / follow trading as an example: if you buy first and everyone follows you, the first buyer will perform very well, but the last person to follow may not end up with good results. So, with the exact same strategy and the exact same copy logic, the outcomes can be completely different for different people. (On top of that, every strategy also has its own capital capacity limits.) Teams that can really build strong AI are, with high probability, going to trade with their own money. In today’s world, money itself is already somewhat like a “commodity”; many people have a lot of capital, and it’s actually not that hard to raise funds. If you truly have an algorithm that can make a lot of money, it’s not hard to get money and run your own book. There is really only one situation where you would sell this algorithm to mass-market users: for example, if you charge a $10 monthly subscription and can sell it to one million users, then your $10 million monthly subscription revenue is higher than the profit you could make by trading the strategy yourself. (Here this touches one of our earlier theses: as training AI models becomes relatively easier and the supply of models increases, model companies have more incentive to open-source. By analogy, as the production process of trading strategies is increasingly simplified by AI and the supply of strategies explodes, traders will have stronger incentives to monetize by expanding their influence in other words, by “open-sourcing” their strategies.) Of course, CZ did not say that this model can never work. Another path is to build an AI trading platform that lets users tune different AI algorithms, or very easily assemble their own structures and strategies, so that what each person ends up running is different and better tailored to themselves. Some people will make money, some people will lose money, but the platform still has value because it’s very hard for most people to build an AI trading algorithm from scratch. So there are a lot of trade-offs here; it’s not as simple as saying “once AI shows up, everything automatically gets better.” (This is exactly what we presented at the hackathon: you describe your own strategy in natural language, and the AI automatically generates a workflow. The parameters in that workflow, the models used, the logical structure, the APIs it calls, and even the algorithms it invokes are all customizable. The reasons we think workflows are a good way to do this include: controllable execution paths, Lego-like modular nodes, and better visualization that makes it easier for users to build and adjust their workflows.) Finally, his conclusion was very clear: it’s not that AI will definitely make trading better, and it’s not that AI will definitely make things worse. Rather, no matter what, in the future a huge number of people will use AI to trade. This will be a very large field, and whoever can build the best algorithms will make a lot of money.

Tykoo

25,535 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

If I had to start from zero tomorrow and bring in new customers fast, here's exactly what I'd build. Top to bottom. I'd start with the ad. Open ChatGPT or Claude, paste in what you sell and who you sell it to, ask it to write you ten different hooks for a Meta ad. Pick the best three. Then jump into or one of the AI video tools and have it generate the visual. Thirty minutes, you've got a real ad ready to run. You run that ad to one landing page. Not your homepage. One page, one offer, one call to action. Headline that stops the scroll, a few lines of value, an email or phone field, a button. That's it. Build it in HighLevel in about twenty minutes, drag, drop, you're done. The second someone enters their email, they drop into your CRM, automatically tagged with where they came from. Now the part most people skip, the follow-up. The moment that form is filled, a sequence kicks off automatically. Email and SMS, spaced over five to seven days. First message thanks them and delivers what you promised. Then a story. Then social proof. Then an objection you know they have. Then the offer. They don't have to think about you. You're showing up in their inbox and their texts at exactly the right time. The last message has a calendar link or a buy button right inside it. They tap, they book, or they buy. Done. The whole flow runs on its own from the ad all the way to the sale. You build it once. It works while you're sleeping. AI does the creative work. The system runs the customer journey. You spend your time on strategy. That's the play.

Neil Patel

38,614 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

Someone just stole from 37,000 $TAO holders and walked away clean. Not because they broke a rule. Because no rule existed to stop them. That changes today. Here is what happened. Covenant AI ran one of the most watched subnets on Bittensor. On April 10, the founder sold their entire position and disappeared. No warning. No announcement. No on-chain signal. By the time holders found out, the price had already moved against them. This was not a hack. This was not a bug. This was a founder legally exiting into their own community with zero accountability. Bittensor just closed that door permanently. The Conviction upgrade is live on mainnet today. Every emission a subnet owner earns now locks automatically the moment it arrives. They cannot touch it immediately. If they want to exit they must submit a public unlock transaction on-chain. Visible to every single person on the network the second it is submitted. Then the clock starts. 30 days before 63% of their position becomes spendable. 90 days before 95% is accessible. You now have a month of warning before the first dollar of sell pressure hits. A silent exit is no longer possible. The founder has to tell you they are leaving before they can leave. And it goes further. Any holder can now lock their tokens toward a different address they believe would run the subnet better. The address with the most locked support behind it becomes eligible to take over entirely. Bad owners can be replaced by the community before they do damage. Before today, subnet investing had one risk nobody could price. The person running it could vanish overnight, and you would never see it coming. That risk has been removed from the equation. Skin in the game used to be a promise. Now, it is a number on a block explorer that every holder can verify in real time. The people who understand what accountable infrastructure means for the value of $TAO will not need to explain themselves later. This is still early.

2xnmore

19,528 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Victor Davis Hanson just delivered a devastating breakdown explaining Democrats’ desperate strategy to hold power. Democrat policies are so unpopular they no longer believe they can win voters — so they’re now trying to radically change the system of governance instead. HANSON: “It seems to me that the Democrats have lost confidence in their agenda. In other words, they don't believe that you, the voter, really does want an open border." “And the same is true of critical race theory or critical legal theory or the emphasis and fixations on transgenderism or the Green New Deal.” “You put it all together and that message of the Democrats is not appealing. And so of course in the short term their strategy has been, ‘We're not Donald Trump. Donald Trump is a fascist.’” "When they look at these long-term prognoses, they get very angry. And so what is the reaction? Is it to change the agenda to win you over the vote? No. It's to change the system." "And so if you want to know why they want to get rid of the electoral college or why they want the census to count residents that could be here, in many cases are here illegally, maybe 30 million. If you want to know why they want to pack the Supreme Court ... it is that their message right now does not appeal to 51%.” “Their only alternative is to find radical changes in the system of governance to allow their unpopular agenda to be what? De facto popular.” Democrats would rather break the system than fix their failing agenda.

Overton

88,637 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Elon Musk is building something no platform in history has actually attempted. A system that judges ideas without knowing who wrote them. Musk: “It should be possible for somebody to post content as a new user with no followers, and if that content is excellent, it gets seen by a lot of people.” Every platform before this ran on a single hidden variable. Identity. Not quality. Not originality. Not depth. Identity. Who you were determined what got seen. The architecture didn’t surface the best thinking. It surfaced the most established thinker. It chose pedigree over precision. Every single time. Musk is the first person with the infrastructure, the capital, and the sheer indifference to consensus required to strip that variable out. Grok reads everything. Every post from every account. Zero followers or ten million. No weighting for legacy. No deference to tenure. It measures one thing. Intrinsic excellence. The printing press created publishers. Radio created networks. Television created anchors. Social media created influencers. Every technology of liberation produced a new gatekeeper within one generation. Musk is betting AI is the first tool that can’t be captured. An algorithm with no concept of identity has no incumbency to protect. It just reads. And it surfaces what’s best. If that works, it doesn’t just change a platform. It exposes something about every system that came before it. Every trending page, every algorithm, every feed that claimed to surface quality was never measuring quality. It was measuring proximity to power and calling it merit. We never had meritocracy. We had hierarchy with better marketing. Musk is building the first real one. And the question it forces isn’t whether you can compete. It’s whether your work was ever actually good, or you were just early. Everyone wants meritocracy. Almost nobody has ever lived in one.

Dustin

29,648 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

It’s like a game of charades. One word, three syllables, sounds like corruption. The word that must not be voiced. Because the ruling class and their pawns in the parliament don't like to be called out for their obvious bad deeds. Australia is not a sovereign nation anymore. It is just a mining outpost for the global corporatocracy. The leadership here at federal, state and local levels do the same things and work for the same people. It does not matter which of them you elect, things only get worse. We have finally caught up with the US and UK, insofar as the middle-class is being erased. There are two distinct camps forming, the very rich and politically connected, and everyone else. It didn’t happen overnight. It has been decades in the making and both major parties have spurred it on. But the corruption does not stop with them. It exists across the political and corporate landscape. Questions not posed for fear of the answers. They dress it up in parliamentary procedure but that is a convenient way to maintain the appearance that they are beyond reproach. You can’t rise in parliament and call out corruption, because they all supposedly deserve the benefit of the doubt. What a laugh. They address each other as “The Honourable”. They give each other deference and practice “just us” in place of true justice. Albanese is just the last in a very long line of grifting clowns that feathered their nests, and those of their friends, and families via influence and authority. But don’t make the mistake of questioning it, because it might bring down the whole house of cards - as we see them for what they truly are. They use legislation to their benefit. They cover up their misdeeds and they regale us with stories of problems solved. But it is all just a lie. You can’t stuff up this much for this long by accident. Albanese certainly did trade his investments before he changed the tax system. I’m sure many others did too. But that’s just a whisper, and to be fair, it is the least of their crimes on the Australian people. We need a giant broom to go through Canberra and the States. We need the local councils fully audited and we need new people that understand what selfless service really means. I just want Australia back.

Matthew Camenzuli

13,222 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat