by 0xbc02db030361121dd43bbb2fcbcb4f9f98c1dc7d (AshKetchum)
Should we look for an AI alternative to replace the wearable curation committee?
This approach is for cutting costs for creators and saving funds on havind on-demand stand by wearable curation committe members. There are AI tools out there (free & paid) which will do what’s required from our human counterparts in this case the wearable curation committee members.
Dedicate a team meber to research and implement this option & once implemented it will be fully automated requiring no or very little human assistance.
I like this idea and I think it’s possible to train AI somehow. But there are lots of unexpected nuances that always happens with wearable models, especially models published from people that created and had experience with 3d for the first time ever.
I’m not sure that there already exists AI that will be able to check this nuances. And i’m not sure that it’s possible to train them to detect all nuances, maybe only if guy whom will train AI is very experienced 3d modeler that know lots of techincal things and issues that might be expected to happen.
Of course, you can train AI to detect limitations, you can even do that without AI. But what about wearables overlaps, wrong materials, or wearables that don’t even appear in-world for some reason? Broken emotes, wrong action names, broken emote thumbnails, wrong emote area? What about Smart Wearables with code inside?
How much this tool would cost and how to achieve guaranteed results?
For now, as for me, it seems that DAO expenses on this tool with be much higher, than monthly payment to curators in long-term?
I would support a project like this as part of research for the Metaverse, to have a cool ecosystem supporting talent that can invest time in research.
But ofc, I wouldn’t expect to replace the curation committee.
Sure, I support it IF, and thats a big if, we pay AFTER it’s delivered and fully working.
We can’t train an AI to do that reliably yet and I don’t want the DAO to waste hundreds of thousands of USD on a grant that say “soon, soon” and never actually delivers it.
JasonX still randomly throwing proposals without thinking about the technical implications…
I like the idea, but it’s not doable right now. IMO there is currently a need for a system that will make the curation process fairer for curators in terms of balance.
Given that the poll is about looking for an alternative, I think it is a good idea. But the reality is that, the best way to move forward is for someone to actually look for an alternative, provide a PoC, post this in the forum, talk with the actual Curation team to understand their workflow, and see if they need a replacement or maybe an enhancement to their day to day work, and after that, start the governance process to make the change. With the details present on this proposal it is hard to make an informed decision. I would certainly vote yes if the PoC is good and reliable and the Curation committee is ok with handing part of their workflow to an automated process, but without that information I will abstain for now.