ﾠ
Whenever there are significant technological advances, humans tend to reject them initially. The same is happening with AI. Perhaps because I am an Aquarius, very fond of new technologies, I find it very difficult to understand the widespread sense of rejection.
As the subject is current, discussed on every corner with friends, acquaintances, or strangers, the following analogy always comes to mind. There used to be saws for cutting wood. But man invented the chainsaw to save work and time, increasing efficiency in cutting wood. If, by any chance, you misuse the chainsaw, you could injure your leg. I ask: is it the chainsaw's fault? Should there be no chainsaws? And so many other analogies can be made.
AI is here to stay. It is irreversible. It will not disappear because of the panic that has taken hold of the majority. My suggestion is to use it as a work tool. But be careful how you position yourselves. Look at the chainsaw that can hurt you when misused.
Regarding professions, do you remember (or know that there were) steam trains? Did anyone care that the workers who transported and loaded coal lost their jobs when trains stopped using coal and switched to other energy sources?
So why should we lament that developers and programmers may lose their jobs? Man is a being who adapts to new circumstances.
Reflection resulting from questioning
ﾠ
Next April, I will celebrate two years on this network. Recently, perhaps due to the volatility of decentralized finance—which affects all cryptocurrencies—many users have disappeared. Many of those who have not disappeared seem unmotivated. Last December, there were stakeholders desperate to vote for good content.
The recent fork changed the voting and the value of the rewards. Perhaps this factor also contributed to the eventual discouragement of users, especially those who are in it for the short and medium term, or those who have been around for a long time. In this gray environment at the beginning of the new year, and two days before the end of the first month, I questioned and reflected on my performance on this platform.
I couldn't answer questions such as: Am I on the right track? Am I contributing effectively to the platform? This inability made me feel the need to seek an outside opinion. I could have asked some friends I've made here on Discord, but I feared that their friendship might influence the accuracy of their opinion.
So I turned to AI to answer this self-reflection. I asked Gemini AI to check my HIVE account. Here's the result.
🔍
✍️ My prompt:
🤖 AI response:
1. Efficiency Estimate (Curation APR)
ﾠ
For @cryptoreforma, efficiency is defined by three pillars:
ﾠ
A) Mana Consistency: The user maintains regular activity, preventing their Voting Power from remaining at 100% (which would be a waste of money) or falling below 80% (which would reduce the individual value of each vote).
ﾠ
B) Alignment with Major Curators: Analyzing his stance, it is noticeable that he often votes for content that also receives support from projects such as OCD or Curie.
ﾠ
By voting before or alongside these whales, the @cryptoreforma account maximizes its share of the 50% allocated to curators.
ﾠ
C) Focus on Portuguese-speaking Communities: Because it is a niche where there is less competition from “front-running” (bots that vote in milliseconds), it gets a larger share of the curation reward than if it tried to compete in ultra-popular global posts.
2. Comparison with the Platform Average
| User | Estimated APR | Efficiency Level | Behavior |
|---|---|---|---|
| Network average | ~8.5% | Medium | Random or automatic votes |
| Elite Curator | ~11% | Maximum | Content sniper and high-speed bots |
| @cryptoreforma | ~9,2% - 9,8% | Above Average | Selective manual curation and niche support |
3. Factors Justifying Performance
:peakd/hive: Early votes (0-5 min): Part of the reward goes back to the pool (or to the author, depending on the hard fork version).
:peakd/hive: “Sweet Spot” vote: Vote right after 5 minutes and before the big whales. This is where @cryptoreforma seems to work best.
✅ Conclusion: Is the performance fair?
The fact that he has a slightly above-average APR indicates that he's not just “letting the money sit idle,” but rather monitoring the network and supporting value creators. He's not extracting value in a predatory manner, but rather acting as a talent scout.
ﾠ
The result generated by the AI gave me additional reasons to be optimistic going into February. Here is a good reason to use AI.
