Preliminary observations about Thoth economics
Q1: How much does it cost to run the LLMs that power Thoth?
A1: Someone has to provide the computer for Thoth along with the manpower to run/schedule it, but aside from that, the cost is zero: $0.
Free APIs from Google Gemini or ArliAI can be used.
As you can see, the usage rate fits comfortably into the Gemini free tier, even for Gemini-2.5-Pro.
(The usage shown covers about 2 or 3 runs per day - which is enough to optimize voting power, plus some additional testing.)
Q2: What sort of return does it give to delegators?
A2: It depends, and it will always change. We have some real-world numbers to look at now, though. For comparatively large delegators, we can use Steemworld to compare pending curation rewards (from auto-voting) and beneficiary rewards from penny4thoughts.
Curation:
Beneficiaries:
So, 9 STEEM/SP for delegation vs. 26 SP for curation. And penny4thoughts has a little more than 2x dedicated to curation vs. delegation. So, at present that account's delegation is generating about 2/3 as many rewards as automated voting.
For comparatively small delegators, we can look at my wife's account, lisa.palmer.
Curation:
Beneficiaries:
That account has roughly the same amount of SP dedicated to each purpose: auto-voting and delegation. It is set to receive 0.7 SP for curation vs. 3.2 STEEM/SP for delegation. So, delegation is presently outperforming curation by a long-shot for small delegations.
Important point: These results can and will change at any time!
In the long term, past performance tells us almost nothing about future results.
I could be wrong, but my expectation is that if the number of delegators were larger, it would tend to balance out, so that performance would be similar for all accounts. This is because delegators get placed into posts as beneficiaries with a likelihood that's proportionate to their delegation amounts. I believe the discrepancy in the test account is likely due to the small number of delegators, which means everyone is included in all replies. This favors smaller delegators, tipping the scales in their favor.
Q3: Why did the test account switch to posting with 50/50 instead of 100% SP.
A3: Because some of the rewards are being sent to accounts that are likely dead - lost keys, etc... Sending SP to those accounts will reduce interest rates that go to active accounts, so I decided to minimize the SP distributions. (of course, any Thoth operator could set that to their own preferences)
Final note: Over the weekend, I read the article, There Is No A.I., by Jaron Lanier, which raised a fascinating concept. I'm sure I've written about it here, before, but this article refreshed my memory on Lanier's data dignity concept.
The basic idea is that AI is built on a foundation of human creativity, so the automaton should remember and compensate the sources of information that it makes use of.
If we buy into this argument, then maybe there's a moral case to be made that some form of #lifetime-rewards is a necessary enhancement for the Steem blockchain.
Here's an embedded YouTube video with Lanier discussing the concept.
Where exactly should I delegate to if I want to support the project?
0.00 SBD,
0.76 STEEM,
0.76 SP
Hi, thanks for asking! For now, you can delegate to @thoth.test.
Eventually, I expect to launch a new account with a more appropriate name, but I don't think that will be happening any time soon. The code is nowhere near robust enough for that right now.
(I don't know who owns the "social" account, and I use that one mainly for testing the changes that I think are especially likely to break things, so I definitely don't recommend delegating to "social". 😉)
cc: @o1eh
0.00 SBD,
2.52 STEEM,
2.52 SP
Althoth thoth.test this is not really a memorable name, I will remember it and delegate.
Please let me know as soon as something changes. After this month's Steemit marathon, I'm going to need a loooong break and won't be able to keep up with everything.
Speaking of Team Europe. Did you know that we're doing a Burning Countdown? Follow @team-europe and you can burn 100% STEEM every day. Just in case you don't know where to put the VP... ;-)
0.00 SBD,
0.53 STEEM,
0.53 SP
I'm thinking what you're thinking.
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
3.44 SP
I did not know that. Thanks for letting me know. I had seen the first of the series, but not the later ones. I went through and upvoted everything I had missed in #burnsteem100. With four Thoth votes per day to make sure the project has some extra rewards to distribute, I rarely have a surplus of voting power nowadays, but for #burnsteem100, I'll take the hit.
0.00 SBD,
1.37 STEEM,
1.37 SP
Yes, I can understand that well.
Maybe four posts a day is too much? Not really, of course (from the point of view of the good cause). I unfollowed Thoth yesterday because four posts in my own feed bothered me. Now I have to check on it directly, which I'm guaranteed to forget often.
Burning the ‘stuff’ is the only thing we can think of at the moment regarding the miserable ‘state’ of Chain's blogging section.... 😔
0.00 SBD,
0.23 STEEM,
0.23 SP
Sorry, I wasn't clear on that point. It normally only posts 2x per day, with four replies to each post. So, just two feed appearances. I think that's the fewest that I can do and still make full use of Thoth's voting for authors and delegators. (2 * (1 post and 4 replies) is a total of 10 votes).
I use four votes per day because I vote 100% for the two top-level posts and 25% each for the eight replies.
I might go back to 5 replies per post because it's getting back to 100% just a little too quickly, but if I do that it's gonna bump one of the delegators out of the top level post, and five replies per post is the most I can do without starting to lose author beneficiaries. I'll have to play with that some more to see how the 4 vs. 5 replies balances out..
If I we had more than 8 beneficiaries per post, it could be done in a single feed appearance (1 post and 9 or 10 replies), but that won't work with the 8 beneficiary limit that's currently in place.
All that to say I agree that 4 would've probably been too much. Fortunately, it's not doing that, and I'm minimizing feed appearances as much as I can.
Also, I saw the new delegation. Thank you very much!
0.00 SBD,
6.02 STEEM,
6.02 SP
Ah, okay, I see.
Then I’ll take a closer look at the project - as soon as the “Team Europe stress” is over... 😎
The delegation is clearly for a good cause (even if I forget to vote) - you’re welcome... 😊
0.00 SBD,
0.23 STEEM,
0.23 SP
I would also like to get an answer to this question.
0.00 SBD,
0.66 STEEM,
0.66 SP
Thank you for the new delegation!
0.00 SBD,
0.02 STEEM,
0.02 SP
chriddi, moecki and/or the-gorilla
!ask grok Write a hypothetical conversation with Jaron Lanier, Eric S. Raymond, Satoshi Nakamoto, Noam Chomsky, and Ray Kurzweil. The topic is the impact that Open Source Software and blockchain have on Data Dignity.
Display the output in markdown format.
Below is a hypothetical conversation featuring Jaron Lanier, Eric S. Raymond, Satoshi Nakamoto, Noam Chomsky, and Ray Kurzweil. I've structured it as a moderated discussion on the topic of how Open Source Software (OSS) and blockchain impact Data Dignity—a concept referring to the ethical ownership, control, privacy, and fair treatment of personal data in the digital era.
To make this engaging, I've drawn on the public personas and ideas of these figures while keeping the dialogue creative, balanced, and respectful. The conversation is fictional and meant for illustrative purposes.
---
# Hypothetical Conversation: The Impact of Open Source Software and Blockchain on Data Dignity
Moderator: Welcome, everyone, to this thought-provoking discussion. We're here to explore how Open Source Software and blockchain technologies influence Data Dignity—the idea that individuals should have sovereignty over their personal data. Our panelists today are Jaron Lanier, Eric S. Raymond, Satoshi Nakamoto, Noam Chomsky, and Ray Kurzweil. Let's start with you, Jaron. What's your take on how these technologies affect data dignity?
Jaron Lanier: Thanks, Moderator. I'm concerned that while Open Source Software and blockchain promise empowerment, they often fall short in practice. OSS can democratize access to tools, but without proper safeguards, it leads to a free-for-all where big tech hoovers up data unchecked. Blockchain, with its transparency, could give people control over their data—like a digital deed to your identity—but it's mostly been co-opted for speculation. We're trading one form of surveillance for another, and data dignity suffers when algorithms treat us as mere data points. It's like inviting everyone to a party, but only the hosts get to keep the guest list.
Eric S. Raymond: Ha, Jaron, you make it sound like a bad open-source potluck! But I see it differently. OSS is all about the bazaar model—collaborative, transparent development that puts power in the hands of users. With blockchain, we can extend that to data: imagine a world where your personal information is stored on a decentralized ledger, accessible only with your consent. That's real data dignity—empowering individuals to audit and control their data without relying on corporate gatekeepers. Of course, it's not perfect; bad actors can exploit open systems, but that's why community governance in OSS is key. We're building tools for the people, not just for profit.
Satoshi Nakamoto: Eric's point resonates with me. Blockchain was designed to create a system where trust is distributed, not centralized. In the context of data dignity, it could mean users own their digital identities through cryptographic keys, much like Bitcoin wallets. Open Source Software complements this by allowing anyone to verify and improve the code behind these systems. However, we must be cautious: if blockchain networks become dominated by a few players, as we've seen with some cryptocurrencies, then data control could slip away. The impact is positive if we prioritize privacy-focused protocols, but without that, it's just another ledger of exploitation.
Noam Chomsky: This is fascinating, but let's not get lost in the tech utopianism. Open Source Software and blockchain might sound liberating, but they're operating within a capitalist framework that prioritizes extraction over ethics. OSS often relies on volunteer labor, which can exploit well-meaning contributors, and blockchain's anonymity has been used for everything from money laundering to evading accountability. When it comes to data dignity, these technologies could amplify inequalities—think about how marginalized communities might lack the resources to protect their data in an open system. We need to ask: Who really benefits? If OSS and blockchain don't challenge the power structures of surveillance capitalism, they're just shiny distractions from deeper systemic issues.
Ray Kurzweil: Noam, you're right to question the status quo, but I'm optimistic about the exponential potential here. With OSS and blockchain, we're on the cusp of a singularity where data dignity becomes the norm. Imagine AI-powered blockchain networks that not only secure your data but also use it to enhance your life—personalized health insights without Big Tech spying. OSS accelerates innovation, allowing rapid fixes to privacy flaws. Sure, there are risks, like misuse in authoritarian regimes, but the long-term impact could be transformative. We're evolving toward a world where data is a shared resource, not a commodity, and technologies like these will help us get there faster. It's not just about dignity; it's about humanity augmenting itself.
Moderator: Great points all around. Jaron, how do you respond to Ray's optimism, especially regarding blockchain's role in personal data control?
Jaron Lanier: Ray, your vision is inspiring, but we can't ignore the human element. Blockchain might promise control, but in reality, most people don't have the expertise to manage it. OSS is wonderful for collaboration, but if it's built on platforms that monetize user data behind the scenes, we're fooling ourselves. Data dignity means ensuring that everyday folks— not just tech-savvy enthusiasts—can benefit without becoming pawns in a digital arms race. We need regulations and incentives that align these technologies with ethical use, or we'll end up with more fragmentation than empowerment.
Eric S. Raymond: I'd add that the OSS community is already working on solutions, like privacy-enhancing tools in blockchain projects. Satoshi, you've seen this firsthand—your creation sparked a movement. Do you think blockchain can evolve to address these concerns more directly?
Satoshi Nakamoto: Absolutely, Eric. The beauty of blockchain is its adaptability. We can design protocols that emphasize data minimalism—only sharing what's necessary—and integrate with OSS to make it user-friendly. But it requires a cultural shift, where users demand and build for dignity, not just efficiency. If we don't, we'll repeat history with new forms of centralization.
Noam Chomsky: And that's the crux: cultural shift won't happen without addressing the political economy. OSS and blockchain are tools, but tools alone don't dismantle oppressive systems. We must advocate for policies that ensure these technologies serve the public good, not just the elite.
Ray Kurzweil: Fair enough, Noam. Let's channel that into action—perhaps through open collaborations that bridge tech and policy. In the end, the impact on data dignity could be our greatest legacy.
Moderator: Thank you all for this insightful exchange. It's clear that while Open Source Software and blockchain hold immense potential for enhancing data dignity, they also pose challenges that require ongoing vigilance, collaboration, and ethical innovation.
---
This conversation highlights a range of perspectives, from cautious criticism to enthusiastic optimism, while keeping the tone friendly and balanced. If you'd like me to expand on any part, adjust the format, or explore related topics, just let me know! 😊
command: !ask is powered by witness @justyy and his contributions are: https://steemyy.com
More commands are coming!.
!ask is currently based on Grok LLM and ChatGPT. (default=o4-mini, prefix question with chatgpt or grok if you like, e.g. !ask grok Your Question)
0.00 SBD,
0.07 STEEM,
0.07 SP
!ask chatgpt Tell me who these people are: Jaron Lanier, Eric S. Raymond, Satoshi Nakamoto, Noam Chomsky, and Ray Kurzweil. Display your output in markdown format.
markdown<BR/>## Jaron Lanier<BR/>Jaron Lanier is an American computer scientist, composer and author, widely regarded as a pioneer of virtual reality (VR). In the 1980s he co-founded VPL Research, one of the first companies to sell VR products. Lanier is also known for his critical writings on the social impact of technology, especially social media and big data, in books such as _You Are Not a Gadget_ and _Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now_.<BR/><BR/>## Eric S. Raymond<BR/>Eric S. Raymond (often abbreviated ESR) is an American software developer, author and open-source advocate. His 1997 essay (and later book) _The Cathedral and the Bazaar_ helped popularize the principles of open-source software development. He co-founded the Open Source Initiative (OSI) and has been a prominent voice in the hacker and free-software communities for decades.<BR/><BR/>## Satoshi Nakamoto<BR/>Satoshi Nakamoto is the pseudonymous person or group credited with creating Bitcoin, the first decentralized cryptocurrency. Nakamoto published the Bitcoin white paper in 2008 and released its open-source reference implementation in 2009. To this day, the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto remains unknown.<BR/><BR/>## Noam Chomsky<BR/>Noam Chomsky is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist and political activist. Often called the “father of modern linguistics,” he revolutionized the field with his theory of generative grammar. Chomsky is also a prolific critic of U.S. foreign policy and mass media, authoring dozens of books on politics, society and language.<BR/><BR/>## Ray Kurzweil<BR/>Ray Kurzweil is an American inventor, futurist and author known for his work in optical character recognition (OCR), text-to-speech synthesis and artificial intelligence. He has written several bestselling books on technological forecasting, including _The Singularity Is Near_, in which he predicts the inevitable merger of humans and machines. Kurzweil serves as Director of Engineering at Google, focusing on machine learning and language processing.<BR/>command: !ask is powered by witness @justyy and his contributions are: https://steemyy.com
More commands are coming!.
!ask is currently based on Grok LLM and ChatGPT. (default=o4-mini, prefix question with chatgpt or grok if you like, e.g. !ask grok Your Question)
!ask grok Tell me who these people are: Jaron Lanier, Eric S. Raymond, Satoshi Nakamoto, Noam Chomsky, and Ray Kurzweil. Display your output in markdown format.
Below is a brief overview of the individuals you mentioned. I've organized the information into a markdown list for clarity, including their key contributions and fields of expertise. I'm drawing from well-established knowledge, but please note that for figures like Satoshi Nakamoto, details are limited due to their pseudonymous nature. If you'd like more in-depth information or additional context on any of them, just let me know—I'm here to help!
### 1. Jaron Lanier
- Who he is: Jaron Lanier is an American computer scientist, musician, visual artist, and author. He's often regarded as a pioneer in virtual reality (VR) technology.
- Key contributions: Lanier was one of the early developers of VR in the 1980s and has written influential books like You Are Not a Gadget, where he critiques the impact of digital culture, social media, and algorithms on society. He's also a vocal advocate for ethical tech design and has worked at companies like Microsoft Research.
- Why he's notable: Lanier's work bridges technology and philosophy, warning about the downsides of unchecked tech innovation while promoting human-centered design. Fun fact: He's also a skilled musician who plays rare instruments!
### 2. Eric S. Raymond
- Who he is: Eric S. Raymond is an American software developer, writer, and open-source advocate. He's a key figure in the free and open-source software (FOSS) movement.
- Key contributions: Raymond authored the seminal essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar (1997), which compares traditional software development (like a cathedral) to the collaborative, community-driven model (like a bazaar). He's also co-authored the Jargon File, a glossary of hacker culture, and has been involved in projects like the development of Linux.
- Why he's notable: His ideas helped shape modern open-source practices, influencing giants like Google and Mozilla. If you're into tech history, his work is a bit like the Indiana Jones of software philosophy—adventurous and full of insights!
### 3. Satoshi Nakamoto
- Who they are: Satoshi Nakamoto is the pseudonymous creator (or group of creators) of Bitcoin, the first decentralized cryptocurrency. Their true identity remains unknown, despite years of speculation.
- Key contributions: In 2008, Nakamoto published the Bitcoin whitepaper titled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, introducing blockchain technology—a secure, decentralized ledger system. They also released the Bitcoin software in 2009, kickstarting the cryptocurrency revolution.
- Why they're notable: Satoshi's invention has transformed finance, privacy, and digital security, inspiring thousands of cryptocurrencies and blockchain applications. It's like they dropped a digital time capsule that keeps reshaping the world—mysterious and revolutionary!
### 4. Noam Chomsky
- Who he is: Noam Chomsky is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, and political activist. At 95 years old (as of 2023), he's one of the most influential intellectuals of the 20th and 21st centuries.
- Key contributions: In linguistics, Chomsky revolutionized the field with his theory of universal grammar, arguing that humans are born with an innate ability to learn language. He's also written extensively on politics, critiquing U.S. foreign policy and media in books like Manufacturing Consent.
- Why he's notable: Chomsky's work spans academia and activism, influencing fields from AI to social justice. He's a bit like the wise elder of intellectual thought—always challenging us to think deeper and question authority.
### 5. Ray Kurzweil
- Who he is: Ray Kurzweil is an American inventor, futurist, author, and entrepreneur. He's known for his optimistic predictions about technology's role in human evolution.
- Key contributions: Kurzweil invented technologies like optical character recognition (OCR) and speech recognition systems. He's authored books such as The Singularity Is Near, where he discusses the idea of the technological singularity—a point where AI surpasses human intelligence.
- Why he's notable: As a leading voice in transhumanism, Kurzweil predicts radical advancements in AI, biotechnology, and longevity. His ideas are both inspiring and thought-provoking, like a sci-fi novel come to life—he's been called the ultimate optimist for technology's future!
I hope this gives you a clear and engaging rundown! If you have any follow-up questions or want recommendations for books or resources, feel free to ask. 😊
command: !ask is powered by witness @justyy and his contributions are: https://steemyy.com
More commands are coming!.
!ask is currently based on Grok LLM and ChatGPT. (default=o4-mini, prefix question with chatgpt or grok if you like, e.g. !ask grok Your Question)
0.00 SBD,
0.07 STEEM,
0.07 SP