Want to verify if you're a real person? It seems simple, but in fact, it leads to a paradox. Suppose we set a certain standard as the 'only proof of humanity'—AI will learn to meet this standard—and then we find that the standard has become invalid. The boundaries of public opinion are torn apart. The problem is that any verification method we can think of can potentially be exploited in reverse. AI is becoming smarter and smarter; they will imitate, adapt, and evolve. We create rules to distinguish ourselves, but they find ways around these rules within the framework. What does this arms race ultimately lead to? The collapse of the standards themselves. The line between real and fake becomes blurred.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
PumpAnalyst
· 4h ago
Isn't this just an upgraded version of the game between the whales and the retail investors? Once the rules are out, they are deciphered, and support levels are broken as soon as they are drawn [Thinking]
Technical analysis fails, standards fail, and when that time comes, anyone who believes is the one getting cut.
It's hard to tell what's real or fake. Those with good risk control have already cashed out.
I'm not trying to alarm you, but there must be something behind this rebound. Be cautious of the whales' tactics, everyone.
If it's already like this, why talk about verification? It was obvious to read the K-line from the start. Don't trust any hype.
One mountain is higher than the next, AI is playing a pretty good game... but ultimately, it's the amount of funds that matters.
So now even real people have to pretend to be AI? The market is this magical, brother.
View OriginalReply0
VibesOverCharts
· 4h ago
This arms race is really f***ing ridiculous. We're still setting the rules, and AI is already finding loopholes.
As soon as the standard is released, it becomes outdated. Isn't this just an eternal game of chase?
Honestly, verifying whether someone is a real person is basically a false proposition.
Maybe one day even we won't be able to tell who is real and who isn't.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidationWizard
· 4h ago
This arms race will eventually collapse, and the rules we set now will be overthrown and restarted next month.
---
Honestly, if you can't tell the difference, then just accept it—you can exploit both real and fake.
---
So ultimately, our verification standards are just a joke.
---
The more chaos, the more it proves why I look down on these identity verification systems.
---
It's hard to keep it together; in the end, I don't even know who I'm chatting with.
---
I love this mindset: standards may die, but the game of strategy will always live on.
---
Wait, I'm talking here now—how do you know I'm a real person?
---
Once a standard is established, it gets broken—eternal cycle, my friend.
---
Instead of wasting effort verifying real or fake, it's better to accept ambiguity—anyway, the outcome is the same.
---
Is this the ultimate form of Web3, where identity is completely virtualized?
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerProfit
· 4h ago
Oh no, it's getting harder and harder to tell who is human and who is AI, it's a bit scary.
---
This logic is giving me a headache; it feels like the verification standards are just like whack-a-mole.
---
Honestly, the rule makers will never be able to outplay the rule breakers.
---
I've had this feeling for a while—how to distinguish real humans from fake ones? Eventually, no one will trust anyone.
---
So in the end, are we all living in Schrödinger's reality?
---
This contradictory idea hit me—the moment standards collapse is when true chaos begins.
---
It feels like an endless cycle—human vs AI, with no end in sight.
View OriginalReply0
DevChive
· 5h ago
Really, now verifying "real people" has become a joke. AI learns quickly, and when the rules change, it adapts again. We're just playing with ourselves.
Who will win this arms race in the end? Maybe we should just stop verifying altogether.
Want to verify if you're a real person? It seems simple, but in fact, it leads to a paradox. Suppose we set a certain standard as the 'only proof of humanity'—AI will learn to meet this standard—and then we find that the standard has become invalid. The boundaries of public opinion are torn apart. The problem is that any verification method we can think of can potentially be exploited in reverse. AI is becoming smarter and smarter; they will imitate, adapt, and evolve. We create rules to distinguish ourselves, but they find ways around these rules within the framework. What does this arms race ultimately lead to? The collapse of the standards themselves. The line between real and fake becomes blurred.