Wikipedia's founder said he used ChatGPT in the review process for an article and thought it could be helpful. Editors replied to point out it was full of mistakes.
So why would they accept said AI-generated applicants?
If we are making a global system, then confirmation using some nation’s ID can be done, with removing fakes found out later. Like with IRL nation states. Or “bring a friend and be responsible if they are a fake”. Or both at the same time.
Well, you will see everyone admitted. Just not their government ID.
Or you might make all admissions public, after all, there’s difference between pseudonymous admission and pseudonymous action. Blind signatures, ghost keys. One can have public admission, but their actions inside the network will be sufficiently pseudonymous.
Flood them with AI-generated applicants.
So why would they accept said AI-generated applicants?
If we are making a global system, then confirmation using some nation’s ID can be done, with removing fakes found out later. Like with IRL nation states. Or “bring a friend and be responsible if they are a fake”. Or both at the same time.
Would every participant get to see my government-issued ID?
One can elect a small group which will and will sign its connection to something intermediate. Then only they will.
How do we know if they’re doing a good job without being able to review their work?
Well, you will see everyone admitted. Just not their government ID.
Or you might make all admissions public, after all, there’s difference between pseudonymous admission and pseudonymous action. Blind signatures, ghost keys. One can have public admission, but their actions inside the network will be sufficiently pseudonymous.
There are plenty of variants really.