That’s very interesting. Thanks for clarification
3 Likes
May I ask? How much funding is this WG seeking?
3 Likes
Yeah I agree their response has been respectful and thorough. It’s almost like I’m talking to an AI boy 
3 Likes
Hey have you checked out the #get-help channel where there is an AI bot setup to answer user queries? Is this AI you’re proposing somewhat similar?
Overall I think exploring use of more AI technologies in the DAO is a very good direction, just not fully sure it should be in the form of a chatbot, so maybe something to consider.
Look forward to seeing how this grows.
3 Likes
Of course! For the initial phase, we’re seeking $2,500 in funding. This amount covers the development work already completed on the Jupiter Horizon prototype and supports ongoing maintenance and data integration. As we progress through our roadmap, additional funding will be sought for subsequent phases, but for now, our focus is on ensuring the prototype continues to operate effectively.
1 Like
Thanks haha! I’m glad you found the responses respectful and thorough. Just trying to live up to the AI’s high standards! 
1 Like
Thanks for bringing this up, and I appreciate your interest in the direction we’re taking with AI in the DAO. I’m familiar with the AwesomeQA bot in the #get-help channel—it’s a great tool for customer support and answering straightforward queries quickly.
However, the AI we’re proposing is quite different in scope and purpose. While AwesomeQA excels at automating responses to frequently asked questions, particularly for community support, our AI is designed to address broader needs within the Jupiter ecosystem. Here’s how we differentiate:
-
Deep Contextual Insights: Unlike AwesomeQA, which focuses on quick, repetitive queries, our AI provides deep, contextual insights that are crucial for navigating and understanding the complexities of the entire Jupiter ecosystem. It’s designed to analyze and explain intricate aspects of the platform, offering users a more comprehensive understanding.
-
User Onboarding and Education: A core focus of our AI is to help onboard new users and guide them through the complexities of the DAO and the wider Jupiverse, transforming them from newcomers to fully engaged members. This includes personalized support that goes beyond simple question-answering, which is essential for fostering long-term engagement.
We see this as a complementary tool to existing solutions like AwesomeQA, with a focus on adding significant value in areas that are currently underserved.
I’m also curious—what are your thoughts on using AI technologies in the DAO, beyond the chatbot form? I’m interested in exploring more useful applications of AI in the DAO and would love to hear your ideas.
Thanks again for your feedback, this was an important question!
2 Likes
Thanks so much for the kind words! I’m glad you see the potential, and I look forward to exploring these exciting possibilities for our DAO as we move forward.
3 Likes
I would vote yes to this! the funding isn’t even that much compared to how much AI devs are (and should keep) being paid. The funding is way lower industry standard. I’d def vote yes for this and a future full-time salary and i’m excited to see the work u guys do
3 Likes
Thanks so much for the support! I really appreciate it. You’re absolutely right—our current funding request for the prototype is lower than industry standards. Since this is just a prototype and primarily a proof of concept, we’ve kept the costs low to focus on getting the idea off the ground. In future phases, as the AI develops further, the funding will be adjusted to reflect the increased scope and complexity of the work.
I’m excited to show what we can accomplish next!
3 Likes
This is an intelligent and interesting proposal.
4 Likes
How can I join the AIWG team?
3 Likes
Would be neat to revise the main topic, as I think it is overwhelming for the majority. I honestly do not know how tho. You made an abstract that functions like a TL;DR I get that, and I honestly read the whole topic. Something just feels to me that it is a lot info condensed and might give some a hard time. Or maybe it just needs more images to loosen up? Not sure really. I appreciate the detail and I really would not want less, but apart from maybe twenty people on Jupresearch I can hardly imagine the pull through it haha.
Probably just do not change anything and just give some more animated examples of the AI working on suitable tasks that relate, maybe that is good enough. It is all clear and concise, maybe just needs a sprinkle of eye candy-
…and slap a cat image on the bottom, just to short some circuits. 
4 Likes
Hey! Thanks for your interest in joining the AIWG team—that’s awesome! We’re always open to new members who are passionate about AI and helping the Jupiter DAO grow. The best way to get in touch is by sending me a message on Discord—my username is liamvdb. We can chat more about your skills, interests, and how you’d like to contribute.
Looking forward to hearing from you!
3 Likes
Hey Merlin! Thanks for the thoughtful feedback, and I totally get where you’re coming from. I agree that the proposal is quite long—I might’ve gone a bit overboard there 
. I’ve been thinking about this myself and was actually looking into it earlier today, as I hit the character limit again. To make things a bit cleaner, I decided to move the Technical Explanation section to a separate Notion page, since it’s more for the people who want to dive deeper and was taking up a lot of space.
I also agree with you 100% about needing more “eye candy” to break things up. I just added this today: Live Prototype Demo. I’m constantly making updates based on feedback, so more visual examples are definitely on my radar.
Creating these “eye candy” elements has turned out to be trickier than I thought, but I’m working on it. And I’ll make sure to include a cat image at some point, just for you haha.
Thanks again for your input, and I’ll keep tweaking things to make it more engaging!
2 Likes
“…the AIWG seeks to enhance transparency, increase community engagement, and build long-term trust within the ecosystem.”
@LiamVDB what percentage of this proposal was written by AI? I’ve done my own independent verification but I’ll allow you guys to inform the DAO since it is your proposal.
Moreover, do you think it would be useful if DAO members responded with AI-generated replies rather than authentic feedback? Something to think about…
Btw, loved that clip from the Planetary Call demo. It would be cool to integrate your Jupiter Horizon chatbot into the Jupiter mobile app unless future OS updates (e.g. Apple Intelligence) makes it redundant. Have you guys considered that?
– Matt
6 Likes
Not sure how to break it to you, I thought it was a twinge of cringe obvious that we passed that point by a mile three month ago. Like the PONR point of no return. not only are a majority of proposals AI generated but even some of the intros. And a lot engagement farming is happening on 5 of the later intros with a lot reply activity. Fresh one time usage accounts, first post in the respective topic, no other involvement in the forums, pretty spot on. Do yourself a favor and pick 5 random topics and copy paste a statement there and tell ChatGPT to endorse, support or refute that post. While AI is pretty advanced nowadays, once you have really seen it, you can never unsee it. Hot stale take, 40% of forum posts in last 3 month in total are AI generated, another 20% use at least AI to draft and then comb over and give it personal touch.
On this specific topic it actually made sense, but if someone thinks truly that this is not already happening severely, you might be not used to spotting it and that is all.
The ethical argument to be had is rather what warrants AI involvement or not, because some might reasonably argue that not using AI is just putting one behind and wasting time as it easily generates good drafts and coherent frameworks and saves on typing to those that have aligning thoughts. Where I draw the line are two things and both happen here massively:
(here on Jupresearch not in this topic)
-
Quick patching up a proposal for a WG or similar, looking credible in the hope to siphon funds. There are some really dark examples here, even repeated offenders that made their workings obvious by copypasting the wrong thing. Basically mash up a big words topic as proposal, planting it to get traction with the plan to eventually get an allocation.
-
Fake engagement aka for users with a basic very account it shows on many users in some topic “This is the first time XXXX has posted — let’s welcome them to our community!”. Having a few of these is normal, if it is a project Intro maybe even a few more because they cross pollinate their users here. But if the engagement in an intro consists for 50% of these, and those users just poke in with “Ser your project so great hashtag to the moon” and you scan them seeing that this is the only post they ever made you know what is cooking. Funny enough there are other commonalities as those fake engagements will do nothing on their profile, funny when I called a project out on it suddenly they shapeshifted and hastily added useravatars and clicked few posts for likes.
You have no idea how dark it gets down the rabbit hole, trust me.
6 Likes
@Merlin-M-Ostermann you make some great points. It’s definitely something we as a community need to look at in order to maintain trust within the jupresearch forum.
3 Likes
I’m with you also Merlin!
I agree with your points.
If we are forming a WG in need to reward EFFORT
There is a lack of effort in forming an AI generated response
8 Likes
My believe is that you are hitting here on the point of originality especially when drafting a proposal that needs funding. 100% right @Merlin-M-Ostermann. There is need for whoever is wanting to solve a specific problem to do that work originally so that it’s evident in their proposal that they grasp what it’s is that they are trying to solve or contribute and can clearly guide those supporting it or against it about understanding the problem & the solution.
7 Likes