Truth (well, so far as we know anyway). But something about this story always makes me smile either way. But maybe that's partly because I always loved those old Kung Fu movies as well.
I'm a big fan of the BDI model, and have been doing a fair amount of experimenting with Jason[1] (a concrete implementation based on BDI) over the last year or so. I have a Jason BDI bot setup to communicate with me via XMPP, and I've done some work on integrating Jason with Spring Boot so that I can easily use libraries like Spring Data JPA for the BeliefBase, etc. I've also been working on a JMX remote interface for Jason bots.
In service of my interest in all of this, I have been maintaining an experimental fork of Jason here[2]. I've also put up a few miscellaneous experiments and some tutorial stuff around using Jason[3][4].
As hyperbolic as it stands, right to privacy should be an amendment.
I don't think it's hyperbolic at all. I think this is something that absolutely must happen, and that it's pretty obvious that it must happen. But then again, I often cite Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four as the most influential book I've ever read in my life, so I'm not exactly unbiased.
I'd like to take this opportunity to remind everyone to read Cory Doctorow's novel Attack Surface and to think deeply about the message contained within. He has something significant to say, IMO, about the need for people like "us" (that is, people who care deeply about these issues) to use our knowledge, resources, skills, etc. to help effect changes in public policy through the legislative process as opposed to trying to "out tech the bad guys". And that's rooted, as I understood it, in an argument that you can't "out tech the bad guys" over the long run, because they (the US government and other nation states) can always just beat you on resources and volume.
Anyway, I hate trying to summarize that, because I'm afraid I'll mis-state things and fail to do it justice. Seriously, just read the book. It's worth it.
And if you don't want to read the book, a reasonable proxy might be to suggest "just donate some money to the EFF".
Couldn't agree more. "I'll just work around it because I know how to" is the hacker's version of "I'll just pay my way out of it because I can afford to".
I haven't gotten to that one yet, but it's on my list! Actually, Attack Surface was my first (and so far only) Cory Doctorow novel, but after reading it, I'm definitely game to dig into more of his oeuvre.
Yeah, for some reason, HN disallows a top-level comment on a submitted link (but you can do a top-level comment on a stand-alone/no-link post). I always found that odd - as a submitter, I generally want to provide some commentary on what I found something interesting.
Worse, their submission form looks like you can provide top-text, and indeed that same form field is used as top-text for Show HN, but for a normal submission it puts that text in a normal comment which almost always reads weirdly in that context.
There's a lot of "it depends" to this. But loosely speaking, I'll say that at the end of the day, I care more about whether the content is interesting/engaging/original/whatever, than the specifics of how it was created. So if, say, I read a blog post and I can't even tell that it was crafted with AI assistance, do I really care that they used AI? Not so much. But if I'm reading something that was clearly generated almost exclusively by AI? I usually find it distasteful and tune-out.
But keep in mind there is a continuum over which the idea of "AI assistance" ranges. You have your "one shot" deals where somebody just says "Hey, Gemini, write me a blog post on the merits of warrantless surveillance in the AI age" or whatever. And then you have ones where somebody uses AI to do research, brainstorm, etc., but writes all (or nearly all) of the actual text themselves. And everything in between. So yeah... "it depends".
reply