Robots: Kenneth vs. Robert

Kenneth

First — programs are not “robots”. Perhaps some of your confusion is tied to your lack of precision in using language? Second — it’s perfectly clear (in this case) that those who wrote the code AND set it in motion are responsible. Their claim to have done it as “art” may, or may not, be a defense. Suppose, for example, that I wrote a program to use your credit card to purchase items “for an art exhibit” — would that be covered by the claim that “art in the public interest is allowed to be free”? And finally…is *possession* of either of the items mentioned against the law in their locale? If so, does the crime continue?

Robert

The author didn’t say “robot”, they wrote “bot”. A “bot” is a real term for semi-autonomous computer code or programs that do things on the web, and has been in usage for years among people that code for the web, or write about people coding for the web. I think the lack of precision is in your vocabulary.

Kenneth

You did read the TITLE, didn’t you?

Robert

A publication’s headline editors are rarely the author, unless it is a personal blog. I ignore the headlines, because I care more about the content. And the content AUTHOR wrote “bots”, repeatedly. Did you not read the actual article?

Kenneth

Reading is fundamental.

Robert

Do you have any friends? Last night, I partied on the Champs Elysees with my gf in Paris, then we crashed a NYE party in the Hotel Costes where I ran up a 172 euro bar tab in two hours. For the two of us. Enjoy your robots, I obviously am still hung over

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.