> From my point of view, the chap blatantly stole the code.
It was open source code he slightly modified. The piece says that some parts where directly related to the Goldman Sachs high-frequency trading code base, but utterly useless when taken out of context.
What makes you believe that he "blatantly stole the code"?
It's irrelevant that it was modified open source code. Wouldn't make any difference.
As a dev employee he simply doesn't get to choose what is and is not proprietary to GS. That decision cannot be made without the involvement of compliance and legal.
And he would have known that. No question.
So, even if he didn't attempt to cover his tracks (which it sounds like he did) he performed an illegal act.
Obviously, without actually knowing what code was taken it's impossible to vet his assertion that it was useless code. It could well be (it's entirely plausible that he just wanted to give back extensions to FOSS code). But, unless GS had explicitly licensed that code otherwise (clearly they hadn't) or he had an agreement with GS that he owned the code (clearly he hadn't) he stole the code belonging to his employer.
While I kind of participated in the current AI/.ai hype, I'm starting to get really sick of hearing about another new application which "talks to you in natural language" or makes "Websites That Design Themselves".
The truth is, where not there yet and these people try to make one believe we are.
Sure, some may argue that these applications are indeed kind of intelligent and thus can be called A.I., but by this definition even Amazons recommendation algorithm is A.I.
I'm pretty sure that applications which "talk to you in natural language" or make "Websites That Design Themselves" are appealing to some at the moment but I doubt they will be successful in the long run.
How would you call it then? It's an app that mimics a friend that knows a lot about restaurants - I believe that can be called AI. However we used AI in the title just to make it easier to understand what we do. We sometimes just say it's a mobile app that gives you restaurant recommendations in a chat interface.
Things like this would more formally be called 'agents', software agents, or intelligent personal assistants (which are a type of agent).
However, I think AI is perfectly acceptable in common usage nowadays. Some people will just get caught up with the 'formal' definition, but the media and, increasingly, consumers are just using the term "AI" now anyway.
That's a retarded retort. In the SSH case you have ONE password to remember. Not one per website. Furthermore, the password never leaves your machine. Log in to a hundred websites with SSL and a password and the NSA comes along, collects all your passwords server side, knows which ones you reuse, knows your password generation patterns, everything. You are completely nuts if you think these two things are the same.