| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 2011-05-24 10:15, William Grant wrote:
But Launchpad is not the only robot talking to Launchpad. It is a general problem, and a special-case solution that works for internal code is probably not a very good solution at all.But robots talking to Launchpad are a different discussion that we can have separately from the question "should there be a celebrity Person to represent Launchpad itself?" Conflating the two is only going to make it harder to get solutions.How are they different? They are both robots.
They are both robots in the sense that they are "persons" who aren't humans, though one kind is primarily a representation in the object model and the other actually works like an independent actor. But that doesn't get us anywhere.
The question is whether we should have a single user identity to represent Launchpad as an owner of objects in Launchpad, author of messages in conversations etc. The fact that that user would arguably be a robot does not mean that we have to answer all questions relating to the nature and function of all robots before we can answer the question.
Imagine we've solved all those problems. So we have an IRobot interface like Curtis suggests, everybody can create them, robots and humans live and work together in peace. Then we still face the same question: should we have a single user identity to represent Launchpad as an owner of objects in Launchpad, author of messages in conversations etc? The fact that that user would probably be a robot doesn't alter it. Conversely, whether Launchpad is represented as a person in the object model has no earth-shattering impact on the various discussions we could be having about robots. In other words, despite the obvious connections between the two, they are basically orthogonal.
Jeroen
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
