Building Jarvis • Hacker News Board

Re: Building Jarvis

#111

Post by avoutthere » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:11 PM UTC

chime wrote: post #76

For me, the primary takeaway was: "This suggests that future AI products cannot be solely focused on voice and will need a private messaging interface as well." > This preference for text communication over voice communication fits a pattern we're seeing with Messenger and WhatsApp overall, where the volume of text messaging around the world is growing much faster than the volume of voice communication. This suggests…

Anybody remember that NeXTMail included voice annotations? Seeing that feature almost never used made me realize that text for messaging will always have its place.

Re: Building Jarvis

#112

Post by duderific » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:13 PM UTC

eldavido wrote: post #43

smaili wrote: post #13

More than anything else, what stood out to me was his discipline for knowing how to manage his time in a way that enabled him to build something like this while still juggling the n number of other things on his plate.

No kidding. I find it impressive both that he put aside (not found , this had to be a very deliberate decision given the demands on his time) 100 hours to do this, AND that he got all of it done in 100 hours. Is there anything written about his personal schedule/habits? When does he go to sleep at night? When does he wake up? What kind of hours does he work? I mean really, he has a kid, is CEO of a huge company, exer…

When you are a billionaire, you can certainly outsource all that mundane stuff (like raising a kid) to extremely capable helpers. He only has to do exactly what he wants to do. Pretty sure Zuck isn't changing any diapers or walking the dog unless he decides he feels like it right at that moment.

Re: Building Jarvis

#113

Post by dekhn » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:16 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #45

I think there's some law or truism that every geek who becomes a billionaire spends more time automating their house than it would take to just walk over and turn on the light switch.

(I was referring to: http://wiki.c2.com/?LazinessImpatienceHubris)

Re: Building Jarvis

#114

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:20 PM UTC

IanCal wrote: post #27

hacker_9 wrote: post #21

Say what you will about Zuckerberg, but this is a really cool project! Steps he took: 1. Connect his home devices (lights, thermostat, doors, music player, TV, CCTV etc) to his computer, so he can turn them on and off from it and in general automate his house from his PC. 2. Add an NLP component to his computer, so he could text instructions to it and it would apply the correct automation task. This can learn prefere…

I think what's particularly great about this in a way is that it's not too remarkable. I'm not knocking it, but it's awesome to be around when creating an natural language, speech controlled, available anywhere system with face recognition to automate your own home is something that can be done in 100 hours.

[deleted]

Re: Building Jarvis

#115

Post by robotresearcher » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:25 PM UTC

mightybyte wrote: post #28

Next up: people start getting into Zuckerberg’s home by holding up a life size picture of Andrea’s face.

Or a small picture close to the camera.

Re: Building Jarvis

#116

Post by dmcginty » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:32 PM UTC

twothamendment wrote: post #50

dmcginty wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think calling it AI is a stretch. It's a system with sensors, actuators, a knowledge base, and a ruleset; plus it can learn and adapt its ruleset based on success/failure. That's the textbook definition of AI.

You added one thing in the list that makes me agree - "it can learn and adapt". Jarvis in my house uses sensors, actuators, lights, switches, etc - but mine is not AI. It only does what I tell it how to do. I'm pretty happy with the results, but it can't learn a thing. The latest thing I "taught" my Jarvis to do is stream the security camera to the TV with a voice command. Now if I only had time to look into how to t…

That being said, I don't think the ability to learn and adapt. This is entirely a statement on semantics, but if I made a tic-tac-toe playing program that had every possible game state pre-programmed in, I would not hesitate to call it a game playing AI even though it lacks the ability to learn.

Re: Building Jarvis

#117

Post by stevehiehn » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:33 PM UTC

stefs wrote: post #104

> I had to reverse engineer APIs for some of these (...) technically ... is that still legal?

I believe that was the fundemental issue in the famous 'Oracle vs Google' trial

Re: Building Jarvis

#118

Post by snoman » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:35 PM UTC

chinathrow wrote: post #102

marme wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a guy who has multiple armed security guards outside hit home 24/7. Plus the fact he almost certainly has staff and assistants who are coming and going from the house. There is no way you make it to the front door if you are not expected, this is just to save his staff from having to use the key or for someone to open the door for them. This would never be secure enough for a normal persons house

> This would never be secure enough for a normal persons house The Canadians beg to differ ;)

Not the ones in Scarborough.

Re: Building Jarvis

#119

Post by pinnbert » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:36 PM UTC

This, written with PHP and Objective C, is far more inspirational than the career-infused blog postings typical here.

Re: Building Jarvis

#120

Post by dimino » Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 9:44 PM UTC

jhartmann wrote: post #77

dimino wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the "security is quite easy" argument. As long as people like you think security is easy, people like me will continue to have a job, unfortunately.

I'm not saying its easy, I'm saying a developer using the tools and processes available at a large internet corporation building something small need not be insecure. Basically until we look at the code and the security processes in place, or do pentesting, we have no clue one way or the other. I'm mostly just saying we shouldn't discount something like this automatically as insecure. It might be terrible, it might b…

I didn't mean to sound like I'm "discounting" this, though I guess I "discount" everything that hasn't had a cycle of security focused QA, let alone zero QA at all.

I bet, with no information other than what's supplied, that this system is insecure. It's not really a knock on Zuckerberg, just a statement based on my experience. I am totally open to being wrong, I just think we know more than nothing about hobby projects and their propensity to consider security secondary, tertiary, or not at all.

Admittedly, this is Mark Zuckerberg, so who knows, it might have been meticulously coded to be perfect. The guy's a bit of an obsessive, based on what I've read, so I would also not be surprised to find it's tightly locked down and very high quality code. I don't the guy, just the general situation.