OpenClaw is literally the most poorly conceived and insecure AI software anyone has ever made. Its users have had OpenClaw spend thousands of dollars, and do various unwanted and irreversible things.
But why would anyone do this? The UI will obviously change unpredictably on every generation, there's no way to deliver quality control if the UI is generated on the fly.
I could see this being useful for client and patient onboarding in the services and medial sectors respectively. For example:
A potential client providing information for a law-firm regarding their grievance.
A patient filling out the medical questionnaire prior to their first visit to a medical practice.
Rather than having a fully deterministic form, you'd be providing them with forms that adapt to their specific issue. The data can then be intelligently stored both as JSON and a more generic record in an RDBMS.
That can be achieved with 100% infallability with a form framework like FormKit. Why risk it, especially in a high-stakes situation like health? Pretty sure it would actually be against some kind of regulation to do that specifically in the healthcare field.
It depends on whether your API provider is HIPAA compliant and what sort of disclosures are provided. If you're running inference in house then it's not an issue provided you're following all the other guidelines.
With FormKit you'd still be using a predefined deterministic flow where all the conditionals are accounted for in advance. FormKit wouldn't be able to generate a truly non-deterministic UI that changes based upon how the user answers. If you're wanting to sue your neighbor for their tree falling onto your house, an AI powered UI for a law firm could be giving you form fields on what type of tree it was, how old the tree was, hot tall the tree was, how close it was to the property line, and what room in your house the tree landed in... All generated from how the user responded to an initial "what's your grievance?" question.
I'm not advocating for or against this type of approach - I'm just pointing out a few potential use-cases for it since that's what you asked for.
Depicting a man being anally raped by an animal is illegal in many places and immoral for most people. If you're downplaying it, take a walk and think about how you got to this place in your life.
Racial/cultural tension is part of the context in which this image is appearing. Not only because of historical tensions, but because this image appears as part of this generation's Manhattan Project style arms race toward AGI and global dominance. Your denial of that is a reflection of your own ignorance.
Super tone-deaf and inappropriate. Not realizing how it would read to the uninformed is a bad look. Myopic at best, openly hostile toward the west along racial lines at worst.
Immature take. Everything is political, or everything is affected by politics. If you say "we shouldn't discuss politics in _____ space" then you are simply supporting the status quo. In this case, the status quo is fascis/nazi takeover of the biggest superpower (technologically, economically, and militarily) in the world, and as the article says, that is having direct effects on software. So it is political whether you "make it" that way or not.
AKA whether you want to be an adult about it, or not.
The question should be "golden age FOR WHOM?" because the traditional meaning of that phrase implies a society-wide raising of the quality of life. It remains to be seen whether the advent of AI signifies an across-the-board improvement or a furthering of the polarization between the haves and have nots.
This fucking guy will fit right in at OpenAI.
reply