3 ms·
Yes, certainly I am not suggesting that we sacrifice humans to go open the sluice gates manually. I am talking about doing it without computers. These things
by rsync 11y ago
Yes, certainly I am not suggesting that we sacrifice humans to go open the sluice gates manually.
I am talking about doing it without computers. These things were done prior to computers with relays and switches and even status lights and a monitoring board, etc.
I'm advocating that we take out all of the general purpose capabilities as well as the ability to interoperate. A human being flicks a switch.
- bifrost 11y agoWe'd have to add a secondary remote interlock capability to prevent an out of control operator from doing something aberrant. Infrastructure without automation is hopefully dead, we just need to be smarter about how we accomplish it.
- rsync 11y ago"Infrastructure without automation is hopefully dead" No, no ... the "without automation" part is the entire point. If a system is automated, then nobody has skin in the game - the way the pilot and copilot of your airplane do. The outcomes we want are the outcomes we get when the operator is the first one to go if something goes wrong. It is in that interaction that we can rely on the (amazing, irreproducible, beautiful) ability of the human brain to recognize patterns and make brilliant deductive leaps. That's just the very thing we want.