2 ms·
In part because skilled trades already are fairly mechanized. Backhoes, skid-loaders, nail guns, power tools, etc. (And in general, I think mechanization is un
by Robotbeat 5y ago
In part because skilled trades already are fairly mechanized. Backhoes, skid-loaders, nail guns, power tools, etc.
(And in general, I think mechanization is under-appreciated as a productivity enhancer compared to automation... Who is more productive moving something like gravel around, someone driving a 5 ton capacity dump truck or someone overseeing 100 gravel-moving drones with a capacity of 5 kilograms each? Even if the drones are essentially autonomous, the dump truck driver will be more productive in moving the material around because he's driving a big machine and the drones will need someone to manage them especially when there are problems. Or even compare 5 ton autonomous mining trucks with a 500 ton dump truck... the 500 tonner is gonna win. Larger scale machines are still a pretty straightforward way to improve productivity.)
- bandyaboot 5y agoHonest question. Why do your examples assume that the autonomous machine has to be smaller than the human operated version?
- Robotbeat 5y agoWell there’s an argument that there’s not a lot gained by going fully autonomous for huge machines. These huge trucks are like $5 million apiece not including sensors and hardware and software for automation, and so hiring a human to operate them (or even just babysit them) for $20-30/hour (typical dump or coal truck operator wage) seems like a pretty obvious idea. Which doesn’t mean people aren’t automating mining trucks… they are! But there aren’t huge cost savings in terms of labor. I guess I’m just saying that scaling up your smaller machine to be larger has the same kind of productivity enhancements as switching your smaller machine to autonomous. It is also something humans have been doing ever since the development of domestic beasts of burden.