3 ms·
The reason why it's bad is that this is an overcomplicated process that introduces potentially unreliable bells and whistles for little upside. At the end of th
by tavavex 3y ago
The reason why it's bad is that this is an overcomplicated process that introduces potentially unreliable bells and whistles for little upside. At the end of the day, there aren't fundamental issues with a trained employee following a checklist. Machine learning is extremely powerful but tons of issues can be solved in a straightforward algorithmic fashion, so we should really be using it where it could make a big difference.
- consumer451 3y agoThanks. I get it, and generally agree with your point here. Paying for good people and giving them enough time to get the job done is generally enough. I was just trying to be fair to op's question as devil's advocate. I don't think it should just be dismissed as a joke. I have always been a huge cryptocurrency skeptic, and I just don't see the same trajectory for ML. So back in the day, Expert Systems were a big thing at Boeing. Searching Boeing's job openings today, it's a still a word used in hiring, but I don't understand what they mean by it in terms of manufacturing. Do you have any idea what they mean by that today?
- tavavex 3y agoYeah, I understand your sentiment. I hope I didn't appear to technologically conservative in my comment, it is kind of a minor pushback to people promoting generative AI as a panacea that makes every problem ever easier. I can't tell you about what Boeing does with expert systems. I've never been employed by them and I never really looked into it or where they use them. It's especially unclear because Boeing does a lot more than just pure manufacturing.