4 ms·
Yes, and he's not the only one. Just look at how many people are convinced that pilots can easily be replaced by autopilots.
by snom380 13y ago
Yes, and he's not the only one. Just look at how many people are convinced that pilots can easily be replaced by autopilots.
- akjetma 13y agoYeah, but then again there are services like Siri that do a phenomenal job at understanding complex user input. I don't think I've ever experienced Siri not understanding my intended query and then giving me a generalized response that has nothing to do what I asked for, so maybe people in roles like this woman's can be easily automated. It's probably trivial to encompass every function that she performs. Maybe a weekend project!
- qu4z-2 13y agoI was worried you were serious until I got to the last sentence. :)
- reginaldjcooper 13y agoCan't they be? I read the autopilot can land a plane in an emergency, and engineers have got them to fly model planes with a whole wing broken off.
- snom380 13y agoWell, they can if all you do is expect them to actually fly the plane. And even then, these autopilots make trivial mistakes if the get the wrong input data. Human pilots make tons of non-trivial decisions that don't have anything to do with the actual maneuvering of the airplane, including where to land the airplane in an emergency. So again, the fallacy is believing that the job is a specific, well-defined task. When we have sentient computers that can process 3D vision, hearing, smell etc as well as a human and exceed humans in decision making, we can replace human pilots and expect the same performance.
- reginaldjcooper 13y agoFor a second I forgot how poor, compared to us, machine vision and planning is. Forgive me.