• ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    […] I just want to point out that automating things that exist purely in the digital domain is far easier than automating things like ship breaking.

    Not that you’re saying otherwise, however isn’t that even more of a reason more developers and resources should be allocated toward automating complex and risky physical processes?

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Honestly, I don’t see how you would do it without general AI, which is something that will be solved in the digital domain first anyway.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Eh, it could be done with non-general AI. There are a finite number of different types of things to handle, so as long as it’s not thrown off by some bent steel or some missing consoles, I’d be amazed if they couldn’t automate at least specific ship designs.

        • epyon22@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          They still manually build ships right now what makes you think they could automate taking one apart

          • Riskable@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Firstly, much of shipbuilding is automated. They use robots to paint them and apply anti-fouling coatings. They also use loads and loads of automated machinery to create the steel parts that make up most of the ship. Do you think some dudes are forging rivets, beams, and pipes by hand? No, those are made by machines that make zillions of them.

            Secondly, nearly every ship–even ships that seem generic like big container ships–is a custom, one-off thing. They’re all bespoke (for the most part), being engineered for specific purposes, routes, and they even have “upgrades” for companies that pay extra (e.g. nicer quarters, extra antenna masts, more and special equipment mounting options, etc).

        • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Automation requires very high precision/consistency in the parts you want to work on. I seriously doubt that after many years of wear, tear, and impromptu repairs, those ships would be anywhere near consistent enough.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            That’s why I said, “eventually with non-general AI”.

            Even a well written algorithm could work with something that’s mostly in expected shape. How in the flying fuck is everyone so brainless that they cannot understand non-general AI can still adapt to things? Fucking hell.

            I’m not talking about current industry practices. I’m talking about combining existing technology with unlimited bidget to create a factory that could kinda’ do the task.

            “Possible” and “practical” are two extremely different things, and you goons pointing out that most obvious basic fact are adding nothing.