Cyclone Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Of course, if there wasn't a human who actually had the requirement then there wouldn't be a requirement... But going from the business user who actually has the requirement, straight in natural language to a program that can produce the result they want, would cut out huge numbers of people and thousands of hours of work. It's an incremental thing isn't it, at each stage (in theory) the number of people involved in the production can be reduced (ala mechanical automation of the production of physical things, or mechanisation of agriculture). Eventually maybe you will just plonk down your automated farm, tell it where the boundaries are and where it should deliver food stuff and there will be no human interaction except when it puts in a maintenance call for something that it can't auto repair. On a similar vein, you've seen iRobot, where the destruction bot is just told to clear the site at 0800 and presumably construction bots were later to be told to build something on that site. The human interaction is minimal, unlike today when those two things would be thousands of hours of man time invested in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Oh I see. So someone who didn't spend half their day doing other things like posting on a forum would be able to write twice as much code and undercut someone who did on price. Or someone working in Rumania on 25% of UK wages could spend 80% of their day posting on a forum and still undercut someone in the UK who only spent half their day doing it. What I'm trying to say is the job isn't dependent on having time to waste. You only have time to waste if you have insufficient work to fill the time. No, I have to wait for the computer to compile what I've written, or run the tests that have already been written, or to just look away for a minute whilst subconsciously I work out what to do next. I'd be no more productive if I stayed off the forum all day, but probably much more frustrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 What I'm trying to say is the job isn't dependent on having time to waste. You only have time to waste if you have insufficient work to fill the time.And what I'm trying to say, is that this viewpoint may be relevant to your job, and underpin your opinion/posts, but is not universally relevant at all. Particularly in situations of work output expressed as productivity targets, rather than number of hours worked heads-down-without-ever-looking-up (a rather simplistic, not to say anachronistic, viewpoint). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holly3 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I agree with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted November 8, 2012 Author Share Posted November 8, 2012 I agree with you Eeeek...Who are you agreeing with Holly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.