Live data from Hacker News

Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

web.archive.org

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#11
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I remember the discussion of this paper at my university a few decades ago. On your topic, I remember also a case that was discussed on a disinvestment of a fully automated factory. Loads of money was invested in the automation, but on several spots it still needed humans to glue the processes together. This work was so limited and dumb that no workers could be found who were able and willing to perform this t…

I see a factory like that! At one point the only remaining work was when something went wrong. The production line ran so fast, if something went wrong it produced enough garbage for 15 people to clean up. Not sure how they arrived at 15 but with fewer it took longer to resume production. I estimate the thing crashed from 2-3 times per day to every 3 days or so with the later more often. Took about 15-20 minutes to c…

> Investors didn't like to see people sit, chat and drink coffee

I do believe that the "workers must be uncomfortable all the time" mentality drives a ton of inefficiency. When my son was born, my wife worked from home, but we still needed a nanny to watch him most of the time so my wife could work. So we hired a teenage girl to come over and keep an eye on him for $10/hour. He was a baby, so it was pretty easy work - she spent most of the time watching TV. My wife complained that she was paying somebody $10/hour to just watch TV and insisted that she spend time cleaning instead. Well, she ended up leaving and we had a hell of a tough time replacing her - I said, "why do you care what she does as long as she gets her job (making sure our son doesn't die) gets done?" But she was adamant that if she was paying somebody, it had to look like "work" to her.

I spent six years in college practicing the fine art of reading books and regurgitating their contents back in various contexts so that I could qualify for a job where any time spent reading anything is prohibited because it doesn't look like "measurable" work.

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#12
post #4
post #3

The endgame is that we will be spending 99% of our time restarting IDEs and clearing caches to get rid of nonsensical errors, but since we will be 1000x as productive in the remaining 1%, it will still be worth it economically.

Funny, I remember the discussion of this paper at my university a few decades ago. On your topic, I remember also a case that was discussed on a disinvestment of a fully automated factory. Loads of money was invested in the automation, but on several spots it still needed humans to glue the processes together. This work was so limited and dumb that no workers could be found who were able and willing to perform this t…

Back when the F-22 was in production, I was in the building in Seattle where the carbon fiber wing skins were being laid up using an automated tape placement machine. The machine head would come down to a precise 3D location on a complex contoured mold, contact it with a precise pressure, lay out a tow of CFRP tape prepreg for a precise length, then trim it to a specific geometry. Before the machine started the next tow, it extruded an inch of tape, trimmed it for the start of the next tow. At this point, a mechanic would reach over with a spatula taped to a length of steel electrical conduit to collect the little piece of scrap and throw it away. I asked a manufacturing engineer why they did not just add a little vacuum hose to collect the trim - Apparently the mechanic's union contract required each machine to have a full-time operator, and they had to invent a task for the operator to do to keep them engaged.

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#13
Automation is the only thing that will actually work in some situations now.

Semiconductor manufacturing might be like a unicorn in terms of this paper. You can't really put humans into a factory without cratering the yield at 7nm and beyond. You see full-auto rates approaching 100% in the highest-end foundries. It is likely that all of the chips in all of your devices never saw any direct human contact until they arrived at Foxconn or wherever.

Achieving this level of automation requires an unbelievable amount of capital and extra human support. The irony definitely holds in this case. The amount of trouble created by the automation is exponentially beyond what any single human could cause. These factories generate event logs at a rate of 300+ megabytes/hour. No human team on earth could break shit that quickly.

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#14
Of interest:

Baxter G, Rooksby J, Wang Y, Khajeh-Hosseini A. The ironies of automation: Still going strong at 30? In: Proceedings of the 30th european conference on cognitive ergonomics [Internet]. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2012. p. 65–71. Available from: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2448136.2448149

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#16
post #13

Automation is the only thing that will actually work in some situations now. Semiconductor manufacturing might be like a unicorn in terms of this paper. You can't really put humans into a factory without cratering the yield at 7nm and beyond. You see full-auto rates approaching 100% in the highest-end foundries. It is likely that all of the chips in all of your devices never saw any direct human contact until they ar…

Fun fact: in the early days of silicon wafer manufacturing (60s or 70s IIRC) they would randomly have yields crater for a few days each month.

Eventually they discovered yields were tanking when their female employee was on her period.

Source: The Big Scoree

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#17
That was a hard paper to read, as someone who automates jobs. I only got 2 pages in.

I felt like I could finish every sentence.

Yes there are benefits, yes there are problems and humans needed, yes you refine over and over, yes you can't use humans to do checks because of long term focus so automation wins here, predicting all edge cases are near impossible, etc...

Maybe I'll read this with friends to make it a bit more humorous and less painful.

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#18
post #13

Automation is the only thing that will actually work in some situations now. Semiconductor manufacturing might be like a unicorn in terms of this paper. You can't really put humans into a factory without cratering the yield at 7nm and beyond. You see full-auto rates approaching 100% in the highest-end foundries. It is likely that all of the chips in all of your devices never saw any direct human contact until they ar…

I've read that the first person to touch a concrete cinder block is the person installing it.

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#19
post #13

Automation is the only thing that will actually work in some situations now. Semiconductor manufacturing might be like a unicorn in terms of this paper. You can't really put humans into a factory without cratering the yield at 7nm and beyond. You see full-auto rates approaching 100% in the highest-end foundries. It is likely that all of the chips in all of your devices never saw any direct human contact until they ar…

Fun fact: in the early days of silicon wafer manufacturing (60s or 70s IIRC) they would randomly have yields crater for a few days each month. Eventually they discovered yields were tanking when their female employee was on her period. Source: The Big Scoree

Why would yields be influenced by that?

Re: Ironies of Automation (1983) [pdf]

#20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun fact: in the early days of silicon wafer manufacturing (60s or 70s IIRC) they would randomly have yields crater for a few days each month. Eventually they discovered yields were tanking when their female employee was on her period. Source: The Big Scoree

Why would yields be influenced by that?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN