• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 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.

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

      Automation does not require very high precision though it does require a modicum of consistency. Millions of vibratory bowl feeders with huge tolerances on their alignment mechanisms demonstrate this fact (“Damnit! A part got caught again… Gerry! Loosen that tolerance screw much farther out so that won’t happen again” LOL).

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      In fact they cannot automate the disassembly of cars even though their construction is highly automated. We just grind them up in a big grinder and separate the materials. So basically the same thing as with ships just on a smaller scale.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 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.