So in other words, a dystopian nightmare where, for the sake of paying as low of wages as possible, corporations would rather use technology to oversee stupid employees instead of actually TRAINING and INCENTIVIZING actually qualified people.
Humans make mistakes with tools like this, and with the tracking systems.
BTDT with stuff completely unrelated but requiring verification and validation steps and initials. Mistakes will happen.
Having a tool that’s configured specifically and can document the torque applied for every bolt makes a lot of sense. I’ve assembled stuff with 30 fasteners and had to check and recheck torque, because, being human, it would be easy for me to miss one, or not read the rorque wrench properly (if using a bar type), or mis-set it if it’s a click type.
Nevermind the time it takes me to verify the value, set/check the tool, etc. It’s clearly about reducing errors with a repetitive task and providing a record of the torque values. The folks using these tools probably really appreciate it, I would, and the stuff I’ve done is trivial in comparison.
The only problem with this system is the lack of planning for proper security. Firmware update able remotely is just silly. Add in the number of vulnerabilities… Sheesh.
OK, remotely updateable could be useful, but it should require a long password and a cryptographic pin (like the old SecurID devices that generated a pin once a minute) that is managed by multiple people, and the devices should only permit updates from a specific piece of hardware on the company network (say a vendor supplied firmware update injector) that has a hardware ID. So when devices are on boarded they get paired with that device and maybe a secondary. So it requires a pairing process that can only be done with physical proximity, combined with device IDs and a password/pin pair that’s cryptographically generated, and managed by a system requiring at least two people to check out the password from the repository.
Hell, I just thought up all this on the spot. I’m sure others did too, and got shot down by management.
So in other words, a dystopian nightmare where, for the sake of paying as low of wages as possible, corporations would rather use technology to oversee stupid employees instead of actually TRAINING and INCENTIVIZING actually qualified people.
Using technology to overcome human mistakes is happening right now in hundreds of other industries.
Of course, its cheaper.
What began with self-checkout machines will inexorably expand into the more professional realm with tools like AI
The funny thing is, some companies are moving away from self checkouts because of “honest mistakes” by customers.
Humans make mistakes with tools like this, and with the tracking systems.
BTDT with stuff completely unrelated but requiring verification and validation steps and initials. Mistakes will happen.
Having a tool that’s configured specifically and can document the torque applied for every bolt makes a lot of sense. I’ve assembled stuff with 30 fasteners and had to check and recheck torque, because, being human, it would be easy for me to miss one, or not read the rorque wrench properly (if using a bar type), or mis-set it if it’s a click type.
Nevermind the time it takes me to verify the value, set/check the tool, etc. It’s clearly about reducing errors with a repetitive task and providing a record of the torque values. The folks using these tools probably really appreciate it, I would, and the stuff I’ve done is trivial in comparison.
The only problem with this system is the lack of planning for proper security. Firmware update able remotely is just silly. Add in the number of vulnerabilities… Sheesh.
OK, remotely updateable could be useful, but it should require a long password and a cryptographic pin (like the old SecurID devices that generated a pin once a minute) that is managed by multiple people, and the devices should only permit updates from a specific piece of hardware on the company network (say a vendor supplied firmware update injector) that has a hardware ID. So when devices are on boarded they get paired with that device and maybe a secondary. So it requires a pairing process that can only be done with physical proximity, combined with device IDs and a password/pin pair that’s cryptographically generated, and managed by a system requiring at least two people to check out the password from the repository.
Hell, I just thought up all this on the spot. I’m sure others did too, and got shot down by management.