While a second person would indeed reduce the number of issues, it’s still another human to fuck things up. What if the second person is lazy? Or they get tired of checking every door because “it’s never been off before, why would it be off now?”
Human error caused the issue in the first place, why are we assuming a human will always find and fix the problem on a second pass?
Human error caused the issue in the first place, why are we assuming a human will always find and fix the problem on a second pass?
I’m not sure why you should trust a piece of technology to be infallible.
I mean, if a networked tool can be hacked then should it be trusted to be accurate? How do you know it hasn’t been hacked and maliciously modified to report correct torque even when wrong?
Didn’t GM just suspend sales of their new cars without CarPlay because their new system had software issues? Trust a company trying to save money to skimp on the implementation costs of any technology they put in place too.
It’s not so much the technology as the people running a business that worry me, VW programming emission modes is a great example. Relying on companies to regulate safety is a sure fire way to get corners cut so they can make a cent. The network wrench may be a good idea but only if regulated by the FAA and not the company.
In my experience its more prone to mistakes, because people just accept what computers tell them as infallible unless its something so massively, egregiously wrong that it shatters what little common sense they have… and even then its only 50/50.
While a second person would indeed reduce the number of issues, it’s still another human to fuck things up. What if the second person is lazy? Or they get tired of checking every door because “it’s never been off before, why would it be off now?”
Human error caused the issue in the first place, why are we assuming a human will always find and fix the problem on a second pass?
I’m not sure why you should trust a piece of technology to be infallible.
I mean, if a networked tool can be hacked then should it be trusted to be accurate? How do you know it hasn’t been hacked and maliciously modified to report correct torque even when wrong?
Didn’t GM just suspend sales of their new cars without CarPlay because their new system had software issues? Trust a company trying to save money to skimp on the implementation costs of any technology they put in place too.
It’s not so much the technology as the people running a business that worry me, VW programming emission modes is a great example. Relying on companies to regulate safety is a sure fire way to get corners cut so they can make a cent. The network wrench may be a good idea but only if regulated by the FAA and not the company.
You are erring dangerously close to the classic “computers don’t make mistakes” argument.
Not at all. A human plus a computer is going to be less prone to mistakes than a human plus a human though.
In my experience its more prone to mistakes, because people just accept what computers tell them as infallible unless its something so massively, egregiously wrong that it shatters what little common sense they have… and even then its only 50/50.