Ford Rehires Human Engineers After AI Fails Quality Checks

[Satofan44]

RE hiring huh?

I hope they got a fat bonus in their check as an apology for their years of hard work for a rotten company that tried to shove them under the bus the first opportunity that they got for bigger profits.

I really do not understand why some people keep celebrating the culture of toxic capitalism. Capitalism does not have to be toxic. We are not cold, heartless robots that only understand imperical units on a balance sheet.

What exactly is "toxic" about it? Firing employees that are dead weight is "toxic"? The reality of your "capitalism" as it stands today is the exact opposite of what you claim, firing is too difficult in most cases in most countries of the world. This is a draconian measure of control against companies at their expense, whereby firing very useless and terrible people can be difficult. This is one of the reasons why the world is messed up as it is, in most positions you will find a lot of incompetent retards that should never be allowed to work again anything other than manual labor work in some dungeon.

Yeah it's really frustrating to see such approach. On which there's criticism towards those action done by corporate they call it anti capitalist, while those concerns shared by people towards this latest situation happening is valid.

They just dump their people and change it to robots then now they rehire because they realize that robots cannot replaced the consistency and great minds of people.

People that are disposable should be dumped as fast as possible, and there are many laws preventing this. This is the reason why many employees in both the public and private sectors are useless cunts, about 80+% of the workforce is mostly useless. You can see only how real this data point is in companies that do not care about seniority or anything useless like that and give out salaries based on merit, you will find people that earn 5 or 10 times the salary of their colleagues at the same position because they do deserve it. Deal with it, grow up.

If they rehire those old experience working on their company before, well yeah the owner owes them an apology and they are truly deserving for bonus especially if those worker prove that they are more efficient worker than those robots.

No, they don't. It is a business, not a fucking therapy session. If you don't want to take the job again, don't do it -- just stop whining about it.

[Akbarkoe]

Artificial Intelligence is nowhere near perfect at the moment, but this might change some few years from now. I do us AI to create some tools and tasks here and there, but sometimes they really do make grave mistakes that need to be corrected by a Human Assistant. So such news never surprises me. Right now the models are still "learning" and we also know that learning is a never ending process.

It can be said that we are still in the development and early stages of adopting AI into the industry directly, so there will still be a lot of learning and evaluation about the program from AI itself in executing its tasks.
Currently, it is still vulnerable and inconsistent from the quality provided by AI, but what if 5 years later, what will AI look like in the future, so we cannot ignore this for future Labor competition.

[pawanjain]

The hype on AI replacing human workers has been making waves for years now. Some people predict a massive job losses in our industries. But a recent report from Ford is raising concern over that claim.

According to report Ford had to rehire human engineers after their AI systems could not consistently meet the rigorous quality standards required in automotive manufacturing. Source

Quality failures can cost millions or even billions in this crypto space. In Bitcoin and crypto, we already know security is everything. would you trust a fully AI-built bridge, wallet, or exchange system without human engineers doing final checks? I know AI is powerful but it still needs human oversight. We've all seen AI-generated code with hidden bugs.

At this point I think human role remain irreplaceable in high quality production.

That's very true. Being a QA myself, I can say that AI cannot replace humans that easily because AI is not fully efficient in some things.
Obviously AI can help us do a particular task much faster but we cannot replace humans just because of this.
We still manual intervention and verify what AI is doing is right or wrong. It should certainly take lesser time than manually implementing everything from scratch.
AI is not to be used to replace humans but it should be used as a personal assistant helping us to do things quickly.
Thus we will have more time to focus on more important things and hence we can achieve more work in lesser time.

[Powerjumboo]

The hype on AI replacing human workers has been making waves for years now. Some people predict a massive job losses in our industries. But a recent report from Ford is raising concern over that claim.

According to report Ford had to rehire human engineers after their AI systems could not consistently meet the rigorous quality standards required in automotive manufacturing. Source

Quality failures can cost millions or even billions in this crypto space. In Bitcoin and crypto, we already know security is everything. would you trust a fully AI-built bridge, wallet, or exchange system without human engineers doing final checks? I know AI is powerful but it still needs human oversight. We've all seen AI-generated code with hidden bugs.

At this point I think human role remain irreplaceable in high quality production.

The role of humans in any field is immense. No matter how much we talk about artificial intelligence, human touch is always needed, nothing can work properly without human touch. I hear from many people that as artificial intelligence (AI) is advancing and being implemented, many people will lose their jobs and many people are worried about losing their jobs, but I think it is very foolish to think like this because human role is needed in any field because AI cannot work the way humans can, so I think people should not be allowed to lose their jobs at all.

[Majestic-milf]

Ai technology is still developing and as far as I know, they don't fix themselves unless humans do. We might still not see so much layoffs but more reduced workforce with AI assistance and that's for the countries who have so much resources allocation to ai development because in truth, no company or platform or organization can totally replace human resources with AI assistance.

Exactly. They can be faster, more accurate but just a tiny hitch in their set-up can make it look useless. Ford are doing damage control by rehiring those engineers they hired before and it's very obvious that the knowledge these men possess can't be replicated by AI because you can't leave anything to chance so you don't lose to the competition.

[Unknown Op]

Though  I agree that AI is a very powerful and influential tool but it is not ready right now to completely replace the human expertise in different field specially in safety and security industries. AI is helping in different industries it is feeding up the coding process the testing and designing process but it is also introducing different errors that are difficult to detect at first. In bitcoin etc a single mistake can costs a lot. Is it is better to view artificial intelligence as an assistant rather than thinking that it is a replacement to human being there are industries in which risk level is very high human oversight remain an essential part regardless of the influence of AI.

Assuming that AI will replace human being once it become good enough is more likely over looking many real life challenges if we talk about business we see that they do not only care about the cost and speed but they also depends on accountability creative and critical thinking, ability to handle the unexpected situation that might occur during businesses, if you talk about AI we can see that AI can make mistakes it can also produced result that are biased or sometimes it fails in situation that requires human intervations along with AI, It is more likely a tool that is helping people to work more efficiently rather than companies where they are completely replacing them they should combine AI with skilled human workers instead of reliance on one or other.

[Oasisman]

Ai technology is still developing and as far as I know, they don't fix themselves unless humans do. We might still not see so much layoffs but more reduced workforce with AI assistance and that's for the countries who have so much resources allocation to ai development because in truth, no company or platform or organization can totally replace human resources with AI assistance.

Exactly. They can be faster, more accurate but just a tiny hitch in their set-up can make it look useless. Ford are doing damage control by rehiring those engineers they hired before and it's very obvious that the knowledge these men possess can't be replicated by AI because you can't leave anything to chance so you don't lose to the competition.

Damage has been done, If I'm one of those engineers who got laid off, I might not want to consider reapplying back, or I might if the offer is pretty decent compared to the competitors. However, I'm not gonna get complacent this time as the same scenario could happen when they fully develop the AI system.

I think Ford has made a huge mistake integrating AI and firing employees too early. Everyone knows AI are still learning, and we're still far from having a perfect AI that could threaten hundred thousands of jobs.
Yeah, AI can be fast and efficient, but it needs specific set of commands before it can perfectly work without any issues, and humans are the only one who can fix it.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

~

That's very true. Being a QA myself, I can say that AI cannot replace humans that easily because AI is not fully efficient in some things.
Obviously AI can help us do a particular task much faster but we cannot replace humans just because of this.
We still manual intervention and verify what AI is doing is right or wrong. It should certainly take lesser time than manually implementing everything from scratch.
AI is not to be used to replace humans but it should be used as a personal assistant helping us to do things quickly.
Thus we will have more time to focus on more important things and hence we can achieve more work in lesser time.

AI can and have replaced many average workers, leaving mostly professionals who use it efficiently to deliver quality jobs. The AI trend was quick to show how money was wasted on labor with no specializations.

AI has replaced common workers in various fields like graphics design(AI does fliers, UI and banners design and even video edits properly if prompted well, leaving the specialist to fine-tune the works to fit). In that field, if you're just the average Joe, AI has replaced you, In the career of Web development, AI has helped in achieving an enormous task which should've included a lot of devs with much fewer ones and at a faster working pace and the ones left are the very skilled ones who can solve real problems and not the average coder who just knows the syntax and semantics of which AI has replaced.

The specialized people who work with AI properly are QA minded, since they understand the craft and use AI plus their brains to achieve tasks efficiently, in the world now, it's either you upgrade your skills to be more desirable or get replaced by AI.

[Kelward]

This must be a good news for those that are in panic that AI would soon take over all their jobs, it shows that artificial intelligence is different from natural intelligence, natural will always have an edge somehow over artificial because it is authentic. From the much that I know AI follows laid down protocols to do whatever they are programed to do, they cannot have the natural intelligence of humans which have emotions and considerations.

AI can be faster and more accurate than humans but I don't think that they have the patience of humans to be emotional and reevaluate circumstances before making decisions. AI can replace some workforce especially in the areas of programmed outputs and consultations but when it comes to critical thinking I believe that natural intelligence can think outside the box of productivity and make unconditional decisions.

[bakasabo]

The reason to hire back quality check engineers could also be because Ford can blame those employees for fails that were made later. If AI fails, you cant blame it and punish it. You can not make it pay compensation. You can not reprimand AI and make it work more effective and accurate. It could also be, that with the increase cost of hardware, cost of AI usage, AI improvements and development cost more than paying human employees. For Ford to use human is just cheaper.

[Synchronice]

The hype on AI replacing human workers has been making waves for years now. Some people predict a massive job losses in our industries. But a recent report from Ford is raising concern over that claim.

According to report Ford had to rehire human engineers after their AI systems could not consistently meet the rigorous quality standards required in automotive manufacturing. Source

Quality failures can cost millions or even billions in this crypto space. In Bitcoin and crypto, we already know security is everything. would you trust a fully AI-built bridge, wallet, or exchange system without human engineers doing final checks? I know AI is powerful but it still needs human oversight. We've all seen AI-generated code with hidden bugs.

At this point I think human role remain irreplaceable in high quality production.

There is no way you can build an exchange system fully with AI, without human workforce. Exchange is a complex system where you have to consider just too many things, starting from a complex UI to databases, features, options, lots of different products besides listed coins, withdrawal, deposit, earning and so on, there are endless things to mention. AI can't build such a complex system and most importantly, it can't build a stable platform. There is a reason these companies pay millions of dollars to their developers every year.

[dansus021]

relying on AI quality control is a massive reality check for the whole "AI replaces all white-collar workers" hype cycle.

AI will certainly speed up unit testing, generate boilerplate code, and spot obvious syntax bugs. But trusting a fully AI-built cross-chain bridge, crypto exchange, or vehicle brake system without human "gray beard" oversight is financial (and physical) suicide.

[pawanjain]

AI can and have replaced many average workers, leaving mostly professionals who use it efficiently to deliver quality jobs. The AI trend was quick to show how money was wasted on labor with no specializations.

AI has replaced common workers in various fields like graphics design(AI does fliers, UI and banners design and even video edits properly if prompted well, leaving the specialist to fine-tune the works to fit). In that field, if you're just the average Joe, AI has replaced you, In the career of Web development, AI has helped in achieving an enormous task which should've included a lot of devs with much fewer ones and at a faster working pace and the ones left are the very skilled ones who can solve real problems and not the average coder who just knows the syntax and semantics of which AI has replaced.

The specialized people who work with AI properly are QA minded, since they understand the craft and use AI plus their brains to achieve tasks efficiently, in the world now, it's either you upgrade your skills to be more desirable or get replaced by AI.

Yes obviously. If you are an average Joe, you will replaced. It doesn't matter if its AI that is replacing you or someone better.
So its mandatory for such a person to upskill himself and stay relevant to the market.
Yes, I agree that AI "can" replace a person but only if he is incompetent. The wise ones will easily find another job anyway.

[noormcs5]

It can be said that we are still in the development and early stages of adopting AI into the industry directly, so there will still be a lot of learning and evaluation about the program from AI itself in executing its tasks.
Currently, it is still vulnerable and inconsistent from the quality provided by AI, but what if 5 years later, what will AI look like in the future, so we cannot ignore this for future Labor competition.

That's an interesting point, as currently AI is dependent more on how we prompt them and how detailed the human gives them the input, and based on that, they give us the output. We can call it an early phase of AI, where it works in a "Learning by doing" model, as AI output depends on human input.

There will come a time when AI will train itself and improve on its own. When it no longer needs to depend on humans, that would be the most advanced and most dangerous stage of AI.

[Taricoins]

It can be said that we are still in the development and early stages of adopting AI into the industry directly, so there will still be a lot of learning and evaluation about the program from AI itself in executing its tasks.
Currently, it is still vulnerable and inconsistent from the quality provided by AI, but what if 5 years later, what will AI look like in the future, so we cannot ignore this for future Labor competition.

That's an interesting point, as currently AI is dependent more on how we prompt them and how detailed the human gives them the input, and based on that, they give us the output. We can call it an early phase of AI, where it works in a "Learning by doing" model, as AI output depends on human input.

There will come a time when AI will train itself and improve on its own. When it no longer needs to depend on humans, that would be the most advanced and most dangerous stage of AI.

Overall I deeply feel it was a rushed move for them, for the fact that the topic says rehires, means alot of people where dropped for them to execute that decision and that's the problem with AI and the workforce, I understand that this organizations wants to cut costs and all but at this stage of AI development, it still lacks the adequate data needed for it to replace the qualified engineers.

AI is a wonderful too but it only good as the information used to train it