• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    237
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I do industrial automation for a living, and I just want to point out that automating things that exist purely in the digital domain is far easier than automating things like ship breaking.

    • TruthAintEasy@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Cant imagine how it even could be automated without advanced robotics. Those ships are freakin HUGE! Maybe a collection of robotic snakes with cutting lazers attached to their heads and some little scuttle bots to pick up the pieces the snakes knock off? Just cut the whole thing into 1’ disks or maybe hexagons is better

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        77
        ·
        9 months ago

        Maybe a collection of robotic snakes with cutting lazers attached to their heads

      • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Just make a huge version of those supermarket bread slicer machines and feed the ships through it.

      • Riskable@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It can be automated it would just never be worth the cost. Every ship is different and has its own requirements.

        If they were all 100% exactly the same, using the same hardware in all the same places then it would be cost effective to automate their disassembly. Otherwise every single ship is a one-off edge case.

        Even if they’re mostly the same many will have had upgrades, repairs, and changes over time that could literally throw a wrench (that someone accidentally left inside an interior area) into the whole (automated) operation.

        I think the best case scenario is to enforce shipbuilding standards and deny ships entry if they don’t follow them (for loading/unloading, anyway). Then you setup standardized dry docks with robotic arms that are already preprogrammed to disassemble these standard vessels. They may need human guidance for some areas that are allowed to be non-conforming but as long as the majority of the ship adheres to the standard it’d make the whole process much smoother and more environmentally friendly.

        From an environmental standpoint the real issues from these vessels isn’t even the difficulty of (environmentally friendly) disassembly. It’s their emissions over their working lifetime and super toxic things like anti-fouling coatings that where we have no good way to remove or dispose of them. Like, even if you rip off the outside of a ship what do you do with that toxic waste? It’s nasty stuff.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      […] I just want to point out that automating things that exist purely in the digital domain is far easier than automating things like ship breaking.

      Not that you’re saying otherwise, however isn’t that even more of a reason more developers and resources should be allocated toward automating complex and risky physical processes?

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Honestly, I don’t see how you would do it without general AI, which is something that will be solved in the digital domain first anyway.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Eh, it could be done with non-general AI. There are a finite number of different types of things to handle, so as long as it’s not thrown off by some bent steel or some missing consoles, I’d be amazed if they couldn’t automate at least specific ship designs.

          • epyon22@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            They still manually build ships right now what makes you think they could automate taking one apart

            • Riskable@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Firstly, much of shipbuilding is automated. They use robots to paint them and apply anti-fouling coatings. They also use loads and loads of automated machinery to create the steel parts that make up most of the ship. Do you think some dudes are forging rivets, beams, and pipes by hand? No, those are made by machines that make zillions of them.

              Secondly, nearly every ship–even ships that seem generic like big container ships–is a custom, one-off thing. They’re all bespoke (for the most part), being engineered for specific purposes, routes, and they even have “upgrades” for companies that pay extra (e.g. nicer quarters, extra antenna masts, more and special equipment mounting options, etc).

              • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                They use robots to paint them and apply anti-fouling coatings. They also use loads and loads of automated machinery to create the steel parts that make up most of the ship. Do you think some dudes are forging rivets, beams, and pipes by hand? No, those are made by machines that make zillions of them.

                The missing piece here is assembly, and disassembly is like 95% of what goes into recycling from what I understand.

          • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 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.

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 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.

            • Riskable@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 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).

            • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              9 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.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            A single repair or modification would ruin the entire automation process. One single screw off by a single mm type thing.

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

              This depends on the system. Mechatronics engineers spend a lot of time learning and figuring out how to make systems that can withstand edge cases like an incorrect screw size. There’s whole engineering/mechatronics disciplines around automation reliability (though much of it involves lots and lots of sensors and cameras, haha).

              The way they test these things is by intentionally throwing bad parts into the mix at various stages of their automation. Something like a screw being too big/small is a trivial matter that won’t make it through a system or facility designed by professionals.

              The real problem that really throws a wrench into every mechatronics engineer’s carefully-planned automated masterworks is people doing things like throwing wrenches into their carefully-planned automated masterworks 😁

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

              Why the flying fuck do you think I said, “non-general AI”? Even a well written algorithm could handle things coming in not in perfect shape, yet everyone pretends “non-general AI” means, “execute instructions repeatedly without any input what so ever.”

              Use your brain. Even basic dumb algorithms that can run on an Arduino can respond to input. Machine learning can easily respond to dynamic input, so stop failing to imagine the most basic of basic things I say.

                  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    But nothing would ever be identical to a blueprint because of repairs and modifications man…… add in wear and tear, yeah it ain’t happening.

                    That’s the part you can’t understand. We don’t have anything that can perform this yet, if you want to claim it exists, let’s see it then.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not that you’re saying otherwise, however isn’t that even more of a reason more developers and resources should be allocated toward automating complex and risky physical processes?

        You’re solving for the wrong problem from the perspective of people with money investing money to solve these problems.

        • Shipbreaking, while dangerous for the workers, isn’t expensive because it is done in far flung countries with workers that have low wages, few protections for safety, and long term health consequences.

        • Art and writing (for western consumption) requires educated and talented people which are expensive to employ.

        People with money, looking for a return, want that return their spending, not reduce human suffering.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Processing the digital world is just the first step. You can’t just build a safe autonomous ship disassembly robot without making sure your algorithms are actually sound. Look at self driving cars, they’re far from being safe and acceptable. Jumping straight into this problem without testing the shit out of your code in a virtual world is a mistake.

    • Codex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean automating it would certainly be a challenge but the first step would be building tools and robotics to allow human operators to more safely and effectively manage the tasks. Then you streamline the industrialized processes. Then you think about automating things.

      But this is all really an economic problem, not a technical one. Software tools have minimal resource costs (compared to building/destroying a ship) but require skilled (expensive) laborers to operate. So to cut costs in any digital field you need to get rid of the expensive laborers. Thus the push for AI to replace any computer-bound work. Physical labor is already considered dirt-cheap in our fucked society, and no one is rushing to add expensive tools in fields where disposable people will suffice.

      I sympathize immensely with the OP image’s final point, but “working for the right company” isn’t going to fix it. Reorganizing society is necessary, rethinking what we culturally value and uphold.

    • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think the solution for ship breakers is for the job to be a highly paid respectable job with protections. In other words the technology that desperately needs to disrupt this industry is probably… unions

      • arin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Unions protect against automation that reduces labor hours.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yeah I think that’s the point. Ship breaking is apparently poorly paid so they need unions.

          I also not sure how much scope there is for automation on tasks like this as each shit will be different there isn’t going to be a huge amount of repeatable action

        • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Honestly more unions should fight for company stock for employees or similar stake programs. As we hopefully get more automated having workers interests aligned against it seems like a losing fight.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Shh. Just give one of them dancing robot dogs an impact driver attachment. They’ll figure it out in a week.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah exactly, I work in AI and robotics for medicine, and im so goddamn sick and tired of these people and their absolute god-awful uneducated takes on AI.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        And this guy’s claiming to be a programmer too which makes it doubly worse because he really should know better.

        It stems from people who seem to think that having the idea is the hard part, and the implementation is just a matter of time and money.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Once we perfect doing it in software, then we can graduate to hardware. Today, digital paintings; tomorrow, real paintings; next year, tear down a fucking ship!

    • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      That is really cool job description I haven’t seen pop up before! Would you mind sharing what type of things you need to automate? It sounds so interesting, I never really understood why factory line jobs should exist for example * because the work is dangerous, the opposite of stimulating/engaging (works for some sure), and just generally overall depressing unpleasant places to work. We SHOULD be striving for a world where humans don’t have to do such menial unfufilling work.

      *very superficially, all the nuance that makes it continue to be necessary and exist I understand)

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I work in the auto industry, so programming the machines that make the car parts. Humans are still involved because getting machines to handle changing conditions is very slow, expensive, and still winds up unreliable in a lot of cases. The simple process of picking a randomly oriented part up out of a bin and placing it accurately on a fixture is actually very difficult for a machine to do, when compared to how easily a human can accomplish the exact same task.