Dotan Cohen wrote: >> I completely disagree. There's no theoretical reason why a computer >> program couldn't do any of the above. > > We are discussing practice, not theory. In theory, there isn't any > difference between the two. But in practice... > > >>"Professionals" are primarily required to >> protect professionals' jobs. In practice, computers can't actually do >> any of those jobs _yet_, though it probably wouldn't be beyond current >> capability to have them rebuild engines or provide good legal advice (at >> least in any precedent-based legal system). I certainly believe that UIs >> can be built that can do a better job of system and network >> administration than the average person currently doing those jobs, and it >> really doesn't matter how much you, or anybody else, thinks that those >> jobs _should_ be done by professionals - it isn't going to happen. > > The problem with your examples is that they assume routine work. I > agree that for 90% of what professionals do, a computer could do > better and cheaper. One has only to look at the autobuilding industry > for a classic example.
I think all of the "professions" have made it pretty clear that really, you don't have to be a member of the profession to do most of the job. Paramedics, paralegals, paragliders ... > However, a professional must be present for the 10% of cases where > something goes wrong. In most (I admit not all) cases that means > having a professional available 100% of the time, so that he will be > there when things fail. Professionals need to be "on-call". In fact, for most medical treatment, the doctor _is_ "on-call". If we could make the day-to-day administration of servers simple and fool-proof, the small business owner might be far more happy to consider keeping an expert on-call. > > >> Right or wrong, companies >> don't believe in paying professional rates for administrative work. > > This is a valid viewpoint for them, as their interest is in saving > money. That does not mean that Ubuntu or any other entity needs to > give the impression that their GUI tools (which we have already > established covers 90% of use cases) cover 100% of their use cases and > no experienced professional is needed. Why would we ever say that? It's way beyond the scope of the proposal. -- derek -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
