Meat mincer, super-robots and research institutes (Not Artificial Intelligence)
If you are already conducting a project for some years, do not you think that he is a knife from the history of number 1 or a plate from the history № 2
The case was many years ago at one of the domestic factories. In addition, the plant produced meat grinders, the usual manual, which were in every Soviet family. These mincers have been produced for many years, according to one technology. But there was always one problem with their production: the operation of sharpening the knife from the back side was very difficult and dangerous.
The fact is that the technology knife sharpened with 2 sides, first, from the side that is adjacent to the grid (parallel to the grid), and secondly, from the back side at an angle to the grid. And if the first part of the problem was not (on the emery stacked several knives and sharpened), then the second operation was performed exclusively by hand, which was low-productivity and extremely dangerous for the worker.
In 198? the Robotics and Automation Department of the Electrosila factory developed an insanely expensive super robot that accurately repeated the movement of the hands of the worker (I recall that it was 30 years ago (!)), But its productivity was so small that the worker was returned to sharpening , almost the next day.
To solve the problem, an external consultant from one research institute was summoned. The consultant started his work, naturally with analysis
and analysis from the survey. And the first question: "Why sharpen the knife on the reverse side?", Introduced the director of the enterprise into a stupor. Then there was a meeting at which none of the plant's employees could answer this question. The only thing that was said: "So on technology is laid."
A little later it turned out that knives from time immemorial were made by casting and initially they were poured into earthen molds. Therefore, an uneven edge was obtained, with defects, and naturally, all this needed to be straightened. But a long time ago the plant switched to precision casting, after which a very clean and smooth knife was produced. For over forty years they have been sharpening the second edge of the knife in vain
------------------------------ End of story number 1 ---------------- ----------------------
And now look at your project. Is not there something superfluous
Maybe there is an extra block of code that has not been needed for a long time (for example, due to the new features of modern browsers)? Or there are superfluous business processes which only brake? Or maybe there are extra employees?
According to my practice of consultations, I can say that this happens in most projects older than five years. But there are projects in which to exclude the operation is simply not possible, but really want, then you need to make some changes.
History number 2
Everyone knows such a sporting discipline, as bench shooting or shooting from a rifle on skeet. In the organization of competitions and training firings, there was one problem: the collection of the fragments of plates, the fragments can scatter over a large area and not always over a "clean field".
Solving the problem, of course, they invented a super robot, which actually collected fragments, but, firstly, it is a very expensive device, and secondly, it did not do well in the forests.
Someone clever (history does not say who it was) was asked to make plates of ice. Flew these plates are not worse than plastic, and you do not need to collect shards, besides, the plates themselves are cheaper.
------------------------------ End of story number 2 ---------------- ----------------------
Look at your project again. Is there something that I really want to remove? What prevents is it just to take and take away? What can be changed in this barrier?
The conclusion from these two stories is simple: often when working on a project, we are hampered by the so-called. psychological inertia. We do as we did before, without paying attention to the changes around, we solve problems in the way that everything around it is solved, and we accept the shortcomings of these decisions.
In fact, both examples above illustrate one type of psychological inertia "Inertia of traditional conditions," and all such varieties are 16 (!)
Well, the second conclusion: do not rush to buy /reinvent robots to solve your problems, try to connect the SRI (Not Artificial Intelligence) first.
P.S. If the article was useful for you and you applied it in your project. Or if you would like to learn about other types of psychological inertia. Write in the comments, with the interest shown and some usefulness of the article, I will continue to write on this topic.