Slashdot Mirror
Autonomic Code not About Replacing Humans
An anonymous reader writes "IT professionals can automate IT management tasks by delegating them to the system, and can plan the degree of automation that is right for them and how manual managers and autonomic managers work together. This article discusses the role of the humans, or lack there of, in autonomic systems. The article claims that isn't about replacing people with machines." How have other readers experienced the use of autonomic code both good and bad?
But aren't most IT departments drastically understaffed as it is? We rely heavily on automated processes to handle the more labor intensive and repetitive checks and operations we carry out on a daily basis. It frees up our staff for project planning, design, and troubleshooting stuff that's failed. Would *you* want to manually check 5000 systems for operational status every 10 minutes? I'd have to hire hundreds of people to handle that kind of load, so in a sense, sure it is 'replacing humans', but give me a break.
We could all ride in rickshaw's too, pulled by humans, instead of buying 'auto-mobiles' to automate carrying 4-8 people or what have you...should we be worried about cars stealing jobs of rickshaw pullers?
Understand the autonomic manager concept Good resource links, including the Autonomic Computing Manifesto [pdf] and Autonomic Computing Toolkit.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Why do we assume that if a computer takes over a task that a human once did, that human has been "replaced?" Really what has been "replaced" is the acting agent. It is sort of sad that we equate someone's job with their actually person.