原文
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
（评论）
(comments)
原始链接: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43644970
Hacker News上关于敲击帕尔马干酪轮的讨论总结如下： 讨论集中在敲击帕尔马干酪（Parmigiano Reggiano）来评估其质量的传统做法上。评论者思考保持这一过程人工操作的价值，即使技术可能复制对空洞和密度的评估。 一些人认为，保留这种传统工作可以防止工业规模、低质量奶酪生产的可能性。另一些人则质疑人工评估中可能存在的偏差，并将其与体育比赛中的人工裁判相提并论。 一位评论者指出，与其他奶酪如佩科里诺罗曼诺（Pecorino Romano）不同，帕尔马干酪通常不带有除官方名称以外的特定乳品品牌的标识。另一位评论者澄清说，所有的帕尔马干酪都通过一个协会销售，奶酪轮上只有三位数的代码来识别具体的乳品厂。最后，一条评论讨论了如果证明这种方法既便宜又有效，这项过程最终可以通过人工智能实现自动化。
相关文章
It is interesting how important it seems to us that jobs like this remain done in the traditional way. For all their expertise, I am sure a technical solution would also easily be able to detect what they are looking for: voids within the cheese, or lack of uniform density. This does not seem to be a case where the human expertise and artistry is actually important to the final product, besides the feeling of tradition.
Perhaps the best argument for keeping traditional jobs like this is that, even if that exact job could be done by machine, replacing these humans with machines would be the start of a short process that would end up with indistrially-produced bad cheese.
reply