Yup, a setting that has both. You see yesterday I offered the quote “I made mention of Deeper Machine Learning. This is awesome, it is not AI (AI does not yet exist) but it got me thinking. You see, we now see mention of AI in construction. This is about to go bad, really bad and Trusting these buildings will become folly soon enough. I will try to explain that soon enough” and that soon is now. To see this we need to make a few sidesteps, but it will be clear soon enough. For this I selected ‘Building a smarter future: The impact of big data and AI in construction’ (at https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/digital-construction-news/big-data-and-ai-in-construction-trimble/132005/) there are several sources, but this one got a few things really right and that matters to me. They give you “Because computers can be programmed to analyse questions and situations using thousands of parameters in the time it takes most of us to type them in, they’re an incredible tool that we can use to do complex calculations in a fraction of the time it takes any human, and because they approach every situation with logic, they can make the most rational decisions even when we can’t. Artificial intelligence in construction simply takes that to the next level, applying machine learning, which allows those same computers to learn from situations they’ve encountered before and to adjust their results accordingly.” I do not fully agree, but they give a better explanation then most others and they made the big good one by giving us ‘applying machine learning’ this is correct.
Why is this what?
That is the setting, you see to see this I will need to take you on a little time travel. That is after you realise that machine learning depends on data, loads of it. But in all this the right category is also important. We are about to overlap best practice and best results onto the cheaper way, the cutting corners way. We might rely on movies like the towering inferno (1974) where the movie based on two books namely the Glass inferno and the tower. In the movie we see the bastardly electrical engineer who cut corners (played by Richard Chamberlain) and the architect played by Paul Newman. There we see the little conversation that the electrical engineer Roger Simmons kept to building codes and that the demands by the architect Doug Roberts were outlandish and to cost driving and fair enough, the building burns down on opening night.
Children of Mediocrates
The previous one was a story, fiction. But reality is not. In the 90’s captains of industry shook hands with politicians and a lacking drive was introduced. Almost like the philosopher Mediocrates who introduced a new life lesson ‘Meh, good enough’. I was actually in some of those meetings where we were told. “What if the strive of excellence is not 100%, but 80%. What had is it to be still really good. How much easier is it to build your bonus when we expect a 80% line?” I was there, I heard it all and I was told to adhere to it all. And yes the bonus for me was easier and I was merely in customer service, but it felt wrong.
Nowadays
So back to today when we look at the application of what some call AI (a wrong term). The data it relies on cannot tell the difference because best practice and cutting corners are all the same thing and it will set a flawed recommendation and the larger folly is that the people in control of that data will not distinguish between the two fronts either. They are to young to tell, or they cannot tell the difference, because those filling their pockets are no longer around. It is a recipe for disaster and when was the last time when construction disasters went without casualties?
This is the setting I see coming and there is also an opportunity. You see, those cutting corners did not protect the original path. As such these patents and IP points are now open and unprotected. As such these options are there for the clever people to create new innovation patents based on the open original patents, the ones the cutting corners people let be and there should be a fair amount of them all over the field. This is merely because best practice was too expensive for them and now those options are open. An example here might be the Reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC). We are now seeing all the issues and the hundreds of buildings that have them. It was an invention in the 1990’s, making the timeline fit. And now we see “Concerns were amplified in 2023 following reports of an earlier roofing collapse at a British primary school, which fell without warning in 2018” Now, one does not mean the other, but there is a premise that fits and as such we see the larger danger. Consider that this all gained popularity in the 50’s. So how many new patents were created based on this idea, and what was left behind and unprotected? I will let you do the math, but whomever has those innovation patents will have the option to fill there pockets with the best practice approach whilst too many are merely in it to make a buck. As such the folly of hiding behind AI is about to hit a lot of people squarely in the face, all whilst the clever people will be able to turn a coin as they have the patents and they will be the only player to be considered soon enough.
Hiding behind hyper words suddenly gives others a chance to become serious players where the big boys never wanted them. How is that for poetic justice?
Enjoy the day, most of the week is still in front of you.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 