Comment by dr_dshiv
2 years ago
I’ve used Kaedim a lot and it is great. We’ve known pretty much from the beginning it is people or mostly people. But not sure why that would be a problem for people. I’m sure they try to automate as much as they can to save cost.
Mostly because they positioned themselves as being a revolutionary AI shop that can crack the 2D->3D mapping with AI. They are not branding themselves as an outsourcing shop but from the circumstantial evidence presented in the article this is what they are.
I think this is another case of a "fake it till you make it" attempt. While legally it might not be in the same category of fraud as Theranos it nonetheless feels pretty fishy when there is a literal man behind the curtain moving the chess pieces.
Unsure why this is controversial.
It's pretty common practice to start full manual and then automate pieces of the process as you go with a human-in-the-loop, often with edge cases still being full manual forever as the cost of labor < cost to engineer out of all edge cases.
Because it's lying to your customers, to your investors, to the press, etc.
I'm unsure if they're claiming "It's 100% automated now" vs "Our goal is 100% automated".
If it's the former, then yea that's dishonest, but the point is whether it's scalable now / likely possible eventually. I could imagine that being the case.
It’s controversial because it’s fundamentally dishonest