Yanni A. Loukissas
This reading provided so many different and unbiased opinions on the good and bad in computer simulations that it is difficult to take a side. The text seemed to posit the computer as a unifying collaborative space for all of the professionals involved in a project, and a good one at that. Though there is still some resistance toward the efficacy of simulation and the computer, it's hard to deny that the collaborative nature and accessibility of its software has been a wonderful contribution to the building trades. Prior to the computer, I assume that closest tools available for collaboration were simply drawings on paper. Even then, drawings constructed by different tradesmen would likely be drawn on their own respective pages. Now, all trades can effectively work simultaneously on a single, seamless page.
Another interesting discussion was that of simulations' validity and truthfulness. Some are hesitant to rely on simulation because it has no capacity for intuition and cannot ever really be trusted. I agree that there is only room for simulation where experienced practitioners are present. Simulations are best used as a complement to personal experience. Perhaps if the risk is lower, we could test the the computer's ability to interrogate human activity. However, in the case of building fires and structural collapse, I don't believe there is room for such efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment