
AI startup claims to automate app making but actually just uses humans - smohnot
https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/14/20805676/engineer-ai-artificial-intelligence-startup-app-development-outsourcing-humans
======
codesushi42
Good grief.

When will people wake up and realize that AI today is just capable of "curve
fitting"?

Yes, that is a bit of a simplification. But not far off.

Neural networks depend on back propagation. They are really just another type
of optimizer for maximum likelihood, using gradient descent. They work better
on high dimensional, non linear data than other methods before.

But if the function you are attempting to model is non differentiable, neural
networks won't help you.

They certainly aren't capable of performing magic tricks like writing an app
for you.

~~~
rohan404
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

AI is certainly not magic, and as an industry we're super far away from what
would be considered real AI in the technical sense. That being said, AI has
become a catch all term for everything as simple as linear regressions, all
the way through to neural networks.

We don't claim to be able to write apps using AI, we're a platform that is
trying to use AI and general automation in order to optimize the traditional
SDLC. Actual code generation/synthesis is years away in my opinion and there
is far more impact that can be had by going after other manual aspects of
software development.

~~~
ammar2
> we're a platform that is trying to use AI and general automation in order to
> optimize the traditional SDLC

I don't think you can get away with corp-speak/buzzwords here this easily.
Could you elaborate on how exactly you're using AI to "optimize" software
development?

~~~
rohan404
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

Happy to elaborate - in a nutshell what we're trying to do is automate as many
parts of the traditional software development lifecycle as we can, and for
whatever cannot be automated, put in place the right tooling to allow for
repeatable results.

Our thesis is that most applications today have a huge amount of duplication
at a code level, and process level. We're trying to use reusable building
blocks (well structured libraries, templated user stories, wireframes, common
errors, etc.), in order to immediately solve that duplication. That being
said, we're not talking about automatic code generation, it's more about being
able to assemble these reusable building blocks together at the beginning of a
project so you have a better starting point. There will always be
customization required for any project however, and that is a human led
process.

Apart from actual development, we're also trying to automate processes around
project management, infrastructure management, and QA. For example, what we've
already been able to do is automatically price and create timeline estimates
for a project without any human involvement, determine which creators on our
network are best suited for a given project, evaluate and onboard developers
on to the network, setup developer environments, and a lot more!

~~~
ammar2
Sorry if I'm missing something obvious but it's not very clear to me how the
first part significantly benefits from AI. Code re-use is just good software
engineer practice, are you somehow able to figure out what libraries to use
automatically? Isn't this trivial to perform by a human anyway?

The latter part, as far as figuring out what work to assign and estimating
time-frames does seem like a legitimate AI use case though.

~~~
rohan404
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

We're attempting to tackle the problem holistically. That means that we're
tackling every single step of the traditional product development process. All
the way from how you ideate, price, and spec, to sourcing and managing
developers through to QA and infrastructure management.

For example, today, our ideation/pricing/spec tools leverage applied ML,
creator management leverages facial recognition for fraud prevention, and
infrastructure management uses statistical modelling.

We're trying to make code re-use a repeatable and predictable process rather
than just a best practice. Today in the industry it's a purely led by
developers, and very often is done solely at their discretion in a manual
fashion. We're attempting to platform enforce code reuse, across autonomous
distributed teams and products. Apart from just deciding what the optimal
building blocks for a project are, the actual assembly or intelligent merging
of these building blocks in an automated way is non trivial and mirrors modern
automative assembly lines.

------
omarhaneef
For all those people asking why the VCs did not catch this: what sort of
diligence would you do?

I don't know the company or the details. Assume two scenarios:

1\. The target company is willing to lie, fabricate code, mix in tensorflow
etc.

2\. The company will not outright lie, and will answer honestly. However, they
are very optimistic about their chances, and about their ability to deliver
some sort of AI-enabled solution.

Right now they have -- let's hypothesize -- some sort of funnel and they route
bits of code to different developers. They think they will replace some of it.
They are using various AI libraries.

Suppose you believe that even if the AI won't eventually code the whole app
from scratch, it will make huge strides in certain areas that we don't even
know about. These strides will dramatically reduce the cost of making an app
(eventually, you believe). Suppose you think that this company is basically an
exploration of those areas.

In other words, be generous to the diligence undertaker.

Now, how would you know? What steps would you take to that you suspect these
people did not?

(Because this is the internet and no one knows for sure: this is a real
question, and not a rhetorical attack on people asking why VCs were "tricked")

~~~
gowld
It's not an unsolvable problem. Software is much easier to read than to write.
It's much easier to see if something works than to make it yourself.

~~~
mLuby
>Software is much easier to read than to write

If you mean software is easier to use than create, sure. But if you mean it's
easier to understand existing code than write new code, countless rewrites
suggest it's not so simple.

------
mkagenius
> Duggal “was telling investors that Engineer.ai was 80% done with developing
> a product that, in truth, he had barely even begun to develop.”

Due diligence? I mean, I understand VCs are not the smartest bunch but if you
are investing $30M, please do the due.

~~~
manigandham
VCs use portfolio theory. Quantity over quality. Due diligence takes too much
time, effort and money that can be better spent just getting into another
deal.

~~~
TuringNYC
>> VCs use portfolio theory.

I dont buy this argument. I used to help manage a large portfolio. Portfolio
theory does not mean that you can put in garbage and magically get more than
garbage (actually, it did with CDOs, since they were tranched, but even that
ended up tragic if you recall 2008.)

Portfolio theory, esp with A-round and beyond VC where your portfolios are
smaller (~15 to 30 entities) requires due diligence.

~~~
manigandham
You don't know it's garbage. Disqualification is easier than qualification.
Funds say "no" to the obviously bad or incompatible. Whether something is a
"yes" takes research and is never certain.

The entire game is picking the winners so how much are you going to dedicate
to predicting that (which is massively unpredictable) vs just investing in
another shot that may be a winner.

------
Maro
Couple of comments:

1\. Fake it 'til you make it is pretty accepted in startup world. It's only a
problem if you don't actually make it. If you do, then you're a hero---even if
you made wildly unrealistic projections initially [and got lucky]. It's kindof
unfair, but nobody said life is fair :)

2\. Most software people (like me) assume that due diligence goes deep into
software. I've been through DDs at several companies, including my own
startup: it's not that deep. I would say growth metrics, financials, legal
structure, executive team is more important.

3\. If you haven't read the Theranos story, read it. It's a good example what
can happen in the extreme, edge case.

~~~
smt88
"Fake it til you make it" should not extend as far as lying to your investors.

If "fake" for this company meant that they told customers there was AI and
there wasn't, no big deal. Customers agree to a service at a certain price.
Why do they care how the company accomplishes it?

Investors, however, do care about whether cost-saving "AI" works today vs. in
2045.

------
onlyrealcuzzo
Ha! This company tried to recruit me a little bit ago. The CTO walked me
through the business model, and it was pretty obvious they were just a typical
agency. I pointed that out, and he got defensive and tried changing subjects.

In their defense, there is a slight twist in that they subcontract to hundreds
of other agencies when those agencies have additional capacity. Essentially,
they arbitrage on that.

But, yeah, the pitch that they use AI to build apps -- it's pretty ridiculous.
They don't. Even with a very open mind to that phrasing, it's still a huge
stretch.

~~~
rohan404
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

To clarify, while we intend to use AI to solve a variety of different
problems, we're not using it for actual code synthesis (ie. building apps).
Instead we are leveraging code reusability and programmatic stitching/merging
for our software assembly line.

In addition to that, we are leveraging various AI/ML techniques throughout the
rest of the product development lifecycle, for areas such as
pricing/specing/ideation, infrastructure management/scalability, code
reusability itself and matching, creator (developer/QA/design) resource
matching, sequencing and dependency prioritization, and more.

~~~
smt88
Yeah, none of that sounds like AI. It sounds like standard features of IDEs
and PaaS. I can't imagine you have a programmatic way to save much time on
pricing/specinf/ideation because machines can't do that yet.

Also, the clear message of the company was "AI writing code that would
otherwise be written by humans".

Again, would strongly suggest you stop posting anything about this situation
without consulting a lawyer. Based on your HN posts, you can't claim ignorance
anymore.

------
areyouroot
I could imagine how their conversations with investors are going.

“When we said we use AI we meant An Indian”

~~~
RosanaAnaDana
You just made me spit protein shake onto my keyboard. You gonna buy me a new
keyboard?

------
madamelic
As someone who used to work at one of these places: shocking.

It pretty much always is this way. They pretend it is AI, then when it comes
out that it is pretty much all humans, they pivot to admitting it is "human-
assisted".

The humans were truly creating data that was being fed back in, that wasn't a
lie. Engineers would have to poke at the bot a bit to get it out of corners it
would get itself into occasionally.

The big issue is the VC nature of the business. You are fighting a shot clock
on an extremely hard problem. So you have to rush things out to get to the
next step, then realize at the next step all of the data you collected, oops,
can't be used because there was a small issue.

Or maybe they realize a model was inaccurate and has to be rebuilt.

I truly don't think a VC-funded true AI company is possible, especially for
hard and fairly unbounded problems (speech is one thing, engineering is
just... that's insane).

If someone made a sustainable AI company that could run infinitely, that
company would have a huge shot due to that financial position.

~~~
goatinaboat
You could call it “artificial artificial intelligence”.

~~~
crazygringo
Yup, for many years that was Amazon Mechanical Turk's actual marketing slogan.

I haven't seen them use it lately, but I might have missed it somewhere.

------
DoreenMichele
I recently wrote two blog posts that touch on this. I honestly think many
people cannot tell real automation from "a box full of little elves with a
tech interface." (I often compare it to the MIB2 scene where Will Smith opens
the _automatic mail sorting machine_ and reveals a multi-armed alien rapidly
flinging mail, not robotic parts.)

It's made me less aggravated with certain things to realize that. It also
makes me wonder if founders are genuinely being intentionally deceptive or
just unclear where to draw that line themselves.

How much AI inside the box do you need to qualify as an AI company when
advertising what you do and wooing VC money? I bet some people honestly don't
know and some of those people may be in decision-making positions at such
companies.

Serious tech people may be clear on that, but most companies involve more than
just tech people. If your PR people don't really get it and your tech people
don't have adequate power to insist "You cannot market the company this way,"
then it will get sorted out in ugly headlines and court cases and the like.

~~~
rland
I think people come up with the idea of marketing things as having AI behind
them, before the implementation is fully realized. Once they have funding and
employees, they can't exactly back down. So they have to put humans behind the
solution as a stopgap. In their minds, it's temporary: they're just gathering
more data, they have real paying customers that they want to keep until their
solution is ready, etc. The little lie becomes a big lie and sooner or later
it will blow up for a lot of companies.

Uber's house of cards is a very transparent example, but there are many others
who don't even disclose that humans are at the wheel.

~~~
DoreenMichele
On the upside, it means that dystopian dreams of automation taking all our
jobs and creating an 80% permanent unemployment rate are laughable.

There will be plenty of paid tasks for people. They will just be online,
remote and we will need to sort out how to make this make financial sense for
all involved parties so it doesn't turn into a permanent underclass.

------
pdonis
"The company claims its AI tools are “human-assisted,” and that it provides a
service that will help a customer make more than 80 percent of a mobile app
from scratch in about an hour"

By the 80/20 rule, that would no doubt be the 80 percent that takes only 20
percent of the time to write; the remaining 20 percent that the tools can't do
is what takes 80 percent of the time to write.

------
jakozaur
Majority of AI startups are starting with manual approach to generate training
data set for future algorithms...

Plus it is a faster way to validate demand for given business model.

~~~
withusx5
Are there any proven examples of a company doing this (starting with a manual
approach), receiving investment, and eventually developing a working AI
product?

~~~
freehunter
Depends on how you define AI. If you're talking hands-off, learned-from-
scratch ML and deep learning. I'm not sure. If you're talking "used a human to
learn the steps and then slowly automated those steps", then you're describing
basically every company that's ever existed.

~~~
EpicEng
>If you're talking "used a human to learn the steps and then slowly automated
those steps", then you're describing basically every company that's ever
existed.

So, obviously not that definition then....

~~~
RosanaAnaDana
That's a pretty weak definition then. Might be your issue right there.

------
TrackerFF
One thing I've noticed in fundraising is that many potential investors almost
expect you to have some AI-driven solution.

Many don't even know what AI is, and would't be able to sniff out bullshit no
mater how much due diligence there's involved. Dumb money is flowing in, as
long as you have a great pitch and sleek presentation.

~~~
ng12
Any sufficiently advanced statistical model is indistinguishable from AI, at
least for the purpose of VC dollars.

------
kahlonel
Smells like Theranos. It's surprising how easy it is to fool VCs these days.

~~~
saagarjha
At least it can't literally kill people…

~~~
jbverschoor
Stress kills people

~~~
saagarjha
That's true of any job, though.

------
modi15
Contrarian view. Read the article top to bottom - there is no fraud here. This
is exactly how it should be done.

VC's dont know shit about AI and you cant expect them to.

Anyone building a cutting edge AI product, SHOULD NOT build it before selling
it product.

First use humans to build/sell the product and then in parallel train the AI
to take over. Often the training phase is best done using the human taskers.

The CEO - 'Sachin Dev Duggal' is doing it exactly right. Anyone claiming
otherwise, including the journalist who wrote this post, don't know what they
are talking about.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Anyone building a cutting edge AI product, SHOULD NOT build it before
> selling it product.

If they are selling a service and AI is part of the blsckt-box implementation,
sure.

If “its being done automatically by a machine” is your selling point, and you
haven't built a product that does that when you sell the product, it's fraud,
pure and simple.

~~~
modi15
If we are talking pure and simple, ALL business takes what you would call
'fraud' to get there.

------
flixic
I wouldn’t see it as a problem if human actions were systematically recorded
into a structured dataset to be used as training data.

But it seems from the article that the labor is not used for this purpose at
all.

~~~
xenocyon
Speaking more generally, I do think it is a _systemic_ problem in the world of
AI that we have to rely so much on human-labeled data, often done by low-paid
workers in other countries (like Amazon's Mechanical Turk) or harvested off
friction deliberately inserted into the human experience (like CAPTCHA).

The AI promise was that eventually the need for human labeling would end, but
the curve currently is going in the opposite direction and it's reasonable to
question whether it will _ever_ reverse.

------
hhas01
LOL, obvious #MagicalPixieDust peddler is obvious. Real AI is currently three-
to-eight years away, just as it has been for the last 40 years. They shoulda
just said it uses “computers”.

In the meantime, you know what _does_ work here and now? Building up a domain-
specific language to the level of that domain’s expert users, empowering those
users to tell their machines what they want without requiring a CS degree to
do it.

Small steps make Progress.

------
braythwayt
So, question:

Why is this fraud, but Uber isn't?

This company claims they're using humans to build apps while they develop an
AI platform out of hand-wavium.

Uber claims they're using humans to drive cars while they develop self-driving
cars out of hand-wavium.

Seems like the same model to me.

~~~
RosanaAnaDana
Yeah. This gives me about 0 pause.

Imo personal opinion, 'AI' at this point is about augmentation of human action
to reduce costs (time, materials, human attention, compute, etc), and
actually, if you know what you're doing, it works and can make you money.

My group works extremely heavily in this space. We use a combination of human
annotation and ML to speed up human annotation and improve the products of the
ML component. Rinse, wash hands, recur until 95% of predictions are 95%
accurate or better. Use ML to find the 5% of predictions that aren't up to
snuff and lay hands on them (this is the part where you have to pay people).
There is nothing shameful about including humans in the process.

~~~
braythwayt
Well, it just goes to show you, it's always something — if it ain't one thing,
it's another.

------
rgrieselhuber
Don’t they all?

~~~
btrautsc
this is the right response.

if you see an early stage company using "AI", then assume they are manually
doing most of the work right now.

They may have a clever way of making it smart in the future

------
rohan404
Disclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai

We actually wrote a blog post a little while ago that might answer a lot of
the questions I'm seeing here: [https://blog.engineer.ai/a-little-bit-about-
ai-and-more-stra...](https://blog.engineer.ai/a-little-bit-about-ai-and-more-
straight-from-the-builders-mouth/)

~~~
smt88
This post doesn't clear much up. The things you describe that are done by AI
sound like project bootstrappers, libraries, or code-gen (in an IDE). None of
those require "AI".

I just ran a tool that bootstrapped most of a CRUD app for me. Was it AI? No,
because the program I ran didn't do any app-specific coding.

My honest advice is to talk to a lawyer and get this company off your resume
ASAP.

------
uasm
I like where this is going. Almost daily now, we're seeing reports of "AI
startups/companies/products/features" getting unmasked. Technical people knew
it all along, but corporate-speak, prefabricated demos, half-baked products
and puff pieces were slowly inflating that bubble. Glad it's bursting.

------
PopeDotNinja
If I were using that company & found out after the fact that they were mostly
people, I might feel a little misled, but I also kind of wouldn't care. AI is
a hot buzzword, but what I really care about is can I input resources (time,
money, unpolished diamonds, whatever) in one end of your black box and get
predictable results out the other end. If the answer is yes, do whatever you
want (in an ethical manner). Whatever you're building, whether it's powered by
people, software, IBM Watson, or free range chickens pecking buttons for
treats, I'm happy if it works at a price I care to pay.

Until we've truly built self-replicating machines, I just assume whatever
you're selling me requires a lot of people to stay competitive anyway. There's
no farm-to-table AI raised by AI farmers yet.

------
xenadu02
Any language or system sufficiently detailed to accurately describe the steps
necessary to solve the problem turns into a programming language.

A very large number of companies have tried to automate software development
with little success.

What is supposed to make these folks special?

------
tiborsaas
Probably the AI part is in the configurator, at most spec generation.
Development is still done by humans.

[https://imgur.com/a/hlsALdj](https://imgur.com/a/hlsALdj)

So a fancy new SAP but with cheap consultants.

~~~
lawlessone
probably automated the selection of templates in Android Studio and xcode
,lol.

------
lazyjeff
I'm pretty sure we already all knew they were using humans 9 months ago. Take
a look at the comments here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18391280](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18391280)

It seems like they were fairly explicit about it, so I'm not sure if the
outrage is justified. komali2 even noted explicitly, "There doesn't appear to
be AI involved. A very good business model, but no AI."

------
jshowa3
VC funding needs to stop. It's a complete cancer on the software industry. All
this money going towards half-baked promises that are completely overvalued,
only to fund companies for decades that never turn a profit.

Maybe I'll hire an animator or something and go to VC firms and ask them for
money by showing them an animation of a new flashy product I've never
designed. Better than working an honest living it seems.

------
mandeepj
Similar approach used by a lot of self-proclaimed self-driving car companies.
They have a driver and an engineer in the front seats but can't stop from
saying we have self-drivings cars on the streets :-) .

Also, the same pattern with Cloud hosted companies. It might be true these
days but back in the day - a lot of them were claiming to be hosted in the
Cloud to look cool but actually, they were using colo data centers.

------
gumby
I was a going to register "soylent.ai" and put up a roll of shame but the ai
registrars charge an arm and a leg. Perhaps someone else will.

------
orf
> The company was sued earlier this year by its chief business officer, Robert
> Holdheim, who claims the company is exaggerating its AI abilities to get the
> funding it needed to actually work on the technology. According to Holdheim,
> Duggal “was telling investors that Engineer.ai was 80% done with developing
> a product that, in truth, he had barely even begun to develop.”

Ouch.

------
vagsmith
so if humans do it, is it called 'Organic Intelligence' which could then be
called 'Artisanal Intelligence' aka AI.

------
lordnacho
This reminds me of a couple of KYC companies, the ones that help you check a
user's passport and other docs.

They talk a lot about algos, then when they demoed it to me it comes out that
they actually send my picture to India for a human to look at. There's
literally 24h service with real people there doing the "image recognition".

------
KaoruAoiShiho
This is yet another black mark on softbank. Seriously? This should be day 1 of
DD for anyone looking into any AI companies.

------
sajan45
They contacted me for a Software Engineer position, 2 months back by them. I
checked Glassdoor review, majority of those are stating that CEO is not a
person you will like to work with and several of them saying it is just manual
labor, no AI, everything they market is fake. I am glad I trusted those
reviews.

------
caymanjim
The HN title is "AI startup that raised $30m claims to automate app making
just uses humans". That's a painful and confusing sentence. The real title is
"This AI startup claims to automate app making but actually just uses humans".
Can someone set a more grammatical and accurate title?

------
jacobsenscott
I'm happy we are starting to move on from all the AI hype and BS. Hopefully
some of that VC money will start shifting to something useful. Mitigating
climate change, or educating children, or feeding children ... Nah. Just
kidding. VCs just want to pretend they are Tony Stark.

------
sebringj
I was attempting something like this but the company paying me to do it lost
patience around 30 days where I was only able to identify widgets visually
from mockups from past training data. This was a nice step but going to know
what to do with those widgets contextually got pretty rough.

~~~
rightbyte
You had 30 days to do an automated website builder with visual input? How can
the stakeholders be that dellusional.

------
codeisawesome
Hmm, I met these folks in Lisbon late last year, at Web conference. They did
tell me it’s humans building, and their play was to build MVPs quickly with AI
APIs - which I thought was honest and useful. Of course, I’m not a VC :D

------
NieDzejkob
> The number of companies which include the .ai top-level domain from the
> British territory Anguilla has doubled in the last few years, the WSJ
> reports.

This sounds like some statistics manipulation. Why limit yourself to
Anguilla?!

~~~
jrahmy
Maybe you're joking, but .ai is the ccTLD for Anguilla. I don't think they
meant to imply the companies in question reside there.

------
iMage
I'm always amazed by the funds that companies manage to acquire from VCs
without a (developed) product. Having recently read _Bad Blood_ it's
horrifying to see how often similar situations arise.

------
mikeash
Did they update their web site? Because as it stands now, it’s clear that
they‘re a standard agency connecting developers to people who want work done,
with some vague stuff about AI helping to match them.

------
Inu
They already tried this kind of thing in the late 18th century:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turk)

------
hzia
At GitStart we use a global pool of devs and mentioned that upfront.

We have still deployed a ton of models to improve quality and SLAs, but
embrace our human nature upfront.

This is bad faith to the extreme.

------
qaq
People are very creative at spinning consulting shops as AI software something
or other to get a higher PE. The most prominent example being Palantir.

------
bit_4l
So they feed their AI with food instead of data

------
mic47
The automation they described sounds like automation of part of project
management. why they are not selling that? :-D

------
welder
Reminds me of Kite - AI Autocomplete and Docs for Programmers. Just always
s/ai/marketing/

------
RocketSyntax
So it's an "I" startup? Almost like you get more than you paid for, haha.

------
ljm
It’s not a lie if you think ‘artificial intelligence’ means ‘pretending to be
clever’

------
Wowfunhappy
Relevant xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/2173/](https://xkcd.com/2173/)

> "Yeah, I trained a neural net to sort the unlabeled photos into categories."
> [...] Engineering tip: when you do a task by hand, you can technically say
> you trained a neural net to do it.

------
m-p-3
They took "fake it till you make it" to another level.

------
paultopia
I mean, "do things that don't scale," amirite?

------
NicoJuicy
37 k. for an app and it uses AI.

Didn't got through the bullshit test :)

------
plexiglass
Wizard of Oz prototypes aren't meant to scale...

------
zomg
their investors should have clarified what the "A" in AI stood for -- actual
intelligence! :)

------
sbuccini
Is this securities fraud?

------
cartercole
i mean they need to generate a training set first right?

------
linker3000
[https://xkcd.com/2173/](https://xkcd.com/2173/)

------
sgt101
Anyone remember Spinvox :

[https://kernelmag.dailydot.com/features/report/2573/spinvox-...](https://kernelmag.dailydot.com/features/report/2573/spinvox-
the-shocking-allegations-in-full/)

My eyes popped open when I read who the author of this was ! Utterly Loathsome
- but apparently doing some journalism in 2012.

------
nordiccoder2
AI is the biggest fraud of the 21st century. Especially Deep Learning. Deep
Learning is a bubble that has no application in reality. And I mean NONE. Even
in cutting edge FAANG companies that claim to use modern AI techniques, Deep
Learning is barely used. Because it's simply not reliable enough for real
datasets. Classical statistical techniques, along with human domain expertise
are what runs the world. Not new-fangled hyped up stuff.

~~~
toxik
This is absurdly wrong, DL is used in industry all the time.

~~~
nordiccoder2
Show me one example where Deep Learning is used in production?

~~~
scotradamus
See my comment above. Image processing alone has saved millions of dollars in
engineering hours alone.

