
CURATION JOBS Not LIKELY TO BE COMPUTERIZED - db-ninja
http://www.curationjunkie.com/2017/01/14/curation-jobs-not-likely-computerized/
======
endswapper
I took the bait because the title seemed counterintuitive, or perhaps my eyes
delighted over the caps.

Bait indeed.

The post is horrible because it lacks information, it's dated and at this
point it's irrelevant.

Curation jobs will be highly automated, and soon. Machine learning and AI will
make computers better at curation jobs. And they may already be better.

The long winded DJ example was pointless. Plenty of music streaming and other
services for fashion, food, etc. use computers to curate.

Lame.

~~~
gus_massa
I agree, but the comment would have been better without the "lame" at the end.

From
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

> _In Comments_

> _Be civil. Don 't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face
> conversation. Avoid gratuitous negativity._

> _When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names.
> E.g. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2,
> not 3."_

~~~
endswapper
You appear to be assuming a negative, perhaps juvenile connotation, of my
usage of the word.

My intention wasn't to be negative, gratuitously, or otherwise. And I wasn't
calling names.

I stand by the sentiment, unconvincingly feeble.

lame[0] lām adjective 2\. (of an explanation or excuse) unconvincingly feeble.

[0]
[https://www.google.com/search?q=lame](https://www.google.com/search?q=lame)

