This article is very interesting. I feel Carr brought up several good points about the balance of technology in a work/everyday environment. I looked up more information on the two flights he had mention the very first one did have an interesting detail in that apparently while the pilots were trying to get control of the plane and take it out of stall the computer inputted the correct way for the stick to be shifted yet it was the pilots who overruled its authority and forced it into another direction. In this case yes, their lack of training or perhaps lack of experience led them to the wrong and deadly outcome. In the second flight there is no doubt lack of experience led to the unfavorable outcome due to one of the pilots performing the completely wrong procedure while the other was performing the right procedure which further led to the planes eventual crash. There is without a doubt that proper training could have most likely led to these two tragic accidents never happening. And I do agree with his way of solving the issue that some scientists recommend.” You can put limits on the scope of automation, making sure that people working with computers perform challenging tasks rather than merely observing.” By working while the computer is working or being forced to perform the task for a certain amount of time can keep people when being put in these situations more confidence in dealing with the task if eventually the machine stops working or perhaps, they notice the machine is giving some wrong outputs. Knowledge in the long run can only help in these situations and those who leave certain tasks to machines eventually lose out on the knowledge they once had. I believe that improving the skill of the worker as well as the technology collectively is the way to go. Teaching the worker how this system works what tasks it performs for the worker would benefit said person but also constantly making the worker perform said tasks see how the outcome of his work compares to that of the machine and where he can improve teaches him that if this was to fail you can pick up the work easily so long as you work with the machine as opposed to the machine doing all the work. I do think in the eventual future technology will be the forefront of a lot of jobs. Yet at the same time humans provide certain care and uniqueness that no machine can replicate. Some tasks are preferred with technology while others I feel need humans as they can understand or perhaps show more compassion than a machine can. I will say this no machine has ever given me an extra drink or a complimentary item, extra toppings on my Starbucks drink. Even the automated response stuff when calling my bank is extremely annoying, I always prefer speaking to an actual person as we can get straight to the issue at hand. An alternative approach to this could be give the proper training or teach workers how to fix the machines when hiring. Although I do mention this it would require jobs to have much more stricter criteria when hiring candidates. Teaching each person on how to fix the machine would definitely lead to a lot more reliance on technology yet you can also enforce days of the week where the machines are turned off and physical labor must be performed to accomplish the task. Perhaps give each a worker X amount of hours the machine may be turned on and X amount of hours the machine must be off so that they can force workers to remember training, protocols, etc.