Intelligent Manufacturing, Or We Should Talk More About "Manufacturing", And Talk Less About "Intelligence".

"Intelligent manufacturing" itself has been completely alienated by public opinion.

Attributive "intelligence" two characters, strangely become the biggest protagonist and fun, and "manufacturing" itself becomes a supporting role.

Manufacturing is making, not always being led.

Last year, "Internet +" was once regarded as a panacea for "intelligent manufacturing".

After a period of quarrel, practice and precipitation, the integration of "manufacturing + Internet" has just made a positive result.

It looks like a reversal of the order of a word, but behind the different interests of the group is the struggle for the right to speak.

This year, with the emergence of "Ai" in the government's report, "AI2.0+ manufacturing" appears to be in the arena again.

This is 2025 of China's manufacturing, I am afraid it is an involuntary shaking.

"Intelligent manufacturing" itself has been completely alienated by public opinion.

Attributive "intelligence" two characters, strangely become the biggest protagonist and fun, and "manufacturing" itself becomes a supporting role.

In this case, the introduction of "AI2.0" only encourages the already heated "intelligence".

Should we call it "artificial intelligence manufacturing"? Let "manufacturing" simply become a "third role" directly.

Can AI2.0 really lead smart manufacturing?

Even Watson, IBM, is now facing a lot of problems.

Watson is working with SIEMENS in supporting the industry.

Only playing the algorithm will not understand the industry.

We always like to use Google's AlphaGo example to illustrate how fast AI can run, but how much it has to do with manufacturing.

We hardly have any examples of how AlphaGo has made progress in the industry.

To put it plainly, it was just a show.

For manufacturing, robots and big data are bubbles that are blowing and floating. Artificial intelligence is rising.

If these bubbles are blown together by the market and investors, the government will enjoy its success. However, if the government spends too much on this technology, intelligent manufacturing is bound to go astray. This "intelligent" overheating manufacturing will be a tragedy for the manufacturing industry.

Why does manufacturing need to be led by ICT? Manufacturing is manufacturing, and it is itself.

No need to use various avant garde flags to confuse the public.

Robots and manufacturing have almost become the mainstream of our intelligent manufacturing. The slogan "machine substitutions" has been popular in the past two years, but now it has become too fast to become a bad word nobody wants to mention.

Robots can't lead manufacturing, but we need to look at our national conditions.

After the introduction of the robot national strategy in January 2015, Japan unswerve to integrate robots with the Internet of things and manufacture closely with Japan.

That's for a reason. Japan is already the most powerful robot power in the world. Borrowing its advantages is a good thing to do. However, the three key components of Chinese robots are not yet able to break through. When the open source robot system and software are backward, the relationship between robots and manufacturing will eventually be reduced to "China is the biggest market for robots".

At the China robot summit held in Yuyao, Zhejiang, Kevin Kelly, the American prophet who had been collecting fees in China, gave us a reminder from the side.

He believes that on the basis of existing technology, the first area that AI affects should be the financial sector, and this impact has already started and the other is retail.

。

Perhaps Kevin Kelly did not understand manufacturing, but he should not see such signs in the United States.

It is a problem that the industry needs to cope with at present.

Instead of doing the great thing that the language is not amazing, it is going to sink some of the breakthroughs that nobody knows in the cold window for ten years.

Intelligent manufacture of valve overheating

Intelligent manufacturing is overheating, and is evolving into a non market driven profit seeking behavior.

In this regard, a number of different ambitions have been integrated, including the addition of novelty elements, easy understanding, easy to "speak the level", the need for demonstration projects and quick inspection of leaders.

What is important is that intelligent manufacturing has become the main public opinion and the main focus of "made in China 2025". It is a universal favor -- whether it is capital investment, government actions at all levels or policy research institutions, which will be very unfavorable to the development of 2025.

The smart manufacturing regulator is too high for China's industry to be extremely unbalanced.

China's industry is a super melting pot. There are very different kinds of rice in raw rice and cooked rice.

The common problem is the indifference of industrial ideology, the weakness of the four base project and the poor manufacturing process.

These problems are not "intelligent" matters.

But it is the foundation of Chinese industry that can really be "powerful".

I went to Fengcheng, Shenyang to inspect turbocharger industrial cluster the other day.

This Phoenix turbocharged industrial area at the foot of Phoenix Mountain shows the vitality of the dragon tiger.

Many enterprises have made technological pformation, technological improvement and horizontal cooperation.

Two of them can see the shadow of the "invisible champion" in Germany.

However, in terms of "intelligent manufacturing", it is almost "motionless".

Taking production mode as an example, the problem of equipment numerical control has been basically solved, but automation is at the stage of coming.

And information is hardly nurtured, and data analysis is missing.

As for industrial ideology and strategic consciousness, it is basically in the stage of spontaneous growth of private enterprises.

The gap is quite small.

Lean is only a bit of shadow, and sporadic 5S Kanban is hung in every workshop.

If the wind of intelligent manufacturing can not better support such a dynamic "supercharger capital" - Fengcheng, we can only say that our "intelligent manufacturing" regulation is too high.

There are hundreds of enterprises here, each of which has more or less dozens of employees - they are a shining banner under the declining industrial situation in Northeast China.

"Spring breeze does not go to Lantau Peak", that is, spring breeze does not know the door of the people, and the "intelligent manufacturing" should not only be hovering over a few enterprises.

In the US advanced manufacturing partnership plan for the future, the national manufacturing innovation network is an important part.

However, from the perspective of its distribution, most of the 14 innovation centers are related to materials, processes, electronics, and digital manufacturing and intelligent manufacturing.

And even the "intelligent manufacturing platform" emphasizes energy efficiency and public platform issues.

In this way, AI is not lined up.

Think about it. If Google and FaceBook can do AI, why Uncle Sam?

Talking less about intelligence and talking more about manufacturing is especially important for China's manufacturing of 2025.

Making China the 2025 is the first step in the stage of strong power, and is only the first step.

For intelligence, it is not too late to focus on 2035.

China now seems to focus on the manufacturing pformation of intelligent manufacturing.

However, most enterprises in China do not even explore digital manufacturing. If we talk about intelligent manufacturing, China will easily enter a "fog array".

"Intelligent manufacturing is the main battlefield of 2025", and this choice is too optimistic.

This will mislead China to create 2025 of the good weather.

There is no version theory in intelligent manufacturing.

More and more practice and public opinion show that industry 4 can be regarded as the most powerful national marketing tool in Germany.

I was very vigilant about it three years ago.

At least now, most people have begun to distinguish between "industrial 4" and the "fourth industrial revolution".

It is difficult to give a convincing conclusion if we strictly examine industrial 4 from the historical stage of industrial development.

It looks more like a version concept, but a dogmatic "industrial history" idea, is a historical stage theory.

If this is understood, there will inevitably be a theory of making up lessons.

Therefore, the "2 industry complement", "industrial 3 popularization and industrial 4 demonstration" will appear.

This statement is an instinctive stress response to the thinking of "4 industry history".