Please good sirs and ladies, may we get back to serious business and drop the exitespeak of Robotic Process Automation (here), as it’s all very nice you know an abbreviation but when there’s no substance behind it, drop it.
Why dweeb with ‘robots’ in an area where there’s no such thing?
The original demonstrate-once, repeat-indefinitely kind of ‘training’ (one size fits all, mostly) had to do with robots indeed, e.g., in factories where robots have been around for decades now and such guided ‘programming’ (hardly) was easy. Yes, that’s right, actual robots were around. For decades already so referring to that makes you an extreme laggard extraordinaire.
Now, however, the RPA thing is applied to pure algorithmic, doing-away-with-physical stuff. Not robots, eww! they’re things with grease and we only want to deal with nice GUIs. But still we want the ring of being Interesting with our jargon.
Simpletons. Just don’t.
Call it digitisation and you’re done. Or workflow pattern extraction or whatever. But leave the robots to the people that actually have an impact on the world.
At the very least, study this. And realise that the above, is in there – a lot [here].
And, unrelated to anything, this.
[Designed by not robots you … (censored), just humans with trivial tools – but then, designed: appropriately; Toronto]