> Ah yes, "groundbreaking collaboration between humans and computers", which in this case actually means "pay a human below minimum wage to type numbers on a keyboard".
I agree that this is marketing speech (which is a reality of any business selling a product), but you implied that their operation is human-powered with only the illusion of machine interaction, which you go onto confirm:
> Gotta love corporate marketing speak. The only thing that would make this even more ridiculous is if Captricity claimed they were using the mystical "machine learning" too. Hmm, let's check their website.
If you had bothered to read the site you linked (or if you knew what OCR stands for), you'd understand that there is machine learning at play here, and not just for chunking up the documents. You made empty speculations about a company's technology for the sole purpose of denigrating them.
You might think this is splitting hairs, but these sardonic swipes lower the bar of intellectual discourse on this forum. It's OK to speculate about the technology in play, but not when you're insinuating that it's essentially fraudulent with absolutely zero evidence.