I had to read the article just to parse the title. Each noun in the sentence has at least two different interpretations, and the choice of verbs is poor imo (but maybe [title] English has evolved over 25 years). If you don't know that this is about tennis <i>and</i> that there is a Cyclops product in that market, you'll probably be lost.<p>Translation for those who don't want to read an entire article just to reconstruct the meaning of the title:<p>Context: Tennis<p>Cyclops ("the 'magic eye' service-line machine) is no longer the only machine helping with tennis rulings. A new machine can now determine if the tennis ball touches the net during the serve.<p>This does not replace the umpire (who now operates this machine via a button), but only another person (the net cord judge) who would have to sit close to the net, in danger of being hit by 100+ mph shots.
For some reason, that made me think of a concept I thought about when I was 19: a Brazil-like, future dystopian company that had only AI management and AI work assets maintained by a small cadre of human workers to keep it going. There would be no human customer service in the AVR tree, and it could only be contacted by fax, email, and back then, snail mail.<p>It makes one wonder when the first essentially fully-autonomous corporation will come online (not named Cyberdyne).<p>The net cord judge doesn't seem a huge deal, but it does take away jobs.