As a college senior preparing for a business career in the ever technological world, I thoroughly enjoy – on both a personal and academic level – reading the latest edition of Fast Company. The April 2011 issue featured an article on the various capabilities of robots. My interest, however, was grabbed when exploring Fast Company’s website and stumbling upon another robot article containing the sentence, “ABB has made an effort to note it doesn’t see robots like Frida stealing jobs in the future…” This got me thinking about my future career: Will I be managing robots one day? Will robots eventually take my job?
The issue of robots and job security dates back beyond April 2011. Computer scientist and academic, Marshall Brain gave life to the conversation with many written works dedicated to the subject including an essay entitled Robot Nation in 2003. Throughout his essay he expresses the notion that robots will proliferate throughout the workplace and improve, ultimately replacing humans and rendering them unemployed.
Robots are nothing new either. When broadly defined robots can encompass anything from ATM machines that automate monetary transfers to vending machines that provide snacks. Society is use to and has already accepted these robots as part of its normal activity. What is not fully accepted are the robots used in the workplace – some worry about the jobs they may take away from humans who, especially in America, are already facing an unemployment rise.
Brain predicted that by 2030 robots will advance beyond the simple robotic arms used in today’s manufacturing to humanoid robots capable of all normal human functions and possibly more brain power. By 2055 he says over half the job force will be unemployed because of them.
Brain specifies the robot takeover as starting with the “kiosk and self-service systems,” which are easy and repetitive tasks such as carrying out transactions – at a gas station for instance. Agreeing with him are economist David Autor and David Dorn of the Center for Monetary and Fincial Studies in Madrid. As pointed out in a blog article by Amar Toor on Switched, they state that jobs more susceptible for replacement by machines involve “routine tasks.” This makes sense that simple repeatable actions are replaceable by a machine programmed specifically to complete such actions.
By replacing the jobs of the lower and lower-middle class, Toor foresees a resulting focus on education and skilled labor – something which he finds beneficial to society. While no one can dispute the benefits of a more knowledgeable population, capable of making better decisions and more discoveries, I would like to point out that the cost of education has been drastically rising with no sign of slowing down. In addition, many of the country’s schools are still reporting low-test scores. Combined, the high cost of education and the lack of its success thus far suggest that even with focus on education, a skilled labor force is unlikely to result.
Aaron Saenz from the tech blog Singularity Hub agrees that such job replacement can be beneficial when he notes that by freeing the labor force from mundane tasks, society can then divert more attention to larger more important issues such as solving the energy crisis. But similarly, if the recently unemployed population cannot be further educated then the benefit of having more time on their hands is mute.
An article on SmartPlanet reports that robots are currently being used in hospitals to replace certain tasks required of nurses, and the original Fast Company article I read elaborates on a robot that will follow an office worker around carrying out various tasks such as getting coffee. These examples move the discussion forward by showcasing how robots will not just replace the immobile, routine, factory jobs but also the mobile and more complicated jobs of other lower-end professions such as nurses and secretaries. An article in the New York Times a year ago reported a telepresence robot with sensory perception could allow a doctor, who is hundreds of miles away, to monitor a patient. This example hints at the possibility of doctors being replaced by robots in the future. Therefore, even some of the highest skilled jobs are at risk of the takeover. One might argue that humans will always be necessary to mange companies, however, I foresee it being very easy for robots to calculate the most optimal number of shirts to order for example, or the most efficient schedule for a catering shift. One might also suggest humans will always be needed to maintain these machines we created, yet coming back to Brain’s article it is clear he believes robots will be able to maintain themselves. He says robots will be able to transport, analyze and fix a broken comrade all with “no human intervention or supervision.” It may even be possible to have robots design robots, thus becoming self-sustaining and rendering humans unnecessary. In a world built on efficiency what is unnecessary is discarded.
Is this the actual reality humanity faces? Not likely. Revisiting some points suggests why the dismal future is unlikely. Robots are unlikely to replace the upper management jobs because of the flaws with data analysis. As hinted at previously, robots are basically appendage-bearing computer programs running mathematical equations. Such data analysis is limited to how the equation is set up as well as whether or not all the possible factors are accounted for. Pepsi illustrates this point: in a blind taste test the data proved that more people preferred Pepsi over Coke yet sales results suggested otherwise. This is because the analysis conducted failed to account for the quantity of liquid consumed, in which case Pepsi was preferred only in small quantities. Therefore, robots will need humans being that relying only on robot generated data may not always lead to the best solution to be carried out by the machine. Furthermore, robots cannot make decisions involving ethical dilemmas being that such situations cannot be mathematically translated into an equation. How can a robot know the repercussions on sales of the decision to dump waste at a landfill near a town?
Joanna Glasner’s Wired article also points out criticism of Brain’s argument when she cites a poster on the geek site Slashdot. The poster points out that robots will be held in check against overrunning the job market being that they are costly and if they were indeed over taking everyone’s job then there would be a reduction of spending, a reduction in company revenue and therefore a reduction in the company’s ability to invest in more robots.
Pessimists like Brain fail to realize the benefits of these machines. The online Fast Company article reminds us that robots are able to work 24 hours per day, won’t take sick days, won’t go on maternity leave, won’t be charged with sexual harassment in the workplace, and won’t ever go on strike. The article goes on to discuss how a newly invented robot is specially designed to work along side humans to support their needs and improve their efficiency on an assembly line rather than take over their jobs. It further points out that machines can be used when dealing with heavy objects or harsh chemicals, and thus, are making the workplace safer for humans.
Even though Brain introduces several good points warning of the takeover of human jobs by robots and even though other bloggers along with myself agree with many of his points, the benefits of a robotic addition to the work force are too vital to be ignored – especially when these machines can help to save a person’s life (reference the two medical examples I gave previously). This is not even the first time that technological advancements have taken away jobs: the industrial revolution’s manufacturing practices left many artisans and craftsmen jobless yet not everyone is jobless today nor is everything manufactured in a city factory. Humans were creative enough to invent these machines, they will be creative to invent a way to co-exist.
As such, I am certain that I will be dealing with robots in my future career and given my adaptability beyond what I was pre-programmed to do along with my ethical compass I am certain that I will be managing robots at some point in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment