Posted on 07/12/2016 5:11:29 AM PDT by expat_panama
Critics of automation are quick to cite a 2013 University of Oxford study which predicts that over the course of the next one to two decades, nearly fifty percent of jobs may be automated. Without context, those numbers certainly could trigger anxiety - and in fact they have. Thankfully, a new OECD-commissioned study has provided some much needed context. Its authors argue that the 2013 study may have overestimated the risk for automation of jobs as its underlying assumption was "that whole occupations rather than single job-tasks are automated by technology." Overall, when accounting for the "heterogeneity of workers' tasks within occupations," the new study finds that on average across the 21 OECD countries, only 9% of jobs are automatable.
Nonetheless, the anxiety over artificial intelligence (AI) will not dissipate, and has even gotten to some of the pioneers of the tech revolution. Recently Apple's Steve Wozniak has joined the ranks of those painting a gloomy picture for humans in the age of artificial intelligence. But it's a statement made by his late friend and business partner Steve Jobs more than 35 years ago that aptly encapsulates the promise of automation. It also alludes to why these worries are largely overblown. In a video presentation filmed in 1980, a young Steve Jobs explains technology and improving human efficiency in the context of "building tools that amplify a human ability." Technology does not replace the work of humans, it transforms it.
Yes, there could be some short term job losses associated with (though the more appropriate term would be the refocusing of human capital) - but we are a far cry from the doomsday scenarios outlined by automation skeptics. I say refocusing because technology won't automate 100% of a service sector job, but the day to day work may change. For example, today I work all day in front of a PC whereas 30 years ago my desk would only have a telephone on it.
Pointing to IBM's supercomputer Watson's handy defeat of two former Jeopardy superstars in 2011, economist Michael Jones acknowledges that machines are replicating human skills. However, he argues that focusing on technology's substitutionary role "fails to appreciate how it can be complementary. Job loss in some occupations will certainly continue," he says, "but it will be accompanied by gains in different fields, just as in the past."
Throughout history, we have seen Schumpeter's "perennial gale of creative destruction" at work. And while the term sounds harsh, it has always gone hand in hand with innovation, which "itself is the inventor of new forms of work," as one observer phrased it.
The new weaving frames vilified by the Luddites along with other technological advances of the Industrial Revolution ultimately helped usher in a new age of prosperity. The personal computer and the advent of the internet equally triggered fears of large-scale unemployment at the time. Society adapted, however, and the internet - a largely unknown quantity for most people a mere twenty years ago - has transformed the way we live and work and afford us with the luxury of greater productivity for less input.
In the context of this transformation, artificial intelligence is already enabling individuals to complete tasks with greater efficiency and accuracy. I am confident that we can reasonably expect that trend to continue.
What is true for science, also applies to business, where AI could function as an augmenter of many tasks performed by white collar workers, increasing productivity while generating new jobs in the process. Opportunity also lies in the medical field. Here, the speed at which artificially intelligent machines can process and sift through data may accelerate the decision making process and allow medical professionals to focus on interacting with the patients.
To some extent, Luddite reflexes are understandable. Initially rejecting what we do not know, and with that progress, may in fact constitute an inherent part of human nature. However, we know the Luddites were wrong in the 1900s. Chances are, their reasoning is misplaced today, too. Throughout history, embracing innovation has served us more than well. We should welcome Artificial Intelligence as the amplifier of human capacity that it is.
Sure. I’d like to believe that, and to some extent it is true. But at what point does it no longer remain true as robots become more generalized and able?
Ahhh, so this is a sales pitch.
Robot Bomb Repairman will certainly be a job of the future.
Dallas July 2016
Robots 1
Murderers 0
The skills needed to survive today are different from what they were pre-technology. They're more involved with the ability to follow directions and procedures. They're not about respecting the wisdom or lessons of the past. The Luddite in me says that this is not a path that will get us past the threat of destruction of civilization as we know it.
Robots will make some groups obsolete.
Until they can repair themselves.
--as long as I get to pick my overlord...
That may be a bit hard to quantify and back up. What I'm seeing is a heck of a lot more independent thought as the internet/info-age has replaced the ABC-NBC-CBS news sources that we all used to listen to.
If industrialization had, in fact, destroyed all those jobs and permanently put all those people out of work where would the customers be to buy the products of the machines? Same goes for modern robotics. If the government were to stay out of it all and the regulatory agencies would disappear with all their regulations and the onerous taxation of business were to go away we would see that the automation would proceed at a slower pace and the nature of work would shift and unemployment would decrease. The mechanization/automation frees up hands and minds to produce more and new things and services.
←This is what people think robots look like...
.. but in real life they look like this: ↓
 |
‘Technology does so much for us that we don’t need to think independently and be resourceful as much as our ancestors (and even us up to a few decades ago). Survival skills will pretty much die off when our generation is gone.’’
That makes me think of James Burke’s excellent series ‘Connections’. One theme of which is that over-reliance on technology always working as expected can be risky. A lesson that preppers seem to intuitively know.
gain the question- if automation steals all the jobs without replacement how do the companies that automate survive when there is no one who can afford to buy the product? How did we survive the original industrialization when all those weavers (and workers in the other trades) were replaced by machines?
For all practical purposes Google Search = Artificial Intelligence. It replaces a Super Human Librarian with access to a Super Duper Library.
Has that taken away some jobs? I’m betting it has. Are we better off? You betcha.
The fear of technological innovation putting all of us out of a job is foolishness in the extreme. No work = No Customers = No Business = Total Collapse of the Economy. Does anyone believe that could/would happen? Not me.
Bingo. We have a winner. Arden does not really have a job. A bot could certainly do the same thing. Nice bio. on your site.
He underestimates what AI will do eventually. The jackhammer replaced the sledge hammer but you still needed a human to operate it. We are close to the time when many manual jobs will be done by robots. Full disclosure, I taught computer engineering some years ago. It was getting weird even back then.
Robots in the near future will need a small number of “overseers” to manage them. Emphasis on small number.
Manning is also a really, really bad writer. The Luddites were active in the early 19th century, not the early 1900s as he states redundantly in his second sentence. The third sentence is just gibberish, and then he misuses the phrase “begs the question” in the fourth. All this in the opening paragraph, and the rest of the piece is not much better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.