I understand your desire to do responsible science, but do you worry that putting robots into society could impact the job market?
Phew! What a question. I can answer simply by saying I think about it all the time and none of the time. I spend plenty of idle thinking about how to automate systems to make them better. Case in point: Subways. Apparently, NYC has computer-controlled subways. That's the way it should be. With such a constrained system, there is absolutely no need for a human operator. In Boston, the Red, Blue, and Orange Lines could be this way. The light rail sections of the Green Line still need a strongly reasoning mind to ensure that they don't mangle a pedestrian
But now I've just said that I have no problems displacing all MBTA workers that operate the trains for the T. What happens when their jobs disappear? Obviously, the new systems will need maintenance, which is one possibility, but if you have as many people to maintain the system as you displaced, then you really have done anyone any good now have you?
Everyday, when I stare out my window or walk down the street, I look at what people are doing and wonder if that task could be automated. Sometimes, I think it can. Garbage trucks, buses, tractors, and the like. What are the things that I have difficulty believing will be automated anytime soon? Plumbers, electricians, etc. So what is the difference? Skilled vs. unskilled labor. Any type of unskilled labor is ripe for automation -- apparently it is already happening with migrant worker tasks: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/06/robo_picker, but skilled labor requires just that, skill. But it isn't the raw skill itself that is the issue -- build a robot to fix wires or pipes? No problem. The issue is the context in which they operate. You have to have the robot go in and determine the best course of action, where to drill that hole, run that cable, etc. which is not easy to do and isn't the same for every job. Does that make it impossible? No. But the advancements needed for this are beyond simple mechanical systems and an algorithmic knowledge of your surroundings. I could see a robot being given a very specific task involving plumbing, but then someone has to decide that task, so why don't they just do it themselves? Perhaps you could have a robot plumber manager that deals with many of the robots, so as to boost efficiency.
What am I saying? Pretty much that most or all unskilled labor is going to disappear in the near (~100 years) future. Make sure you have that diploma right?
But wait! If we have people doing all these skilled tasks, eventually our robots will become better and better. Soon, those skilled positions will start to get gobbled up. As the skilled labor disappears, what are we left with? If robots can design new robots to do more advanced things based upon their own set of principles, then where does it stop? Eventually, everything is society may become automated. Why are there farmers? Simply because they love farming, not because there is any serious need. When this happens what is left? Maybe people all just work in the dirty financial industry trying to make more money on the robots. But it seems that would dry up in an automated society. Perhaps construction or architecture will still need to be done by humans, but I can imagine that robots will be able to handle all of that as well. Those decisions about where to drill, etc. become moot if the building was initially constructed by robots, as that will all have had to been decided beforehand. Ultimately, humans become obsolete. We remove our own "need" for existence. What do we do? We enjoy life. Maybe some people will have to be employed to fix robots that break (think recursively and you'll realize something besides a robot has to repair a robot at some point...or else you just manufacture a new robot to replace the old one).
There is one thing that I can't imagine being automated, as it is purely human, and that is art. Sure you might have a machine compose and play a piece of music (some would say that is the state of a large part of classical music these days), but it is fundamentally lacking the one reason for the existence of art: emotion. You can try to say art exists for any other reason, but it doesn't. All art evokes emotion. The emotions evoked are what tell us what music we don't like, why we hate a building, etc. If we somehow manage to replicate the human brain and create a truly emotional robot, then perhaps we'll have something. Otherwise, the world will descend into dystopia. It is hard to do nothing. To justify the act of doing nothing. Perhaps not.
So am I worried about the potential ramifications of what I do? Yes. At the same time, I think they will be more of a benefit than a hindrance to society. Will all of the above come true? No. I don't think it will ever get that far. There will always be a spoon.
or TBone a car that runs a red light (not that that would necessarily be bad, teach someone a
lesson really). And actually, given proper sensors and a little reasoning, it could be done. I'd
say it would cost $20,000 per train to be able to make them completely automated, plus cost
for infrastructure changes necessary for making the trains able to know what color the light
is without using a camera just a wireless method really. Give me $5 million and I'll make it
happen and pay back the money that I didn't need (minus a decent sum for my labors of course).
lesson really). And actually, given proper sensors and a little reasoning, it could be done. I'd
say it would cost $20,000 per train to be able to make them completely automated, plus cost
for infrastructure changes necessary for making the trains able to know what color the light
is without using a camera just a wireless method really. Give me $5 million and I'll make it
happen and pay back the money that I didn't need (minus a decent sum for my labors of course).
But now I've just said that I have no problems displacing all MBTA workers that operate the trains for the T. What happens when their jobs disappear? Obviously, the new systems will need maintenance, which is one possibility, but if you have as many people to maintain the system as you displaced, then you really have done anyone any good now have you?
Everyday, when I stare out my window or walk down the street, I look at what people are doing and wonder if that task could be automated. Sometimes, I think it can. Garbage trucks, buses, tractors, and the like. What are the things that I have difficulty believing will be automated anytime soon? Plumbers, electricians, etc. So what is the difference? Skilled vs. unskilled labor. Any type of unskilled labor is ripe for automation -- apparently it is already happening with migrant worker tasks: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/06/robo_picker, but skilled labor requires just that, skill. But it isn't the raw skill itself that is the issue -- build a robot to fix wires or pipes? No problem. The issue is the context in which they operate. You have to have the robot go in and determine the best course of action, where to drill that hole, run that cable, etc. which is not easy to do and isn't the same for every job. Does that make it impossible? No. But the advancements needed for this are beyond simple mechanical systems and an algorithmic knowledge of your surroundings. I could see a robot being given a very specific task involving plumbing, but then someone has to decide that task, so why don't they just do it themselves? Perhaps you could have a robot plumber manager that deals with many of the robots, so as to boost efficiency.
What am I saying? Pretty much that most or all unskilled labor is going to disappear in the near (~100 years) future. Make sure you have that diploma right?
But wait! If we have people doing all these skilled tasks, eventually our robots will become better and better. Soon, those skilled positions will start to get gobbled up. As the skilled labor disappears, what are we left with? If robots can design new robots to do more advanced things based upon their own set of principles, then where does it stop? Eventually, everything is society may become automated. Why are there farmers? Simply because they love farming, not because there is any serious need. When this happens what is left? Maybe people all just work in the dirty financial industry trying to make more money on the robots. But it seems that would dry up in an automated society. Perhaps construction or architecture will still need to be done by humans, but I can imagine that robots will be able to handle all of that as well. Those decisions about where to drill, etc. become moot if the building was initially constructed by robots, as that will all have had to been decided beforehand. Ultimately, humans become obsolete. We remove our own "need" for existence. What do we do? We enjoy life. Maybe some people will have to be employed to fix robots that break (think recursively and you'll realize something besides a robot has to repair a robot at some point...or else you just manufacture a new robot to replace the old one).
There is one thing that I can't imagine being automated, as it is purely human, and that is art. Sure you might have a machine compose and play a piece of music (some would say that is the state of a large part of classical music these days), but it is fundamentally lacking the one reason for the existence of art: emotion. You can try to say art exists for any other reason, but it doesn't. All art evokes emotion. The emotions evoked are what tell us what music we don't like, why we hate a building, etc. If we somehow manage to replicate the human brain and create a truly emotional robot, then perhaps we'll have something. Otherwise, the world will descend into dystopia. It is hard to do nothing. To justify the act of doing nothing. Perhaps not.
So am I worried about the potential ramifications of what I do? Yes. At the same time, I think they will be more of a benefit than a hindrance to society. Will all of the above come true? No. I don't think it will ever get that far. There will always be a spoon.
No comments:
Post a Comment