Digital innovation, impact of artificial intelligence, AI Artificial Intelligence, automation on jobs, automation on economy, robotics, IBM Watson, Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking
While it is certain that AI and robotics are already automating low-skilled jobs such as the job of the cashier, the argument of the article displays a dystopian and technological determinist point of view. The idea is that AI will destroy more jobs than it creates and that robots might take over the world. I disagree with the article's argument, because technological progress in AI can create new jobs, free up time and cash for humans and be a powerful productivity tool. However, as AI will likely destroy the middle class white-collar jobs, it might increase the inequality between the high income/well-educated classes and the rest of the population. In fact, AI tends to create high-skilled jobs in IT and professional services.
[...] This brings a good boost in consumption to the economy and can therefore help increase production of goods and services, which creates new jobs. The issue is that as these jobs are higher-skilled, they require university degrees. Quality higher education is not accessible to all, in terms of finance and skills. This might widen the inequalities between the middle- class and the rich. Investment in education is therefore crucial, as the digitalisation of the workplace creates the necessity of a higher-skilled workforce. Another reason why robots and A.I. [...]
[...] ROSS, powered by IBM Watson, can determine whether a legal statement is true or not, and answer questions asked in natural language. It can accelerate legal research, and keep lawyers up to date with the latest cases and updates on the legal system. However, ROSS and other A.I. devices alike can't and will never have the creativity of a human mind, and the legal research must be approved by a human lawyer, as bugs may always arise. When it comes to creating legal arguments, A.I. [...]
[...] Also, the increasing use of technology might allow us to work less and have more time for leisure and human development. If the routine tasks are executed by machines, the workers will then focus more on the human side of their jobs, for instance meetings with clients and eventually have fewer things to do. The Daily Mail article mentions the TV series Humans, in which humans work much less and have more time for leisure due to the omnipresence of robots at work. [...]
[...] Electric cars are very beneficial for humanity, in a way that they don't produce any GHG emissions and could be one of the key ways to fight climate change. A.I. would have to be carefully regulated, as it might be used for instance by the military. But saying that it might “spell the end of the human race” (Stephen Hawking) sounds like an overly pessimistic vision of the future. Sources • Autor David H. (2016). Why are there still so many jobs? [...]
[...] create jobs is that human intelligence and A.I. are often complementary: as ATM machines were increasingly being used by banks, people thought bank tellers would lose their jobs. However, the number of bank tellers in the US rose from 500,000 to 550,000 from 1980 to 2010 despite the introduction of ATMs (Autor, 2015). The routine cash handling tasks were executed by ATMs, and it enabled bank tellers to become active in “relationship banking”, selling customers additional services such as loans, credit cards, investment products. [...]
using our reader.