Discussion Forums » New Topics
The march of Intelligent Automation
-
I believe this topc is one of the forthcoming big issues of our time. Does anyone else think so?
Interestingly there have been articles in the media recently about a basic wage for everyone, partly on the basis of automation replacing jobs.
Also over the weekend the Sunday Times business section had Bill Gates talking about taxing the robots. This happens to be one of my hobby horses i.e. back in the 60s we all thought computers were going to allow us all to work less hours by the time we got to this stage of our lives. In practice it has gone in the opposite direction with just the few benefitting. I have always thought that a small tax on every chip would have allowed us to make sure we all benefitted in some way and I think the same is true of automation and artificial intelligence.
There are clearly two schools of thought on this topic, those that think new types of job will arise to take ythe place of those automated and those that think jobs will be lost and not replaced. I'm of the school of thought that there will be a net loss of jobs which will need addressing.
Woudd anyone else like to join me in developing ideas on this subject? -
Tony,
I'm inclined to agree that AI will have far-reaching impacts on the workplace but don't subscribe to the view that this will necessarily result in job reduction. An excellent article here http://www.information-age.com/4-ways-get-personalisation-right-123461054/ reflects my view that AI will augment rather than replace leading to more productive, more competitive businesses. If you'd like to discuss further then why don't we meet at a local hostelry in the not-too-distant future.
Geoff
-
-
The article you have quoted is certainly about extending capability beyond what might be offered without advanced personalisation and therefore I don't think it is too likely to have too much of an impact on reducing jobs. In articles I have read recently estimates have been as high (and I'm quoting from memory here) as 41% of jobs potentially being at risk of being replaced (I think over the next 20 years). Insurance and Invoice processing being two of the quoted examples.
In fact just found this in the Sunday Times: 'Last month the research arm of McKinsey said 49% of workers' time could be handled by" currrently demonstrated technology".
When Bill Gates is suggesting a need for a levy on profits derived from automation or "directly in some sort of Robot Tax" then I think his awareness of technology impact has to be taken seriously.
Given the potential for putting millions out of work, which would be likely to leadi to social chaos, I think this definitely needs close examination to understand to what extent new jobs could balance loss of existing ones and what capability would be required for those presumambly higher value jobs and how/whether re-skilling could be achieved for those displaced.
Like the idea of discussing further at a hostelry. Dave the date and location are in the diary.
-
More in the Sunday Times this weekend on the topic of Aviva asking its 16,000 employees if their job could be better done by a robot, with anyone saying yes being retrained for anoyher role.
Other facts coming out were that Oxford Uni research warned that 35% of jobs in the UK were in danger of automation in the next 20 years. Another interesting snippet was the suggestion that many unskilled jobs can't be automated so if you moved someone down they would be very over qualified while if you need to move someone upyou need investment in skills and training.
Another interesting article was around Universal Basic Income (UBI) and Rutger Bregman's book 'Utopia for Realists' - interesting bits were: argument that poverty was expensive one study estimated cost of child poverty in US cost $500 bn but a UBI would only cost $178bn and UK study showed child poverty cost £78 bn. Other info quoted was India are thinking about it, Canada trying it out, Finland is trying it out and a trial is proposed in Glasgow. Also suggestion UBI is equally attractive to left and right and Nixon administration very nearly introduced it. Also question: wouldn't it result in surger in immigration if just one or two countries did it.
Also another article in Business section re Robots. Suggestion that alarm among Tech evangelists worrying that society isn't ready for large-scale automation. Advances in AI and robotics mean that once far off innovations e.g. driverless cars - suddenly are quite real. Also question is raised of how to handle people who no longer had jobs, how would they have meaning or dignity in their lives.
Although there are potentially huge issues in this, I think it is actually an opportunity to re-think what we want our society to be and use technology to get us there as long as everone benefits and everything we do is seen to be fair to every sector of our population.
This is clearly a discussion that is going to come increasingly to teh fore so definitely one for Probably42 to have as one of the Big Issues.
-
I can certainly see that many of the jobs that people do today can and will be replaced by some form of AI. What is more difficult to forsee is the type and scale of new jobs that will be created on the back of a more efficient economy. Figures aren't easy to come by, but in America in 1970 78m people were in work just as computerisation was beginning to bite with similar predictions of mass unemployment. By 2012 142m Americans were in work, many of them doing jobs that no-one could have forseen in 1970.
-
Agree that it is harder to see the job creation side of the equation but I think it is exactly the sort of thing we should be thinking through and trying to make sure we identify potential areas and make them happen. I can't say I've analysed it yet but my instinct is that this time it's different.
I guess my feeling is that there is at least a 50/50 chance of cauisng significant unemployment this time round and if not in the next 20 years then more probably in the next 50 years.
At the very least there will be a huge re-training cost associated with replaced jobs and potentially in a very short space of time. So it would be wise not to let it creep up on us. Government is in my view far too focused on short term and prone to kick the can down the road, so I think it needs good airing. In doing so we do need to look closely at both sides of the equation but I do also feel, because of its far reaching nature that it is a good opportunity to re-look at how we want to operate our society in the next 50 years.
Tony
-