ROBOTICS AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYMENT (proposal to address massive unemployment) MARIA NEGREPONTI-DELIVANIS*
ROBOTICS AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYMENT
MARIA NEGREPONTI-DELIVANIS*
ABSTRACT
The
invasion of robots and Artificial Intelligence in human societies is
accompanied by a radical upheaval of everyday elements, not always for the
best. Robots, as human helpers, relieve him of heavy labor and provide him with
free time for leisure and entertainment. At the same time however, apart from
helpers, robots substitute human labor on an ever-wider scale, in increasingly
difficult and demanding specialties. In order to prevent the creation of 1/10
societies in the future, with massive unemployment and a few billionaires
owning the robots, timely action is needed. Since the wealth generated by
robots belongs to the whole of mankind as the product of the evolution of human
knowledge, a more equitable distribution should be ensured. The evolution of
Artificial Intelligence, however, creates other unprecedented risks stemming
from the finding that, in many cases, robot capabilities and actions exceed the
limits of human teaching. Therefore, the future use of robots should proceed
with caution and with the strong presence of the state which should strive to
substitute the unfavorable consequences of widespread use of robots with
welfare services.
Keywords: robot, artificial intelligence, human communication with robots, post-industrial society, equitable distribution, new technologies and democracy
Keywords: robot, artificial intelligence, human communication with robots, post-industrial society, equitable distribution, new technologies and democracy
INTRODUCTION
The invasion of robots and Artificial Intelligence is
predicted to radically change our everyday life. New technologies, which in
many cases already apply on a relatively large scale, bring revolutionary
changes on all levels. The main problem of the dominant economic theory is its
inability to interpret the way they operate. It could be argued that the
initial post-industrial stage has come to an end, and a new stage of capitalist
development is rising, into the international economic front, through the old
one, namely the stage of automation. The agonizing question logically put
forward here, is whether these radical changes to society and the economy will
be for the best or the worse. The easy and quick answer would be that they
will be for the best, as these new technologies are expected to considerably
relieve mankind from routine and heavy work. The human race could therefore
free up time to engage in what it most prefers, and could not previously
extensively enjoy.
It is clear,
however, that this answer perceives robots as human associates and not as
substitutes. However, the danger that a large and increasing part of the
activities of the new technologies will not simply co-operate with man but will
replace and even threaten him, is visible and perhaps already present. This is
why it unfortunately seems that these optimistic predictions are not absolutely
realistic. On the contrary, what is already happening, and what is certainly
about to happen in this field seems to justify the pessimists. The major
threat of automation for human societies, is the creation of uncontrollable
technological unemployment, accompanied by a worsening of the already
unacceptable inequality of income and wealth distribution, unless the necessary
measures are taken to counteract it.
In addition to
the impact of new technologies on employment, on which the quality of life as
well as mankind’s survival depend, new technologies include other risks that
refer to dangerous and undesirable changes in behavior, choices and human psychology
(Brooks (2017). There seems to be a new human species
which spends endless hours of each day on "smart phones", which
rarely goes out with friends, which is better informed than in the past but has
no time and especially no interest in thinking, analyzing and going to the
bottom of things and which presents frequent and sometimes dangerous depression
tendencies. This is a transition from too many working hours to the work of
"smart phone".
In the following
three paragraphs, I will first address the content and consequences of new
technologies on employment, secondly the content of Artificial Intelligence and
its threats to humanity, and thirdly, I will propose a solution for the
problem of unemployment and some of the other visible risks, which I have been
supporting for a long time.
I. THE CONTENT AND IMPACT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES
A. What Are Robots And How They Were Created
Robotics has been born through the advancement of many
technologies, with the result that robots were initially able to distinguish
objects, move them, imitate simple human movements, learn simple skills, work
as a team, and with other robots. Up to this point, robots would represent
valuable human assistants, would free up time and allow man to work less hours
and enjoy more time for leisure, personal development and entertainment, while
the robots would be totally dependent on him.
This was
exactly what happened initially, and these
expectations were, obviously, the basis of the original idea behind their creation. Over time however, the
robot's evolution became almost uncontrollable. That is why it is almost naive
now to refer to robots exclusively as assistants. This is because it is no
longer possible for man to be sure that when he leaves the robots alone
in the evening, he will find them in the same state in the morning. No matter
how unbelievable, the newest developments in the field of robotics prove that,
after a critical learning limit, human teaching is no longer enough for the
robots, who proceed to develop their knowledge by teaching each other. The
most striking but also the most scary fact is that robots converse in a
language that is inaccessible to humans.
The
simplistic interpretation of the method used for the achievements of robotics
is, by analogy, imitation of the function of the human brain. The learning
method is based on the repetition of a large number of data, such as images,
voice, credit cards, which have been fine-tuned over time, ensuring almost 100%
successful results. Robot programs are based on algorithms that are customized
and constantly refined by dedicated scientists sought out by the major
platforms of Facebook, Google, IBM, Alibaba, Tencent, etc. The latter invest
huge amounts of money in robotics and ferociously compete with each other to
conquer the robotics market, promising huge profits.
B. The Basic Theoretical Problems Of New Technologies
a) Measurement of labor and capital productivity
a) Measurement of labor and capital productivity
An important and unresolved problem at present is the
inability to measure the productivity of the two key factors of production,
labor and capital. This is because, in this new stage of capitalist evolution,
the importance of both main factors of production, labor and capital is
decreasing and a third, or even fourth production factor emerges, if land is
taken into account. This new factor of production is automation which embodies
the ultimate form of innovation, and promises significant profits in the
future. These profits are no longer predicted to favor capital, in its
classical form, nor labor, both of which represent traditional factors of
production. On the other hand, a small group with new ideas, innovative and
creator of new products, new services and new business models, is
emerging and imposing itself as the beneficiary of these significant profits.
The mode of distribution, thus set for the future, is that of the well-known
Pareto curve, in which a small number of players earn a disproportionately
large portion of the profits (Brynjolfsson et al, 2014). This new
factor is innovative ideas, which are more scarce than work, but also than
traditional capital. Ultimately, however, innovative ideas can also be
perceived as a form of special capital whose increased remuneration will
continuously reduce the share of labor in GDP.
b) Measuring total productivity
Difficulties arise, however, not only in the calculation
of the productivity of the two main traditional factors of production but also
in the assessment of total productivity in this new evolutionary stage of
capitalism.
Thus, M.
Kalecki's (Robinson et al, 1977)
predictions are justified, according to which, contrary to the second
industrial revolution which was accompanied by a more equitable income
distribution necessary for the absorption of mass production, the third stage
of the capitalist process has caused unemployment and poverty in humanity. A few
years ago there was talk of a 2/3 society, and the healthy reaction was that it
should be avoided in every way. The society, however, that is now expected,
is at risk of being 1/10, which represents a hellish future for most.
The difficulty of
measuring overall productivity resulting from this new form of technical
progress is due to the fact that it concerns qualitative rather than
quantitative data (Gordon, 2016). Obviously,
mobile phones, the internet, decreasing computer prices, etc. are in the
interest of consumers, but they do not increase GDP, in accordance to Solow's
paradox which has become the focus of numerous interpretive efforts on what
might be happening at the AI stage, and one may explain the fact that it
results in low productivity.
Indeed, although
companies invest astronomical amounts in robotics, productivity growth is
steadily decreasing. According to Jean-Hervé Lorenzi, chairman of the Economics
Cycle: "Everywhere in Europe, the US and China, productivity gains are
divided by two over a decade (Robert 2016)." In the
United States, the annual productivity growth rate was 3% for the 1920-1970
period, 1.8% for the 1970-2006 period and 0.9% for the last decade (Mathieu, 2017). But without increasing productivity there is no
growth.
C) The Effects On Employment
Regarding the effects of robotics on employment and on
income and wealth distribution, there are optimists and pessimists. Both
categories agree on the following:
-first that full-time employment is ultimately a thing of the past, and
-second, that globalization has already created a situation with a few winners and many losers.
-first that full-time employment is ultimately a thing of the past, and
-second, that globalization has already created a situation with a few winners and many losers.
I will argue here that the difference between the
optimists and pessimists mainly refers to their respective time frame. More
precisely, the optimists believe that robots will always be people's helpers
and will depend on them, while possible problems relate to the distant future,
while pessimists see further at a time when robots will be substitutes for
human labor and will have surpassed human intelligence.
a) The optimistic version- Robots as human aids
a) The optimistic version- Robots as human aids
Scientists, in the optimistic category (better
qualified as less pessimistic), argue that the major problems for workers will not be pressing for the next ten years.
They also hope that they will be able to deal with them in time. This relative
optimism was expressed in an early study[1] by
the Mc Kinsey Institute. It questions the very pessimistic conclusions of a
previous study according to which 47% of employment is
in danger of being automated (Rus 2015) In principle, the McKinsey study also
supports that 49% of working time can be substituted by automation. The
optimism, however, of these studies lies in the assumption that the future of
employment will not only be determined by what is technologically possible but
also by other factors. The McKinsey study e.g., states that cars with no driver
are expected to abolish the employment of 1.7 million truck drivers. However,
the replacement of the trucks will require an investment of one trillion
dollars, and it is expected to take time. Excessive optimism seems to be
justified by similar developments in the past that did not verify pessimistic
predictions, including those by John Maynard Keynes, 80 years ago. Keynes then
referred to a "new epidemic", which he named "technological
under-employment," and which fortunately did not materialize.
An additional
problem, resulting from the massive substitution of workers by robots, is the
drastic reduction of government tax revenue. There are thoughts that robots
should be taxed as normal human workers. Optimists, regarding the impact of robots on
our lives, highlight the side of the help that they will provide to humans,
arguing
that
robots will replace personal computers.
One of the most important robot services is unmanned
cars, which are expected to reach consumers by 2020, limiting the circulation
of traditional cars by about 80%, greatly reducing the duration of trips, as
well as atmospheric pollution (Rus, 2015). Robots are
also predicted to offer significant services to housewives in transporting
their groceries. More precisely, in the housewife's help area, a robot, named
GITA (The Economist, 2017), will follow its owner on the way back from the
supermarket, laden with the latter’s shopping and communicating with him when
needed. Automated airplanes are furthermore being planned for the US Air Force,
with a system designed to reduce the relative cost of each aircraft by $800,000
(The Economist, 2016). The activities,
which are predicted to be mostly affected by robots as human assistants, are
shipping, medicine, hospitals and the war industry (Fitzpatrick, 2016).
b) The pessimistic version of robots as substitutes
for human labor
Unfortunately,
the optimistic outlook concerning the impact of robotics on employment has
proven to be utopian and has never materialized. Robots did not
come to help, but to replace human labor, and not only. Substitution of human
labor by robots is progressing in many sectors at an accelerated pace, and it
is burdening the already difficult situation prevailing in advanced economies,
where the form of full-time employment accounts for an ever-lower percentage of
the total, to the benefit of informal work. In 2013, robots were used on a
global basis at around 1.2 million. In 2015, their number reached 1.6 million
and is projected to reach 2.6 million in 2019.
Their
capabilities are improved and multiplied by astronomical speed, conquering
human skills in rapid succession, even those considered the most difficult and
complex. Even worse, in many cases robots prove to be more "able" and
more "endowed" than humans.
Following are a few references and examples on the
substitution process of humans by robots:
aa) Those already happening
Unfortunately optimism is dramatically overruled on a
daily basis, as evidenced by the few, if any, following references:
* Note that already today, 101 robots are used for
every 10,000 employees.
* In the first place, I choose in particular a recent announcement referring to a large hospital bed manufacturing facility in Prague, Czech Republic, with exports all over the world (Adelman, 2018). This company, Linet, was unable to secure workers despite offering higher wages[2] and had to resort to robots. And it is neither the first nor the only enterprise in the Czech Republic employing robots, since automation in the country has increased by 40% in the period 2010-2015[3]. In addition to making beds, robots in the Linet company perform other tasks such as sewing, painting, welding. 30 robots do jobs that would require 200 employees. Although the case of the Czech Republic is excellent, representing the highest rate of growth and the lower unemployment in the EU, as well as a ban on the admission of refugees / migrants to its territory, the decline in growth or even recession in the future will raise there, as well, the general problem created by the use of robots, i.e. unemployment.
* In the first place, I choose in particular a recent announcement referring to a large hospital bed manufacturing facility in Prague, Czech Republic, with exports all over the world (Adelman, 2018). This company, Linet, was unable to secure workers despite offering higher wages[2] and had to resort to robots. And it is neither the first nor the only enterprise in the Czech Republic employing robots, since automation in the country has increased by 40% in the period 2010-2015[3]. In addition to making beds, robots in the Linet company perform other tasks such as sewing, painting, welding. 30 robots do jobs that would require 200 employees. Although the case of the Czech Republic is excellent, representing the highest rate of growth and the lower unemployment in the EU, as well as a ban on the admission of refugees / migrants to its territory, the decline in growth or even recession in the future will raise there, as well, the general problem created by the use of robots, i.e. unemployment.
* Let me also mention the case of a new hotel in Japan
called Henn-na, where customers are welcomed, registered and bid farewell to by
robots. The robots in the hotel in question, are also able to accompany
customers to their rooms, speaking their preferred language, and adjust room
temperature. In their rooms, hotel guests have access to voice instructions
concerning lighting, as well as weather and time information (West, 2015)
* Always, by way of example, as the list of
substitution possibilities for human work is already long and enriched daily,
let me quote an Amazon experiment aiming to see whether robots would be able to
automatically select items from a warehouse shelves, which employs 50,000
people, and move them around. During the experiment, a robot managed to perform
10 of the 12 tasks in total. The company, located in Berlin, "hired"
15,000 robots, and plans to hire more in the future.
* Very recently, a robot very successfully completed an extremely delicate surgery, joining veins, which only a handful of surgeons would be able to do. And although it was the first time a robot was recruited for this fine job, there was no problem (Wehner, 2017).
* Very recently, a robot very successfully completed an extremely delicate surgery, joining veins, which only a handful of surgeons would be able to do. And although it was the first time a robot was recruited for this fine job, there was no problem (Wehner, 2017).
bb) Coming changes
British scientists have developed a new Artificial
Intelligence system that can diagnose heart disease in a timely manner, better
than doctors. A second system does something similar concerning lung cancer.
This is the first system, developed at Oxford's John Radcliffe's hospital, which
can “see” critical details in the diagnostic tests that go beyond the doctor's
eye.
Artificial Intelligence is estimated to significantly
reduce health costs as, among other things, many patient interventions could be
avoided thanks to the most timely and accurate diagnoses. According to
researchers, the effectiveness of robots seems to exceed that of doctors in the
diagnosis and the assessment of the likelihood of each patient suffering a
heart attack in the future. Ultromics was originally trained in the study
of the medical archives of the 1,000 patients who had been hospitalized over
the past seven years, along with the analysis of additional information on
whether each patient eventually developed heart disease. Along the way, the
system was taught to diagnose on its own.
A similar
Artificial Intelligence system was developed for the early diagnosis of lung
cancer. The system detects the pulmonary nodes and distinguishes harmless
from dangerous ones.
Very recently,
the Americans built a tiny robot, intended to enter the human body, control its
functions and secure the necessary drugs. It eventually dissolves within the
human body (Corman, 2017).
A recent report,
referring to employment in banks[4],
predicts that over the next decade, the latter will cut employment by 30% due
to the use of new technologies.
Economist Martin
Ford predicts that all middle-class jobs will disappear, economic mobility will
cease, and plutocracy will flee to fenced communities or special cities guarded
by automated military robots and unmanned airplanes (The Economist, 2017a).
At the University
of Berkeley, California,, much more complex machines than before are being
manufactured which, in addition to industry, will be used in the near future
for housework (Metz,2017).
Catalytic changes
are also envisaged in the wider area of education (The Economist, 2014), where
digital new technology is already replacing traditional teaching through online
teaching without human participation. Moreover, in several cases, personal
secretaries have already been substituted by robot Alexa, who is available at
all times to serve her boss, has a calm and almost warm voice and is able to
serve every request.
Robots, on the
other hand, recognize the human voice and are able to speak, but are still
unable to take part in a conversation. Stunning advances have also been made by
robots who are now able to mimic voices (The Economist, 2017b).
Unbelievable but
true: British man Giles Waker has created striptease dancers out of scrap
metal, languorously dancing at a night club in Las Vegas[5].
Researchers in
Singapore have created the first two robots in the world to do something
difficult and unpleasant for humans: furniture assembly. These are the robots
belonging to the Nanjing Technological University, which have arms, sensors and
3D cameras and were able to assemble an IKEA “Stefan” chair in about 20
minutes.
Robots are everywhere! They displace man and take his
place.
These few
aforementioned cases are enough to convince that robots have already pushed
many workers out of the labor market, as well as predict a truly daunting
future for human employment, in which unfortunately there is no room for
optimism. A future where uncontrollable unemployment will prevail, leaving no
job untouched, even those requiring knowledge, specialization and planning.
II. THE UNSEEN AND
UNCONTROLLABLE POSSIBILITIES OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
A. Material Hazards
The dangers surrounding the growing ability of robots
to substitute for human employment as a whole are nothing compared to those
threatened by Artificial Intelligence, many of which are already among us.
There is a dark side to the Internet, which refers to "possibilities of
gaining benefits through access to previous unknown software
vulnerabilities," offered for purchase at the cost of thousands of
dollars. It is estimated that the loss of business caused by hackers and
cyberwar, amounts to $400 billion per year (Shmidt, 2017). "One can easily imagine a scenario in which
non-governmental players - terrorists, militias, political centers - start a
cyberwar, faking its origin as belonging to a country-specific
government"( Shmidt, 2017). Hazards that are inconceivable, which cannot be predicted,
but could perhaps be prevented. The billionaire
businessman Elon Musk (The Economist, 2016a ), who founded Spacex and
Tesla, expressed his fears concerning the threats by artificial intelligence,
with the following statement: "With Artificial Intelligence we are
inviting the devil," while philosopher Nick Bostrom of Oxford University
believes that "Artificial Intelligence is more dangerous than nuclear
weapons."
Not
long ago, robots were able to perform relatively simple planned tasks they had
been taught by humans, such as grasping and moving objects they had been shown.
They are now already functioning in much broader fields, have significantly
developed speech imitation, and most importantly, something that creates
unpredictable future risks is their new ability to teach one another (Markoff, 2016) with no human intervention and to communicate with
each other in a language unknown by man. The associated risks are well-known by
the expansion of malware programs, which are increasingly available on the
Internet, known as Black shades. In addition, several computer security experts
support that Internet criminals have been using Artificial Intelligence in a
criminal way for more than a decade[6].
The threats posed
by robots start and end with the assumption that their learning curve follows a
geometric progress and nothing prevents them from surpassing humans in
intelligence. A hypothetical scenario is the occupation of the planet by
pro-intelligent robots, deciding on their own future and crowding out or even
exterminating humans. Experienced scientists in Artificial Intelligence, such
as Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk, suggest the need for research aiming at avoiding
such, no longer improbable developments.
Just like human
intelligence often leads to actions that cannot be understood, Artificial
Intelligence can cause unpredictable, unthinkable, and threatening situations
for man. Particularly because, as in many cases, robot actions go beyond the limits of
human teaching. But this dimension of robots means that man is unable, and in
the future even less so, to control robots. Their own intelligence already
presents evidence of being different and alien to human intelligence, and
therefore, there is a very possible risk that any form of communication between
humans and robots may prove impossible in the future. Furthermore, on the
assumption that the nature and extent of robot knowledge follows uncontrolled
paths, after a critical point, it is reasonable to assume that their actions
will also be unpredictable. In addition, with the assumption that
Artificial Intelligence is progressing faster than human intelligence, the
submission of the human race to robots may in a few years no longer be
part of the field of science fiction.
In many areas,
robots perform better than humans, although their performance is due to their
human education and repetition. In 1977 Gary Kasparov, the world chess
champion, was defeated by an IMB computer. Dr Demis Hassabis from Google (The
Economist 2016a) with his own chess program, had an unbelievable result so far,
when in March 2016, his AlphaGo system defeated him by 4: 1 in Seoul. Mr.
Hassabis and his team at Google are already trying to create a "General
Artificial Intelligence," capable of solving many problems, so as to
abolish the need for specific programs for each. Artificial Intelligence
programs are used on a daily basis by the major platforms of Google, Facebook,
Microsoft, IBM, and so on, to improve service to users.
Another area
where Artificial Intelligence is predicted to be a great success, and which has
already been investigated by RTB House[7]. This
research has shown that Artificial Intelligence can recognize, learn patterns
and predict individual consumer behaviors better than humans. The study took
into account how users responded to two different posters, the first of which
was man-made and the second based on algorithms. The question was to clarify
whether intuition hinders online advertising success and whether Artificial
Intelligence can have better results. After a test week, it turned out that
the algorithm campaigns had better results than the corresponding human
efforts. This is because in a split second it is possible to segment
potential customers, create targeted ads for each of them, and to determine the
change in their behavior.
The frightening
side of Artificial Intelligence is that, in fact, even the scientists involved
in it do not know its potential, and therefore the potential dangers it
involves. There are dark secrets at the heart of Artificial Intelligence, which at
present nobody is able to explain and which Carlos Guestrin summarizes as
follows (Knight, 2017): "We have
not completed the dream, which is the Artificial Intelligence conversation with
you or able to interpret it "and adds:" We are still far from being
able to give a true interpretation to Artificial Intelligence".A simple
but satisfactory definition of Artificial Intelligence has been attempted in
the context of research as follows: "Artificial Intelligence is any
technology that can perform work as would be done by man (Chokshi, 2018,)". Reference is made to the article by Will
Knight, which invokes incredible experiences from the use of Artificial
Intelligence in a hospital, showing man's inability to understand the way of
thinking of machines he himself created. In particular, at the Mount Sinai
Hospital in New York, a research team implemented a program called "Deep
Patient". This program, which was trained to use data from 700,000 people,
discovered hidden hospital data that predicted which patients were predisposed
to certain diseases, such as liver cancer, without receiving any order to do
so. But what left the programmers surprised, and which was not called for by the
program, is that the latter proceeded to forecasts which are very difficult
even for psychiatrists. In other words, the program indicated which people were
predisposed to schizophrenia. The head of the research team, Joel Dudley, made
the following statement: "We can build these models, but we do not know
how they work." Furthermore, an algorithm, capable of determining the
day of our death, has been announced in the infinite and largely indecipherable
sphere of Artificial Intelligence. This feature should preferably not be used
for obvious reasons.
There is a moral problem raised by robots, made so perfect that
they do not differ from human beings, with the question as to whether they can
gain a conscience. Philosophers and scientists not only do not exclude this
possibility, but also consider it very likely, although they have not yet found
the way to "create consciousness." These robots will be machines
that will hurt, love, rejoice, wish, be disappointed and hope.
Those who fear
the future capabilities of robots follow two directions. The first one refers
to the dark aspects of the results often caused by algorithms, to the
"black box" of their consequences. As to the future which they do not
see as distant but quite near, they imagine Terminator disasters, and support
the need for precautionary measures. It is, however, quite unlikely that
robots will rise against humans of their own accord. On the contrary, it is
very likely that they may be used by terrorists, villains or even dictators,
and thus endanger humanity. The possibility of a robot war, with
unpredictable and terrible consequences, can also not be ruled out. I would
endorse Stephen Hawking, Max Tegmark, and Elon Musk's "request" to
ban Artificial Intelligence weapons. Because, as robo-sceptisists argue
"it's easier to turn an Artificial Intelligence machine towards
destructive purposes than a nuclear reactor." (Musgrave et al, 2015). According to Elon Musk's projections, the
evolution of Artificial Intelligence will begin to threaten mankind in 2024 and
by 2060 one million people will have settled permanently on Mars.
"Machines are οverpowering and replacing
us. The big question is whether they will go as far as subjugating us
according to the Israeli prophet, and" Homo Deus", which is the
gospel of guru Yuval Noah Harari ("Proto Thema", 2018).
Especially for
China, which is expected to be the leader in the field of Artificial
Intelligence in 2030, there are fears from the West that it will try to secure
Artificial Intelligence findings in order to monitor its citizens. Note that
the West is not innocent of similar approaches. The only difference between
China and the West is that the monitoring is less secretive in the second case,
though not always. And in particular, not signing security terms on the use of
confidential data will most likely prove dangerous to the world outside China.
An additional area of Artificial Intelligence, which raises justified fears, is
the possibility of its future combination with faked news, which will be
impossible to distinguish from reality.
B. Artificial Intelligence And Democracy
Even beyond the unfathomable dangers threatened by the
generalized use of robots, lies a very important unaddressed issue which the
West, at least theoretically, seems to be very interested in, namely the effect
of robots on democracy. Capitalism and democracy are indeed based on the
following hypothesis: "If well-informed citizens behaving rationally are
able to express their free will, the combination of their individual
preferences will result in the best possible outcome for society as a whole.
Capitalism and democracy are therefore based on two conditions: the people must
have access to information and the people must have the privilege of
choice" (Nourbakhsh, 2015). Robotic
technology, however, threatens to deactivate both of these aforementioned
conditions. Here is an example of this happening, and in many cases already
happening (Nourbakhsh, 2015). Google, and
not only, is conditioning consumers' wishes, gathering a lot of information
about them, and then informing businesses of its findings. I would also like to
mention the recent Facebook scandal, through which private data on 87 million
users were sold to Cambridge Analytica.
A scheme, which
at first glance would be easily characterized as satanic, and which has already
been implemented in a few cases in a rather simplistic form, aspires at
mingling the human mind with Artificial Intelligence.
III. PROPOSALS FOR ADDRESSING THE RISKS OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES
It is time to
overcome the fears that are clouding our judgment about new technologies and,
in particular, robotics, and to try to look at the problem at its core, without
being affected by the prevailing viewpoint. We should try to see the exact
nature of the problem in question and the form of the threats
against human labor, whose manifestation is the most probable. It seems to be a
fact that very soon, virtually all types of employment, not just routine jobs,
will be possible to execute very fast by properly trained robots. And it also
seems a fact that almost all skills, even scientific ones, will be implemented
by robots in ways that will prove more satisfying than human labor.
Human labor will
be almost useless with the exception of training and directing the work of
robots. Let's see, then, how panic addresses the labor of robots. "We will
have no jobs, how will we make a living"? is panic’s obvious response to
the above (at first glance) naive question. But, I think that the question is
not at all naive, because these are two completely different problems, which
are inextricably linked in the pre-robotic era, but are completely separated in
robotics.
In the
pre-robotic economy, human labor, combined with capital and land (the three
factors of production), generated the production of goods and services. A
portion of the wealth so produced belonged to labor and this portion amounted
to about two-thirds based on the Cobb-Douglas function's interpretation until
the 1980s, but was then reduced due to the peak of inequalities, caused by
globalization. People were obliged to work in order to secure an income that
would allow them to survive. The problem of unemployment and underemployment is
not new to the global economy and especially to Europe, but is
perpetuated with no solution, and obviously worsens the problem of distribution
inequalities. The evolution of robotics however, to the point of
replacing human labor, not only alters the terms of human labor, but leads to
radical changes. In fact, nothing remains the same in relation to the
pre-robotic era.
Although it does
not yet represent a major problem, perhaps due to the false impression that
"we still have time", "that radical changes are not
imminent", "that we need to solve more urgent problems", the new
reality that is already upon us is in the meantime overthrowing the whole of
economic science. And it is incomprehensible how this problem which should
normally prevail over any other problem, has not yet become a major concern of
trade unions, the left, sociologists and economists, philosophers,
theologians and humanity as a whole. Some of the currently unanswered
questions are as follows:
* Who will be the beneficiary of the robot labor
productivity? Since robots represent neither "labor" nor
"capital".
* How will the produced output be distributed, since
the two main factors of production, "labor" and "capital"
will have disappeared?
* Who will be the owners of the robots and how, and by
whom will the quantity and type of robot production be regulated?
* What will be the relationship between robots and
scientists (who will be among the few whose labor is indispensable) who will
plan and oversee the work of the robots and how and by whom will they be paid?
* What kinds of monopolies, contrary to economic
theory, could be created, and how could they be avoided?
Furthermore, above all else comes the big question of how the population
will survive without working. In my opinion this is the problem that seeks
immediate solution, with the increasing power of robotics, not the
implications of substituting human labor with robots.
Putting the
same question more directly: "do we live to work or work to live"?
We undoubtedly work to live, so if we do not have to work in order to
survive, the problem will perhaps be more of a psychological rather than a
survival problem. That is, we will need to organize our time, liberated, from
obligatory work for survival, channeling it into constructive, collective and
private activities.
In the
robotic era, production will, of course, continue with productivity constantly
on the rise, but only due to robots. The mistake, therefore, is to consider
robots as our competitors (as we seem to think of them), instead of our
servants and slaves who will provide us with earthly paradise. We will be able
to travel to the ends of the Earth, and soon the end of the universe; develop
any kind of skill; take walks with our children and give them more time than
ever before. Thanks to their slaves, our ancestors were able to develop
arts and literature as few peoples on earth. Now, we are given a unique
opportunity to have slaves without the moral concern of exploiting human
beings. So what is our problem concerning robots? Certainly not the loss of
jobs, which we are, however, focusing on. This is a pseudo-problem. Fear
about the results of new technologies and robotics in particular, is
theoretically absurd. Because if the ability of robots to replace human labor
grows together with the production and wealth of nations, all people can live
like kings, having slaves of a special nature to serve them. So where is the
problem, and why is there such a debate about job loss? New technologies and
robots belonging to them represent neither capital nor labor. They represent
the evolution of humanity, which belongs to the whole of humanity, and not to
certain groups
Substituting labor with robots will provide tremendous profits for the companies that
created Artificial Intelligence, as well as for those adopting it. At the same
time it will create mass unemployment.
Again, it
is clear that the real problem with robots is a problem of distribution of
income and wealth, as in the near past, and the problem of unemployment that
preceded robotics still remains. In particular, unemployment, which has not
been addressed in either a rational or even humane manner, as it should have,
namely by reducing compulsory working hours, is a precursor to the abolition of
employment.
to the whole of
mankind. That is why it is inconceivable that it should be monopolized by
capital / or by a small group of innovators, with the sole justification the
lack of laws and rules of income distribution, in this new development stage
presently witnessed by mankind. It is therefore necessary to achieve full
employment through a drastic reduction of working hours, as was the case in the
post-war economy. Indeed, while in 1840 the average weekly work amounted to
about 70-80 hours, since the Second World War it has been reduced to about 40
or even fewer hours. There was full employment both with increased and lesser
working hours, while the significant post-war reduction in working hours in no
way prevented the rapid pace of progress in the then advanced economies and the
realization of the It is a matter of life and death, for tomorrow's societies,
finding ways to provide humanity with positive instead of negative consequences
of new technologies. Although the problem wrongly appears as complex and hard
to solve, we should note however that it is we the humans who will decide on
developments, that solutions are real and simple, and that we therefore still
have the power to prevent our planet from being transformed into hell.
Let me start with
the solution to the problem of unemployment that preceded the problem of
robotics and observe that it would be relatively easy if excessive
individualism, the unlimited accumulation of wealth by a small elite and the
culmination of corruption at all levels had not prevailed at such an
unacceptably high degree. I have been arguing here for years that unemployment
is, in fact, a pseudo-problem, while the real problem is income distribution (Negreponti-Delivanis, 1995). This is
because unemployment is a consequence of the peaking income and wealth
distribution inequality that has accumulated 45% of world GDP in the hands of
an elite of 62 tycoons.
To continue
with unemployment, let remind us that it has been successfully addressed
in the past, a fact that has been forgotten. Indeed, the problem is not new, as
by analogy it emerged and was successfully dealt with after the end of the
Second World War, with a large number of women entering the labor market. The
problem of unemployment was then addressed in the only rational way that should
be adopted in modern times. That is, with a radical reduction of official
weekly working hours, by about 35%, then, compared to the corresponding pre-war
level.
It is clear that
the catalytic changes in the labor market marked in the late 20th and early
21st century require greater instead of lesser government intervention so that
unemployment is no longer used as the vehicle to achieve ever greater distribution
disparities and to halt the transformation of the labor market into an
increasingly wild jungle.
To avoid
turning the 21st century into hell, we should speedily accept and understand
that improved human knowledge is a heritage of the past and belongs to 30
glorious years, thanks to them.
A similar bold
decision should have long been adopted to avoid the worst, especially in the
area of distribution. Obviously, this initiative should be taken on a global
level, so as to avoid jeopardizing any economies adopting it with a
deterioration in their competitiveness. The reduction in working hours would
have to go as far as restoring labor and capital shares in GDP, as prevalent in
the Cobb-Douglas production function. These conditions in the labor market are
a guarantee for the maintenance of a relative macroeconomic equilibrium and
ensuring adequate effective demand for new products/services, in order to
encourage the implementation and adoption of innovations.
The solution to
the problems raised by robotics should follow the same direction as the
solution to unemployment. That is, to the diffusion of the benefits brought by
robots and not to the accumulation of the problems they create. It would be
unacceptable for tomorrow's societies to tolerate the accumulation of the
uncontrollable wealth created by robots, in the hands of the few who will own
or control them. This wealth, on the contrary, should be distributed to the
masses that will be unemployed precisely because the whole of mankind has reached
such unpredictable heights that it does not need to work, or need to work
hard, because it will have "slaves "to replace its labor. Unlike
capital, at the industrial stage, robots are made up of ideas born out of the
evolution of mankind and which therefore cannot possibly become the possession
of the few who have managed to accumulate wealth during the previous stage of
capitalism, the basic specifications of which they are attempting to extend to
the new stage. In the capitalistic stage preceding robotics, wealth was
combined with inequality and poverty, while in the robotics stage the
combination will be wealth for very few and death for many, in the absence of a
solution.
Competition
between businesses or individuals will be irrelevant, since the wealth
generated by the work of robots will suffice for the entire human population,
and all that needs to be done will be to ensure that it is distributed in such
a way that everyone may live satisfactorily. In order to achieve a smooth
operation of the robotic world, the uncontrolled accumulation of wealth must be
eliminated; the latter would be meaningless anyway, as long as the creation of
ever greater wealth would be secured without any need for human effort.
At the stage of
robotics, the generalization of the consequences of which will naturally take
time, the active presence of the State is more necessary than ever. The state
should study new ways of distributing the newly generated wealth so as to avoid
the immense inequalities of previous periods and to ensure a decent living for
the entire population. The state will also need to employ creative imagination
so that the unemployed due to robotics may engage in constructive work, as
idleness is at the core of all evil. Moreover, there will always be the need
for giving in future human societies, even as robots are continuously
perfected, replacing man everywhere ".
However,
supposing that humanity has the intelligence to overcome the problems that
robotics will create in the purely economic field, another much more
frightening question remains unanswered. It could be formulated as follows:
"what will be the impact of the generalized use of robots on the human
psyche?" An article has come to my attention titled The Course Toward
Post-Humanity (Lamendola, 2016), which does not
directly refer to the consequences of robots in our lives but which probably
includes them, and which outlines a mechanic man without sensibilities and with
no soul, who is unable to love, and unable to communicate with the world of
yesterday.
CONCLUSION
It is obviously not a solution to the problems
of the 21st century economies to attempt to curb new technologies, since their
implementation is linked to a number of positive results, which signify
progress. However, as there have been bad experiences of mass unemployment, as
a consequence of innovations in the past, it is imperative to take radical and
effective measures to minimize the adverse effects of new technologies. Apart
from the self-evident need to adapt new technologies to the specific conditions
of individual economies, with an emphasis on emerging economies, the difficulty
or inability to exploit them in an austerity environment or, even worse, in an
environment of deflation is still to be highlighted. This is because new
technologies are a vehicle for faster growth, which requires adequate liquidity
and a better / more equitable income distribution to ensure sufficient demand
for the products and services of new technical progress. The austerity
imposed by the EU, with no expiration date, does not lend itself to adopting
new technologies.
The adoption of
new technologies, moreover, should be done with moderation and not
uncontrollably. Taking some form of protective measures so that the economy is able to
gradually exploit new technologies and not crash under their weight, is seen as
a sine qua non choice of the economic policy to be followed.
State
intervention will prove extremely important in this difficult stage of
development, with the aim of reducing inequalities caused by technical
progress. In addition to drastically reducing working hours, which is
considered to be the most important measure to avoid the adverse effects of new
technologies, the State will have to invest in large-scale investments to
ensure high-standard education for all, linked to the requirements of new
technologies. This measure is not a panacea but is expected to help in several
cases. Also, instead of further reducing the welfare state, which has long been
happening in Europe, the state should ensure an adequate number of hospitals
free of charge, put limits on privatization, especially utilities, and
intensify structural changes, in particular, in the field of employment, in
order to make better and more efficient use of all workers.
The tolerance of
peak unemployment in modern economies coupled with the practical refusal to
adopt the only appropriate measure to deal with it (that is, the drastic
limitation of working hours) is an irrefutable proof that humanity, in spite of
its revolutionary advances in the field of technology, did not, unfortunately,
improve the aspect of ethics. The other facet of unemployment is the refusal to
diffuse the increased productivity of new technologies to the whole of mankind,
where it is rightfully owned.
*Adelman,
Liz (2018), "Finding no workers, companies get robots-Fast-growing
economies in Eastern Europe solve their severe labor shortage", International
New York Times,18/04.
* Artificial Intelligence (2016a), Special Report, The Economist,
25/06
* "Aviation and robots" (2016), The Economist, 20/08
*Brynjolfsson, Eric, Andrew McAffee and Michael Spence,
New World Order., Foreign Affairs. July/August 2014, pp 44-53.
*Chokshi, Niraj (2018), "Most see A.I, as a threat to jobs- just
not their jobs" International New York Times,08/03.
* "Cloning
voices" (2017b), The Economist, 22/04.
*Corman, James (2018), "A tiny robot to dole out the
medicine", International New York Times, 26/01.
* Fitzpatrick, Alex (2016), "Grappling with the right role for
robots at work", Time 11/04.
*Gordon, Robert (2016), The Rise and
Fall of American Growth , The U.S. Standard of Living Since the Civil
War, Princeton University Press.
*Knight, Will (2017) "The Dark Secret at the Heart
of AI",MIT Technology Review, 11/04
*"Machine Translation-beyond Babel" (2017a), Technology
Quarterly/Language, The Economist 07/01
*Markoff, John (2016),
"An artificial intelligence evolves, so does its criminal
potential", International New York Times, 25/10.
* Metz, Cade (2017) "Machines that teach themselves", International
New York Times, 19/09.
*Musgrave, Nach and Bryan W. Roberts (2015), "Humans, Not Robots,
Are the Real Reason Artificial Intelligence Is", The Atlantic,
14/08,
*Negreponti-Delivanis, Maria (1995) Unemployment – a pseudo-problem,
Sakkoula, Thessaloniki, p.182 ss.
* Nourbakhsh, Illah Reza (2015) "The coming Robot Dystopia", Foreign
Affairs, July/August, p. 26.
* "Proto Thema" (2018), greek newspaper
25.03
*Robinson, Joan and F. Wilkinson , "What has become of
employment policy? ", Cambridge Journal of Economics, March 1977, pp.
5-14 .
*Rus, Daniela (2015), "The robots are
coming", Foreign Affairs, July/ August.
* Shmidt, Eric and Jaret Cohen (2017c), "Cyberwars: We must
prepare ourselves for the wars of the future", The Economist, 02/01.
*«Τhe digital degree”(2014), The Economist-Briefing :The future
of universities,28/06.
*"The future of home delivery" (2017), The Economist,
18/02
*West, Darrel M. (2015) "What happens if robots take the jobs? The impact of emerging technologies on employment and public
policy", Center for Technological Innovation at Brookings, October.
*Wehner, Mike @MikeWehner (2017), 03/10, 6.20 " A robot just
performed one of the most precise medical procedures for the first time
ever".
* Former Rector and Professor at the University of
Macedonia, Honorary Member of the Romanian Academy of Sciences, President of the
Delivanis Foundation
[1] The
study refers to the US economy, which
however does greatly differ from other advanced western economies
[2]Note
that the Czech republic refuses to accept immigrants and belongs to the few
exceptions with the lowest unemployment rate in the EU (2.4% corresponding to
full employment) and the highest growth rate (5%)
[5] With the significant developments in robotics all optimists predicting
that artists would be spared unemployment due to robots, have been proved wrong.
ROBOTICS AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYMENT (proposal to address massive unemployment) MARIA NEGREPONTI-DELIVANIS*
![ROBOTICS AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYMENT (proposal to address massive unemployment) MARIA NEGREPONTI-DELIVANIS*]()
Reviewed by Μαρία Νεγρεπόντη - Δελιβάνη
on
Νοεμβρίου 27, 2018
Rating:
.png)
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια