The two sides of the title question was debated at the Emmanuel Centre in London 02 March 2015. The particpiants were (pro - we should be afraid) Andrew Keen and George Magnus; and (con - robots present opportunity) Walter Isaacson and Pippa Malmgren (who has contributed to GEI). The debate was sponsored by Intelligence Squared. The debate is judged by the audience with results revealed at the end.
From the summary at YouTube:
They are coming to an office near you: job-gobbling robots that can do your work better and more cheaply than you can. One in three jobs could be taken over by a computer or a robot in the next 20 years. Most at risk are less skilled workers such as machine operators, postmen, care workers and professional drivers. The CEO of Uber, the ride-sharing company, recently said that his goal is to replace all the firm's drivers with autonomous cars.
But it's not just blue-collar workers who are under threat. The relentless drive to replace expensive humans with artificial intelligence poses a threat to better paid jobs too. People whose work requires uniquely human skills, such as teachers, priests, and social workers, are likely to be safe. But already in law firms, junior lawyers are being replaced by software that can scan reams of documents in search of evidence; and in hospitals the role of pharmacists is being taken over by drug-dispensing robots. What's worse, the people gaining from all this disruption are those already rich enough to own the technology and algorithms. Many experts are warning of a 'winner takes all' world of billionaires and beggars which will lead to increasing social unrest.
That's the view of the tech pessimists, but others would argue that all this automation anxiety is overblown. While advances in technology have always caused disruption, in the long run they have led to the creation of more jobs. To give an example, in the 19th century the industrial revolution wiped out jobs on the land as farm workers were replaced by machinery, but millions found new work in factories as they sprang up in the cities. Why should things be different with the AI revolution? The vastly reduced costs to business, say the optimists, will create a boom that will ultimately lead to millions of new jobs - jobs that we can't even envisage yet. For many the release from the daily drudgery of work will lead to new and more fulfilling means of employment. And for knowledge workers such as scientists and doctors, AI will enhance their expertise, not replace it. There will always be a premium paid for human ingenuity and insight, and these are the very qualities that will ensure we will prosper from this latest development in human history.
** PLEASE NOTE: This video is owned by the BBC and as such is unavailable in some countries. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause. However, the event is available as an episode of our podcast here: https://soundcloud.com/intelligence2/. **
Econintersect wants your comments,
data and opinion on the articles posted. As the internet is a
"war zone" of trolls, hackers and spammers - Econintersect must balance its
defences against ease of commenting. We have joined with Livefyre
to manage our comment streams.
To comment, using Livefyre just click the "Sign In" button at the top-left corner of
the comment box below. You can create a commenting account using your
favorite social network such as Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn or
Open ID - or open a Livefyre account using your email address.
You can also comment using Facebook directly using he comment block below.
Print this page or create a PDF file of this page
The growing use of ad blocking software is creating a shortfall in covering our fixed expenses. Please consider a donation to Econintersect to allow continuing output of quality and balanced financial and economic news and analysis.
Take a look at what is going on inside of Econintersect.com