 |
| |
|
|
aneeshm
|
 |
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:02
|
|
There is an issue that I have thought may be important in future .
Methods and AI are evolving to a point where we may have humaniform robots capable of doing most manual labour and repetitive jobs within the next 20 to 30 years . The processing power required will have arrived by then , and the prototypes for neural networks capable of learning and evolving are already here .
If more is spent on this technology , robots will become capable of replacing unskilled and semi-skilled manual labour ( one where no deep analytical thinking is involved , and where the variations ae few ) . We will also have robots capable of adapting and learning from past problems , as neural nets are already doing . Thus , a robots imprinted with oly the basic ability to learn , and apply that learning willl be in priduction not too far off . THey will also be vastly cheaper than an average worker .
Is it ethical , then , for employers to completely replace low and semi-skilled human labour ( cashiers , receptionists , manual labourers , waiters , secretaries , etc. ) with robot labour as soon as it becomes available ? This will be accomplished within five to ten years , will lead to a collapse of social security , even if full severance benifits are given to said workers .
I say it is perfectly fine to replace humans when possible/necessary/benificial . What do you say ?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:32
|
|
Roboticisation is an inherently good thing as long as the robots aren't intelligent enough to rebel against their human masters, or to evolve in such a fashion.
The huge difference between today and the late 18th century is technology. Thanks to technology, our life is more comfortable and healthy than ever in human history. There are only extremely few areas in the world that saw absolutely no net positive impact from technology: even the average African (in peaceful times) has access to more comfort than his pendant of a few centuries back.
Thanks to technology, there was less human genius wasted on the plow, and there was less human genius wasted on the machine-tool. Hopefully, there'll be soon less human genius wasted on operating the cashier.
However, while automation is inherently good in the long run, it does pose serious short-run problems. Unskilled workers, after having been laid off, rarely find better jobs, and must often settle for jobs where the conditions are actually much worse. And that's when they find a job at all. Automation can lead to terrible life conditions for a whole generation (like the early 19th century peasants forced to go to the city). That's why history has shown many skeptics against automation, like the Luddites.
The capitalists alone cannot contribute to solving the transition problem: their sole responsibility is to make profit, and they don't need to care of their fired employees to that effect. That's why a collective effort is needed to bring the unskilled in more skilled jobs. The State has to provide efficient education to all (and not only to the young generation), it has to financially help the fired ones while they're still in transition, and it has to protect those who are too old to learn a new job.
That's how you can have a humane economic transition, that doesn't sacrifice entire generations to productivity gains.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-03-2005 14:40
|