The underemployment debate is key in any technological revolution. And judging by the mainstream press, there are growing concerns about job-loss due to automation and AI. There’s even a popular book out there claiming a Jobocalypse.
The 4th EUCogIII Members Conference on the “Social and Ethical Aspects of Cognitive Systems" will address the issue of how robotics will play out for human employment in the long term. Here’s a brief compilation of different points of view on the debate, each with its risks and silver linings.
In “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?”, Carl Frey and Michael Osborne estimate that almost half of U.S. jobs are at risk to being automated in the next two decades. The findings are alarming, but by addressing which jobs are more vulnerable of computerization, the study opens up de debate of what we can do about it. Here are comments by Miles Brundage that point out that
“…various policy changes could enable more equitable social outcomes from the spread of intelligent machines we can expect this century.”
An opposing headline is given in this interview to Prof. Henrik Christensen: “Robots are Not Killing Jobs, Says a Roboticist”. The argument is based here on historical evidence that authors like Brynjolfsson and McAfee have interpreted differently, for instance in the book “Race Against The Machine”.
We are going to hear conversations about this topic over the next decade as cognitive systems continues to improve. The 4th EUCogIII Members Conference on the “Social and Ethical Aspects of Cognitive Systems" is a good place to address this debate. How are robotics advances threatening skilled labor? Are we concerned for the right reasons? What can we do about it? What are the key ideas we should take home about the employment impact of robotic technologies?
Share your ideas with the network through Twitter or get in contact