 |
| "Unemployed" (1891) by Ferdinand Hodler |
Does technological advancement pose a real danger, or are we merely worried that our individual work will be replaced and that we will be made redundant?
Saturday, June 25, 2016
3a. Better for Me? Or better for the world?
Does technological advancement pose a real danger, or are we merely worried that our individual work will be replaced and that we will be made redundant?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As humans become more aware of the rise of automation, we are set back by the idea that "computers are taking over the world", but at the same time I sense that we can understand the power we hold to make that idea possible or not. I don't think redundancy is what we're worried about but we are more focused on the realization that our world is becoming easier to live in. Should we fear the false belief that we are becoming smarter, or should we be even more fearful that with technology we're losing our sense of the world around us?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the fear of machines taking over is mostly based on self interest. The biggest fear is job security as more and more people believe that their jobs will eventually be done better and faster by machinery or computers. Technological advancement could pose a real danger if it keeps progressing into the work force. Evidence has already show that machines and software are replacing human jobs, especially in the airline industry, factory jobs, medicine, and even Wall Street. We are now tasked with a difficult decision. Humans could stop the advancement of machinery and software and choose to hire more humans, but then they risk losing money, time, and resources. It is a tough choice that many will face and will ultimately decide the future of machinery in the workplace. Machines definitely make the world better in many aspects, but if given too much control, will definitely increase unemployment. Machines could become the boss if humans give them too much control.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a great point about technological invasion within the work force. Just to play devil's advocate, do you think deciding to halt this takeover is something society still has the power to do, or might it be too late? As jobs continue to go extinct and automated assistance continues to decrease the skills professionals possess, it could be argued that machines are already on the fast track to making human workers obsolete.
DeleteYou bring up a great point about technological invasion within the work force. Just to play devil's advocate, do you think deciding to halt this takeover is something society still has the power to do, or might it be too late? As jobs continue to go extinct and automated assistance continues to decrease the skills professionals possess, it could be argued that machines are already on the fast track to making human workers obsolete.
DeleteBecause people are so used to using machines everyday, whether it's in their job or home, halting the machine takeover could be too late in some areas of our life. One area that could be reversed is piloting, like Carr wrote about. Teaching those pilots to not rely so much on technology could make better pilots. You are right that some machines have already made humans obsolete. I believe that if an industry is not yet driven by machinery, they should work to continue the limited use of machinery.
DeleteI think it is partially self-interest, but is also concern for the people around us. I think that "machines taking over the world" is actually very irrational, because machines don't do anything that people don't tell them to do. If technology is ruining the world, it is because people are causing it to. I just think that technology is causing a shift in power in the world.
ReplyDeleteYou make a great point that it isn't the computers that our taking our job industry, it's the big money corporations that are trying to make the most money while spending the least amount of money that they can. But I think that instead of technology causing the shift, it is multimillion dollar corporations. Technology is just the means to an end.
DeleteMachines are becoming more powerful and more efficient. Those factors, along with the idea that machines do the work at a fraction of the price, scare people. People are motivated by self interest and what benefits them and their families. So the idea that machines will take over jobs and puts their income at risk is out of self interest.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe automation is a threat to everyday people’s jobs. Automation takes away some aspects of a person’s role in a job, but also adds other aspects. There will always be a need for a workforce in society.
I believe, in this situation, what looks like self-interest on the surface could also be called societal interest. It’s one thing for you to get laid off from your job, but what if your neighbors are losing their jobs as well? What if your kids cannot find jobs when entering the workforce? Putting aside whether technological advancement is a danger to our egos, we need to look at whether it is a danger to our workforce. You may feel redundant with a job aided by computers and but if the computer is doing your entire job (and many other entire jobs) you will end up feeling redundant and hungry.
ReplyDeleteI think the fear of automation is grounded with not knowing much about it. There were people legitimately concerned that the world would end in the year 2000 at the hands of computers. I don't think automation has worked it's way in the workforce enough for people to be knowledgeable enough to know how it's currently implemented and the roles it can perform. Right now automation is a dark whisper that scares people at night. The prospect of losing one's job is scary absolutely, but we don't need to be afraid of the boogy man right now.
ReplyDeleteI think that it can be hard to tell people of certain professions at what point they should or shouldn’t be fearful of losing their livelihoods to the “boogeyman” of advancing technology. For instance, automation proved to be more than just a dark whisper to switchboard operators. That job was quickly rendered obsolete once the tech caught up to the task, and consequently an entire workforce with a very specific skill set became completely phased out. That happening on a larger scale may conceal even greater economic impacts than just a niche spike in unemployment. However, I do agree that the rise in automation does seem to have had a bit of a fear mongering effect among those who, as you said, don’t really know much about it.
DeleteIt is something to worry about when technological change is destroying jobs faster than it is creating them. New technologies are not only being adopted in jobs such as retail and manufacturing, but in education and medicine as well. So what does that do for us? I hear people in Walmart say, “Well I am going to use the cashier checkout because the self-checkout is stealing the cashier’s job.” What happens when you do not have a job anymore? Less social interaction and less body movement, you become shut-in. You feel inadequate and just useless. Robots are becoming smarter. They do not need to take breaks, they make fewer mistakes, and they do not get bored with their job. So of course the workplace is going to want to have these robots in their businesses. We are not in danger such as to say “the end of the world” but more in the danger of not knowing what to do and the loss of our happiness. In the book Carr says that our job is where we are happy. Because we have accomplished something. We spend all day at working wishing and wanting to go home and have time off. But when you get home, you are just bored and do not know what to do. You drag yourself back to work again, yet this is where you feel most adequate, so to speak. How are you going to feel when that sense of adequateness is gone? The fear is definitely in being replaced.
ReplyDeleteI believe that humanity's concern over the rise of machines is largely based on self-interest. No one wants to lose their job, especially to only be replaced by a machine. Technological advancement does pose a real threat in many fields, especially blue-collar ones. For example, I've hauled hay for the past five or six summers. Up until last year, my crew was composed of three people: me, my cousin, and my dad. We would have one person drive the truck, one throw bales onto the trailer, and one stack hay on the trailer. However, last year my dad and I came across a hayloader. It's exactly what it sounds like; it loads hay onto the trailer. We acquired the machine and it didn't take long for my dad and I to arrive to the conclusion that we would no longer need the services of my cousin. And so for the last two years it has been a two-man crew. Luckily my cousin didn't need the money.
ReplyDeleteI think that automation and technical progress is a real danger if it is taken to an extreme, but I don't believe that it is this extreme that we are afraid of. Humanity's self interest might hold back some degree of automation because we are afraid of a hard truth, that we are almost all inconsequential in the scheme of the universe. Carr refers to the "Romantic Times" of pilots that were in a direct mechanical control of an airplane. In fact, he refers to them more as THEIR airplanes. I think this is an example of the idealism that Carr is trying to present in this book, that automation is slowly pulling us away from what he might refer to as an artwork of skill. Carr has suggested that as we automatize our lives, we are taking away a pride and honor in the skills that we learn to operate these machines, looking at the past through rose-tinted glasses about the pride in learning more mechanically difficult methods to these machines, such as manual gears and the physical "connection" between the pilot and the airplane.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is a little bit of both. It is most definitely self-interest, why wouldn't it be? We are a very selfish species. Our knowledge and intelligence is what separates us from every other species. If we have machines running the world, we disappear. We don't disappear literally, but we do become insignificant and I think that that is a major part into why some people are wanting to limit the power of machines. On the other hand, there is a real danger. With machines obtaining more knowledge, they are constantly gaining more power. We've seen the dangers in a single human being having too much power, what if an indestructible machine has that much or more? What if they can't be stopped? I think that the two go hand in hand. Yes, it is self-interest but also it is in good nature to want to preserve our world as we know it.
ReplyDeleteI feel like most concerns about technology and automation are largely based on self-importance, but by no means are they ridiculous or anything of that extent. They are plausible concerns. Every little concern that society has with automation has a reason for coming about, it just so happens that most of them fall under the category of self-importance. Some control on the matter of automation might be beneficial, especially to those who want to keep their jobs. I don't know if it's a necessity, but if so it's mainly because people want to keep their jobs. I do think that there are some legitimate, worldly concerns on the topic, but they aren't the most pressing in the general public's mind.
ReplyDeleteKamryn Akers
Self-interest more than likely plays a big role in this controversial topic as it does in honestly anything anyone shoes interest towards. There is nothing wrong with that as it propels us in many ways we just can’t let it take control and blind us from the real issues. Computers are making people feel obsolete and unwanted, the companies who laid off workers for computers are only proving this to a lot of people. This scares a lot of us, no one ever wants to feel unwanted or irrelevant but that’s what computers are doing. They are doing our jobs better than us making us feel insecure in our professions. When people are scared we lash out much like a cornered animal, because we see no other way. So we attack computers claiming they are unethical and a danger to society which in all fairness they may be but it seems the bigger problem is the rate in which we are turning to computers. As humans we are not necessarily great when it comes to moderation especially when we are addicted. Which is what we are, addicted to computers and technology. This is dangerous because if we don’t pull back a little and try to moderate the transition so all goes smoothly and every one stays employed and happy we might just end up replacing ourselves entirely or see a rise in luddites.
ReplyDeleteOur fear of automation is entirely the result of our own doing. The more reliant we become on technology will only make our own insecurities more complex. The stigma of perfection and absolute efficiency plagues the human race and causes us to strive for something we can't achieve without help, this "help" is technology. The more we strive for this unachievable goal of total narcissism, the more make ourselves unnecessary. We fear automation because we fear becoming useless, but we only further complicate this feeling of inadequacy by making our minds more reliant on technology. Human nature has set in motion a near unstoppable train of greed and sloth that will eventually leave us behind in our own narcissistic minds. The danger of being entirely obsolete is very real and if the mindset of society doesn't change soon we will find ourselves in a situation in which we have absolutely no control of. The current trend of self-absorption that is held by much of the world is due to a lack of virtue and objective morality. This mindset is causing for there to be no limit to how far automation can progress, and without a boundary uphold automation's reach into the most basic or human principle, it will eventually make human existence obsolete entirely.
ReplyDelete