People will not be replaced because robots can represent themselves, because when robots can represent people, robots are still under the control of people. But when robots can do better than people, there is a chance to replace people, just as people replace people. Just as many people lost their jobs because of machines after the industrial revolution, so can imagine the robot revolution (if we're lucky, the word will mean "robots do jobs that humans don't want to do", not "robots kill humans") after Many people lost their jobs because of robots. This imagery is troublesome for some people, but I would like to point out that the trouble is based on a premise that does not necessarily hold true. When we have work anxiety, what we worry about is not that we don’t have to work, but that we don’t have to work and therefore have no income. However, earning income is not a law of nature, but a result of a given mode of operation of human society. Human society can have other modes of operation, such as universal basic income. In the " Basic Income Reader for Everyone.
The author lists the automation brought by AI as one of the reasons for the establishment of basic income. In fact, humans build robots to replace human jobs and let us live completely flat. It would be silly if robots replacing human jobs were a problem for humans. Given the proper way society works, it's not a bad thing for robots to replace us in things we don't want to do. However, is it possible for robots to replace us in what we want to do? Creation is an activity for human beings number list to show their wisdom and experience fun, and now there are AIs that can create new poems and music. If one day AI can produce a large number of various forms of creation, novels, poems, sculptures, movies, comics, philosophical papers... , will human beings no longer be able to make fun of creation? One thing is for sure, audiences and readers will be happy in a world where robots are in charge of producing a lot of work, and 80% of the time robots will recommend things for them that they will actually like. However, will those who want to enjoy not only the work but also the creation be happy? Or they will feel the pressure.
After all, it seems that the works that may exist in the world have already been made by robots. Whether or not it has entered the age of robots, human history has been accumulating creative works. Looking at art history, you should feel that the "creative space" grows with the accumulation of works, not the other way around. New works bring inspiration and make people think of new creative directions. Impressionism brought a new style of painting, Picasso brought abstract painting, and Du Xiang brought conceptual art. If human beings have more creative space in the 20th century than in the 10th century because of their enlarged horizons, then the creative space for human beings in the 30th century should also be larger than in the 20th century. This article is published with the permission of Readmoo , the original text is published here Further reading The Uncanny Valley Theory: Why does the "simulation robot" feel fluffy after watching it for a long time? Does the Korean AI girl group Eternity make you afraid? How to avoid the "uncanny valley phenomenon" and reduce discomfort? Responsible editor: Weng Shihang Review editor: Pan Bohan you may also like