According to the Editorial Board, in the article, "Artificial intelligence isn't the scary future. It's the amazing present," as technology makes headway with artificial intelligence, we-humans still seem to be in charge. First, the author explains how computer programs are being invented to play complex board games against actual human beings along with machines that can learn faster than its human counterpart. The article then goes on to talk about the self-driving car and how they can make complex decisions based on algorithms. Also, the report stresses a promise that robot drivers will never make the mistakes that humans do when driving behind the wheel which in return will make some of the wheel jobs obsolete. Lastly, like the algorithms used with self-driving cars, the same algorithms will be used in robots who will understand the latest trends that a specific family has a preference for (The Editorial Board). Finally, the article argues that even though humans have developed such machines for great advancement, we are assured that humans will always have the edge because we built them. (179).
I agree with the author that technology has the potential to change the living conditions on the planet for the better considering that positive implications of artificial intelligence (AI) but I believe that the adverse effects are underestimated. The author states “The great promise is that robot drivers will never make dumb mistakes” (The Editorial Board). The author posits that there is a chance for self-driving cars that will make their way to traffic to lessen the number of errors on the road, but I think that the assessment fails to acknowledge the challenge posed by communication setbacks. It could prove a daunting task to integrate self-driving cars in a crowded area where all other drivers are human especially in the rural settings. I, therefore, believe that there are possible setbacks that AI offers but the author chooses to cover them sparingly to emphasize the positive effects which are a biased way of describing the theme.
How to Protect Workers from Job-Stealing Robots
The article by Jason Furman published by Reuters titled "How to Protect Workers from Job-Stealing Robots" describes a subject that accompanies most AI discussion with the question of whether automation will lead to the loss of jobs. The author begins by outlining the positive integration of AI can result in labor-market institutions being strengthened for the betterment of the economy. It is also stated that even though there is a potential risk of automation, there is not much need to worry because the low-paying jobs are thought to be the most likely affected by the shift. The author sums the report by outlining that even though there is a threat to human capital as a result of machine integration in areas where skilled personnel are needed, there no need to worry because it will take some time before the effects are felt in the economy (Furman).
I agree with the author that the potential of AI is worthy the excitement and positive reception that is advocated, but I feel that the threat is significant too. The article gives a detailed breakdown through statements like “just 4 percent of jobs making above $40 per hour” to illustrate how jobs are likely to be affected by the high paying jobs stated to be contributing only 4 percent of the economy. However, the fact that the majority of those that are at risk are the low-paying one means that more of the population is likely to be affected because it is where the majority fall. I, therefore, feel that the article undermines the real threat by stating that AI should not be feared when in reality it should pose a considerable threat.
The Robot Revolution Will Be the Quietest One
The article "The Robot Revolution Will Be the Quietest One" by Liu Cixin published in the New York Times covers the subject of AI from the positive perspective by outlining the anticipated and the already existing benefits as a result of AI integration. The range of positive effects include the self-driving cars, the boost in the economy and the fact that the machine will be programmed to perform human roles as any person would do, only that efficacy is enhanced. The case by the author is such that as a result of the positive implication, AI is expected to make rapid progress in the manner in which it will be integrated into people's lives (Cixin).
I agree with the author on the favorable outcomes that AI offers but I believe that it will take a while before it is fully operational in most aspect of people's lives. It is undisputed that the role of the human mind remains unmatched by machines and it is unlikely that devices will have such an instantaneous impact. The author makes a statement that "In this future, creativity is highly valued. We sport ever more fantastic makeup, hairstyles, and clothing" which is true but the true success in these fields depends entirely on the human mind. It is thus critical to affirm that even though AI is poised to change lives, it will not be integrated as fast the author seems to describe it.
Works Cited
Cixin, Liu. “The Robot Revolution Will Be the Quietest One.” The New York Times
(2016): n. pag. Print.
Furman, Jason. “How to Protect Workers from Job-Stealing Robots.” Reuters
(2016): n. pag. Print.
The Editorial Board. “Artificial Intelligence Isn’t the Scary Future. It’s the Amazing Present.” Chicago Tribune (2017): n. pag. Print.
