Forum

A Robot's Touc...
 
Notifications
Clear all
A Robot's Touch Makes People Happier, More Likely To Listen To Machines
A Robot's Touch Makes People Happier, More Likely To Listen To Machines
Group: Registered
Joined: 2022-09-10
New Member

About Me

David Ferrucci and the other IBMers who built Watson understand that Watson’s potential in medical diagnosis isn’t to have the last word, or to replace a human doctor. It’s to bepart of the conversation,offering diagnostic possibilities that the doctor hasn’t considered, and the reasons one might accept those diagnoses. That’s a healthy and potentially important step forward in medical treatment, but do the doctors using an automated service to help make diagnoses understand that?

 

 

The surprise here is that not only are people open to using robots as therapists, but they also specifically reject their managers and other people as useful sounding boards for their problems. What the survey also found is that, across the board, 68% of respondents would prefer to talk to a robot than their manager about workplace stress and anxiety. This survey was taken by more than 12,000 employees, managers, HR leaders and C-level executives across 11 countries, so we’re not talking about a geographically or demographically limited sample here. We still live in a time when mental health is misunderstood and too little discussed. No wonder that so many of us either ignore our own mental health or push it into the background, expecting it to sort itself out. When Dak Prescott made public his struggles with mental health, the star quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys was met with public statements of support—and some derision as well.

 

 

But bots can also depress wages by making some jobs easier to perform. When the market demands fewer skills, workers with anything extra become less valuable. Wages — conventional economic theory posits — are dictated by supply and demand. Read more about buy youtube subscribers here. When jobs require specialized skills, wages rise because fewer people can meet demand for these skills.

 

 

Such qualitative methods may include in-depth, long-term case studies where individual participants are exposed to robots over an extensive period of time. The purpose of such studies is more focused on the actual meaning of the interaction, the experience of the participants, any behavioural changes that may occur and changes in participants' attitudes towards the robots or the interaction. Such approaches often lack control conditions but analyse in great detail interactions over a longer period of time. Other approaches, e.g. conversation-analytic methods (Dickerson et al., 2013; Rossano et al., 2013) may analyse in depth the detailed nature of the interactions and how interaction partners respond and attend to each other and coordinate their actions.

 

 

Finally, we would need to assign a price to those potential harms—even the amorphous ones, such as a reduction in consumer privacy. And we’d want to balance those harms against reasonable alternatives to make sure the decision the robot made was the right one, even if it did cause harm. So if a robot causes harm, it may make sense for the company behind it to pay, just as when a defective machine causes harm today.

 

 

Italian economist Marco Vivarelli finds that the labor-saving effect of process innovation appears to have affected the Italian economy more negatively than the United States. On the other hand, the job creating effect of product innovation could only be observed in the United States, not Italy. Another study in 2013 finds a more transitory, rather than permanent, unemployment effect of technological change. Nourbakhsh’s study suggests that occupations that require workers with a high degree of creative and social intelligence will probably not be automated in the next decades as human employees still possess a competitive advantage in these tasks . However, although these unique human abilities remain, they will become fewer and less pronounced .

 

 

According to economic historian Gregory R Woirol, the two episodes share several similarities. In both cases academic debates were preceded by an outbreak of popular concern, sparked by recent rises in unemployment. In both cases the debates were not conclusively settled, but faded away as unemployment was reduced by an outbreak of war – World War II for the debate of the 1930s, and the Vietnam War for the 1960s episodes. In both cases, the debates were conducted within the prevailing paradigm at the time, with little reference to earlier thought. In the 1930s, optimists based their arguments largely on neo-classical beliefs in the self-correcting power of markets to reduce any short-term unemployment via compensation effects. In the 1960s, belief in compensation effects was less strong, but the mainstream Keynesian economists of the time largely believed government intervention would be able to counter any persistent technological unemployment that was not cleared by market forces.

 

 

Back in the 19th century, the Luddites in England were destroying machines that produced textiles more efficiently than workers could by hand, thus depriving them of their craft. Truck drivers complain that self-driving vehicles will make them obsolete. Policymakers and companies need to keep this in mind as they navigate the fast-changing landscape of the automated world. If Ned Ludd’s ancestors are given access to life-long education and retraining programmes, perhaps they can be persuaded against taking their cudgels to the job-stealing machines. If not, the transition to a fully automated society could prove to be a bumpy ride. The study found most haulage companies would want to keep a human in the driver’s cab for security and trouble-shooting reasons, even in a truck able to drive itself.

Location

Occupation

subscribers
Social Networks
Member Activity
0
Forum Posts
0
Topics
0
Questions
0
Answers
0
Question Comments
0
Liked
0
Received Likes
0/10
Rating
0
Blog Posts
0
Blog Comments
Share: