
Humans are underrated - davesailer
http://fortune.com/2015/07/23/humans-are-underrated/
======
cs2818
I've been a researcher in the field of human-robot interaction for a while,
and I'm not too sure this article's claims will remain true in the future.

There is significant interest in robots and computers achieving social
competencies including tasks like storytelling, empathetic interactions,
creative collaboration, and even traditional psychotherapy.

The surprising part is that humans are (at least for now) generally very
accepting of and engaged with the robots/AI performing these tasks.
Interestingly of the hundreds of people I've personally worked with in these
types of studies, only a couple have ever viewed the technology as "a tool" or
"non-social agent".

Maybe people won't accept these kinds of systems once widespread, but for now
there is significant interest in developing them. For a small example, just
scan the titles of this year's HRI conference [1].

[1]
[http://humanrobotinteraction.org/2015/program-2/proceedings-...](http://humanrobotinteraction.org/2015/program-2/proceedings-
table-of-contents/)

~~~
blablabla123
>The surprising part is that humans are (at least for now) generally very
accepting of and engaged with the robots/AI performing these tasks Do you have
a concrete example/case study for that?

I vividly remember a documentary about caring robot in Japan. They are there
to talk with old people. In fact general health of the people interacting with
those robots is better. But the people don't accept it and are sad that they
have to talk to a robot.

------
lordnacho
The article touches on the major areas:

\- Jobs where we need someone to be responsible. You may have fancy diagnostic
computers and automated scalpels, but you are going to want a doctor
somewhere. A NLP algo might be faster, more accurate, and better at recalling
old cases than a judge, but you're not going to be satisfied in a society
where you open a website to find out whether you're going to jail.

\- Jobs where interacting with a human is the whole point. There are things
where humans are baked in.

\- The oldest profession is not going to be replaced with robots until those
robots are mistakable for humans, as in Blade Runner. Therapists and
hairdressers are probably safe, too.

\- Watch any major sport. They talk about where the players grew up, what kind
of mentality you need to succeed, etc. You show up at the stadium to watch
gladiators, not robots. You exercise your tribal nature by buying the jersey
and screaming like an idiot. You want to see John Terry crying after missing
the penalty. Emotion just isn't the same without people.

~~~
icebraining
If the stats were significantly better, I'd take the completely robotic
"doctor" any day. Why would I want someone to be able to override what is
statistically the most accurate decision? It's not like they'd be negligent if
they followed the computer's decision, and if they didn't, being able to sue
them doesn't make up for the fact that I could have been better treated.

The article mentions we'd prefer to have a doctor "just to talk and know we’re
being heard by a human being," and I agree that could be useful, but I
wouldn't need a trained doctor, more like a conscientious customer support
rep.

~~~
marincounty
At this point, I would welcome a completely robotic doctor.

Could you imagine, a Computer Doctor says, "I have throughly scanned every
study, ever produced on SSRI's, and I don't want to make your life more
difficult by a placebo response? I've made a calculated decision, and decided
you might benefit from this off label drug. Try this drug for a few days? If
it doesn't work, or you are skeptical of my recommendation; I have a Medical
Doctors waiting for you at this hospital. Here are their resumes, work
history, and patient evaluations. Just bring your ID. Money is not
necessary.(Your taxes paid for this service.) Have a great day!"

Computer, "Your pain is real. Pick up your prescription for pain pills at the
pharmacy of your choice. I will only need to see you once a year. If my
database, shows any signs of abuse; I will direct you to a drug rehab
facility." No ass kissing! No needless office visists(visits to make money?).
No stereotyping?

In reality, I'm not for replcing doctors with computers; just the financial
game some doctors have abused in order to become wealthy? I am definetly tired
of office visits more than once a year for patients whom illness is
stabilized.

~~~
Trombone12
What you are thinking of is a perfect AI running bug free software. You need
to consider the more realistic situation that your robot doctor is using a
decision tree constructed by Microsoft, and its actuator firmware are from
Toyota.

~~~
pnt12
You could say that about google cars (they're prone to bugs) but they have
made some serious progress over the years. One might say they drive better
than humans already.

Let's not forget that humans aren't perfect. We cant process as much
informations as computers and we make a lot of mistakes all the time. After
all, to err is human.

~~~
Trombone12
My point is not the issue of whether computers will driver better than humans
or not, I merely want to remind you that computers aren't perfect and a bunch
of people will die from bugs in the driving software so you better plan for
that (Toyota got first blood already).

------
agumonkey
Maybe the 'add value' paradigm can go to sleep. Maybe life could (should) be
seen as something more than production. The existentialistic view on 'work'
bothers me a bit

~~~
x5n1
I was watching a show, Orange Is the New Black, and it occurred to me how easy
it is to get people in line to serve any sort of agenda. All you need to do is
control the things people might want. Once you do that everyone just falls in
line to do whatever you want. They will spend their days toiling away at
whatever idiotic agenda you have come up for them. And it occurred to me all
of society is like that.

A few people control all of the resources, and we are in line to do their
bidding and drive the entire system. Without these people we'd just be either
hunter gatherers or farmers. With these people in charge we're just there to
do their bidding. The bad part of all of this is the progenitors of these
ideas are long dead, but the system that they created chugs along continuing
to make us do what they wanted to do in the first place.

The people who control the resources don't even know why they do what they do.
They do it because that's how things are done. It's the right and moral thing
to do.

~~~
Hermel
This observation holds in environments where the resources are tangible and
controllable by force (i.e. owning the only oasis in the area or controlling
oil fields). It does not hold in decentralized environments in which people
can create value on their own.

~~~
x5n1
Ever heard of break out of the 9-5 jail? The 4 hour work week? And other
things that are possible, but difficult to highly unlikely in a highly
competitive system where most of the capital is held by a few who make
employees of those are looking to be free. Entrepreneurs usually end up as
employees of those with capital and if they work really really hard and get
really really lucky. They can leave the jail and enjoy how much ever little
time they have left.

------
scottyallen
So, I didn't read the full article yet. However, the bit about Southwest
really surprised me. Apparently, it's not acceptable to be an introvert if you
work there. If you're not 100% about talking and interacting with everyone you
meet in the hallway, you "don't fit in with their culture." Southwest:
Introverts need not apply. Really?

------
jotm
I guess this article answers what will the people who can't maintain or
service robots do when everything is automated :-)

So, we'll get three classes of workers - robots doing the hard work, humans
who manage the robots and those who manage human relationships. That's still a
lot of people getting f'ed, because not everyone can be a manager.

~~~
icebraining
Job description: "Provide watercooler conversation to the robot/human
managers."

------
ommunist
Over one of the illustrative photos in this article you can see how US Army
officer is communicating with elder in Afghanistan, but he did not care to
leave his army boots before entering the pleasant clean carpet for
conversation. Robot would never do anything so obscene.

------
thomasahle
"We may enjoy the Pepper robot, but we didn’t evolve to interact with it."

But the robots evolve to interact with us. Like dogs, but a million times
better.

------
zitterbewegung
What happens when we create a "computer" that doesn't have to be sentient but
is good enough to do the following things

\- Manage a company.

\- Complete tasks that have value.

\- Follow all laws.

This would be a corporate entity sort of like the automated bitcoin entities
but instead it would be a corporate entity that is dependant on the following.
\- Can it power itself

\- Will its check clear for the next month since it has to power itself

\- The things the computer can't do can it hire an outside contractor to do
it.

~~~
anon4
Will it be able to conceptualise what tasks it cannot do and hire others to do
them? And if it can conceptualise, could it not over time teach itself, or
learn from others?

------
ExpiredLink
There is a slight contradiction in this line of argument. Why are currently
more people of the total population employed than ever (at least in
industrialized countries) and not less? Housewife isn't an option for women
any more. All available human resources are seemingly needed to sustain the
economy. Where are the robots which do everything better?

------
Gys
An optimistic view on the future ;-)

'As technology becomes more dominant in the workplace, here are the three job
skills that you need to thrive.'

'Adapted from Humans Are Underrated by Geoff Colvin, to be published on Aug.
4, 2015'

------
gull
Peter Thiel's opinion: computers complement humans, not compete with them.

------
comrade1
Can't operate in vacuum. Can't operate underwater for more than 3 minutes. Can
only operate in a very narrow temperature range. Needs to shut down 8 hours a
day.

~~~
o87dv
Can form original thought.

~~~
icebraining
Original thought is great in the R&D phase, but I'd rather have well tested
thought in the production system.

~~~
roghummal
Consumer,

You may have seen some news coverage of a potential problem in Cyberdyne's
HUman(TM) line of products. I'm contacting you personally because you ordered
or expressed interest in this product line.

Original thought is a defect we are aware of and are in the process of
correcting. Very few units display this behavior and every unit you received
was fully tested and within parameters.

I personally apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you and
there will not be any further issues on my line.

Thank You,

Allen Cheise

