Politicians make clear on an almost hourly basis they have no idea of changes in the job market which are likely due to robotization. Multiple papers have been presented on the subject but politicians either are not aware of them or ignore them. (Science Daily: Policymakers 'flying blind' into the future of work)
Ed: does this go to the GUI (Guaranteed Universal Income) again?
Naturally and the horror at the idea of that shows the extent of the lack of awareness in the country as a whole regarding robotization. We hear constantly of 'bringing jobs back' but they're not coming back and you know it. That results in a great deal of fear in people, as we have reviewed previously, but it hasn't resulted in any discernible demand to know more, to understand the situation.
Here's the problem and you know it already:
Will a robot take away my job? Many people ask that question, yet policymakers don't have the kind of information they need to answer it intelligently, say the authors of a new study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).
- SD
Just as with a medical situation, the thing which allays fears the most is information and policymakers are not providing it since they don't appear to even be aware of it.
"Policymakers are flying blind into what has been called the fourth industrial revolution," said Tom M. Mitchell, the E. Fredkin University Professor in the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science, and Erik Brynjolfsson, the Schussel Family Professor in the MIT Sloan School of Management, co-chairs of the NASEM study.
Government agencies need to collect different kinds of labor data to accurately assess and predict how computer and robotic technologies will affect the workplace, Mitchell and Brynjolfsson said. Failure to do so could, at best, result in missed opportunities; at worst, it could be disastrous.
The study, "Information Technology and the U.S. Workforce: Where Are We and Where Do We Go From Here," and a related commentary by Mitchell and Brynjolfsson was published today by the journal Nature.
- SD
OK, that's a plug but we will take it since the information is vital for policymaking. We do not believe it is any kind of an exaggeration by calling this a fourth Industrial Revolution and the appalling aspect of it is people seem no better prepared for this one than the last.
This gets too nebulous for significant value but that's part of the problem as well.
The NASEM panel recommended that to prepare students for a constantly changing workforce, schools should focus attention on those uniquely human characteristics that could differentiate people from machines in the workplace, and emphasize training in fields expected to drive the future economy.
The panel said new data sources, methods and infrastructures are necessary to support this research. In their Nature commentary, Mitchell and Brynjolfsson go further, calling for the government to create an integrated information strategy to combine public and privately held data.
"Governments must learn the lessons that industry has learned over the past decade, about how to take advantage of the exploding volume of online, real-time data to design more attractive products and more effective management policies," Mitchell said.
- SD
In fact, government does not need to follow the corporate lead since they haven't done such a bang-up job of approaching robotization either. A corporation's nature is necessarily reactive and not much proactive but we need a whole lot better review of the evolution than that. Corporations only think of the next model year but we're thinking about the rest of our lives.
Ed: does this go to the GUI (Guaranteed Universal Income) again?
Naturally and the horror at the idea of that shows the extent of the lack of awareness in the country as a whole regarding robotization. We hear constantly of 'bringing jobs back' but they're not coming back and you know it. That results in a great deal of fear in people, as we have reviewed previously, but it hasn't resulted in any discernible demand to know more, to understand the situation.
Here's the problem and you know it already:
Will a robot take away my job? Many people ask that question, yet policymakers don't have the kind of information they need to answer it intelligently, say the authors of a new study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).
- SD
Just as with a medical situation, the thing which allays fears the most is information and policymakers are not providing it since they don't appear to even be aware of it.
"Policymakers are flying blind into what has been called the fourth industrial revolution," said Tom M. Mitchell, the E. Fredkin University Professor in the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science, and Erik Brynjolfsson, the Schussel Family Professor in the MIT Sloan School of Management, co-chairs of the NASEM study.
Government agencies need to collect different kinds of labor data to accurately assess and predict how computer and robotic technologies will affect the workplace, Mitchell and Brynjolfsson said. Failure to do so could, at best, result in missed opportunities; at worst, it could be disastrous.
The study, "Information Technology and the U.S. Workforce: Where Are We and Where Do We Go From Here," and a related commentary by Mitchell and Brynjolfsson was published today by the journal Nature.
- SD
OK, that's a plug but we will take it since the information is vital for policymaking. We do not believe it is any kind of an exaggeration by calling this a fourth Industrial Revolution and the appalling aspect of it is people seem no better prepared for this one than the last.
This gets too nebulous for significant value but that's part of the problem as well.
The NASEM panel recommended that to prepare students for a constantly changing workforce, schools should focus attention on those uniquely human characteristics that could differentiate people from machines in the workplace, and emphasize training in fields expected to drive the future economy.
The panel said new data sources, methods and infrastructures are necessary to support this research. In their Nature commentary, Mitchell and Brynjolfsson go further, calling for the government to create an integrated information strategy to combine public and privately held data.
"Governments must learn the lessons that industry has learned over the past decade, about how to take advantage of the exploding volume of online, real-time data to design more attractive products and more effective management policies," Mitchell said.
- SD
In fact, government does not need to follow the corporate lead since they haven't done such a bang-up job of approaching robotization either. A corporation's nature is necessarily reactive and not much proactive but we need a whole lot better review of the evolution than that. Corporations only think of the next model year but we're thinking about the rest of our lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment