New York Post: When Robots Take Over

by Diane Francis


The world’s first robotized sales assistants were rolled out last month in California. They are nifty, cute — and terrifying.
Nicknamed OSHbots, the two ma­ chines cost $50,000 apiece, are five feet of plastic on wheels and carry built­in natural language processors, computers, product scanners and navigation tools. Named after the Orchard Supply Hardware store where they work in San Jose, they greet customers, ask if they need help, identify items, then offer to guide them to the appropriate aisle without bumping into anyone or anything.
At night, they do inventory by cruising the store to identify missing products and update their store map.
The OSHbots will never ask for a raise or call in sick. They also have the recall of a National Merit Scholar, but, on the other hand, they can’t open a box or climb a ladder to reach a hammer. And if you went up to one and shouted “fire,” it would respond that “fire extinguishers are on aisle 4 and I can take you there” . . . in English or Spanish.
So far, OSHbots are primitive, as are other automated services, such as Google’s driverless cars. But they won’t always be. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and others are in­ vesting billions to make machines smarter than people. And then what happens to America’s 13 million re­ tail work force when OSHbot 2.0 or 3.0 arrives on the scene? Are Google and the others going to support the displaced workers?
Amazon has already attacked re­ tail’s workforce with its online plat­form. This summer, it took the nextstep, rolling out its first battalion of robots, 3,000 so far called Kiva, to re­ place warehouse workers who drive forklifts, or fetch and file incoming and outgoing products.
This is the face of “technological unemployment” and will accelerate, though how quickly is debatable. One dire prediction is that by 2030, 2 billion jobs will be lost globally to robots and software. But this is based on a hyper­leap in the cogni­tive ability of machines that may, or may not, happen. One of Silicon Valley’s foremost entrepreneurs and director of Facebook and eBay, Marc Andreessen, says robots won’t eat all the jobs because they won’t be sophisticated enough for de­ cades.
“There is still an enormous gap be­ tween what many people do in jobs today and what robots and AI can re­ place and there will be for decades,” he wrote in his blog recently.
What happens when that day ar­ rives? Andreessen, like many Silicon Valley optimists, thinks it will be a utopia. Goods and services will be abundant and virtually free. Govern­ ments will be fat enough to afford a social safety net needed to retrain or protect people. Workweeks may be reduced to 20 hours and many jobs will go begging. “Creativity, innova­ tion, exploration, art, science, enter­ tainment and caring for others: We have no idea how to make machines do these,” he wrote.
Back on planet Earth, former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Sum­ mers is less sanguine. “The eco­ nomic challenge of the future will not be producing enough. It will be providing enough good jobs,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal this summer.
In 1965, only one in 20 males be­ tween 25 and 54 years of age was out of work. Today, it’s one in six. The Internet already wiped out millions of middle­class jobs. What happens when robots destroy retail and ware­ house jobs as well?
Summers suggests that just as the Industrial Revolution led to welfare states for displaced farm workers, the Software Revolution must lead to a super­welfare state to pick up the job and training slack.
The time line varies as to when dislocations will be dramatic, but it’s clear that a deadline looms.
It’s unfashionable to question progress, to wonder whether inno­ vation is always a good thing. It’s happening, the great minds say, so you better just get used to it.
But I wonder whether the compa­ nies behind OSHbot have really thought it all through. Sure, they may make money, but how much of that will be taxed to pay for the rest of us to do nothing?