[ad_1]
Robots also lack intelligence, dexterity and interpersonal skills. Any good chef, host or waiter depends on making their diners happy. Can Peanut convince customers who are angry because the eggs are fried instead of fried? Can it cleverly place the tuna tartare and avocado tart on a plate and sprinkle a delicious little sauce on the edges? Can robots prevent a chef from getting angry because someone calls their work? Low-end dog food? Never.
Even using a simple robot like Peanut requires some kind of negotiation between the machine and human colleagues. basically: Stay in your driveway, robot“They can’t integrate us well,” said Julie Carpenter, a researcher in the Ethics and Emerging Science Group at California Polytechnic State University. “We are negotiating how to work about They-they are not smart enough to work by our side. They do not cooperate. They are not cooperative. They just obeyed orders. “
Because of this awkwardness in interpersonal communication, you can prove that we don’t want robots for some jobs bearFor example, part of a nurse’s job is to comfort patients and work seamlessly with other medical staff, while robots lack this empathy and collaboration ability.The police navigate an extremely sensitive emotional environment-robots cannot even perform simple security patrols No trouble. April, New York Police Department Canceled a program Boston Dynamics Robot Dog Spot, Following the public’s concerns about the militarization of the police. It is also called “Digidog” and is designed to be used for hostages and reconnaissance situations.
In addition, the restaurants and bars that we humans like so much are actually a nightmare for mobile machines like Peanuts. Robotics call this kind of space an “unstructured” environment, in which the robot must navigate through various chaos, such as chairs, splashes, and toddlers. This is in sharp contrast to a “structured” environment such as a factory, in which a fixed robotic arm performs repetitive tasks. The robot does a great job in this respect-doing heavy objects, riveting or welding over and over again in a space without accidents.
However, even on the car assembly line—the best environment for robots to work—machines can supplement humans. Robots do heavy work, while humans do delicate operations, just like detailed work inside a car. If the robot can do anything in the factory, humans can turn off the lights and go home and let the machine produce vehicles in the dark.
Erik Brynjolfsson, Director of Digital Economy, said: “Trying to automate the process from soup to nuts is much more difficult than dividing labor and finding places where humans can play their advantages and machines can play their advantages.” Stanford University Lab (For robots, this is literal power, coupled with their ability to handle repetitive tasks in an extremely consistent manner. Humans do better in almost every other way.) “If you have this division of labor, “Brynjolfsson continued, “You may have a more flexible assembly line, higher overall productivity, and more flexible capabilities.”
Therefore, in such economic times, when companies suddenly increase recruitment, they cannot just mechanize extremely complex tasks. Peanuts are rare, it can still only move food and dirty dishes from point A to point B.
In fact, the primitive nature of robots provides a strong reason for the value of human labor. Now, companies are calling for this kind of labor – but it’s not enough. This should be a good thing for workers. Dean Baker, a senior economist at the Center for Economics and Policy Research, a non-profit think tank, said: “This means that workers may be more picky. They may seek higher wages, but they will also seek better jobs. Conditions.” “So, if a manager is considered a real bastard somewhere, they won’t feel compelled to accept this, because they can spend some time on unemployment benefits and then get a right It looks like a better job for them.”
[ad_2]
Source link
