In a somewhat breathless report in the Financial Times on February 14th, Moshe Vardi, computer 
science professor at Rice University in Texas, is quoted as saying that “We are approaching the time when machines will be able to 
outperform humans at almost any task. Society needs to 
confront this question before it is upon us: if machines are capable of 
doing almost any work humans can do, what will humans do?"
There 
may be a dash of panic emerging about the emergence of robotics and AI - after all, scientists and engineers have form when it comes to doing the 'chicken licken' 
thing as they move into the public sphere. It is as if these professions have a deep psychological problem in understanding social and system complexity, 
adaptability and unpredictability. We have certainly seen this with 
climate change much as we once saw it with scientific panic about racial
 degradation!
Nevertheless, AI and robotics are set to make an 
impact similar to that of the introduction of machinery in the early 
agricultural phase of the industrial revolution. This pushed masses of 
peasants out of traditional jobs into the cities as cheap labour. This lead to the next round of applications of machinery to industrial 
processes as urban labour started to become more expensive. Administrative, clerical and skilled labour are now expensive enough to drive the next set of applications of machine intelligence.
Robotics probably will eliminate many skilled 
manufacturing jobs. AI will certainly eliminate many clerical and even professional 
jobs. Robotics plus AI will eliminate many unskilled jobs. On past form, 
new jobs of a different nature to meet new needs eventually get created. Human existence and experience, after a painful disruption, then improves
 significantly yet the disruption could be politically and socially dangerous.
In the earlier cycles, there was no democracy so
 we had riots, then revolutions and then the formation of new political 
parties constructing the democracy and other radical forms of governance that allowed society to engage in the internal Darwinian struggle that led to the triumph of a rather
 weak form of welfarist liberal democracy.  This may have frustrated Nietzsche who saw the 'weak' collectivising to become strong and it is true that this collectivisation could de-humanise as much as the machines did but the outcomes were, on balance, more beneficial than not in terms of creating the conditions for at least the possibility of personal empowerment and individuation. 
The next cycle looks 
as if it will be expressed through populist upsurges. We are now
into new territory, so we may as well enjoy the ride ... but the one thing we can be sure 
of is that this new system like the old will be managed by 
self-reinforcing elites periodically replaced by more suitable 
self-reinforcing elites.
This is the nature of power - it cannot
 be held by everyone at the same time although the powerful are just as 
controlled by those over whom they exercise formal power, in subtle and 
devious ways, as they control those who have no formal power. Foucault was good on the complexity of all this, If so, the 
first 'new' elite will only be the cleverer elements of the old elite seeking to manage the new 
populism. It is when that fails that the fun and games begin ...
But before we get over-excited here is an example of hype that needs 
treating with care, The FT again: "Prof Vardi said it would be hard to think of any 
jobs that would not be vulnerable to robotics and AI — even sex workers.
 “Are you going to bet against sex robots?” he asked. “I’m not.”" As 
usual in our rather sexually anxious culture, the Professor uses sexuality to 
heighten the air of tension. We really do need to grow up about sex but that is not why I raise it.
If you think about Vardi's comment, it begs the question of what sort of sex 
worker - we are speaking of the oldest profession, one that deserves being taken 
seriously and respected in our otherwise sex-negative society. There is 
the aspect of 'relief' and of 'fetish' whose demands might be relieved by autonomous
 robots with no personality (the problem of robots with personality and 
consciousness is one for science fiction and very far into the future 
but still one eventually to be taken seriously).
But there is the
very separate aspect of human need for contact with other humans, as opposed to the autistic but perfectly reasonable human need to have no contact with other human beings, where the 
elimination of the exhaustion of work and our daily scrabbling for 'time-resource' 
(an overhang from the industrial era) might actually create a positive 
need for a huge range of erotic services for all sorts for very different 
people in safe and psychologically healthy ways.
Perhaps the 
female interest in the performance art of burlesque or the turning of 
pole-dancing into a form of athletic prowess are just the beginning of 
this vast range of human-to-human interactions which will involve 
'trade' and extend to all other forms of experience - ambience, 
performance, fashion, play, aesthetics, humour, dance and movement, 
fragrance, seduction, ritualised safe violence (which is what much sport
 is at heart), magical belief and the invention of cults, 
psychotherapies and philosophies, new ways of constructing family and 
community, new politics (against the reactionary politics of Iron Age 
religiosity and industrial age bureaucracy), safe altered states and new 
forms of economic organisation.
All that will then be needed is a 
limited framework for protecting the person (and the animal and 
eventually the conscious robot) from unwarranted unequal exploitation 
and physical and (within reason because all conscious creatures create 
themselves out of risk and struggle) mental harm. The State should, 
ideally, as Marx expected, 'wither away' except that there will long be a 
need for something to construct and set the limits for the massive 
infrastructural investments that will help create that limited 
framework's potentialities.
Professor Vardi chooses sex workers 
as a trope because our culture is still hung up on sexuality. A 
socially conservative puritanism is re-emerging in this context as the last reactionaries 
hope to use the coming crisis to reintroduce their worn out values - 
hence the explosion of Islamism, Papal energy, Super-Federalism, 
Neo-Cold War idiocies, counter-terrorism strategies, surveillance, 
prohibitionisms and engineered anxieties and panics.
The choice 
of sexuality as the primary point of excitement itself suggests the problem - a 
deep cultural issue with the normality of sexual response and the ancient 
fear of it in a context of limited resources, the need by elites to control humans as property (which still carries on in those states that conscript their young) and the danger to order of emotions in closed 
spaces.
The new technology opens up spaces, no longer permits humans to be 
treated as property (which is very scary to people who find security in 
being slaves) and increases resources - suddenly, there is no excuse at 
the educated and intelligent end of society for savage authoritarian 
mores other than the existence of the disturbed personality type of the authoritarian.
We have often noted that the struggle between freedom and authority or power, often generational, is far more central to the human condition even than class or gender or ethnic conflict. The problem then becomes one of the fear of ancient ways dissolving and 
releasing the mob into chaos (which is the current terror that permits 
social conservatism to be tolerated).
The AI/robotics revolution may be 
scary for the disruption in employment and community (but what positive 
change in society is not) but it is also scary for another reason - it 
will terrify Authority faced with the loss of their elite control 
over the distribution of resources, over cultural space and over the 
disposition of labour value.
The most frightened will be the 'educated' 
(education not being the same as usefulness or intelligence) who have 
believed that they rule by divine right because they have ruled, at 
least culturally, for over half a millennium in some form or another, 
whether liberal-bureaucratic, pseudo-socialist, progressive, corporatist
 or fascist.
So, for the rest of us who embrace the future while
 thinking it reasonable for new elites to arise who will mitigate bad 
effects on humans and who will prepare for the day when the descendants of the 
AI/robots will be our conscious equals (and one hopes our friends), it 
is a case of watchfulness against the claw-back of power by the losing 
classes, the exploitation of fear and anxiety to impose restrictions on 
our freedom and the crass over-claims of excitable scientists and 
engineers. Avanti!
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment