Article Analysis Essay on Artificial Intelligence, Robots and Work

Introduction

The article" Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Work: Is This Time Different?" by Stuart Elliot, published in 2018 in the Issues in Science and technology volume thirty-five, discussed the following questions; are artificial intelligence and robots the same like past technologies that induce shifts in places of work? Secondly, are the artificial intelligence and robots unique in any way that illustrates that they can induce a different kind of change this time around? The author is a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University is considered an expert in that field. In the recent past, there has been much discussion regarding the impact of robots as well as artificial intelligence. Regardless of all the attention, the topic generated, there was not much progress towards understanding whether artificial intelligence, as well as robots, deserved special treatment.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Using the latest test studies in computer science along with an analysis of the proficiency level of skills, this paper will assess the impact of Elliot's article on the present need to comprehend the possible impact of technological advancements in employment and economic production. Elliot logically poses the question regarding the level of skill proficiency that faces the most risk of replacement by computers along with whether computers can cope with the competition posed by less-skilled employees. Using Elliot's logical reasoning and factual representations the questions regarding whether scientists could make computers perform at increasing levels across every field of employment offers more insights on the future of work. Therefore, this essay will evaluate Elliot's article to get to understand the validity of his ideas.

In the article, Elliot explores the possibility of having a different outcome with regards to changes in the job market as a result of technological advancements. The author establishes this argument by exploring the different impacts of technological advancement in both artificial intelligence and robots on fundamental work structure in all fields in the future. The author focuses on several strategic questions in a quest for an understanding of the actual effect of the two phenomena as technology continues to advance. First, the author assesses whether "AI and Robots, just like past technologies, cause shifts in the workplace without interference with the extant fundamental structure of work " (Elliott, 2018). Besides, the author seeks to understand whether the differences in the artificial intelligence and robotics technology provide a unique scenario that may suggest that that future changes in the work would be different from the conventional impacts of technological advancements. Through this curious depiction of the scenario, the author slowly develops an ideal environment to enhance comprehension (Elliott, 2018).

Additionally, the author explores the entire concept of AI and robots through a technological and economical lens but disregards the deductions offered in both sides about the reason for this discussion citing the latter offers a little perspective with regards to examples of tasks that AI and robots can accomplish. Sequentially, the former mainly focuses on prior changes in the fundamental work structure as a result of technological advancements but is disregarded for failing to establish a generalizability effect between key deductions and the case at hand (Elliott, 2018 p40-44). The author labels the two approaches unreliable as they represent the mere repetition of conflicting conclusions entailing whether or not the AI and robot technologies will lead to changes in the current structure of work. Nevertheless, the author identifies that the final arguments are drawn from discussions about technological advancements always end up with almost similar conclusions, such as an enthusiastic description of the new jobs to be created by the AI and robots technologies. Besides, the discussions almost always end with the suggestion that advanced education approaches ought to help people to adjust to these new job roles. However, these key arguments fail to offer insights regarding whether AI and robots offer any uniqueness that can cause a disparity in the sort of changes sought from these discussions.

Consequently, the author suggests a unique technique to establish whether the AI and robots represent significant differences in contrast to traditional advancements in technology through an insight into future jobs and the relevant education improvements to enhance adoption into the new roles. Typically, the author attempts to draw deductions concerning the topic in question by exploring the types of jobs that will exist in the future for people. Using the past change patterns identified during the 19th century, the author seeks to establish a basis for evaluating the expected changes in the case of AI and robots. In this respect, the author concludes that to identify whether the two advancements in technology offer the likelihood to alter the fundamental structure of work, there ought to be an evaluation to establish whether the new technologies require feasible changes in work skills (Elliott, 2018). The absence of feasible work skill changes leads to the conclusion that these new technologies will have a different kind of impact in contrast to more conventional technological advancements.

Furthermore, the author explores both PIAAC and IALS exam discussion to help understand the nature of current jobs and future changes as a result of the new technologies. First, the author explores the skill of literacy and provides a simple explanation of the concept, which represents a key feature in presenting thoughts to the audience. As this concept represents a key term in the article, the author provides the meaning indicating their meticulousness in presenting the work (Elliott, 2018). The author uses PIAAC and IALS exam discussions as they enable for easy identification of the degree of job proficiency among people and uses the deductions to develop a comparison between the two discussions. Through a ranking criterion, the author establishes that there are various levels of proficiency ranging from 1-5, where 1 represents least proficient and five the most proficient (Elliott, 2018). Therefore, the author deduces that most people lie between the second and third levels of efficiency. Similarly, the author explores computer capabilities using similar testing criteria with the help of highly competent computer scientists. In this section of the article, the author fails to provide a detailed definition of the concept of computer capabilities, which indicates imperfection.

The author employs both logic and experiential techniques to reason throughout the article as most of the details revealed mainly had some backing from experimental data or logical depiction of several functions in the workplace. The paper is well-ordered to allow the reader to develop an understanding of the critical concept through chronological criteria, where the author introduces the main questions to tackle at the beginning of the paper and continues through to the end developing valid discussions towards the appropriate responses. Several concepts within the paper are well presented with suitable additional arguments to help the reader grasp the fundamentals of these concepts. However, the paper still fails to expound on some rather complex aspects leaving the reader confused. The inclusion of a graphical representation of the various proficiency levels allows the reader to get a clearer picture with regards to the concept of skill proficiency. The graphical figure included in the paper acted as the ultimate representation of empirical evidence to support the arguments discussed under the concept of literacy proficiency. Nonetheless, the data represented on the graph is dated close to 8 years, but it provides useful insights to the reader in a bid to enhance their understanding of the issue at hand.

In the latter sections of the paper, the author attempts to establish the relationship between the AI and robot technologies to the fundamental structure of work. The final findings indicate that as much as most people fall under the second and third levels of skill proficiency, the computers also perform well within the same range, particularly the second level. Therefore, the author identifies that all the people whose job proficiencies match the computer ought to explore feasible changes in work skills through improvement in education. Consequently, the author admits that education presents a major influencing factor in literacy skills, as seen in the study (Elliott, 2018, p40-44). Data suggest that countries with well-structured education systems enjoy a higher percentage of people with high-level skill proficiencies ranging from level 4 to level 5. This makes it ideal for such countries as most of their populous do not have to enhance or change their skills because current AI and robot technologies do not offer such high skill proficiencies.

Moreover, the author presents a detailed logical analysis entailing the reasons why new technologies might influence the future fundamental work structure. The author successfully presented a thorough evaluation of the main factors influencing the job industry concerning new technological advancements (Elliott, 2018, p40-44). The study uniquely explores various techniques to understand the current state of workplaces and the previous technological induced changes in the workplace to establish the ideal changes that might be required in the future. The language used is mostly informal and appeals to a larger pool of audiences, which helps the reader derive meaning from the article with much ease. The author considers the possibility of having audiences in different fields hence restrains from using strong technical terms that would bring about confusion and render the work difficult to understand. Also, the chronological approach used to draft the article provides the audience with a proper step by step approach to understanding the problem, understanding its causes and solutions, and developing a link between the various concepts to have an informed general understanding of the entire article and its implications.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the author does a fantastic job delivering their intended message to various audiences using inclusive language and presenting logical evaluations throughout the paper. The major strength identified in the paper represents the author's use of factual and statistical data and information to developed informed arguments throughout the paper. In some instances, the author rightfully disregards various concepts that failed to provide any useful support to the main idea of the paper. Sequentially, the overall paper structure presents an ideal opportunity for the reader to comprehend the main ideas presented by the author with an easy to follow approach from the introduction section towards the concluding arguments of the paper.

References

Elliott, S. W. (2018). Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Work: Is This Time Different?. Issues in Science and Technology, 35(1), 40-44.