Navigating Disruption
Interviewees for Making a New Reality identified the disruptions coming from emerging smart, immersive, and bioengineered technologies as urgently in need of collaborative design. Like atomic energy, these new human capabilities will have dramatic impacts on our way of life, especially around the future of work. We can not afford to suffer the consequences of groupthink in this transition.
The [Obama White House] report stated: “‘AI-driven changes in the job market in the United States will cause some workers to lose their jobs, even while creating new jobs elsewhere…The economic pain this causes will fall more heavily upon some than on others… Policymakers must consider what can be done to help those families and communities get back on their feet and assemble the tools they need to thrive in the transformed economy and share in its benefits.” — Margi Murphy, The Sun
Many of the current U.S. political upheavals involve the long-term economic challenges to blue-collar workers, who were disrupted by jobs going overseas. Many world leaders argue that these pains are caused more by automation than outsourcing. With coming smart technologies that promise to expand automation into the arena of white-collar jobs, we can expect major disruptions to the future of work and, possibly, large-scale job loss. Some have expressed concern that this may lead to deeper gaps in inequality and challenges to democracy by concentrating power even further. This dynamic creates silos of both knowledge and opportunity.
Rowena Lindsay reports in the Christian Science Monitor that, “The question of exacerbating already existing inequalities is more difficult. However, the report [Stanford University’s 100-year study on AI] recommends the immediate start of a discussion on how the additional wealth created by AI can be spread equitably and fairly… In the perceivable future, most jobs will not be replaced by AI technologies, but will be augmented or changed. The healthcare advances are not going to replace doctors, but they may change the skills that the doctors need or how doctors spend their time.”
Lauren McCarthy, Salome Asege, Rachel Ginsberg, Lance Weiler, Nick Fortugno, Grace Lee, Tony Patrick, Hyphen-Labs, Michael Almereyda, Alex McDowell, Detroit Narrative Agency, Pigeon Hole Productions, Sam Ford, Alexander Reben, Nnedi Okorafor and Heather Dewey-Hagborg are just a few of the artists and technologists mentioned by interviewees for their practices of collaborating with diverse fields of knowledge to constructively interrogate and imagine our future. They were referenced as examples of how silo-breaking efforts could help us navigate this disruption.
Although many believe artists and creative work are safe from the AI jobs “apocalypse,” others are not so sure. AI and robotic expert Dr. Pascal Fung participated in a session among the cultural leaders at the June 2017 World Economic Forum in China and declared that machines can already generate high quality visual art, literature, and music. This raised existential questions about the definition of art: Is it the faithful output of aesthetically pleasing or interesting products that replicate human expression and allow for us to reflect on our existence in some manner? Or is it something in the creative process of making work and creating connections between people (i.e. artist and audience) that makes art meaningful and valued?
There is some solace in that experts do not believe jobs will be completely gone, but they do agree the nature of work will be very different. In fact, some of the oldest companies such as PG & E “believe strongly that humans and machines will work closely in a relationship of augmentation rather than automation.”
As we evolve our knowledge and technological capabilities, change is inevitable, but can we avoid the often inhumane side effects of transitioning from one paradigm to the next? Will decisions about how AI is deployed be in service to the stockholders and consumers only, or will we take care to retrain our workforce — including cultural workers — for new, relevant and viable jobs? How can we learn from the past?
Interviewee Chris Hollenbeck of Granite Ventures acknowledged the potential for huge advancements in optimizing many aspects of our businesses and personal lives, such as AI-enhanced healthcare. However, he also expressed concerns that the income inequality issue and shift in blue collar work, which were hot-button issues during the 2016 election cycle, could be exacerbated if machine learning is not carefully implemented, especially for those most marginalized.
This is the same concern being raised by thought leaders around the world. Satya Nadella (CEO of Microsoft) asked the members of the 2017 annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, “Is the surplus that is going to be created because of breakthroughs in AI…only going to the few, or is it going to be more inclusive growth?” Some even wonder if AI ultimately will require capitalistic systems to fundamentally change, as this interdependent technology may require more collaboration than traditional free market competition.
Google’s Deepmind program demonstrated the issue of unleashing purely competitive AI for free market regulators to ponder, when it pitted two AIs against each other in an apple picking game that quickly turned aggressive. Nick Summers of Engadget reports that, “The findings are important as humanity releases multiple AI into the world. It’s likely some will clash and try to either co-operate or sabotage one another. What happens, for instance, if one AI program is managing traffic flow across the city, while another is trying to reduce carbon emissions in the state? The rules of the ‘game’ that govern their behavior then become vital. Setting parameters and being mindful of other agents will be crucial if we’re to balance the global economy, public health, and climate change.” Software Ag Asia’s Anneliese Schulz also explains that the adoption of IoT and AI will require industries to embrace collaboration and adjust business models for interdependence in the IoT ecosystems.
Additionally, this technology will completely change the idea of how to maintain a level economic playing field. How is it possible to have a fair competitive marketplace when the “haves” are capable at executing machine learning, robots and other advanced technologies to shut out competition, or hoard the surplus that AI is capable of producing?
There is much to consider as we design new systems and values in an AI integrated future. Many of the interviewees expressed concerns that the lack of inclusion, of different backgrounds and fields of knowledge in the centers of power, could lead to — at best — missed opportunities and — at worst — further inequality and equity. They feel it is especially important to have artists and storytellers involved in, and even leading parts of, the process.
How can we break the silos between the fields of influence related to navigating this transition?
How can media makers, artists and storytelling help to facilitate that process? Check out March 2018’s issue for the recommendations provided by our interviewees and researchers.
The Making a New Reality research project is authored by Kamal Sinclair with support from Ford Foundation JustFilms and supplemental support from the Sundance Institute. Learn more about the goals and methods of this research, who produced it, and the interviewees whose insights inform the analysis.
