Robots taking over simpler jobs could widen inequality

So when Google's "AlphaGo" artificial intelligence won against champion player Lee Sedol last month, there were ripples of shock and awe.

A far more complex game than chess, this was a "holy grail" moment for machine learning, an important milestone in history.

South Korean professional Go player Lee Sedol, right, puts the first stone against Google's artificial intelligence program, AlphaGo, during the Google DeepMind Challenge Match in Seoul. Photo: AP

Robots are increasingly becoming better at some cognitive tasks than humans. So where does that leave us?

Make no mistake, we are on the cusp of a rapid technological transformation that some experts say will be faster and more disruptive than the industrial revolution.

Whether you define artificial intelligence as a sophisticated being that is convincingly "human" and can pass a Turing Test, or simply an algorithm that dictates which stories you see in your Facebook feed, the rise of smart machines will see more and more of the jobs we do today transformed and even replaced.

Where mechanisation replaced a large swathe of manual labour jobs, now we're going to see more and more white-collar jobs overtaken by algorithms.

"In the past we were removed from the limitations of our muscles; now we'll be removed from some of the limitations of our brains," says Toby Walsh, a prominent Australian AI expert who has taken a global campaign against the development of autonomous weapons (aka "killer robots") to the United Nations.

As with previous cycles of technological advancement, the rise in productivity is expected to bring a rise in living standards. But there will be pain, too, at least in the short term.

Forrester Research calculates 16 per cent of jobs in the US will be completely displaced by automation and AI in the next decade.

No sector is safe from disruption. Even doctors could soon give over much of their brain power to computers like IBM's Watson, which is able to give accurate medical diagnoses by drawing on its encyclopedic brain.

There will be new jobs, too – ones we can't even begin to imagine – created off the back of these new technologies. But Forrester estimates only one new job will be created for every 10 lost – a 7 per cent net loss in total jobs by 2025.

Who will be first in the firing line? Walsh says it comes down to whether your job is "open" or "closed".

Open-ended jobs are those that will be augmented by the addition of artificial intelligence. A scientist, for instance, can pursue knowledge faster and to unforeseen heights with the aid of computers. We can expect mammoth breakthroughs in scientific and medical research in coming years as a direct result of technological advancement.

A taxi driver, on the other hand, is a closed job. Uber, which uses algorithms to automate many of its back-end processes, is already disrupting the taxi industry. The incumbents' pain is all too public. But once Uber launches its fleet of automated cars, there'll be no need for Uber drivers, either.

"You don't want to be working in a closed job," Walsh says.

The upshot is that we're still a very long way off from creating the kind of artificial intelligence that can understand the kinds of complex tasks and concepts that humans can.

It would take weeks to retrain AlphaGo's "neural networks", which somewhat mimic the way the human brain is wired, just to learn how to play and win at a different game, such as chess.

A human, on the other hand, can observe and learn multiple nuanced things before lunch: drive a car, have a meaningful conversation with a loved one, notice someone behaving strangely at a train station, read and ponder a poem.

"We really don't need to have too low a view of humankind – humans are very special and unique," says Monash University's Simon Angus, an expert in the economics of technology.

Computers are great at doing the repetitive tasks we don't like. That frees humans to pursue more interesting and fulfilling work, Angus says.

"I'm pretty optimistic but I think this is another kind of progress in the relationship between humanity and labour/work," Angus says.

"If the jobs we continue to lose are ones which we all feel like if we asked the people doing them, 'Did you ever enjoy that job?', 'Not really' – well then that's a good thing."

Cleaning up on the home front. Manual chores get the robot treatment. Photo: Getty

Take journalism, for example. Following Angus' theory, if I'm lucky, computers will be writing up sports results and financial earnings, and journos will be busy pursuing in-depth analysis and hard-hitting investigations.

It's a nice idea but, in an industry obsessed with cost-cutting, feels like a pipe dream.

Experts also warn the new wave of "enlightened" jobs could end up in the hands of a select few. History shows the people who are hardest hit by technological change are those with the lowest levels of education.

Governments will need to ramp up the emphasis on education and social support to prevent the gap widening further between society's haves and have nots, says University of Canberra economist Phil Lewis.

"Strangely enough it [technological advancement] promotes inequality because we know people in the poorest households are the least likely to go to university.

"If you didn't stay on at school for year 12, your job prospects now for the rest of your life are pretty bleak."

Ideas like a universal basic income, where all citizens receive a basic wage from government, are gaining popularity in some countries, as well as among thought leaders in Silicon Valley.

"If we're going to have all these innovative technologies, the challenge probably calls for innovative politics as well," Lewis says.

"I'm not so sure we're ready for that."