AI, automation and the lightening of work

IF 2.9 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

AI & Society Pub Date : 2024-05-16 DOI:10.1007/s00146-024-01959-3

David A. Spencer

{"title":"AI, automation and the lightening of work","authors":"David A. Spencer","doi":"10.1007/s00146-024-01959-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) technology poses possible threats to existing jobs. These threats extend not just to the number of jobs available but also to their quality. In the future, so some predict, workers could face fewer and potentially worse jobs, at least if society does not embrace reforms that manage the coming AI revolution. This paper uses the example of Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson’s recent book—<i>Power and Progress</i> (2023)—to illustrate some of the dilemmas and options for managing the future of work under AI. Acemoglu and Johnson, while warning of the potential negative effects of an AI-driven automation, argue that AI can be used for positive ends. In particular, they argue for its uses in creating more ‘good jobs’. This outcome will depend on democratising AI technology. This paper is critical of the approach taken by Acemoglu and Johnson—specifically, it misses the possibility for using AI to lighten work (i.e., to reduce its duration and improve its quality). This paper stresses the potential benefits of automation as a mechanism for lightening work. Its key arguments aim to advance critical debates focused on creating a future in which AI works for people not just for profits.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"40 3","pages":"1237 - 1247"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00146-024-01959-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-024-01959-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology poses possible threats to existing jobs. These threats extend not just to the number of jobs available but also to their quality. In the future, so some predict, workers could face fewer and potentially worse jobs, at least if society does not embrace reforms that manage the coming AI revolution. This paper uses the example of Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson’s recent book—Power and Progress (2023)—to illustrate some of the dilemmas and options for managing the future of work under AI. Acemoglu and Johnson, while warning of the potential negative effects of an AI-driven automation, argue that AI can be used for positive ends. In particular, they argue for its uses in creating more ‘good jobs’. This outcome will depend on democratising AI technology. This paper is critical of the approach taken by Acemoglu and Johnson—specifically, it misses the possibility for using AI to lighten work (i.e., to reduce its duration and improve its quality). This paper stresses the potential benefits of automation as a mechanism for lightening work. Its key arguments aim to advance critical debates focused on creating a future in which AI works for people not just for profits.

查看原文本刊更多论文

人工智能、自动化和工作轻松化

人工智能（AI）技术可能会对现有的工作岗位构成威胁。这些威胁不仅体现在工作岗位的数量上，还体现在工作岗位的质量上。一些人预测，在未来，工人可能会面临更少、更糟糕的工作，至少如果社会不接受管理即将到来的人工智能革命的改革的话。本文以Daron Acemoglu和Simon Johnson的新书《权力与进步》（power and Progress, 2023）为例，说明了在人工智能下管理未来工作的一些困境和选择。阿西莫格鲁和约翰逊虽然警告了人工智能驱动的自动化的潜在负面影响，但他们认为人工智能可以用于积极的目的。特别是，他们认为它可以用于创造更多的“好工作”。这一结果将取决于人工智能技术的民主化。这篇论文对Acemoglu和johnson所采取的方法持批评态度，特别是，它错过了使用人工智能减轻工作的可能性（即减少其持续时间并提高其质量）。本文强调了自动化作为一种减轻工作的机制的潜在好处。它的主要论点旨在推动关键辩论，重点是创造一个人工智能为人类服务的未来，而不仅仅是为了利润。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-

CiteScore

8.00

自引率

20.00%

发文量

257

期刊介绍： AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.