I read the article. Not much content there. :(
They need to come up with the AI part before they can do the robotics..
But with just that AI part, they could do:
47% of the lawyers
47% of the doctors
47% of the Senators
and, of course,
90% of the smart-asses...
;-)
I agree, the article missed several really important features of the coming of “AI”. IBM has a project that will bring a connection based electronic equivalent (in terms of connection ability) of a brain the size of a two liter bottle of pop. It will burn about 1.5 KW of energy so it could be plugged into a household outlet. IBMs view on the cognitive part...
http://www.research.ibm.com/cognitive-computing/index.shtml
Noting what Watson on Jeopardy! did and what it is being prepped for.
I think, when you combine this with some of the DARPA like projects, Big Dog, some of the powered armor, artificial feeling materials for robotic hands, and some of the perceptual recognition programs this article was not very rigorous. Assisted driving is currently on Mercedes menu. Google has self driving vehicles...as a job skill...when driving is lost as a marketable skill, how many people will not be able to get a “fast food” job?
The economics determine the use of robotics in the workplace. Labor at $9/hour may work at McDs but if the labor goes to $15/hour then a robot may all of a sudden become a viable economic alternative. When the robotic alternative drops below $9/hour...and that has to take into account all customer interactions good and bad. We are in the technology and don’t see the changes unless we look to the forgotten past. Lucy on the assembly line in “I love Lucy” isn’t really part of the current generation’s experience. Those jobs are leaving or gone. And they are certainly out of sight. My garbage truck uses a robot arm to dump the can into the truck. No one injures their back anymore, but anyone can be trained to do it...even a computer...soon. See google.
The author would never work for Wired.
DK