The quest for automation has been the prime reason for technological advancements. Engineers, and perhaps in an indirect manner, even scientists seem to be intent on making the common man lazier. Being an engineer, I find this pursuit towards advancement quite exhilarating, interesting and challenging but I find myself in a fix when a new invention is presented to humanity. A part of my mind rebels and thinks like a Luddite (don't worry if you are not aware of this term for now). The thought of blogging about this topic ahead of my Amsterdam trip adventure arose when I was working on an interesting algorithm. It became more intense when I watched the employed factory workers in the movie "Schindlers' List" last weekend. No, this is not about the eventual fate of those workers. In this blog, I want to briefly take you through history and then explain my dilemma. This blog (though most of it is under the grasp of a layman) might be of more interest to my tech savvy friends.
The dilemma which I am referring to is 'our over indulgence with machines'. While often I feel that it is good, there are also several instances when I wonder whether
What happened since then is that we saw the advent of marvellous machines and skilled labour which, no doubt, has led us to where we are now. But, now there is a sudden shift in paradigm. One might argue that there is still strong employment potential because we still need people to operate such machines given the fact that machines are dumb. But what we might not readily be aware is the second level of intelligence we are trying to add through "Machine learning" and other intelligent algorithms that makes human intervention and supervision unnecessary. Okay! earlier machines took away
So this is the 21st century Luddite Fallacy that I have now. The topic is open for discussion. With conviction, can you tell me if it is good to be inordinately machine dependent? Or is it bad?
Some reflection helped me conclude by giving myself the following answer:
We live in an age of Limitless Automation. So long as we stay updated, we can bring continuous improvement in human condition thereby evolving mankind to a new level. In this pursuit we should ensure that we do not neglect the very home (nature) that we live in. I hope we are intelligent enough in keeping machines one step behind.
Hopefully I did not confuse you whilst recounting my dilemma. Nevertheless, few insights from you will be appreciated.
The dilemma which I am referring to is 'our over indulgence with machines'. While often I feel that it is good, there are also several instances when I wonder whether
What happened since then is that we saw the advent of marvellous machines and skilled labour which, no doubt, has led us to where we are now. But, now there is a sudden shift in paradigm. One might argue that there is still strong employment potential because we still need people to operate such machines given the fact that machines are dumb. But what we might not readily be aware is the second level of intelligence we are trying to add through "Machine learning" and other intelligent algorithms that makes human intervention and supervision unnecessary. Okay! earlier machines took away
So this is the 21st century Luddite Fallacy that I have now. The topic is open for discussion. With conviction, can you tell me if it is good to be inordinately machine dependent? Or is it bad?
Some reflection helped me conclude by giving myself the following answer:
We live in an age of Limitless Automation. So long as we stay updated, we can bring continuous improvement in human condition thereby evolving mankind to a new level. In this pursuit we should ensure that we do not neglect the very home (nature) that we live in. I hope we are intelligent enough in keeping machines one step behind.
Hopefully I did not confuse you whilst recounting my dilemma. Nevertheless, few insights from you will be appreciated.
I guess if machines do get that intelligent then all that we'd be doing is building new machines...unless they start doing that too...
ReplyDeleteBut by then I'm sure machines would start demanding a pay , a raise, reduction of work times..they'd end up having a family, fall in love and not work efficiently;-)
I think by making machines more intelligent we are only bringing them closer to how we are;-)
Nice thought praveen :) ! To maintain ones family is getting tough these days and next will be families of machines :) . Machines falling in love reminds me of Wall-E :)
Delete@Rakshith: Nice one dude.. :)
ReplyDeleteya u are right.. a day will will come when everything works on automation.. an instrument can read what human minds are thinking.. and innovation from National Instruments.. which was actually made to read the thoughts of the people who are physically not able to speak.. but those things can be used in future to write the algorithms that any person is thinking about.. and some day will come when those algorithm will write algorithm of a Human brain.. and that's the extension of humans on earth..
There is end to everything.. but when is the end?? until then we are safe to learn new things, experience those new things, work on what we have learnt that's all.. till then learning is continuous process.. :)
Thanks Bug. We can go as far as our imagination takes us :) .. Which I feel is endless and sometimes much beyond machines ;)
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of i-Robot. It is, definitely, not good to be machine dependent. But again, today's world is impossible to live without depending on machines. When there are two contradicting statements being made, I feel the judgment comes to man. So, we could put the phrase as - "It is not good to be totally machine dependent".
DeleteMachine Learning must not make human intervention and supervision unnecessary. It should only minimize the effort. To what extent must this effort me minimized? This is where man has to make a decision. It should not be to an extent where man is made to sit down lazily.
The day when we have an intelligent machine with advanced algorithms that will automatically generate algorithms for a problem is not far. But, this kind of a machine must be used to help man in his thinking. The word "Help" in this context would mean to assist man's brain and not as a replacement.
It is a thin line that man has to handle. It is thin, so it might look easy. But, it is fragile and so, it is not so easy. As long as mankind can hold this thin line, we will not see i-Robot really happening.
(On a lighter note) - Lets ask the machines, what they have to say about this topic.
Wow ;) !! Awesome thought bro :)
DeleteYes the line is thin and we should not let machines make our thinking go down by making us mentally more lazier.
Nice one dude!
ReplyDeleteThe one thing about continuously improving automation is the brains which go behind creating that automation is a man and not a machine. So the more advanced a machine gets, the more advanced the brain behind it would have evolved. In short, I think, all these advancements are an indication of how intelligent we have become and that's a good sign.
Neat :) !! I agree..
Deletegood article dude.. the article sense.. i too was arguing with quite a few friends recently that i don't like the topics of computer vision,machine learning etc etc..but in the course of technological advancement we have already started using most of these features without our knowledge.. its only for time to answer whether these new branches/fields ll make humans dumb or benefit them..
ReplyDeleteHehe Ck :) . I hope not.
DeleteDear Rakshith
ReplyDeleteSee what I mean!! There are so many readers for your blog and such active participation too !!
Best wishes
All thanks to you Deepak :)
DeleteNice thought bro..!!!
ReplyDeleteIts all progression from the era of stone age to modern age,change is inevitable but it should be good and do good..I think a day would come where a machine would teach human to think differently coz.. our minds would be saturated..So lastly one thing to sum it up..The BALANCE between man and machine should never cross the Threshold..!!