Skip to main content

Robot-Proof - Vivienne Ming ****

As Vivienne Ming makes apparent, there seem largely to be two views of AI's pros and cons, both of which are almost certainly wrong. It's either doom-saying 'It'll destroy life as we know it' or Pollyanna-ish 'It'll do all the boring work and we can all be wonderfully creative and live lives of leisure.'

Instead, Ming gives us a clear analysis of the likely trajectory for the workplace, particularly for the IT industry. She describes three 'equally flawed, intellectually lazy strategies' to deal with the impact of AI. The first is substitution and deprofessionalisation, using AI to allow cheaper 'AI-augmented technicians' to replace more expensive professionals, producing more low wage jobs and fewer mid-range. This does save money but leaves a company at risk of being easily outcompeted.

The second is what Ming describes as the '"A-Player" Hunger Games', the approach favoured by Silicon Valley. This sees the growing rift between routine and creative work and always searches for the 'supposed "10x" creative geniuses', outsourcing the grunt work. The idea is that you find the absolute best creative programmers and such, who have inherent talent and who will continue to thrive when basic coding is in the hands of AI.

Finally there is what she describes as 'the AI Bait-and-Switch'. This is where AI does all the everyday boring repetitive work so all staff are supposedly freed up to do the fun creative stuff. Ming's modelling suggest that in reality what happens is that 'When AI is deployed merely to make routine work more efficient, it doesn't create more creative time; it creates more routine work.'

This analysis is hugely important, because there is so much misunderstanding of AI's benefits (and flaws). Ming argues that we can indeed provide more opportunities to be creative with the help of AI, but that it's not about automating routine work - it's more about using the AI to enhance the creative process, recognising that we can develop creativity, it isn't a purely inherent ability. She describes how we can potentially build more innovation and creativity into people (with the help of properly used AI), particularly when looking at children. I was, though, slightly unsure about at least one suggested approach she suggests that has raised some academic concerns.

My only other uncertainty regarding Ming's solution is that the book is littered with examples where she has provided tools, for instance, to enable teachers to become more creative and effective which don't get used. I honestly can't see many big businesses actually doing anything with this approach. It's certainly effective for someone like me: as a freelance I find AI can really help in the way she describes. But sadly I think most organisations will go down one of her three doomed routes. (I do slightly differ on the 'A-player' side in that when I ran a team of programmers, there really were some who were a lot more productive than others in a way that could not be retro-fitted. Talent is a real thing.) 

This is, then, an important book. I didn't honestly enjoy Ming's writing style, where she tries too hard to be funny and seems to be somewhat overenthusiastic in sharing stories of how everyone thinks she's wonderful and want to recruit her to senior positions, while effectively noting that a lot of people she meets are stupid. (Shouldn't she be improving their creative viewpoints?) 

Will Robot-Proof change the world? No, because just as Ming has found in real life, most often organisations won't take her advice. But without doubt it's a powerful analysis of how AI could change the workplace for good or evil.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...

The Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...