Prioritizing human-friendly choices in robotic development

03 Jul

Just a short thought today. I recently finished a Technology & Ethics class on Coursera. It wasn’t very good and lacking any reason to do so, I didn’t bother to turn in the writing assignments, but I did research them.  One final paper prompt asked us to imagine a scenario in which robotic caregivers were found to be a cost-effective solution for elderly care. It got me thinking about the ethics of using robots to replace people in low-paying jobs that require little education.


According to the most recent figures I could find, a home healthcare aide in the US does not require any college or even a high school diploma and earns a median salary around $20,000. Not a fortune, but the sort of pay that could put a two-income household into the middle class. It’s a difficult job that requires compassion. Could a robot do it someday? Probably. Is that the direction we should be going? I’m skeptical.

The scenario for my final paper was clearly hypothetical, but there is a school of thought that often sees robots as replacements for complete human jobs. I’d like to suggest that we change that mindset. Robots can be money-saving through other means than reduction of the labor force: improving efficiency and safety, extending human abilities, and doing precision tasks. Seeing them as augmentation rather than replacement seems more optimistic and human-friendly to me.

1 Comment

Posted by on July 3, 2014 in Our Robot Overlords


Tags: ,

One response to “Prioritizing human-friendly choices in robotic development

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: