Robots and Humanity
What the first article is saying is that to compete with global demand with a lot of the products that are being factory produced now a days that around 70% of people NEED to be replaced by robots. Simply put people are too expensive and not reliable enough compared to robots on a statistical level. The second article is talking about that when it comes to takes that aren’t too many things that a robot can’t do better than a human with the correct programing. One of the few thing that robots can’t do even close to as well as humans can is make music. What the article is saying is that Computers can create impressive pieces, but they'll continue needing human involvement to sound “real”. Algorithms won't be able to copy those all-too-human patterns of imperfection perfectly anytime soon. Right now I think that even though we CAN replace a most human workers with robots, I don’t believe that that would be the best course of action.
Just because we CAN do something doesn’t necessarily mean that we SHOULD do something’s. It really wouldn’t be in the best interest of the worker or the average person to just be replaced. The only real person or thing that would benefit from that would really be the company that is using the robots. That’s really on in manufacturing when it comes to “creative” thing like art, music or just emotion in general robots or computers have a very severe dis-advantage. The dis-advantage lies in the fact that a lot of those things are very depend in the very “perfect imperfections” that only humans can really create. This was proven in a 2012 Harvard study, Hennig (the lead director of the experiment) analyzed patterns behind the rhythmic deviations apparent when a human musician performs and found that they often follow long-range patterns. Those deviations from the mathematically perfect beat that were actually timed in accordance with one another in a sequences reaching seconds to minutes in length. In other words,...