Will Robots Take Your Job?: A Plea for Consensus

by Nigel M De Cameron

The trend that began with ATMs and do-it-yourself checkouts is moving at lightning speed. Everything from driving to teaching to the care of the elderly and, indeed, code-writing can now be done by smart machines. Conventional wisdom says there will be new jobs to replace those we lose – but is it so simple? And are we ready?

Technology writer and think-tank director Nigel Cameron argues it's naive to believe we face a smooth transition. Whether or not there are "new" jobs, we face massive disruption as the jobs millions of us are doing get outsourced to machines. A twenty-first-century "rust belt" will rapidly corrode the labor market and affect literally hundreds of different kinds of jobs simultaneously.

Robots won't design our future – we will. Yet shockingly, political leaders and policy makers don't seem to have this in their line of sight. So how should we assess and prepare for the risks of this unknown future?

176 pages, Hardcover

Published July 5, 2017

Reviews

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Will robots take your job is a book that should be on everyone’s mind as they think towards the future. Nigel m. De S. Cameron does a good job of laying out the fundamental questions although some of his conclusions I do take issue with. The book starts out strong looking at self-driving cars being developed by the auto industry, google, uber, apple and others and the impact they will have on trucks, taxis and even emergency room staffs as accidents fall with self-driving cars. He spends some time on automation of things like fast food and heavy industry. There are many parallels with the industrial revolution and the fall of employment in agricultural jobs as well as the difference between say a Kodak and an Instagram in the number that they employ. This book is an excellent primer on the subject and is a great conversation starter for a book club or to get someone thinking about what it would look like in the future. My cautionary note is that his understanding of Milton Friedman’s direct handout for welfare was not an argument for basic universal income but a way to establish welfare more efficiently in the cases where it must exist. From my reading of Capitalism and Freedom I find a very different out come then what Cameron does. Keynes and Friedman represent two very different ends of the economic spectrum and I do not believe they agree in this case.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

Shallow thoughts and a general lack of understanding of the technical issues, everything a self perceived great mind needs to feed the fear.

[Wendelle]

and the author's answer is: nobody's job is sacred, except maybe recreational therapists

[Toyin Spades · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was such an introspective book as it makes the reader think about ways in which technological advancements is making the requirements of certain jobs obsolete.