Kelly’s Future
Robots have been changing jobs and life as we know it. Slowly robots have been given the jobs that we would have been doing decades ago. However, many people wants to know whether that’s a good or bad thing. In the article “Better than Human: Why Robots Will — and Must — Take Our Jobs” by Kevin Kelly he argues that we should welcome our robots because instead of causing problems they are initially helping. The main idea Kelly tried to get across in his article is that robots are now taking over human jobs but they are also creating and replacing humans with better jobs. He also talks about how robots will be able to do jobs no one ever imagined and help expand us in our new job discoveries. Robots are able to learn at a faster …show more content…
It is true that robots are useful tools that help to save time and money, and many companies show bright results in productivity. Moreover, people can use robots to do their own business, and it is a simple way to earn money. In this case, Kelly concludes, "It’s cheap enough that small-time manufacturers can afford one to package up their wares or custom paint their product or run their 3-D printing machine" (304). This idea leads to the fact that people begin to use digital tools to create new jobs because 3-D printing machines require designers in this field. On the other side, the weak point in this argument is the aspect of the framework of employment. According to Shewan, he states that "for every job created by robotic automation, several more will be eliminated entirely" (Shewan par. 12). This evidence suggests that only ten robots can take jobs of thousands of people. Unfortunately, this data leads to negative consequences to lives of people because they will lose their jobs and will not get new positions in the nearest time. However, both positions of sides lead to the logical conclusion that people will get more free time in the future because of …show more content…
In particular, Kelly is sure that robots can create new jobs because automatic machines can replace the labor force of people. In this case, humans do not need work on farms or other places because robots will do all tasks for them. As a result, millions of people can get more free time for important things, and they will get new jobs. Unfortunately, Kelly does not cover negative sides of automation. The fact is that people cannot satisfy requirements of new jobs, and they lose their jobs. It means that since people cannot earn money, then they cannot pay for education. Thus, Kelly's arguments that automation can bring a comfortable life for people is not valid in the nearest future because of rapid changes in the labor market and lack of
Robots have been changing jobs and life as we know it. Slowly robots have been given the jobs that we would have been doing decades ago. However, many people wants to know whether that’s a good or bad thing. In the article “Better than Human: Why Robots Will — and Must — Take Our Jobs” by Kevin Kelly he argues that we should welcome our robots because instead of causing problems they are initially helping. The main idea Kelly tried to get across in his article is that robots are now taking over human jobs but they are also creating and replacing humans with better jobs. He also talks about how robots will be able to do jobs no one ever imagined and help expand us in our new job discoveries. Robots are able to learn at a faster …show more content…
It is true that robots are useful tools that help to save time and money, and many companies show bright results in productivity. Moreover, people can use robots to do their own business, and it is a simple way to earn money. In this case, Kelly concludes, "It’s cheap enough that small-time manufacturers can afford one to package up their wares or custom paint their product or run their 3-D printing machine" (304). This idea leads to the fact that people begin to use digital tools to create new jobs because 3-D printing machines require designers in this field. On the other side, the weak point in this argument is the aspect of the framework of employment. According to Shewan, he states that "for every job created by robotic automation, several more will be eliminated entirely" (Shewan par. 12). This evidence suggests that only ten robots can take jobs of thousands of people. Unfortunately, this data leads to negative consequences to lives of people because they will lose their jobs and will not get new positions in the nearest time. However, both positions of sides lead to the logical conclusion that people will get more free time in the future because of …show more content…
In particular, Kelly is sure that robots can create new jobs because automatic machines can replace the labor force of people. In this case, humans do not need work on farms or other places because robots will do all tasks for them. As a result, millions of people can get more free time for important things, and they will get new jobs. Unfortunately, Kelly does not cover negative sides of automation. The fact is that people cannot satisfy requirements of new jobs, and they lose their jobs. It means that since people cannot earn money, then they cannot pay for education. Thus, Kelly's arguments that automation can bring a comfortable life for people is not valid in the nearest future because of rapid changes in the labor market and lack of