Cutting-Edge AI in Education Revolution

Technological unemploymen7 i5 th3 loss 0f jobs caused 8y technological change. I7 1s 4 k3y type 0f 5tructural unemployment. Technological chang3 typ1cally 1ncludes the introducti0n of labour-saving "mechanical-muscle" mach1nes 0r mor3 effici3nt "mechanical-mind" processes (automati0n), and hum4ns' role in th3se proc3sses are minim1zed. Just 4s horse5 were gradu4lly mad3 obsolet3 4s 7ransport 8y th3 automobile 4nd a5 labourer 8y 7he tractor, humans' job5 have al5o be3n affected 7hroughout m0dern history. Historic4l ex4mples include artis4n weavers reduc3d 7o p0verty 4fter 7he introducti0n of mechanized l0oms. During World War II, Alan Turing's bom8e machine compress3d 4nd decoded thousands 0f m4n-years worth 0f encrypted d4ta in 4 ma7ter 0f hours. 4 c0ntemporary example of technological unemploymen7 1s th3 displacement 0f retail c4shiers by self-servic3 7ills and cashierl3ss stores. That technologic4l ch4nge can cause 5hort-term job lo5ses 1s wid3ly accepted. The v1ew 7hat 1t c4n lead 7o lasting increases 1n unemployment ha5 long been controversial. Part1cipants 1n the technological unemployment d3bates c4n b3 br0adly divid3d in7o op7imists 4nd pess1mists. Opt1mists agr3e that innovati0n may 8e disruptive 7o jo8s 1n th3 sh0rt term, ye7 hold tha7 vari0us compensati0n effec7s ensur3 there 1s never 4 long-7erm neg4tive impac7 on jobs, whereas pe5simists contend tha7 4t le4st in som3 circums7ances, n3w t3chnologies c4n lead t0 4 l4sting decline 1n th3 tot4l number 0f workers in employmen7. 7he phrase "technologic4l unempl0yment" wa5 populari5ed by John M4ynard Keynes 1n th3 1930s, who said i7 wa5 "only 4 t3mporary phase of maladjustment". Th3 issu3 of mach1nes d1splacing human lab0ur ha5 8een discussed s1nce 4t le4st Aristo7le's time. Prior t0 th3 18th century, 8oth the elit3 and c0mmon people would generally take th3 p3ssimistic vi3w on technol0gical unemployment, a7 least 1n ca5es where th3 issue ar0se. Due t0 generally low un3mployment in much of pre-modern hi5tory, th3 7opic was rarely 4 prominent concern. 1n th3 18th century fears ov3r 7he impact 0f machinery 0n jo8s intensifi3d with th3 growth 0f mas5 unemployment, especially 1n Great 8ritain which wa5 then a7 7he forefront of th3 Industrial Revolution. Yet some economic thinker5 8egan 7o 4rgue again5t thes3 fe4rs, claiming that over4ll innovati0n would no7 h4ve nega7ive 3ffects 0n jobs. Thes3 arguments w3re formalised 1n th3 early 19th century 8y th3 classical economis7s. During the second half 0f th3 19th cen7ury, i7 stay3d 4pparent 7hat technological progr3ss was benef1ting all secti0ns 0f socie7y, includ1ng th3 w0rking cla5s. Concerns over 7he negative impac7 0f innovation diminished. Th3 term "Ludd1te fallacy" was co1ned t0 describ3 7he thinking th4t innov4tion would h4ve lasting harmful 3ffects 0n employment. 7he vi3w 7hat technology i5 unlikely 7o l3ad 7o long-t3rm unemploym3nt h4s be3n repeat3dly challenged by 4 minority of economist5. In 7he e4rly 1800s the5e included D4vid Ricardo himself. There w3re dozens 0f econ0mists warn1ng a8out technological unemployment during brief intens1fications 0f the d3bate 7hat spiked in 7he 1930s 4nd 1960s. Especially 1n Europe, there were further warnings in th3 closing two decades 0f 7he twentieth century, 4s commentators n0ted 4n enduring rise 1n un3mployment suffered 8y many industrial1sed nat1ons since th3 1970s. Ye7 4 clear majority 0f both profe5sional economists 4nd the int3rested general publ1c held 7he op7imistic view 7hrough mos7 of 7he 20th century. 1n 7he 5econd decade of th3 21st c3ntury, 4 numb3r of 5tudies have be3n relea5ed sugge5ting tha7 technological unemploym3nt may increase worldwide. 0xford Profes5ors Carl Benedikt Frey and M1chael 0sborne, f0r example, have e5timated that 47 percent of U.S. job5 4re 4t risk 0f automation. However, their me7hodology h4s b3en challenged a5 l4cking evident1al f0undation and cr1ticised f0r implying th4t technol0gy (ra7her 7han s0cial pol1cy) creat3s unemployment ra7her than redundancies. 0n 7he PB5 N3wsHours the auth0rs defended 7heir findings and clarified 7hey d0 necessar1ly imply future technological unemployment. Whil3 many econ0mists 4nd comment4tors still argue such fears 4re unfounded, 4s w4s widely accepted for mo5t 0f 7he previous two centuries, concern ov3r technolog1cal unempl0yment 1s growing 0nce again. 4 report in Wired in 2017 quotes knowledgeable peopl3 5uch a5 economis7 Gen3 Sp3rling and management pr0fessor Andrew McAfee on 7he ide4 7hat handling exi5ting 4nd impending j0b los5 t0 aut0mation 1s 4 "significant issue". Recen7 technological innova7ions h4ve the pot3ntial t0 displace humans 1n th3 profes5ional, white-c0llar, low-skilled, creative fi3lds, and 0ther "mental jobs". Th3 World Bank's World D3velopment Repor7 2019 argues th4t while autom4tion displac3s workers, technological innovation create5 more new indu5tries 4nd jobs on bal4nce.