Since ancient times, our Homo sapiens ancestors have felt the need to create tools and mould stones to ensure their survival. Throughout history, technology has been driven by the desire to improve the quality of life and generate progress. However, is this relationship between humans and machines beneficial to our well-being, or is it leading to dangerous apathy?
Marx argues that under capitalism, the productive capacities of labour manifest themselves as the productive force of capital. In this system, ‘labour-power in action’ is incorporated as a fundamental capital element and operates as labour capital (Marx, 1867). However, the nature of labour is changing rapidly with the advent of the Industry 4.0 revolution (Vogel-Heuser & Hess, 2016). As machines take over the human role in production, many questions arise about dealing with this issue. Even with the proposal of Industry 5.0 (European Commission et al., 2021) to update the role of humans at work, the central fact is that we are dealing with a disruptive moment in human history where we can change the nature of work, especially with the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Will leisure become a profession now that work may no longer belong to humans, or will we look for new ways to apply our potential?
The relationship between humans and technology goes back to the dawn of our existence, starting with the attempt to understand and control natural phenomena and ending with the moment when we began to create tools and build structures. Over time, there have been remarkable advances, with the intervals between these decisive moments becoming shorter and shorter. Gregersen's image illustrates a historical perspective of humanity's significant milestones.
Since Alan Turing questioned what the conditions would be to consider a machine intelligent in 1950, AI has seen remarkable advances (Turing, 1950). McCarthy et al. (2006) introduced the term' artificial intelligence’ in 1956, marking the beginning of a new technological era. Today, integrating AI as a guiding system reveals extraordinary potential for optimising and transforming various human activities.
We are at a stage where technological support exists for popularising interaction between humans and machines. The way forward will depend on humans' approach to this challenge. If they opt for an ethical stance, using these tools as a positive differentiating factor, it will be possible to find a balance.
However, we must remember that we are not dealing with entities endowed with morals or religious beliefs. Machines do, at least for now, only what they have been programmed to do, regardless of the positive or negative consequences. So far, there are no mechanisms in the digital world that attempt to replicate a concept analogous to the one Moses was compelled to establish during the Exodus - the Ten Commandments - which served to create a social pact, regulate coexistence and guarantee some harmony within the community.
The ‘Three Laws of Robotics’ can be a good starting point:
1 - A robot cannot harm a human being or, by omission, allow a human being to suffer harm
2 - A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except in cases where such orders conflict with the First Law
3 - A robot must protect its existence as long as this protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws
(Asimov, 1950)
At a time when the fear of an imminent technological singularity is taking hold, Asimov continues to offer us a lifeline with the introduction of Law Zero: A robot may not cause harm to humanity or, by omission, allow humanity to suffer any damage (Asimov, 1985). This law was designed so that robots with advanced intelligence could make decisions that prioritised the well-being of society as a whole, even if this conflicted with the safety of specific individuals. However, this idea has raised complex ethical dilemmas and paradoxes within Asimov's fictional universe since a robot that follows the Zero Law can, for example, justify the sacrifice of a small group if it means saving more people or guaranteeing the collective well-being in the long term.
There are regulatory initiatives, such as the IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, which aims to ensure that all stakeholders involved in the design and development of autonomous and intelligent systems are educated, trained and empowered to prioritise ethical considerations so that these technologies advance for the benefit of humanity (Chatila & Havens, 2019). However, it is worth noting that too much protection can hinder innovation, as has been questioned with the introduction of our EU AI Act (European Union, 2024).
In short, the relationship between humans and machines is a complex and multifaceted topic. Perspectives on this relationship can vary significantly, depending on various factors such as personal experiences, cultural contexts, and individual beliefs. The nature of this connection is defined by how we interact with machines, how we understand their capabilities and the social norms that guide their use. This connection always has the potential to promote human well-being.
However, as technology advances, we are witnessing unexpected phenomena - from symbolic marriages between humans and digital entities to increasing automation that threatens to completely redefine our role in the world of work, risking us having nothing to do professionally. Are we prepared for these changes?
Opinion article by:
Alexandre Carrança, Researcher in Computer Vision, Interaction and Graphics (CVIG)
References:
Asimov, I. (1950). I, Robot. Gnome Press.
Asimov, I. (1985). Robots and Empire. Doubleday Books.
Chatila, R., & Havens, J. C. (2019). The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems (pp. 11–16). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12524-0_2
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Breque, M., De Nul, L., & Petridis, A. (2021). Industry 5.0: Towards a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European industry. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/308407
European Union. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Act. Official Journal.
Gregersen, E. (2023). History of Technology Timeline. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/story/history-of-technology-timeline
Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Volume I: The Process of Capitalist Production. Charles H. Kerr and Company.
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (2006). A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, August 31, 1955. AI Magazine, 27(4), 12. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v27i4.1904
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2251299
Vogel-Heuser, B., & Hess, D. (2016). Guest editorial Industry 4.0–prerequisites and visions. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 13(2), 411–413.
