The Coming Saga of Robots

Asoke K Laha
resident & MD, InterraIT

In this world of patents and intellectual property rights, let me begin this article with an acknowledgment, which is quite unusual since such things are always put on the backburner and are invoked at the tail end and mostly go unnoticed.  Recently, I read an editorial titled “Robots Could Have What It (IT) Tax”. It is mostly a satirical one, an obtuse dig at the tax authorities for their alacrity in taxing everything that comes to their mind, provided it can generate some revenue. Not being totally simmered by humility, the author of the editorial may have to acknowledge the makers of one Tamil movie “Enthiran” (Robot), which was remade into Hindi and several other Indian languages. Besides being a huge box-office hit, the film casting superstar Rajnikant and the heartthrob of millions – Aishwarya Rai, talks about the life of a robot, who fell in love with a next-door neighbour (Aishwarya Rai) and the hardships and hostilities that robot (Rajnikant) has to undergo until he was destroyed by the very person who created him.

In a more subdued manner, the paper also should have acknowledged me since some time back in this very column, I had tried to simulate a few illustrious people – Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose in the modern world of information technology. I tried to capture their thought process, broad direction of their speeches, writings and leadership qualities and what they could have done had they lived in the present world.  How they could have handled their digital space; what would have been their approach to life: how would have they handled their gizmos, apps and other devices that would have connected them with people, places, ideas and what have you?

Everything changes with time and sometimes things leapfrog as if time does not wait for anyone. In today’s world when people are talking about artificial intelligence to make robots to obey commands to do difficult jobs ranging from navigating aircraft to odd jobs like cleaning toilets. Now, everyone is talking about Robots as if they present both prospects and gloom. According to Bill Gates, robots can displace many jobs, even most complex and intricate ones being done by humans of high intellectual. Those jobs include that of a pilot flying the most sophisticated aircraft, a software engineer evolving solutions to most complex problems, a mining engineer who supervises what is happening some 3,000 metres below the earth or of a space scientist who shuttles to the outer space. Robots and AI are a reality: they will replace the jobs that are mundane and can be described by a series of steps or processes.

Will the humans become redundant? Happily, there are some comforting statements coming from the same quarters, which envision the inroads robotics would make into the digital space. They say robotics will create ten times more jobs in the world than it will replace. It may sound to be apocalyptical. But I tend to believe it. Not many decades ago, people apprehended about the labour replacement power of the computers. Did it replace any jobs? Rather, it has created millions of creative and gainful jobs around the world. India, which resisted the introduction of computers, I must say, has hugely benefited from it. That seems to be a paradox but a fact. Let us take a survey to know how many Indians do not have seen a computer or do not know its functioning? The same may be the case with robots also. It will make life easier, comfortable and, perhaps, worth living since it might take care of some of human drudgeries and vicissitudes. However, the types of jobs will change – the new jobs will need technical education with a reasonable IQ. However, unemployment will increase, as some people will just become “unemployable”.  

It is a great concern for the government, police and other law-enforcement authorities how people can misuse technology for criminal activities. Can there be robot thieves, hackers, criminals (as Enthiran has demonstrated) and even other types of antisocial elements, triggered by artificial intelligence. Knowledge is strength in the hands of right people who can use it judiciously and a destructive weapon with people having a criminal mind

The underlying premise is that when one creates a robot and infusing it by ingraining artificial intelligence, there is no limit to its capacity. It can do both good and bad things as its creator (developer) wishes to infuse or manipulate. Does it sound that one has to be extra cautious while creating such edifices? What I have to offer is that robotic is a science, a front-end one. It can create and destruct as if they are two sides of a coin. One can interpret it as a perfect example of duality.  The question is how we make use of discoveries – to make or break!

There is no end to technology. It evolves as and when people feel the need for it. Possibly, the West would have felt the pangs of a graying and declining population. They have to have devices to work for, to look after the aged and invalid, cook for people who do not have the time for it, to keep the house for them whenever they are at home and also to do several other household and office chores. Can these be the case with other countries? Certainly not! There is unemployment and deprivation in other parts of the world. Many of the troubles that have erupted and that may erupt in future can be traced ultimately to deprivation, unemployment and denial of legitimate rights of the people. While one side is looking at finding lasting solutions to find ways to employ and feed people, the other side is looking at the prospects of replacing them with robots created through scientific breakthroughs like artificial intelligence? Is there any contradiction in the two situations? It is how we look at it:  from a human angle and from a mechanical angle, bereft of underlying human considerations. The other-world has the capacity to help them from the morass of deprivation they are suffering for a long time, even while continuing with their scientific pursuits. The point is deliverance of multitudes is compatible with scientific pursuits. What makes a difference depends on how we blend them.