Woodley Jean

Cindy Casper
English D101
Research Paper

Introduction
The topic I decided to research turned out to be very interesting because every time I
thought I had come to a conclusion, I ended up re-asking the same question, Will Robots take
over future jobs and should they. The amount of questions that were asked were nothing short but
impressive because there were a lot of points that were being stated as to why or why not. In
order to get to the bottom of this, I did an exponential amount of research, followed buy a survey
just so I could get a full understanding of this. I've searched high and low to find out the
mysteries to my questions to find the proper answers.

The Experts
When it came down to should robots work in jobs, first question was like where should
they work. We start our first research with Jay M. Tenenbaum and Jeff Shrager. Tenenbaum is
attends the American Association for Artificial Intelligence and is a consulting professor of
Information Technology at Carnegie Mellon's West Coast campus, and Shrager is a
computational psychologist of science as well as a consulting associate professor at Stanford
University.Both men are founders of the company CollabRx. Their research states that robots
should be better used to find a cure for cancer. The reason they concluded with this statement
was because of the current knowledge that current robots possess will be able to help the study
process into finding the cure. There is a lot that humans need to put into consideration when
researching the disease. "Toward this end we are developing Cancer Commons, a family of webbased rapid-learning communities in which physicians, patients, and scientists collaborate to

individualize cancer therapy. The goals of this initiative are to (1) give each patient the best
possible outcome by individualizing his or her treatment based on their tumor's genomic subtype,
(2) learn as much as possible from each patient's response, and (3) rapidly disseminate what is
learned. The key innovation is to run this adaptive search strategy in "real time," so that the
knowledge learned from one patient is disseminated in time to help the next." According to
Tenebaum and Shrager, more of an explanation because what they state with this is showing that
the current thought process by humans would not be able to keep up with the disease at hand, but
the robots fast processing and multi-tasking proves possible. "Every patient's cancer tumor is
unique. Doctors hold a wealth of information about how each of the unique cancer tumors they
treat responds to different drug treatments. However, this information is generally lost because it
is not shared, organized, or expanded." Being able to understand each unique disease consists of
a lot of memory which the regular human brain can and can't absorb, but the robots main frame
can hold as much data as needed.
"Eventually the AI becomes sophisticated enough to start improving itselfnot just small
improvements but improvements large enough to cascade into other improvements ... and the AI
leaves our human abilities far behind", which was written by Luke Muehlhauser who is an
executive director of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, at Berkeley, California. His
research was put into sequential events to test the human's current progress versus robots. He
states that robots will surpass human intelligence while they are working in general. Most people
would be able to say that it is either a good thing or a bad thing, only because we won't know
how the mind process for robots work until it happens. Muehlhauser then explains that through
his tests in terms of speed, serial depth, introspective access and more, "The human brain can't
rapidly perform any computation that requires more than 100 sequential steps; thus, it relies on
massively parallel computation. More is possible when both parallel and deep serial
computations can be performed. Considering the benefits of robots working to help our
community, Muehlhauser believes that the exponential growth rate of robots knowledge may
prove displeasing.
Continuing on with the different viewpoints of different scholars, there is always the
question of should robots working should be allowed.

http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2016/12/08/new-starbucks-ceo-well-never-haverobots.cnnmoney/index.html
This video was a brief interview with the next CEO of Starbucks, Kevin Johnson. While
he was asked the question on would he have a robot working in Starbucks baristas and he says
no. He continues his statement saying that I can't imagine a Starbucks without a barista and that
they are in the business of human connection. Now this quote has so many explanations that it
truly makes sense that he would say that. I fully agree with that fact because, the way most work
places run is mainly made of the great customers and the legendary customer service they give
day in and out. I dont think that if a robot would start working there, there would be the same
legendary service. The interaction between customer and worker can be as simple as a smile or a
handshake at the end of the point of sale. The same experience wont be said if a robot is to do
the same thing.
It goes to show you that so many experts dont have the same opinion in this matter.
From yes, it would be worth it to no its not worth taking the risk. Wallach Wendell and Colin
Allen had their own viewpoint on this matter and they consider that robots would cause a serious
threat to humanity. Wallach is a consultant with Yale University's Interdisciplinary Center for
Bioethics and Allen is professor of history and the philosophy of science at Indiana University. In
their research, they have similar ideals like Muehlhauser does, however they claim that the
robots will grow much smarter faster. Speculation that AI systems will soon equal if not surpass
humans in their intelligence feed technological fantasies and fears regarding a future robot
takeover. This was written by the two engineers supporting this claim saying that its already
possible that robots are capable of exceeding human knowledge and will also be able to feed
their own mindset into thinking more differently than usual which can cause robots to potentially
take over the world.
Ive come to realize that there were more voices than I had expected. Most of my
research worked in two ways. Some actually agreed with the robot working environment
whereas others fully disagreed with it. For the reasons being either malfunctioning or the
doomsday of the world, a lot of the reasons were colorful and really put a lot of thought into my
mind for whether or not we should have a robot working environment.

Methods
Even after this research, I was still scratching my head at the question should robots
should be working in jobs. In order for me to fully get to the bottom of this, I decided to conduct
a survey and pass it to all my colleagues at a business meeting. Probably one of the best ideas I
thought of yet since a lot of them were actually asking the same question. I asked a series of
questions on paper and had my audience answer them accordingly. Considering at how fast many
of them finished it, I knew the results would be worth the while. I roughly handed the survey to
30 participants all over the age group of 20.

Results
Should Robots work in jobs?
25

20

21

15

10
9
5

1
Yes

No

The first and foremost question which beyond stating the obvious was shown in this
simple graph. Judging this graph, not many people were for the robots working part, whereas

there were people who agree that they should. This was all opinion based so there is a larger poll
for this question which would involve millions.

What jobs should robots work for?

33%

43%

17% 7%

Community Service

Retail

Other

None

This next question really had to go more into detail because even though many of the
people in the first question didnt want robots working in general, they still put that among the
four choices in this pie chart, thats the spot that they would feel more comfortable if robots were
working there. As you can see, the workplaces that most chose to be preferred for robots to be in
would be community service.

Would robots working in your occupation make a huge impact?

Rate 1-5
20%

37%

17%
10%

One Star

Two Stars

17%

Three Stars

Four Stars

Five Stars

To rate performance, if robots working in your current job, would u believe that their
presence would make a huge impact to your store. This chart is more self-explanatory because
everyone is working and this question could be easily answered.

Discussion
After I was able to conclude my research, Ive come to find out that the robot working
environment is much closer than we consider it to be. A lot of our work places already have
robots working there, not to mention the productivity in that place is very promising. Most
wouldnt want other beings working in their jobs in the future, but what will happen is the
progression of robots and the adaptation of humans and robots working together to get job done.
I suggest that we as humans should just get prepared for it.

Conclusion
The information has been written. Its more about who agrees with the decision more
rather than people getting ready for the fact that it will happen. Most agree with the decision of
robots working with humans in jobs whereas others just do not stand the fact that a machine will
be doing the work around here. After my survey, Ive come to realize that most people are not
ready for robots working with us, or the idea of robots working just doesnt compel to them. The
only way this can come across is not to agitate people but to continue to ask the question on
would you prefer robots working standard jobs that you and me work in.

Works Cited
Prelipcean, Gabriela, Florin Moisescu, and Mircea Boscoianu. "Artificial Intelligence
Can Improve Military Decision Making." Artificial Intelligence. Ed. Noah Berlatsky. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2011. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "New Ideas on the Artificial
Intelligence Support in Military Applications." World Scientific and Engineering Academy and
Society, 2010. 34-37. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&currPage=&scanId=&query=&
prodId=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&limiter=&displayquery=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ3010771225&windowstate=normal&activityType=&failOverType=&commentary=&
source=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=43f5078c8bda70132966bb483e73f18e
Sotala, Kaj. "Artificial Intelligence Poses a Doomsday Threat." Doomsday Scenarios. Ed. Noah
Berlatsky. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2011. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Thinking of
AIs as Humans Is Misguided." PreventingSkynet.com. 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in
Context. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&currPage=&scanId=&query=&pro
dId=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&limiter=&displayquery=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ3010784227&windowstate=normal&activityType=&failOverType=&commentary=&sou
rce=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=95975c4162444d6fbf37c7e652d9e459
Muehlhauser, Luke. "Artificial Intelligence Will Exceed Human Intelligence." Facing the
Intelligence Explosion. 2013. Rpt. in Robotic Technology. Ed. Louise Gerdes. Farmington
Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2014. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Web. 7 Oct. 2016.
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&currPage=&scanId=&query=&pro
dId=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&limiter=&display-

query=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ3010899218&windowstate=normal&activityType=&failOverType=&commentary=&sou
rce=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=ad61dc9bc1056c300450105647c37aa6
Artificial Intelligence Patents." Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Detroit: Gale, 2010.
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 23 Oct. 2016
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/StatisticsDetailsPage/StatisticsDetailsWindow?
displayGroupName=Statistics&prodId=OVIC&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&view=statist
icsDocDisplay&limiter=&displayGroups=&action=e&documentId=GALE
%7CPC4295800120&windowstate=normal&source=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=d6765140c
38f1249e67b8e2c0454b78b
Wallach, Wendell, and Colin Allen. "Autonomous Robotic Technology Could Pose a Serious
Threat to Humanity." Robotic Technology. Ed. Louise Gerdes. Farmington Hills, MI:
Greenhaven Press, 2014. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Dangers, Rights, and
Responsibilities." Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong,. Vol. 189. Oxford
University Press: USA, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24 Oct. 2016.
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
disableHighlighting=true&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&currPage=&scanId=&query=&prod
Id=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&limiter=&displayquery=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ3010899205&windowstate=normal&activityType=&failOverType=&commentary=true&
source=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=87e2a18fd5aa478b08f4b341ac2e369e
Tenenbaum, Jay M., and Jeff Shrager. "Artificial Intelligence Can Help Find a Cure for Cancer."
Cancer. Ed. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Cancer:
A Computational Disease That AI Can Cure." AI Magazine (Summer 2011). Opposing
Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 Nov. 2016.
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
disableHighlighting=true&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&currPage=&scanId=&query=&prod
Id=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&mode=view&catId=&limiter=&displayquery=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE

%7CEJ3010823209&windowstate=normal&activityType=&failOverType=&commentary=true&
source=Bookmark&u=24011&jsid=f3e3f1ecaef57e17d8cd68cbb2745f17

Maney, Kevin. "How Artificial Intelligence and Robots Will Radically Transform the
Economy; AI will help humans find solutions to our biggest problems." Newsweek 9 Dec. 2016.
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 7 Dec. 2016.
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A472298945/OVIC?u=24011&xid=019b97e6

CNN. Draznin, Harley & Trafecante, Kate. CNN Money. Web. 12 Dec, 2016

<http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2016/12/08/new-starbucks-ceo-well-never-haverobots.cnnmoney/index.html>