The Future is Here



In the 1950's to the 1970's, robots were a major topic in speculative fiction. From Isaac Asimov's robot-focused novels (the movie 'I, Robot' is based on Asimov's work, taking its title from a short story collection published in 1950) to Philip K. Dick's 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' (filmed in a rather mangled version as 'Blade Runner'), 'The Simulacra' and 'We Can Build You', famous science fiction writers spilled a lot of ink on the robotic future.

They were however not necessarily interested in the question of whether or not there would be a world filled with robots one day – that was sort of assumed to be inevitable – they focused on how humanity would use its creation and interact with it. A major theme was always the question of what would happen if artificial intelligence (AI) were to evolve to the point of gaining self-awareness. The subject remains a staple of science fiction literature and movies to this day. Often the machines are portrayed as antagonistic to their creators, such as in the 'Terminator' series. In the 'Culture' novels of Iain M. Banks (space operas set in a distant future), self-aware machines have partnered with humanity and are described as morally ambiguous – they exercise a kind of 'benevolent hegemony' over the galaxy, by way of covert and overt interventionism, often inviting unintended consequences – somewhat reminiscent of the role the US play today in the world.

Kraftwerk live on German TV in 1978 – 'Wir sind die Roboter' (We Are the Robots)

These speculations certainly make novels about robots more interesting, but they have little bearing on the role robots (and related devices) increasingly play today. Clearly even the most advanced AI type programs are a long way from attaining self-awareness and whether they will ever be able to do is a matter of intense debate between AI researchers, philosophers, theologians and cognitive scientists. Even the hypothetical 'ethics of artificial intelligence' are fervently discussed. There are indeed many attempts to create human-like robots, for a wide variety of applications (more on that further below).

Robots have of course long been employed in factories, where they have taken over many tiresome and repetitive tasks in assembly lines (including welding), in which they are superior to humans and lower costs. Increasingly robots are also employed in warehousing type tasks, loading, unloading and stacking standardized containers. These industrial robots become ever more sophisticated. As an example, consider ABB's dual-armed and very agile robot “Frida”:





ABB's Frida, a very agile assembly type robot.





A recent Bloomberg video features a stacking robot prototype that identifies crates by their color and is able to ascertain whether things are stacked in the proper order or need to be rearranged, and whether something is out of its reach. It communicates with its handlers if anything is not as it should be. The palletizer robots made by Man-Machine are types of warehousing robots that are already on the market.

Robots are also becoming an ever more ubiquitous presence in households, in the form of simple but effective vacuum-cleaning robots and lawnmower robots.

The Misguided Focus on Job Obsolescence



Increasingly sophisticated robots and AI applications take over more and more of the tasks that humans used to perform. A recent example are these noodle-making 'robot chefs' made in China, of which 3,000 have already been sold (they go for $2,000 apiece) and which are taking over the very strenuous task of slicing noodles from a block. As their inventor Cui Yunquan correctly remarks, “as there are more and more job opportunities, young people no longer want to work as a chef to slice noodles, because this job is very exhausting. It is the trend that robots will replace men in factories and it is certainly going to happen in the sliced noodle restaurants”. One restaurant owner mentions that the robot is actually better at slicing and dicing noodles than a human – and it just costs $2,000, whereas a human noodle slicer's wages come to $4,700 per year.

However, what struck us was the title of the video: 'Restaurants Fire Chefs as Robots Take over Kitchen'. The implication is of course that the invention and employment of these robots is somehow bad, because they are making human noodle slicers obsolescent.

This type of complaint about the effects of technological and economic progress has been with us since the industrial revolution. It is as misguided today as it was then. In 1811, the Luddite movement in England was on a mission to destroy the automated looms that had replaced handloom weavers. Their modern-day ideological heirs are referred to as 'Neo-Luddites'.

The Luddite fallacy is to believe that the very core of economic progress – doing more with less – is bound to increase unemployment. This is also known as the 'Luddite fallacy'. The 'lump of labor' fallacy is a closely related concept, originally intended to prove that unemployment cannot be expected to be reduced by simply shortening the work week by legislative fiat.

The basic error of these views is to regard the economy as static and to disregard the fact that human labor is in fact a scarce resource. The reason for the current high unemployment rate is firstly that there is a large amount of institutional unemployment due to minimum wage laws and secondly that the economy needs to recover from a failed artificial credit boom of truly staggering proportions. As we have discussed in earlier missives, an economy in recovery must inter alia deal with previously neglected capital maintenance, a process that requires fewer workers than were required during the boom. It takes time for the factors of production to be rearranged in a configuration that reflects actual consumer demand and the true size of the pool of savings. The process is moreover facing considerable obstacles in the form of interventionist policy measures ranging from deficit spending to over-regulation to extremely loose monetary policy.

If the Luddites were right, then unemployment would have been on the rise ever since Ugg invented the first hand ax in the stone age.

Stone Age tool problems

(Cartoon by Larson)

Not everyone is destined to see the future.

(Cartoon by fran)



In a similar vein, here are a few more examples of authors focusing on the problem that technological progress makes certain jobs and even entire industries obsolescent. Here is one article that reports on modern diagnostics tools that allegedly will 'make millions of doctors obsolete' (we rather tend to think they will make doctors more efficient, especially as not every doctor can be a Dr. House) and a more thoughtful article on the same topic that looks at the bright side of this development.

Another example is the article “The Destructive Nature Of The Internet”, ironically published by a sub section of 'Investor Briefing' that calls itself 'Ahead of the Curve'. This article reports on the many industries the 'internet has destroyed', something the author seems to regret, although he does mention that the internet has been a 'positive growth force in the economy'. His list of industries that have succumbed to the internet doesn't mention the imminent bankruptcy of the state-run postal service, which is however bemoaned elsewhere. It all reads a bit like nostalgia for buggy whip producers.

We actually tend to think that the internet is much more than just a 'positive growth force in the economy'. It harbors the seeds of revolution and reformation, as it allows for the free exchange of information that was previously controlled by the mainstream media 'gate keepers' that act as the mouthpieces of the ruling elite. As the Daily Bell often points out, it is probably no exaggeration to state that it represents an advance on a scale comparable to Gutenberg's invention of the printing press.

Static versus Dynamic Economy



It is of course true that technological progress always threatens certain established groups. The manufacturers of stage coaches and buggy whips cannot have been very happy with the advent of the motor car. There have been many remarkable disruptions in the past as the economy progressed. One only needs to consider that a mere century ago, some 70% of the working population were still employed in agriculture. Today less than 2% of workers are employed in agriculture and the output they produce is orders of magnitude greater that that produced a century ago.

However, in spite of such disruptions, in an unhampered market economy an increase in unemployment due to technological progress is not possible due the fact that human labor is the scarcest factor of production – at least as long as there are still unexploited resources and opportunities available to us and not all human wants are fully satisfied (which probably means for all practical purposes 'forever').

As Ludwig von Mises writes on this point (in Human Action, ch. VII, 3):

“Labor is more scarce than material factors of production. We are not dealing at this point with the problem of optimum population. We are dealing only with the fact that there are material factors of production which remain unused because the labor required is needed for the satisfaction of more urgent needs. In our world there is no abundance, but a shortage of manpower, and there are unused material factors of production, i.e., land, mineral deposits, and even plants and equipment. This state of affairs could be changed by such an increase in population figures that all material factors required for the production of the foodstuffs indispensable – in the strict meaning of the word – for the preservation of human life are fully exploited. But as long as this is not the case, it cannot be changed by any improvement in technological methods of production. The substitution of more efficient methods of production for less efficient ones does not render labor abundant, provided there are still material factors available whose utilization can increase human well-being. On the contrary, it increases output and thereby the quantity of consumers' goods. "Labor-saving" devices reduce want. They do not bring about "technological unemployment."

(emphasis added)

Some may argue that at times the disruption to the established economic order due to the introduction of technological improvements can be so great as to temporarily contribute to an increase in unemployment until people have adjusted to the new situation. However, most of the time progress is fairly gradual, as even production techniques that have been superseded by technologically superior ones are often still worth pursuing. As Ludwig von Mises notes, the past has an influence on the present. Existing production processes and capital goods are only discarded in favor of new ones if economic calculation concludes that it is sound to do so. Here is a pertinent quote (from Human Action, ch. XVIII, 6):

“A new machine, more efficient than those used previously, is constructed. Whether or not the plants equipped with the old, less efficient machines will discard them in spite of the fact that they are still utilizable and replace them by the new model depends on the degree of the new machine's superiority. Only if this superiority is great enough to compensate for the additional expenditure required, is the scrapping of the old equipment economically sound.”

What is overlooked by the enemies of technological progress are the numerous effects that are not immediately seen. Take the case of the robotic 'noodle chef'. It seems highly likely that this robot will eventually replace most of the human noodle slicers. However, while human noodle slicers will no longer have a job, there is now a new factory producing these robots, which uses all kinds of inputs from other factories which will increase their production commensurately. New jobs will be created in all these branches of industry.

Furthermore, restaurant owners will save a considerable amount of money. This will tend to be partly passed on to customers, and partly it will increase their profits. The additional funds thus earned or saved can be employed in new investments which were previously not possible, or alternatively can be used to increase consumption. Finally, as the inventor of the 'noodle chef' robot notes, noodle slicing isn't exactly a job many people hanker for anyway. It is monotonous and exhausting, precisely the kind of job that should be relegated to machines as soon as possible.

While certain jobs and industries do regularly become obsolete by technological progress, new jobs and new industries come continually into being at the same time – and often the new jobs are more rewarding in terms of remuneration and involve less drudgery than the old ones that have disappeared.

It should also be mentioned here that economic and technological progress is only attainable in the context of a free market economy. Without economic freedom, the progress achieved since the Industrial Revolution would not have occurred. There are no mysterious 'material productive forces' operating independently of the economic system we adopt, as Karl Marx erroneously asserted. If one looks at Marxist economic theory, from a practical implementation point of view it appears to proceed from the assumption that the economy is static, or that something akin to an evenly rotating economy – an economy that will never change – can be established. However, it is impossible to actually create such a static economy: there are constantly changes in population, mineral deposits are mined out and new ones are discovered, the climate changes, the fertility of soil changes, and people have new ideas and come up with new products or new production processes (this latter factor is greatly suppressed in a socialist economy). Leaving aside that an evenly rotating economy would hardly be desirable – it would be 'akin to an anthill' as Mises says – it is at best a mental tool. It can never be representative of reality. Free market capitalism is not merely one of many ways available to achieve economic progress – it is the only way.

Humanoid Robots, Military Robots, Simulacra



Below are a few videos showing humanoid robots that have been built in recent years, as well as robots that emulate certain human (or animal) features, especially modes of walking and even flying robots. This is by no means a comprehensive overview, these are just a few of the more interesting examples we have come across. Why would anyone want to build a humanoid robot? There are a number of interesting applications. For instance, the pair of robots shown below is apparently inter alia going to be used to provide companionship to patients in hospitals:

Two very life-like humanoid Japanese robots

Next comes Jules, who clearly is much too friendly to be a human, filmed here while saying good-bye to his maker before he is switched off in order to be shipped to the University of West England.

Jules saying good-bye before he's switched off and speculating whether he will dream

One of the most advanced walking robots is the Honda Asimo, which looks a bit like a shrunken astronaut:

A video showing all features of the Asimo 2012

The HRP-4 humanoid robot, a human-sized walking robot prototype:

AIST's HRP-4 walking around.

A quite fascinating robot is the military robot mule 'Big Dog' developed by Boston Dynamics, a four-legged robot that can climb over obstacles, negotiate difficult terrain and manages to keep its balance when kicked or when it loses its grip on ice:

Big Dog, the mule robot for the military – it would be nice if they muffled the annoying sound of its motors, but otherwise it's quite impressive

Boston Dynamics is also working on PETMAN, a humanoid military robot, the prototype of which can be seen in action here:

PETMAN, or rather, PETMAN's legs, running on a treadmill

A very interesting idea is this simple i-Pad controlled quasi-simulacrum, essentially a robotic double of its owner in the form of a screen on wheels. One can send it out to have 'live' communications with people elsewhere without having to leave one's home. Owners of this device will in the future probably have to specify whether they come to visit in person or whether they will send their double. Presumably it will one day also be able to go shopping.

Roaming around as a screen on wheels – a simple quasi-simulacrum

Then there are the quadrotor flying robots developed by the Penn School of Engineering and Applied Science, performing a well known piece of music in this video:

The quadrotor robots perform the James Bond theme

Entertainment robots are also in fashion lately. First up, the relatively harmless violin-playing Toyota robot which is highly unlikely to endanger the livelihood of human violin players just yet:

Toyota's violin-playing robot scratches away with understandably muted enthusiasm

There's a singing and dancing robot by the name of Titan:

Titan sings and dances and gets into a brawl

There is of course also a sex robot available by now – the 'Roxxxy True Companion', which can upload different personalities and is capable of both small talk and, well, servicing its owner. Apparently the first impression reviews were rather mixed though, due to the considerable creepiness factor:

The somewhat creepy sex robot Roxxxy

Lastly, speaking of the weird, we would be remiss not to introduce you to a piece of slightly overpriced art, the creepy singing android heads, who are clamoring for their freedom – very much out of tune:

The out of tune android heads trio – it can be yours for only $75,000

Addendum: Contour Crafting



On a related topic, 3-D printers seem to have come a long way as this TED talk by Behrokh Khoshnevis reveals – he plans to 'print' entire houses with the help of giant scaled up 3-D printers:

Behrokh Khshnevis talks about the use of scaled-up 3-D printing techniques in construction

In conclusion, it certainly appears that robotics is progressing at quite a rapid rate these days. To us this is a source of wonderment and reaffirms our belief in the power of human ingenuity. The future that was once considered science fiction is ever closer to becoming every day reality. Now, if only we had a sound monetary system…

Dear Readers!

You may have noticed that our so-called “semiannual” funding drive, which started sometime in the summer if memory serves, has seamlessly segued into the winter. In fact, the year is almost over! We assure you this is not merely evidence of our chutzpa; rather, it is indicative of the fact that ad income still needs to be supplemented in order to support upkeep of the site. Naturally, the traditional benefits that can be spontaneously triggered by donations to this site remain operative regardless of the season - ranging from a boost to general well-being/happiness (inter alia featuring improved sleep & appetite), children including you in their songs, up to the likely allotment of privileges in the afterlife, etc., etc., but the Christmas season is probably an especially propitious time to cross our palms with silver. A special thank you to all readers who have already chipped in, your generosity is greatly appreciated. Regardless of that, we are honored by everybody's readership and hope we have managed to add a little value to your life.

Bitcoin address: 12vB2LeWQNjWh59tyfWw23ySqJ9kTfJifA