<谷歌翻譯>
AI時代就業和技能的演變
由於人工智能改變了各行各業所做的工作，公司和政府可以通過支持收入和促進技能培訓幫助工人轉型。
公司和政府面臨著人工智能（AI）改變未來工作方式的壓力。在6月份的“Aspen Ideas Festival”上錄製的這段錄像中，專家Markle Foundation首席執行官兼總裁ZaëBaird， MIT媒體實驗室算法正義聯盟的創始人Joy Buolamwini;大西洋的國家通訊員詹姆斯·法洛斯（James Fallows）和Coursera的聯合創始人Andrew Ng討論如何讓每個人都能輕鬆過渡到這個新時代。
Andrew Ng：AI是新的電力。大約一百年前，我們開始在美國推廣電力，它改變了每一個主要行業，從醫療保健，文化到交通，通信和製造業，現在都是電力供應。
我們現在看到了一個令人驚訝的清晰的AI路徑，也可以改變每一個主要行業。從更好的醫療，更個性化的教育到更高效的零售和製造到自動駕駛汽車，這將取代許多工作，從呼叫中心運營商到自動駕駛汽車到來時，數以百萬計的卡車司機和可能會受到影響的出租車司機。但對於白領和藍領工人來說，情況確實如此。
AI真的很擅長閱讀放射影像，所以如果你們有一個兒子，一個女兒或者一個從醫學院畢業的放射學學位的朋友，我想他們在放射學方面可能會有一個非常好的5年職業生涯。甚至10年。但我不打算今天從事同樣的放射工作40年的職業生涯。這將會帶來挑戰，並會對社會施加壓力，想出解決辦法，例如新的教育制度，以幫助那些工作將會流離失所的人。
在人工智能時代誰將成為工作的守門人？
Joy Buolamwini：隨著自動化的興起，你肯定會談論失業的工作。但是我認為，我們不是那麼在意的是，誰成為那里工作的守門員？即使是現在，你也有自動化系統通過應用程序尋找工作，尋找特定的模式。
這些具體的模式可能反映出先前決策者的偏見。所以，現在你所做的就是嵌入這種偏見，如果你不是故意檢查偏見或者試圖採取措施來保證公正的話。我們非常關注以數據為中心的技術。在某些方面，正如我的一位朋友所說，數據就是命運。如果你有偏見的數據，你注定有偏見的結果或你的預測，如果沒有檢查。
勞動力市場適用於所有美國人
佐·貝爾德：一百年前我們發明了高中，但是今天我們還沒有真正發明出這個數字經濟的一部分。今天的數字經濟正在改變國家，我們需要為人們創造機構來實現這一轉變。
熟練的馬克爾基金會計劃是為了創造一個勞動力市場，為70％沒有大學文憑的美國人工作。現在我們的勞動力市場正朝著大多數增長型工作要求獲得學士學位（四年制學位）的方向發展。而且我們知道這不是人們進入這些工作的獨特途徑。因此，我們正在與雇主合作，利用數據來了解工作所需的技能，並使數據透明化，並使求職者能夠理解這一點。我們正在與教練一起幫助人們理解這些數據，並找出他們需要什麼樣的訓練。我們正在與教育工作者更好地了解他們所教授的內容如何與人們工作所需的技能相聯繫。
過渡到人工智能為每個人工作
詹姆斯·法洛斯（James Fallows）：我還沒有活過美國的所有歷史，但是我活著很多，並且已經閱讀了其餘的大部分內容。美國經濟的故事是重複的失業和失業，人們找出找到新的機會的方法。在我祖父母的時代，大多數美國人是農民，現在幾乎沒有美國人是農民，儘管它是世界上領先的農業國。所以[前進的道路將需要]使新培訓機會成為可能，並使人們與正在開放的熟練技能行業中的大量中等或高工資技能工作相匹配。
ZoëBaird：把重點放在工作培訓資金上，看看我們已經花錢的項目，並確保它們可以用於各種培訓方案，讓各州進行一些實驗，這一點非常重要。
但也有背後的數據，這有助於各國了解增長工作的位置，技能是什麼，在哪裡進行投資。因此，聯邦政府既可以指導花費的資金，也需要更多的技能培訓資金，但同時也可以通過增加可用的數據，使這些美元花得更多。
Joy Buolamwini：我的主要建議之一是查看數據集，看他們是如何平衡你想要服務的人的代表性，或者你試圖做的決定的類型。
詹姆斯·法洛斯（James Fallows）：當他們從不可避免地受到壓力的工作（無論是採礦還是零售還是涉及交通的事物）轉變為汽車駕駛汽車時，尋求支持人們收入的方法，以便他們既能感受到經濟安全心理安全為我們的經濟應該繼續生產的新工作做好準備。
Andrew Ng：與其說是無條件的基本收入，不如說我有一個不同的解決方案，那就是有條件的基本收入，但是以個人學習為條件。我認為工作的尊嚴是有的。我寧願讓社會付錢給人繼續學習，而不是付錢給別人，因為儘管很多工作都是流離失所，但是卻有很多的工作，我們找不到足夠的人做這些工作。
如果我們能夠付錢讓人們不要什麼都不做，而是去學習，那麼我認為這會增加他們獲得重新進入勞動力所需技能的機率。並向納稅人回饋，為我們的經濟創造新的價值創造引擎。
The evolution of employment and skills in the age of AI
As artificial intelligence alters work done in all manner of industries, companies and governments can help workers transition by supporting incomes and facilitating skills training.
The pressure is on for companies and governments to address the ways that artificial intelligence (AI) is altering the future of work. In this video, recorded at the Aspen Ideas Festival in June, experts—Markle Foundation CEO and president Zoë Baird; Joy Buolamwini, founder of the Algorithmic Justice League at MIT Media Lab; James Fallows, national correspondent of the Atlantic; and Coursera cofounder Andrew Ng—discuss how to make the transition into this new age easier for everyone.
Andrew Ng: AI is the new electricity. About 100 years ago, we started rolling out electricity in the United States, and it changed every single major industry, everything ranging from healthcare and culture to transportation, communications, and manufacturing are now all electricity powered.
We now see a surprisingly clear path for AI to also transform every single major industry. Everything ranging from much better healthcare to more personalized education to much more efficient retail and manufacturing to self-driving cars. This will displace a lot of jobs, everything ranging from call-center operators to, when self-driving cars come, the millions of truck drivers and maybe taxi drivers whose jobs will be affected. But this is true for white-collar and blue-collar workers.
AI’s getting really good at reading radiology images, so if any of you have a son or daughter or a friend graduating from medical school with a radiology degree, I think they might have a perfectly good 5-year career in radiology. Maybe even 10 years. But I wouldn’t plan for a 40-year career doing that same radiology job today. This will create challenges and will put pressure on society to figure out solutions such as a new educational system to help those whose jobs will be displaced.
Who will become the gatekeepers of jobs in an age of artificial intelligence?
Joy Buolamwini: With the rise of automation, you definitely have conversations about jobs that are going to be lost. But I think something we’re not talking as much about is who then become the gatekeepers for the jobs that are there? Even now, you have automated systems going through applications for jobs, looking for specific patterns.
Those specific patterns might reflect prejudice in selection from prior decision makers. So now what you do is you embed that prejudice, potentially, if you’re not intentional about checking for bias or trying to take measures to ensure fairness. We’re very much focused on data-centric technologies. In some ways, as one of my friends likes to say, data is destiny. If you have biased data, you’re destined to have bias in your outcomes or your predictions if it’s left unchecked.
A labor market that works for all Americans
Zoë Baird: One hundred years ago we invented the high school, but today we haven’t really invented the paths to be part of this digital economy. Today the digital economy is transforming the country, and we need to create the institutions for people to be able to make that transition.
Skillful [a Markle Foundation initiative] is an effort to create a labor market that works for the 70 percent of Americans who don’t have a college diploma. Our labor market now is increasingly going in the direction of requiring a bachelor’s degree, a four-year degree, for most growth jobs. And we know that that isn’t the singular path for people to get into those jobs. So we’re working with employers to use data on what the skills are that are needed in jobs and make that data transparent and enable job seekers to understand that. We’re working with coaches to help people make sense of that data and figure out what kind of training they need. We’re working with educators to understand better how what they’re teaching can be connected with the skills that people need for work.
Making the transition to artificial intelligence work for everyone
James Fallows: I haven’t been alive for all of American history, but I’ve been alive for a lot of it and have read about a lot of the rest of it. The story of the US economy is of repeated dislocations and losses of jobs and people figuring out ways to have new opportunities. In my grandparents’ time, most Americans were farmers, and practically no Americans are farmers now, even though it is a leading agricultural nation in the world. So [the way forward will require] making it possible both in terms of new training opportunities and of matching people with a lot of medium- or high-wage skilled jobs that are in the skilled trades that are opening up.
Zoë Baird: It’s very important to focus on job-training funding and to look at the programs where we’re already spending money and make sure that they can be used for a variety of training options and to let the states experiment somewhat.
But to also have data behind that that helps the states understand where the growth jobs are, what the skills are, where to make those investments. So the federal government can both direct the dollars it spends, and we need much more skills-training funding, but it can, at the same time, make those dollars spent much more wisely by enhancing the data that’s available.
Joy Buolamwini: One of my major recommendations would be looking at the data sets to see how balanced they are to be representative of the people you want to serve or the types of decisions that you’re trying to make.
James Fallows: Finding ways to support people’s income as they make this transition from jobs that are inevitably coming under pressure, whether it’s mining or retail or things involving transportation, as auto-driving vehicles come up, so that they can feel both the economic security and the psychic security to be ready for the new jobs that our economy should keep producing.
Andrew Ng: Rather than unconditional basic income, there’s a different solution I favor, which is conditional basic income, but conditioned on individuals studying. I think that there’s something in the dignity of work. Rather than paying people to do nothing, I would rather have society pay people to keep studying, because even though many jobs are displaced, there are so many jobs where we just can’t find enough people to do that work.
If we can pay people not to do nothing but instead to study, I think this increases the odds that they’ll gain the skills they need to reenter the workforce. And contribute back to the taxpayers that could contribute to this new engine of value creation for our economy.
沒有留言:
張貼留言
發表意見者，請留稱呼。用匿名不留稱呼者，一律自動刪除。