会笑会学习有礼貌：家用机器人Jibo

    人工智能无疑是很多美国人耳熟能详的东西，这既托了电影《她》的福，也是因为很多人一直担心机器人会抢了我们的饭碗。《纽约时报》(The New York Times)最近刊发的一篇名为《机器人护士的未来》的文章乐观地表示，机器人护工未来可能会承担起照顾“婴儿潮”一代老年人的重任，从而将大大减轻我们这一代年轻人的养老压力。

    “在理想世界里，等我们老了，每个人都应该至少有一名善良、合格的人类护工来照顾我们的身体和精神需求。但我们大多数人并非住在‘理想国’，因此一个可靠的机器人很可能强于一个不可靠甚至有虐待倾向的人——更别说可能根本没人来照顾我们。”

    这篇文章声称，在日本，由于护工不足，机器人已经承担起了与老年痴呆患者交谈的任务。类似的护士机器人也出现在了瑞典等欧洲国家。

    但也并非所有人都欢迎这种新进展。对于这篇文章，北卡罗来纳大学(University of North Carolina)信息学院社会学教授泽伊内普•图菲克希撰文回应道：“这是第三个机器时代的失败。”

    “在我看来，把大量的老人和孩子关在屋子里——尤其是有残疾的儿童，然后用机器人陪着他们干这干那，而全球大量的人类则忙着找一份勉强糊口的工作，这其实比狄更斯笔下的机器工业化噩梦更可怕，比卡夫卡笔下冷漠、疏远的职场更可悲。”

    “这相当于放弃了对保持人性的渴望，放弃了通过关爱来彼此联系，放弃了互相照顾。”

    图菲克希认为，从失业数据来看，我们并非面临护工的短缺。相反，“我们面临的是缺乏关爱。”

    与此同时，皮尤研究中心（Pew Research）的一项新研究显示，对科技行业有影响力的人们在机器人究竟会促进还是会损害国民经济的问题上持不同态度。约半数以上受访者认为，机器人抢走的工作不会比它们创造的工作多，因此会给经济带来正能量。另一半受访者则对与机器人共处的未来感到不太乐观。

    “有48%的受访者认为，未来10年里，机器人将会取代大量白领和蓝领工人。这不仅会导致大量人口失业，还会导致社会失序。”

    布雷西亚认为，Jibo并不是要成为老年人的护工，也不想取代人力劳动。研制这些机器人的目的，是为了帮助用户能够独立面对老年生活。她表示：“Jibo是要给人以能量，帮助人们做他们想做、需要做的事，而不是要取代别人。”

    她表示：“有很多人本能地表示反对。我们并不是要发明一个机器人护工，而是要让人们能够独立生活，在情感上与他们的家庭保持连接，因为这才是最重要的。”（财富中文网）

    译者：朴成奎

    Artificial intelligence has certainly been top-of-mind for many Americans, both because of the film Her and ever-present economic fears that robots will make our jobs redundant. A recent New York Times article, “The Future of Robot Caregivers,” sunnily outlined how robots could lighten the burden of caring for aging baby boomers:

    “In an ideal world, it would be: Each of us would have at least one kind and fully capable human caregiver to meet our physical and emotional needs as we age. But most of us do not live in an ideal world, and a reliable robot may be better than an unreliable or abusive person, or than no one at all.”

    In Japan, robots help with a nursing shortage by conversing with patients that have dementia. Similar life-helper robots can be found in Sweden and around Europe, according to the Times.

    Not everyone welcomes this development. “This how to fail the third machine age,” wrote Zeynep Tufekci, a sociology professor at the University of North Carolina’s iSchool, in response to the article.

    “In my view, warehousing elderly and children—especially children with disabilities—in rooms with machines that keep them busy, when large numbers of humans beings around the world are desperate for jobs that pay a living wage is worse than the Dickensian nightmares of mechanical industrialization, it’s worse than the cold, alienated workplaces depicted by Kafka.”

    “It’s an abdication of a desire to remain human, to be connected to each other through care, and to take care of each other.”

    Tufekci argues that based on unemployment figures, we’re not facing a shortage of caregivers. Rather, she writes, “we’re facing a shortage of caring.”

    Meanwhile, a new study from Pew Research suggests that tech industry influencers are split on whether robots will help or hurt the economy. Just over half of those surveyed believed robots won’t take away more jobs than they create, resulting in a net positive for the economy. However, the other half felt less optimistic about our robotic future.

    “The other 48%, though, think that robots will displace huge numbers of white and blue collar workers in the next 10 years, which would not only leave people unemployed but which could disrupt social order.”

    Breazeal contends that Jibo isn’t meant to be a caregiver for aging people or a replacement for human labor. The robots are meant to help older users age independently. “Jibo is about empowerment and helping people do what they want to do and what they need to do,” she says. “Its not about replacing people.”

    “There’s a lot of kneejerk reaction,” she adds. “We’re not trying to create a robot caregiver at all. We’re empowering people to live independently and be emotionally connected to their family, because that’s what matters.”