Are We About To Be Even More Marginalised?

Post Reply New Topic

I must be tired but "huh?"

First, robots are tools. They are hard-soft integrated technology systems programmed to do specific functions, primarily in industrial assembly processes. Although they can operate in many ways in most settings they perform specific repetitive tasks.

Second, emotions in a robot, while interesting, offer no economic value. Building such a device would be expensive and time consuming and unless some corporation or NT can make a profit it will never pass a beta / prototype stage. A science fiction writer's dream does not a dollar in the wallet make.

How can anyone consider this a legitimate threat? A band of roving NTs with gifted IQs (??) are out to create emotionally embedded robots with free choice to deliberately marginalize Aspies (??) and follow the NT's every whim...at least until the robots figure out that they don't feel like it and stop!

The fact that NTs even consider us on the same planet, let alone consider us at all enough to spend millions of dollars on this borders the strange. The fact that this is done by droves of NTs with brilliant IQs within the gifted or genius range approaches the inconceivable. Absolutely priceless. LOL.

One more time: I am not suggesting this is a deliberate effort to marginalise us. My concerns are that that would be a side effect.

As to where the profit lies in this: the populations of many countries are aging. The cost of hiring enough humans to take care of all the elderly patients is staggering. For that matter, hiring people to take your order for a burger and fries adds up over time. If robots could be designed to handle these tasks, and made at a low enough cost (just because this isn't possible now does not mean it won't become so), there could be a huge profit in manufacturing them.

And, although no one is deliberately trying to shut us out, if these robots become common, and they are designed to interact specifically according to NT rulesets, then whatever the intent of the design, the practical effect of it will be that we will be unable to interact well with these common tools. Why is that point so hard to understand?

When you walk across the ground, you are probably not bothering to plot your course so that you'll crush insects with every footstep. But, to the insect who happens to be in the spot where your foot lands, your intent matters much less than the fact it is now squashed and dead. If another insect shouts "Look out!" the only thing that matters is seeing where the foot is going to land; the intent behind it has no effect on the outcome.

I understand that concern but I think you are assuming a dichotomy where there isn't one. You are assuming that if programming instructions are added that allow the robots to respond to certain NT body language or speech that the capacity to respond to more direct commands will disappear. There is no reason to think that. That's not what happens in other machines. Adding new features doesn't mandate the removal of previous features. I think you are anthropomorphizing these robots and forgetting they are nothing but machines and what happens with machines as they proliferate is that features get added and muliple variations are created to serve diverse markets.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think this situation is that simple. Once a robot is programmed to respond to "body language", it will tend to interpret even a direct command in the context of those signals, because that is what NTs will want and expect. And we do send off signals - just not the right ones. So the added feature will influence how we interact with this new type of robot, and not in an ideal way.

Now, only experience will show just how large a problem this will become. It might be a minor issue, easily dealt with, or it might create a greater hurdle. I think the time to be concerned about the potential is now, so we can at least consider how best to express our concerns. No, this isn't the only problem, and it probably isn't the worst one. I'm not suggesting it should receive all our attention. But the problems that get ignored are the ones that tend to come back and bite you.

Will there be alternate programming available to allow robots to interact with the autistic? It is possible, and I'd think that's a good thing, but unless someone sees a profit in that, or a public relations benefit... Meanwhile, many NTs seem to be of the opinion that it is "best" for us to be forced to interact in their way. So although I can't claim to know just how severe the problems might be, I do see a real possibility of problems with a feature of this sort.

Look at computer programs. Whether or not you consider this a good thing, when the "ribbon" was added in MS Office, other features were removed, in part I presume to reduce the burden of maintaining the code. Adding features is not always just a matter of leaving the old in place and layering something else on top. It is often considered desirable to shift all focus over to the new, "better" features.

Have you considered that NTs do not operate the same way from a feedback response perspective? There are over 2000+ languages in the world, each linked to a separate culture and geographic nuance. In some parts of the world shaking your head side by side means no and in others yes. This concept of a "universal" NT response that will lock us out from machine interaction completely oversimplifies how NT culture works and the challenges to build such programming.

I advise multi-national corporations on technology investment. That is my job and profession and I have been doing it for many years. Unless such technology can yield an ROI (Return on Investment) in a specific time frame (which for consumer electronics is 6 to 18 months max), for intermediate technology is 3 years and for ERP enterprise scale software systems such as SAP the horizon is 7 to 10 years, they will not invest.

This is a gross oversimplification as well. Organizations have internal departmental and individual agendas and politics totally unrelated to strategic vision or even money but have everything to do with job preservation, power, ego, logic, illogic, etc. Thinking that corporations run like the movies and TV portray is naive at best. Don't discount internal politics.

You are also discounting the political impact such as unions, governmental and non-governmental organizations, lobbying organizations, and other personnel resisting with the perception of losing their jobs or affecting their constituency.

You are discounting the resistance of the public which likes "toy" technology such as cell phones and TVs but are resistant to anything that may automate choice out of the equation. Not everyone loves technology. I personally like it, have been programming for 20 years and architecting large scale data and BI analytic systems for 12 years. Additionally I am on the planning committee of a national robotics competition organization. But when I come home I want a paper book and I don't even touch the microwave.

Technology is a better tool but only a tool. Robots are just that: they are not companions, friends, or even society transforming. They are excellent ways to train STEM skills, engage in interesting competition, and automate manufacturing to ensure 6-sigma quality. That’s it.

The main challenges that AS people have regarding NTs are that NTs won’t waste their worrying if they will be excluded by technology. They use it and if it is ineffective they move on. If you are worried about how robots will interface, go into technology development or strategic planning for business or political action and take control over technological innovation and direction. You are not a victim and robots will not exclude Aspies. If they do, so what? Build different robots?

It is our attitudes that marginalize us from NTs. Robots are the least of our worries.

A robot can't form illogical opinions, and talk against you behind your back. It won't have the capacity recognize the pecking order, either. You'd basically be dealing with pre-programmed responses, so it's nothing like socializing.