The article, “New Reporter? Call Him Al, for Algorithm” discusses how computer algorithms can now replace journalists by generating sports and business articles for local newspapers. Using a basic formula and some raw data, the computer can produce the same type of news reports and articles that were once written by journalists. The article also mentions that depending on where the article is published, citing areas such as New York and New England, the algorithm can even use a tone that is appropriate for the audience. Taking reader preference into account shows that even computers are now attempting to add that little extra; therefore crossing the line between being a “routine creator” and a “creative creator”.
After reading this, I immediately connected to the book and
the idea of outsourcing “routine creators”. If journalists are being replaced
by algorithms, how far are we from robots or computers taking our jobs as well?
The book seems to suggest that having that “extra” and bringing creativity to
your “routine” job may be one thing that can spare you from being replaced. However,
if a company can find a computer that can do a job cheaper than a human being,
will creativity really outweigh cost savings?
I just finished reading this section as well, and was struck by the same passage. I started thinking about the rise of cyber schools, which is only just beginning. If a handful of great teachers create great online content, then there are just a handful of courses out there--very frightening from a diversity perspective. As far as frightening for our job outlooks--it would just take assistants to monitor the delivery and grade the work. Not to mention..... there are already prototypes of programs that can grade essays....it's only a matter of time before this is improved. That would all certainly alleviate the problem of paying teachers! I think that the creativity Rebecca mentions is therefore that much more critical.
ReplyDeleteIt was a pretty sobering section. Especially as Raghuram Rajan points out the history of job-replacement after a recession.
ReplyDeletePost WWII to 1991: 8 months
After 1991: 23 months
After 2001: 38 months
After 2007: expected to take 5 years or more
The idea that technology is making businesses more efficient and therefore making us obsolete is way too Matrix for me!
FYI: I can only post comments. Therefore - I made 5 posts to Ed Doran's post entitled The System is Broke and Broken from June 30,2012. Check 'em out if you wish.
I had the same troubling feeling reading this section of the book. I wonder if I am doing enough in my profession as a creator--and thus preserving my job. Since I teach the same subject each semester, does it mean Mrs. Hersker can be outsourced to someone who can serve in a routine way? Perhaps we need to branch out in this professional development, and figure out ways to make ourselves even more unique, and therefore an asset to the profession.
ReplyDeleteThe writer says that we are living in “Flat World 2.0—a hyper-connected world” while I am reading a highlighting text on a Kindle. What will teaching look like in Flat World 3.0?