WEBVTT - LIVE: We Are Not Machines - with Sarah O'Connor 

0:00:15.410 --> 0:00:22.370
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin. Tim here with an exciting announcement about the Cautionary Club,

0:00:22.690 --> 0:00:26.850
<v Speaker 1>our Patreon community for Cautionary Tales listeners. So many of

0:00:26.850 --> 0:00:30.210
<v Speaker 1>you joined our live table read earlier this year that

0:00:30.330 --> 0:00:33.610
<v Speaker 1>we're doing it again. Join me and I production team

0:00:33.770 --> 0:00:37.690
<v Speaker 1>for a live reading of an unreleased episode about the

0:00:37.730 --> 0:00:43.410
<v Speaker 1>people who almost invented the iPhone fifteen years early and

0:00:43.450 --> 0:00:46.770
<v Speaker 1>the surprising reasons they failed. This will be a chance

0:00:46.850 --> 0:00:49.010
<v Speaker 1>for you to see how the stories we tell are

0:00:49.010 --> 0:00:53.490
<v Speaker 1>developed in real time and ask your burning questions about

0:00:53.490 --> 0:00:57.010
<v Speaker 1>Cautionary Tales. It's on the eighth of July at five

0:00:57.050 --> 0:01:01.090
<v Speaker 1>pm UK or noon Eastern. If you join the Patreon

0:01:01.170 --> 0:01:03.770
<v Speaker 1>before then, or if you're already a member, you'll get

0:01:03.770 --> 0:01:09.810
<v Speaker 1>your exclusive invitation. Head to Patreon dot com slash Cautionary

0:01:09.850 --> 0:01:13.450
<v Speaker 1>Club that Patreon p A t R e O N

0:01:13.770 --> 0:01:25.490
<v Speaker 1>dot com slash Cautionary Club. Missus Goodair is enjoying a

0:01:25.570 --> 0:01:29.690
<v Speaker 1>leisurely breakfast while she reads the morning paper. It's April

0:01:29.930 --> 0:01:34.410
<v Speaker 1>eighteen twelve, and the headlines are dominated by Wellington's military

0:01:34.410 --> 0:01:40.010
<v Speaker 1>successes in Spain. A strange noise jolts her from her reading.

0:01:40.770 --> 0:01:44.650
<v Speaker 1>It sounds like the iron gates to her home rattling.

0:01:46.650 --> 0:01:49.730
<v Speaker 1>She rushes upstairs to get a better view and sees

0:01:49.770 --> 0:01:53.410
<v Speaker 1>the mob for it is a mob. More clearly, they're

0:01:53.410 --> 0:01:58.050
<v Speaker 1>throwing stones, making lude gestures, and shouting for her to

0:01:58.130 --> 0:02:02.250
<v Speaker 1>open the gates. Two men appear to be wearing dresses,

0:02:02.690 --> 0:02:08.450
<v Speaker 1>proclaiming loudly to be General Lud's wives. She knows exactly

0:02:08.450 --> 0:02:12.050
<v Speaker 1>what this is about. It's about what's in her husband's

0:02:12.130 --> 0:02:16.570
<v Speaker 1>mill next door. So why are they at her house?

0:02:18.010 --> 0:02:22.450
<v Speaker 1>Her husband, John Goodair, is out of town. She hovers

0:02:22.450 --> 0:02:26.770
<v Speaker 1>at the window, unsure of what to do. The mob

0:02:26.850 --> 0:02:30.450
<v Speaker 1>leaders grow impatient. They shout to their comrades that it's

0:02:30.490 --> 0:02:33.770
<v Speaker 1>time to move on and begin marching through the streets

0:02:33.810 --> 0:02:37.970
<v Speaker 1>of Stockport. As they weave through the town, they smash

0:02:38.050 --> 0:02:42.890
<v Speaker 1>windows and break down factory doors. By noon, the mob

0:02:42.930 --> 0:02:48.970
<v Speaker 1>has swelled over two thousand men. Soon they run out

0:02:48.970 --> 0:02:52.530
<v Speaker 1>of targets, so they turned back to where they began,

0:02:53.490 --> 0:02:58.250
<v Speaker 1>John Goodair's enormous mill, the place many of them have

0:02:58.330 --> 0:03:02.410
<v Speaker 1>spent their working lives. Once a symbol of pride in

0:03:02.450 --> 0:03:06.650
<v Speaker 1>their craft, now a symbol of everything they feel is

0:03:06.770 --> 0:03:11.850
<v Speaker 1>wrong with the industrialized world. They break down the doors,

0:03:12.490 --> 0:03:16.970
<v Speaker 1>smash through the windows, and destroy all they can inside

0:03:17.690 --> 0:03:22.810
<v Speaker 1>every last frame, every last spindle. The mob has grown

0:03:23.130 --> 0:03:26.250
<v Speaker 1>so large that even the iron gates to the Good

0:03:26.250 --> 0:03:31.970
<v Speaker 1>Air Home can't hold them back. Missus Goodair has already

0:03:31.970 --> 0:03:38.050
<v Speaker 1>gone a wise move. The Luddites burn the house to

0:03:38.130 --> 0:03:43.810
<v Speaker 1>the ground. I'm Tim Harford and you're listening to Cautionary

0:03:43.850 --> 0:04:08.770
<v Speaker 1>Tales live at the Bristol Festival of Economics. Loyal listeners

0:04:08.770 --> 0:04:11.690
<v Speaker 1>will remember this is not the first time the Luddites

0:04:11.770 --> 0:04:15.090
<v Speaker 1>have featured on this podcast. Two years ago I told

0:04:15.130 --> 0:04:18.730
<v Speaker 1>you about the failure of the Luddite Revolution, the weavers

0:04:18.770 --> 0:04:24.010
<v Speaker 1>who were incensed that automation was devaluing their craft in general,

0:04:24.090 --> 0:04:29.570
<v Speaker 1>Lud's rage against the machines. Today, the Ludites seem more

0:04:29.610 --> 0:04:34.730
<v Speaker 1>relevant than ever as the so called Ai revolution threatens

0:04:34.770 --> 0:04:38.890
<v Speaker 1>to overturn the world of work. So should we be

0:04:39.130 --> 0:04:43.850
<v Speaker 1>smashing up large language models or is resisting as futile

0:04:43.850 --> 0:04:46.410
<v Speaker 1>as it was for the Luddites? Who's going to be

0:04:46.490 --> 0:04:51.730
<v Speaker 1>most affected? And have economists been asking the wrong questions

0:04:51.890 --> 0:04:57.050
<v Speaker 1>all along? I'm joined by a very special guest, Sarah O'Connor.

0:04:57.250 --> 0:05:00.810
<v Speaker 1>She's a Financial Times journalist with a specialism in technology

0:05:00.890 --> 0:05:04.730
<v Speaker 1>and work, and she's written a book called we are

0:05:04.770 --> 0:05:09.490
<v Speaker 1>not machines the fight for the future of work. She

0:05:09.650 --> 0:05:12.610
<v Speaker 1>is the perfect person to guide us through what's coming next,

0:05:13.050 --> 0:05:15.690
<v Speaker 1>and she's got plenty of cautionary tales to tell us.

0:05:16.450 --> 0:05:18.890
<v Speaker 2>Welcome Sarah, Hello Tim, Thank you for having me.

0:05:19.010 --> 0:05:22.010
<v Speaker 1>Oh it's a pleasure. We've got to get something out

0:05:22.010 --> 0:05:25.770
<v Speaker 1>of the way first. So, Sarah O'Connor, have you seen

0:05:25.770 --> 0:05:31.570
<v Speaker 1>the Terminator movies yet? No, you're gonna have to watch them.

0:05:31.810 --> 0:05:33.490
<v Speaker 2>It's a point of principle.

0:05:33.090 --> 0:05:34.810
<v Speaker 1>That, yeah, it now feels like stubbornness.

0:05:34.970 --> 0:05:37.250
<v Speaker 2>Yes, so you might have noticed that my name bears

0:05:37.250 --> 0:05:40.730
<v Speaker 2>a faint resemblance to the heroine of the Terminator films.

0:05:40.810 --> 0:05:43.290
<v Speaker 2>Growing up, occasionally people made Terminator jokes to me, and

0:05:43.290 --> 0:05:45.810
<v Speaker 2>as a result, I never watched them on principle because

0:05:45.850 --> 0:05:48.290
<v Speaker 2>it annoyed me. And so about a decade ago, I

0:05:48.370 --> 0:05:53.210
<v Speaker 2>went accidentally sort of globally viral when I very simply

0:05:53.290 --> 0:05:56.370
<v Speaker 2>tweeted a news story that i'd seen come out, which

0:05:56.450 --> 0:05:58.810
<v Speaker 2>was that a robot had killed a worker in a

0:05:58.850 --> 0:06:02.730
<v Speaker 2>Volkswagen factory, and didn't realize that this would cause the

0:06:02.730 --> 0:06:06.650
<v Speaker 2>Internet to break. So yeah, so people just found it

0:06:06.770 --> 0:06:10.810
<v Speaker 2>very hilarious that someone called Sarah O'Connor had written about robots,

0:06:10.850 --> 0:06:13.970
<v Speaker 2>and for about a decade people have occasionally sent me,

0:06:14.570 --> 0:06:18.330
<v Speaker 2>you know, terminator gifts posters of the Terminator films with

0:06:18.370 --> 0:06:21.730
<v Speaker 2>my face photoshopped in, and as a result, no, I

0:06:21.730 --> 0:06:22.650
<v Speaker 2>have not watched those.

0:06:22.810 --> 0:06:27.850
<v Speaker 1>Okay, So the book is it's fantastic, we are not machines.

0:06:28.330 --> 0:06:30.690
<v Speaker 1>What's the headline? What are you basically driving out with

0:06:30.730 --> 0:06:31.210
<v Speaker 1>this book?

0:06:31.410 --> 0:06:34.130
<v Speaker 2>I think what I'm trying to say in the book

0:06:34.210 --> 0:06:37.810
<v Speaker 2>is that, you know, we're all sort of drowning in

0:06:37.810 --> 0:06:43.050
<v Speaker 2>information predictions about AI and what it might do to

0:06:43.090 --> 0:06:44.810
<v Speaker 2>the world of work, and a lot of those are

0:06:44.850 --> 0:06:49.010
<v Speaker 2>coming from either economists or the big tech executives who

0:06:49.090 --> 0:06:54.370
<v Speaker 2>have created large language models and are marketing them.

0:06:53.490 --> 0:06:55.970
<v Speaker 1>And both these sources are unreliable for different reasons.

0:06:56.450 --> 0:06:59.490
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the tech guys have something to sell, right, and

0:06:59.530 --> 0:07:04.970
<v Speaker 2>so they have their own motivations. And then you know, economists,

0:07:05.050 --> 0:07:07.170
<v Speaker 2>I think are trying their best to figure out what's

0:07:07.170 --> 0:07:10.250
<v Speaker 2>going on. But the pay which they're doing that I

0:07:10.250 --> 0:07:12.850
<v Speaker 2>think is very feels very abstract to me as someone

0:07:12.930 --> 0:07:15.170
<v Speaker 2>you know, I'm a reporter at heart, So my favorite

0:07:15.210 --> 0:07:17.250
<v Speaker 2>thing to do is to like get my notebook, put

0:07:17.250 --> 0:07:19.970
<v Speaker 2>my boots on and like go and meet people and

0:07:20.490 --> 0:07:22.810
<v Speaker 2>stand outside the factory gates and talk to people about

0:07:22.810 --> 0:07:25.730
<v Speaker 2>what's actually happening. And so over the past few years,

0:07:25.730 --> 0:07:28.250
<v Speaker 2>I've just felt very frustrated that everything that I'm hearing

0:07:28.290 --> 0:07:30.970
<v Speaker 2>about this is coming from people who are either looking

0:07:30.970 --> 0:07:34.970
<v Speaker 2>at spreadsheets and models or who have a product to sell,

0:07:35.370 --> 0:07:37.050
<v Speaker 2>and I just wanted to hear less about what these

0:07:37.130 --> 0:07:39.210
<v Speaker 2>men say is going to happen, and more about what's

0:07:39.290 --> 0:07:42.410
<v Speaker 2>already actually happening from the people that it's actually happening too.

0:07:42.810 --> 0:07:45.370
<v Speaker 2>So in the book, I basically went to find people

0:07:45.610 --> 0:07:48.570
<v Speaker 2>and places and workplaces that are on the front lines

0:07:48.610 --> 0:07:52.690
<v Speaker 2>of what's already happening. So people who are encountering autonomous

0:07:52.770 --> 0:07:56.370
<v Speaker 2>robots in their workplaces, or are working with or for

0:07:57.090 --> 0:08:00.170
<v Speaker 2>or around large luggage models, and they're starting to change

0:08:00.410 --> 0:08:02.530
<v Speaker 2>the way they work. And when I did that, what

0:08:02.610 --> 0:08:05.370
<v Speaker 2>I realized was that you, no, I wasn't really hearing

0:08:05.530 --> 0:08:09.330
<v Speaker 2>this very utopian story that this is liberating me, this

0:08:09.570 --> 0:08:13.450
<v Speaker 2>is freeing me from dull, dirty, dangerous work and making

0:08:13.810 --> 0:08:16.290
<v Speaker 2>everything fantastic. But nor was I really hearing a lot

0:08:16.330 --> 0:08:19.010
<v Speaker 2>of stories that were like my job has been completely

0:08:19.090 --> 0:08:21.850
<v Speaker 2>wiped out. What I was hearing instead were stories about

0:08:22.410 --> 0:08:25.890
<v Speaker 2>quite profound changes to the nature of people's jobs and

0:08:25.930 --> 0:08:28.690
<v Speaker 2>how they felt about their jobs and whether they enjoyed

0:08:28.730 --> 0:08:30.770
<v Speaker 2>their jobs or not. And some of those were quite

0:08:31.170 --> 0:08:32.250
<v Speaker 2>cautionary tales.

0:08:32.450 --> 0:08:32.690
<v Speaker 3>You know.

0:08:32.890 --> 0:08:35.730
<v Speaker 2>There were a lot of people who were saying, actually,

0:08:35.810 --> 0:08:38.370
<v Speaker 2>what's happening to me is almost the opposite of this

0:08:38.490 --> 0:08:41.570
<v Speaker 2>idea that technology is going to give us space to

0:08:41.610 --> 0:08:44.170
<v Speaker 2>be more human. People were finding themselves sort of crunched

0:08:44.210 --> 0:08:47.890
<v Speaker 2>into systems that were paced by machines run by machines,

0:08:47.930 --> 0:08:52.530
<v Speaker 2>in which judgment was being overtaken by machines, in which

0:08:52.570 --> 0:08:55.970
<v Speaker 2>creativity was being sort of compressed or contained by machines.

0:08:56.250 --> 0:08:58.370
<v Speaker 2>And I thought, actually, if that's what's beginning to happen

0:08:58.410 --> 0:09:00.570
<v Speaker 2>to people, then everyone should know about that, and we

0:09:00.570 --> 0:09:03.450
<v Speaker 2>should try and talk about why that's happening and whether

0:09:03.490 --> 0:09:06.170
<v Speaker 2>there is a way to avoid that, because fundamentally, I

0:09:06.210 --> 0:09:07.490
<v Speaker 2>don't think that's what anybody wants.

0:09:07.650 --> 0:09:09.490
<v Speaker 1>Before we sort of take a trip to to the

0:09:09.490 --> 0:09:12.370
<v Speaker 1>cutting edge, I just I wanted to go back a

0:09:12.410 --> 0:09:15.090
<v Speaker 1>couple of hundred years we began with the ludd heightes.

0:09:15.170 --> 0:09:17.810
<v Speaker 1>Are they still relevant? Do people misunderstand the story of

0:09:17.850 --> 0:09:18.410
<v Speaker 1>the loudtes?

0:09:18.530 --> 0:09:18.690
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?

0:09:18.690 --> 0:09:20.650
<v Speaker 2>I think they are still relevant. I mean, Luddite is

0:09:20.770 --> 0:09:23.490
<v Speaker 2>just now used as a sort of a flippant term

0:09:23.530 --> 0:09:26.730
<v Speaker 2>for somebody who's sort of reflexively anti technology and just

0:09:26.730 --> 0:09:29.290
<v Speaker 2>doesn't like any new tech. But actually the ludd Heites,

0:09:29.410 --> 0:09:32.850
<v Speaker 2>they weren't really fighting against technology full stop. They were

0:09:33.010 --> 0:09:36.810
<v Speaker 2>fighting against the way in which machines were being put

0:09:36.850 --> 0:09:39.810
<v Speaker 2>to a new use, which was to cut them out

0:09:39.810 --> 0:09:43.610
<v Speaker 2>of the equation. These sort of knitting and wide frame machines.

0:09:43.650 --> 0:09:47.010
<v Speaker 2>They weren't displacing work entirely. What they did was they

0:09:47.050 --> 0:09:50.490
<v Speaker 2>allowed people who had no skill and no experience to

0:09:50.570 --> 0:09:54.090
<v Speaker 2>make a less good quality product. And in that sense,

0:09:54.130 --> 0:09:56.290
<v Speaker 2>as we might come onto it, actually has an awful

0:09:56.330 --> 0:09:59.690
<v Speaker 2>lot of similarities with some of the technologies that we're

0:09:59.730 --> 0:10:00.330
<v Speaker 2>seeing today.

0:10:00.490 --> 0:10:03.290
<v Speaker 1>Instead of knitting a stocking, you knit a massive bit

0:10:03.330 --> 0:10:05.930
<v Speaker 1>of cloth that you can make up punch stockings out of,

0:10:05.970 --> 0:10:07.730
<v Speaker 1>and you just cut them into strips and then you

0:10:07.730 --> 0:10:09.850
<v Speaker 1>make the stockings. The stockings the terrible they fall apart.

0:10:10.090 --> 0:10:13.890
<v Speaker 1>So you've suddenly got interesting, well paid jobs being replaced

0:10:13.890 --> 0:10:19.010
<v Speaker 1>by boring, badly paid jobs. You've got expensive, high quality

0:10:19.610 --> 0:10:22.130
<v Speaker 1>work being replaced by cheap, crappy work.

0:10:22.330 --> 0:10:25.450
<v Speaker 2>Even if they were lower quality. They were also a

0:10:25.530 --> 0:10:27.250
<v Speaker 2>much lower price, and that I think that was a

0:10:27.250 --> 0:10:29.210
<v Speaker 2>deal that a lot of consumers were willing to make.

0:10:29.690 --> 0:10:33.330
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about warehouses. The picture I have in

0:10:33.370 --> 0:10:35.290
<v Speaker 1>my mind, or the picture I had in my mind

0:10:35.370 --> 0:10:38.290
<v Speaker 1>before I read the book, was, in fact, I realized

0:10:38.330 --> 0:10:42.210
<v Speaker 1>a picture painted for me by you about ten years ago.

0:10:42.690 --> 0:10:45.770
<v Speaker 1>One of the things that some workers in these had

0:10:45.930 --> 0:10:49.570
<v Speaker 1>was they had this earpiece, the Jennifer unit, basically just

0:10:49.610 --> 0:10:51.650
<v Speaker 1>a voice in their ear telling them where to go

0:10:51.690 --> 0:10:54.450
<v Speaker 1>in the warehouse, what to pull off the shelves. You

0:10:54.490 --> 0:10:56.890
<v Speaker 1>don't need them to think about the best way to

0:10:56.930 --> 0:10:59.770
<v Speaker 1>get around the warehouse or to remember anything, just tobay

0:10:59.770 --> 0:11:01.930
<v Speaker 1>the voice in your head. So this sort of creation

0:11:02.010 --> 0:11:05.610
<v Speaker 1>of these flesh robots. So I was reading this article

0:11:05.650 --> 0:11:07.570
<v Speaker 1>by you about ten years ago and thinking that that

0:11:07.690 --> 0:11:10.770
<v Speaker 1>sounds bad. But of course that's ten years ago. So

0:11:11.250 --> 0:11:15.890
<v Speaker 1>how accurate is that image of what is now happening?

0:11:15.890 --> 0:11:16.570
<v Speaker 1>What's changed?

0:11:17.090 --> 0:11:19.290
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so quite a lot has changed. And actually I

0:11:19.330 --> 0:11:22.770
<v Speaker 2>think that article from ten years ago and that sort

0:11:22.810 --> 0:11:24.850
<v Speaker 2>of reporting that I've done, And just to clarify that

0:11:24.970 --> 0:11:27.450
<v Speaker 2>Jennifer unit isn't something that's used in Amazon warehouses, but

0:11:27.490 --> 0:11:30.450
<v Speaker 2>it is used in some other warehouses really informed the

0:11:30.490 --> 0:11:32.810
<v Speaker 2>way I used to think about technology. So, yeah, I

0:11:32.850 --> 0:11:34.450
<v Speaker 2>had met and interviewed a lot of people over the

0:11:34.490 --> 0:11:36.330
<v Speaker 2>years who worked in jobs in which they were basically

0:11:36.410 --> 0:11:40.850
<v Speaker 2>expected to work like robots. I used to think, well,

0:11:41.090 --> 0:11:43.330
<v Speaker 2>you know, bring on the down robots. Then you know, like,

0:11:43.370 --> 0:11:45.650
<v Speaker 2>let's get real robots in to do these jobs, like

0:11:45.690 --> 0:11:48.530
<v Speaker 2>this is a waste of kind of human potential, and

0:11:48.890 --> 0:11:51.490
<v Speaker 2>this is a great example of where automation would be brilliant.

0:11:51.530 --> 0:11:53.410
<v Speaker 2>And so I used to be quite a techno optimist

0:11:53.450 --> 0:11:55.570
<v Speaker 2>in the sense that I thought there were huge numbers

0:11:55.570 --> 0:11:58.570
<v Speaker 2>of roles that actually could and should be automated. So

0:11:58.610 --> 0:12:02.890
<v Speaker 2>what's happened now in Amazon warehouses, at least in the

0:12:02.890 --> 0:12:06.050
<v Speaker 2>one that I went to visit, is that the robots

0:12:06.090 --> 0:12:09.170
<v Speaker 2>have arrived, but not really in the way that I had.

0:12:09.410 --> 0:12:11.970
<v Speaker 2>So I'd basically imagined like a one for one swap, right,

0:12:12.010 --> 0:12:14.450
<v Speaker 2>so instead of a person walking around, you'd have like

0:12:14.450 --> 0:12:17.290
<v Speaker 2>a kind of human humanoid robot doing it.

0:12:17.730 --> 0:12:20.170
<v Speaker 1>But it's never actually like that, is it. It's never

0:12:20.250 --> 0:12:24.250
<v Speaker 1>ever like that, Like, a robot accountant is basically Microsoft exell.

0:12:24.290 --> 0:12:27.010
<v Speaker 1>A robot accountant is not C three post sitting in

0:12:27.010 --> 0:12:29.050
<v Speaker 1>your chair top.

0:12:28.970 --> 0:12:31.570
<v Speaker 2>No, exactly, and it's not how it works in Amazon either.

0:12:31.650 --> 0:12:35.050
<v Speaker 2>So I went to visit a new Amazon warehouse which

0:12:35.370 --> 0:12:38.490
<v Speaker 2>has their sort of latest automation technology. And the way

0:12:38.530 --> 0:12:41.010
<v Speaker 2>it works now is that rather than you, as a

0:12:41.050 --> 0:12:43.610
<v Speaker 2>worker walking around for like maybe ten miles a day

0:12:43.730 --> 0:12:46.970
<v Speaker 2>just weaving between all of these shelves and picking things off,

0:12:47.490 --> 0:12:50.250
<v Speaker 2>now on each floor there's a big fence and around

0:12:50.290 --> 0:12:54.570
<v Speaker 2>the perimeter of that fence, the workers stand stationary in

0:12:54.610 --> 0:12:56.530
<v Speaker 2>one place and inside the fence of the robots. But

0:12:56.530 --> 0:12:58.930
<v Speaker 2>the robots are basically like giant rumbers, and what they

0:12:58.970 --> 0:13:01.210
<v Speaker 2>do is they drive around inside this perim defence and

0:13:01.210 --> 0:13:04.130
<v Speaker 2>they pick up the shelves and they bring the shelves

0:13:04.170 --> 0:13:06.810
<v Speaker 2>to the workers. And so you now, as a worker,

0:13:06.850 --> 0:13:08.770
<v Speaker 2>you stand in one place and a robot brings you

0:13:08.810 --> 0:13:12.250
<v Speaker 2>a shirt, and then a light illuminates which part of

0:13:12.250 --> 0:13:14.250
<v Speaker 2>the shelf you need to look at, and a screen

0:13:14.330 --> 0:13:15.810
<v Speaker 2>gives you a picture of what the thing is you

0:13:15.850 --> 0:13:17.770
<v Speaker 2>need to pick off. And I tried this out. I

0:13:17.770 --> 0:13:19.610
<v Speaker 2>think I had to pick off like a mobile phone

0:13:19.650 --> 0:13:21.290
<v Speaker 2>case with a dolphin on it, so you know, you

0:13:21.330 --> 0:13:24.130
<v Speaker 2>pick it out, and then another light illuminates which box

0:13:24.170 --> 0:13:25.570
<v Speaker 2>that you need to put it into and you push

0:13:25.570 --> 0:13:28.370
<v Speaker 2>a big button and then that robot takes that shelf away,

0:13:28.410 --> 0:13:30.250
<v Speaker 2>and the next robot's already queuing up for you with

0:13:30.290 --> 0:13:31.930
<v Speaker 2>the next shelf, and you do the same thing.

0:13:32.130 --> 0:13:33.370
<v Speaker 1>How long did you do it? For?

0:13:33.650 --> 0:13:34.290
<v Speaker 2>Two minutes?

0:13:34.530 --> 0:13:36.490
<v Speaker 1>Okay? How long? How long do they do it for?

0:13:36.610 --> 0:13:39.570
<v Speaker 2>Ten hours a day, forty hours a week with two

0:13:39.650 --> 0:13:42.170
<v Speaker 2>thirty minute breaks? And so this is not what I

0:13:42.250 --> 0:13:45.370
<v Speaker 2>had imagined when I sort of cheered on the robots

0:13:45.370 --> 0:13:47.530
<v Speaker 2>and thought this would be great. You know, in some

0:13:47.570 --> 0:13:50.050
<v Speaker 2>ways I think that job is better. It is less

0:13:50.090 --> 0:13:52.930
<v Speaker 2>physically demanding than walking around for ten hours a day.

0:13:53.330 --> 0:13:55.930
<v Speaker 2>Amazon says that it's safer so they have, you know,

0:13:56.090 --> 0:13:59.250
<v Speaker 2>fewer injuries and accidents, and I think that's probably true.

0:13:59.770 --> 0:14:02.210
<v Speaker 2>But if anything, I think it's also become more boring

0:14:02.530 --> 0:14:05.970
<v Speaker 2>and more monotonous. And also it's still not that easy

0:14:06.530 --> 0:14:08.410
<v Speaker 2>on the human body to stand up for ten hours

0:14:08.450 --> 0:14:11.810
<v Speaker 2>a day, and because they're now much more productive, right

0:14:11.850 --> 0:14:14.770
<v Speaker 2>because you're not walking around from one place to the next,

0:14:14.770 --> 0:14:17.370
<v Speaker 2>and so the products are coming at you, so you're bending,

0:14:17.410 --> 0:14:20.250
<v Speaker 2>you're lifting, you're twisting over and over and over again.

0:14:20.290 --> 0:14:22.410
<v Speaker 2>So I think it's still quite quite a physically demanding

0:14:22.530 --> 0:14:25.690
<v Speaker 2>job and arguably like a bit more monotonous and a

0:14:25.690 --> 0:14:26.530
<v Speaker 2>bit lonelier.

0:14:27.010 --> 0:14:28.850
<v Speaker 1>Presumably there are people who did the old job and

0:14:28.890 --> 0:14:30.450
<v Speaker 1>now do the new job, So what do they think.

0:14:31.050 --> 0:14:34.970
<v Speaker 2>Well, I interviewed one worker who had volunteer to transfer

0:14:35.050 --> 0:14:39.370
<v Speaker 2>from a manual, old fashioned warehouse to a new one,

0:14:39.530 --> 0:14:41.530
<v Speaker 2>and he wanted to go back. He said, actually, I

0:14:41.530 --> 0:14:44.090
<v Speaker 2>don't like working with the robots. It's too intense, it's

0:14:44.130 --> 0:14:46.810
<v Speaker 2>too exhausting, it's really lonely. I don't get to talk

0:14:46.850 --> 0:14:49.730
<v Speaker 2>to anyone anymore. And he yeah, he's now transferred back

0:14:49.770 --> 0:14:51.450
<v Speaker 2>to his old warehouse.

0:14:51.730 --> 0:14:56.050
<v Speaker 1>By way of contrast, you also visited a mine in Sweden,

0:14:56.330 --> 0:14:59.090
<v Speaker 1>So how is automation taking off there?

0:14:59.890 --> 0:15:02.730
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so this mine in Sweden was right up near

0:15:02.770 --> 0:15:06.290
<v Speaker 2>the fringe of the Arctic Circle and their mine copper

0:15:06.330 --> 0:15:10.050
<v Speaker 2>there and various other minerals, and it is one of

0:15:10.090 --> 0:15:12.970
<v Speaker 2>the most sort of technologically advanced mines in the world,

0:15:13.010 --> 0:15:14.930
<v Speaker 2>or so they say. So it used to be that

0:15:14.970 --> 0:15:19.610
<v Speaker 2>miners would drive vehicles around below. Grounds are very deep down.

0:15:19.930 --> 0:15:22.650
<v Speaker 2>It's horrible down there. It's like really dark, it's really

0:15:22.770 --> 0:15:26.730
<v Speaker 2>humid and claustrophobic. And now the vehicles are autonomous, so

0:15:26.770 --> 0:15:30.530
<v Speaker 2>they drive themselves, and the miners sit in a control room.

0:15:30.850 --> 0:15:32.850
<v Speaker 2>They can take over the vehicles if they need to,

0:15:32.930 --> 0:15:34.970
<v Speaker 2>but a lot of the time they're just they're sitting there,

0:15:35.010 --> 0:15:37.250
<v Speaker 2>They're watching what's happening on big screens. They're in a

0:15:37.250 --> 0:15:40.850
<v Speaker 2>comfy chair, and they're listening to Spotify, they're listening to

0:15:41.490 --> 0:15:43.650
<v Speaker 2>the ice hockey. And the ones that I spoke to

0:15:44.090 --> 0:15:47.250
<v Speaker 2>were quite satisfied with this change in their working conditions.

0:15:47.490 --> 0:15:50.330
<v Speaker 1>Is the fact that the Swedish mineworkers are happy and

0:15:50.370 --> 0:15:54.650
<v Speaker 1>the Amazon workers are at best ambivalent about the way

0:15:54.690 --> 0:15:57.250
<v Speaker 1>their job works. What explains the difference.

0:15:57.610 --> 0:15:59.930
<v Speaker 2>So I think there's a few differences. One difference is that,

0:16:00.530 --> 0:16:02.690
<v Speaker 2>you know, the reason that in Amazon they don't have

0:16:02.770 --> 0:16:05.570
<v Speaker 2>humanoids walking around doing the whole thing is that that

0:16:05.730 --> 0:16:09.090
<v Speaker 2>technology is not ready yet and so in some ways

0:16:09.210 --> 0:16:12.530
<v Speaker 2>are still kind of plugged into a system which is

0:16:12.970 --> 0:16:17.250
<v Speaker 2>like part robot, part human, but is increasingly being paced

0:16:17.330 --> 0:16:20.370
<v Speaker 2>by the capabilities of the robots, Whereas I guess for

0:16:20.450 --> 0:16:23.690
<v Speaker 2>the miners, they do not need to be in the

0:16:23.690 --> 0:16:26.890
<v Speaker 2>cab anymore, and so that means that there's the potential

0:16:26.890 --> 0:16:30.410
<v Speaker 2>for a much kind of greater improvement in their health

0:16:30.410 --> 0:16:32.210
<v Speaker 2>and safety. But as well as that, I think there

0:16:32.290 --> 0:16:35.370
<v Speaker 2>is a governance thing. So I don't know how much

0:16:35.410 --> 0:16:38.770
<v Speaker 2>everyone knows about Sweden, but they have a very distinctive

0:16:38.890 --> 0:16:42.690
<v Speaker 2>kind of labor market whereby trade unions are very powerful,

0:16:43.330 --> 0:16:46.250
<v Speaker 2>and there is a rule that any new technology has

0:16:46.290 --> 0:16:49.290
<v Speaker 2>to be bargained collectively about before it happens. And so

0:16:50.090 --> 0:16:52.330
<v Speaker 2>before they introduced this new technology, they had to sit

0:16:52.370 --> 0:16:54.210
<v Speaker 2>down with the workers and they had to talk about

0:16:54.210 --> 0:16:56.570
<v Speaker 2>it and how it would go and what the workers'

0:16:56.610 --> 0:16:59.890
<v Speaker 2>concerns were and what the company wanted to get out

0:16:59.890 --> 0:17:03.330
<v Speaker 2>of it. And you know, more broadly in Scandinavian countries,

0:17:03.370 --> 0:17:06.250
<v Speaker 2>what you find is that when people answer surveys about

0:17:06.250 --> 0:17:09.210
<v Speaker 2>how they feel about technology, people are like much more

0:17:09.210 --> 0:17:11.690
<v Speaker 2>positive than they are in the UK or in the US,

0:17:11.810 --> 0:17:13.330
<v Speaker 2>and I think that's because they have a sense that

0:17:13.370 --> 0:17:15.410
<v Speaker 2>they will have a seat at the table when those

0:17:15.410 --> 0:17:16.330
<v Speaker 2>decisions get made.

0:17:16.610 --> 0:17:20.450
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, Sarah. You're listening to a special cautionary conversation

0:17:20.610 --> 0:17:24.370
<v Speaker 1>recorded live at the Bristol Festival of Economics. And after

0:17:24.410 --> 0:17:28.530
<v Speaker 1>the break, my guests Sarah O'Connor will be telling a

0:17:28.690 --> 0:17:42.770
<v Speaker 1>cautionary tale about language translators at artificial intelligence. Stay with us,

0:17:45.570 --> 0:17:49.050
<v Speaker 1>we're back this is the Bristol Festival of Economics. I

0:17:49.090 --> 0:17:53.010
<v Speaker 1>am Tim Harford and my special guest is Financial Times

0:17:53.090 --> 0:17:59.930
<v Speaker 1>journalist and author Sarah O'Connor. So, Sarah, perhaps the canaries

0:17:59.970 --> 0:18:03.850
<v Speaker 1>in the coal mine are the translators. When I thought

0:18:03.890 --> 0:18:07.210
<v Speaker 1>about translators, I just thought, oh, you guys are just

0:18:07.250 --> 0:18:09.490
<v Speaker 1>all You've lost all your jobs because of Google Translate.

0:18:09.570 --> 0:18:13.290
<v Speaker 1>It's all gone. But actually your the story you tell

0:18:13.290 --> 0:18:15.010
<v Speaker 1>in the book is is a lot more interesting and

0:18:15.050 --> 0:18:15.890
<v Speaker 1>more complex than that.

0:18:16.170 --> 0:18:20.210
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. So I interviewed some translators for my book. One

0:18:20.210 --> 0:18:22.490
<v Speaker 2>of them is a guy called Peter. He lives in

0:18:22.490 --> 0:18:26.370
<v Speaker 2>the Czech Republic and he translates subtitles for TV shows,

0:18:26.930 --> 0:18:28.770
<v Speaker 2>which is a great job. I mean, he told me

0:18:28.810 --> 0:18:31.210
<v Speaker 2>lots of things about why it's more difficult than you

0:18:31.290 --> 0:18:34.450
<v Speaker 2>might imagine to do that. So, for example, you know,

0:18:34.490 --> 0:18:36.530
<v Speaker 2>in English, we just have one way of saying you,

0:18:36.730 --> 0:18:39.610
<v Speaker 2>but in lots of languages, including Zech, there's like a

0:18:39.690 --> 0:18:42.010
<v Speaker 2>formal tense of you and an informal tense of you.

0:18:42.130 --> 0:18:45.570
<v Speaker 2>And so when you're writing the translated subtitles, you have

0:18:45.650 --> 0:18:48.850
<v Speaker 2>to think like, how well do these characters know each other?

0:18:48.890 --> 0:18:51.010
<v Speaker 2>Like what tense would they be speaking in? And that

0:18:51.090 --> 0:18:53.170
<v Speaker 2>might change, you know, through the course of an episode

0:18:53.250 --> 0:18:55.090
<v Speaker 2>or through the course of a series, and so there

0:18:55.130 --> 0:18:57.250
<v Speaker 2>are lots of kind of interesting judgment calls that you

0:18:57.730 --> 0:19:00.370
<v Speaker 2>have to make. And then, you know, translating jokes is

0:19:00.410 --> 0:19:04.130
<v Speaker 2>another thing that's incredibly difficult because so many jokes are

0:19:04.170 --> 0:19:07.090
<v Speaker 2>like culture specific or they're like plays on language.

0:19:07.170 --> 0:19:09.650
<v Speaker 1>We're in a bookshop where the guests of war systems

0:19:09.690 --> 0:19:12.690
<v Speaker 1>in Bristol. There must be some asterisks and obeliqs somewhere

0:19:12.690 --> 0:19:13.290
<v Speaker 1>in the bookshop.

0:19:13.370 --> 0:19:14.730
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, they're the perfect example.

0:19:14.810 --> 0:19:15.010
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:19:15.090 --> 0:19:20.090
<v Speaker 2>So Obelix's dog in the original French is called ede feaks,

0:19:20.210 --> 0:19:24.290
<v Speaker 2>which means obsession, and the brilliant English translation is dogmatics.

0:19:24.850 --> 0:19:27.210
<v Speaker 2>You know. So like, there's so much sort of creativity

0:19:27.250 --> 0:19:30.050
<v Speaker 2>and humor involved in being a really good translator, and

0:19:30.090 --> 0:19:31.930
<v Speaker 2>so like, this is a great job for people that

0:19:32.130 --> 0:19:34.490
<v Speaker 2>enjoy doing that sort of thing. But what's happened to

0:19:34.570 --> 0:19:37.010
<v Speaker 2>him and to people like him, is that he has

0:19:37.050 --> 0:19:40.410
<v Speaker 2>not lost his job entirely. Like, it's actually quite hard

0:19:40.450 --> 0:19:43.290
<v Speaker 2>to get a machine to translate things with that level

0:19:43.330 --> 0:19:47.650
<v Speaker 2>of cultural knowledge and understanding. So, just to explain slightly

0:19:47.690 --> 0:19:50.130
<v Speaker 2>the way a lot of translation works is a lot

0:19:50.130 --> 0:19:53.610
<v Speaker 2>of translators of freelancers, and there are agencies that will

0:19:53.610 --> 0:19:57.850
<v Speaker 2>take work from you know, a TV studio and then

0:19:57.890 --> 0:20:00.290
<v Speaker 2>parcel it out to freelance translators. And what those agencies

0:20:00.330 --> 0:20:03.930
<v Speaker 2>have started to do is to take something, get it

0:20:03.970 --> 0:20:06.890
<v Speaker 2>translated by a large language model or a different kind

0:20:06.930 --> 0:20:10.050
<v Speaker 2>of machine translation service, and then it to the translator

0:20:10.090 --> 0:20:11.970
<v Speaker 2>and say, hey, can you just check that this is

0:20:12.050 --> 0:20:14.210
<v Speaker 2>right and maybe like just finesse it a little bit,

0:20:14.250 --> 0:20:16.890
<v Speaker 2>polish it, make it sound a bit more human. And

0:20:16.930 --> 0:20:18.930
<v Speaker 2>this has become the kind of bete noir of lots

0:20:18.970 --> 0:20:23.090
<v Speaker 2>of translators, because what they say is that it's a

0:20:23.650 --> 0:20:26.290
<v Speaker 2>you know, you're expected to do this much faster and

0:20:26.330 --> 0:20:28.530
<v Speaker 2>be you're expected to do it for much less money.

0:20:29.010 --> 0:20:31.210
<v Speaker 2>But in fact, if you care about quality, it's very

0:20:31.210 --> 0:20:35.330
<v Speaker 2>difficult to actually check a translation is accurate, and then

0:20:35.370 --> 0:20:38.010
<v Speaker 2>even things like trying to make it sound a bit

0:20:38.050 --> 0:20:40.330
<v Speaker 2>better like that's actually what the translators told me was,

0:20:40.370 --> 0:20:42.930
<v Speaker 2>it's actually quite hard to do when there's already like

0:20:42.930 --> 0:20:45.450
<v Speaker 2>an answer in front of you, and it feels much

0:20:45.530 --> 0:20:49.050
<v Speaker 2>less creative and more kind of cumbersome and less enjoyable.

0:20:49.170 --> 0:20:52.210
<v Speaker 2>And so a job that that was sort of creative

0:20:52.250 --> 0:20:58.730
<v Speaker 2>and challenging and interesting, has become faster, harder, more monotonous,

0:20:58.770 --> 0:21:03.330
<v Speaker 2>feels more mechanical, and fundamentally kind of less satisfying. And

0:21:03.370 --> 0:21:05.050
<v Speaker 2>I think that is a real cautionary tale. And when

0:21:05.050 --> 0:21:06.650
<v Speaker 2>I was speaking to them, it made me think a

0:21:06.690 --> 0:21:09.890
<v Speaker 2>lot of the luod ites, because what the translators will

0:21:09.890 --> 0:21:12.530
<v Speaker 2>tell you is that the end product is less good

0:21:12.610 --> 0:21:15.530
<v Speaker 2>quality than There are even some studies that have checked this.

0:21:15.730 --> 0:21:18.130
<v Speaker 2>So there's a big study that looked at a bunch

0:21:18.170 --> 0:21:22.210
<v Speaker 2>of subtitles from TV shows before and after the introduction

0:21:22.330 --> 0:21:26.090
<v Speaker 2>of machine translation post editing, and the quality has kind

0:21:26.090 --> 0:21:27.010
<v Speaker 2>of deteriorated.

0:21:27.370 --> 0:21:28.370
<v Speaker 1>It's the stockings again.

0:21:28.490 --> 0:21:29.930
<v Speaker 2>It's the stockings again, exactly.

0:21:30.210 --> 0:21:33.170
<v Speaker 1>And I guess partly obviously we care about the quality

0:21:33.170 --> 0:21:36.930
<v Speaker 1>of jobs. That's important. But I guess one of the

0:21:36.970 --> 0:21:40.850
<v Speaker 1>interesting questions from the point of view of the consumer,

0:21:41.370 --> 0:21:45.210
<v Speaker 1>because the whole idea here is even if individuals get

0:21:45.250 --> 0:21:50.890
<v Speaker 1>worse jobs, the consumer gets more choice, more quality, lower prices.

0:21:51.810 --> 0:21:56.130
<v Speaker 1>I always do sort of wander is the product actually

0:21:56.170 --> 0:22:00.930
<v Speaker 1>better and will the market deliver kind of the right

0:22:01.010 --> 0:22:02.970
<v Speaker 1>trade offs or are we actually just going to make

0:22:03.250 --> 0:22:06.130
<v Speaker 1>all kinds of mistakes and we end up with crappy

0:22:06.130 --> 0:22:09.890
<v Speaker 1>products that we don't want. I'm just wondering whether I

0:22:09.890 --> 0:22:12.610
<v Speaker 1>know it don't sound like an economist here, but I'm

0:22:12.610 --> 0:22:14.890
<v Speaker 1>wondering whether we're all just going to get stockings that

0:22:14.930 --> 0:22:19.770
<v Speaker 1>fall apart and translations that we that are joyless. But

0:22:19.850 --> 0:22:24.290
<v Speaker 1>some manager somewhere was convinced by some AI salesman somewhere

0:22:24.450 --> 0:22:26.090
<v Speaker 1>that it would be that it would be fine.

0:22:26.690 --> 0:22:28.050
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, I think this is one of the

0:22:28.090 --> 0:22:30.130
<v Speaker 2>things that I realized working on the book is that

0:22:30.650 --> 0:22:33.490
<v Speaker 2>you know, economists, when they're sort of doing their modeling

0:22:33.530 --> 0:22:38.770
<v Speaker 2>about which jobs might be displaced or degraded or changed

0:22:38.810 --> 0:22:41.250
<v Speaker 2>by technology, they look at like how good is the

0:22:41.690 --> 0:22:44.490
<v Speaker 2>technology and compare that to how good is the human?

0:22:44.890 --> 0:22:47.130
<v Speaker 2>But actually, like can a robot do my job as

0:22:47.130 --> 0:22:49.650
<v Speaker 2>well as me? It's not always a particularly useful question,

0:22:49.850 --> 0:22:53.250
<v Speaker 2>Like can someone persuade my boss that a robot can

0:22:53.290 --> 0:22:55.250
<v Speaker 2>do my job as well as me? Is a more

0:22:55.290 --> 0:22:59.690
<v Speaker 2>relevant question? Or would my customers or consumers be content

0:22:59.810 --> 0:23:02.730
<v Speaker 2>to have someone do my job less well than me

0:23:03.130 --> 0:23:04.450
<v Speaker 2>but for a much cheaper price.

0:23:04.770 --> 0:23:08.650
<v Speaker 1>With the case of the translators, is this fundamentally about

0:23:08.650 --> 0:23:11.610
<v Speaker 1>the technology? This just happens to be a thing that

0:23:11.690 --> 0:23:13.770
<v Speaker 1>computers can do. At a certain speed with a certain

0:23:13.850 --> 0:23:19.330
<v Speaker 1>quality that kind of is maximally disruptive to the job

0:23:19.370 --> 0:23:22.450
<v Speaker 1>of being a translator. Or is it actually more to

0:23:22.530 --> 0:23:25.210
<v Speaker 1>do with the fact, for example, that all these people

0:23:25.210 --> 0:23:27.650
<v Speaker 1>are freelancers. Is it actually to do with economic power

0:23:27.650 --> 0:23:29.010
<v Speaker 1>and not to do with technology at all.

0:23:29.370 --> 0:23:31.290
<v Speaker 2>I think it's to do with both. But I think

0:23:31.330 --> 0:23:33.970
<v Speaker 2>you make a good point, which is that often this

0:23:34.530 --> 0:23:38.450
<v Speaker 2>question about what will AI do to the world of

0:23:38.490 --> 0:23:40.890
<v Speaker 2>work as seen as a technical question, but it's not

0:23:41.010 --> 0:23:43.570
<v Speaker 2>just a question of the technical side. It's also a

0:23:43.650 --> 0:23:49.850
<v Speaker 2>question of consumer choice and institutions and culture and bargaining

0:23:49.930 --> 0:23:55.050
<v Speaker 2>power and economic power. So yeah, I mean, partly the

0:23:55.130 --> 0:23:58.410
<v Speaker 2>reason it's been very disruptive to translators is that the

0:23:58.530 --> 0:24:02.410
<v Speaker 2>translating is like them basically all they do, like that

0:24:02.490 --> 0:24:05.810
<v Speaker 2>one task of like translating something. If you're a freelance translator,

0:24:05.850 --> 0:24:09.850
<v Speaker 2>that is pretty much your whole job, whereas for a journalist,

0:24:10.130 --> 0:24:12.890
<v Speaker 2>writing an article is actually quite a small part of

0:24:12.890 --> 0:24:16.050
<v Speaker 2>my job. My job also involves doing a lot of reading,

0:24:16.290 --> 0:24:19.490
<v Speaker 2>going out to interview people, doing stuff like this, and

0:24:19.570 --> 0:24:26.090
<v Speaker 2>so it's more disruptive in some particular professions, depending on

0:24:27.210 --> 0:24:31.410
<v Speaker 2>how much of your tasks are automatical. And then also, yeah,

0:24:31.450 --> 0:24:35.210
<v Speaker 2>like your your market power, right, If you're a freelancer,

0:24:35.250 --> 0:24:38.010
<v Speaker 2>then that's a very different thing to being a well

0:24:38.050 --> 0:24:42.010
<v Speaker 2>protected miner in a unionized mind company in Sweden.

0:24:42.450 --> 0:24:46.890
<v Speaker 1>And can we talk about coders, because superficially programmers software

0:24:46.930 --> 0:24:52.930
<v Speaker 1>coders seems quite like translators. It turns out that for

0:24:52.970 --> 0:24:55.130
<v Speaker 1>some reason, large language models seem to be pretty good

0:24:55.130 --> 0:24:57.090
<v Speaker 1>at coding. At least that's what I'm told. I wouldn't know,

0:24:57.170 --> 0:25:01.130
<v Speaker 1>but people say it's pretty good. So coders in the

0:25:01.130 --> 0:25:04.330
<v Speaker 1>same positions as translators, suddenly I've got all this terrible

0:25:04.410 --> 0:25:06.250
<v Speaker 1>code and kind of they want me to do twice

0:25:06.250 --> 0:25:07.970
<v Speaker 1>as much work for half the salary. Do they feel

0:25:07.970 --> 0:25:09.010
<v Speaker 1>the same way as the translators.

0:25:09.330 --> 0:25:12.090
<v Speaker 2>Most of the ones I interviewed do not feel like that.

0:25:13.130 --> 0:25:16.090
<v Speaker 2>I think coding is an example of a job that

0:25:16.130 --> 0:25:18.970
<v Speaker 2>in many ways actually has probably been enriched and made

0:25:19.170 --> 0:25:23.650
<v Speaker 2>more fun and more productive by this new technology. And

0:25:23.690 --> 0:25:26.370
<v Speaker 2>I think the reason that it is playing out different

0:25:26.450 --> 0:25:29.290
<v Speaker 2>is partly, you know this thing about bargaining power and

0:25:29.330 --> 0:25:32.650
<v Speaker 2>where you sit in the sort of economic chain, but also,

0:25:33.090 --> 0:25:35.530
<v Speaker 2>if you're a computer programmer, like you're what you really

0:25:35.570 --> 0:25:38.290
<v Speaker 2>care about and love is not literally sitting there and

0:25:38.330 --> 0:25:41.170
<v Speaker 2>writing out lines of code. What you love doing is

0:25:41.210 --> 0:25:45.810
<v Speaker 2>like solving problems. And so what the tools do. They

0:25:45.890 --> 0:25:48.770
<v Speaker 2>might automate some of the kind of the actual literal coding,

0:25:48.850 --> 0:25:52.810
<v Speaker 2>but they're not automating that kind of really fun creative

0:25:52.890 --> 0:25:53.850
<v Speaker 2>problem solving.

0:25:54.290 --> 0:25:54.530
<v Speaker 3>Bit.

0:25:54.850 --> 0:25:57.610
<v Speaker 2>It just allows you to like try things out or

0:25:58.090 --> 0:25:58.850
<v Speaker 2>do stuff faster.

0:25:59.090 --> 0:26:00.770
<v Speaker 1>This is the problem. This is what they keep telling us.

0:26:00.810 --> 0:26:02.690
<v Speaker 1>It's going to do for all the jobs. It's going

0:26:02.730 --> 0:26:04.490
<v Speaker 1>to do the boring stuff so you can do the

0:26:04.490 --> 0:26:05.090
<v Speaker 1>fun stuff.

0:26:05.090 --> 0:26:07.730
<v Speaker 2>And this is why they're so enthusiastic and think it's brilliant,

0:26:07.730 --> 0:26:09.850
<v Speaker 2>because for their jobs it is. That's pretty brilliant.

0:26:09.930 --> 0:26:15.050
<v Speaker 1>What is it then, that determines whether your job is

0:26:15.170 --> 0:26:19.370
<v Speaker 1>like translating or whether your job is like coding, And

0:26:19.810 --> 0:26:21.210
<v Speaker 1>is it under our control or not?

0:26:21.850 --> 0:26:24.970
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. So I think one of the things that I've realized,

0:26:25.290 --> 0:26:27.450
<v Speaker 2>and I now really flinch when I hear it, and

0:26:27.490 --> 0:26:30.050
<v Speaker 2>I flinch when I think that I've probably said it

0:26:30.090 --> 0:26:32.490
<v Speaker 2>sometimes as well in the past, is that I think

0:26:32.530 --> 0:26:36.170
<v Speaker 2>we're really using some of the wrong metaphors when we

0:26:36.210 --> 0:26:38.530
<v Speaker 2>talk about this. So I don't know if you've noticed this,

0:26:38.650 --> 0:26:41.730
<v Speaker 2>but I find that like technology executives in particular, but

0:26:41.770 --> 0:26:45.490
<v Speaker 2>also sometimes economists. We'll talk about like there's a tsunami

0:26:45.570 --> 0:26:48.770
<v Speaker 2>of change coming or there is a new wave of

0:26:49.210 --> 0:26:52.610
<v Speaker 2>technological change. I think it's misleading because it makes it

0:26:52.650 --> 0:26:55.050
<v Speaker 2>sound like it's akin to a natural phenomenon, like it's

0:26:55.050 --> 0:26:57.770
<v Speaker 2>something that's just happening, that just came out of nowhere,

0:26:57.770 --> 0:26:59.890
<v Speaker 2>and it's going to happen to us, and it invites

0:26:59.970 --> 0:27:02.490
<v Speaker 2>us to think that at best, all we can do

0:27:02.570 --> 0:27:05.130
<v Speaker 2>is a prepare for it and be get ready to

0:27:05.170 --> 0:27:08.130
<v Speaker 2>mop up after it. And you know, these metaphors I

0:27:08.130 --> 0:27:12.250
<v Speaker 2>think are really useful to technology executives in their conversations

0:27:12.250 --> 0:27:15.610
<v Speaker 2>with policymakers because you know, nobody wants to look like

0:27:15.650 --> 0:27:18.050
<v Speaker 2>the fool who thinks you can hold back the tide, right,

0:27:18.090 --> 0:27:21.410
<v Speaker 2>and so it invites you to think of this as

0:27:21.450 --> 0:27:25.010
<v Speaker 2>something that is happening anyway, and you know that there's

0:27:25.090 --> 0:27:27.370
<v Speaker 2>very little that you can fundamentally do about it. But

0:27:27.410 --> 0:27:30.370
<v Speaker 2>that's not true at all. That's never been true. Technology

0:27:30.410 --> 0:27:33.330
<v Speaker 2>is stuff that is made by people and implemented by people,

0:27:33.890 --> 0:27:36.370
<v Speaker 2>and there is a huge variety, as we've just discussed,

0:27:36.410 --> 0:27:38.090
<v Speaker 2>in the ways in which it can play out in

0:27:38.130 --> 0:27:41.490
<v Speaker 2>different occupations and in different countries and in different parts

0:27:41.530 --> 0:27:43.050
<v Speaker 2>of the labor market, and a lot of that is

0:27:43.050 --> 0:27:46.170
<v Speaker 2>dictated by the choices that people make and the things

0:27:46.170 --> 0:27:47.130
<v Speaker 2>they choose to value.

0:27:47.410 --> 0:27:49.730
<v Speaker 1>So you can do something about this because you can

0:27:49.730 --> 0:27:51.970
<v Speaker 1>write columns and the Financial Time as telling Sam Altman

0:27:52.010 --> 0:27:55.370
<v Speaker 1>that he's being a naughty boy. What can ordinary people

0:27:55.410 --> 0:27:59.010
<v Speaker 1>who do not have newspaper columns and who are not

0:27:59.170 --> 0:28:03.370
<v Speaker 1>running AI companies, just regular people, what can they do

0:28:04.170 --> 0:28:10.450
<v Speaker 1>to help direct this change in a more productive, empowering way.

0:28:10.930 --> 0:28:14.690
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I think people do and are and will

0:28:15.370 --> 0:28:19.850
<v Speaker 2>direct and determine this next progression of technological change, because

0:28:19.850 --> 0:28:22.650
<v Speaker 2>that's what's that's what's always happened. I mean, some people

0:28:22.730 --> 0:28:25.290
<v Speaker 2>obviously have more power than others, particularly in terms of

0:28:25.330 --> 0:28:27.690
<v Speaker 2>like what kind of working conditions they may or may

0:28:27.730 --> 0:28:31.010
<v Speaker 2>not have to accept. But you know, everyone that I

0:28:31.090 --> 0:28:34.890
<v Speaker 2>interviewed in my book is responding to what's happening. And

0:28:35.250 --> 0:28:38.530
<v Speaker 2>you know, whether that is that they are going on

0:28:38.610 --> 0:28:41.370
<v Speaker 2>strike or forming a union, or whether it's that they

0:28:41.570 --> 0:28:45.530
<v Speaker 2>are changing their profession or figuring out some new way

0:28:45.770 --> 0:28:49.050
<v Speaker 2>of doing what they do in a different way. Also

0:28:49.090 --> 0:28:51.010
<v Speaker 2>as consumers, you know a lot of the questions we've

0:28:51.050 --> 0:28:53.250
<v Speaker 2>been talking about is like, well, what will the market accept?

0:28:53.530 --> 0:28:55.690
<v Speaker 2>We are the market, you know, so it's kind of

0:28:55.810 --> 0:28:59.210
<v Speaker 2>up to us to decide whether we like AI music

0:28:59.370 --> 0:29:00.210
<v Speaker 2>or real music.

0:29:00.330 --> 0:29:01.810
<v Speaker 1>You know, so flat that the one's ever said on

0:29:01.890 --> 0:29:04.250
<v Speaker 1>the market before you are the market. The nicest thing

0:29:04.290 --> 0:29:05.010
<v Speaker 1>anyone's ever said.

0:29:05.890 --> 0:29:07.130
<v Speaker 2>How to complement an economist?

0:29:07.210 --> 0:29:11.090
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely so you heard it. Fight back, stand up show, show,

0:29:11.530 --> 0:29:14.410
<v Speaker 1>show the man, why you're better than the machine. Sarah

0:29:14.450 --> 0:29:19.330
<v Speaker 1>and I are going to talk about large language models

0:29:20.170 --> 0:29:34.850
<v Speaker 1>after the break. We're back. I'm Tim Harford. We are

0:29:34.970 --> 0:29:38.490
<v Speaker 1>live at the Bristol Festival of Economics, and this is

0:29:38.530 --> 0:29:46.650
<v Speaker 1>a cautionary conversation with expert in artificial intelligence, expert in workplaces,

0:29:46.930 --> 0:29:51.370
<v Speaker 1>author of We Are Not Machines, Sarah O'Connor, who is

0:29:51.370 --> 0:29:55.690
<v Speaker 1>also my colleague at the Financial Times. The title of

0:29:55.690 --> 0:29:58.610
<v Speaker 1>the book is We Are Not Machines. You've given us

0:29:58.610 --> 0:30:05.370
<v Speaker 1>some really striking examples of demands of made of workers

0:30:05.730 --> 0:30:09.410
<v Speaker 1>to be more machine like, being under constant surveillance, to

0:30:09.450 --> 0:30:13.210
<v Speaker 1>move in a very kind of weird and unnatural way.

0:30:14.970 --> 0:30:17.290
<v Speaker 1>I wanted to bring it back to the experience a

0:30:17.330 --> 0:30:21.250
<v Speaker 1>lot of white collar workers have of sort of sitting

0:30:21.290 --> 0:30:23.570
<v Speaker 1>in a computer every day and suddenly discovering there's this

0:30:23.570 --> 0:30:28.050
<v Speaker 1>thing called chat gpt. Do you think that chat gpt

0:30:28.370 --> 0:30:31.490
<v Speaker 1>is this making us more machine like and we don't

0:30:31.810 --> 0:30:32.170
<v Speaker 1>know it.

0:30:32.610 --> 0:30:34.610
<v Speaker 2>So this is something that a lot of the translators

0:30:34.650 --> 0:30:38.170
<v Speaker 2>that I interviewed brought up. I think because they they're linguist,

0:30:38.170 --> 0:30:41.570
<v Speaker 2>so they have like an ear for language and how

0:30:41.610 --> 0:30:43.730
<v Speaker 2>it's changing. But a number of them said to me

0:30:43.770 --> 0:30:47.210
<v Speaker 2>independently that they had noticed that the sorts of language

0:30:47.250 --> 0:30:52.090
<v Speaker 2>that we are using is becoming narrower and flatter and

0:30:52.250 --> 0:30:55.370
<v Speaker 2>more homogeneous. And I wonder if that is partly because

0:30:56.010 --> 0:30:59.170
<v Speaker 2>we are using chat GPT more to write our LinkedIn

0:30:59.250 --> 0:31:02.690
<v Speaker 2>posts and our emails, and maybe that even seeps into

0:31:02.730 --> 0:31:05.890
<v Speaker 2>the way that we communicate with one another. So I

0:31:05.970 --> 0:31:08.650
<v Speaker 2>think there are certain risks there. But also, you know,

0:31:08.730 --> 0:31:12.770
<v Speaker 2>I think large angers models do clearly have the capacity

0:31:12.810 --> 0:31:14.650
<v Speaker 2>to do that thing that we talked about at the start,

0:31:14.690 --> 0:31:16.850
<v Speaker 2>which is like take away some of the boring stuff.

0:31:16.850 --> 0:31:18.810
<v Speaker 2>And I think there are plenty of examples of people

0:31:19.290 --> 0:31:22.010
<v Speaker 2>doing that, whether it's like, oh, now I don't have

0:31:22.090 --> 0:31:24.650
<v Speaker 2>to take any minutes for this meeting, or now I

0:31:24.650 --> 0:31:28.450
<v Speaker 2>don't have to spend two hours googling three relevant research

0:31:28.530 --> 0:31:31.850
<v Speaker 2>articles but I do think it's also it's very easy

0:31:31.930 --> 0:31:34.890
<v Speaker 2>to start also using it for things that maybe in

0:31:34.930 --> 0:31:36.530
<v Speaker 2>the past we would have put a bit of human

0:31:36.530 --> 0:31:38.930
<v Speaker 2>care and attention into. Like, you know, I think a

0:31:38.930 --> 0:31:40.890
<v Speaker 2>lot of people are using chat gupt now to write

0:31:40.930 --> 0:31:44.050
<v Speaker 2>wedding speeches or speeches at funerals and that sort of

0:31:44.050 --> 0:31:47.450
<v Speaker 2>thing which you know, you might once have thought were

0:31:47.490 --> 0:31:49.530
<v Speaker 2>among the more human tasks that we did.

0:31:49.930 --> 0:31:53.290
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, although I have heard a few wedding speeches, chatchupt

0:31:53.330 --> 0:31:57.330
<v Speaker 1>would have done better than some of them. So you know, yeah,

0:31:58.690 --> 0:32:02.970
<v Speaker 1>rising tide lifts sundboats. Are you are you frightened or

0:32:02.970 --> 0:32:04.130
<v Speaker 1>are you hopeful for the future.

0:32:04.450 --> 0:32:06.970
<v Speaker 2>I'm a lot more hopeful now than I was when

0:32:06.970 --> 0:32:09.970
<v Speaker 2>I started writing the book, actually, and I think that's

0:32:10.210 --> 0:32:13.930
<v Speaker 2>probably because of the people that I met along the way.

0:32:15.130 --> 0:32:18.810
<v Speaker 2>So like another of these sort of metaphors or like

0:32:18.810 --> 0:32:21.770
<v Speaker 2>cliches that we often hear is you know, people will say, well,

0:32:21.810 --> 0:32:24.330
<v Speaker 2>you know, inevitably there's going to be winners and losers.

0:32:24.850 --> 0:32:28.250
<v Speaker 2>You know, there's there's dangers and opportunities, and that sort

0:32:28.250 --> 0:32:30.170
<v Speaker 2>of invites us to think, like, oh good, I'd better

0:32:30.290 --> 0:32:31.730
<v Speaker 2>just wait and find out if I'm going to be

0:32:31.770 --> 0:32:34.170
<v Speaker 2>a winner. Or a loser, and like you know, fingers crossed,

0:32:34.530 --> 0:32:36.170
<v Speaker 2>I'll be a winner. You just kind of got your

0:32:36.210 --> 0:32:38.490
<v Speaker 2>lottery ticket and then you wait and see. But like

0:32:38.570 --> 0:32:41.330
<v Speaker 2>that's not actually what people are doing. Like people actually

0:32:41.450 --> 0:32:45.250
<v Speaker 2>are maneuvering themselves and trying to figure out what they

0:32:45.250 --> 0:32:47.810
<v Speaker 2>can do to make sure that things work out well

0:32:47.850 --> 0:32:51.650
<v Speaker 2>for them, Like everyone is shaping and determining this. So

0:32:51.690 --> 0:32:54.730
<v Speaker 2>in that sense, I ended up more optimistic because I

0:32:54.810 --> 0:32:57.810
<v Speaker 2>think that we have a lot more agency to figure

0:32:57.850 --> 0:32:59.970
<v Speaker 2>out how this goes and to make sure it goes

0:33:00.010 --> 0:33:02.010
<v Speaker 2>in a way that we want. Then we're sometimes led

0:33:02.010 --> 0:33:02.410
<v Speaker 2>to believe.

0:33:03.450 --> 0:33:06.890
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much, Sarah. Let's take some questions. So

0:33:06.930 --> 0:33:11.930
<v Speaker 1>we've got a question from a Cautionary Club member, Emily.

0:33:12.090 --> 0:33:14.410
<v Speaker 1>By the way, anybody wants to join the Cautionary Club,

0:33:15.290 --> 0:33:17.570
<v Speaker 1>it's very wonderful. You'd get the podcast ad free, you

0:33:17.570 --> 0:33:20.690
<v Speaker 1>get bonus episodes all very good, and you get your

0:33:20.770 --> 0:33:23.730
<v Speaker 1>question read out live at the Bristol Festival of Economics.

0:33:24.170 --> 0:33:27.930
<v Speaker 1>So Emily says, there's a research instituite called me et

0:33:28.290 --> 0:33:31.970
<v Speaker 1>R which found that both the expected and the perceived

0:33:32.010 --> 0:33:36.490
<v Speaker 1>efficiency improvements from using AI in software R and D

0:33:37.210 --> 0:33:42.530
<v Speaker 1>were substantially overstated. She asks, do you think businesses are

0:33:42.610 --> 0:33:46.690
<v Speaker 1>likely to scale back AI investment until the efficiency gains

0:33:46.730 --> 0:33:51.010
<v Speaker 1>promised are demonstrated, or have they sunk so much money

0:33:51.010 --> 0:33:53.970
<v Speaker 1>in at this point that they feel they have to

0:33:54.010 --> 0:33:54.930
<v Speaker 1>justify the expense.

0:33:55.450 --> 0:33:57.690
<v Speaker 2>I think it remains to be seen. I think that

0:33:57.810 --> 0:34:01.530
<v Speaker 2>matr study was really interesting because what it sort of

0:34:01.570 --> 0:34:04.210
<v Speaker 2>highlights to me is that, you know, we were talking

0:34:04.210 --> 0:34:08.210
<v Speaker 2>about this distinction between tasks and jobs, and that actually

0:34:08.410 --> 0:34:10.690
<v Speaker 2>your whole job might disappear, but some tasks within it

0:34:10.770 --> 0:34:12.970
<v Speaker 2>might change. But when you think about something at the

0:34:13.090 --> 0:34:16.370
<v Speaker 2>level of an entire organization, you've also got to think

0:34:16.370 --> 0:34:21.090
<v Speaker 2>about jobs and systems, and so you know, a computer

0:34:21.170 --> 0:34:24.730
<v Speaker 2>programmer on his or her own might have become much

0:34:24.730 --> 0:34:28.770
<v Speaker 2>more productive if they can use a coding AI A system,

0:34:28.770 --> 0:34:30.810
<v Speaker 2>but actually, if there are still bottlenecks in other parts

0:34:30.850 --> 0:34:33.530
<v Speaker 2>of that system, you might not really see the benefit

0:34:33.650 --> 0:34:36.250
<v Speaker 2>of it. You know, you might just create lots and

0:34:36.250 --> 0:34:38.610
<v Speaker 2>lots and lots of code, but then you still you

0:34:38.690 --> 0:34:41.530
<v Speaker 2>still don't have enough people to review it, for example,

0:34:41.730 --> 0:34:43.690
<v Speaker 2>or you know, whatever it might be. And so I

0:34:43.730 --> 0:34:46.250
<v Speaker 2>think what a lot of companies are finding is that

0:34:46.730 --> 0:34:51.090
<v Speaker 2>suddenly being able to do certain tasks within jobs much

0:34:51.090 --> 0:34:53.690
<v Speaker 2>more and much faster, doesn't necessarily mean that you're going

0:34:53.730 --> 0:34:56.890
<v Speaker 2>to see the same kind of productivity outcome filter through

0:34:57.330 --> 0:35:00.010
<v Speaker 2>to the whole organization. The other thing I would say

0:35:00.050 --> 0:35:02.210
<v Speaker 2>is that we're still like in the very early stages

0:35:02.250 --> 0:35:05.970
<v Speaker 2>of companies trying to figure out how to use these

0:35:06.010 --> 0:35:09.690
<v Speaker 2>new tools effectively. And what I think we might start

0:35:09.730 --> 0:35:15.570
<v Speaker 2>to see is companies kind of redesigning workflows around what

0:35:15.650 --> 0:35:17.810
<v Speaker 2>the machines can and can't do. I mean, in a way,

0:35:17.850 --> 0:35:20.450
<v Speaker 2>that's exactly what Amazon has done, right. I mean, it's

0:35:20.450 --> 0:35:23.730
<v Speaker 2>completely changed its workflow in order to make the most

0:35:23.730 --> 0:35:25.810
<v Speaker 2>of the machines that it has available to it at

0:35:25.850 --> 0:35:29.330
<v Speaker 2>the moment, and plugged humans in to do the bits

0:35:29.330 --> 0:35:31.450
<v Speaker 2>that the machines can't do. But I think it's still

0:35:31.490 --> 0:35:34.690
<v Speaker 2>a really open question, you know, particularly with large language models.

0:35:34.730 --> 0:35:37.530
<v Speaker 2>I mean, the kind of the hallucination problem I think

0:35:37.610 --> 0:35:40.490
<v Speaker 2>is quite could be quite existential for a lot of

0:35:40.850 --> 0:35:44.530
<v Speaker 2>sort of high risk professions. You know, certainly, you know,

0:35:44.570 --> 0:35:46.490
<v Speaker 2>we're not going to be using large language models that

0:35:46.690 --> 0:35:49.010
<v Speaker 2>the ft to write our articles because we just can't

0:35:49.250 --> 0:35:50.890
<v Speaker 2>possibly trust them not to hallucinate.

0:35:51.130 --> 0:35:52.810
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean, I always find when I'm using large

0:35:52.850 --> 0:35:55.850
<v Speaker 1>language models The first question is will anybody else ever

0:35:55.930 --> 0:35:58.530
<v Speaker 1>see any of this? And if the answer is yes,

0:35:58.570 --> 0:36:01.850
<v Speaker 1>then it's unusable. Like if it's just for me, then

0:36:02.170 --> 0:36:05.010
<v Speaker 1>sometimes it comes up with useful ideas, but I absolutely

0:36:05.010 --> 0:36:07.970
<v Speaker 1>cannot trust it at all to produce anything that anybody

0:36:08.010 --> 0:36:13.410
<v Speaker 1>else will ever see. So anyway, more questions. There were

0:36:13.410 --> 0:36:16.450
<v Speaker 1>loads of questions, can we get the microphone? Somebody looking

0:36:16.690 --> 0:36:18.970
<v Speaker 1>quite young and fresh face there. I want a question

0:36:19.010 --> 0:36:20.850
<v Speaker 1>from Hi.

0:36:22.010 --> 0:36:25.410
<v Speaker 4>I have a question, which industry do you think is

0:36:25.730 --> 0:36:32.610
<v Speaker 4>most at risk of AI replacing the job or having

0:36:32.770 --> 0:36:37.610
<v Speaker 4>the biggest amount of the job being taken away?

0:36:38.690 --> 0:36:42.210
<v Speaker 1>So, Sarah, which industry is most at risk of just

0:36:42.250 --> 0:36:44.610
<v Speaker 1>having these jobs completely removed?

0:36:44.890 --> 0:36:46.530
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I hate to say it, but.

0:36:46.890 --> 0:36:47.930
<v Speaker 1>It's the translators.

0:36:48.210 --> 0:36:50.050
<v Speaker 2>I know I was going to say it's I think

0:36:50.170 --> 0:36:53.050
<v Speaker 2>sort of creative industries more generally. I mean not that

0:36:53.130 --> 0:36:56.770
<v Speaker 2>I think that, you know, people will stop wanting to

0:36:56.810 --> 0:37:02.210
<v Speaker 2>pay for human created stuff, but I think that there

0:37:02.290 --> 0:37:08.410
<v Speaker 2>are lots of people who work in you know, they're

0:37:08.450 --> 0:37:12.210
<v Speaker 2>not necessarily originating the ideas, but they work in the

0:37:12.290 --> 0:37:15.330
<v Speaker 2>kind of in that long process between someone coming up

0:37:15.330 --> 0:37:18.490
<v Speaker 2>with an idea and the thing being made. Whether that's

0:37:18.610 --> 0:37:24.530
<v Speaker 2>like working in special effects in Hollywood, or music production,

0:37:25.090 --> 0:37:29.290
<v Speaker 2>or storyboarding in an advertising agency or whatever it might

0:37:29.330 --> 0:37:32.530
<v Speaker 2>be your copywriting. I think there are lots and lots

0:37:32.530 --> 0:37:36.370
<v Speaker 2>of jobs there which you know, are good jobs and

0:37:36.410 --> 0:37:38.570
<v Speaker 2>people like them, and so I think it's a real

0:37:38.610 --> 0:37:42.450
<v Speaker 2>shame if they become disrupted. But I can imagine that

0:37:42.450 --> 0:37:45.410
<v Speaker 2>those are the sorts of roles that could be quite

0:37:45.890 --> 0:37:48.010
<v Speaker 2>quite vulnerable. But I might be wrong, and I hope

0:37:48.050 --> 0:37:48.650
<v Speaker 2>I am.

0:37:49.050 --> 0:37:51.410
<v Speaker 1>So you heard it here first, human creativity is dead.

0:37:52.890 --> 0:37:54.370
<v Speaker 2>It's definitely what I said. Thanks to him.

0:37:54.450 --> 0:37:58.090
<v Speaker 1>This from the woman who calls herself an optimist, So

0:37:58.170 --> 0:38:00.410
<v Speaker 1>thank you for that. We've got time for one more question.

0:38:01.410 --> 0:38:05.490
<v Speaker 3>You said that AI is no advanced enough to translate

0:38:05.570 --> 0:38:09.250
<v Speaker 3>the tags accurately enough, but it's really been around or

0:38:09.850 --> 0:38:12.970
<v Speaker 3>two years, like even by twenty SAIDs is going to

0:38:12.970 --> 0:38:16.610
<v Speaker 3>be enough advance to replace some of the jobs. Surely

0:38:16.730 --> 0:38:20.290
<v Speaker 3>it will lead to like structural unemployment and the Regon

0:38:20.650 --> 0:38:22.090
<v Speaker 3>government will there happen.

0:38:22.370 --> 0:38:25.130
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. So basically I think two ideas

0:38:25.130 --> 0:38:27.490
<v Speaker 1>nested in that question. So one is this point that

0:38:28.170 --> 0:38:30.490
<v Speaker 1>we can point to what the AIS can't do yet,

0:38:30.730 --> 0:38:35.090
<v Speaker 1>but they change fast, So maybe a lot of the

0:38:35.130 --> 0:38:37.650
<v Speaker 1>things that we're saying AI can't the AI vision doesn't

0:38:37.690 --> 0:38:40.050
<v Speaker 1>work that well, AI translation doesn't work that well. Well,

0:38:40.370 --> 0:38:43.450
<v Speaker 1>maybe the answer is just wait. And then the second

0:38:43.490 --> 0:38:50.450
<v Speaker 1>question is, if this really is incredibly disruptive to labor markets,

0:38:50.610 --> 0:38:53.930
<v Speaker 1>are government's actually going to just do something drastic to

0:38:53.970 --> 0:38:54.650
<v Speaker 1>outlaw it?

0:38:55.770 --> 0:38:58.650
<v Speaker 2>So the first part of your question, I mean, we've

0:38:58.690 --> 0:39:01.530
<v Speaker 2>already seen how much better these things have gotten in

0:39:01.570 --> 0:39:04.130
<v Speaker 2>the last few years. I mean, when things like mid

0:39:04.170 --> 0:39:07.650
<v Speaker 2>Journey first came out, the image generation, like every person's

0:39:07.690 --> 0:39:10.730
<v Speaker 2>hand had like six or somenings right, and we thought

0:39:10.770 --> 0:39:14.450
<v Speaker 2>it was hilarious. And now they're not making those mistakes anymore.

0:39:14.490 --> 0:39:17.530
<v Speaker 2>So yes, definitely things are getting better. And in a way,

0:39:17.570 --> 0:39:19.930
<v Speaker 2>that's what's a bit difficult about writing about this topic

0:39:20.050 --> 0:39:22.130
<v Speaker 2>is it's such a kind of moving target. So you're like,

0:39:22.170 --> 0:39:25.410
<v Speaker 2>you're trying to write about something that just keeps keeps changing.

0:39:25.890 --> 0:39:28.170
<v Speaker 2>But as I was saying, like, I don't actually think

0:39:28.250 --> 0:39:31.810
<v Speaker 2>the capability of what they can do is the only

0:39:32.010 --> 0:39:35.090
<v Speaker 2>thing that matters, because it's also about like what kind

0:39:35.130 --> 0:39:37.090
<v Speaker 2>of trade offs are people willing to accept? And then

0:39:37.130 --> 0:39:40.610
<v Speaker 2>in terms of if we started to see really big

0:39:41.490 --> 0:39:46.170
<v Speaker 2>labor market dislocations, would governments step in and do something

0:39:46.210 --> 0:39:49.730
<v Speaker 2>drastic maybe. I mean, I don't think there's any precedent

0:39:50.450 --> 0:39:53.930
<v Speaker 2>for that that I can think of. I mean, in

0:39:53.970 --> 0:39:56.090
<v Speaker 2>the example of the ludd Ites, the government stepped in

0:39:56.490 --> 0:39:59.610
<v Speaker 2>on behalf of the owners of the machines and sent

0:39:59.650 --> 0:40:01.890
<v Speaker 2>the luodyes to Australia. So that was like the opposite.

0:40:03.330 --> 0:40:08.770
<v Speaker 1>Well, the President surely is is tariffs because I mean, effectively,

0:40:09.930 --> 0:40:12.090
<v Speaker 1>this is the point that economists like to make. But

0:40:12.210 --> 0:40:16.050
<v Speaker 1>trade with China, for example, it's effectively a technology. I mean, yeah,

0:40:16.210 --> 0:40:18.850
<v Speaker 1>it's China over there, but it could be just some

0:40:19.570 --> 0:40:22.530
<v Speaker 1>robots in a factory in Los Angeles next to the docks.

0:40:22.970 --> 0:40:27.290
<v Speaker 1>And you know, whether you're shipping grain into the robot

0:40:27.290 --> 0:40:30.130
<v Speaker 1>factory and they're turning it into television sets, or whether

0:40:30.130 --> 0:40:32.650
<v Speaker 1>you're shipping the grain across the Pacific and the Chinese

0:40:33.170 --> 0:40:35.090
<v Speaker 1>by the grain and then they say and they send

0:40:35.130 --> 0:40:38.610
<v Speaker 1>you television sets. I mean, it kind of doesn't matter.

0:40:38.770 --> 0:40:43.330
<v Speaker 1>So you could imagine taxing robot produced you know, robot

0:40:43.330 --> 0:40:45.890
<v Speaker 1>produce goods. I just don't know if people hate robots

0:40:45.930 --> 0:40:47.290
<v Speaker 1>as much as they hate foreigners.

0:40:49.450 --> 0:40:50.250
<v Speaker 2>Let's find out.

0:40:50.650 --> 0:40:53.010
<v Speaker 1>That is sadly all we have time for. Thank you

0:40:53.090 --> 0:40:55.130
<v Speaker 1>so much for coming. It's been an absolute pleasure to

0:40:55.130 --> 0:40:57.250
<v Speaker 1>be here in Bristol. Thank you so much to my

0:40:57.330 --> 0:41:01.290
<v Speaker 1>wonderful guest Sarah O'Connor. Her book We Are Not Machines

0:41:01.490 --> 0:41:03.930
<v Speaker 1>The Fight for the Future of Work is out now

0:41:04.410 --> 0:41:08.130
<v Speaker 1>do please pick up a copy, But before then, please

0:41:08.210 --> 0:41:16.170
<v Speaker 1>join me in thanking my guest, Sarah O'Connor. Horse Retales

0:41:16.210 --> 0:41:19.170
<v Speaker 1>is written by me Tim Harford, with Andrew Wright, Ryan

0:41:19.250 --> 0:41:23.170
<v Speaker 1>Dilly and Alice Fines. This live episode was produced by

0:41:23.210 --> 0:41:27.370
<v Speaker 1>Georgia Mills with help from Marilyn Russ. The sound design

0:41:27.410 --> 0:41:30.810
<v Speaker 1>and original music was the work of Pascal Wise. The

0:41:31.050 --> 0:41:35.690
<v Speaker 1>sound engineer for tonight's show was Tom Dunn with eduardo' galley.

0:41:36.170 --> 0:41:39.290
<v Speaker 1>Thank you to xaviie Levantis and the Bristol Festival of

0:41:39.290 --> 0:41:40.010
<v Speaker 1>Economics