Analysis Of Better Than Humans: Why Robots For The Better

1380 Words3 Pages

We live in a time where technology is at the center of our society. We use technology on a daily basis, for the simplest tasks, or to aid us in our jobs, and don’t give a second thought to whether these tools are actually helping us. Writers such as Kevin Kelly and Clive Thompson argue that the use of technology actually helps us humans; whiles writers such as Nicholas Carr argue that technology affects people’s abilities to learn information negatively. Robots are important to humans in the workforce, even though, it may not appear so. In Better than Humans: Why Robots Will- and Must- Take Our Jobs, Kelly initially unsettles the reader by noting that our, “job [will be] taken by machines”- if not already taken (Kelly 300). The reason why …show more content…

Once Deep Blue supercomputer defeated chess grandmaster Kasparov, he, Kasparov, thought what would happen if “humans and computers collaborated” (Thompson 343)? Kasparov figured that it would be a symbiotic relationship in which “each might benefit from the other’s peculiar powers” (Thompson344). A Notably example would a 2005 “freestyle” chess tournament, which consisted of teams with computers and chess players. With a tournament full of computers and chess grandmasters, the winners were amateur chess players Cramton and Zackary (Thompson345). The reason why these players were able to win is because they were “expert[s] at collaborating with computers.” By themselves these players would not have the skills to take on such talented players, but since Cramton and Zackary were able to know “when to rely on human smarts and when to rely on the machine’s advice” they were able to succeed (Thompson 345). These players were able to harness the power of the symbiotic relationship between man and machine. In conclusion, when it comes down to the wire on “who’s smarter-humans or machines; the answer is neither, it’s both working side by side” (Thompson 347). In addition, the benefits of these digital gadgets can be summarized into three …show more content…

In Is Google Making Us Stupid, Nicholas Carr disputes that due to new digital tools, peoples’ ability to retain and acquire information has been negatively altered. Even though, we have information at our fingertips, we often don’t take the time to soak in all the information. Carr mentions Bruce Friedman, a blogger, who finds it extremely difficult to read a “longish article on the web” and to try to focus on the importance of the text holistically (Carr 316). This is an issue that many can relate even Carr knows that, “ the deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle (Carr 314). Additionally, media theorist Mcluhan describes the net as “chipping away [mental] capacity for concentration and contemplation” (Carr 315). In essences, Carr states that we are having less of an attention span and consequently, less patience for longer articles (Carr 314). Therefore, this affects media outlets such as magazines, newspapers, and other articles, because they must conform and shorten their texts to fit the status quo that people safely enjoy (Carr 321). In addition, the net forces people to be efficient, and so, causes people to “weaken [their] capacity for deep reading” (Carr 317). People are becoming more driven on how quick he or she has to do something rather than think why this text is important. As a consequence, Carr believes that we are starting to lose our ability to be critical readers and

Open Document