As technology becomes increasingly inextricable from our everyday lives, it's interesting to consider how the rise of robotics will play into the future of humanity. The Internet of Things is upon us, smart devices abound, and smart homes are becoming more and more common. I wonder if the same can be said for caring for humans--smart care? How will humans interact with robots in various scenarios, particularly if robots take on the roles of caregivers?
The scenario of a robot caregiver becoming an inextricable force in a human's life has already been explored in science fiction, such as in Nanny, by Philip K. Dick, or in Robbie, by Isaac Asimov. Although the robot nannies in these scenarios care for children instead of elderly adults, the consequences on society and people's interactions might be affected in the same way--not for the better. However, implementing robot caregiver programs that are closely monitored and well organized could certainly be beneficial to elderly people and their families.
While having a mechanical assistant would undoubtedly provide efficient assistance or crucial services (for example, the lack of widespread access to daycare in Japan could ostensibly be solved by robots, according to NPR) that even the most competent of humans could not always manage, too much of a good thing can be bad, and it is wise to proceed with caution. The Frankenstein Complex comes to mind as the backbone of theories dealing with humans wondering if their creations can overpower them.
Even though we now generally embrace technology, especially younger people, the rise of artificial intelligence may lead to the potential risk of the robots and computers realizing that they are destined for more than service. Stephen Hawking wrote that “Success in creating artificial intelligence would be the biggest event in human history, unfortunately, it might also be the last...” Take the somewhat recent example of chatbots at the Facebook AI Research Lab (FAIR). Engineers had to shut them down when they found that the chatbots had created their own language, which humans couldn't understand!
In the June 2014 issue of WIRED magazine, an interesting article by Emily Anthes presented a bunch of useful data on how humans perceive robots. It seems human elements are key in the acceptance and implementation of robots, (such as respect). Most Americans say that they wouldn’t feel comfortable riding in an automated vehicle, for example, because it essentially feels as if you are at the mercy of a machine. A quote from the article reads, “When robots do things we don’t understand, like sensing objects we can’t or following rules we don’t know, we tend to lose confidence and wrest control away from them - even when the robots are right.”
Holly Yanco, a roboticist at the University of Massachusetts Lowell whose work with colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh was discussed in the article, provided an interesting scenario in an experiment that cast a harsh light on how brightly the human condition shines through in dealing with robots in our everyday life: she programmed a robot to make mistakes and alert a human user when it was doing so. It turns out we humans interpreted that as humility and thought more highly of the robot and were willing to work with it more.
Another quote from the same article reads “We thought there was a chance that the robots saying ‘I’m not doing so well’ would lead people less,” says Aaron Steinfeld, an engineer at Carnegie Mellon. "It had the exact opposite reaction. The machine’s self-effacing play-by-play kept trust levels high.”
This all began with Dr. Cynthia Breazeal's pioneering work at MIT in the 1990s. She began by developing "Kismet", a robotic head that simulates emotion through various mechanisms, and thus founded the field of Human Robot Interaction (HRI), heralding a new era of robotic information.
More recently, WIRED magazine published an extremely interesting piece titled "Love in the time of Robots." It explores the work of Dr. Hiroshi Ishiguro of Osaka University, who works on developing androids and studying their interactions with humans. His findings--some of the most interesting ones being accidental when he observed his students' interaction with his androids--are interesting because they seem to point to how aware we are of being human when in the presence of something decidedly non-human.
Human beings form emotional bonds fairly quickly (even with nonhumans - read "Love in the time of robots" to hear how humans apparently project emotions onto literally anything, including a piece of balsa wood), and being aware of those tangible factors is as important as the technology that enables androids to form expressions and hold conversations.
So it seems that as robots nestle themselves deeper within the rhythms of our everyday lives, we have to not only accept and understand their strengths, but their weaknesses, and our weaknesses with respect to them, in order to work with them in the most productive manner. As long as we are cognizant of this, I think robots can certainly be used to care for humans in a variety of roles, ranging from assistive technology to emotional companions.
Heading back to the science fiction drawing room for a moment, consider the dichotomy between the stories of H.G. Wells and Jules Verne, the fathers of science fiction (Mary Shelley, of course, is not only the grandmother of science fiction but also the queen. SLAY). While Jules Verne embarked upon flights of fancy and kindled the delight of the general public with his wildly enthusiastic cheerleading of science regardless of the consequences, H.G Wells kept his head and his sense of what is right and what is downright wrong with him even as he had his stories embark on paths never traveled on before.
Being an H.G Wells instead of a Jules Verne is the best thing to do in this scenario, as the distance between robots and humans get smaller and smaller. Embark on the fascinating, useful, helpful, beautiful path of scientific progress and discovery, but carefully, and armed with the proper knowledge. In order to let robot caregivers do their jobs, we need to create concrete programs and plans, carefully monitor the role and effect of artificial intelligence in laboratory conditions before an extensive testing process in the real world, and above all, maintain a balance between analog and digital.
