Jake LaCaze

May 22, 2024 ↓

Replacing human workers with AI is easy when we've already removed humanity from work

Since OpenAI released ChatGPT to the masses, there’s plenty of debate over where and when AI can replace human workers.

But I think this debate misses a crucial point. If AI can replace a human worker for a specific job function, why is that? Is it because the job is so simple and that human insight would be better put somewhere else? Or is it because we’ve created a working environment that squashes human insight and innovation?

In the pursuit of lowering costs in any way possible, we’ve basically turned humans into machines. We’ve eroded the possibility of human touch in most business transactions.

I first realized this problem when order kiosks started popping up at fast food restaurants like McDonald’s. I noticed I preferred the kiosk over the human experience.

Why? For one, the employees behind the counter hardly put forth any effort. They mumble, they hardly smile, they rarely pretend to care.

But who can blame them? They’re paid terrible wages for thankless, undervalued work.

These routine interactions with the people on the front lines can make a real difference in how customers perceive your brand. When I make a genuine (even if brief) connection with the man or woman scanning my groceries, I may be in a good mood for the rest of the day. Such a simple thing is now a pleasant surprise. But it’s unfair to expect those people to make the effort to improve my experience when the only metrics they’re measured on pertain to how many people they can check out in a certain amount of time.

But here’s another point that doesn’t get enough attention:

AI isn’t all that great at this stuff either, as we say with the failure of Amazon’s cashier-free shops.

The official definition of AI is ‘artificial intelligence’. But we’re seeing again and again that the definition is actually more like ‘actually Indians’, who are grossly underpaid.

{{< youtube -WVUHTNsfTg >}}

So the non-human solution is more human, yet more inhumane, than some would like us to believe.

What if the solution isn’t to replace humans, but to empower them instead? That would be a step in the right direction in regards to reforming capitalism.

Not all humans are great at customer service, or quite frankly, anything at all. That is undeniable. But some humans are. And they should be rewarded.

But all the developers of AI appear to be hitting the same ceilings at the same time, resulting in diminishing returns and an inability to differentiate one company’s offerings from the other. AI is codifying average, and with AI, you know exactly what average you'll get.

With humans, there’s at least the chance of getting something special and unique. Can the same be said for AI?

Jake LaCaze hopes the companies that say their employees are their best assets will remember that when they're tempted to implement AI anywhere and everywhere.