Dancing robots
I was impressed, and not only me, by the spectacular Chinese exhibition last Monday of humanoid robots dancing with a skill we used to associate with expert human dancers. This prompted three comments.
1. What are they for? Human appearance is irrelevant to a robot replacing a machine operator in their job. But it could be when it comes to replacing services currently provided by humans. This substitution could occur if the cost of the humanoid robot were affordable and if humans didn't intrinsically value having a human service provider. I have little doubt that price wouldn't be a major obstacle. But I also believe that the propensity to eliminate jobs currently held by humans will be greater in manufacturing or remote services than in face-to-face personal services. Human contact and companionship matter. Which, incidentally, can help balance the overall economy, insofar as the aging population leads to a compensatory increase in employment in companionship and caregiving. It should also be said that these latter services, provided by people, will improve in efficiency, quality, and safety through the use of robotic tools incorporating advanced AI. And these can also be complemented by humanoid and animal-like robots cute enough to generate emotional satisfaction. As for the dancing robot, my opinion is that it won't replace the dancing human either, except perhaps when the latter plays a very minor role. Considering the rapidly changing limits of what a machine can do versus the very slowly changing limits of what a human can do are different exercises. But both are interesting.
2. What will come next? Companies offering dancing robots aren't doing so to make people believe the dance services market is so vast that the business opportunity is enormous. While the demonstration effect will generate orders, they primarily use it to showcase the quality and power of their technology and to position themselves, as there's still a long way to go. We're at the stage where a robot can perform a dance number so lifelike it leaves us speechless, and where a group of robots can execute a complex choreography with cooperative humans, like a ballet performance. It's likely that in the coming years we'll shift our focus from performances to competitions between robot teams. But we're still far from the point where a group of humanoid robots can maintain a non-cooperative relationship with a group of humans. That will be the next frontier. Imagine, for example, that a challenge—with a real prize—were designed in a laboratory at Barça (or Espanyol, or Girona, or even Can Piqué) for a team of physical robots capable of defeating the sponsoring human team. The design, as is typical in sporting competitions, would need to include physical requirements for the robot teams, making dexterity the decisive competitive factor. Or, if you prefer, imagine it with tennis. In intellectual competitions between non-robotic AI and humans, we already have situations—such as in mathematics olympiad medals—where AI has performed on par with the best humans.
3. Sputnik moment? I wonder if the level, or above all, the dynamism of Chinese technology will be a Sputnik moment for the US. That is, a moment when they realize that if they don't react, they could lose a vital strategic race. The US has more than enough capabilities to react. Robots that dance just as well, or better, are within their reach. But whether they react will depend on which political sensibility prevails. They won't move forward if it's Trump's sensibility of climate change denial, a return to oil, hostility toward universities, or skepticism toward vaccines. In all of this, China looks to the future and the US to the past. But the US is also the country at the forefront of digital technologies, AI, and many areas of science, and its universities remain leaders. It's hard to believe they won't invest in these strengths.
The case of Europe is different. Here, there is broad consensus on the strategic importance of a science-based response. But it lacks the political capacity to implement it. Hopefully, the evidence that we could be caught between the technological powers of the US and China will catalyze a reaction.