If I had my wish, I would wave a wand and make MOOCs disappear.
Moshe Vardi
People at the very top of the income scale also benefited from globalization and automation. But the income of working- and middle-class people in the developed world has stagnated.
Are machines getting more and more powerful? Absolutely. It's been going on since 1940. We are making progress, and for many people, it will be a lifesaver.
You can now eat bananas from Chile; you couldn't do it before you had air shipping. Now, communication technology enables the shipping of labor.
In economics, it is easier to agree on the data than to agree on causality.
It is easy to underestimate in advance the impact of globalization and automation - I have done it myself.
We will hear more regrets from founders of tech companies about the addictive technologies they have launched.
We cannot shirk responsibility from concerns for the welfare of the next generation.
The bottom line is that while automation is eliminating many jobs in the economy that were once done by people, there is no sign that the introduction of technologies in recent years is creating an equal number of well-paying jobs to compensate for those losses.
Getting elected to the National Academy of Sciences is the ultimate peer recognition.
In 2017, there was a sudden recognition of several adverse societal consequences of information technology, from job losses due to automation to manipulation of public opinion, with significant political consequences.
The impact of technology on labor has become clearer and clearer by the day.
Humanity is about to face perhaps its greatest challenge ever, which is finding meaning in life after the end of 'In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread.'
What people are now realizing is that this formula that technology destroys jobs and creates jobs, even if it's basically true, it's too simplistic.
We cannot blindly pursue the goal of machine intelligence without pondering its consequences.
Recognition by one's peers is the goal of every scientist.
I believe that society needs to confront this question before it is upon us: If machines are capable of doing almost any work humans can do, what will humans do?
I believe that work is essential to human well-being.
The hope is that we'll continue to create jobs for the vast majority of people. But if the situation arises that this is less and less the case, then we need to rethink, how do we make sure that everybody can make a living?
Everything that humans can do a machine can do.
Are we prepared for an economy in which 50 percent of people aren't working?
Twice a week, a truck comes near my house, and two guys get out and pick up the garbage. This will disappear. There will still be a truck coming, but it will be driven autonomously, and the garbage will be picked up autonomously, and those jobs will be gone.
Offshoring is like the winter. You don't ask if it is good or bad - you ask what do you do about it. The answer is you dress warmly.
The question I want to put forward is, 'Does the technology we are developing ultimately benefit mankind?'
Dating back at least as far as the Luddites of early 19th-century Britain, new technologies cause fear about the inevitable changes they bring.
The stabilizing influence of the modern social welfare state emerged only after World War II, nearly 200 years on from the 18th-century beginnings of the Industrial Revolution.
Automation will significantly change many people's lives in ways that may be painful and enduring.
