Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on the day's biggest business stories

Subscribe to Axios Closer for insights into the day’s business news and trends and why they matter

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Stay on top of the latest market trends

Subscribe to Axios Markets for the latest market trends and economic insights. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Sports news worthy of your time

Binge on the stats and stories that drive the sports world with Axios Sports. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tech news worthy of your time

Get our smart take on technology from the Valley and D.C. with Axios Login. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Get the inside stories

Get an insider's guide to the new White House with Axios Sneak Peek. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Denver news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Des Moines news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Twin Cities news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Tampa Bay news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Charlotte news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/Axios

AI and robots are capable of both decimating and improving human work. By and large, they're doing the former. That’s in part because AI researchers are mostly creating systems that leapfrog human abilities, rather than do what humans cannot.

The big picture: By changing incentives that currently encourage the development of technologies that compete with people, experts hope to redirect the future of work away from widespread automation-fueled job loss.

As we reported this week, economists Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo have found AI and robotics are destroying more jobs than they are creating.

  • But "it doesn't have to be this way," the pair wrote. AI has the potential to improve work and create new jobs — but for that to happen, researchers and companies would need to shift the direction of their work, and quickly.

Details: Most progress in AI and robotics is measured against humans.

  • Every researcher wants to be able to say their invention can beat grandmasters at an age-old game, or drive more safely than the average adult. That extends to basic research, too. From machine vision to speech synthesis, the big question is: Can you do it better than a person?
  • These tasks are easier to benchmark and they’re easier for computers to master, says Andrew Ng, a Stanford professor who founded Google's and Baidu's AI efforts.
  • So for an expert deciding what problem to tackle next — one that, if solved, would bring them honor and glory at a top AI conference — all arrows point toward making a system that beats humans at their own game.

The problem with this obsession: "If your goal is human-level capability, you're increasing the probability that you're doing substitutive work," says James Manyika, director of the McKinsey Global Institute. That is, you're replacing humans.

  • "If you were trying to solve this as an economic problem, you'd want to develop AI algorithms or machines that are as different from humans as possible," Manyika tells Axios.
  • That's the sort of research that would move computers from an automating, human-replacing role to enabling new, labor-intensive work — these complementary systems would require humans.

Some examples of current research that would not replace humans:

  • Augmented reality, a fundamentally assistive technology that can boost a wearer's productivity in a way that's hard to measure.
  • AI systems that can predict how proteins are folded, or how to route trucks better — problems that are just too complex for humans to ever figure out on their own.
  • Robots that can see around corners, or register sounds outside our hearing range.

Two weeks ago, Manyika and MIT economist Erik Brynjolfsson convened top economists and AI researchers, including Ng, at Stanford to discuss how to encourage work in complementary AI. Manyika and Brynjolfsson will publish some of the resulting ideas in a forthcoming paper.

The bottom line: Both complementary and substitutive AI will end up entering, and fundamentally changing, the workplace. In many cases, substitutive technology will likely be cheaper — and much less fussy — than human workers.

  • In the long run, replacing people can sometimes be positive, argues Frank Chen, a partner at the prominent VC firm Andreessen Horowitz.
  • In high-stakes situations, like diagnosing diseases or sentencing criminals, an automated system that's more stable, consistent, hardy, or potentially unbiased is far superior to a wishy-washy person, he says.

The big question: How these substitutive technologies will be balanced with new, labor-creating technologies.

Go deeper: AI's uneasy coming of age

Go deeper

Scoop: Stephanie Murphy announcing challenge to Marco Rubio

Rep. Stephanie Murphy. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Democratic Rep. Stephanie Murphy is planning to announce a campaign for the U.S. Senate in Florida against Republican Sen. Marco Rubio in early June, people familiar with the matter tell Axios.

Why it matters: Murphy is a proven fundraiser. Jumping in now would give her an early start to build her case for the Democratic nomination and potentially force Rubio and allied GOP groups to spend heavily to retain a seat in a state that’s trending Republican.

2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Inside the GOP's infrastructure strategy

Sen. Roger Wicker. Photo: Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Top Republican senators are hoping the White House will make some sort of counteroffer to their infrastructure proposal when they meet with President Biden on Thursday, lawmakers and their aides tell Axios.

Why it matters: This is a sign of how serious the negotiations are, they say. In advance of the meeting, some of the senators are already publicly signaling the areas in which they have flexibility.

2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

By the numbers: Senate seats to watch in 2022

Data: Axios Research, Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections; Chart: Andrew Witherspoon/Axios

While Republicans are giddy about their chances for regaining the House next year, GOP prospects for taking the Senate remain more uncertain, data reviewed by Axios suggests.

By the numbers: At least five Republican senators are retiring after the midterms, and four of their seats are in battleground states. That makes a simple Republican-for-Republican election exchange all the more difficult.