The fourth industrial revolution could lead to a dark future

What will our lives look like in a decade? Will there be as much optimism as the technology companies claim, or will the economy as we know it today disappear?

Jamie Morgan, Professor of Economics, Leeds Beckett University

Organizations are constantly trying to get hold of the future by mapping what it means to us. The "fourth industrial revolution" is the latest version of this. It is generally defined as a combination of new technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, natural language coding, robotics, sensors, cloud computing, nanotechnology, 2030D printing, and the Internet. According to the supporters of the fourth industrial revolution, these technologies are designed to change the societies in which we live and the economies in which we work. And it is likely that it will already be in full swing in XNUMX.

However, it is important to understand that the fourth industrial revolution is only a concept, an attempt to grasp the meaning of what seems to be about to happen. The idea draws anxiety-inducing headlines regarding threats to employment and a change in our attitude towards the benefits of technology from positive to negative.

A bright future
The main supporters of the idea of ​​the fourth industrial revolution are think tanks and consultants working with models, economists and technology experts (and of course technology companies themselves).

At the heart of this idea is the work of the World Economic Forum, led by the chairman of the board, Klaus Schwab, and the McKinsey Global Institute. The focus of both is weighted to express the benefits of the transformations that will occur if we invest a lot and quickly.

For example, imagine a world where your toilet tells your refrigerator that your cholesterol is high. Your refrigerator, in turn, adjusts the order of dairy products to low-fat products. The products are delivered by automated vehicle or drone from the grocery warehouse and at the same time they send an alert to the health institution that stores the information and monitors your cardiovascular system. This AI system, in turn, communicates with your home chatbot (which scolds you and suggests you cut fat and make more use of your home gym membership) and, if necessary, schedule a home visit or virtual reality appointment with your local nurse or doctor .

According to the literature, the fourth industrial revolution, like many other possibilities, is science fiction on the basis of being based on scientific fact. This is a commercialized future, from the cradle to the grave, a system that apparently may help us survive our past and present and give us a sustainable future, where a system of connected technologies allows controlled use of energy and resources, while creating a minimum of waste and maximum recycling.

But these think tanks and consultancies will rarely take direct responsibility for the future they are helping to create. They are not evil organizations, but they are not neutral either. The "fourth industrial revolution" is not just an opportunity. It is important to understand who it is intended for, and under what conditions. This is very rarely discussed.

Future for whom?
The emphasis on the benefits and the focus on the need for investment subtly distracts from the core issue of who will own the basic infrastructure of our future. Large companies strive to control the intellectual property of the technologies that will affect all areas of life.

At the same time, the writers on the fourth industrial revolution recognize that what they call "technological unemployment" is expected. The estimates according to some studies are that between 30% and 50% of the current forms of employment may disappear. Others underestimate and talk about ten percent.

However, the implicit message conveyed by corporations and consultants, despite the fact that it will affect most sectors of society, is that "the future is approaching and you should get used to it". Government messages and policies tended to absorb this point of view. For the governments, the opportunities were translated into the language of competitive threats: "If we don't do these things, others will." It subtly focuses attention on inevitable economic outcomes without providing space to consider the wider social consequences that may need to be managed.

And yet the technologies of the fourth industrial revolution may endanger the basic functional relations of the capitalist economy. Wage work enables consumption, which in turn becomes profit for companies, which in turn maintains companies, wages and the ability to pay taxes. If the adoption of new technologies is rapid, then the exodus of workers may overwhelm the ability of economies to provide alternative forms of work.

That's one extreme possibility, but it's one that current British government policy does little to address. At the moment, in Britain, only trade unions and elements on the fringes of the Labor Party are thinking about the scope of new technology for different types of companies that could put us out of work. This must change.

Editor's note
In Israel - from tests we conducted before the first elections in the series - those that took place in April, no party emphasized in its platform the need to prepare for changes in the employment market. Apparently, even today no party understands the criticality of this threat. There is also no known analysis of the subject by the Ministry of Economy or any other ministry on the issue that may overshadow all other general issues.

to the article on The Conversation website