UK govt sucks at AI and robots, doesn't use them to its advantage – wait, is that good or bad? The UK government does not have a clear strategy on how to maximise AI and robotics for economic benefit, according to the Commons Select Committee for Science and Technology. This conclusion was published today in a report by the committee, which earlier this year launched an inquiry into Blighty's take up of artificial …
"The UK government does not have a clear strategy on how to maximise AI and robotics for economic benefit"
Businesses develop and market AI and robotics and other businesses decide where and how to use it based on the economic benefits they see in its use. Government has a very poor record of understanding technology, and there is no need or benefit in their attempting to develop a strategy. The businesses paying over hard cash have the biggest incentive and are best placed to evaluate the economic benefits of their purchases.
The UK government does not have a clear strategy on how to maximise AI and robotics for economic benefit, according to the Commons Select Committee for Science and Technology.
Why did the committee just focus on economic benefit, and not on wider issues? Haven't they noticed that their voters aren't solely economic entities. e.g. Pure economic benefit might mean a great balance of payments but 90% unemployment.
"Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movement of small green pieces of paper, which was odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy.” -- Douglas Adams
Why did the committee just focus on economic benefit, and not on wider issues?
Err, because they aren't real scientists and technologists...the technology luminary is a former GPO technician (from what, twenty years ago) the rest are now career politicians who in their time in the real world did things like events manager, "social scientist", public relations consultant, opthalmologist et al.....
I got really depressed seeing how the select committee on science and technology appear to be almost entirely unqualified by either education or experience to hold any view on the matter.
I think that the most important aspect of this is the unemployment issue and no one is facing up to it - neither government nor business.
Although AI and robotics systems can increase quality of manufactured goods and services though improved consistency, the real motivation for their deployment is to reduce costs. However, whilst some of the cost reduction could come from reduced wastage due to improved consistency, it's difficult to see how the reduction in costs from just this factor, on its own, could cover the costs of developing and deploying the systems in the first place; the greatest reduction in costs will be from the reduction of jobs.
It's true that an increase in the development of AI and robotics systems would see an increase in the number of jobs in this field but the number of new jobs must be less than the number of jobs that will be made redundant otherwise you'd end up with more jobs than you had before, which means that you've increased costs, not reduced them. So without even considering population growth, progress must lead to a cost reduction and that means fewer jobs and higher unemployment.
The problem arises because employment is the solution that allows people to provide for their needs: people go to work and get paid, which allows them to buy services and goods. But what will happen as unemployment increases? As the number of people employed decreases, to reduce costs, then the amount of money available to be spent on the services and goods must also decline, otherwise you're back to increasing costs again.
So, in the long term, I think the concept or policy of people providing for themselves through employment is time-limited and what government really needs to do is come up with an entirely new paradigm for providing for people, and hopefully not one that incorporates slavery.
And when I say that I hope it doesn't incorporate slavery, I'm genuinely being honest - a significant proportion of humanity (those with wealth) would have no problem with slavery (for those without wealth) even in this day and age.
<I?The problem arises because employment is the solution that allows people to provide for their needs: people go to work and get paid, which allows them to buy services and goods. But what will happen as unemployment increases? As the number of people employed decreases, to reduce costs, then the amount of money available to be spent on the services and goods must also decline, otherwise you're back to increasing costs again.</I>
This....^^^^ Outsourcing/off shoring have been creating this very problem for a long time in both the UK and the States. The "brains" have said "Well, we'll just move our jobs to a service economy". Hasn't worked out very well, has it? Still need the manufacturing and exports to balance the books.
"The UK government does not have a clear strategy on how to maximise AI and robotics for economic benefit"
But I thought the UK government did have a clear (well for politicians) strategy, namely encourage various companies to set up R&D facilities in the UK so that monies flowed into the UK and jobs were provided in the UK enabling the potential employment of UK residents (among others) and the payment of UK taxes. This strategy doesn't actually require the R&D to deliver any useful products anytime soon, just so long as it gives confidence that something is being achieved and that the UK is a good place to do R&D and so encourage more money to be invested in the UK...
Google DeepMind thought that using AI would provide “new areas of economic activity and employment,” but that certain types of skills will decrease in relevance.
AI leading takeover and makeover of banking and government with CyberIntelAIgent Divisions drivering change and presenting future event horizons for population is a natural choice for SMARTR IntelAIgent Systems as a Service Servering SMARTR Active Systems.
And corrupt and easily subverted intelligence agencies are also a prime primary target for fundamental proaction and radical engagement with Humanised Virtual Machinery.
Such though will never be, so long as pussy is a cat, a public sector run and controlled enterprise. IT is a private mined King Solomon mines mind field and that attracts all manner of rogues and renegades and pirates in search of a fast buck and free ride.
Can't disagree though that the present UK is lost in such new space places. And that is entirely due to a lack of novel noble leadership in right royal politically adept directions. Where are the Windsors whenever they are needed?
Where are the Windsors whenever they are needed?
Giving themselves medals for not having gotten a criminal conviction despite the fact that scandal would prevent such a circumstance and they'd never be in a position that desperate.
I wouldn't expect modern thinking from Whitehall, apart from the dogged mindset that if they can read everyones mail then no bad things will happen again ever.
At least, in the area of trading algorithms.
I was ready to welcome our new robot overlords but they haven't turned up again.
Seriously, though, what counts as robotics? People are constantly banging on about CNC milling machines with ancient software which still do the job. To me this is robotics. So perhaps there isn't an economic case for replacing existing kit and we would need greenfield sites to push forward with new kit.
Ship building for the UK armed forces, perhaps?
Seriously, though, what counts as robotics?
Most people have a very blinkered definition. But in practice, lots of people even routinely travel by robot. Once the airliner has taken off, the pilots have a nice doze until it is time to land. And they even let the robot land itself if it is a bit foggy.
The Science and Technology committee has urged the government “without further delay” to establish a RAS Leadership council with a clear strategy – or “the productivity gains that could be achieved through greater uptake of the technologies across the UK will remain unrealised.”
Hi, Katyanna Quach,
A RAS Leadership council, made up of that and those with the right stuff, would have a clear strategy, which they could easily enable either with or without government knowledge, for wealth creation and power disbursement both achieved and rendered through the greater uptake and understanding of systems and information technology, when all is recognised as being virtualisable ….. for is not/are not the future and the worlds there yet to be realised and presented, simply complex figments of internetworking imagination at their work, rest and play?
Or are we to be led to believe that all such things just happen as if they be made remotely off site and delivered from a heaven and/or crazy space place?
As a species we're not responsible enough to be dabbling in AI yet.
God's forbid we manage to create something self-aware (I'm aware that might be a little advanced for current progress, but as a species we have a tendency to stick our fingers in the electric sockets of the universe and then be surprised when we get shocked).
'Fourth Industrial Revolution' indeed, it'll probably lead to slavery then enslavement.
"I'm from the Government and I'm here to help."
As others have said, we need less interference from the Gov't rather than more. Let Industry do it's own thing. As demand for AI increases so salaries go up, so University applications for AI increase, AI depts at Unis get bigger, and so on. The Government tried to second guess how to reduce carbon emissions by subsidising selected technologies, instead of just introducing a carbon tax (as the Canadians are about to) and let the markets find their own solutions.
"The UK government does not have a clear strategy on how to maximise AI and robotics for economic benefit ..."
It's none of my business anyway as a non-Brit, and I don't want to be rude or callous, but from an outsider's perspective - is there anything right now that the UK gevenment has a clear strategy on?
@ allthecoolshortnamesweretaken
Other than self preservation?
"It's none of my business anyway as a non-Brit..."
For goodness sakes, don't let that slow you down. The topic de jure certainly makes no difference to most of the Brits, nor to many other posters.
It was a nice change to have the TL:DR at the top of the article for once, and in less than ten words as well.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
