6 Page 4 OPINION 1 y f Robotics: Wednesday,_March 17, 1982. Problems a end The Michigan Daily potential By Henryk Skolimowski The state and the University increasingly are looking toward high technology and ,obotics to pull them out of the current 'ecession. Gov. Milliken has formed a task force to attract high-technology industry to the state-and the University is expected to be at the hub of new high technology obotics development. A special conference will be held this Saturday at Rackham Hall to discuss how robotics will affect the economy, unem- ,ployment, and existing industries such as Zr/g auto industry. To prepare for the conference, three Wiythical characters-High Tech, Low Tech, and Concern-met this week to discuss the social implications of the robot. - <>; ,. . __ 'revolution. quickly before others do. Robotics can create exciting new research possibilities. Many graduate students will be involved, for whom there will be good jobs later. Industry also will benefit tremendously. If industry benefits it will trickle down to everybody. Social consequences? There will be some-there always are with new products. Society will take care of that. Strictly speaking, the consequences are not my business. If I were to worry about the social consequences of new technologies, I would have no time for anything else. My job is purely technical and I do it well. Low Tech: You are not responding to the problems robotics may present, High Tech. We are creating a revolution with consequences as far-reaching as anything the industrial revolution has seen so far. We are responsible for it. Who else can be? Concern: Neither of you is addressing the specific social consequences bf introducing robotics to the production process. When robotics become a reality, this will lead to in- dustrial unemployment on an unprecedented scale. And this will lead to a totalitarian regime ... High Tech: How come? You are being rash and irrational. Concern: Let me explain. If robotics suc- ceeds, the elimination of jobs on a tremendous scale will follow us as robotics technology replaces workers. These jobless workers will not be absorbed in other industries. Now when you have 20 to 30 percent of the people unemployed in the country, you have an enor- mous legion of frustrated and unhappy citizens. This will lead to tension and outbursts. To calm these outsursts, totalitarian controls will increase bit by bit and we will lose more and more of our liberties and freedom-for the sake of law and order. I put it to you, High Tech, that the coming of a totalitarian regime is not as rash and irrational as you think. It will be an inevitable outcome of technology, like robotics, which we know how to activate, but High Tech: I don't know how we can take care of all the potential problems to society either now or in the future. We are the technicians, the experts, the inventors. We bring new goods. Let other people decide about the social consequences. In any case, some poeple have to control. Others have to be controlled. If this new technology requires a new social structure so that we can run it smoothly and efficiently, we'll have to create this new structure. Progress must not be stopped. which we do not know how to benefit of all. 4i Low Tech: You are talking rubbish, High Tech. To say that some have to control and others have to be controlled, sounds like a fascist kind of ideology which is foreign to the traditions of this country and has little to do with the overall benefits of technology. I think Concern is right. We have to look into the large- scale social consequences of the robotics revolution, even if it is painful and difficult to do. direct for the * * * * High Tech: We are here to talk about robotics, an exciting new development which promises so much. I think that we should fully endorse this development. Through robotics, we will not only develop new technologies; we will create new jobs and help the Michigan economy get back on its feet. Concern: This is all very true-up to a point. You talk about new jobs. But which jobs? And for whom? And at what prices? How many jobs will we have to eliminate from existing in- dustries in order to create one new job in robotics? Getting the economy on its feet is very im- portant and an exciting prospect, but aren't we pipedreaming about robotics? Won't we have to put in a tremendous amount of moneyfirst, since robotics is very capital intensive?' Who will reap the'benefits from it later? No doubt those who invest the capital. Won't robotics become another scheme to benefit the rich? Let Robotics: Harbinger of a totalitarian state? Concern: As for me, I take robotics quite seriously. I am already planning to move out of the United States and settle in a village in a remote part of Mexico, where I will grow corn for my tortillas. This will not be escapism or an irrational choice, but on the contrary a very rational one. To live in a totalitarian regime would be the irrational thing. There is a splendid painting by the Spanish artist Goya which depicts the nightmares of reason. des, reason and rationality have their nightmares. I just hope (sometimes against hope) that your robotics revolution will not become a nightmare of reason. Skolim owski is a humanities professor at the University. me be brief: robotics yes, but for whose benefit? Low Tech: There is a germ of truth in what you both say, but you both exaggerate. I ap- preciate your concern, Concern, but you put the whole thing in such perspective it seems you are against technology. I'm sure you're not. We have to evolve with technology in order not to stand still-to stand still is to go backward. We have to take advantage of new technologies, particularly with our,industries in such a slump, the auto industry especially. Robotics must be given a chance. But you, High Tech, are jumping too fast. You want to leap before you look. We must first consider how robotics will affect society in the long run. High Tech: This is not my concern. I'm in charge of this new technology and I'm going to make it work ! This is my only job. I say we must jump at this opportunity Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Weasel Vol. XCII, No. 130 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board HE~LLO? WPIV-TV? Sp LIKE TO .SPERM. WITH THE PIRo6RW a.' OfP-rAE YES S A STUPERT A 'Mf, U VNV41Y OF t'ICAI6AN, ANPIN iNORPEK n ? ROM~IT TW4 bout4N~t NC!UVCTof 9PUCATIN, ;$4 cam. 67a sIT 114 wY ROOM ANP NEYtP, SPEAK- TOANYoA4E EVER A6AiN. r A5 IWWPROY6 GoV~iZA( E ovE'. IERE. - o ) 0 WE W14i YOO k&. TRr wa 1ZERFT TtMT;PUF TThy. VASr AMOU14r of NJWHOH HAPPN S OA($ JPAY, WE.MUST i4t.r ouR TIRUL'f NOTEWORTHY(. By Robert Lence TRu+.Y NMTWoKrHY?/ GAME ON, r sAW TiAT F _A RREYov DO WrST NlGwr oN TeAT CCU'( O CAN BAMNCE 100 Pe M S 04KI OE -/zg 6 'I. " ::y , CESF poll: A measure of discontent HE UNIVERSITY'S faculty members want more voice in :determining their salaries, yet they aren't ready to unionize in ordertto get that voice. That's what a survey conducted by the Committee, on the Economic Status :of the Faculty revealed yesterday. The fervor for forming a union-demon- Zstrated last term by union petitions 'from two LSA departments- apparen- tly has died down from lack of broad- -based support. However, the administration should hesitate before it celebrates the fact -:that the drastic step of unionization is -not an immediate possibility. Although the CESF poll shows faculty un- willingness to try a union "cure" for salary grievances, all the usual sym- :ptoms for a possible faculty union currently are present and still thriving. The CESF results may be incon- -clusive. Only 33 percent of the :professors polled bothered to answer, a disturbing example of apathy on the faculty's part. Those who responded, however, overwhelmingly agreed that they were unhappy with last year's salary distribution. That unhappiness depended to a large extent on what size raise a professor received. Twice as many professors in the bottom end of the raise scale thought the salary distribution was unfair as those professors in the top half of the scale. This discontent is inherent to the University's merit-based salary . ..r mnw ..nminh ,,lric nmP realizing the current economic bind of the University, are more worried than ever on just how much age, teaching quality, and research activities are considered when University dollars are doled out. Some charge the salaries are awarded on an incon- sistent, even capricious, set of rules. It is ironic that the faculty want more power to control their future when they are unwilling to unionize- especially since the two are so in- timately linked. Collective bargaining agents at other colleges agree that professors unionize not to get higher salaries, but to win power and influen- ce over the administration. Unions are born out of feelings of frustration toward, and impotence over, the ar- bitrary nature of 'administrative decisions. These feelings of helplessnegs mesh accurately with the current state of the faculty. More and more University professors feel their informal influence over the administration is proving inadequate. The current discontent seems a perfect breeding ground for an adverserial faculty/administration relationship that may eventually lead to a union. The administration should become more alert to the possibility of a faculty union. For, unless faculty members become more influential and effective in making major policy decisions, CESF's inconclusive dissatisfaction is sure to bring more union talk in the future. Professors may hp nvin thhd nn't nnt a uninn LETTERS TO THE DAILY: p 40 Rally peacefully against the neo-Nazis To the Daily On March 20 (this Saturday) the present incarnation of the Nazi party will make its presence known in Ann Arbor. Their avowed intention is to protest communism. Socially respon- sible citizens must be aware that this purpose is farcial and ironic. The neo-Nazis who will be here in a few days share the philosophy of the group respon- sible for millions of deaths less than a generation ago. The Ann Arbor march will "protest" not only the threat of communism, but also the threat posed by homosexuals, liberals, blacks, Jews, and other groups or in- dividuals who disagree with Nazi doctrine. ThW Nazis call for the destruction of those who do not subscribe to their beliefs. Their aim is world domination. We recognize their right to march, their freedom of speech, and their right to assemble peacefully. These rights are guaranteed by the U.S. Con- stitution. It is ironic that a group such as the Nazis will take advan- tage of those freedoms in order to deny others of them. We do not wish to stop the Nazis from marching. It is their un-. deniable right. We oppose their beliefs, but we will not adopt their methods.. Their doctrine of hate and tac- tics of selective destruction are reprehensible. We urge everyone in Ann Arbor, everyone who has some sense of what freedom and democracy mean, to react to this parade of injustice. Confronting the Nazis with a counter-march, at the same time and at the same place of their rally, would be counterproduc- tive. The possibility of provoked violence is too great. At Green- sboro, the Nazis and the Klan clashed with police and protesters. Only protesters were hurt. Only protesters died. The Nazis and the Klan members are free. In Southfield, a melee in the streets left demonstrators arrested for inciting a riot and disrupting a peaceful assembly. The Nazis walked away under police protection. A peaceful demonstration is called for-a mature, rational response which reflects our belief in freedom, liberty, and peace. At 1:00 p.m. on March 20 there will be such a demonstration at Federal Plaza. We hope to take the ill wind out of the Nazis' sails. Mayor Belcher will speak, along with representatives from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, B'nai B'rith, and other organizations opposed to irrational hatred. This declaration of our love of life, brotherhood, and freedom is sponsored by the Committee for the Affirmation of Human Dignity and Freedom, the American Friends Society, B'nai B'rith, the Michigan Student Assembly, the Association of Religious Counselors, and the Jewish Community Council, among others. We urge you to join us this Saturday. It will be time well spent. You'll be among friends. -Kimberly Small Bruce Goldman March 16 It's never too late to rush To the Daily: I am writing to protest Howard Witt's repeated condemnation of the fraternity/sorority system here on campus. Besides being institutionalized pseudo- mutuality, populated with rich, bigoted, sexist, and insecure airheads (and those who hanker after those qualities) I hear they're really a fun bunch (wit- ness the mudbowl). I also hear it's relatively easy to join up. Just have confidence in the abilities of the current ad- ministration, security in the superiority of the white race and the males therein, and pretend that it really matters whether you wear your ducks or your dock-siders tonight (gosh, I hope I spelled those correctly). See? I think you probably still'have a shot at rush. Don't delay! -Patricia Fabrizio March 9 Wasserman rawtow'LeTS of 'ft OuANvs f OU Yo KPvsMet4 CUI, STOP TH CAMERAS THIS WOUT Do/ THIS M~AKES IT SOWAD LIKe No0 ONE- RfCSP(T! TIC Gov\EN~etT!. TAKE-jwo ! FELLOW POLE OVER 25 MILLIOF OEYU l4AVE NOT k I I rr