之一。但這種擔心是錯誤的。我們不太可能看到大規(guī)模失業(yè)；相反，工人們將轉向新的經濟部門—盡管有轉型的陣痛—就像一直如此。真正的風險是，機器人會把我們太多的人推入不那么具有社會生產力的工作—尤其是那些在營銷方面的工作。
?? The fear that robots, or more generally smart software, will put us all out of work is one of dominant economic memes of our time. But that fear is misplaced. We’re unlikely to see mass unemployment; rather, workers will shift into new economic sectors — albeit with transition pains — as has always been the case. The real risk is that the robots will push too many of us into less socially productive jobs — especially those in marketing.
讓我們來考慮一下ATM機。與許多人所認為的相反，1990年代自動取款機的廣泛采用并未大大減少對銀行計票員的需求。自動取款機使銀行分行更容易操作，并使銀行能夠雇傭更多的員工，包括計票員。
?? Let’s consider the ATM. Contrary to what many people think, the widespread adoption of automated teller machines in the 1990s didn’t significantly diminish the demand for bank tellers. ATMs made bank branches easier and cheaper to operate, and that led banks to hire more staff, including tellers.
這些計票員在計算現金和處理存款方面的作用比以前要小，它們是怎么做的呢？經濟師James Bessen解釋說：“他們在與銀行客戶打交道方面，他們的市場能力和人際交往能力變得更加重要。”所以轉型—ATM機確實是有效地將銀行出納機的工作變成了更多的一個營銷人。他們是銀行所謂的客戶關系團隊的一部分。”
?? These tellers play a smaller role in counting cash and handling deposits than before, so what are they doing instead? Economist James Bessen explained: “Their ability to market and their interpersonal skills in terms of dealing with bank clients has become more important. So the transition — what the ATM machine did was effectively change the job of the bank teller into one where they are more of a marketing person. They are part of what banks call the ‘customer relationship team.’”
從廣義上講，這種轉向營銷的做法不僅僅是銀行計票員。更多的法律工作是通過智能軟件完成的，但是培養(yǎng)客戶端關系從來就不太重要。醫(yī)療助理的一些功能正在自動化，但醫(yī)院和醫(yī)生仍在努力改善患者體驗，并達到新客戶。亞馬遜Inc.的倉庫使用機器人將商品下架，但有人必須說服消費者購買這些東西。
?? This shift toward marketing, in the broad sense of that term, isn’t just about bank tellers. More legal work is done by smart software, but cultivating client relationships has never been more important. Some functions of medical assistants are being automated, but hospitals and doctors are still trying to improve the patient experience and reach new customers. Amazon Inc. warehouses use robots to pull goods down off the shelves, but someone has to persuade consumers to buy the stuff.
以上這些具體的例子，要考慮人工替代的一般邏輯。機器和軟件往往很擅長“制作東西”，而且越來越多的是在提供明確定義的服務時，比如當Alexa為你安排一個包。但機器在開發(fā)廣告宣傳、宣傳產品或公司、或以迷人的方式在家門口向你打招呼時，并不是有效的，因為在餐廳里，即使你在iPad上訂購，也經常會這樣做。這些活動將在很長一段時間內仍然是人類的所在。
?? Above and beyond these specific examples, consider the general logic of labor substitution. Machines and software are often very good at “making stuff” and, increasingly, at delivering well-defined services, such as when Alexa arranges a package for you. But machines are not effective at persuading, at developing advertising campaigns, at branding products or corporations, or at greeting you at the door in a charming manner, as is done so often in restaurants, even if you order on an iPad. Those activities will remain the province of human beings for a long time to come.
勞動力向營銷邁進了多少？可以肯定的是，大量的商業(yè)說服力是有用的。營銷會讓消費者了解新產品及其屬性，或者讓消費者相信一款產品比另一個產品更好。是營銷讓我停下來看棒球，轉到比較精彩的NBA。有時候廣告的存在—甚至除了任何直接的信息價值之外—讓產品變得更加愉快。如果一個特定的籃球sneaker與詹姆斯·詹姆斯有關，通過代言和電視廣告，一些人會喜歡穿這種運動鞋。
?? How much is this shift of labor into marketing a step forward? To be sure, a lot of commercial persuasion is useful. Marketing informs consumers about new products and their properties, or convinces them that one product is better for them than another. It was marketing that got me to stop watching baseball and switch to the more exciting NBA. Sometimes the very existence of an ad — even apart from any direct informational value — makes a product more enjoyable. If a particular basketball sneaker is associated with LeBron James, through an endorsement and TV commercials, some people will enjoy wearing that sneaker more.
這一切都說了，很多營銷是零或負的游戲。每個企業(yè)都試圖將客戶從其他品牌中脫穎而出，而客戶與產品的最終匹配通常與人們的需求緊密相關，更多的是用于這些商業(yè)戰(zhàn)爭，而不是理想的社會效率。我的銀行可能會讓我感覺更好，在那里成為一名客戶，但其服務并不比最接近的競爭對手優(yōu)越，如果有的話。也許可樂真的比百事可樂更好，或者反之亦然，但不是那么好—而且數十億都花在了試圖說服消費者進行切換或者另一個開關的時候。根據一項估計，可口可樂去年在全球廣告上花費了大約40億美元。
?? That all said, a lot of marketing is a zero- or negative-sum game. Each business tries to pull customers away from the other brands, and while the final matching of customers to products is usually closely attuned to what people want, more is spent on these business battles than is ideal for social efficiency. My bank might make me feel better about being a customer there, but its services just aren’t much superior to those of the nearest competitor, if at all. Maybe Coke really is better than Pepsi, or vice versa, but it’s not that much better — and billions are spent trying to persuade consumers to make one switch or the other. By one estimate, the Coca-Cola Co. spent about $4 billion last year on global advertising.
更多的部門表現規(guī)模經濟，因此一些壟斷利潤，更高的浪費廣告支出可能會上升。盡管消費者在一定程度上享受到了這些panderings，但附加值也有限制。隨著工作人員從服務臺轉到問候客戶，許多食客會更加受歡迎。去銀行也將是一個更有趣的經歷，因為過去計算現金的柜員現在已經被培訓，以便我們如何管理我們的儲蓄。不過，這是一個令人無常的愿景，我們將如何處理由機器人釋放的人力勞動。還有一個更黑暗的愿景：一些營銷人員可能會面臨欺詐行為，例如富國銀行的員工，他們注冊了不知名客戶的新帳戶。
?? The more a sector exhibits economies of scale, and thus some monopoly profits, the higher wasteful advertising spending can rise. Although consumers enjoy these panderings to some degree, there’s a limit on value added. As workers shift from serving tables to greeting customers, many diners will feel just a little more welcome. Going to the bank will also be a more fun experience, as tellers who used to count cash are now trained to sell us on how the bank is managing our savings. Still, that’s an uninspiring vision of what we will do with the human labor freed up by robots. There’s a darker vision too: Some of those marketers may look toward fraud, such as the Wells Fargo employees who signed up unknowing customers for new accounts.
如果你在日常生活中看到很多機器人，在新聞故事中看到很多，但在公布的統(tǒng)計數據中沒有巨大的生產力收益，不要感到驚訝。這完全是美國經濟的權利。
