未来工作场所--AI间谍（下）

英文原文来自 ：http://www.economist.com

Yet AI’s benefits will come with many potential drawbacks. Algorithms may not be free of the biases of their programmers. They can also have unintended consequences. The length of a commute may predict whether an employee will quit a job, but this focus may inadvertently harm poorer applicants. Older staff might work more slowly than younger ones and could risk losing their positions if all AI looks for is productivity.

但是AI带来好处的同时也伴随着很多潜在的缺点。算法不免会受到程序员偏见的影响。它们可能带来意想不到的结果。通勤的长度可能会预测一个员工是否会离职，但是这个关注点可能会不经意的影响到经济条件较差的员工。老员工也许会比年轻的员工工作节奏更慢，如果AI关注他们的生产效率，他们可能会有丢掉工作的风险。

And surveillance may feel Orwellian—a sensitive matter now that people have begun to question how much Facebook and other tech giants know about their private lives. Companies are starting to monitor how much time employees spend on breaks. Veriato, a software firm, goes so far as to track and log every keystroke employees make on their computers in order to gauge how committed they are to their company. Firms can use AI to sift through not just employees’ professional communications but their social-media profiles, too. The clue is in Slack’s name, which stands for “searchable log of all conversation and knowledge”.

并且监视可能会使人感觉生活如奥维尔笔下的世界-一个敏感的问题是人们已经开始质疑如Facebook和其他科技巨头公司到底掌握了多少他们的私人数据。公司开始监视员工花在休息上的时间。一家软件公司Veriato甚至能够跟踪和监视员工在他们电脑上的每一次按键以此来衡量他们对公司的尽力程度。公司能够使用AI技术不仅能够检查员工的工作沟通内容，还能够检测他们社交媒体的信息。Slack这个缩写就能给出和好的解释-它代表'所有对话和信息的可搜索日志'。

注：Orwellian（奥维尔）他的代表作《动物庄园》和《1984》是反极权主义的经典名著，其中《1984》是20世纪影响最大的英语小说之一。

Some people are better placed than others to stop employers going too far. If your skills are in demand, you are more likely to be able to resist than if you are easy to replace. Paid-by-the-hour workers in low-wage industries such as retailing will be especially vulnerable. That could fuel a resurgence of labour unions seeking to represent employees’ interests and to set norms. Even then, the choice in some jobs will be between being replaced by a robot or being treated like one.

一些人比另外一些人更有资格阻止老板做的更过分。如果你的技能被需要，你更可能去抵制这种行为而不是简单的被替代。在低工资行业比如零售行业的时薪工人将会特别的容易受到伤害。这可能会促使寻求代表工人利益和制定规范的劳动工会的复兴。就是到那时候，某些岗位的选择也将会是或者被机器人代替或者被机器人监视。

As regulators and employers weigh the pros and cons of AI in the workplace, three principles ought to guide its spread. First, data should be anonymized where possible. Microsoft, for example, has a product that shows individuals how they manage their time in the office, but gives managers information only in aggregated form. Second, the use of AI ought to be transparent. Employees should be told what technologies are being used in their workplaces and which data are being gathered. As a matter of routine, algorithms used by firms to hire, fire and promote should be tested for bias and unintended consequences. Last, countries should let individuals request their own data, whether they are ex-workers wishing to contest a dismissal or jobseekers hoping to demonstrate their ability to prospective employers.

当监管者和雇主权衡AI在工作场所的利弊，三个原则应该去指导它的普及。第一，如果可能数据应该被匿名。例如，微软有一款产品向个人展示他们如何管理在办公室的时间，但是提交给经理的信息应该是一份总和数据。第二，使用AI应该是公开透明的。员工应该被告知那些技术在办公场所被应用了，那些数据被收集了。作为一个常规的做法，算法被公司用作雇用、解聘、提升时应该被测试是否存在偏见和意外结果。最后，各国家应该使个人能够申请他们的个人数据，无论是前员工希望对解聘提出质疑或者是求职者希望对未来雇主展示他们的个人能力。

The march of AI into the workplace calls for trade-offs between privacy and performance. A fairer, more productive workforce is a prize worth having, but not if it shackles and dehumanizes employees. Striking a balance will require thought, a willingness for both employers and employees to adapt, and a strong dose of humanity.

AI进军工作场所，要求人们要在个人隐私和工作表现绩效之间做出权衡。一个更公平，更高效的工作场所是值得拥有的，但是如果束缚工人，并且使员工丧失人性那么就是不可取的。取得两者的平衡是需要深思熟虑，雇主和员工都有意愿去调节，并且需要更多的人性关怀。