By reading through the article Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030, it is obvious that the panel of researchers and experts are well-informed and took a largely unbiased and logical approach to all that they wrote about. For this reason, it is difficult to find topics or passages to disagree with. However, I took some issue with a stance they took in Section Three, under AI Policy, Now and in the Future. They consider how AI systems that take over tasks currently performed by humans will affect peoples capabilities. They claim that as machines deliver super-human performances on some tasks, peoples ability to perform them may wither, giving the example of calculators inhibiting childrens abilities to learn simple mathematics. I disagree that having tasks taken over by computers will irrevocably hinder our capability to perform them. At the very least, I believe that even if the skills of humans are weakened by lack of use, inactivity cannot destroy our capacity to think critically and inevitably reclaim our past competence.

First, it is worth deconstructing some examples of tasks that have already been replaced by artificial intelligence. The article makes use of the calculator example, claiming that by introducing them into the learning environment, students do not develop the ability to perform basic arithmetic manually. I do not believe this is the case. First and foremost, to my knowledge, teachers are still using the (now false) argument that students will not have a calculator everywhere they go and thus need to be able to do it themselves. While this may not be true, I am certain that standardized tests prohibit calculator use, forcing the environment upon the students, forcing them to develop the skill. Additionally, anyone who has ever tried to do advanced mathematics using a more advanced calculator like Wolfram Alpha can attest to the fact that such programs can only do so much; it can handle simpler processes, but to the common user without knowledge of how to properly make use of it, it cannot handle larger, conceptual questions, once again forcing the person to understand the math behind a problem.

To name a few other basic tasks taken over by computers, there is also cleaning (e.g. the Roomba), factory jobs (e.g. automated part making, etc.), and driving (e.g. Tesla, etc.). The problem with the articles argument is as follows: as of yet, all everyday tasks that have been replaced by AI are simple, easily-learnable skills that could be relearned (if a persons skill withers away) with ease. The hardest of those mentioned above is likely driving, which legally takes 6 months for a person to learn (based on the person getting a learners permit, etc.), but could probably be sufficiently attained even quicker. 

The point being made is that presently, artificial intelligence computers take over our tasks that we find so simple to learn so quickly that they become boring for us to do. If needed, we could regain these skills with little effort, but chances are, they are so ingrained in our lifestyles that we would not lose such abilities in the first place.
