By Sally A. Castellanos | Perspectives: Innovation, Technology, and the Law
Published on August 5, 2025 at 3:46 am PST. Updated at 4:03 am.
I asked ChatGPT a question about automation, robotics, and the future of work—and here is the article that developed from that discussion.
The 2025 World Robot Contest Championship in China—covered recently by the Associated Press—featured nearly 400 teams competing in events like humanoid robot soccer. It was a showcase of engineering achievement leading up to what is being billed the so-called Humanoid Games. Machines, built by students and developers, ran in calculated strides across green fields, simulating one of the world’s most beloved sports. Maybe this is part of the reason why we are all becoming less interested in the dystopian world that is quickly becoming television news. That and character assassinations.
The event was inspiring from a technical standpoint—but also unsettling.
In a world where entire sectors are being automated and global workforces displaced, it’s fair to ask: Do we want to watch a robot play soccer, or do we want to witness the beauty of human brilliance, risk, and emotion?
This isn’t a critique of the students who build these machines. Nor is it a personal commentary on any individual, including journalist Chris Cuomo or his recent guest—an artificial intelligence expert—who discussed the increasing automation of jobs. Their conversation while serious, also struck me as rather curious.
It’s a stark contrast between two stories. On one hand, machines are becoming increasingly capable of simulating what once belonged entirely to the human experience. On the other, real people are being displaced by that same progress, often without social safety nets, policy protections, or ethical guardrails. But it’s not just about congressional leadership fighting for safety nets.
Innovation requires intelligence, creativity, and experimentation—but it also requires a human touch. This includes thought leadership and human ingenuity. But it also requires heart, having hope and something to believe in.
The human touch is often romanticized as artistic brilliance or innovation, and rightly so. Humans are capable of acts of extraordinary genius—vision, composition, storytelling, athleticism, invention. But that same human touch includes imperfection, misjudgment, and emotion. It includes showing up for work every day with quiet pride, not for recognition, but to contribute to something greater. A machine may outperform a human in speed or consistency—but it cannot dream, struggle, or sacrifice.
Would you rather watch Lionel Messi stride across a soccer field, driven by resilience, courage, and a lifetime of dedication? Or would you rather watch a robot kick a ball with mechanical precision? What are you hoping to feel when you gather to watch the Superbowl? What do you get from that shared experience across a nation? What was that feeling or shared elation you felt watching the final episode of Seinfeld, Lost or meeting at the water cooler to discuss the previous nights episode of Survivor.
Messi represents something far greater than performance. He symbolizes perseverance, national pride, personal discipline, and the power of human will. These are the intangibles that robots cannot replicate, no matter how advanced the code.
And this is where the legal and ethical questions arise. As attorneys, policymakers, and citizens, we must ask: Are we regulating innovation, or merely reacting to it? Are we designing a future where technology serves people—or where people are displaced in service of machines?
Robot soccer may be framed as harmless competition, and for many students it is a gateway into STEM careers. That’s worth celebrating. But the danger lies in failing to question what these trends mean for the human experience—particularly for vulnerable workers around the world, whose jobs and communities are being transformed or eliminated without representation at the table.
Technological progress must be guided—not just by curiosity or capital—but by conscience.
Legal frameworks should not only address data privacy and algorithmic fairness, but also labor displacement, digital equity, and the preservation of human dignity in a world of machines. We must build systems that understand what cannot be coded: the soul of effort, the pain of failure, the courage to try again.
The future is not just about what machines can do. It’s about what only humans can give.
Sources:
Associated Press. “Robots race across soccer field in China, in competition drawing nearly 400 teams.” July 30, 2025.
Cuomo, Chris. Interview on Artificial Intelligence and Job Displacement. NewsNation, 2025.
Author’s Note:
Sally Castellanos is a California attorney and editor of Perspectives, a legal blog exploring innovation, technology, and global privacy through the lens of law, ethics, and civil society.
