The reading passage states that robots will greatly enhance daily life by making tasks more efficient, reducing human workload, and handling dangerous jobs. However, the professor in the lecture disagrees, arguing that robots also introduce several challenges that could outweigh their benefits. First, the reading claims that robots increase efficiency by performing repetitive tasks more quickly and accurately than humans. However, the professor refutes this claim by explaining that while robots can handle simple, repetitive tasks well, they struggle with complex or unpredictable situations. He provides an example of self-checkout machines in grocery stores, which often malfunction or require human assistance, ultimately slowing down the process rather than improving efficiency. Second, the reading suggests that robots reduce human workload by automating tasks, allowing people to focus on more important work or leisure activities. In contrast, the professor argues that automation may lead to widespread job losses, creating economic instability. He explains that many workers, especially in manufacturing and customer service, rely on jobs that could be replaced by robots. As a result, rather than reducing workload, automation could leave many people unemployed, making life more difficult rather than easier. Finally, the reading claims that robots can perform dangerous jobs, such as working in hazardous environments or assisting in disaster response, reducing the risk to human workers. However, the professor challenges this idea by pointing out that robots are not always reliable in dangerous conditions. He explains that robots can malfunction or fail in unpredictable ways, sometimes putting human lives at even greater risk. For example, he mentions that robotic rescue devices have failed in emergency situations due to technical errors, delaying critical operations rather than improving safety. In conclusion, while the reading passage presents robots as a positive development for society, the professor disagrees. He argues that robots are not always efficient, may cause job losses, and are not entirely reliable in dangerous situations, making their impact on daily life less beneficial than the reading suggests.