人工智能：平衡器还是分裂者？
有一句话说：“上帝创造了人，但塞缪尔·科尔特让他们平等。”人工智能有时也能产生类似的效果。在我见过的一个企业系统中，使用工具每周40小时的人与每周仅使用2小时的人的差距在引入人工智能代理后几乎消失。我还看到，在每个人都获得慷慨的Cursor订阅后，10倍开发者与普通开发者之间的差距也缩小了。
与此同时，最近关于Anthropic的Claude Fable 5和Mythos级模型的公开报道表明，最强大的系统可能会通过有限访问的项目或高级渠道推出，而不是广泛而均匀地分发。
历史上，能够负担得起当时最佳技术的人往往决定了谁能够掌权。在古希腊，重装步兵是普通的自由公民，他们自费购买装备，将军事服务与公民参与紧密联系在一起。类似地，殖民时期的美国民兵将武装服务融入日常社区生活。相比之下，晚期中世纪欧洲盔甲、战马和军事训练的高昂成本将军事权力牢牢掌握在少数富人手中——这导致了雅典和早期美国的民主传统，同时在整个中世纪欧洲加强了专制统治。
因此，在我看来，人工智能是否成为一种平等化的工具，或者成为加大有无访问差距的工具，都是一个重要的问题。
查看原文
There is a saying “God made men, but Samuel Colt made them equal.” AI sometimes can have similar effect. In one enterprise system I’ve seen, the gap between people using a tool 40 hours a week and those using it 2 hours a week nearly disappeared after AI agents were introduced. I have also seen the gap between a 10x developer and an average one shrink after everyone got generous Cursor subscriptions.<p>At the same time, recent public reporting on Anthropic’s Claude Fable 5 and Mythos-class models suggests that the most capable systems may be rolled out through limited-access programs or premium channels rather than broadly and evenly.<p>Throughout history, who could afford access to the best technology of the time often shaped who got to govern. In ancient Greece, hoplites were ordinary free citizens who funded their own gear, tying military service to civic participation. Similarly, colonial American militias embedded armed service into everyday community life. By contrast, the prohibitive cost of armor, warhorses and military training in late medieval Europe placed military power firmly in the hands of the wealthy few - leading to democratic traditions in Athens and the early United States, while reinforcing autocratic rule across medieval Europe.<p>So IMHO it is an important question whether AI becomes an equalizer, or a tool that widens the gap between those who have access and those who do not.