请问HN：我们是否见证了人工智能的“三位一体时刻”？
我不知道是不是只有我这样觉得，但昨天美国决定禁止访问Fable模型，感觉像是“人工智能竞赛”中的一次划时代的转变，规模堪比“三位一体”试验。
很难统计昨天发生了多少事情：
一个政府关闭它不喜欢的人工智能模型？一个政府撤回数百亿美元的收入，来自一个几乎没有盈利的万亿美元初创公司，而该公司的整个发展轨迹，实质上其生存，都依赖于该模型的商业成功？一个人工智能模型的访问权由国籍决定，可能通过严格的身份证明进行验证？
想象一下，如果下周该模型再次可用。我们能信任它吗，或者信任Anthropic为了遵守美国法律而施加的更改吗？可能不能。我们能相信美国政府不会出于自身网络安全操作而访问非限制模型吗？可能也不能。
毫无疑问，中国会开始效仿。我们已经看到中国公司逐渐收缩它们的开放性，并且有传言称这一趋势将会持续。现在我们可以预期中国公司开始发布经过删减的模型，或根据国籍或地点限制访问。
感觉就像美国政府昨天打开了潘多拉的盒子，把我们推入了一个武器化的人工智能竞赛领域，伴随着更多的限制、控制和访问监管。即使最终这一切只是Anthropic的另一个TACO故事或“营销活动”，造成的损害也很难被逆转。
查看原文
I don’t know if it’s just me, but yesterday’s US decision to ban access to the Fable model feels like an epochal shift in the “AI race,” something on the scale of the Trinity test.<p>It is hard to count how many boxes were ticked yesterday:<p>A government shutting down an AI model it doesn’t like? A government revoking tens of billions of dollars in revenue from a barely profitable $1T startup whose entire trajectory, and in essence its survival, depends on the commercial success of that model? Access to an AI model being governed by citizenship, likely verified through rigorous ID checks?<p>Imagine that the model is made available again next week. Can we trust it, or trust the changes imposed by Anthropic to comply with the US? Likely not. Can we trust that the US government will not have access to the non-restricted model for its own cybersecurity operations? Likely not.<p>There is little doubt that China will start to follow suit. We already see Chinese companies slowly scaling back their openness, and there are rumors that this trend will continue. Now we can expect Chinese companies to start releasing redacted models or limiting access based on nationality or location.<p>It feels like the US government opened Pandora’s box yesterday and pushed us into the territory of a weaponized AI race, with more restrictions, control, and regulation of access. Even if, in the end, this is all another TACO story or a “marketing campaign” from Anthropic, the damage is very unlikely to be undone.