
图片来源:Steve Jennings / Stringer / Getty Images
在谈及AI将给世界带来的影响时,商界领袖们的意见大相径庭,Anthropic首席执行官达里奥·阿莫迪警告称,职场将迎来一轮“浩劫”,五成白领职位将走入历史;谷歌DeepMind掌门人德米斯·哈萨比斯则预言,技术将开启太空殖民与超人类生产力的“黄金纪元”。当AI智能体不断蚕食基层岗位,雇员们开始为职业前景惴惴不安——而亿万富翁投资人马克·安德森则在设法平息这种“全民失业返贫”的恐慌。
“我发现,现在有个重大经济谬论盛行于世,即认为AI将以摧枯拉朽之势大幅提升生产力、颠覆一切、摧毁所有岗位,”安德森近日在Stripe的 Cheeky Pint播客中说,“然而矛盾的是,(此番论调同时还认为生产力的提高)会导致人们被榨干资源,陷入赤贫之中。”
这位安德森·霍洛维茨基金的联合创始人预言,即便此景成真,民众仍将拥有巨大消费能力。他指出生产力暴涨将引发万物“供过于求”,昔日百元之物届时或仅需一分即可购得。
“而且即便此景成真,那么结果将是物价的断崖式下跌,而这恰是大家忽略的关键所在,”这位54岁的亿万富翁补充道。
“因此在这种环境中,凭借如此程度的生产力飞跃,商业服务价格将一落千丈,今日耗费不菲的产品将转瞬变得廉价乃至免费。”
AI智慧胜于常人,但暂且无法替代所有人类工作
正如黄仁勋等商界领袖所强调的那样,AI绝非夺人饭碗的“职位杀手”,相反,如能熟练运用该项技术,员工反而将在职场上占得先机。安德森同样认为AI技术将助力专业人士提升工作效率,成为行业翘楚
“借助AI技术,每个人都能成为所有领域的超级专家,”这位企业家在访谈中表示,“因此,每个个体都能取得远超以往的成就。”
虽然我们已经目睹有计算机程序员、金融分析师乃至部分技能岗位正被AI大面积取代,这位风险投资企业家仍认为,人类无需担忧工作岗位被AI全面取代。他坚称,某些职能仍非由人类承担不可,即便AI更能胜任。
“大家所担忧的职场变局,其进展速度远远慢于预期,”安德森直言,“因为美国相当比例的工作需持证上岗、受工会保护或属公共服务范畴,实际上不可能被AI所替代。”
“AI教父”、OpenAI首席执行官萨姆·奥尔特曼等科技领袖预言,医疗健康将是少数几个在这场就业风暴中受到冲击相对较小的领域,毕竟患者始终渴望由人类为其治疗疾病,且机器人尚不具备完成手术及相关任务的能力。
安德森持相同观点,他认为,受法规与执业许可限制,医疗法律等领域尚难与AI深度融合。聊天机器人无法参与法庭辩论,算法无法治病救人,但其处理能力实际已经超越从事相关工作的人类从业者。
“如今的ChatGPT实际上已经比普通医生优秀,这一点几乎可以百分之百确定,”他说,并以自动驾驶汽车的发展类比称:“一直以来大家都在争论,我们究竟是要追求完美,还是只要优于普通人类驾驶员即可?如果将同样的问题置于法律或医疗领域,答案显而易见,那就是选择ChatGPT医生现在对你更有利,但现实不允许我们这么做,因为它并不具备医生的身份。”(财富中文网)
译者:梁宇
审校:夏林
在谈及AI将给世界带来的影响时,商界领袖们的意见大相径庭,Anthropic首席执行官达里奥·阿莫迪警告称,职场将迎来一轮“浩劫”,五成白领职位将走入历史;谷歌DeepMind掌门人德米斯·哈萨比斯则预言,技术将开启太空殖民与超人类生产力的“黄金纪元”。当AI智能体不断蚕食基层岗位,雇员们开始为职业前景惴惴不安——而亿万富翁投资人马克·安德森则在设法平息这种“全民失业返贫”的恐慌。
“我发现,现在有个重大经济谬论盛行于世,即认为AI将以摧枯拉朽之势大幅提升生产力、颠覆一切、摧毁所有岗位,”安德森近日在Stripe的 Cheeky Pint播客中说,“然而矛盾的是,(此番论调同时还认为生产力的提高)会导致人们被榨干资源,陷入赤贫之中。”
这位安德森·霍洛维茨基金的联合创始人预言,即便此景成真,民众仍将拥有巨大消费能力。他指出生产力暴涨将引发万物“供过于求”,昔日百元之物届时或仅需一分即可购得。
“而且即便此景成真,那么结果将是物价的断崖式下跌,而这恰是大家忽略的关键所在,”这位54岁的亿万富翁补充道。
“因此在这种环境中,凭借如此程度的生产力飞跃,商业服务价格将一落千丈,今日耗费不菲的产品将转瞬变得廉价乃至免费。”
AI智慧胜于常人,但暂且无法替代所有人类工作
正如黄仁勋等商界领袖所强调的那样,AI绝非夺人饭碗的“职位杀手”,相反,如能熟练运用该项技术,员工反而将在职场上占得先机。安德森同样认为AI技术将助力专业人士提升工作效率,成为行业翘楚
“借助AI技术,每个人都能成为所有领域的超级专家,”这位企业家在访谈中表示,“因此,每个个体都能取得远超以往的成就。”
虽然我们已经目睹有计算机程序员、金融分析师乃至部分技能岗位正被AI大面积取代,这位风险投资企业家仍认为,人类无需担忧工作岗位被AI全面取代。他坚称,某些职能仍非由人类承担不可,即便AI更能胜任。
“大家所担忧的职场变局,其进展速度远远慢于预期,”安德森直言,“因为美国相当比例的工作需持证上岗、受工会保护或属公共服务范畴,实际上不可能被AI所替代。”
“AI教父”、OpenAI首席执行官萨姆·奥尔特曼等科技领袖预言,医疗健康将是少数几个在这场就业风暴中受到冲击相对较小的领域,毕竟患者始终渴望由人类为其治疗疾病,且机器人尚不具备完成手术及相关任务的能力。
安德森持相同观点,他认为,受法规与执业许可限制,医疗法律等领域尚难与AI深度融合。聊天机器人无法参与法庭辩论,算法无法治病救人,但其处理能力实际已经超越从事相关工作的人类从业者。
“如今的ChatGPT实际上已经比普通医生优秀,这一点几乎可以百分之百确定,”他说,并以自动驾驶汽车的发展类比称:“一直以来大家都在争论,我们究竟是要追求完美,还是只要优于普通人类驾驶员即可?如果将同样的问题置于法律或医疗领域,答案显而易见,那就是选择ChatGPT医生现在对你更有利,但现实不允许我们这么做,因为它并不具备医生的身份。”(财富中文网)
译者:梁宇
审校:夏林
Business leaders are split on how AI will change our world; Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei warned of a jobs armageddon on the horizon that will wipe out 50% of white collar roles, while Google DeepMind chief executive Demis Hassabis said the tech will usher in a “golden era” of space colonization and superhuman productivity. As AI agents continue to snatch up junior-level work, employees are handwringing about their future careers—but billionaire investor Marc Andreessen is laying the concern to rest that we’ll all be unemployed and penniless.
“The other great economic fallacy that I just see everywhere right now is this idea that AI is somehow going to be this hyper-successful thing: hyper-acceleration of productivity and [will] dramatically change everything, destroy all the jobs,” Andreessen recently said on Stripe’s Cheeky Pint podcast. “And yet somehow that’s going to lead to people being eviscerated, and being poor and not having anything.”
Even if that scenario were to come true, the Andreessen Horowitz cofounder predicted that people would enjoy massive spending power. A surge in productivity would cause everything to be “oversupplied,” he said, and things that once cost $100 would now sell for a penny.
“Even if it played out, the result would be hyper-deflation of prices, which is the thing that people miss,” the 54-year-old billionaire continued.
“So in that environment, with that level of productivity growth, the price of business services will collapse, and things that today cost a lot of money will all of a sudden all be cheap or free.”
AI will give people a ‘super-PhD’ and is smarter than humans—but it won’t replace everyone yet
CEOs like Jensen Huang stress that AI won’t be a job-killer stealing human jobs—instead, employees who are savvy with the tech will be the ones snatching up roles. And Andreessen agreed that AI will give professionals wings to be hyper-efficient workers.
“AI just makes every individual a super-PhD in every topic,” the entrepreneur predicted in the interview. “As a consequence, every single one of those people is now capable of doing so much more than they were ever capable of doing before.”
Although we are already witnessing swaths of jobs getting replaced by AI, from computer programmers and financial analysts to even some trade jobs, the venture capital entrepreneur said humans shouldn’t be worried about a total wipeout. In fact, he insisted that some roles will still only be filled by humans, even if AI is better at the job.
“The employment shifts everybody’s worried about are actually not going to happen at anywhere near the velocity people think,” Andreessen said, “because a significant percentage of jobs in the U.S. are licensed or unionized or civil service in a way where they literally cannot be replaced.”
One of the few sectors that tech leaders like the “Godfather of AI” and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman predict will be relatively unscathed from AI job disruption is healthcare: patients will always want a human connection for that service, and robots aren’t advanced enough to perform surgeries or related tasks.
Andreessen echoed that sectors like medicine and law can’t be heavily integrated with AI yet due to regulations and licensing hurdles. A chatbot can’t make an argument in court, and an algorithm can’t treat an ailing human—but it does already have the processing power to outperform people in those roles.
“ChatGPT is in fact a better doctor than your doctor today, with almost a hundred percent certainty,” he said. The investor pointed to self-driving cars as a parallel: “There’s always been this question of: Is the requirement perfection or is the requirement better than the median human driver? If you apply that same question into law or medicine, it’s just overwhelmingly clear that you’re better off today with doctor ChatGPT…You can’t live your life that way, because it can’t be your doctor.”