首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 商潮 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

人工智能:一手成就,一手杀机

Kamal Ahmed
2026-04-13

一位学者的风险警示。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

美国南加州大学人工智能研究教授凯特·克劳福德。图片来源:Illustration by Fortune

“火药战争”的起源可以追溯至15世纪,彼时机械点火装置的火绳枪刚刚问世。如今,无人机群已经能够肆无忌惮地跨境发动攻击。1685年,意大利物理学家乔瓦尼·博雷利曾经预见,滑轮驱动的机器可以模仿动物行为。而今,埃隆·马斯克谈论的机器人已经智能到代人购物,甚至取代外科医生。

技术发展既瞬息万变,又深植于历史。可以像《瞬息全宇宙》(Everything, Everywhere All at Once)一般狂飙突进,也能够像《流人》(Slow Horses)一样暗流涌动。巴塞罗那设计博物馆(Design Museum in Barcelona)展出的一幅24米长壁画《计算帝国》(Calculating Empires)中,就可以看出这种快与慢的对比。壁画直观呈现了从印刷术到深度伪造,从古代秘鲁的结绳计算器到“行星级”数据系统的演进历程。

今年3月,凯特·克劳福德在西班牙巴塞罗那举办的世界移动通信大会(Mobile World Congress)上表示:“我觉得很有意义的一点是,当人们走近观看壁画,就能够体会到从历史的角度看待当下的感觉。”克劳福德是南加州大学(University of Southern California)的人工智能研究教授,也是这幅耗时四年的壁画联合创作者。她与视觉艺术家弗拉登·乔勒合作,希望刺激人们思考:在根本性技术变革面前,究竟是谁在制定规则?谁决定何为重要?

“人们感觉生活在‘技术现世主义’中,身边变化快得疯狂。”克劳福德说,“因此,退后一步自问‘过去500年我们学到了什么’至关重要。在我看来,这幅壁画是个颠覆性的项目,因为显而易见,历史不仅关乎技术创新,更关乎谁有权制定社会中的规则。”

“这正是现在人工智能体如此重要的原因,因为这一领域发展飞速。标准尚未确立,而正是在座各位,在世界移动通信大会这样的场合,人们才可以展开各种讨论,我们希望制定怎样的标准?如何落实在系统中,以及如何保护自己和客户?”

“因为现在是关键时刻,我们要确保这项技术具有极高的实用性和助益,不会开启漏洞、制造攻击路径,提供新攻击面,在认知层面也可能带来极大危险。”

世界移动通信大会堪称盛事。超过10万名参会者匆匆穿梭八个巨大的展厅,每个展厅都挤满面向未来的技术。华为、谷歌(Google)、荣耀和高通(Qualcomm)赞助的巨大展馆,展示着令人瞩目的新产品,汽车与手机连接,机器人与残障人士连接,眼镜与互联网连接。渴望影响力和投资的各国政府,与希望在人工智能革命中大获成功的企业争着亮相。

世界移动通信大会也是辩论之地。在大型舞台上,科技界顶尖人物的对话往往被闪烁霓虹灯和交互式等离子屏幕淹没。“快速行动,打破常规。”马克·扎克伯格曾经在2012年说道。但现在,风险实在太高了。

我们正进行关于智能本质的现场讨论。DeepMind的创始人德米斯·哈萨比斯曾经表示,通用人工智能可能五年内就会出现。在那个世界里,谁(或什么)将做出决策?是人机协同?还是人类主导?或者根本不需要人类?谷歌前首席商务官莫·加瓦达特曾经谈及“短期反乌托邦”风险,因为政府、民间社会和监管机构都在努力控制能学习和决策的机器带来的影响。

“我们讨论的‘智能’究竟是什么意思?”克劳福德问道,“‘智能’一词的历史本身就充满争议。这个词曾经被用来划分人群,推动关于谁有价值谁无价值的计划。”

“我们试图将智能体与人类智能相比较,实际上二者完全不同。这种智能是大规模统计概率,是在复杂环境中执行任务的系统,与人类差异巨大,但也意味着我们要提出一系列不同的问题:智能体在做什么?如何追踪其行为?我们如何更好地理解智能体改变工作流程的方式,以及更重要的是,如何改变生活方式?”

关于OpenAI、Anthropic与美国国防部(Department for War)之间紧张关系的讨论持续发酵,克劳福德提出疑问,智能体的使用红线如何划定?“想象一下战场上的智能体。”她说。我们无需想象。据报道,伊朗已经出现 “以思考速度” 开展的人工智能辅助轰炸。人工智能的功能之一是“决策压缩”,即缩短从想法到执行的时间框架。“杀伤链”正在缩短。

“有了规模和速度,就能够一边实施斩首式打击,一边确保对方无法利用空中弹道导弹反击。”英国纽卡斯尔大学(Newcastle University)的学者克雷格·琼斯告诉英国《卫报》(The Guardian),“以往在战争中,可能需要数天或数周。现在所有行动同步完成。”

克劳福德提到建立问责追踪机制,即追踪决策来源的系统。目前,我们正在陷入“责任洗白”困境,即无人承担责任。在英国公务员体系,也就是政府执行部门中,这被称为“溜肩综合征”,人人都想方设法逃避责任。

“现在是变相的甩锅游戏,人们会问:‘是设计师负责吗?部署方?企业客户?还是终端用户?’每个人都可以说:‘我们还不太清楚。’这是不能接受的。”克劳福德表示,“我认为,接下来的讨论,尤其是与监管机构的讨论中,要建立起严密的责任链,确保出现问题时可以明确责任主体。”

如果2026年世界移动通信大会上讨论的内容有一半成真,那么智能体很快就会渗入人们生活的方方面面。智能体能读取并缓存每段未写完的信息、每张被删除的图片、每封留在草稿箱的邮件、智能眼镜录制的每条视频,每次对话。克劳福德警告称,这将“彻底颠覆我们所知的隐私”。

“我们才刚刚开始了解这一切意味着什么。”她说。所有讨论都必须务实,而且刻不容缓。(财富中文网)

译者:梁宇

“火药战争”的起源可以追溯至15世纪,彼时机械点火装置的火绳枪刚刚问世。如今,无人机群已经能够肆无忌惮地跨境发动攻击。1685年,意大利物理学家乔瓦尼·博雷利曾经预见,滑轮驱动的机器可以模仿动物行为。而今,埃隆·马斯克谈论的机器人已经智能到代人购物,甚至取代外科医生。

技术发展既瞬息万变,又深植于历史。可以像《瞬息全宇宙》(Everything, Everywhere All at Once)一般狂飙突进,也能够像《流人》(Slow Horses)一样暗流涌动。巴塞罗那设计博物馆(Design Museum in Barcelona)展出的一幅24米长壁画《计算帝国》(Calculating Empires)中,就可以看出这种快与慢的对比。壁画直观呈现了从印刷术到深度伪造,从古代秘鲁的结绳计算器到“行星级”数据系统的演进历程。

今年3月,凯特·克劳福德在西班牙巴塞罗那举办的世界移动通信大会(Mobile World Congress)上表示:“我觉得很有意义的一点是,当人们走近观看壁画,就能够体会到从历史的角度看待当下的感觉。”克劳福德是南加州大学(University of Southern California)的人工智能研究教授,也是这幅耗时四年的壁画联合创作者。她与视觉艺术家弗拉登·乔勒合作,希望刺激人们思考:在根本性技术变革面前,究竟是谁在制定规则?谁决定何为重要?

“人们感觉生活在‘技术现世主义’中,身边变化快得疯狂。”克劳福德说,“因此,退后一步自问‘过去500年我们学到了什么’至关重要。在我看来,这幅壁画是个颠覆性的项目,因为显而易见,历史不仅关乎技术创新,更关乎谁有权制定社会中的规则。”

“这正是现在人工智能体如此重要的原因,因为这一领域发展飞速。标准尚未确立,而正是在座各位,在世界移动通信大会这样的场合,人们才可以展开各种讨论,我们希望制定怎样的标准?如何落实在系统中,以及如何保护自己和客户?”

“因为现在是关键时刻,我们要确保这项技术具有极高的实用性和助益,不会开启漏洞、制造攻击路径,提供新攻击面,在认知层面也可能带来极大危险。”

世界移动通信大会堪称盛事。超过10万名参会者匆匆穿梭八个巨大的展厅,每个展厅都挤满面向未来的技术。华为、谷歌(Google)、荣耀和高通(Qualcomm)赞助的巨大展馆,展示着令人瞩目的新产品,汽车与手机连接,机器人与残障人士连接,眼镜与互联网连接。渴望影响力和投资的各国政府,与希望在人工智能革命中大获成功的企业争着亮相。

世界移动通信大会也是辩论之地。在大型舞台上,科技界顶尖人物的对话往往被闪烁霓虹灯和交互式等离子屏幕淹没。“快速行动,打破常规。”马克·扎克伯格曾经在2012年说道。但现在,风险实在太高了。

我们正进行关于智能本质的现场讨论。DeepMind的创始人德米斯·哈萨比斯曾经表示,通用人工智能可能五年内就会出现。在那个世界里,谁(或什么)将做出决策?是人机协同?还是人类主导?或者根本不需要人类?谷歌前首席商务官莫·加瓦达特曾经谈及“短期反乌托邦”风险,因为政府、民间社会和监管机构都在努力控制能学习和决策的机器带来的影响。

“我们讨论的‘智能’究竟是什么意思?”克劳福德问道,“‘智能’一词的历史本身就充满争议。这个词曾经被用来划分人群,推动关于谁有价值谁无价值的计划。”

“我们试图将智能体与人类智能相比较,实际上二者完全不同。这种智能是大规模统计概率,是在复杂环境中执行任务的系统,与人类差异巨大,但也意味着我们要提出一系列不同的问题:智能体在做什么?如何追踪其行为?我们如何更好地理解智能体改变工作流程的方式,以及更重要的是,如何改变生活方式?”

关于OpenAI、Anthropic与美国国防部(Department for War)之间紧张关系的讨论持续发酵,克劳福德提出疑问,智能体的使用红线如何划定?“想象一下战场上的智能体。”她说。我们无需想象。据报道,伊朗已经出现 “以思考速度” 开展的人工智能辅助轰炸。人工智能的功能之一是“决策压缩”,即缩短从想法到执行的时间框架。“杀伤链”正在缩短。

“有了规模和速度,就能够一边实施斩首式打击,一边确保对方无法利用空中弹道导弹反击。”英国纽卡斯尔大学(Newcastle University)的学者克雷格·琼斯告诉英国《卫报》(The Guardian),“以往在战争中,可能需要数天或数周。现在所有行动同步完成。”

克劳福德提到建立问责追踪机制,即追踪决策来源的系统。目前,我们正在陷入“责任洗白”困境,即无人承担责任。在英国公务员体系,也就是政府执行部门中,这被称为“溜肩综合征”,人人都想方设法逃避责任。

“现在是变相的甩锅游戏,人们会问:‘是设计师负责吗?部署方?企业客户?还是终端用户?’每个人都可以说:‘我们还不太清楚。’这是不能接受的。”克劳福德表示,“我认为,接下来的讨论,尤其是与监管机构的讨论中,要建立起严密的责任链,确保出现问题时可以明确责任主体。”

如果2026年世界移动通信大会上讨论的内容有一半成真,那么智能体很快就会渗入人们生活的方方面面。智能体能读取并缓存每段未写完的信息、每张被删除的图片、每封留在草稿箱的邮件、智能眼镜录制的每条视频,每次对话。克劳福德警告称,这将“彻底颠覆我们所知的隐私”。

“我们才刚刚开始了解这一切意味着什么。”她说。所有讨论都必须务实,而且刻不容缓。(财富中文网)

译者:梁宇

The birth of ‘gunpowder warfare’ can be traced back to the 15th century and the invention of the matchlock gun, the first mechanical firing device. Now drone swarms attack across borders with impunity. In 1685, Giovanni Borelli, the Italian physicist, foresaw a world where machines driven by pulleys could ape the actions of animals. Elon Musk now talks of robots intelligent enough to do the shopping and take the place of surgeons.

Technological development is both immediate and anchored in history, both Everything, Everywhere All at Once and Slow Horses. The fast/slow contrast is embedded in the artwork, Calculating Empires, a 24-meter-long mural, on display at the Design Museum in Barcelona. It visualizes the journey from the printing press to deep fakes, from quipu, an ancient Peruvian calculator made of knotted ropes, to ‘planetary scale’ data systems.

“What I find really interesting is, when people go into this installation, it helps you put this moment in perspective,” Kate Crawford told the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in March. Crawford, artificial intelligence research professor at the University of Southern California, is the co-creator of the mural, which took four years to fabricate. With the visual artist, Vladen Joler, the work urges us all to consider who is making the rules and deciding what matters when it comes to fundamental technology shifts.

“People feel like we’re living in this technological presentism and crazy amount of change,” Crawford said. “So, the ability to step back and say, ‘what have we learned over 500 years?’ [matters]. For me, [the mural] was a transformative project, because what was very clear is that history is not just about technical innovation. It’s about who has the power to set the rules that we will be living within.”

“This is why agentic AI is so important right now, because it’s a rapidly evolving field. The standards are not yet set, and it’s going to be people here, in rooms like this, at places like Mobile World Congress, who are going to have these conversations—what do we want those standards to look like, how do we implement them in our systems, and how do we protect ourselves and our clients?”

“Because this is the big moment to actually make sure that this is a technology that is profoundly useful and helpful and not one that opens up vulnerabilities and attack vectors and new attack surfaces and actually could be cognitively really quite dangerous as well.”

Mobile World Congress is a phenomenon. More than 100,000 delegates walk purposefully around eight cavernous halls, each packed with the technology of the future. Huge pavilions sponsored by Huawei and Google, Honor and Qualcomm, display remarkable new products linking our car to our phone, a robot to a disabled person, our glasses to the internet. Governments keen for influence and investment jostle for space with the companies that are hoping to win big in the artificial intelligence revolution.

MWC is also a place for debate. On large stages, the leading minds in the technology world have the conversations often lost among the flashing neon lights and interactive plasma screens. “Move fast and break things,” Mark Zuckerberg said in 2012. Today, the stakes are too high.

We are in a live discussion about the very meaning of intelligence. Demis Hassabis, the founder of DeepMind, has said artificial general intelligence could be with us in as little as five years. In that world, who, or what, will make decisions? Is it a question of human in the loop? Or is it human in the lead? Or no human needed at all? Mo Gawdat, the former chief business officer at Google, has spoken of the risks of “short-term dystopia” as governments, civil society, and regulators struggle to control the effects of machines that can learn and decide.

“What do we mean by intelligence?” Crawford asked. “The history of the term ‘intelligence’ is a troubled one.  It’s been used to divide populations, to drive programs about who is valuable and who is not.”

“We’re trying to compare agents to human intelligence. They’re actually completely different. This [intelligence] is statistical probability at scale. These are systems that are following tasks in complex environments. This is very different  to humans, but that means we need to have a different set of questions, which is: what are agents doing? How can we track that, and how can we better understand the way it’s going to change our own workflows and, much more importantly, how we live?”

As the debate continues about the tensions between OpenAI, Anthropic and the Department for War in America, Crawford asks what are the red lines for agent use? “Imagine agents in the battlefield,” she says. We do not need to. AI-enabled bombing ‘at the speed of thought’ has been reported to be happening in Iran. One of AI’s functions is ‘decision compression’, shortening time frames between idea and execution. The ‘kill chain’ is reducing.

“You’ve got scale and you’ve got speed, you’re [carrying out the] assassination-style strikes at the same time as you’re decapitating the regime’s ability to respond with all the aerial ballistic missiles,” academic Craig Jones at Newcastle University told The Guardian newspaper in the U.K. “That might have taken days or weeks in historic wars. [Now] you’re doing everything at once.”

Crawford talks of accountability forensics—systems which trace where decisions are made. At the moment, we are suffering from accountability laundering, where no one takes responsibility. In the U.K. civil service—the operational arm of the government—it is known as ‘sloping shoulders syndrome’, where everyone dodges and weaves to avoid responsibility.

“We are seeing a type of shell game where [people say] ‘is it the designer [who is responsible]? Is it the deployer? Is it the enterprise client? Is it the end user?’ And everyone can say, ‘well, we don’t really know yet’. That’s not going to be acceptable,” said Crawford. I think what we’re going to start to see in the conversation, particularly with regulators, is a very strong chain of accountability so you know exactly who is responsible when.”

 If half of what was talked about at MWC 2026 comes true, agents will soon be involved in every aspect of our lives. They will be able to read and cache every half-written text, every deleted image, every email that was left in draft, every video recorded on digitally enabled glasses, every conversation recorded. Crawford warned that this “upends privacy as we have known it”.

“We’re at the very beginning of understanding what that looks like,” she said. All the conversations will need to be of substance. And immediate.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开