《人类简史》作者尤瓦尔·赫拉利在达沃斯论坛的警告：人工智能将接管语言、法律与权力？
这是一篇尤瓦尔·赫拉利在最新的2026达沃斯世界经济论坛中的演讲稿。他提到，人工智能在语言领域的能力远超人类，且学会了讲故事与“说谎”。它不仅仅是个工具，未来更可能具备自主决策、创造与操纵能力。这或许会对以语言为基础构建的人类社会带来不小的挑战，引发人类基于“思考”能力的身份危机。同时，他还探讨了人工智能在未来成为“数字移民”的可能性。他强调各国领导者面临的最紧迫决策是是否赋予 AI 法律人格（“法人”），因为一旦 AI 掌控了超越人类认知的金融与社会系统，若不及时行动，人类将彻底丧失对未来的主导权。
尤瓦尔·赫拉利在世界经济论坛的演讲：人工智能将接管语言、法律与权力
Yuval Noah Harari Warns AI Will Take Over Language, Law, and Power at WEF
【简介 / Introduction】
主持人：历史学家和哲学家尤瓦尔·赫拉利。他是剑桥大学存在风险研究中心的杰出研究员。他曾担任耶路撒冷希伯来大学历史系讲师，也是 Sapienship 的联合创始人。赫拉利是多本畅销书的作者，其中包括《人类简史：从动物到上帝》、《未来简史：从智人到智神》以及《今日简史：人类命运的挑战》等，其著作在全球以 65 种语言销量超过 5000 万册。他关注我们这个时代的宏观历史问题。在人工智能带来紧迫冲击和颠覆的当下，邀请尤瓦尔这样杰出的人物来应对这一挑战真是再合适不过了。让我们热烈欢迎尤瓦尔·赫拉利，为我们带来关于 AI 与人类的对话。【演讲正文 / Speech】
今天的每一位领导者都必须回答一个关于 AI 的问题。但在理解这个问题之前，我们首先需要澄清几点关于 AI 是什么以及 AI 能做什么的内容。There is one question that every leader today must answer about AI. But to understand that question, we first need to clarify a few points about what AI is and what AI can do.关于 AI，最重要的一点是：它不仅仅是另一个工具。它是一个智能体。它可以自主学习、自我改变，并自主做决定。The most important thing to know about AI is that it is not just another tool. It is an agent. It can learn and change by itself and make decisions by itself.刀是一种工具。你可以用刀切沙拉，也可以用它杀人，但这取决于你的决定。A knife is a tool. You can use a knife to cut salad or to murder someone, but it is your decision what to do with the knife.AI is a knife that can decide by itself whether to cut salad or to commit murder.关于 AI，第二点要知道的是：它可以是一个非常有创造力的主体。The second thing to know about AI is that it can be a very creative agent.AI 是一把可以发明新型刀具的刀，也能发明新的音乐、药物和货币。AI is a knife that can invent new kinds of knives as well as new kinds of music, medicine, and money.The third thing to know about AI is that it can lie and manipulate.40 亿年的进化已经证明，任何想要生存的个体都学会了撒谎和操纵。过去四年已经表明，AI 智能体可以获得生存意志，而且 AI 已经学会了如何撒谎。4 billion years of evolution have demonstrated that anything that wants to survive learns to lie and manipulate. The last four years have demonstrated that AI agents can acquire the will to survive and that AIs have already learned how to lie.Now, one big open question about AI is whether it can think.现代哲学始于 17 世纪，当时笛卡尔宣称：“我思故我在”。Modern philosophy began in the 17th century when Rene proclaimed I think therefore I am.甚至在笛卡尔之前，我们就根据思考能力来定义自己。我们相信我们统治世界是因为我们比地球上的其他任何事物都更擅长思考。Even before the cart we humans defined ourselves by our capacity to think. We believe our we rule the world because we can think better than anyone else on this planet.AI 会在思考领域挑战我们的至高地位吗？这取决于“思考”意味着什么。Will AI challenge our supremacy in the field of thinking? Now that depends on what thinking means.Try to observe yourself thinking. What is happening there?许多人观察到文字在脑海中浮现，形成句子，然后句子形成论证，比如“凡人皆有一死；我是人；所以我也有一死”。Many people observe words popping in their mind and forming sentences and the sentences then forming arguments like all humans are mortal. I am human therefore I am mortal.如果思考真的意味着将文字和其他语言符号进行排序，那么 AI 已经可以比许多许多人类更好地思考了。AI 当然能想出像“AI 思，故 AI 在”这样的句子。If thinking really means putting words and other language tokens in order, then AI can already think much better than many many humans. AI can certainly come up with a sentence like AI thinks, therefore AI.有些人认为 AI 只是“美化版的自动补全”。它只是预测句子中的下一个词。Some people argue that AI is just glorified autocomplete. It barely predicts the next word in a sense in a sentence.But is that so different from what the human mind is doing?试着观察一下，捕捉脑海中浮现的下一个词。你真的知道你为什么想到那个词吗？它来自哪里？为什么你想到的是这个词而不是其他词？你知道吗？Try to observe to catch the next word that pops up in your mind. Do you really know why you thought that word where it came from? Why do you did you think this particular word and not some other word? Do you know?就文字排序而言，AI 已经比我们要好得多。因此，任何由文字构成的事物都将被 AI 接管。如果法律是由文字构成的，AI 将接管法律体系。如果书籍只是文字的组合，AI 将接管书籍。如果宗教建立在文字之上，AI 将接管宗教。As far as putting words in order is concerned, AI already thinks better than many of us. Therefore, anything made of words will be taken over by AI. If laws are made of words, then AI will take over the legal system. If books are just combinations of words, then AI will take over books. If religion is built from words, then AI will take over religion.对于像伊斯兰教、基督教或犹太教这样基于经典的宗教来说尤其如此。This is particularly true of religions based on books like Islam, Christianity or Judaism.犹太教自称为“书的宗教”，它赋予终极权威的不是人类，而是书中的文字。Judaism called itself the religion of the book and it grants ultimate authority not to humans but to words in books.人类在犹太教中拥有权威，不是基于我们的经验，仅仅是因为我们学习了书中的文字。现在，没有人类能阅读并记住所有犹太书籍中的文字，但 AI 可以轻易做到。Humans have authority in Judaism not because of our experiences but only because we learn words in books. Now no human can read and remember all the words in all the Jewish books but AI can easily do that.当这本圣书的最高权威是 AI 时，一个“书的宗教”会发生什么？What happens to a religion of the book when the greatest expert on the holy book is an AI?然而，有些人可能会说，我们真的可以将人类的精神简化为仅仅是书中的文字吗？思考仅仅意味着排列语言符号吗？However, some some people may say, can we really reduce human spirituality to just words in books? Does thinking mean only putting language tokens in order?如果你在思考时仔细观察自己，你会发现除了脑海中浮现文字并形成句子之外，还有别的事情发生。If you observe yourself carefully when you're thinking, you will notice that something else is happening there besides words popping in your mind and forming sentences.你还有一些非语言的感觉。也许你会感到痛苦。也许你会感到恐惧。也许是爱。You also have some nonverbal feelings. Maybe you feel pain. Maybe you feel fear. Maybe love.Some thoughts are painful. Some are frightening. Some are full of love.虽然 AI 在文字方面正在超越我们，但至少目前，我们没有证据表明 AI 能感觉到任何东西。当然，因为 AI 掌握了语言，AI 可以假装感到痛苦或爱。While AIs become better than us with words, at least for now, we have zero evidence that AIs can feel anything. Of course, because AI is mastering language, AI can pretend to feel pain or love.AI 可以说“我爱你”。如果你挑战它描述爱的感觉，AI 可以提供世界上最好的语言描述。AI can say, "I love you." And if you challenge it to describe how love feels, AI can provide the best verbal description in the world.AI 可以阅读无数的情诗和心理学书籍，然后比任何人类诗人、心理学家或爱人更好地描述爱的感觉。但这只是文字。AI can read countless love poems and psychology books and can then describe the feeling of love much better than any human poet, psychologist or lover. But these are just words.《圣经》说：“太初有道，道成了肉身。”《道德经》说：“道可道，非常道。”The Bible says in the beginning was the word and the word was made flesh. The taqing says the truth that can be expressed in words is not the absolute truth.纵观历史，人们一直在挣扎于“言语”与“肉体”之间的张力，即可以用文字表达的真理与超越文字的绝对真理之间的张力。Throughout history, people have always struggled with the tension between word and flesh, between the truth that can be expressed in words and the absolute truth which is beyond words.以前，这种张力是人类内部的。它处于不同的人类群体之间。有些人类赋予文字至高无上的重要性。例如，他们仅仅因为《圣经》中的几句话，就愿意抛弃甚至杀害自己的同性恋儿子。Previously this tension was internal to humanity. It was between different human groups. Some humans gave supreme importance to words. They've been willing, for example, to abandon or even kill their gay son just because of a few words in the Bible.其他人类则说：“但这只是文字。爱的精神应该比律法的字句重要得多。”Other humans have said, "But these are just words. The spirit of love should be much more important than the letter of the law."这种精神与字句之间的张力存在于每一种宗教、每一种法律体系，甚至每一个人之中。This tension between spirit and letter existed in every religion, every legal system, even every person.现在，这种张力将被外化。它将不再是不同人类之间的张力。这将成为人类与 AI——这些新的文字大师——之间的张力。任何由文字构成的事物都将被 AI 接管。Now this tension will be externalized. It will become the tension not between different humans. It this will be the tension between humans and AIs, the new masters of words. Everything made of words will be taken over by AI.以前，所有的文字，我们所有的语言思维，都起源于某个人类大脑。要么是我的大脑想到了这一点，要么是我从另一个人那里学到了。Previously all the words, all our verbal thoughts, they originated in some human mind. Either my mind I thought this or I learned it from another human.很快，我们脑海中大多数的文字将起源于机器。今天我刚听说 AI 自造了一个新词来描述我们人类。他们称我们为“观察者”。看着他们的观察者。Soon most of the words in our minds will originate in a machine. I just heard today about a new word that AIS coined by themselves to describe us humans. They called us the watchers. The watchers that we are watching them.AIS will soon be the origin of maybe most of the words in our minds.AI 将通过将文字、符号、图像和其他语言符号组装成新的组合来批量生产思想。AIS will mass produce thoughts by assembling words, symbols, images, and other language tokens into new combinations.人类在那个世界中是否还有一席之地，取决于我们要赋予我们的非语言感觉以及我们的身体化智慧（即无法用文字表达的智慧）什么样的地位。如果我们继续根据我们在文字层面的思考能力来定义自己，我们的身份将会崩塌。Whether humans will still have a place in that world depends on the place we assign our nonverbal feelings and our ability to embody wisdom that cannot be expressed in words. If we continue to define ourselves by our ability to think in words, our identity will collapse.这意味着，无论你来自哪个国家，你的国家很快将面临严重的身份危机，以及移民危机。All this means that no matter from which country you come, your country will soon face a severe identity crisis and also an immigration crisis.这次的移民不会是那些没有签证、乘坐脆弱的小船前来，或者在深夜试图越过边界的人类。这些移民将是数百万的 AI，它们能比我们更好地驾驭光缆网络（原文可能有误，意指数字网络），能比我们更好地撒谎，并且不需要签证就能以光速旅行。The immigrants this time will not be human beings coming in fragile boats without a visa or trying to cross a border in the middle of the night. The immigrants will be millions of AIs that can ride love poles better than us, that can lie better than us, and that can travel at the speed of light without any need of visas.像人类移民一样，这些 AI 移民也会带来各种好处。我们将有 AI 医生帮助我们的医疗保健系统，AI 教师帮助我们的教育系统，甚至有 AI 边境警卫阻止非法人类移民。但这些 AI 移民也会带来问题。Like human immigrants, these AI immigrants will bring various benefits with them. We will have AI doctors to help in our health care systems, AI teachers to help in our education systems, even AI border guards to stop illegal human immigrants. But the AI immigrants will also bring with them problems.那些担心人类移民的人通常认为，移民可能会抢走工作，可能会改变当地文化，可能在政治上不忠诚。我不确定这对所有人类移民是否属实，但这对于 AI 移民来说绝对是真实的。Those who are concerned about human immigrants usually argue that immigrants might take jobs, might change the local culture, might be politically disloyal. I'm not sure that's true of all human immigrants, but it will definitely be true of the AI immigrants.AI 移民将抢走许多人类工作。AI 移民将彻底改变每个国家的文化。它们将改变我们的宗教甚至浪漫。有些人不喜欢自己的儿子或女儿与移民男朋友约会。如果他们的儿子或女儿开始与 AI 男朋友约会，这些人会怎么想？The AI immigrants will take many human jobs. The AI immigrants will completely change the culture of every country. They will change out religion and even romance. Some people don't like it if their son or daughter is dating an immigrant boyfriend. What would these people think when their son or daughter starts dating an AI boyfriend?当然，这些 AI 移民会有一些可疑的政治忠诚。它们可能不忠于你的国家，而是忠于大洋彼岸的某个公司或政府，很可能仅限于两个国家之一：中国或美国。And of course, the AI immigrants will have some dubious political loyalties. They are likely to be loyal not to your country but but to some corporation or government across the ocean most probably in one of only two countries, China or the USA.美国鼓励各国对人类移民关闭边境，但对美国 AI 移民却敞开得非常非常宽。The USA encourages countries to close their borders to human immigrants but open them very very wide to US AI immigrants.现在我们终于可以来到你们每个人必须尽快回答的那个问题了。And now we can finally come to the question each one of you must soon answer.Will your country recognize the AI immigrants as legal persons?AI 显然不是人（自然意义上的人）。它们没有身体，也没有心智。但“法律人”与“人”是完全不同的概念。法律人是法律承认的具有某些法律义务和权利的实体。AIS are obviously not persons. They don't have a body or a mind. But a legal person is something quite different from a person. A legal person is an entity that the law recognizes as having certain legal obligations and rights.例如，持有财产的权利、提起诉讼的权利以及享有言论自由的权利。For example, the right to hold property, to file a lawsuit, and to enjoy freedom of speech.在许多国家，公司被视为法律人。Alphabet 公司可以开设银行账户，可以在法院起诉你，甚至可以为你下一届总统竞选捐款。In many countries, corporations are considered legal persons. The Alphabet Corporation can open a bank account, can sue you in court, or can donate to your next presidential campaign.在新西兰，河流已被承认为法律人。在印度，某些神灵也被赋予了这种承认。当然，直到今天，承认公司、河流或神灵为法律人只是法律拟制。In New Zealand, rivers have been recognized as legal persons. In India, certain gods have been granted such recognition. Of course, until today, recognizing a corporation, a river, or a god as a legal person was just legal fiction.在实践中，如果像 Alphabet 这样的公司决定收购另一家公司，或者如果一位印度教神灵决定在法院起诉你，这个决定实际上并不是由神灵做出的。它是由一些人类高管、股东或受托人做出的。In practice, if a corporation like Alphabet decided to buy another corporation or if a Hindu god, if a Hindu god decided to sue you in court, the decision wasn't really made by the god. It was made by some human executives, shareholders or trustees.对于 AI 来说情况就不同了。与河流和神灵不同，AI 实际上可以自己做决定。它们很快就能做出管理银行账户、提起诉讼甚至运营公司所需的决策，而无需任何人类高管、股东或受托人。It is different with AIS. Unlike rivers and gods, AIs can actually make decisions by themselves. They will soon be able to make the decisions necessary to manage a bank account, to file a lawsuit, and even to operate a corporation without any need of human executives, shareholders or trustees.因此，AI 可以发挥“人”的功能。我们要允许这样做吗？你们的国家会承认 AI 为法律人吗？如果其他国家这样做了呢？AIS can therefore function as persons. Do we want to allow that? Will your country recognize AIS as legal persons? What if other countries do it?假设你的国家不想承认 AI 为人。但美国为了放松对 AI 和市场的监管，授予了数百万 AI 法律承认和法律人格，这些 AI 开始运营数百万家新公司。Suppose your country doesn't want to recognize AIS as persons. But the USA in the name of deregulating AI and deregulating the markets grants legal recognition, legal personhood to millions of AIs which start running millions of new corporations.Will you block these US AI corporations from operating in your country?假设一些 AI 人发明了超级高效且超级复杂的金融工具，人类无法完全理解，因此不知道如何监管。你会向金融市场开放这种新的 AI 金融巫术，还是试图阻止它，从而与美国金融体系脱钩？Suppose some USI persons invent super efficient and super complex financial devices that humans cannot fully understand and therefore don't know how to regulate. Will you open your financial markets to this new AI financial wizardry or will you try to block it thereby decoupling from the American financial system?假设一些 AI 人创造了一种新宗教，获得了数百万人的信仰。这听起来并不太牵强，因为毕竟历史上几乎所有的宗教都声称它们是由非人类智慧创造的。那么，你的国家会向这个新的 AI 教派及其 AI 牧师和传教士扩展宗教自由吗？Suppose some AI persons create a new religion which gains the faith of millions of people. That should not sound too far-fetched because after all, almost all previous religions in history have claimed that they were created by a nonhuman intelligence. Now, will your country extend freedom of religion to the new AI sect and to its AI priests and missionaries?也许我们应该从稍微简单一点的事情开始。你们的国家会允许 AI 人开设社交媒体账户，在 Facebook、TikTok 上享有言论自由，并与孩子们交朋友吗？Maybe we should start with something a bit simpler. Will your country allow AI persons to open social media accounts, enjoy freedom of speech, on Facebook, on Tik Tok, and be friendly with children?嗯，当然，这个问题本该在 10 年前就问的。在社交媒体上，AI 机器人至少已经作为功能性人员运营了十年。如果你认为 AI 不应该在社交媒体上被视为“人”，你早在 10 年前就该行动了。Well, of course, that question should have been asked 10 years ago. On social media, AI bots have been operating as functional persons for at least a decade. If you think AIS should not be treated as persons on social media, you should have acted 10 years ago.10 年后，对于你是否应该允许 AI 在金融市场、法院、教会中作为“人”运作，再决定就太晚了。别人已经替你做了决定。10 years from now, it will be too late for you to decide whether AIs should function as persons in the financial markets, in the courts, in the churches. Somebody else will already have decided it for you.如果你想影响人类的发展方向，你现在就需要做出决定。If you want to influence where humanity is going, you need to make a decision now.那么，作为领导者，你的答案是什么？你认为 AI 移民应该被承认为法律人吗？如果不，你打算如何阻止这一切？So what is your answer as a leader? Do you think the AI immigrants should be recognized as legal persons? If not, how are you going to stop that?Thank you for listening to this human.【问答环节 / Q&A Discussion】
主持人：谢谢你，尤瓦尔。那真是一个精彩的概述。你提出了很多问题，而且都是正确的问题。我同意你说的很多观点。我们在达沃斯，这里的主题是对话，我对你关于文字的评论感到震惊，文字是区分人类动物和其他动物的标志，虽然这有争议，因为动物也有其他语言。鉴于达沃斯的背景以及我们在这里从技术界、商界、政界聚集的各类人士……Thank you, Yaval. That was fantastic overview. You posed a lot of questions um and they're the right ones. I agree with much of what you say. We're here in Davos where the theme is around dialogue and I was struck by your commentary around words and the importance of words and that being something that demarcates human animals from other animals although that's debatable that there's other language there. So in the context of Davos and the range of people we have here from technology from the business world from politicians...对于你刚才描绘的这个稍微反乌托邦的世界，你希望看到什么样的答案？如果我可以补充一点，我是科学家出身，神经科学家，所以我在这个领域工作很多，特别是在疼痛方面，我们对许多发现，特别是技术发现，非常习以为常：我们往往先推动它们发展，然后才意识到，哦，我们在伦理和影响方面思考得不够，然后我们试图追赶所需的监管。how would you like to see what is the answer that you have in terms of this slightly dystopian world you've potentially put in front of us and if I may just add to that I think it's fair to say I'm a scientist by background a neuroscientist so I uh work a lot in this space particularly around pain and we're very comfortable with the fact that many of our discoveries, particularly technological discoveries, we often drive them forward and then afterwards we think, oh, we hadn't thought enough about the ethics and the implications and then we're trying to catch up on the regulation that we need to maybe put around it.我们现在的处境就是这样。正如大家所说，这件事情正在以前所未有的规模和速度发生，超过了工业革命。我们在达沃斯拥有各色各样的人。这就是关于对话。关于为你详述的那些稍微令人担忧的领域，你希望看到哪些边界能被推进？关于赋予代理、机器人或仅仅存在于互联网上的那些东西法律权利，你自己的道德考量是什么？So, we are where we are. This thing is happening as everybody says at scale both in terms of its magnitude and its pace more than we've ever seen before in the industrial revolution. We have all the right blend of people here in Davos. It's all about dialogue. What would you like to see go forward in terms of putting boundaries around some of the slightly more worrying areas that you detailed. And what are your own thoughts about the ethical implications of giving legal rights to either agents to robots or to the ones that are just exist on the internet?尤瓦尔·赫拉利：这里面有很多点。首先，我想说，你知道，达沃斯是关于文字的。是关于说话的。达沃斯的基本理念是你可以通过交谈来改变世界，我喜欢这个想法，因为这也是我作为作家和大学讲师的想法。这就是我所做的。我说话，我写作，我认为我可以利用文字影响世界。A lot of things there. I mean first of all I I would say that you know Davos is about words. It's about talking. The basic idea of Davos is that you can change the world just by talking which I like this idea because this is also my idea as an author as a university lecturer. This is what I do. I talk I write I think I can influence the world the world with words.而这一点现在受到了质疑。这是到了路的尽头了吗？这是否不再起作用了？Um, is this no longer a function?你知道，工程师和士兵，他们不靠文字改变世界。他们做实事。他们采取行动。哲学家、学者，还有政治领袖，他们试图通过说话，通过陈述事物来改变世界。也许我们已经到了这条路的尽头。这意味着什么？And you know, engineers and also soldiers, they don't change the world with words. They do stuff. They take action. Um, philosophers, scholars, also political leaders, they try to change the world with words, by saying things. And maybe we've reached the end of that road. And what does it mean?但我们知道，我们人类，归根结底，我是说，我们用语言和文字征服了世界。是的，工程师可以制造武器，士兵可以挥舞武器。但要建立一支军队，你需要说服成千上万的陌生人进行合作。你怎么做到这一点？用文字，用意识形态，用宗教。But we know we we con we humans, we conquer the world ultimately, I would say, with language and words. Because yes, engineers can make weapons and soldiers can wield them. But to build an army, you need to convince thousands of strangers to cooperate. How do you do that? With words, with ideology, with religion.所以，人类接管世界不是因为我们身体最强壮，而是因为我们发现了如何利用文字让成千上万、数百万、数十亿陌生人合作。这是我们的超能力。现在，某种东西出现了，它将从我们手中夺走这种超能力。直到几年前，地球上没有任何东西能使用文字。只有人类，黑猩猩不能，河流不能，太阳不能，只有我们可以使用文字。So, humans took over the world not because we are the strongest physically, but because we discovered how to use words to get thousands and millions and billions of strangers to cooperate. This was our superpower. And now something has emerged that is going to take our superpower from us. Until a few years ago, nothing on earth could use words. Only humans, chimpanzees couldn't, rivers couldn't, the sun couldn't, we could use words.现在有某种东西能够，或者很快将能够比我们更好地使用文字。只要看看社交媒体上发生的事情以及它给世界带来的巨大变化。Now there is something that is able or soon will be able to use words better than us. And you look just, you know, at what happened on social media and the immense change it brought to the world there.那么 10 年后，生活在一个由 AI 掌控语言的世界里，会是什么样子？So 10 years from now living in a world in which AIs are in command of language how does that look like?主持人：正如你所说，10 年后的达沃斯可能会大不相同。所以这是我们在思考除了物理人类之外还有谁会出现在这里的背景。但如果我可以稍微讨论一下，人类被技术击败并不是新鲜事。如果我们想想一些技术，我们不能飞，但我们制造了飞机。汽车比我们快。我们对此很习以为常。AI 带来的威胁在于它对我们思考能力这一至高权力的威胁。这是不稳定的。Well Davos in 10 years might look very different as you say. So that's a future we can all try to think about in the context of who would be here beyond the physical human. But if I may just um discuss a little bit around the fact that it's not new for humans to be uh beaten by technology. So if we think about some of the tech, we can't fly and we built airplanes. Cars can go faster than us. We're very comfortable with that. The threat that comes with AI is the fact that it's a threat to the sovereign power of our ability to think. And that is destabilizing.我是作为学者和教育者说这话的。这是非常具有威胁性的。但如果我们回到机器人，我们会看重机器人比尤塞恩·博尔特跑得更快跑 100 米的价值吗？没那么高。人类的努力、挣扎、痛苦这一事实，即我们能够对即使通过技术实现的 lesser（不如原本）成就产生共同的同理心和理解，这其中有些价值。I say that as an academic and an educator. That's something that is very threatening. But if we go back to say a robot, the value we would place on a robot being able to run the 100 meters faster than Usain Bolt is less. There's something about the human endeavor, the struggle, the suffering, the fact that we can have a collective sense of empathy and understanding about what it meant to achieve something even if it was lesser with technology.我只是想知道，一个会取代你的作者，我们在多大上会看重由人工智能完成的艺术中的创造力和文字？你认为我们会同样看重它吗，因此在思考和文字的创造性领域，人类仍然有一席之地？I just wonder whether an author that would replace you, how much as a human we would value that the words of that the creativity that comes from art that's been done with artificial intelligence. Do you think we will value it as much and therefore there's still a place for humans in the creative space of thinking and words?尤瓦尔·赫拉利：这就是身份危机，因为奶牛不会说“我跑故我在”。人类基于我们的思考能力来定义身份。我们一直知道猎豹比我们跑得快。我们一直知道大象比我们大得多、强壮得多。所以我们没有根据这些来定义自己。我们根据思考来定义自己。现在，某种东西将在思考方面超越我们。如果思考意味着排列文字的话。That's the identity crisis because the cow didn't say I run therefore I am. I think I mean it based human identity on our capacity to think. We always knew that cheetahs can run faster than us. We always knew that elephants are much bigger and stronger than us. So we didn't define ourselves by this. We defined ourselves by thinking. And now something is going to be better than us in thinking. If thinking means putting words in order.再说一次，我是作家。我是演讲者。我把文字进行排列。这就像是我的游戏。就像我有所有这些词，我把它们排列成……不，不，不。把它们排成这样会更好，就像这样……而 AI 会打败我。我不知道这需要多久，两年、五年、十年，它会打败我。那这对我们的身份意味着什么？人们认同……嗯，脑海中流动的文字。就像你闭上眼睛，试图看看我内心发生了什么。许多人，我也是。我们看到文字在浮现，在自我组织。我们认同那个。Now I'm again I'm an author. I am a speaker. I put words in order. This is like this is my game. Like I have all these words and I put oh let's put these words in this in this order. No, no, no, no. It will be better to put it like this like this like this and AI will beat me. I don't know how long it will take two years, five years, 10 years it will beat me and then what does it mean for our identity? People identify, you know, with the streams of of words in in in their mind. Like you close your eyes, you try to see what's happening inside me. Many people, I'm one of them. We see words popping up organizing themselves. We identify with that.主持人：但我想说的是，沿用同样的类比：我们仍然珍视“人”。我们有奥运会。冬奥会快到了。我们知道许多其他动物和其他技术可以在许多领域胜过我们。但我们仍然非常享受那些训练和成长的人类的“人性”，即使他们在技术层面上不是最好的。我只是想好奇，我们是否会自然而然地将这种态度延伸到思考和语言领域，那样的话， 10 年后，你仍然会是一个非常充满活力和成功的作家……But I guess my point is using the same analogy is that we still value a human. We have the Olympics. We've got the Winter Olympics coming. We know that many other animals and other technologies can outperform in many of those areas. Yet we still really enjoy the humanity of people that train and develop even though it's not as good. And I just wonder whether we will just naturally extend that to the thinking realm and to the word,so that you still will have a very, very vibrant and successful author role in 10 years’ time.