 October 2024 2024 年 10 月 I'm usually reluctant to make predictions about technology, but I feel fairly confident about this one: in a couple decades there won't be many people who can write. 我通常不願對科技發展做出預測，但這次我相當有把握：再過二十年，會寫作的人將所剩無幾。 One of the strangest things you learn if you're a writer is how many people have trouble writing. Doctors know how many people have a mole they're worried about; people who are good at setting up computers know how many people aren't; writers know how many people need help writing. 身為作家最奇特的發現之一，就是原來有這麼多人苦於寫作。醫生知道多少人為身上的痣擔憂；電腦高手明白多少人搞不定設定；而作家清楚多少人需要寫作協助。 The reason so many people have trouble writing is that it's fundamentally difficult. To write well you have to think clearly, and thinking clearly is hard. 寫作之所以讓這麼多人困擾，根本原因在於它本質上就很困難。要寫得好必須思路清晰，而清晰的思考本來就不容易。 And yet writing pervades many jobs, and the more prestigious the job, the more writing it tends to require. 然而，寫作滲透於許多工作中，且職位越顯赫，通常越需要寫作能力。 These two powerful opposing forces, the pervasive expectation of writing and the irreducible difficulty of doing it, create enormous pressure. This is why eminent professors often turn out to have resorted to plagiarism. The most striking thing to me about these cases is the pettiness of the thefts. The stuff they steal is usually the most mundane boilerplate — the sort of thing that anyone who was even halfway decent at writing could turn out with no effort at all. Which means they're not even halfway decent at writing. 這兩股強大的對立力量——對寫作的普遍期待與其不可簡化的難度——形成了巨大壓力。這正是為何知名教授往往淪為抄襲者。最令我震驚的是這些抄襲案件的瑣碎性：他們竊取的通常是極其平凡的制式內容，任何具備基本寫作能力的人都能輕鬆完成。這意味著他們連最基本的寫作能力都不具備。 Till recently there was no convenient escape valve for the pressure created by these opposing forces. You could pay someone to write for you, like JFK, or plagiarize, like MLK, but if you couldn't buy or steal words, you had to write them yourself. And as a result nearly everyone who was expected to write had to learn how. 直到最近，這種對立壓力仍無便捷的宣洩管道。你可以像甘迺迪那樣雇人代筆，或像金恩博士那樣抄襲，但若無法用金錢購買或竊取文字，你就得親自寫作。因此幾乎所有被要求寫作的人都必須學會這項技能。 Not anymore. AI has blown this world open. Almost all pressure to write has dissipated. You can have AI do it for you, both in school and at work. 如今情況已截然不同。人工智慧徹底改變了這個世界。寫作壓力幾乎完全消散——無論在學校或職場，你都能讓 AI 代勞。 The result will be a world divided into writes and write-nots. There will still be some people who can write. Some of us like it. But the middle ground between those who are good at writing and those who can't write at all will disappear. Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write. 結果將是一個分裂為「能寫者」與「不能寫者」的世界。仍會有人能夠寫作，我們當中有些人也樂於寫作。但介於擅長寫作與完全不會寫作之間的灰色地帶將會消失。屆時不會再有優秀寫手、普通寫手與文盲的分別，只剩下優秀寫手和文盲兩個極端。 Is that so bad? Isn't it common for skills to disappear when technology makes them obsolete? There aren't many blacksmiths left, and it doesn't seem to be a problem. 這樣真的很糟嗎？當科技讓某項技能過時，該技能逐漸消失不是很常見嗎？如今鐵匠所剩無幾，似乎也沒造成什麼問題。 Yes, it's bad. The reason is something I mentioned earlier: writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing. You can't make this point better than Leslie Lamport did: 不，這確實很糟。原因正如我先前提過的：寫作即是思考。事實上，有種思考只能透過寫作完成。Leslie Lamport 說得再透徹不過： If you're thinking without writing, you only think you're thinking.So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too. 因此，一個區分為「能寫者」與「不能寫者」的世界，其危險程度遠超表面所見。這將成為「思考者」與「非思考者」的對立世界。我清楚自己選擇站在哪一邊，相信你也心知肚明。 This situation is not unprecedented. In preindustrial times most people's jobs made them strong. Now if you want to be strong, you work out. So there are still strong people, but only those who choose to be. 這般情境並非史無前例。在前工業時代，多數人的工作自然造就強健體魄。如今若想強壯，你得刻意鍛鍊。所以世上仍有強者，但僅限於主動選擇成為的人。 It will be the same with writing. There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be. 寫作之道亦復如是。聰慧之人依然存在，但只會是那些主動選擇智慧的人。 Thanks to Jessica Livingston, Ben Miller, and Robert Morris for reading drafts of this. 感謝潔西卡・李文斯頓、班・米勒與羅伯特・莫里斯審閱本文草稿。 |