Writes and Write-Nots

October 2024

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.

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.

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.

And yet writing pervades many jobs, and the more prestigious the job, the more writing it tends to require.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:
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.

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.

It will be the same with writing. There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.

Thanks to Jessica Livingston, Ben Miller, and Robert Morris for reading drafts of this.
https://paulgraham.com/writes.html

Last edited by @suen 2024-10-27T22:58:13Z

介紹下作者 Paul Graham然後翻譯然後評價本文
@Creative

Paul Graham 简介

Paul Graham是一位英国出生的美国程序员、风险投资家和作家。他最出名的是作为Viaweb的联合创始人(后来被雅虎收购并更名为Yahoo! Store),以及作为风险投资公司Y Combinator的联合创始人。

Graham毕业于康奈尔大学和哈佛大学,拥有计算机科学博士学位。除了他在科技领域的成就外,他还以他的文章和随笔而闻名,涵盖了各种主题,包括编程、创业、艺术和写作。他的一些文章被认为是对硅谷文化和创业精神的深刻见解。

文章翻译

2024年10月

我通常不愿意对技术做出预测,但我对这一预测相当有信心:在几十年内,不会有很多人会写作。

如果你是一个作家,你学到的最奇怪的事情之一是,有多少人难以写作。医生知道有多少人有一颗他们担心的痣;擅长设置电脑的人知道有多少人不会;作家知道有多少人需要写作方面的帮助。

这么多人难以写作的原因是,写作从根本上来说是困难的。要想写得好,你必须思路清晰,而思路清晰是很难的。

然而,写作渗透到许多工作中,而且职位越高,往往需要的写作就越多。

这两种强大的对立力量——普遍的写作期望和写作的不可简化的难度——产生了巨大的压力。这就是为什么著名的教授们经常被发现诉诸剽窃。对我来说,这些案例中最引人注目的是他们偷窃内容的琐碎。他们偷窃的东西通常是最普通的样板文字——任何一个稍微擅长写作的人都能毫不费力地写出来的东西。这意味着他们连稍微擅长写作都算不上。

直到最近,还没有一个方便的逃生阀来释放这些对立力量所造成的压力。你可以像肯尼迪那样花钱请人帮你写,或者像马丁·路德·金那样剽窃,但如果你不能买或偷文字,你就必须自己写。结果,几乎每个被期望写作的人都必须学会如何写作。

现在不再是这样了。人工智能已经打破了这个世界。几乎所有写作的压力都消失了。你可以在学校和工作中让人工智能帮你写。

其结果将是一个分成会写和不会写两部分的世界。仍然会有一些人会写作。我们中的一些人喜欢写作。但是那些擅长写作的人和那些完全不会写的人之间的中间地带将会消失。与其有好作家、一般的作家和不会写的人,不如只有好作家和不会写的人。

这真的很糟糕吗?当技术使某些技能过时时,这些技能消失不是很常见吗?现在已经没有多少铁匠了,这似乎也不是什么问题。

是的,这很糟糕。原因是我前面提到的:写作就是思考。事实上,有一种思考只能通过写作来完成。你无法比莱斯利·兰波特更好地阐述这一点:

如果你不写作就在思考,你只是以为自己在思考。

因此,一个分成会写和不会写两部分的世界比听起来更危险。这将是一个会思考和不会思考的世界。我知道我想要成为哪一半,我打赌你也一样。

这种情况并非史无前例。在工业化前的时代,大多数人的工作都让他们变得强壮。现在,如果你想变得强壮,你就去锻炼。所以仍然有强壮的人,但只有那些选择变得强壮的人。

写作也会是这样。仍然会有聪明的人,但只有那些选择变得聪明的人。

感谢杰西卡·利文斯顿、本·米勒和罗伯特·莫里斯阅读本文的草稿。

文章评价

Paul Graham在这篇文章中提出了一个大胆的预测:人工智能的发展将导致未来世界出现“会写”和“不会写”的两极分化。他的核心论点是,写作本质上是一种困难的技能,需要清晰的思考能力,而人工智能的出现使得人们可以轻松地借助工具完成写作任务,从而导致人们不再需要培养写作能力。

Graham认为,这种分化将带来负面影响,因为写作不仅是一种表达工具,更是一种思考方式。他引用Leslie Lamport的话来说明“不写作就在思考,你只是以为自己在思考”,强调写作对于深度思考的重要性。

文章的逻辑清晰,论证有力,引发人们对人工智能时代写作技能的思考。Graham的观点可能会引起一些争议,例如:

  • 人工智能是否真的能够完全取代人类的写作能力? 虽然人工智能在生成文本方面取得了很大进步,但其在创造性、情感表达和深度思考方面仍存在局限性。
  • 写作技能的衰退是否真的会导致思考能力的下降? 写作和思考之间存在着密切的联系,但写作技能的下降是否一定会导致思考能力的下降,还需要进一步的研究和论证。
  • 我们应该如何应对人工智能时代写作技能的挑战? Graham的观点提醒我们,在人工智能时代,我们仍然需要重视写作技能的培养,将其作为一种重要的思考和学习工具。

总的来说,这是一篇值得深思的文章,它提醒我们在享受人工智能带来的便利的同时,也要警惕其可能带来的负面影响,并积极思考如何在人工智能时代保持和提升人类的核心能力。