????自從上世紀(jì)50年代開始涌現(xiàn)大量以機器人為主題B級片以來，人類對機器人、計算機和自動化的恐懼已經(jīng)達到歷史最高水平。這不僅是因為機器人可能搶走他們的工作（甚至就連白領(lǐng)工作也變得岌岌可危），一些科技界大佬的言論也加重了人們的擔(dān)憂。

????微軟聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人、慈善家比爾?蓋茨曾說過：“我不能理解為什么有些人不擔(dān)心會出現(xiàn)人類無法控制的超級人工智能”。物理學(xué)家史蒂芬?霍金也認(rèn)為，“任由人工智能無拘無束地發(fā)展，可能會招致人類的滅亡，”因為機器能夠以生物進化絕對達不到的速度重新設(shè)計自己。特斯拉公司的CEO、科技投資人伊隆?馬斯克表示，人工智能領(lǐng)域的研究有可能“召喚出人類無法控制的惡魔”。馬斯克最近向生命未來學(xué)院捐贈了1000萬美金，這所學(xué)院主要研究人類如何平安地在科技變革中生存下去。

????這是一個陣營。

????還有另一群科學(xué)家表示，人工智能帶來的“末日危機”其實被夸大了，就像美國總統(tǒng)羅斯福所說的，唯一值得我們恐懼的就是恐懼本身。支持人工智能的科學(xué)家和經(jīng)濟學(xué)家表示，人工智能、自動化和機器人會為人類世界的各種問題帶來新的、更好的解決方案。

????他們認(rèn)為，人們對科技的恐懼其實早已存在。以往的經(jīng)驗表明，人工智能領(lǐng)域的新發(fā)展雖然會剝奪一些人的工作，但同時也會創(chuàng)造更多的工作崗位來取代舊的職業(yè)。從理論上看，機器雖然可以取代很多種由人類從事的職業(yè)，但機器缺乏創(chuàng)新和變革的能力，甚至缺乏常識，這就使得它們在可以預(yù)見的未來還無法徹底取代人類。

????他們認(rèn)為，機器人和計算機將與人類并肩工作，在提高工作效率的同時，還可以為人類帶來更多自由，因為它們能夠讓我們免于從事一些累人的苦差事。簡而言之，未來與之前的歲月沒什么區(qū)別，社會完全能夠自我調(diào)節(jié)。今年3月6日在美國上映的新片《超能查派》就講述了一個“反終結(jié)者”的故事，世界要靠機器人來拯救，而人類成了壞人。該片導(dǎo)演尼爾?布洛姆坎普對《NBC新聞》表示：“未來機器人會擁有相當(dāng)于我們1000倍的智能，如果讓它們來解決我們面臨的問題，我認(rèn)為這種好處是難以估量的。”

????娛樂業(yè)在“終結(jié)者”和“反終結(jié)者”之間的搖擺，反映出人們對科技究竟會帶來福音還是災(zāi)難這一問題的關(guān)注與分歧。歸根結(jié)底，問題在于過去的經(jīng)驗是否必然能反映未來？還是未來的某天會發(fā)生令全人類震驚的“大事件”？希望樂觀主義者到時候會說：“我們早說了沒事吧。”以下五位科學(xué)家就是這種樂觀主義者，他們認(rèn)為人們對人工智能的擔(dān)憂完全是杞人憂天，并認(rèn)為科技的飛躍必然會促進人類社會的進步。

????大衛(wèi)?奧特爾

????麻省理工學(xué)院經(jīng)濟學(xué)院副院長、經(jīng)濟學(xué)教授

????“哲學(xué)家邁克爾?波蘭尼在1966年指出：‘我們所知道的東西，多于我們所能表達的……駕駛員的技能是再詳細(xì)的駕駛理論教學(xué)也取代不了的；我對自己身體的認(rèn)識，與它的生理學(xué)實際也有很大區(qū)別?！ㄌm尼的觀察在時間上要遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)早于計算機時代，但是他發(fā)現(xiàn)的悖論——即我們對世界的隱性知識往往超過了顯性理解——在很大程度上成功預(yù)言了過去50年的計算機發(fā)展史……記者和專業(yè)評論人士夸大了機器取代人力的程度，卻忽略了兩者之間存在極強的互補性。人類從事的許多任務(wù)都需要適應(yīng)性、嘗試和創(chuàng)新能力，機器人要想取而代之，依然面臨巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。”

????杰夫?霍金斯

????紅木神經(jīng)科學(xué)中心常務(wù)董事兼主席、Palm Computing公司聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人、人工智能公司Numenta聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人。

????“我們目前正在創(chuàng)建的機器智能技術(shù)基于大腦的新皮質(zhì)原理，不會催生有意識脫離人類控制并且具有自我復(fù)制功能的機器人。它并不是一個現(xiàn)實威脅。這就是未來幾十年的現(xiàn)實。而且就算未來真的出現(xiàn)了現(xiàn)實威脅，我們也可以輕易改變方向?！?/p>

????Fear of robots, computers, and automation may be at an all-time high since B movies of the 1950s. Not only is there concern about jobs — even white-collar occupations are vulnerable — but big names in technology have weighed in with their worries.

????Philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said, “[I] don’t understand why some people aren’t concerned” about artificial super intelligence that could exceed human control. Physicist Stephen Hawking thinks that “development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race,” as machines could redesign themselves at a rate that would leave biological evolution in the dust. Tesla Motors CEO and technology investor Elon Musk said research in the area could be like “summoning the demon” that is beyond control. Hedonated $10 million to the Future of Life Institute, which sponsors research into how humanity can navigate the waters of change in the face of technology.

????That’s one camp.

????Then there’s another that says doomsday concerns are overblown and that, like a new age FDR, the only thing to fear is fear itself. These people — technologists, economists, and others — say that the combination of artificial intelligence, automation, and robotics will usher in new, better solutions to world problems.

????They argue that the fear of technology is old and past experience has proven that while new developments can kill off jobs, they create even more to replace them. Machines could, in theory, replace humans in a wide variety of occupations, but shortcomings in creativity, change, and even common sense are vast, making them unable to in the foreseeable future.

????Instead, these people suggest, robots and computers will work side by side with humans, enhancing productivity and opening new vistas of freedom for people to move beyond the drudgery of current life. In short, the coming years will look like all the ones that came before and society will sort itself out. In fact, a new film “Chappie,” due out March 6, depicts an anti-Terminator view, a world in which robots hold the solutions and humans are the bad guys. “You would have something that has 1,000 times the intelligence that we have, looking at the same problems that we look at,” the director Neill Blomkamp told NBC News. “I think the level of benefit would be immeasurable.”

????The swings of show biz reflect a deep concern and disagreement over whether technology holds promise or peril. The question comes down to whether the past necessarily predicts the future or if humankind could be in for a nasty shock. Hopefully the optimists will be able to say, “We told you so.” Here are five voices that say worries are overblown and leaps in technology will bring the human race along with them.

????David Autor

????Professor of Economics and Associate Department Head, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

????"In 1966, the philosopher Michael Polanyi observed, 'We can know more than we can tell... The skill of a driver cannot be replaced by a thorough schooling in the theory of the motorcar; the knowledge I have of my own body differs altogether from the knowledge of its physiology.' Polanyi’s observation largely predates the computer era, but the paradox he identified — that our tacit knowledge of how the world works often exceeds our explicit understanding — foretells much of the history of computerization over the past five decades. ...[J]ournalists and expert commentators overstate the extent of machine substitution for human labor and ignore the strong complementarities. The challenges to substituting machines for workers in tasks requiring adaptability, common sense, and creativity remain immense."

????Jeff Hawkins

????Executive director and chairman of cognitive theory research organization Redwood Neuroscience Institute, co-founder of Palm Computing, and co-founder of machine intelligence company Numenta

????"The machine-intelligence technology we are creating today, based on neocortical principles, will not lead to self- replicating robots with uncontrollable intentions.There won’t be an intelligence explosion. There is no existential threat. This is the reality for the coming decades, and we can easily change direction should new existential threats appear."