人工智能：均衡器还是分裂者？

There is a saying “God made men, but Samuel Colt made them equal.” AI sometimes can have similar effect. In one enterprise system I’ve seen, the gap between people using a tool 40 hours a week and those using it 2 hours a week nearly disappeared after AI agents were introduced. I have also seen the gap between a 10x developer and an average one shrink after everyone got generous Cursor subscriptions.<p>At the same time, recent public reporting on Anthropic’s Claude Fable 5 and Mythos-class models suggests that the most capable systems may be rolled out through limited-access programs or premium channels rather than broadly and evenly.<p>Throughout history, who could afford access to the best technology of the time often shaped who got to govern. In ancient Greece, hoplites were ordinary free citizens who funded their own gear, tying military service to civic participation. Similarly, colonial American militias embedded armed service into everyday community life. By contrast, the prohibitive cost of armor, warhorses and military training in late medieval Europe placed military power firmly in the hands of the wealthy few - leading to democratic traditions in Athens and the early United States, while reinforcing autocratic rule across medieval Europe.<p>So IMHO it is an important question whether AI becomes an equalizer, or a tool that widens the gap between those who have access and those who do not.