评论
打印
An IBM executive told a recent conference that when supercomputer Deep Blue was halfway through its 1997 chess match with Garry Kasparov, it made a random move, due to a software bug. Assuming the machine was smarter than it was, Kasparov later made a strategic error that helped hand Deep Blue victory in the match.
IBM的一位高管在最近的一次会议上表示，1997年超级计算机“深蓝”(Deep Blue)与加里•卡斯帕罗夫(Garry Kasparov)进行国际象棋比赛，在对弈到一半时，“深蓝”由于软件故障走了一步闲棋。卡斯帕罗夫认为“深蓝”后来变聪明了，他本人犯了一个战略性错误，从而帮助深蓝获得了比赛的胜利。
Thomas Davenport and Julia Kirby warn that humans could, like Kasparov, cede the future to machines too easily.
托马斯•达文波特(Thomas Davenport)和茱莉亚•柯比(Julia Kirby)警告称，与卡斯帕罗夫一样，人类可能轻易将未来拱手让给机器。
“Many knowledge workers are fearful,” they write. “We should be concerned, given the potential for these unprecedented tools to make us redundant. But we should not feel helpless in the midst of the large-scale change unfolding around us.”
他们写道：“许多知识型员工非常担心。鉴于这些史无前例的工具有可能导致我们失去工作，我们应该担心。但面对我们身边正在出现的大规模变化，我们也不用感到茫然无助。”
Only Humans Need Apply falls into the sub-genre of techno-optimism, at the opposite end of the bookshelf from, say, Martin Ford’s doomier Rise of the Robots .
《只有人类需要求职》(Only Humans Need Apply)可以归入“技术乐观派”的类别，书架的另一端则有马丁•福特(Martin Ford)较为悲观的著作——《机器人时代》(Rise of the Robots)。
Not all of every job can be automated, the authors point out. Change may be a long time coming (they cite futurist Paul Saffo’s wise insight: “Never mistake a clear view for a short distance”). Critically, humans have the power to shape their destiny. They can develop, program and direct machines, and adapt to working with them, in a process of “augmentation” rather than mere automation. Machines, up to now “the brawn to our brains, can become the brains to our brio”.
《只有人类需要求职》的两位作者指出，并非每一种工作都可以自动化。变化可能在一个漫长的时期内发生——他们援引未来学家保罗•萨福(Paul Saffo)的至理名言：Never mistake a clear view for a short distance（望山跑死马）。关键是，人类有能力塑造自己的命运。在“扩增”(augmentation)而非简单自动化的过程中，人们可以开发机器、给机器编程以及向机器下指令，调整自身以适应与机器合作。机器至今“对我们的大脑来说就犹如肌肉，它们可以成为大脑，使我们获得精神上的愉悦”。
Having deftly outlined the gloomier forecasts, Kirby and Davenport lay out how to avoid submission to, or substitution by, machines. A few senior managers will step up into overseeing automated systems. Other workers will step aside, by developing careers in areas machines are not as good at, such as motivation, creativity or empathy.
柯比和达文波特列举了一些较为悲观的预测，阐述如何避免被机器压迫或者取代。少数高级经理将“向上迈步”，从事监控自动化系统的岗位。其他劳动者将会“向旁边迈步”，在激励、创造或移情等机器不擅长的领域发展职业。
Still others will step in (by learning more about how computers work and how to improve them), step narrowly (becoming super-specialists), or step forward to develop new systems and technology.
还有些人将会“迈进”这一行（通过进一步学习计算机工作原理并研究如何改进它们）、专攻某个狭窄领域（成为超级专家），或者“向前迈步”开发新的系统和技术。
Plenty of people have already made these changes, and they describe many of them. Here is the redundant lawyer who “stepped in” to become an expert overseer of automated contract reviews; or the editor who “stepped up” to develop a computerised system for preparing and publishing sports statistics and earnings reports. If you pair adaptable humans with computers, you can remove tedious tasks and manage the change humanely.
许多人已经做出了这些改变，并描述了其中的诸多变化。这里有丢了工作的律师“迈进”这一行，成为一名自动化合同审查的专业监督者；也有编辑“向上迈步”，开发了一套计算机化系统，用于准备和发布运动统计数据和盈利报告。如果将适应能力强的人与计算机搭配，就可以消除单调乏味的工作，人性化地应对这种变化。
Developers must “look for ways to help humans perform their most human and most valuable work better”, the authors say. Simply asserting this bright future will not make it occur, however. The temptation for bosses to opt for the most efficient robot solution is strong. Davenport and Kirby “expect corporations’ efforts to keep human workers employable will become part of their ‘social licence to operate’”. But is that wishful thinking and, even if not, will it happen soon enough?
两位作者表示，开发者必须“设法帮助人类更好地进行最具有人性特点、最有价值的工作”。然而，只是简单断言这种光明未来不会让它变成现实。促使老板们选择最有效的机器人解决方案的诱因会非常强烈。达文波特和柯比“希望企业让人类工人可就业的努力将成为他们‘社会运营执照’的一部分”。但这是一厢情愿的想法，或者即便不是一厢情愿，它能及时实现吗？
This is a fine call to action in the face of uncertainty. But let us program the automated story-writing tool for a sequel in 2026. Only then will we know whether humans who stepped up, in or forward, sustained a fulfilling working existence, or were merely treading water ahead of a tsunami.
面对不确定的前景，这是一个很好的行动号召。但是让我们为2026年的续集设计自动化的故事创作工具吧。只有到那时我们才会知道，那些向上、向内或者向前迈步的人们是维持了充实的工作存在，还是只是在海啸来临前蹚水。
