跳到正文

#现象/趋势

今日 2 条
9月30日周三
  1. Tomer Tunguz 博客(VC 分析)57

    Tomer Tunguz 解析 GPU 租金翻倍而 AI 成本仍下降的原因

    GPU 租赁价六个月内从 $4.40 涨到 $8.08 每卡时,但 AI 价格仍在下降。文章归因于数据中心建设推高电力、材料和信贷成本,需求激增放大竞价;同时模型效率快速提升,Claude Opus 5.5 运行成本降 40%,同一基准的通过成本从 $0.55 降至 $0.0015。Microsoft 称每 GPU 生成的 token 年增 90%,效率与成本两股力量大致相当。

9月29日周二
  1. MIT News(RSS)46

    MIT 研究:算法单一化的影响取决于具体细节

    MIT 研究人员系统评估了算法单一化的主要反对意见,认为系统性排斥等论点并不成立,并用数学证明单一化主要造成信息回声室、阻碍探索。在招聘场景中,将多个招聘算法组合成单一“ensemble”可克服这一局限,有时表现不逊于甚至优于多算法并存的 polyculture。研究发表于 Philosophical Perspectives。

9月28日周一
9月26日周六
9月25日周五
  1. a16z:News(RSS)40

    a16z 为何推出 Cosign:硅谷如何靠"背书"识别人才

    a16z 正在推出 Cosign,用于呈现硅谷靠彼此背书识别人才的关系网络。文章认为,早期信念通过关注、转发、引荐、天使投资等"co-sign"行为变成公开信号,让一个人的地位在社交图谱上被实时定价。相比"非共识","足够早"才是更关键的下注优势。

9月24日周四
  1. Peter McCrory19

    Anthropic 首席经济学家 Peter McCrory 与经济学家 Jason Furman 同台,在哈佛 JFK Jr. Forum 探讨 AI 对就业、生产率、不平等和经济政策的影响。McCrory 称学生现场及会后的提问令他印象深刻,并强调要让 AI 收益广泛惠及大众、合理缓释风险,就必须提出尖锐问题。

    引用Institute of Politics@HarvardIOP

    What happens to jobs, productivity, inequality, and economic policy as AI transforms the way we work? Anthropic Chief Economist @PeterMcCrory and economist @JasonFurman took to the JFK Jr. Forum stage to explore these questions and more. https://ken.sc/forum0923-live

9月23日周三
  1. a16z:News(RSS)46

    a16z 联合创始人撰文:该不该送孩子去 HAA?

    由 Gagan Biyani(Udemy 创始人)担任 CEO 的 Horowitz Andreessen Academy(HAA)昨日正式上线,面向大学年龄段年轻人,在旧金山以住宿制方式学习动手构建。两位身为父母的作者由此讨论是否愿意让自己的孩子就读这类项目,并对比传统大学与每年 6.5 万美元的私立教育投入。

9月21日周一
  1. Peter McCrory24

    大体同意。一些实际启示: (1) 优先做能用新数据定期更新的分析 (2) 公开地做研究(根据新证据修正观点) (3) 承认不确定性;做出可证伪的预测 (4) 认真且谦逊

    引用Alex Imas@alexolegimas

    A few (personal) thoughts on reading empirical AI papers on the economy. Economists have gotten used to reading papers with super clean identification, arguing about the validity of an instrument, making sure parallel trend assumptions are satisfied. This is what gets you into a top journal, and it is *very* important research (no question here). But it also takes years and sometimes decades to get these types of papers right---people often don't find a good instrument to answer a specific causal question decades after the natural experiment. We will eventually have this type of research for AI as well, and it is absolutely necessary. But right we also need signals *right now*, even if they are noisier than what we are used to. We need papers where we can trust that researchers did their best methodologically, while at the same time acknowledging that the space is moving way too fast to wait for perfect identification. This will allow us to accumulate enough signals, coming at the same question using different angles, for example, to say "yes, X is likely happening in the economy". The AI exposure and early career hiring papers are a good example of this. There is no silver bullet paper with super clean identification. But at this point we have several independent teams reaching the same general conclusion, enough where we can say "there seems to be a slow down in AI-exposed, early career hiring."

9月19日周六
  1. MIT News(RSS)27

    MIT Reads 十周年转型:转向虚构与回忆录,应对 AI 时代

    MIT Libraries 的 MIT Reads 项目在十周年之际转型,将重点转向虚构与回忆录,以在 AI 时代促进社交连接与共同人性。MIT 校长 Sally Kornbluth 选定 Ted Chiang 的《Exhalation》为 2026 年秋季书目,该书探讨人类与 AI 的关系等议题。MIT 教学与科研中 AI 使用特设委员会报告引用该项目,称其有助于推动校园关于共同规范的对话。

9月18日周五
  1. GitHub Blog22

    GitHub Podcast 拆解 AI 热门观点:该不该读代码、RAG 是否已死、Skills 是否杀死了 MCP

    GitHub Podcast 最新一期拆解了五个 AI 热门观点:AI 生成的代码仍需阅读和负责,只是审查力度应按风险分级;Skills 与 MCP 解决不同问题,MCP 提供工具与数据的标准接入,Skills 封装团队流程与最佳实践,二者可组合使用;RAG 并未消亡,检索能为模型提供训练数据之外的信息,减少 token 消耗并让回答更有依据。

9月17日周四
  1. jietang66

    唐杰发文复盘,GLM-5.3-Flash 从首次在国内加速器上运行到承接全部生产流量只用两周,端到端吞吐达 3.2 倍,大量工作由 GLM-5.3 驱动的 Infra Agent 完成。

    引用Z.ai@Zai_org

    We’re sharing how GLM-5.3 helped build and optimize the inference infrastructure serving GLM-5.3-Flash. The system went from its first successful run to production readiness in less than two weeks, with end-to-end throughput tripling relative to the initial baseline. The key was dense feedback: local correctness tests, execution traces, microbenchmarks, and end-to-end measurements that enabled targeted hypothesis testing rather than reliance on aggregate performance metrics alone. https://z.ai/blog/glm-built-its-inference-infrastructure

    推荐理由:作者复盘了 GLM-5.3 智能体优化推理基础设施的两周过程,提出了可迁移的分层密集反馈方法与工程师角色转变的判断。

9月16日周三
9月15日周二
9月14日周一
9月12日周六
  1. Peter McCrory37

    这是该模型的一个重要局限。我们聚焦于 AI 转型的供给侧(AI 能做什么、扩散多快、工人转岗多快)。 价格是灵活的,总需求等于经济体的产出能力。 更多思考见 🧵

    引用modest proposal@modestproposal1

    Anthropic's economic scenario analysis is interesting. But this is not something you can ignore, this is the most important consideration! "the model cannot generate the negative feedback in which disruption depresses demand and amplifies its own labor-market consequences"

9月11日周五
  1. a16z:News(RSS)43

    a16z:LP 为何错过 SpaceX、Anthropic 与 OpenAI 这一波 AI 浪潮

    a16z 指出,许多 LP 对 SpaceX、Anthropic 和 OpenAI 三家前沿模型公司几乎零敞口,而 SpaceX 上市后市值约 2 万亿美元,成为规模达此前纪录 10 倍的史上最大 VC 背景 IPO,Anthropic 估值 965B 美元、OpenAI 最近估值 852B 美元。作者认为,传统把风投控制在整体组合 5-10% 的资产配置框架已经破裂,LP 需要重新调整风投仓位。

  2. a16z:News(RSS)32

    a16z:雇主开始寻找新型健康保险计划,AI 正在降低建计划门槛

    a16z 发文指出,随着保费每年上涨 10% 以上,多数雇主正开始寻找替代方案,或转向低成本健康计划,或彻底放弃传统健康保险。这一规模达 1 万亿美元、覆盖 1.5 亿以上美国人的雇主医保市场,正因 AI 降低建计划与运营的固定成本门槛而出现代际替换机会,催生一批新型替代健康计划(AHP)、挑战者 PBM 和现代化基础设施平台。

9月10日周四
  1. Peter McCrory52

    Anthropic 首席经济学家 Peter McCrory 与 Jack Clark 对谈其 AI 经济影响情景研究。他表示目标不是做预测,而是理解可能结果的区间及其出现的条件,希望厘清对不确定未来的分歧来源;引用内容提到研究情景从影响很小到 2030 年 GDP 增长 15%、知识工作者失业率达 18%。

    引用John Burn-Murdoch@jburnmurdoch

    New from us: Anthropic just published scenarios for AI’s possible economic impacts, which range from minimal, to explosive GDP growth of 15% by 2030 as knowledge-worker unemployment hits 18%. I sat down with their co-founder Jack Clark to pick his brains on how they’re thinking about all of this.

  2. Peter McCrory47

    很好,与我们今天分享的内容互为补充。 评估决定 AI 在未来数年对增长影响大小的关键经济力量(并判断我们如今可能处于哪条路径上)是至关重要的工作。 干得漂亮 @alexolegimas @ben_moll

    引用Alex Imas@alexolegimas

    New post on the blog, featuring the excellent @ben_moll There’s been tons of discourse on how AI will contribute to economic growth, with many people closest to the technology predicting double digit increases. Are these forecasts likely? Probably not. The blog goes through the economics for why exploding improvements in capabilities (which technologists have been largely right about) may not translate to explosive growth. Ben’s thread covers this in detail, but gist is that: 1) there is nothing in economic growth models that prevents AI from leading to explosive growth but 2) this trajectory relies on a series of assumptions that are unlikely to hold in the real world. For example, one assumptions is likely to be violated because of a pretty counterintuitive feature of structural change: the sectors that become automated become smaller parts of the economy (because they’re cheaper, people become richer, and spending moves to non-automated parts of the economy). This, plus other features of the economy, is what will likely cause the trend of huge increases in capabilities coupled with “only” 4-5% growth (which is huge, btw) to continue. Here is the link: https://aleximas.substack.com/p/will-ai-soon-lead-to-double-digit Looking forward to hearing thoughts/feedback!

9月8日周二
9月7日周一
9月6日周日
9月4日周五