返回 X 名人动态

Arthur Mensch:欧洲必须建设自己的前沿 AI

中文全文 · AI 翻译

建设,还是投降

一种观点正在欧洲获得认同:我们应该把前沿 AI 模型留给美国人和中国人去做。倡导这种观点的是一些严肃认真的人士,他们的推理自有逻辑。每一代前沿模型都要耗资数亿欧元,很快就会达到数十亿。他们认为,更好的做法是沿用互联网时代的路径——价值在应用层创造——把精力放在欧洲擅长的领域:工业数据、中小企业和专业领域知识。至于其他方面,他们说,使用别人发布的开放模型应该就够了。

这是一个根本性的错误。它最终会让欧洲失去所剩无几的世界地位,并将欧洲锁定在一种文明史上前所未有的经济依赖状态中。

云服务和软件的价值已流向别处

欧洲沿用了互联网时代的路径。我们开发应用,把平台留给了别人。二十年后,价值流向了别处。欧洲企业每年向美国云服务和软件供应商支付超过 2600 亿欧元。欧洲已成为消费他人所建产品的大陆。

谁控制模型,谁就制定条件

AI 不是互联网。互联网运行在不属于任何人的开放协议之上。相比之下,封闭的 AI 模型有其所有者。应用或智能体能够做什么,由模型决定;而谁控制模型,谁就制定条件:调整价格、限制用途、撤下某个版本。上游作出的每个决定都会强加给整条链条。在其上构建产品的人只能承担后果,却没有发言权。

这种风险绝非纯粹的理论假设。今年 6 月,一家美国实验室暂停了对其最先进模型的访问。后来访问恢复了。但这个决定既不是在欧洲作出的,也不是出于欧洲的原因。没有人征求我们的意见。

关乎安全与进步的重大问题

有人会回应说,开放模型能解决这个问题。这在一定程度上是对的。开放模型可以下载、自行部署和审计。但如果不积极参与这个生态,你就无法决定发布什么、何时发布,以及下一版本将采用什么许可证。依赖他人,即便依赖的是他们的开放性,仍然是依赖。

构建前沿 AI 系统正成为关乎安全的重大问题。模型如今正在网络防御和关键基础设施保护中承担核心角色。一个国家必须能够审计自己使用的系统,按自身需要进行调整,并确信明天仍然能使用它们。如果模型是在别处设计和控制的,这三个条件就都无法得到长期保证。

这个问题对欧洲的基础研究也日益突出。前沿模型如今已成为各个研究领域科学进步不可或缺的工具。它们越来越多地被某些公司独占使用,而这些公司完全有动力守住模型带来的研究优势,不与外界共享访问权限。用 AI 开展 AI 研究,会同时加快我们和竞争对手的进步,这意味着可能出现非常显著的门槛效应。

将研究与部署对立起来的陷阱

因此,将前沿 AI 研究与工业 AI 部署对立起来,是一个陷阱。当然,欧洲的一部分增长将来自为工业量身定制的 AI。但这要求我们建设一个欧洲 AI 产业,而不是接受一个我们只能充当租户的 AI 产业。我们在客户身上看到了这一点:对于要求最苛刻的用途,掌握模型不是奢侈品,而是先决条件。仅仅引进一个模型,并不能让你学会如何有效地修改和使用它。

构建前沿 AI 需要什么

欧洲有能力构建这些系统。Black Forest Labs 和 ElevenLabs 这两家欧洲公司,打造出了各自类别中最好的模型。在 Mistral,我们的研究人员和工程师分布在巴黎、伦敦、慕尼黑、巴塞罗那和华沙,也分布在我们向其出口产品的美国。我们用更少的资源训练通用推理模型,如今它们已跻身最佳开放模型之列;我们也在多个用途类别中训练出了世界领先的专用模型。

此外,我们非常清楚如何提升性能。基于我们对自身方法和运营积累的信心,未来一年我们准备将算力扩大到目前的六倍。有了更多资本,我们就能更快前进,而我们也会筹集这些资本。

摆脱悲观主义

要缩小差距,首先必须摆脱悲观主义。我们不断被告知,比赛已经结束,欧洲已经输了。这种叙事符合领先者的利益。它不必是真的也能发挥作用:只要我们相信就够了。在 Mistral,三年来人们一直用这套说法质疑我们,而三年来我们也一直在证明它是错的。

如果欧洲认命,AI 就会继续在别处被构建,而我们只能支付数万亿欧元的费用,换取次等出口版本的使用权。这将抹去增长或获得力量的任何前景,甚至可能让我们无法继续作为一个社会团结在一起。

建设,还是投降:至少现在,选择权仍在我们手中。

对照原文

Build or surrender An idea has gained ground in Europe: we should leave frontier AI models to the Americans and the Chinese. It is advocated by serious people, whose reasoning has its logic. A frontier model costs hundreds of millions of euros per generation, and soon billions. Better, they argue, to follow the internet playbook, where value was created at the application layer, and to focus our efforts on what Europe does well: its industrial data, its small and medium-sized businesses, its domain expertise. For everything else, they say, open models released by others should  be enough. This is a fundamental mistake. It will end up costing Europe what remains of its place in the world and lock it into a regime of economic dependence unprecedented in the history of civilizations. The Cloud and software value has gone elsewhere Europe followed the internet playbook. We developed the applications and left the platforms to others. Twenty years later, the value has gone elsewhere. European companies pay more than €260 billion every year to American cloud and software providers. Europe has become the continent that consumes what others build. Whoever controls the model sets the terms AI is not the internet. The internet ran on open protocols that nobody owned. Closed AI models, by contrast, have an owner. What an application or an agent can do is decided by the model, and whoever controls the model sets the terms: they change the price, restrict uses, withdraw a version. Every decision made upstream is imposed on the entire chain. Those who build on top bear the consequences, with no say in the matter. The risk is anything but theoretical. Last June, an American lab suspended access to its most advanced models. Access was restored. But the decision was not made in Europe, nor for European reasons. Nobody asked for our opinion. A vital matter of security and progress Some will reply that open models solve the problem. That is partly true. An open model can be downloaded, self-hosted, and audited. But without actively contributing to the ecosystem, you cannot choose what gets released, nor when, nor under what license the next version will ship. Dependence on others, even on their openness, is still dependence. Building frontier AI systems is becoming a vital matter of security. Models are now taking on a central role in cyber defense and in protecting critical infrastructure. A state must be able to audit the systems it uses, adapt them to its needs, and be certain it will still have access to them tomorrow. With a model designed and controlled elsewhere, none of these three conditions is guaranteed over time. The question is also becoming salient for fundamental research in Europe. Frontier models are now indispensable to scientific progress in every field of research. They are increasingly used exclusively by certain companies, which have every interest in guarding the research advantages they confer without sharing access. Using AI for AI research accelerates progress for us and for our competitors alike, which points to very significant threshold effects. The trap of pitting research against deployment Pitting frontier AI research against industrial AI deployment is therefore a trap. Of course, part of Europe's growth will come from AI tailored to industry. But that requires building a European AI industry, not accepting an AI industry in which we would be mere tenants. We see it with our customers: For the most demanding uses, mastering the model is not a luxury; it is a prerequisite. You do not learn to modify and use a model effectively simply by importing it. What it takes to build frontier AI Europe has the means to build these systems. Black Forest Labs and ElevenLabs, two European companies, produce the best models in their category. At Mistral, our researchers and engineers are based in Paris, London, Munich, Barcelona and Warsaw, as well as in the United States, where we export our products. With fewer resources, we train general-purpose reasoning models that now rank among the best open models, along with the world's best specialized models in several use categories. Furthermore, we know exactly how to improve our performance. We are about to increase our compute capacity sixfold over the coming year, building on the confidence we have earned in our methods and operations. We can move faster with more capital, and we will raise it. Breaking with pessimism Closing the gap demands first and foremost a break with pessimism. We keep being told the game is over and that Europe has lost. That story suits those who are ahead. It does not need to be true to be effective: all it takes is for us to believe it. At Mistral, this story has been held up against us for three years, and for three years we have been proving it wrong. If Europe resigns itself, AI will go on being built elsewhere, and we will only have access to second-rate export versions, in exchange for fees running into the trillions of euros. That will wipe out any prospect of growth or power. It could even prevent us from continuing to hold together as a society. Build or surrender: for now, the choice is still ours.

老杨AI实操

微信扫一扫,添加好友

老杨AI实操的微信好友二维码

手机可长按保存图片,再到微信中识别二维码

保存二维码