为什么公司选择使用人工智能来降低成本，而不是开展雄心勃勃的项目
看到大多数公司几乎将人工智能视为削减成本的工具，主要通过替代员工，而不是将其视为扩大规模、承担更大风险和追求更具雄心、改变世界的项目的机会，这令人感到沮丧。
历史上，每一次重大的技术飞跃都带来了更多的机会，而不是更少：更多的实验、更多的产品、更多的服务以及更多的就业。当电力、蒸汽机或互联网被广泛采用时，最具雄心的公司并没有缩小他们的目标，而是积极扩张、冒险并创造全新的市场。那么，为什么人工智能却被以不同的方式对待呢？
一个原因似乎是风险厌恶。许多公司，尤其是大型和成熟的企业，专注于短期收益、股东期望和运营效率。他们将人工智能视为一种“优化”手段——裁减员工、自动化工作流程和提高利润率，而不是将其作为新业务线或变革性创新的基础。
但这只是对深厚技术的肤浅利用。
想象一下，一家公司使用人工智能不是为了缩减团队，而是为了成倍增加他们的产出。他们可以负担得起雇佣更多的人，让更多的创意人才投入工作，同时人工智能作为加速器——自动化重复性任务、生成原型、协调代理和模拟大规模系统。这为那些以前看似过于复杂或昂贵的项目打开了大门：个性化教育平台、开放式科学研究、人工智能驱动的药物发现、可持续农业系统或高效的数字公共服务。
是的，这类项目确实存在风险。但它们也提供了不成比例的回报，无论是财务上还是社会上。那些押注于大胆、变革性人工智能应用的公司——而不仅仅是优化现有流程——将塑造未来，正如谷歌在搜索领域或SpaceX在航空航天领域所做的那样。
具有讽刺意味的是，人工智能还可以降低失败的成本。它允许更快的原型制作、更迅速的洞察和更紧密的反馈循环。这使得大胆实验比以往任何时候都更可行。
真正的障碍不是技术，而是缺乏愿景和勇气。对人工智能采取保守态度可能会提高短期利润，但却限制了长期的增长和影响。那些采用更雄心勃勃的思维方式，并将人工智能视为合作伙伴而非替代品的公司，有机会重新定义可能性。
因此，问题不应是“我们可以用人工智能替代多少人？”而应是“有哪些我们从未敢尝试的事情，现在人工智能使之成为可能？”
查看原文
It’s frustrating to see how most companies view AI almost exclusively as a tool to cut costs, mainly by replacing workers, rather than as an opportunity to scale up, take bigger risks, and pursue more ambitious, world-changing projects.<p>Historically, every major technological leap has enabled more, not less: more experimentation, more products, more services, and more jobs. When electricity, the steam engine, or the internet were adopted, the boldest companies didn’t shrink their ambitions. They expanded aggressively, took risks, and created entirely new markets. So why is AI being treated differently?<p>One reason seems to be risk aversion. Many companies, especially large and established ones, are focused on short-term gains, shareholder expectations, and operational efficiency. They see AI as a way to "optimize" — to cut staff, automate workflows, and increase margins — instead of using it as a foundation for new lines of business or transformative innovation.<p>But this is a shallow use of a deep technology.<p>Imagine instead a company using AI not to downsize teams, but to multiply their output. They could afford to hire more people, putting more creative minds to work, while AI acts as an accelerator — automating repetitive tasks, generating prototypes, coordinating agents, and simulating large-scale systems. This opens the door to projects that previously seemed too complex or costly: personalized education platforms, open-ended scientific research, AI-driven drug discovery, sustainable agriculture systems, or highly efficient digital public services.<p>Yes, these kinds of projects are risky. But they also offer disproportionate rewards, both financially and socially. Companies that bet on bold, transformative uses of AI — instead of simply optimizing existing processes — are the ones that will shape the future, just as Google did with search or SpaceX with aerospace.<p>Ironically, AI can also reduce the cost of failure. It allows for faster prototyping, quicker insights, and tighter feedback loops. This makes bold experimentation more feasible than ever.<p>The real obstacle is not the technology, but a lack of vision and courage. Playing it safe with AI might improve short-term profits, but it limits long-term growth and impact. Companies that adopt a more ambitious mindset, and treat AI as a collaborator rather than a replacement, have the chance to redefine what is possible.<p>So the question shouldn’t be, "How many people can we replace with AI?"
It should be, "What are the things we’ve never dared to try that AI now makes achievable?"