【文章标题】：How accurate have Ed Zitron’s AI skeptic predictions been?
埃德·齐特伦（Ed Zitron）这位知名AI怀疑论者的预测准确性如何？
【文章正文】：
I was curious how well the predictions of the most widely cited AI skeptic I’ve seen (Ed Zitron) have done, so I looked at how his predictions panned out.
我很好奇这位被广泛引用的AI怀疑论者（埃德·齐特伦）的预测准确性，于是仔细核验了他的预言兑现情况。
To disclose my own biases, I’ve never had a particularly strong pro or anti AI progress position.
先表明立场：我对AI发展从未持强烈支持或反对态度。
For example, in 2022, I did a comprehensive look at predictions Futurists made, including well-respected folks like Kurzweil and found them to be generally wrong on both the prediction results as well as the reasoning.
例如2022年我曾系统分析未来学家（包括库兹韦尔等权威人士）的预测，发现他们的结论和推理基本都错了。
On the flip side, in 2015, I wrote about how people were underestimating AI’s ability to displace humans in jobs and have repeatedly been on the record as saying that many people are underestimating AI’s ability to displace humans from jobs.
而2015年我就撰文指出人们低估了AI取代人力的潜力，并多次公开强调这个观点。
My position on AI has been extremely boring and is basically, “if something is currently happening, the people who are saying that it’s impossible that it will ever happen are probably wrong”.
我的AI立场很无趣，简单来说就是：“若某现象正在发生，那些断言其绝不可能发生的人大概率错了”。
One comment I’ve seen from a lot of AI skeptics when someone responds to an AI skeptic is that all of the people who are saying that AI isn’t fake are self-interested liars.
我注意到当有人反驳AI怀疑论时，怀疑论者常会指控所有支持AI真实性的人都是利益驱动的骗子。
Personally (to my obvious detriment), I have no particular financial interest in AI companies.
就我个人而言（显然对我不利），我在AI公司并无特殊经济利益。
I own whatever the standard share of them is via boring index funds.
仅通过普通指数基金持有标配份额。
I have some seed stage investments, but just due to the timing and what’s gotten big, that part of my portfolio is underweight on AI.
虽有早期投资，但因时机和行业爆发点关系，投资组合中AI占比偏低。
I don’t work at an AI lab or a company that supplies AI labs.
我既不在AI实验室工作，也不供职于AI实验室供应商。
I’ve mentioned being hilariously bad at interviews before, and I did interview at an AI lab a number of years ago and failed the phone screen in a performance that was the kind of performance that must’ve inspired Jeff Atwood’s famous Why Can’t Programmers… Program?
我曾自嘲面试表现糟糕——几年前某AI实验室电话面试中，我的表现简直能成为Jeff Atwood那篇《为什么程序员不会编程》的灵感来源。
where he concludes that there must be a lot of fake programmers out there because nobody could fail a coding interview that badly if they knew how to program.
该文结论是：若真懂编程，没人会搞砸编码面试到那种程度，所以市面上肯定充斥冒牌程序员。
I don’t benefit in any particular way if AI does well, except insofar as anyone who holds broad index funds benefits, but I do care about accuracy.
AI成功对我无特殊好处（除了指数基金持有者的普遍收益），但我重视事实准确性。
Because there are quite a few prediction results, let’s look at one in detail before the complete list to get an idea of the kind of reasoning Zitron uses.
因预测条目较多，我们先详析一例来理解齐特伦的论证逻辑。
We’ll arbitrarily look at this November 2024 talk where Zitron says, among other things, the major tech companies (like Meta and Google) are dying and they’re thrashing around on AI because they don’t know how to grow.
随机选取他2024年11月的演讲，其中声称Meta、Google等科技巨头正在衰亡，因不知如何增长才在AI领域胡乱挣扎。
Zitron specifically named Meta as a company that’s dying (“it’s a dying product, and it’s kind of a dying company”).
齐特伦特别指出Meta濒临死亡（“这是个垂死的产品，也是家垂死的公司”）。
Meta’s revenue and profit (GAAP operating income) have been
但Meta的营收和利润（GAAP运营收入）如下：
| 时期 | 营收 | 利润 |
|---|---|---|
| 金额 | 同比 | 金额 |
| 2023 | 1350亿美元 | +16% |
| 2024 | 1650亿美元 | +22% |
| 2025 | 2010亿美元 | +22% |
| 2026上半年 | 1170亿美元 | +30% |
When he talked about companies not knowing how to grow (“none of these companies anymore really know how to grow … in the desperation to try to reignite growth in a dying ecosystem the tech industry is going to shove this [AI] shit into everything”), he named Google and then Microsoft.
他谈及”这些公司不知如何增长…科技行业在垂死生态中绝望地试图重燃增长，会把AI这坨屎塞进所有产品”时，点名了Google和微软。
Alphabet (Google’s parent company) has had the following revenue and profit numbers:
Alphabet（Google母公司）财务数据如下：
| 时期 | 营收 | 利润 |
|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3070亿美元 | +9% |
| 2024 | 3500亿美元 | +14% |
| 2025 | 4030亿美元 | +15% |
| 2026上半年 | 2300亿美元 | +23% |
And Microsoft’s numbers have been (note that, for consistency, all numbers are calendar year numbers and not fiscal year numbers):
微软数据如下（注：为统一口径均采用自然年数据）：
| 时期 | 营收 | 利润 |
|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2280亿美元 | +12% |
| 2024 | 2620亿美元 | +15% |
| 2025 | 3050亿美元 | +17% |
| 2026上半年 | 1730亿美元 | +18% |
Although this wouldn’t be in the spirit of Zitron’s statement, one could argue that Meta is actually dying, it just hasn’t died yet.
虽不符合齐特伦原意，但或可辩称Meta”正在死亡但尚未断气”。
However, the reasoning in Zitron’s argument is incorrect here—the Meta, Google, and Microsoft ecosystems are not dying.
但其论证逻辑根本错误——Meta、Google和微软的生态并未衰亡。
Given how fast these companies are growing (in terms of revenue and profit), it doesn’t seem that AI is, as Zitron implied, some kind of desperation move they’re reaching for because “they don’t know how to grow” and are all out of ideas.
鉴于它们的营收利润增速，AI显然不像齐特伦暗示的那样是”无计可施的增长绝望之举”。
I don’t think it’s worth spending this much text on each prediction, but the pattern Zitron used here is illustrative.
虽不值得逐条分析，但此例足以体现其论证模式。
To make the case that these things are dying, he pulls on minor issues that are not positioned to cause the very large changes he suggests are about to occur.
为证明”衰亡论”，他总揪住些无关宏旨的细节。
For Meta, he cited some kind of alleged MAU drop for Facebook.
比如引用某第三方机构Similarweb的Facebook月活数据下降传闻，
Rather than use Meta’s own MAU figures or any kind of revenue or profit numbers, he seems to have used numbers from Similarweb.
却不用Meta官方月活数据或财务指标。
My experience with 3rd party tracking numbers like this is that they’re quite inaccurate and generally useless for anything other…
据我经验，此类第三方追踪数据极不准确，基本没有参考价值…
🔗 知识库双向关联
- [[[TV][多模型] 一条假消息全硅谷都信，半导体又崩了_20260819_1128|一条假消息全硅谷都信，半导体又崩了]]
- 李一恩8.26点评：你们都被套在什么里了？
- The twilight of the chatbots_简报