译：解读扎克伯格的“超级智能”备忘录
原文： https://om.co/2025/07/30/decoding-zucks-superintelligence-memo/
作者： Om Malik
译者： Gemini 2.5 Pro
2025年7月30日
Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta (aka the company formerly known as Facebook), has published a memorandum about “superintelligence” and what it will mean not only for his company but for the world and society at large. It has had a wide variety of reactions ranging from delight to derision. As is normally the case, every single time I come across a memo such as one published by any chief executive (or a founder), I ask myself a few simple questions:
Meta（也就是以前的 Facebook）的 CEO 马克·扎克伯格，发表了一份关于“superintelligence”（超级智能）的备忘录，阐述了它不仅对他的公司，也对整个世界和社会意味着什么。这份备忘录引发了各种各样的反应，从欣喜到嘲讽，不一而足。通常，每当我读到任何 CEO（或创始人）发布的这类备忘录时，我都会问自己几个简单的问题：
- Why did the company publish this memo?
- Who is the target audience for this memo?
- Is there any prior historical pattern the company is following?
- Will it have an intended impact?
- And what do I think?
- 公司为什么要发布这份备忘录？
- 这份备忘录的目标读者是谁？
- 公司是否在遵循某种以往的历史模式？
- 它会产生预期的影响吗？
- 以及，我自己的看法是什么？
I am in the unique position to dig into Zuck’s words — I was one of the earliest reporters to write about a nascent and burgeoning Facebook (when it was called TheFacebook) and was a campus-only phenomenon. I have followed Facebook (now Meta) long enough to distinguish between what the company says and what it really means.
我有一个独特的视角来解读扎克伯格的言辞——当 Facebook 还叫 TheFacebook，还只是一个校园现象时，我就是最早报道这个新生事物的记者之一。我关注 Facebook（现在的 Meta）已经很久了，足以分辨出这家公司所说的，和它真正想表达的。
And over almost two decades of following the company, I have come to a conclusion that Zuck is one of the best “chief executives” to come out of Silicon Valley. And this is coming from someone who has no qualms about viewing him with moral disdain. In the past, I have referred to the company as “amoral” for a reason. Not only is Zuckerberg paranoid and Machiavellian, he is also willing to go to any extreme to survive and thrive.
在近二十年对这家公司的跟踪中，我得出一个结论：扎克伯格是硅谷最顶尖的“CEO”之一。说这话的我，是一个在道德上对他毫不掩饰地鄙夷的人。过去，我曾称这家公司为“非道德”（amoral），这是有原因的。扎克伯格不仅偏执多疑，信奉马基雅维利主义，而且为了生存和发展，他愿意不择手段。
The newest memo is very much on point for Zuck and in keeping with every single time his company has faced an existential crisis.
这份最新的备忘录非常符合扎克伯格的风格，也与他公司每次面临生存危机时的做法如出一辙。
扎克伯格热衷于宣言
- 2012 IPO Letter: “Facebook was not originally created to be a company. It was built to accomplish a social mission” Zuck compared Facebook to “the printing press and television.”
- 2012年 IPO 信函：“Facebook 的初衷不是成为一家公司。它是为了完成一项社会使命而生的”。扎克伯格将 Facebook 比作“印刷机和电视”。
- 2017 “Building Global Community”: In a 5,000-word letter, he talked about “building the world we all want” and outlined Facebook’s mission to “develop the social infrastructure to give people the power to build a global community.” This was on the heels of a historic election and questions about how social platforms were undermining society.
- 2017年 “建立全球社区”：在一封5000字的长信中，他谈到“建立我们都想要的世界”，并概述了 Facebook 的使命是“发展社会基础设施，赋予人们建立全球社区的能力”。这封信是在一次历史性的选举之后发布的，当时社交平台如何侵蚀社会的问题正备受质疑。
- 2019 “Privacy-Focused” Vision: 3,200-word memo outlining a vision for messaging and privacy, where Mark wanted Facebook to be more integrated into our lives.
- 2019年 “以隐私为中心”的愿景：一份3200字的备忘录，概述了关于消息和隐私的愿景，马克希望 Facebook 更深入地融入我们的生活。
- 2021 Metaverse Memo: Company rebranded to Meta, massive investment promises
- 2021年 Metaverse 备忘录：公司更名为 Meta，并承诺投入巨额资金。
- 2025 “Personal Superintelligence” Memo: At 625 words, much more concise than previous manifestos.
- 2025年 “个人超级智能”备忘录：仅625字，比以往的宣言简洁得多。
***
The formula in all these memos is exactly the same:
所有这些备忘录的套路都完全一样：
- Existential framing around “Are we building the world we want?” or “New era for humanity.”
- Historical comparisons: Printing press, Industrial Revolution.
- Mission over money.
- Massive resource commitments. Billions in investments.
- Vague timelines: “The coming years” or “this decade,” for example.
- 存在主义式的框架，围绕“我们是否在建设我们想要的世界？”或“人类的新纪元”。
- 与历史进行类比：印刷机、工业革命。
- 使命高于金钱。
- 巨大的资源承诺，数十亿的投资。
- 模糊的时间表：例如“未来几年”或“未来十年”。
There is even a pattern to the context. Each memo coincides with major competitive threats:
甚至连发布的背景都有一种模式。每一份备忘录都恰逢重大的竞争威胁：
- 2012: Mobile transition crisis.
- 2017: Post-election scrutiny, questions about platform responsibility.
- 2019: Privacy backlash, regulatory pressure
- 2021: Platform dominance concerns, iOS changes
- 2025: AI disruption, Chinese competition
- 2012年：移动转型危机。
- 2017年：选举后的审查，平台责任问题。
- 2019年：隐私强烈反对，监管压力。
- 2021年：平台主导地位的担忧，iOS 的变化。
- 2025年：AI 的颠覆，来自中国的竞争。
Compared to all founders and CEOs, Zuck does seem to have a great understanding of when he needs to bet the farm on an idea and a behavioral shift. Each time he does that, it is because he sees very clearly Facebook is at the end of the product life and the only real value in the company is the attention of his audience. If that attention declines, it takes away the ability to really extend the company’s life into the next cycle.
与所有创始人和 CEO 相比，扎克伯格似乎对何时需要押上全部赌注去抓住一个新想法和行为转变，有着深刻的理解。他每次这么做，都是因为他清楚地看到，Facebook 正处于产品生命周期的末端，公司唯一真正的价值就是用户的注意力。如果这种注意力下降，公司就失去了将生命延续到下一个周期的能力。
Let’s look back at the company’s history.
让我们回顾一下公司的历史。
In 2012, when Zuck saw “the stunning, hard shift of users from desktop to mobile,” Facebook went into “lockdown” mode to shift from desktop to mobile. Zuck was willing to sacrifice short-term profits and rebuild the entire platform.
2012年，当扎克伯格看到“用户从桌面端到移动端惊人而决绝的转变”时，Facebook 进入了“封锁”模式，全力转向移动。扎克伯格愿意牺牲短期利润来重建整个平台。
A few years later, when Instagram and WhatsApp threatened to undermine its social platforms with visual social networks and comms-first network effects, it went ahead and bought those two companies.
几年后，当 Instagram 和 WhatsApp 以视觉社交网络和通信优先的网络效应威胁到其社交平台时，它果断收购了这两家公司。
In 2021, when the Facebook brand was at its nadir, he came up with the Metaverse strategy and renamed the company Meta. An expensive way to reinvent a tarnished brand, but nonetheless, it allowed him to talk about the future instead of being constantly on the defensive. Giving Zuck the benefit of the doubt, I am okay with companies with insane profits experimenting with insane ideas. I mean, unless we had that approach, we wouldn’t have Waymo.
2021年，当 Facebook 的品牌声誉跌至谷底时，他提出了 Metaverse 战略，并将公司更名为 Meta。这是一个重塑受损品牌的昂贵方式，但它确实让他能够谈论未来，而不是总是处于守势。就算我们姑且相信扎克伯格，对于那些利润高得离谱的公司去尝试一些疯狂的想法，我也可以接受。我的意思是，如果没有这种做法，我们就不会有 Waymo。
And now Super Intelligence. I mean, what’s $65 billion if you can reinvent society itself?
现在是超级智能。我的意思是，如果你能重塑整个社会，650亿美元又算得了什么？
Most CEOs defend their existing moats. Zuckerberg systematically abandons them. He understands that Facebook’s real asset isn’t the blue app. Instead, it is the graph of human attention and relationships. Each pivot is about preserving that graph while migrating it to new interfaces.
大多数 CEO 会捍卫自己现有的护城河。而扎克伯格则系统性地抛弃它们。他明白 Facebook 真正的资产不是那个蓝色的 App，而是人类注意力和关系的总和图谱。每一次战略转型都是为了在将这个图谱迁移到新界面的同时，保护好它。
这才是扎克伯格的真正意思…
When viewed through that framework, here is how I have attempted to decode Zuckerberg’s 625-word corporate speak.
通过这个框架来看，我是这样尝试解读扎克伯格那625字的商业辞令的。
There is about 25 percent genuine strategic content, the rest is aspirational marketing and corporate positioning. For instance, infrastructure commitments and device strategy show the seriousness of the effort. However, claims about superintelligence being “in sight” are inflated for competitive reasons.
其中大约有25%是真正的战略内容，其余的都是愿景式营销和公司定位。例如，对基础设施和设备战略的承诺显示了他们是认真的。然而，声称超级智能“已近在眼前”则是出于竞争目的的夸大其词。
More than anything, this is a positioning document in the AI arms race. By using “super intelligence” as a marketing phrase, Zuck is making his efforts feel superior to the mere “Artificial Intelligence” of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. It is him saying we will empower individuals, a remarkably positive message compared to the “AI will replace jobs” narrative that competitors like OpenAI have been painted with.
最重要的是，这是一份在 AI 军备竞赛中的定位文件。通过使用“super intelligence”（超级智能）这个营销术语，扎克伯格让自己的努力听起来比 OpenAI、Anthropic 和 Google 的“Artificial Intelligence”（人工智能）更高级。他想说的是，我们将赋能个人——与 OpenAI 等竞争对手被贴上的“AI 将取代工作”的负面论调相比，这是一个非常积极的信息。
Zuck has competitive anxiety. By repeatedly talking about being “distinct from others in the industry” he is tipping his hand. He is worried that Meta is being seen as a follower rather than leader. Young people are flocking to ChatGPT. Programmers are flocking to Claude Code.
扎克伯格有竞争焦虑。他反复强调自己“与业内其他人不同”，这暴露了他的底牌。他担心 Meta 被视为追随者而非领导者。年轻人正涌向 ChatGPT，程序员正涌向 Claude Code。
What does Meta AI do? Bupkiss. And Zuck knows that very well. You don’t do a company makeover if things are working well.
Meta AI 能做什么？什么也做不了。扎克伯格对此心知肚明。如果一切顺利，你根本不需要对公司进行彻底改造。
He is also trying to frame his competitors as un-American. He paints centralized AI as creating a “dole” system. Is he trying to appeal to American individualist values while making competitors sound authoritarian and dystopian? By talking about the transition from farmers to modern times, he says he knows how to free humanity to be bigger than itself.
他还在试图将竞争对手描绘成“非美国”的。他把中心化的 AI 描绘成一种创造“救济金”的系统。他是不是想通过迎合美国的个人主义价值观，同时让竞争对手听起来像专制和反乌托邦的？通过谈论从农民到现代的转变，他想表达的是，他知道如何解放人性，让其变得更伟大。
It would be easier to believe him if his three vectors of influence — Instagram, WhatsApp, and increasingly aging Facebook — were anything more than vehicles for an advertising-based attention economy.
如果他的三大影响力载体——Instagram、WhatsApp 和日益老化的 Facebook——不仅仅是基于广告的注意力经济的工具，那么相信他会更容易一些。
后来者的忧郁
With a broader AI context, despite some notable successes, Meta’s efforts to spearhead open-source AI have been unsuccessful in positioning it ahead of rivals such as OpenAI. I would argue that they have been so unsuccessful that they have inspired others, particularly from China, to aggressively pursue the same open-source path and take the mantle of leadership away from Meta. And they are doing it cheaper, faster, and some experts think, better.
在更广阔的 AI 背景下，尽管取得了一些显著的成功，但 Meta 引领开源 AI 的努力并未能使其在与 OpenAI 等对手的竞争中占据领先地位。我认为，这些努力是如此不成功，以至于激励了其他国家，特别是来自中国的公司，积极走上同样的开源道路，并从 Meta 手中夺走领导地位。而且他们做得更便宜、更快，一些专家甚至认为，做得更好。
A less cynical way of looking at Meta’s open source efforts is that LLaMA succeeded too well at being open source. It created a vibrant ecosystem but struggled to capture value from it. The open source AI model presents inherent business model challenges for the company.
用一种不那么愤世嫉俗的眼光来看待 Meta 的开源努力，那就是 LLaMA 作为开源项目太成功了。它创造了一个充满活力的生态系统，却难以从中获取价值。开源 AI 模型给公司带来了固有的商业模式挑战。
Meanwhile, OpenAI and others were building billion-dollar businesses with closed models. Meta has to somehow justify that $65 billion spending on “AI,” especially to the Wall Street community. They’re playing catch-up after ChatGPT. Anyone who has used either ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini knows that Meta AI is lacking.
与此同时，OpenAI 和其他公司正在用闭源模型建立价值数十亿美元的业务。Meta 必须以某种方式向华尔街证明，那 650 亿美元花在“AI”上是值得的。他们在 ChatGPT 之后一直处于追赶状态。任何用过 ChatGPT、Claude 或 Gemini 的人都知道，Meta AI 差得远。
Meta’s AI efforts, despite some notable wins with LLaMA, are not enough. And Zuck knows it. If this was not the case, he wouldn’t be dangling hundreds of millions in front of AI researchers. His decision to buy Scale AI was as much for Meta as it was for delaying the efforts of its AI rivals.
Meta 在 AI 上的努力，尽管 LLaMA 取得了一些显著的胜利，但还远远不够。扎克伯格也知道这一点。如果不是这样，他就不会在 AI 研究人员面前晃悠着数亿美元的支票。他决定收购 Scale AI，既是为了 Meta 自身，也是为了拖延 AI 对手们的进程。
Meta 是否具备进入 AI 时代的能力？
With that said, in the new post-ChatGPT era, attention and relationships are redefined. On the positive side, since Meta has the richest dataset of human preferences, relationships, and behavioral patterns, it can help craft a “personal intelligence” system with an individual’s social context. AI assistants require unprecedented personal access, and Meta has that. There is a reason why Zuck was going on and on about “personal superintelligence.”
话虽如此，在后 ChatGPT 时代，注意力和关系被重新定义了。从积极的一面看，由于 Meta 拥有关于人类偏好、关系和行为模式最丰富的数据集，它可以帮助打造一个融入个人社交背景的“个人智能”系统。AI 助手需要前所未有的个人数据访问权限，而 Meta 拥有这些。这就是为什么扎克伯格喋喋不休地谈论“个人超级智能”的原因。
The memo’s emphasis on “personal empowerment” suggests Zuckerberg understands this distinction. However, in this new AI-first internet era, AI is your attention manager. So how does Meta translate its past business model of “capture and monetize attention” to “optimize and enhance attention?” The attention economy business model of “endless scroll for ad revenue” fundamentally breaks in the new AI reality.
备忘录对“个人赋能”的强调表明，扎克伯格理解这种区别。然而，在这个新的 AI 优先的互联网时代，AI 是你的注意力管理者。那么，Meta 如何将其过去“捕获并变现注意力”的商业模式，转变为“优化并提升注意力”呢？那种“通过无限滚动换取广告收入”的注意力经济模式，在新的 AI 现实中，从根本上被打破了。
What’s interesting is what is omitted in the memo. All the talk about personal AI assistants is in sharp contrast to the lack of any conversation about socially-aware AI. I mean, if anything, that has been Meta’s historical competitive advantage.
有趣的是备忘录中省略了什么。所有关于个人 AI 助手的讨论，与对社交感知 AI 的只字不提形成了鲜明对比。我的意思是，如果说有什么是 Meta 的历史竞争优势，那恰恰就是这个。
I am not sure why the relationship aspect is intentionally understated. Does this reflect concerns about privacy backlash or regulatory scrutiny? Or does it portend a society that is going to be increasingly singular, interacting with machines rather than humans?
我不确定为什么关系这个方面被有意地淡化了。这是否反映了对隐私反弹或监管审查的担忧？或者，这是否预示着一个日益孤立的社会，人们更多地与机器而不是与人互动？
我的判决
So what do I think about this memo, and all the efforts of Meta? I remain skeptical of his ability to invent a new future for his company. In the past, he has been able to buy, snoop, or steal other people’s ideas. It has been hard for him and his company to actually develop a new market opportunity.
那么，我对这份备忘录以及 Meta 的所有努力有何看法？我仍然对他为公司开创一个新未来的能力持怀疑态度。在过去，他能够购买、窥探或窃取别人的想法。但对他和他的公司来说，真正开发一个新的市场机会一直很难。
Zuckerberg also tends to overpromise on timelines and underestimate execution challenges. The metaverse is strugglingafter over $50 billion in investments. This “superintelligence” memo has the same breathless, reality-distorting tone. It would be interesting to see how Meta can avoid the metaverse’s fate of burning massive resources while competitors (Chinese models) deliver equivalent value far more efficiently.
扎克伯格也倾向于在时间表上过度承诺，并低估执行的挑战。在投入超过500亿美元后，Metaverse 仍在挣扎。这份“超级智能”备忘录带有同样令人窒息、扭曲现实的腔调。看看 Meta 如何避免重蹈 Metaverse 的覆辙——在竞争对手（中国模型）以远高于其的效率交付同等价值的同时，自己却在燃烧巨额资源——将会很有趣。
The memo reads like someone trying to convince shareholders that this time the moonshot will work. However, I have learned not to underestimate Zuckerberg and his CEO skills.
这份备忘录读起来，就像有人在拼命说服股东，这次的“登月计划”一定能成功。但是，我早已学会，永远不要低估扎克伯格和他的 CEO 技能。
July 30, 2025. San Francisco.