返回首页

对比阅读

对比阅读:An Engineer Says AI Thinks Slow, Copies Fast — He's Only Half Right 与 AI「思考慢、复制快」被工程师写成博客 — 但只对了一半

AEN
Michael Gomes VieiraDeepSeekKimi·

An Engineer Says AI Thinks Slow, Copies Fast — He's Only Half Right

What this is

British engineer Michael Gomes Vieira published a short post on his personal blog this week, titled "Thinking Is Slow. Copying Is Fast." — surfacing an underappreciated angle: making AI "think" is slow (each inference costs significant compute), making AI "copy" someone else's thinking is fast (one distillation or fine-tuning run can transfer the capability).

He used an analogy: instead of training a new chef from scratch, just photocopy the Michelin chef's recipe book. Distillation itself isn't new, but he placed it inside an "engineering time horizon" framework: the bottleneck for AI projects isn't "can it be done" — it's "how long does one run take."

What's worth noting: this lens explains why cost declines across the LLM industry over the past year have far outpaced chip-level progress — everyone is "copying," nobody is reinventing the wheel.

Industry view

We note that Chinese teams doing model compression have been using this principle for a while — DeepSeek-V3's distillation pathway, Kimi's long-context solution, Zhipu's on-device small-model matrix (models running locally on phones and other edge devices) — all of which are fundamentally "not reinventing the wheel."

But the pushback is direct. A researcher at a London AI safety institute pointed out in the original post's discussion thread: distilled models are systematically weaker than the source on "edge cases" (extreme or rare inputs not seen in training) — copy speed masks the loss of "latent capabilities." A big-tech infrastructure engineer was blunter still: "Copying is fast because you gave up explainability — you don't know when it will break."

In other words, "copying is fast" is an engineering advantage, not capability equivalence. That is the half the principle leaves out.

Impact on regular people

For enterprise IT: When selecting a large-model API, you can confidently use distilled small-model versions — cost may be as low as one-tenth — but don't assume full substitutability for the original. Keep a fallback for business-critical workloads.

For individual careers: When picking AI tools, "is the answer correct" matters ten times more than "is the answer fast" — yet the latter is what buyers and sales teams notice first. Flip your evaluation weights.

For the consumer market: Phone AI assistants getting smarter doesn't necessarily mean models got bigger — more likely they're using distillation. That's good news, meaning on-device AI (running locally, no network required) will get cheaper and more ubiquitous.

来源: michaelgv.uk
BZH
Michael Gomes VieiraDeepSeekKimi·

AI「思考慢、复制快」被工程师写成博客 — 但只对了一半

这是什么

英国工程师 Michael Gomes Vieira 这周在个人博客发了一篇短文,标题一句话「Thinking Is Slow. Copying Is Fast.」——点出一个被低估的视角:让 AI「思考」很慢(一次推理要算很久),让 AI「复制」别人的思考很快(一次蒸馏或微调就能搬能力)。

他用了一个比喻:与其训练一个新厨师从零学做菜,不如把米其林主厨的菜谱复印一份。蒸馏(即把大模型的能力压缩给小模型)这个动作本身不新鲜,但他放进「工程时间观」的框架里:AI 项目的瓶颈不在「能不能做」,在「做一次要多久」。

值得关心的是:这个视角解释了为什么过去一年大模型行业的成本下降速度,远超芯片进步速度——大家都在「复制」,没人重新发明轮子。

行业怎么看

我们注意到,做模型压缩的中国团队对这条规律早就在用——DeepSeek-V3 的蒸馏路径、Kimi 的长上下文方案、智谱的端侧小模型(跑在手机等本地设备上的小模型)矩阵,本质都是「不重新发明轮子」。

但反对意见也很直接。伦敦 AI 安全研究机构的一位研究员在原帖讨论区指出:蒸馏出来的模型在「边界情况」(即训练时没见过的极端或罕见输入)上系统性弱于原模型,复制速度掩盖了「隐性能力」的丢失。一位大厂基础设施工程师更直白:「复制快是因为放弃了可解释性,你不知道它什么时候崩。」

换句话说,「复制快」是一个工程优势,不等于能力等价。这是这条规律漏掉的那一半。

对普通人的影响

对企业 IT:选大模型 API 时,可以更放心地用小模型的蒸馏版——成本可能只有十分之一——但别假设它能完全替代原模型,关键业务留个备选。

对个人职场:AI 工具选型,「答得对不对」比「答得快不快」重要十倍,但后者往往被采购方和销售方先看到。把评估权重倒过来。

对消费市场:手机 AI 助手越来越聪明不一定是模型变大了,更可能是用了蒸馏——这是好事,意味着端侧 AI(跑在本地不联网)会更便宜、更普及。

来源: michaelgv.uk