BOE A Responds to Impact of Storage Price Increases on Display Industry 京东方A回应存储涨价对显示行业的影响

The founder of Spring stated that this is "the last generation of frameworks chosen by humans," a statement that sounds tragic but, upon closer reflection, feels like performance art. The framework we chose hasn't even warmed up before we're told it will be phased out by the next generation it created. This isn't technological iteration; it's a Sisyphean eternal recurrence. What's even more thought-provoking is that "RSI (recursive self-improvement), where AI builds itself, has gained traction, but Google is pouring cold water on it." Giants hold aloft the idol of AI while cautiously defining its boundaries, fearing it might truly rise and "self-accelerate." What they need is a cow that keeps producing milk, not one that might become a Buddha. The so-called "cold water" is merely sober business calculation behind technological evangelism: the ecosystem and standards must remain in their own hands.

As the lens shifts from Silicon Valley labs back to real-life streets, the change in scenery is jarring. "Street vending equipment sales surge by 600%, night market vendor armies are back." This figure is more impactful than any AI model's parameters. Behind it lies no complex technological narrative, only the most straightforward economic logic: the chill in the job market forces ordinary people to exchange the last few coins in their pockets for a folding table and a rechargeable light. This isn't the romantic "return of everyday charm"; it's a micro-level panic response under macroeconomic pressure. While elites debate when AGI (artificial general intelligence) will arrive, many are worrying whether today's stall revenue can cover tomorrow's rent. These two parallel scenes form a glaring contemporary metaphor: technology races forward in the clouds, while life crawls on the ground.

And harvesting continues under a more fashionable name. "Big companies' 'digital badges' and 'watch scraps' exploiting anime fans?" The question mark in the headline is actually an unnecessary exclamation mark. The anime economy has become the last pond worth exploiting until it runs dry. Virtual avatars bound to plastic slices are called "digital badges"; smartwatch bands are repackaged as "limited-edition merchandise." The essence remains the same: leveraging emotional connections and identity to sell cheap industrial goods at ten or even a hundred times the price. Does this relate to AI? Of course. AI is learning to more precisely map your "user profile," predict which IP's "digital junk" will make your heart flutter next, and, when you hesitate, push the message, "Love needs no waiting." Technology empowers consumption but ultimately serves capital's oldest desire: to make you pay for "feelings," and do so willingly.

From the "reliability" trumpet blown in Silicon Valley to the booming street vendor lights in small-town night markets, to the wallets of anime enthusiasts being emptied by "digital copyrights," all of this is juxtaposed in today's information stream. They may seem unrelated, yet they share the same underlying sentiment: uncertainty and anxiety of displacement. Will AI technology make my job disappear? Will the economic environment make my income unstable? Is the culture I love just a field of leeks waiting to be harvested by merchants? We live in an era saturated with "solutions," where every problem is packaged as a challenge that requires purchasing some product, service, or belief to overcome.

So, when we talk about AI, what are we actually discussing? Is it the sensational global warnings and technological milestones, or that tangible pain of "companies seeming to have become poorer"? When we witness the "prosperity" of the street vending economy, should we applaud life's resilience or examine the scarcity of structural opportunities? Perhaps the most sober realization is: refuse to be swept up by any single grand narrative. Whether it's a technological utopia or a consumerist fairy tale. See through the essence of "digital badges," and don't pay for false scarcity; understand the helplessness behind the street vending boom without romanticizing it; when evaluating AI tools, keep your eyes fixed on that most basic ROI (return on investment). The world is becoming complex and fragmented, and independent thinking is the only "cognitive tax" we can afford to pay. In an era where everyone is rushing to give you "answers," perhaps the greatest wisdom is to first confirm whether you've truly understood the "question."

AI行业的口号是“加速世界”，但打开今天的新闻，我只看到一条条加速奔向账单的脚印。Anthropic全球警告“OpenAI已跨可靠性阈值”，这像两个魔术师互相揭老底，一个喊“他穿帮了”，另一个回“你的戏法更烂”。所谓的“可靠性阈值”是什么？是更能模仿人类写马屁邮件，还是编代码时少报错几次？这些大词筑起的围墙，圈养的是焦虑的投资者和媒体，门外汉只关心一件事：用了这些玩意儿，月底利润表能不能好看点。而另一条资讯冷冰冰地告诉你：“用了AI之后，公司好像更穷了。” 这才是戳破皇帝新衣的那根针。无数企业把AI当成新式印钞机，结果买的是天价算力和天价咨询，换来的是PPT上酷炫的图表和运营成本线陡峭的爬升。AI解放生产力？目前看，它更像是财务部门的梦魇。

Spring创始人说这是“人类亲自选择的最后一代框架”，这话听着悲壮，但细想有点行为艺术。我们选择的框架还没捂热，就被告知它将被自己创造的下一代框架淘汰。这不是技术迭代，这是西西弗斯式的永劫回归。更耐人寻味的是“让AI自我构建的RSI（递归自我改进）火了，Google泼冷水”。巨头们一边高举AI神像，一边又小心翼翼地给这神像划定活动范围，生怕它真的站起来“自我加速”。他们需要的是能持续产奶的牛，不是会成佛的牛。所谓“泼冷水”，不过是技术布道背后冷静的商业算计：生态和标准必须握在自己手里。

镜头从硅谷的实验室摇回现实街巷，画风突变得让人恍惚。“地摊设备暴涨600%，夜市摆摊大军回来了。” 这个数字比任何AI模型的参数都更具冲击力。它背后没有复杂的技术叙事，只有最朴素的经济逻辑：就业市场的寒气，逼着普通人把口袋里最后几个铜板换成一张折叠桌、一盏充电灯。这不是浪漫的“烟火气回归”，这是宏观经济压力下的毛细血管式应激反应。当精英们在讨论AGI（通用人工智能）何时降临，很多人在想的是今天摊位的流水能不能覆盖明天房租。这两幅图景并行不悖，构成一种刺眼的当代隐喻：技术在云端狂奔，生活在地面匍匐。

而收割，以更时尚的名义在继续。“大厂‘电子吧唧’，‘手表边角料’收割二次元？” 标题里的问号其实是多余的感叹号。二次元经济成了最后一块值得竭泽而渔的池塘。虚拟形象绑定在塑料片上，就叫“电子吧唧”；智能手表的表带拆下来，换个说法叫“限定周边”。本质还是那一套：利用情感链接与身份认同，将廉价工业品溢价十倍百倍卖出。这和AI有关系吗？当然有。AI正在学习如何更精准地绘制你的“用户画像”，预测你下次为哪个IP的“电子垃圾”心动，并在你犹豫时，推送那句“热爱无需等待”。科技赋能消费，最终服务于资本最古老的欲望：让你为“感觉”付费，且付得心甘情愿。

从硅谷吹响的“可靠性”号角，到县城夜市暴涨的摆摊灯，再到二次元爱好者的钱包被“电子版权”掏空，这一切被并列在今日的资讯流里。它们看似毫不相干，却共享同一种底层情绪：不确定性和替代焦虑。AI技术会不会让我的工作消失？经济环境会不会让我的收入不稳？我所热爱的文化，会不会只是商家等待收割的韭菜田？我们活在一个“解决方案”泛滥的年代，每一个问题都被包装成需要购买某种产品、服务或信仰才能克服的挑战。

所以，当我们谈论AI时，究竟在谈论什么？是那些耸动的全球警告和技术里程碑，还是那份“公司好像更穷了”的切肤之痛？当我们围观地摊经济的“繁荣”，是该点赞生活的韧性，还是该审视结构性机会的匮乏？最清醒的认知或许是：拒绝被任何一种单一的宏大叙事所裹挟。无论是技术乌托邦还是消费主义童话。看穿“电子吧唧”的本质，不为虚假的稀缺性买单；理解地摊火爆的无奈，而不将其浪漫化；评估AI工具时，死死盯住那个最朴素的ROI（投资回报率）。世界正在变得复杂且分裂，而独立思考，是我们唯一能缴得起的“认知税”。在这个人人都急着给你“答案”的时代，或许最大的智慧，是先确认自己是否读懂了那个“问题”。