翻译[保罗·格雷厄姆]的文章： writes and write-nots
原文链接：https://www.paulgraham.com/writes.html
I’m usually reluctant to make predictions about technology, but I feel fairly confident about this one: in a couple decades there won’t be many people who can write.
我通常不愿意对技术做出预测，但对这一点我相当有信心：几十年后，会写作的人不会很多。
One of the strangest things you learn if you’re a writer is how many people have trouble writing. Doctors know how many people have a mole they’re worried about; people who are good at setting up computers know how many people aren’t; writers know how many people need help writing.
如果你是一名作家，你会发现最奇怪的事情之一就是有多少人在写作方面有困难。医生知道有多少人有他们担心的痣；擅长设置电脑的人知道有多少人不擅长设置电脑；作家知道有多少人在写作方面需要帮助。
The reason so many people have trouble writing is that it’s fundamentally difficult. To write well you have to think clearly, and thinking clearly is hard.
许多人写作困难的原因在于写作从根本上来说很难。要想写好文章，你必须思路清晰，而思路清晰很难。
And yet writing pervades many jobs, and the more prestigious the job, the more writing it tends to require.
然而，写作渗透到许多工作中，工作越有声望，就越需要写作。
These two powerful opposing forces, the pervasive expectation of writing and the irreducible difficulty of doing it, create enormous pressure. This is why eminent professors often turn out to have resorted to plagiarism. The most striking thing to me about these cases is the pettiness of the thefts. The stuff they steal is usually the most mundane boilerplate — the sort of thing that anyone who was even halfway decent at writing could turn out with no effort at all. Which means they’re not even halfway decent at writing.
这是两种强大的对立力量：普遍存在的写作期望和写作的不可降低的难度——造成了巨大的压力。这就是为什么著名教授经常诉诸剽窃的原因。这些案件最让我震惊的是盗窃行为的琐碎性。他们偷的东西通常是最普通的样板——任何写作水平还算不错的人都可以毫不费力地写出来。这意味着他们的写作水平还不够高。
Till recently there was no convenient escape valve for the pressure created by these opposing forces. You could pay someone to write for you, like JFK, or plagiarize, like MLK, but if you couldn’t buy or steal words, you had to write them yourself. And as a result nearly everyone who was expected to write had to learn how.
直到最近，这些对立力量所造成的压力还没有一个简单的解决方案。你可以像肯尼迪一样花钱请人为你写作，也可以像马丁·路德·金一样剽窃，但如果你不能买或剽窃文字，你就必须自己写。结果，几乎每个被期望写作的人都必须学习如何写作。
Not anymore. AI has blown this world open. Almost all pressure to write has dissipated. You can have AI do it for you, both in school and at work.
现在情况已不同了。人工智能已经打开了这个世界。几乎所有写作压力都已消失。你可以让人工智能为你代劳，无论是在学校还是在工作中。
The result will be a world divided into writes and write-nots. There will still be some people who can write. Some of us like it. But the middle ground between those who are good at writing and those who can’t write at all will disappear. Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can’t write, there will just be good writers and people who can’t write.
结果是，世界将分为能写和不能写。仍然会有一些会写的人。我们中的一些人喜欢写作。但善于写作的人和完全不会写的人之间的中间地带将会消失。不再有好作家、还行的作家和不会写的人，而是只有好作家和不会写的人。
Is that so bad? Isn’t it common for skills to disappear when technology makes them obsolete? There aren’t many blacksmiths left, and it doesn’t seem to be a problem.
这真的很糟糕吗？随着技术的发展，技能也会消失，这不是很常见吗？剩下的铁匠不多了，这似乎不是问题。
Yes, it’s bad. The reason is something I mentioned earlier: writing is thinking. In fact there’s a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing. You can’t make this point better than Leslie Lamport did:
是的，这很糟糕。原因就是我之前提到的：写作就是思考。事实上，有一种思考只能通过写作来完成。没有人比 Leslie Lamport 更好地阐述了这一点：
If you’re thinking without writing, you only think you’re thinking.
如果你思考而不写作，那么你只会认为自己在思考。
So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too.
因此，一个分为写作和不写作的世界比听起来更危险。它将是一个思考和不思考的世界。我知道我想成为哪一半，我敢打赌你也知道。
This situation is not unprecedented. In preindustrial times most people’s jobs made them strong. Now if you want to be strong, you work out. So there are still strong people, but only those who choose to be.
这种情况并非史无前例。在工业化前时期，大多数人的工作使他们变得强大。现在，如果你想变得强大，你就得锻炼。所以仍然有强大的人，但只有那些选择强大的人。
It will be the same with writing. There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.
写作也一样。仍然会有聪明人，但只有那些选择成为聪明人的人。