内容来源：https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/07/06/1140176/your-familys-300-stake-in-openai/

内容总结：

OpenAI向特朗普提议：5%股份归美国全民，每户或分得320美元

据《金融时报》报道，OpenAI首席执行官萨姆·奥尔特曼正与美国总统特朗普商讨一项计划——将OpenAI的5%股份交给美国政府。这并非奥尔特曼首次提出类似设想：早在2021年，他就主张所有超过一定估值的公司每年向全民分红基金缴纳2.5%市值；今年4月，OpenAI更缩窄方案范围，与当下讨论内容高度吻合。参议员伯尼·桑德斯甚至提议让美国民众持有顶级AI公司50%的股份。

逻辑何在？ 支持者认为，AI直接学习人类创作的书籍、电影、艺术等成果，却未向原创者付费，股权分红可视为迟到的补偿。同时，在AI可能导致劳动力市场崩塌的普遍焦虑下（尽管经济学家存在分歧），这笔收入能充当安全网。

数字算账： 以OpenAI最近融资轮次估值8520亿美元计算，5%股份约值426亿美元。若分给全美约1.33亿个家庭，每户能获得约320美元股权。但更可能的模式是政府不直接分配股权，而是让基金持续增值，待AI公司实现可持续盈利后，再将部分收益全民共享。

科技公司的算盘： 奥尔特曼或许希望，分红承诺能扭转公众对AI的负面情绪（多数美国人不信任企业负责任地使用AI，反对本地建设数据中心，并对AI渗透生活感到担忧）。但对OpenAI而言，更大收益在于迎合特朗普政府热衷科技交易的特点——此前政府已持有英特尔股份、参与英伟达对华芯片销售分成。在AI公司亟需白宫支持的当下，保持良好关系意味着避免被认定“供应链风险”，或获得更多遏制中国对手的助力。

核心观察： 这些计划目前更像是“叙事故事”而非“政策蓝图”。奥尔特曼已讨论该构想五年，就任总统之初即向特朗普推销，但至今未见成型方案。桑德斯的激进提案更难以落地。然而，这些讨论恰恰揭示AI未来的不确定性——奥尔特曼从阿拉斯加永久基金（1970年代为让民众分享石油收益而设）汲取灵感，该基金基于两个前提：石油是共享资源，且终将枯竭。奥尔特曼乐于承认AI是共享资源，却回避“枯竭”之说，誓言AI将在未来几十年创造非凡财富。所以，美国人能否领到支票并不重要；方案的真正目的，或许是让民众相信这轮AI繁荣足够巨大，值得人人分享。

中文翻译：

你家300美元在OpenAI的股份
萨姆·奥尔特曼希望美国人分享AI创造的财富。这个提议作为政治叙事可能比作为政策方案更具启示性。

本文原载于我们的每周AI通讯《算法》。如需第一时间在收件箱中获取此类文章，请在此处订阅。

OpenAI首席执行官萨姆·奥尔特曼常挂在嘴边的“美国人将分享AI创造的财富”这一承诺上周再次成为新闻。周四，《金融时报》报道称，奥尔特曼正与特朗普总统商谈，计划给予美国政府OpenAI 5%的股份。

从某些方面来看，奥尔特曼的计划并非新鲜事。早在2021年，他就写过更为激进的版本，提议所有估值超过一定门槛的公司（不仅限于AI公司）每年将市值的2.5%投入一个基金，向美国人发放年度分红。今年4月，OpenAI提出了一个范围更窄的方案，与奥尔特曼据称正与特朗普讨论的内容非常相似。这一想法具有广泛的政治吸引力：参议员伯尼·桑德斯曾提议让美国人持有顶级AI公司50%的股份。

这背后的逻辑是什么？对潜在受益者而言，有两点。第一，AI直接学习人类创作的作品——书籍、电影、艺术——但AI公司通常从不向这些作品的作者付费。免费股权可以作为某种迟来的补偿。第二，分红可以通过提供安全网，缓解人们对AI导致劳动力市场崩溃的普遍焦虑（即使经济学家对此看法不一）。

这个安全网有多大，尚有争议。OpenAI最新提案的细节很少，但假设政府直接将这些股权分配给美国人。在3月融资轮后，该公司估值达8520亿美元，因此OpenAI 5%的股份目前价值约426亿美元（据报道，该公司将首次公开募股推迟到估值达到1万亿美元之后，这任务艰巨，因为它在数据中心上投入巨大，且仍未实现盈利）。将这426亿美元平均分配给约1.33亿美国家庭，每户大约能获得320美元的股权。但如果它像其他财富基金一样运作，政府不会直接向美国人发放股权，而是让基金增值，然后与所有人分享部分回报，待AI公司能够开始持续盈利时，或许能提供更大的分红。

如果这种分红真的实现，科技公司能从中得到什么？奥尔特曼可能希望，分红承诺有助于让公众舆论稍微转向支持AI公司。（大多数美国人不信任公司能负责任地使用AI，反对在其所在地区建设数据中心，一半人对AI日益渗透日常生活更多是担忧而非兴奋。）

但OpenAI更大的收获可能是，特朗普政府热衷于达成科技交易——比如它在英特尔的持股以及从英伟达对华销售中分得的份额等。对AI公司来说，眼下与政府保持良好关系至关重要（问问Anthropic就知道了）。这意味着你的模型可能不会被认定为供应链风险，或者能从白宫获得更多帮助来遏制中国竞争对手。

我的主要看法是，这些计划目前更多是作为一种叙事而非政策在发挥作用。奥尔特曼已经谈论这个想法的某个版本长达五年，据报道他在特朗普上任后不久就向其推销过，但至今仍几乎没有迹象表明具体计划正在成型。桑德斯更为雄心勃勃的提案更不可能获得支持。

但这些计划确实揭示了一件事：AI的未来仍有很大的争议空间。奥尔特曼从阿拉斯加永久基金中汲取了灵感，该基金成立于20世纪70年代，目的是让阿拉斯加人分享石油利润。这一想法基于两个前提：石油是共享资源，并且终将枯竭。奥尔特曼似乎乐于承认关于AI的第一个论断。但他会反对第二个，因为他承诺AI将在未来几十年创造非凡的财富。美国人是否真的能收到支票并不重要；该提案的真正目的可能是让他们相信，AI繁荣的规模将足够大，足以分享。

深度探索
人工智能
一家初创公司声称突破了制约大语言模型的瓶颈
Subquadratic现已公布其新模型的更多细节。但一些人仍持怀疑态度。

对AI就业恐慌的现实检验
关于人工智能对劳动力市场的影响，数据究竟说明了什么？答案可能会让你惊讶。

Anthropic的“Claude写代码”展示了编码的未来——无论你喜欢与否
随着Claude Code等工具越发强大，越来越多的开发人员乐于将编程任务交给它们。软件的构建方式已经彻底改变。

AI聊天机器人正在泄露人们的真实电话号码
人们报告称，他们的个人信息被Google AI暴露出来——而且显然没有简单的办法来阻止这种情况。

保持联系
获取麻省理工科技评论最新资讯
发现特别优惠、重要新闻、即将举办的活动等更多内容。

英文来源：

Your family’s $300 stake in OpenAI
Sam Altman wants Americans to share in AI’s wealth. The proposal may be more revealing as a political narrative than as a policy plan.
This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s oft-discussed promise that Americans will share in the wealth AI creates was in the news again last week. On Thursday, the Financial Times reported that Altman is in talks with President Trump about giving the US government a 5% stake in OpenAI.
In some ways, Altman’s plan is old news. He wrote about a more radical version of this back in 2021, proposing that all companies above a certain valuation (not just AI companies) pay 2.5% of their market value each year into a fund that sends Americans annual disbursements. In April this year, OpenAI described a narrower proposal that closely resembles what Altman is reportedly discussing with Trump now. And the notion has broad political appeal: Senator Bernie Sanders has proposed giving Americans a 50% stake in top AI companies.
What’s the logic here? For would-be recipients, it’s twofold. First, AI learns directly from human-generated work—books, movies, art—but AI companies generally never pay the authors of that work. A free equity stake could serve as a form of belated compensation. Second, the payout could mitigate the widespread anxiety that AI will cause a collapse of the labor market (even if economists disagree) by providing a safety net.
How large a safety net is up for debate. Details of OpenAI’s latest proposal are sparse, but let’s say the government were to distribute this equity stake directly to Americans. After its funding round in March the company was valued at $852 billion, making a 5% stake in OpenAI worth about $42.6 billion today (the company is reportedly delaying its IPO until it can reach a $1 trillion evaluation, a tall order given that it’s spending heavily on data centers and still has not turned a profit). Distributing that $42.6 billion equally among the roughly 133 million American households would give each about $320 in equity. But if it were to operate like other wealth funds, the government would not give equity directly to Americans but rather let the fund grow and then share a portion of the returns with everyone, perhaps delivering a bigger payout, if and when AI companies can ever start sustainably turning a profit.
If this dividend does materialize, what’s in it for tech companies? Altman might hope the promise of payouts could help swing public opinion a bit more back toward AI companies. (A majority of Americans don’t trust companies to use AI responsibly and oppose construction of data centers in their area, and half are more concerned than excited about the increased creep of AI into their daily lives.)
But the bigger prize for OpenAI might be that the Trump administration loves making tech deals—like its equity stake in Intel and its share of Nvidia’s sales to China, among others. Staying on the administration’s good side is pretty essential for AI companies right now (just ask Anthropic). It could mean not having your models deemed a supply chain risk, or getting more help from the White House in stopping your rivals from China.
My main takeaway is that these plans currently function more as a story than a policy. Altman has been talking about some version of this idea for five years and reportedly pitched it to President Trump soon after he took office, yet there is still little indication that a concrete plan is taking shape. The more ambitious proposal from Sanders is even less likely to gain traction.
But what these plans do reveal is just how up for debate the future of AI still is. Altman drew inspiration for his plan from the Alaska Permanent Fund, which was set up in the 1970s to give Alaskans a share in oil profits. The idea was based on two premises: that oil is a shared resource, and that eventually it will run out. Altman seems happy to concede the first claim about AI. But he’d balk at the second, having promised that AI will generate extraordinary wealth for decades to come. Whether Americans ever receive a check is beside the point; the proposal’s real purpose may be to convince them that the AI boom will be large enough to share.
Deep Dive
Artificial intelligence
A startup claims it broke through a bottleneck that’s holding back LLMs
Subquadratic has now shared more details about its new model. But some are still skeptical.
A reality check on the AI jobs hysteria
What do the numbers really say about the impact of artificial intelligence on the labor market? The answer might surprise you.
Anthropic’s Code with Claude showed off coding’s future—whether you like it or not
As tools like Claude Code get better, more and more developers are happy to hand off coding tasks to them. The way software gets built has changed for good.
AI chatbots are giving out people’s real phone numbers
People report that their personal contact info was surfaced by Google AI—and there’s apparently no easy way to prevent it.
Stay connected
Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review
Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.