内容来源：https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/27/anthropics-dario-amodei-responds-doesnt-oppose-open-weight-models-but-fears-chinese-ai/

内容总结：

Anthropic CEO澄清：从未支持禁止开源AI模型，但对中国AI安全风险发出警告

当地时间4月21日下午，Anthropic创始人兼CEO达里奥·阿莫迪就外界传言其公司支持美国政府禁止中国开源模型甚至全面封禁开源模型一事作出回应。他明确表示：“任何读过我过往文章的人都知道，我并不认为这类禁令是有效措施。我在此郑重声明：Anthropic从未主张禁止开源模型。”

这一表态源于上周五英伟达CEO黄仁勋在X平台发布的首条推文——一封由英伟达、Hugging Face、Meta、微软、Mistral等多家AI公司联名签署的公开信，呼吁政策制定者不要对开源AI模型实施“过早且宽泛的限制”。虽然该信未直接点名中国，但行业争论焦点始终围绕“中国AI实验室通过窃取美国同行知识产权（如模型蒸馏技术）快速提升能力”的指控。

阿莫迪在博文中将开源模型与中国威胁区分对待。他认为：“不具备危险能力的开源模型属于公共产品——除运行所需算力外不产生额外成本，且能为企业、开发者和研究人员提供价值。”他坦言对AI技术长期存有担忧，但企业使用开源模型（包括中国开发的模型）并不在其担忧之列。

他真正担忧的是“威权政府”开发出比美国更强大的模型，以实现“永久军事优势”或利用AI压制本国人民。阿莫迪特别指出，中国共产党虽非唯一令其担忧的威权政府，但“能力最强”。此外，他还警告AI可能引发“生物攻击”等非网络安全威胁，而开源模型因难以设置防护栏或监控使用情况，在上述场景中风险更高——并援引英国AI安全研究院报告称，开源模型一旦发布便无法撤回。

这与开源倡导者的观点相悖：后者认为由单一实体控制的强大开源模型反而能帮助防御方保护自身。

为遏制中国，阿莫迪提出多项措施：限制中国获取高性能芯片（美国长期执行的政策）、正式打击模型蒸馏行为。美国已威胁若确认中国涉及美国模型知识产权盗窃将实施制裁。

值得注意的是，阿莫迪支持建立模型安全测试机构的国际努力，尤其是美国主导的此类倡议。“我认为这一想法接近共识。令人振奋的是，特朗普政府近月已朝此方向行动，且行业最新提案主张对最强模型（无论来源国或是否开源）实施统一测试，同时豁免初创企业和学术界的低风险模型。”他写道，并强调测试必须全球化，“甚至需要中国共产党的参与。我认为这或许可行——在防止AI生物武器方面的有限合作符合中国自身利益。”

中文翻译：

Anthropic创始人兼首席执行官达里奥·阿莫代周一下午回应了业界传言，该传言称其公司以某种方式支持美国政府禁止中国开源模型、或普遍禁止开源模型的做法。阿莫代写道：“任何读过我过往文章的人都应知道，我并不认为此类禁令是有效措施，但让我明确表态以免存疑：Anthropic从未主张禁止开源模型。”——他强调道。

他的回应源于英伟达创始人兼首席执行官黄仁勋周五在X平台（他的首个帖子）上分享的一封公开信。信中，英伟达及Hugging Face、Meta、微软、Mistral等一众AI企业敦促政策制定者不要对开源AI模型实施广泛的“过早限制”。

尽管那封信未具体提及中国，但业界争议的焦点始终围绕“中国AI实验室常通过窃取美国同行知识产权来提升能力”的指控。其中一种手段是“蒸馏”——让AI用海量提示词反复测试其他模型以学习其运作机制。

阿莫代在周一发布的博文中表示，他认为开源模型与中国构成的威胁属于不同范畴。“不具备危险能力的开源模型是公共产品：除运行所需算力外不产生任何成本，且能为企业、开发者和研究人员创造价值。”

阿莫代在文中坦言，他对AI早有担忧，但企业使用开源模型（即便是中国产的）并不在其忧虑之列。他担忧的是“威权政府”将打造比美国更强大的模型，以谋求“永久军事优势”或利用AI压迫民众。他称中国共产党并非他担心的唯一威权政府，但却是“能力最强的”。

阿莫代还表示，他担心AI不仅会引发网络安全问题，更会导致“生物攻击”。在他看来，开源模型在这种情境下更危险，因为难以对其设置防护栏或监控使用情况。他还援引英国AI安全研究所报告指出，开源模型一旦发布便无法撤回。

这与开源倡导者的观点相悖：后者认为，掌握不受单一实体控制的强大开源模型，能帮助防御方更好地保护自身。

阿莫代列举了他认为能遏制中国的措施，包括限制其获取先进芯片（美国长期政策）以及呼吁正式打击“蒸馏”行为。美国已威胁若认定存在涉及美国模型的知识产权盗窃，将对华实施制裁。

有趣的是，阿莫代还表示支持美方主导等各方推动建立模型安全检测组织——尤其在包括中国在内的全球各国都同意接受检测的前提下。他写道：“我认为这个想法实际上接近共识：令我欣慰的是，特朗普政府近几个月已朝此方向推进，近期行业提案也主张将此类检测应用于最强大的模型——无论其原产国或是否开源（同时完全豁免初创公司、学术界等低能力模型）。”

他补充道：“请注意，要达到效果，检测必须全球化，这意味着连中国共产党也需要参与。我认为这或许可行……围绕防范AI生物武器的有限合作可能实现，因为这同样符合中国利益。”

英文来源：

Anthropic founder and CEO Dario Amodei responded on Monday afternoon to murmuring in the industry that his company somehow supports efforts by the U.S. government to ban open-weight Chinese models, or possibly open-weight models generally.
“Anyone who has read my past writing should know that I don’t regard such bans as a useful measure, but let me state it clearly so that there is no doubt: Anthropic has never advocated for a ban on open-weights models,” he wrote, emphasis his own.
His response came after Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang took to X (his first post on the platform) to share an open letter on Friday in which Nvidia and a long list of other AI companies including Hugging Face, Meta, Microsoft, Mistral, and Nvidia urged policymakers not to impose broad “premature restrictions” on open-weight AI models.
While that letter did not mention China specifically, the debate in the industry has centered on allegations that Chinese AI labs are growing in capability often by stealing intellectual property from their American counterparts. One method is distillation, where an AI bombards another model with prompts to learn how it works.
Amodei said in the blog post published Monday that he views open-weight models as falling into a different bucket than the threat China poses. “Open-weights models that don’t have dangerous capabilities are a public good: they don’t cost anything besides the compute needed to run them, and they provide value to businesses, developers, and researchers.”
Amodei said in his post that he has longstanding fears about AI, but businesses using open-weight models, even ones from China, are not among them.
His fear is that “authoritarian governments” will build models that are more powerful than those in the U.S. to achieve “permanent military superiority” and/or use AI to repress their own people. He said the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) isn’t the only authoritarian government he’s concerned about, but it is the “most capable.”
Amodei also said he fears AI will enable “biological attacks” not just cybersecurity ones. And, in his view, open-weight models are more dangerous in those scenarios because it’s difficult to apply guardrails to them or monitor their usage. He also noted, citing a UK AI Security Institute report, that once open-weights are released they cannot be withdrawn
This runs counter to what open source advocates argue: that access to powerful open models not controlled by a single entity helps defenders protect themselves.
Amodei listed actions he believes would thwart China, including restricting its access to powerful chips (which has been a longstanding U.S. policy) and calling for a formal crackdown on distillation. The U.S. has threatened sanctions against China if it determined there was IP theft involving U.S. models.
Interestingly, Amodei also said he supports growing efforts, some led by the U.S., to create a model safety testing organization, especially if the entire world, including China, agreed to submit to it.
“I think this idea is actually close to a consensus: I have been heartened both that the Trump administration has moved in this direction in recent months, and by recent industry proposals that would apply such testing to the most capable models regardless of their country of origin or whether they are open or closed (while exempting less capable models, such as those from startups and academia, entirely),” Amodei wrote.
“Note that to be effective,” he added, “testing would need to be global, which means even the CCP would need to be on board. I think this may actually be possible … limited cooperation around preventing AI biological weapons may be possible because it is in China’s interest too.”