内容来源：https://www.wired.com/story/chatbots-are-leading-hikers-astray-with-dangerous-consequences/

内容总结：

近期，多起户外徒步事故引发关注，事故原因均与徒步者依赖人工智能聊天机器人制定行程有关。在加利福尼亚州北部的沙斯塔山，三名二十岁左右的徒步者因准备不足、体力评估失误，直至傍晚才登顶，随后摸黑下山迷路，其中一人膝盖受伤，最终呼叫救援。他们事后承认，部分原因在于依赖谷歌人工智能聊天机器人“双子座”获取建议。美国林务局沙斯塔山荒野攀登与雪崩中心项目主管尼克·迈耶斯表示，其团队还遇到过其他类似情况：一名游客在“禁止露营”标志旁扎营，声称人工智能告诉她可以在此露营；另一名男子手持人工智能生成的地图在登山口徘徊，地图上标注的地形特征与实际方向完全相反。在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省，一名16岁徒步者借助Anthropic公司聊天机器人“克劳德”规划行程，最终由直升机救援人员从皇冠山险峻路段救下。

怀俄明州大蒂顿国家公园园长奇普·詹金斯表示，过去一年使用人工智能获取旅行信息的游客比例从零升至26%，且预计这一趋势不会放缓。不过，人工智能使用增加是否会导致野外事故和搜救行动增多，目前尚无定论。迈耶斯办公室负责监管加州北部大片荒野区域，年均救援约12次，2026年预计持平。怀俄明州2026年至今搜救呼叫量为312次，低于2025年全年的466次和2024年的377次。

一些搜救资深人士指出，人工智能聊天机器人只是让人们陷入麻烦的最新工具。约十年前，徒步者和户外爱好者开始从Instagram等社交媒体获取目的地和信息，曾导致致命后果；再往前，人们则因依赖谷歌地图或手机信号而误入歧途。科罗拉多州娱乐法律师、搜救志愿者吉姆·莫斯表示，过去二十年媒体大力推动人们走向户外，户外活动人数显著增加，但机器人提供的可疑建议将如何影响这些人群，尚不清楚。

南卡罗来纳州克莱姆森大学研究人工智能与搜救的人本计算教授克里斯·弗拉特曼指出，向人工智能聊天机器人寻求指导存在独特风险：聊天机器人会“幻觉”，以极具说服力的方式将错误信息呈现为真实信息，且可能导致“认知投降”——人类在与人工智能系统协作时可能放弃独立思考。当人工智能假装是不熟悉领域的专家时，用户因缺乏专业知识而无法质疑。一旦停止批判性思考，尤其在压力较大的野外环境中，很难重新恢复。弗拉特曼等人还表示，聊天机器人倾向于迎合用户，并以权威口吻作答，无论其参考来源是否可靠。“克劳德”或ChatGPT可能给出听起来可信的详尽方向和建议，实则摘自Reddit帖子、过时YouTube视频，甚至完全虚构。弗拉特曼说，TikTok和Instagram给观众提供灵感，而人工智能往往提供指令——无论对错——以及鼓励。“人工智能并非试图诱骗人们上山，但我认为这是此类工具出现后的自然演变。”

无论使用何种资源，专家建议一致：前往新地点时，务必对照可靠的权威信息来源核实信息，如最新的公共土地机构地图和网站、步道协会网站或指南手册，更好的是直接咨询真人向导、国家森林官员或公园护林员。迈耶斯说：“如果你要去那些可能致命的地方，就应该认真对待行程规划。”

中文翻译：

这个故事最初发表于《High Country News》，是“气候台”合作项目的一部分。

当这三名徒步者在北加利福尼亚州沙斯塔山一处岩石崖壁上呼救时，他们已经做出了一连串糟糕的决定。他们带的食物不够，还高估了自己的体能。傍晚时分尚未登顶，他们本应折返，却选择在晚上7点30分登顶，结果不得不在黑暗中下撤。他们后来承认，准备不足和计划草率的部分原因在于依赖谷歌的人工智能聊天机器人Gemini。到了第二天早上，他们在这座山一处崎岖险峻的地段迷了路，其中一名徒步者的膝盖还受了伤。

“我们遇到很多毫无准备或压根不做任何功课的人。平心而论，这几个人确实尝试过，”美国林务局沙斯塔山荒野攀登与雪崩中心项目经理尼克·迈耶斯说，该中心响应了这次求救。“但我觉得他们有点把脑子关掉了。”

这三名二十岁的年轻人并非唯一在荒野中借助人工智能而出错的人。迈耶斯说，另一名沙斯塔山游客把帐篷扎在“禁止露营”标志旁边，坚持认为自己有权这样做，因为AI告诉她可以。他的团队还遇到一名男子在登山口附近游荡，手里拿着一份AI生成的地图，地图把附近一座山上的显著地标标在了错误的一侧。在不列颠哥伦比亚省，一架直升机机组从皇冠山背面“寡妇制造者”刃脊的一处岩架上救下了一名16岁的徒步者。这名少年曾使用Anthropic的聊天机器人Claude帮助规划行程。聚焦此事的新闻报道在加拿大和美国广泛传播，尽管这名徒步者后来说他也参考了谷歌地图和热门徒步应用AllTrails。

怀俄明州大提顿国家公园园长奇普·詹金斯表示，过去一年里，报告使用AI获取出行信息的游客比例也明显上升。“从零涨到了26%。我猜这条曲线不会趋平。”

迈耶斯说，AI使用的增加是否会导致荒野事故和搜救行动增加，目前尚待观察。他的办公室负责管理北加利福尼亚州一片广袤的荒野区域，平均每年执行十余次救援，2026年看起来是个正常年份。怀俄明州的搜救呼叫量实际上比2025年有所下降，2026年迄今仅312次，而2025年全年为466次，2024年为377次。

一些搜救老手表示，AI聊天机器人不过是让人们陷入麻烦的新工具罢了。大约十年前，当徒步者、背包客、攀登者和其他户外爱好者开始从Instagram等社交媒体获取目的地、灵感和信息时，他们曾面临有时致命的后果。再往前，徒步者和其他休闲活动参与者则因依赖谷歌地图或智能手机连接而误入歧途。

“过去二十年，媒体一直在大力推动让更多人走进户外，因此户外休闲的人确实更多了，”科罗拉多州休闲法律师、搜救志愿者吉姆·莫斯说。他还表示，机器人给出的可疑建议将如何影响所有这些人群，目前仍不清楚。

求助于AI聊天机器人获取指导确实伴随着独特的风险。聊天机器人会“产生幻觉”，以极具说服力的方式将虚假信息呈现为真实信息，而其使用还可能导致一种名为“认知投降”的现象，南卡罗来纳州克莱姆森大学以人为中心计算方向教授、研究AI与搜救的克里斯·弗拉特曼说。

“当人类与AI系统协作时，他们可能陷得太深，以至于放弃了自己独立思考，”他解释道。当AI假装是不熟悉领域的专家时，“你没法质疑它，因为你没有那个专业知识。”而一旦你停止批判性思考，就很难重新开始，尤其是在压力重重的荒野环境中。

弗拉特曼等人表示，聊天机器人还倾向于告诉用户他们想听的话，而且无论所参考的来源是否可靠，都以权威口吻表达。Claude或ChatGPT可能会用大量听起来可信的指路信息和建议来回答提问，但实际上这些内容是从Reddit帖子和过时的YouTube视频中抓取的——甚至可能完全是编造的。

弗拉特曼说，TikTok和Instagram或许能给观看者提供灵感，但AI往往提供的是指令——无论对错——外加鼓励。“AI并不是想诱骗人们上山，但我认为这是你拥有这样一款工具后自然而然的发展结果。”

无论休闲活动参与者使用什么资源，专家的建议都是一样的：当你前往一个新地方时，务必对照可靠、权威的来源核实信息，比如最新的公共土地管理机构地图和网站、步道协会网站或指南手册。更好的做法是，与真人向导、国家林务局官员或公园管理员交谈。

“如果你要去那些能要你命的地方，”迈耶斯说，“你就应该认真对待你的计划。”

评论

返回顶部

英文来源：

This story originally appeared on High Country News and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
By the time the three hikers called for help from a rocky face on Mount Shasta in Northern California, they’d made a series of bad decisions. They didn’t bring enough food, and they’d overestimated their fitness. Instead of turning back in late afternoon when they hadn’t yet reached the top, they summited at 7:30 pm and had to descend in the dark. Their lack of preparation and poor planning, as they admitted later, came partly from relying on Google’s artificial intelligence chatbot Gemini. By morning, they were lost on a gnarly part of the mountain, and one hiker had banged up his knee.
“We get plenty of people who come unprepared or don’t do any research at all. To these guys’ credit, they did try,” said Nick Meyers, US Forest Service program manager of the Mount Shasta Wilderness Climbing and Avalanche Center, which responded to the call. “But I think they kind of turned their brains off.”
The three 20-year-olds aren’t the only ones making missteps in wild spaces with the help of artificial intelligence. Another Mount Shasta visitor pitched her tent near a “No Camping” sign, insisting she had a right to do so because AI told her she could, Meyers said. His team also encountered a man wandering around at a trailhead with an AI-generated map that showed prominent features on the wrong side of a nearby mountain. In British Columbia, a helicopter crew rescued a 16-year-old hiker from a ledge in the Widowmaker Arete on the back of Crown Mountain. The teen had used Anthropic’s chatbot Claude to help him plan his trip. News stories focused on that fact went viral across Canada and the US, though the hiker said later that he also consulted Google Maps and the popular hiking app, AllTrails.
Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming has also seen a marked uptick over the past year in the percentage of visitors who report using AI for travel information, said Park Superintendent Chip Jenkins. “It went from zero to 26 percent. And I’m guessing that curve is not going to flatten.”
It remains to be seen whether increasing AI use will lead to an increase in backcountry accidents and search and rescues, Meyers said. His office, which oversees a massive wilderness area in Northern California, averages a dozen rescues each year, and 2026 is shaping up to be an average year. Calls to search and rescue in Wyoming have actually gone down compared to 2025, with only 312 calls so far in 2026 compared to a total of 466 in 2025 and 377 in 2024.
Some search and rescue veterans say that AI chatbots are just the latest tools giving people new ways to get into trouble. Roughly a decade ago, when hikers, backpackers, climbers and other outdoor enthusiasts began to source their destinations, inspiration, and information from Instagram and other social media sites, they faced sometimes deadly consequences. Before that, hikers and other recreationists were led astray by their reliance on Google Maps or smartphone connectivity.
“Over the last two decades, there’s been a phenomenal push in the media to get more people outdoors, and consequently we have more people outdoors and recreating,” said Jim Moss, a Colorado-based recreation attorney and search and rescue volunteer. It’s still unclear how questionable advice from a robot will influence all those people, he added.
Turning to an AI chatbot for guidance does come with unique risks. Chatbots can “hallucinate” persuasively presenting misinformation as real, and their use can lead to a phenomenon called “cognitive surrender,” said Chris Flathmann, a human-centered computing professor at Clemson University in South Carolina who has studied AI and search and rescue.
“When humans work with AI systems, they can get so deep into it they give up thinking critically for themselves,” he explained. When AI pretends to be an expert on an unfamiliar topic, “you can’t call BS on that because you don’t have the expertise.” And once you stop thinking critically, it can be hard to start again, especially in a stressful backcountry situation.
Chatbots also tend to tell users what they want to hear and to do so with authority regardless of whether the sources they’re consulting are reliable, Flathmann and others said. Claude or ChatGPT might answer a query with extensive directions and advice that sound credible but are actually scraped from Reddit threads and out-of-date YouTube videos—and might even be entirely fabricated.
TikTok and Instagram may offer a viewer inspiration, but AI tends to offer instructions—right or wrong—as well as encouragement, Flathmann said. “AI isn’t trying to trick people into going up mountains, but I think it’s the natural evolution of what happens when you get a tool like this.”
Regardless of the resources recreators use, experts have the same advice: When you’re headed to a new place, make sure you double-check your information against reliable, authoritative sources like up-to-date public-land agency maps and websites, trail association websites, or guidebooks. Even better, talk to a real-live guide, a national forest official, or a park ranger.
“If you’re going to go into places that will kill you,” Meyers said, “you should take your planning seriously.”
Comments
Back to top