尊敬的用戶您好，這是來自FT中文網的溫馨提示：如您對更多FT中文網的內容感興趣，請在蘋果應用商店或谷歌應用市場搜尋「FT中文網」，下載FT中文網的官方應用。
As far as the stock market is concerned, attempts by competition regulators to restrain the power of big tech have invariably been a case of too little, too late.
對股市而言，競爭監管機構限制大型科技公司權力的努力總是力度太小、動作太遲。
That was evident again this week as Microsoft and Apple came under fire from a European Commission armed with new and more draconian regulatory powers. Both companies’ shares flirted with record highs as investors displayed their usual, sanguine response.
本週，微軟和蘋果受到擁有新的、更嚴厲監管權力的歐盟委員會的打擊，再次證明了這一點。由於投資者表現出一如既往的樂觀反應，這兩家公司的股價都屢創新高。
The tech world moves too fast for regulators burdened with old theories of competition and weighed down by bureaucratic processes, they reckon (though the EU’s new Digital Markets Act is designed to change that). Even cases that have resulted in large fines haven’t forced any changes to the tech giant’s business models that would seriously weaken the power of their online platforms.
他們認爲，對於揹負著陳舊的競爭理論、受官僚程式拖累的監管機構來說，科技世界發展得太快——儘管歐盟新的《數字市場法》旨在改變這種狀況。即使是導致鉅額罰款的案件，也沒有迫使科技巨擘的商業模式發生任何嚴重削弱其在線平臺權力的變化。
Those assumptions will be tested with a round of actions and investigations that target some of the core practices that have helped the biggest tech companies consolidate their power. And though the cases have been triggered by complaints that seem to have little relevance to new markets such as artificial intelligence, they could still establish important principles.
這些假設將受到一系列行動和調查的考驗，這些行動和調查針對的是幫助大型科技公司鞏固其權力的一些核心做法。儘管這些案件是由似乎與人工智慧等新市場無關的投訴引發的，但它們仍然可以確立重要的原則。
This week’s cases in Brussels included the old charge that Microsoft unfairly targeted rivals such as Slack and Zoom by including its Teams collaboration free of charge in the Office suite of productivity apps. This hardly feels like a pressing issue in today’s tech world. It is seven years since Teams was bundled with Office and four since Slack complained to regulators.
本週在布魯塞爾的案件包括對微軟的舊指控，即微軟將其Teams協作工具免費包含在Office辦公應用套件中，不公平地打擊了Slack和Zoom等競爭對手。在當今的科技界，這幾乎不像是一個緊迫的問題。Teams與Office捆綁已有7年，Slack向監管機構投訴已有4年。
The preliminary complaint that Brussels levelled against Apple also had a historic feel to it. It was brought under the EU’s DMA, which came into force in March, but turns on the same disputed App Store rule that already resulted in a €1.8bn fine against the iPhone maker under earlier EU rules.
歐盟對蘋果提出的初步訴訟也有一種歷史感。它是根據今年3月生效的歐盟DMA提出的，但它針對的是同樣的有爭議的App Store規則，根據早先的歐盟規則，蘋果已經被處以18億歐元的罰款。
All this has left the sense that regulators are fighting the last war. The focus of competition has moved on to new battlegrounds. Yet these cases get at business practices that will also shape new markets, including AI.
所有這些都讓人感覺到監管機構正在打上一場戰爭。競爭的焦點已經轉移到了新的戰場。然而，這些案例涉及的商業行爲也將塑造包括人工智慧在內的新市場。
Microsoft’s use of bundling, for instance, has long been one of its most powerful business weapons, while Apple’s App Store restrictions on developers have cemented the power of its mobile platform.
例如，微軟的捆綁銷售一直是其最強大的商業武器之一，而蘋果的App Store對開發者的限制鞏固了其移動平臺的權力。
Other investigations announced earlier this year under the new DMA targets other core practices, including Google’s ability to direct search engine users to its other in-house services (something that has been on Brussels’ radar since it first opened an investigation into online comparison shopping 14 years ago). It is also probing Meta’s take-it-or-leave-it requirement for users to accept all the company’s data practices if they don’t want to take up a new option to pay for its services in the EU.
今年早些時候根據新的DMA宣佈的調查還針對其他核心做法，包括谷歌引導搜索引擎用戶使用其他內部服務的能力（自14年前布魯塞爾首次對在線比較購物展開調查以來，布魯塞爾就一直在關注這一問題）。布魯塞爾還在調查Meta的「要麼接受，要麼離開」要求，即如果用戶不願意接受在歐盟境內爲其服務付費的新選項，就必須接受該公司的所有數據處理方式。
This more activist attempt to tackle central parts of the tech giants’ business models has been echoed in the US. A judge is set to deliver his judgment soon on the Department of Justice’s claim that Google unfairly monopolised control of distribution for its search engine, including paying billions of dollars a year to have its service featured prominently on Apple’s devices.
這種解決科技巨擘商業模式核心問題的更激進的嘗試在美國也得到了響應。美國司法部指控谷歌不公平地壟斷了其搜索引擎的分銷控制權，包括每年支付數十億美元讓其服務在蘋果設備上佔據顯著位置，一名法官將很快就這一指控作出判決。
The regulators still have a long way to go to prevail in these cases, including against the inevitable legal appeals, and, if they win, will need to come up with effective sanctions. But the success of actions such as these is likely to play a key role in determining how disruptive the rise of AI turns out to be for today’s tech giants. As things stand, their control of networks spanning billions of people and the troves of personal data they hold present a daunting barrier to upstarts.
要在這些案件中獲勝，監管機構還有很長的路要走，包括應對不可避免的法律上訴，而且如果他們贏了，還需要拿出有效的制裁措施。但這類行動的成功很可能在決定人工智慧崛起對當今科技巨擘的顛覆程度方面發揮關鍵作用。從目前的情況來看，它們對覆蓋數十億人的網路的控制，以及它們所掌握的大量個人數據，對新創企業來說是一道令人生畏的障礙。
That has made it possible for companies like Apple and Meta to treat generative AI as just another tech ingredient, something they can use to add new features to their existing services.
這使得蘋果和Meta等公司有可能將生成式人工智慧視爲另一種技術成分，可以用來爲現有服務新增新功能。
As things stand, AI start-ups have had little choice but to play by the big companies’ rules. OpenAI, for instance, has aligned itself with Microsoft as a big investor and business partner and negotiated a deal to put ChatGPT in front of Apple’s users. But it also has more disruptive ideas: an app store of its own that would create an entirely new platform for developers looking to harness the power of large language models, for instance, and an expansion of ChatGPT for businesses that puts it into direct competition with Microsoft.
從目前的情況來看，人工智慧新創企業別無選擇，只能按照大公司的規則行事。例如，OpenAI已經與微軟結盟，作爲重要的投資者和業務合作伙伴，並透過談判達成協議，讓蘋果用戶可以使用ChatGPT。但它也有更具顛覆性的想法：例如，建立自己的應用商店，爲希望利用大型語言模型的強大能力的開發者成立一個全新的平臺；將ChatGPT擴展到企業市場，與微軟直接競爭。
Tech’s AI wave is only just beginning. How it develops will depend greatly on regulators’ success at picking apart some of the practices that have shored up today’s giants.
科技界的人工智慧浪潮纔剛剛開始。它將如何發展，在很大程度上取決於監管機構能否成功地剔除一些支撐當今巨擘的做法。