Hal Varian on Taking the Academic Approach to Business (Ep. 69)
Today, I’m very happy to be here with Hal Varian, who is chief economist at Google and emeritus professor at Berkeley.
今天，我很高兴与谷歌首席经济学家、伯克利大学名誉教授哈尔·瓦里安一起来到这里。
Hal, welcome.
哈尔，欢迎。
Thank you.
谢谢。
Good to see you.
很高兴见到你。
Now, one of your most famous articles — it dates from 1980, and it’s about a theory of the economics of sales.
现在，您最著名的文章之一——它可以追溯到 1980 年，是关于销售经济学的理论。
One motive for sales is price discrimination.
销售动机之一是价格歧视。
But what’s the main alternative explanation of why sales happen?
但对于销售为何发生的主要替代解释是什么？
Well, the claim is always overstocking or fashions changing or selling something at a loss or a remainder sale.
好吧，索赔总是库存过多或款式改变或亏本出售或剩余销售。
But even that’s a bit like a price-discrimination explanation.
但即便如此，这也有点像价格歧视的解释。
It’s a Coasean durable goods monopolist — you’re just unloading it at a loss.
它是科斯耐用品垄断者 ——你只是亏本卸载它。
Yeah, but they’re unloading at a loss because some new models come along that’re superior.
是的，但他们正在亏本卸载，因为出现了一些更优越的新型号。
They’ll cut the price.
他们会降价。
You know, in France, you’re only allowed to have sales twice a year, and they have to be legitimate price discounts.
你知道，在法国，你每年只能进行两次促销，而且必须是合法的价格折扣。
Kind of a remarkable fact I discovered on a visit there.
我在访问那里时发现了一个值得注意的事实。
When you say legitimate price discounts, what counts as legitimate?
当您说合法的价格折扣时，什么才算合法？
They had to be charging a higher price before and then actually cut the price from the previous high price.
他们之前必须收取更高的价格，然后实际上在之前的高价基础上降价。
Now that we have the internet, how has the economics of sales changed?
现在我们有了互联网，销售经济学发生了怎样的变化？
The economics of sales has really found its home on the internet because you look at users: Some people search for the lowest price, and they have all these tools to find it.
销售经济学确实在互联网上找到了自己的家，因为你看看用户：有些人搜索最低价格，他们拥有所有这些工具来找到它。
Some people just buy on an as-needed basis.
有些人只是根据需要购买。
So you’ve got these two segments of the population that fit the model that I wrote in 1980 really quite nicely.
因此，这两部分人口非常符合我在 1980 年编写的模型。
Should we be more or less worried about the economics of price discrimination, given the internet?
鉴于互联网的存在，我们是否应该或多或少地担心价格歧视的经济学问题？
We hear two stories, of course.
当然，我们听到两个故事。
One is, there’ll be this highly personalized pricing that will leave consumers with no surplus whatsoever.
一是，这种高度个性化的定价将使消费者没有任何剩余。
That story seems, to me, to be ridiculous because it’s so easy for consumers to conduct this kind of search and try to find a lower price.
在我看来，这个故事似乎很荒谬，因为消费者很容易进行这种搜索并试图找到更低的价格。
So consumers have been empowered by this technology in my view.
因此，在我看来，这项技术赋予了消费者权力。
Let’s say I’m searching on the internet.
假设我正在互联网上搜索。
Amazon has a lot of data about me.
亚马逊有很多关于我的数据。
Say they were completely allowed to price-discriminate.
假设他们完全被允许实行价格歧视。
What’s my response to this hypothetical Amazon third-degree perfect price discrimination?
我对这种假设的亚马逊三级完全价格歧视有何反应？
What should I do?
我应该怎么办？
Use Google.
使用谷歌。
COWEN: And buy from someone else?
COWEN：从别人那里购买？
Sure.
当然。
By the way, this is not an uncommon behavior because lots of people will go to a big retailer — it might be Amazon, it might be Macy’s — and they’ll get a price.
顺便说一句，这并不是一种罕见的行为，因为很多人会去一家大型零售商——“可能是亚马逊，可能是梅西百货”——然后他们会得到一个价格。
Then they do a little search to see if they can improve on that price.
然后他们会进行一些搜索，看看是否可以提高该价格。
It’s a model that’s not at all unusual, to see people describe that kind of behavior as, say, a normal way of online shopping.
这种模式一点也不罕见，人们将这种行为描述为一种正常的在线购物方式。
But the size of that convenience wedge — is that captured by Amazon?
但这个便利楔子的大小 ——亚马逊抓住了它吗？
Or how much of that surplus do I get?
或者我能得到多少盈余？
I’m set up for one click on Amazon, right?
我已经设置好在亚马逊上一键点击了，对吗？
So I want to use Amazon, all else equal.
所以我想使用亚马逊，其他条件都一样。
Well, how much would you charge to do two clicks?
那么，点击两次要花多少钱？
It’s one of these things.
这是其中之一。
Yes, there’s a minor extra cost because the site is trying to make it as easy as possible for you to buy, but at the same time, they can’t really impose any significant cost.
是的，有一点额外的费用，因为该网站试图让您尽可能轻松地购买，但与此同时，他们不能真正强加任何重大费用。
So the most they can make is the difference between your valuation of one click, two clicks, whatever.
因此，他们最多能赚到的就是你对一次点击、两次点击等的估值之间的差异。
Another topic you’ve written a great deal about: electronic journals.
您写了很多文章的另一个主题：电子期刊。
Today, why are so many of them still priced so high?
时至今日，为何仍有如此多的产品定价如此之高？
Marginal cost is zero, right?
边际成本为零，对吗？
Right.
正确的。
They would appear to be semi-close substitutes.
他们看起来是半接近的替代品。
And they are semi-close substitutes because, as you know, you’ll often find copies of published papers or preprints or something available online.
它们是半接近的替代品，因为如您所知，您经常会找到已发表论文或预印本或在线可用内容的副本。
The end users — the faculty members or the students — they can usually get what they want, so they don’t protest these high prices much.
最终用户——“教职员工或学生”——他们通常可以得到他们想要的东西，所以他们不会对这些高价提出太多抗议。
It’s the libraries that end up paying.
最终付费的是图书馆。
And the librarians, generally, say, “We want to provide useful information to our constituency.” So they’re not highly motivated to resist these high prices either.
图书馆员通常会说：“我们希望向我们的读者提供有用的信息。”所以他们也没有很大的动力去抵制这些高价。
But I can use Google to look for substitutes, right?
但我可以用谷歌寻找替代品，对吗？
To bring it back to the Amazon comparison.
回到亚马逊的比较。
Of course.
当然。
But yeah, journals will still charge, say, a few thousand dollars a year for a subscription.
但是，期刊仍然会收取每年几千美元的订阅费用。
But not to you.
但对你来说不是。
It’s to the library or the university you’re at, is the basic answer.
基本答案是去图书馆或你所在的大学。
So there’s a little bit of a division of a problem with incentives here in terms of getting you to face the true cost of that journal access.
因此，在让你面对期刊访问的真实成本方面，激励问题存在一些分歧。
Why don’t libraries rebel more?
为什么图书馆不再反抗呢？
They do to some degree.
他们在某种程度上确实如此。
And you’ll see situations, especially at smaller places, where they will arrange an interlibrary loan or some system that they can ride on the larger organizations’ coattails.
你会看到一些情况，特别是在较小的地方，他们会安排馆际互借或某种可以利用较大组织的顺风车的系统。
And that’s not at all uncommon.
这并不罕见。
Why don’t pirate copies now break down the equilibrium?
为什么现在盗版没有打破这种平衡呢？
I could go to Sci-Hub, right?
我可以去 Sci-Hub，对吗？
Which is black or gray market, but it’s there.
这是黑市或灰市，但它确实存在。
No one will stop me.
没有人会阻止我。
Well, again, the main users are going to be people at universities.
好吧，再说一次，主要用户将是大学里的人。
The universities already have a license for these things.
大学已经拥有这些东西的许可证。
So yes, you might go to Sci-Hub if you can’t find it elsewhere, but just like you said before, the path of least resistance is just search over my library connections to see if we have access to this material.
所以，是的，如果你在其他地方找不到它，你可以去 Sci-Hub，但就像你之前说的，阻力最小的路径就是搜索我的图书馆连接，看看我们是否可以访问这些材料。
But if someone says that, well, the equilibrium is a kind of market segmentation, where the ready searchers get it very cheaply or for free.
但如果有人这么说，那么均衡就是一种市场细分，准备好的搜索者可以非常便宜或免费地获得它。
The other people are elastic.
其他人都是有弹性的。
If Amazon is perfectly price-discriminating against us, do we end up with the same situation?
如果亚马逊对我们实行完全价格歧视，我们最终也会遇到同样的情况吗？
Is it like the journal articles?
和期刊文章一样吗？
Or is it, somehow, we all search and Amazon’s price discrimination breaks down altogether?
或者，不知何故，我们都在搜索，亚马逊的价格歧视完全消失了？
Well, I would say — if we take the journal example again — as we all know, where we’re going to get the price reductions is competition.
好吧，我会说 — 如果我们再次以期刊为例 — 众所周知，我们将通过竞争获得降价。
And you’ve probably seen that in the last couple of years, the American Economics Association has offered four new journals.
您可能已经看到，在过去几年中，美国经济学协会提供了四种新期刊。
You’ve got a bigger set of publishing outcomes.
您已经获得了更多的出版成果。
There’s a high level of prestige attached to these journals, and they’re very reasonably priced.
这些期刊享有很高的声誉，而且价格非常合理。
I think we are seeing entry of that sort, not only in economics, but in other scholarly disciplines as well.
我认为我们不仅在经济学领域，而且在其他学术学科中都看到了这种现象的出现。
Why are textbooks still priced so high?
为什么教科书的价格仍然如此之高？
Not all textbooks, but many.
不是所有教科书，但很多。
They are priced remarkably high, and it’s a situation where I really would like to see lower prices because, obviously, there’s a durable goods monopoly problem there.
它们的价格非常高，在这种情况下，我真的希望看到更低的价格，因为显然，那里存在耐用品垄断问题。
As you have more and more competition from previous editions, each of the new editions has to differ markedly from the old edition to support the pricing model.
由于与以前版本的竞争越来越激烈，每个新版本都必须与旧版本显着不同才能支持定价模型。
But that’s getting harder and harder to do.
但这正变得越来越难。
In fact, a friend of mine once told me, “Having a successful textbook is like being married to a very wealthy person you don’t like much anymore.”
事实上，我的一个朋友曾经告诉我，“拥有一本成功的教科书就像嫁给一个你不再喜欢的非常富有的人。”
Why doesn’t the world use more second-price auctions?
为什么世界不使用更多的二价拍卖？
Well, that’s quite an interesting question.
嗯，这是一个非常有趣的问题。
Especially now, you’re probably seeing this note that Google was switching to a first-price auction on display ads.
尤其是现在，您可能会看到这样的说明：谷歌正在转向对展示广告进行最高价格拍卖。
Yes.
是的。
And the reason they did that is because they wanted to put all of the ad sellers on a level playing field.
他们这样做的原因是因为他们希望将所有广告卖家置于一个公平的竞争环境中。
There was concern — I think unfounded concern, but I will say there’s definitely concern about having the last look at the price.
有人担心——我认为这种担心毫无根据，但我想说的是，人们肯定会对最后一次查看价格感到担心。
If you are going through a series of auctions, as you often are, then the person who gets to look at the last price could say, “Well, do I want to beat that or not?”
如果您像平常一样经历一系列拍卖，那么看到最后价格的人可能会说：“好吧，我是否想击败这个价格？”
We all know from the revenue equivalence theorem that you would expect a continuous first-price auction to end up about the same place as a one-time second-price auction.
我们都从收入等价定理中知道，您会期望连续的第一价格拍卖与一次性第二价格拍卖的结果大致相同。
So we’ll have a nice chance to see how well that theory works in this context.
因此，我们将有一个很好的机会来看看该理论在这种情况下的效果如何。
Why don’t we see more descending-price auctions?
为什么我们没有看到更多降价拍卖？
Just start with a high price.
就先从高价开始吧。
Keep on lowering it.
继续降低。
When someone says, “It’s mine,” it’s theirs.
当有人说“这是我的”时，它就是他们的。
Or, even better, the first person to push the button gets the item, but he has to pay the price when the second person clicks the button.
或者，更好的是，第一个按下按钮的人可以获得物品，但当第二个人点击按钮时他必须支付价格。
So you’ve got a combination of a sealed bid and a descending auction.
因此，您将获得密封出价和降序拍卖的组合。
That’s a very good question.
这是一个很好的问题。
Of course, we do see it.
当然，我们确实看到了。
It still happens in the Netherlands at the flower auction.
在荷兰的花卉拍卖会上，这种情况仍然发生。
If you are passing through Schiphol one of these days, it’s a five-minute taxi drive.
如果您有一天路过史基浦机场，乘坐出租车只需五分钟即可到达。
You can go see the market in all of its glory.
您可以去看看市场的所有辉煌。
But I don’t really know.
但我真的不知道。
I think you need to have this equipment, this infrastructure that will allow you to do it.
我认为你需要拥有这样的设备和基础设施才能让你做到这一点。
That used to be kind of hard, but now, with a mobile phone, it just comes down to being an app.
这在过去有点困难，但现在，有了手机，它就变成了一个应用程序。
So, why?
那么，为什么呢？
I don’t know.
我不知道。
If I buy something at Sotheby’s, there’s the price I pay for winning the auction.
如果我在苏富比买东西，我就会为赢得拍卖而付出代价。
And then I pay a 15 percent buyer’s premium.
然后我支付 15% 的买家佣金。
Why does that make sense?
为什么这有道理？
Why does that persist?
为什么这种情况持续存在？
Is that a behavioral quirk?
这是一种行为怪癖吗？
That people think they’re getting it for cheap, and then the 15 percent is tacked on, and they’re fooled?
人们以为自己买到的东西很便宜，然后再加上 15%，然后他们就被骗了？
Well, remember, Sotheby’s is offering some services.
好吧，请记住，苏富比正在提供一些服务。
They’re offering you some guarantees about whether this is an original.
他们向您提供一些关于这是否是原创的保证。
They’re offering you certain amenities and so on.
他们为您提供某些便利设施等等。
Now, whether that’s worth a 15 percent fee, that’s up to you to decide.
现在，这是否值得支付 15% 的费用，由您决定。
But why is that a percentage fee?
但为什么要按百分比收费呢？
There’s other ways you could charge people for their services, right?
您还可以通过其他方式向人们的服务收费，对吗？
Sure.
当然。
I think it’s two big firms doing this kind of antiques, fine arts auctions and so on.
我认为是两家大公司在做这种古董、艺术品拍卖等。
They’ve established these patterns of behavior, and I’m sure that we will see challenges to that in the future because it’s so easy to experiment with auction design now.
他们已经建立了这些行为模式，我相信我们将来会看到这方面的挑战，因为现在尝试拍卖设计非常容易。
Do Sotheby’s and Christie’s have anything to learn from Google about auctions?
苏富比和佳士得在拍卖方面有什么可以向谷歌学习的吗？
Or vice versa?
或者反之亦然？
Well, remember, they normally use this ascending-bid English auction, and as you know, the second-bid auction is equivalent under certain circumstances.
好吧，请记住，他们通常使用这种升序出价的英式拍卖，并且如您所知，在某些情况下，二次出价拍卖是等效的。
But there is some degree of excitement, irrationality, madness of crowds — whatever you want to say — that people get caught up in the bidding.
但人群中存在一定程度的兴奋、非理性和疯狂——“无论你想说什么”——人们都会陷入竞价之中。
And they probably do make higher revenue from the descending-bid auction than from the theoretically equivalent Vickrey auction.
而且他们从降价拍卖中获得的收入可能确实比理论上相当的维克里拍卖中获得的收入更高。
How much do you believe in winner’s curse?
你对胜利者诅咒有多相信？
Winner’s curse would be most relevant when there is some asymmetry of information.
当存在某种信息不对称时，赢家的诅咒最为相关。
I think, from what I could tell looking at the experimental literature, that naïve players do have a winner’s curse, but they learn over time to shade their bids in a way that gives them a better outcome.
我认为，从我对实验文献的观察来看，天真的玩家确实有赢家的诅咒，但随着时间的推移，他们学会了以一种给他们带来更好结果的方式来掩盖他们的出价。
So there’s a learning behavior going on there.
所以那里正在发生一种学习行为。
But if there aren’t many auctions where everyone is experienced, then, on average, we see winner’s curse?
但如果没有很多拍卖，每个人都有经验，那么，平均而言，我们会看到赢家的诅咒？
When I started out at the University of Michigan and wanted to furnish my first house, I would go to auctions.
当我开始在密歇根大学就读并想要装修我的第一所房子时，我会去拍卖。
One of the rules of thumb that I developed was, you never go to the auction that has the best stuff because everybody’s there.
我制定的经验法则之一是，你永远不会去拍卖最好的东西，因为每个人都在那里。
You go to the auction that’s sort of second best because then you have a better chance of beating the dealer.
你去参加第二好的拍卖会，因为这样你就有更好的机会击败庄家。
When I started out at the University of Michigan and wanted to furnish my first house, I would go to auctions.
当我开始在密歇根大学就读并想要装修我的第一所房子时，我会去拍卖。
One of the rules of thumb that I developed was, you never go to the auction that has the best stuff because everybody’s there.
我制定的经验法则之一是，你永远不会去拍卖最好的东西，因为每个人都在那里。
You go to the auction that’s sort of second best because then you have a better chance of beating the dealer.
您参加的是次优的拍卖，因为这样您就有更好的机会击败庄家。
So there’s a lot of — I don’t know — common-sense sort of strategies that people use in this, and I think there are inefficiencies that could be exploited, at least at these small-scale auctions with nonprofessional buyers.
因此，人们在这方面使用了很多“——”我不知道“——”常识性的策略，而且我认为，至少在这些与非专业买家进行的小规模拍卖中，可以利用效率低下的情况。
Why doesn’t business use more prediction markets?
为什么企业不使用更多的预测市场？
They would seem to make sense, right?
他们似乎有道理，对吧？
Bet on ideas.
押注于创意。
Aggregate information.
汇总信息。
We’ve all read Hayek.
我们都读过哈耶克的书。
Right.
正确的。
And we had a prediction market.
我们有一个预测市场。
I’ll tell you the problem with it.
我会告诉你它的问题。
The problem is, the things that we really wanted to get a probability assessment on were things that were so sensitive that we thought we would violate the SEC rules on insider knowledge because, if a small group of people knows about some acquisition or something like that, there is a secret among this small group.
问题是，我们真正想要进行概率评估的事情非常敏感，以至于我们认为我们会违反 SEC 关于内幕知识的规则，因为如果一小群人知道某些收购或类似的事情，那么这个小团体中就有一个秘密。
You might like to have a probability assessment of whether that would go through.
您可能想对这是否会成功进行概率评估。
But then, anybody who looks at the auction is now an insider.
但话说回来，任何关注拍卖的人现在都是内部人士了。
So there’s a problem in you have to find things that (a) are of interest to the company but (b) do not reveal financially critical information.
因此，问题在于你必须找到 (a) 公司感兴趣但 (b) 不会泄露财务关键信息的信息。
That’s not so easy to do.
这并不容易做到。
But there are plenty of times when insider trading is either illegal or not enforced.
但很多时候内幕交易要么是非法的，要么是不被执行的。
Plenty of countries where it’s been legal, and there we don’t see many prediction markets in companies, if any.
在很多国家/地区都是合法的，但我们在公司中看不到太多的预测市场（如果有的话）。
So it seems like it ought to have to be some more general explanation, or no?
所以看起来应该有一些更一般的解释，或者不是？
Well, I’m just referring to our particular case.
嗯，我只是指我们的具体案例。
There was another example at the same time: Ford was running a market, and Ford would have futures markets on the price of gasoline, which was very relevant to them.
同时还有另一个例子：福特在经营一个市场，福特会有汽油价格的期货市场，这与他们非常相关。
It was an external price and so on.
这是外部价格等等。
And it extended beyond the usual futures market.
而且它的范围超出了通常的期货市场。
That’s the other thing.
那是另一回事。
You’re not going to get anywhere if you’re just duplicating a market that already exists.
如果你只是复制一个已经存在的市场，你将一事无成。
You have to add something to it to make it attractive to insiders.
你必须添加一些东西才能使其对内部人士有吸引力。
So we ran a number of cases internally.
所以我们内部运行了很多案例。
We found some interesting behavior.
我们发现了一些有趣的行为。
There’s an article by Bo Cowgill on our experience with this auction.
Bo Cowgill 有一篇文章介绍了我们在这次拍卖中的经历。
But ultimately, we ran into this problem that I described.
但最终，我们遇到了我所描述的这个问题。
The most valuable predictions would be the most sensitive predictions, and you didn’t want to do that in public.
最有价值的预测将是最敏感的预测，而你不想在公共场合这样做。
If you were a young entrepreneur, what industry would you look to improve upon using mechanism design tools?
如果您是一位年轻的企业家，您希望使用机制设计工具来改进哪个行业？
Health, of course.
当然是健康。
Health.
健康。
But how so?
但怎么会这样呢？
How can we improve health?
我们怎样才能改善健康？
There are all sorts of screwed-up incentives.
有各种各样搞砸的激励措施。
If you start thinking about it from a mechanism design point of view, you can imagine situations where you could improve those incentives by various kinds of marketplaces, market mechanisms.
如果你开始从机制设计的角度来思考它，你可以想象可以通过各种市场、市场机制来改善这些激励的情况。
Now, I’m not an expert in health.
现在，我不是健康专家。
I said health because we’re living in an aging population.
我说健康是因为我们生活在人口老龄化的时代。
There’s going to be all sorts of increased expenditures in this area.
该领域的各种支出都会增加。
There’s going to be greater calls for more efficiency and cost reduction.
人们将会更加呼吁提高效率和降低成本。
So using a mechanism design tool might really help in some of these cases.
因此，在某些情况下，使用机制设计工具可能确实有帮助。
The idea of using mechanism design to improve voting — I don’t mean voting in national presidential elections, but ways you could do it noncontroversially: Demand revelation mechanisms.
使用机制设计来改善投票的想法 —— 我指的不是在国家总统选举中投票，而是指可以毫无争议地做到这一点的方法：需求披露机制。
Glen Weyl’s quadratic voting.
格伦韦尔的二次投票。
What do you think of those ideas?
你觉得这些想法怎么样？
Can we actually use them?
我们真的可以使用它们吗？
They’re hardly ever used.
它们几乎从未被使用过。
They seem to make good economic sense.
它们似乎具有良好的经济意义。
They haven’t evolved.
他们还没有进化。
Right, but we have seen things like instant-runoff voting, which Australia has been doing for a hundred years.
是的，但我们已经看到了像即时决选投票这样的事情，澳大利亚已经这样做了一百年了。
We’ve got now Maine doing the same mechanism.
现在缅因州正在采取同样的机制。
Eric Maskin talked to me a few days ago.
埃里克·马斯金几天前和我谈过。
He’s working on an issue to get Massachusetts to adopt this kind of system, and I think he puts forth some pretty compelling reasons.
他正在研究一个问题，让马萨诸塞州采用这种系统，我认为他提出了一些非常令人信服的理由。
But why are we so reluctant to incorporate preference intensity?
但为什么我们如此不愿意将偏好强度纳入考虑范围呢？
Again, it doesn’t have to be a national election.
再说一遍，这不一定是全国选举。
It could be the local bridge club.
它可能是当地的桥牌俱乐部。
You could have people do Groves-Ledyard-Clarke.
你可以让人做 Groves-Ledyard-Clarke。
They could do Tullock.
他们可以做塔洛克。
They could do many other schemes.
他们还可以做很多其他的计划。
Never seems to evolve other than a bunch of nerds doing it for kicks or research purposes.
除了一群书呆子为了好玩或研究目的而这样做之外，似乎从来没有进化过。
This question of intensity — there is one margin, namely, people who feel very strongly about a certain candidate or certain issues, devote their own time, energy, volunteerism.
这个强度问题——有一个边际，即对某个候选人或某些问题有强烈感觉的人会投入自己的时间、精力和志愿服务。
That’s a measure of intensity there.
这是强度的衡量标准。
If I can recruit another voter to my side, then it’s like I get two votes, my own vote plus the person I recruited.
如果我可以招募另一位选民加入我的阵营，那么就像我得到了两张选票，我自己的选票加上我招募的人。
So, there’s a little intensity going on there as well.
所以，那里也有一点强度。
Why do people trade so much in financial markets?
为什么人们在金融市场上进行如此多的交易？
It doesn’t seem Bayesian rational, right?
这看起来并不符合贝叶斯理性，对吧？
“Oh, you want to trade with me.
“哦，你想和我交易。
I’ll take that off your back.” Yet trade volume is massive.
我会把它从你的背上拿下来。”然而贸易量却是巨大的。
Well, people say it’s massive, but actually, it’s usually a relatively small fraction of the total amount of the asset that’s held.
嗯，人们说它很大，但实际上，它通常只占所持有资产总量的相对较小的一部分。
Even on a very heavy trading day, that might be a few percent of the total volume of the assets.
即使在非常繁忙的交易日，这也可能只占资产总量的百分之几。
So it’s not so big.
所以它没有那么大。
But you might think you only trade when your kids are about to go college, and you need to write a big check.
但您可能认为只有在您的孩子即将上大学时才进行交易，并且您需要开一张大额支票。
Yeah, I agree with your point that there is more trading than there should be by any reasonable model.
是的，我同意你的观点，即交易量超出了任何合理模型应有的水平。
Part of it is because people really do have differences of opinion, and they’re not fully Bayesian, so they may not find the other person’s opinion credible.
部分原因是人们确实存在意见分歧，而且他们并不完全是贝叶斯主义者，所以他们可能认为对方的意见不可信。
We don’t really get the agreeing to disagree or, I guess, the converse.
我们并没有真正得到同意或不同意，或者我想，相反。
We don’t get this pushed into the model where you’ve got full agreement.
我们不会将其纳入您完全同意的模型中。
I actually did some work in this area several years ago, and it really came down to people do have a different model.
事实上，几年前我在这个领域做了一些工作，这实际上取决于人们确实有不同的模型。
We can’t agree on the model.
我们无法就模型达成一致。
If we don’t agree on the model, then we won’t get uniformity.
如果我们不同意模型，那么我们就不会得到统一。
And we’re also not meta-rational across models?
而且我们也不是跨模型的元理性？
Right.
正确的。
We can keep going turtles all the way down.
我们可以继续把海龟一直往下走。
I don’t trade, by the way, if you’re curious to know.
顺便说一句，如果你想知道的话，我不进行交易。
Well, that’s good.
嗯，那很好。
I would say, yeah, why trade?
我会说，是的，为什么要交易？
You shouldn’t be trading.
你不应该进行交易。
We know that just as an empirical fact.
我们知道这只是一个经验事实。
Here’s a piece of yours that’s not commonly associated with you: “Are There Psychological Barriers in the Dow Jones Index?” Once it hits a certain level, then it’s broken through, and you can predict future returns.
这是一篇与您不常见的文章：“道琼斯指数存在心理障碍吗？”一旦达到一定水平，就突破了，你就可以预测未来的回报。
True or false?
是真是假？
It’s very interesting you raise that question.
你提出这个问题很有趣。
What happened was, back in the .
发生的事情是，回到.
.
。
.
。
Oh gosh, when would this be?
天哪，这会是什么时候？
In the ’70s sometime, the Dow Jones approached 1,000 and then backed off.
20 世纪 70 年代的某个时候，道琼斯指数一度接近 1,000 点，然后回落。
And they did it 23 times, I believe.
我相信他们这样做了 23 次。
I don’t remember the exact number, but it was multiple times.
具体数字我不记得了，但确实有好几次了。
People were talking about the barrier or the $1,000 barrier, et cetera.
人们正在谈论障碍或 1,000 美元障碍等等。
And I said, “Hmm, I wonder what shows up historically.” And it turns out at this time, Dow Jones had just published a book of all of its prices going way back to when it was founded.
我说：“嗯，我想知道历史上会发生什么。”事实证明，此时道琼斯刚刚出版了一本书，其中记录了其成立之初的所有价格。
We did a little analysis of that to see if there were barriers — so, if century marks was at a barrier, in the sense — did the stock price behave in some unusual way?
我们对此做了一些分析，看看是否存在障碍——那么，如果世纪标记处于障碍，从某种意义上说——股价是否表现出了某种不寻常的方式？
This was not a theory or a hypothesis.
这不是理论或假设。
We were just looking at the data to see what it said.
我们只是查看数据来看看它说了什么。
What we found out was that the price increases accelerated as they approached the century marks in most periods.
我们发现，在大多数时期，当价格接近世纪标志时，价格上涨就会加速。
And that’s true even after people know that?
即使人们知道了这一点，情况仍然如此吗？
Well, it’s one of these things.
嗯，这是其中之一。
Of course, the index is totally arbitrary, and I would suspect, as the Dow Jones has perhaps receded in importance compared to S&P or other indices, probably this pattern became dramatically weakened, or it was eliminated altogether.
当然，该指数完全是任意的，我怀疑，由于与标准普尔或其他指数相比，道琼斯指数的重要性可能已经下降，这种模式可能会急剧减弱，或者完全被消除。
Now, as you know, some of your most frequently cited pieces are on the economics of envy, and these are from the mid-1970s.
现在，如您所知，您最常被引用的一些文章是关于嫉妒经济学的，这些文章来自 20 世纪 70 年代中期。
Now, you’ve lived for a while in Silicon Valley.
现在，您已经在硅谷生活了一段时间。
How have your thoughts on envy changed since you wrote those articles?
自从你写了这些文章以来，你对嫉妒的看法发生了怎样的变化？
I think what’s interesting is, there are lots of cases where we’re seeking some sort of fair division.
我认为有趣的是，在很多情况下我们都在寻求某种公平的分配。
There is something that we agree is equitable, et cetera.
我们同意有些事情是公平的，等等。
If you look at that theory of fairness that I worked on — actually my thesis was on that topic — everything seemed to work out nicely if you just have a fixed pot of goods, and you wanted to divide them in a fair way.
如果你看看我研究的公平理论——“实际上我的论文就是关于这个主题的”——“如果你只有一罐固定的商品，并且你想以公平的方式分配它们，那么一切似乎都会很好地进行。
For example, an estate.
例如，房产。
There were a number of inheritors to an estate, and you wanted to make it both equitable and also efficient.
遗产有许多继承人，您希望使其既公平又高效。
So, that problem we can solve.
所以，这个问题我们可以解决。
The difficulty came when you brought production into it because people could contribute differently — different amounts to the production.
当你将生产带入其中时，困难就来了，因为人们对生产的贡献可能不同——不同的数量。
Then, how much would they be compensated for their contributions?
那么，他们的贡献能得到多少补偿呢？
And there, there seems to be a great variety of views in the world.
在那里，世界似乎有各种各样的观点。
Different people seem to have different opinions on that, and it doesn’t work out as cleanly as the first story.
不同的人对此似乎有不同的看法，而且它并不像第一个故事那么清晰。
Does the typical American envy more the billionaire or the next-door neighbor?
典型的美国人更羡慕亿万富翁还是隔壁邻居？
I think the next-door neighbor.
我认为是隔壁邻居。
It’s interesting, the billionaires are like our instance of royalty.
有趣的是，亿万富翁就像我们的皇室成员。
The people want to see what they’re doing and where they’re going out and how they dress and all those kind of stuff.
人们想看看他们在做什么、去哪里、穿什么等等。
But I don’t think it’s actually envy.
但我不认为这实际上是嫉妒。
By the way, I know a few billionaires, and there’s a lot of cost to being a billionaire in the sense that you can’t go out in public.
顺便说一句，我认识一些亿万富翁，成为亿万富翁需要付出很大的代价，因为你不能公开露面。
Maybe you need bodyguards.
也许你需要保镖。
Doing a trip here and there is a major undertaking because of the people that have to be informed.
到处旅行是一项重大任务，因为必须通知人们。
It’s much better to be a half a billionaire, I think, than to be a billionaire.
我认为，成为半个亿万富翁比成为亿万富翁要好得多。
Do the billionaires envy each other more than poorer people envy billionaires?
亿万富翁之间的嫉妒是否比穷人对亿万富翁的嫉妒更强烈？
There seems to be something of a pecking order there.
那里似乎存在某种等级秩序。
It depends.
这取决于。
Not so much in tech, I would say, but maybe in finance and Wall Street guys, I think.
我想说，在科技领域并没有那么重要，但我认为，在金融和华尔街人士方面也许可能如此。
It’s a motivation that’s different than we see on the West Coast.
这种动机与我们在西海岸看到的不同。
A few questions about education.
关于教育的几个问题。
You’ve written the most frequently used graduate economics text for many years.
多年来，您一直在撰写最常用的研究生经济学文本。
Do we still need to teach Shephard’s lemma and duality in first year PhD micro?
我们还需要在第一年的博士微课中教授谢泼德引理和对偶性吗？
Absolutely.
绝对地。
Why?
为什么？
When I thought about what should go into that book, I thought about, what do you need to understand the journals?
当我思考那本书应该写什么内容时，我想，你需要什么来理解期刊？
Take something like the American Economic Review.
以《美国经济评论》为例。
You’ll thumb through the American Economic Review and come up with a list of topics.
您将浏览《美国经济评论》并列出一系列主题。
The two things you mentioned — they’re still mentioned in the research literature.
你提到的两件事 ——它们仍然在研究文献中被提及。
So that’s what you need to know to read the journals, and that’s what the textbook is supposed to teach you.
这就是阅读期刊所需要知道的内容，也是教科书应该教给你的内容。
But if you look, say, at the AER today, so many pieces seem based on stand-alone datasets.
但如果你看看今天的 AER，你会发现很多作品似乎都是基于独立的数据集。
There’s much less of a model.
模型就少了很多。
It’s mostly not consumer expenditure theory.
这主要不是消费者支出理论。
And if they don’t know Shephard’s lemma, are they really at sea?
如果他们不知道谢泼德引理，他们真的在海上吗？
Well, for example, there is a big debate going on now about how margins have changed over the years.
举例来说，现在正在进行一场关于多年来利润率如何变化的大辩论。
You may have followed as well.
您可能也关注过。
Sure.
当然。
But it comes right from manipulating first-order conditions, throwing in a little bit of duality.
但它来自于操纵一阶条件，并加入一点二元性。
So understanding how that model works is critical to understanding that particular literature.
因此，了解该模型的工作原理对于理解特定文献至关重要。
Now, it may be that you know where to look it up, and that may be good enough for some of these things, but it’s just the nature of a textbook.
现在，您可能知道在哪里查找它，这对于其中一些事情来说可能已经足够了，但这只是教科书的本质。
It has to prepare you for actually performing, for actually doing and reading and understanding what’s going on in the economics literature.
它必须让你为实际表现、实际行动、阅读和理解经济学文献中发生的事情做好准备。
You’ve now worked at Google almost 20 years.
您现在已经在 Google 工作了近 20 年。
Is that correct?
这是正确的吗？
That’s correct.
这是正确的。
If you were writing the text again just from scratch with almost 20 years of knowledge at Google — practical knowledge — what would you change?
如果你用在 Google 近 20 年的知识 — 实用知识 — 从头开始重新写这篇文章，你会改变什么？
I would say I have added some of the things that I learned at Google to my undergraduate textbook, which is more frequently revised.
我想说，我已经将在谷歌学到的一些东西添加到我的本科教科书中，该教科书的修订更加频繁。
There’s a whole section on auctions, the kinds of things we were talking about before, what the ad auctions look like.
有一个完整的部分是关于拍卖的，我们之前讨论过的事情，广告拍卖是什么样的。
A lot of strategic considerations showing the student that, “Hey, this stuff is really relevant in practice.
许多战略考虑向学生表明，“嘿，这些东西在实践中确实相关。
It’s used to trade billions of dollars’ worth of assets using these algorithms.”
它被用来使用这些算法交易价值数十亿美元的资产。”
So, definitely that work has gone into the textbooks.
所以，这项工作肯定已经进入教科书了。
The one thing I would say is that in the textbook — both the undergraduate and the graduate textbook — there’s more .
我要说的一件事是，在教科书中——“本科生和研究生教科书”——“还有更多内容。”
.
。
.
。
what should I say?
我应该说什么？
Exactitude than might be necessary in real life.
比现实生活中可能需要的精确性。
There’s this line that no battle plan has ever survived encounter with the enemy.
有句话说，没有任何作战计划能够在与敌人遭遇后幸存下来。
And when you look at how decisions are made in organizations, they’re often a lot messier than they are in the textbooks.
当你观察组织中的决策是如何制定的时，你会发现它们通常比教科书上的要混乱得多。
We might think of the textbooks as kind of an ideal case, and what we want to allow is that there could be departures from that ideal case.
我们可能认为教科书是一种理想情况，但我们希望允许这种情况与理想情况有所不同。
We want to look at robust issues.
我们想关注稳健的问题。
So I would work on that.
所以我会努力做到这一点。
And also, by the way, I added a chapter in the undergraduate text on behavioral economics, which I think is quite important in this respect.
另外，顺便说一下，我在本科教材中添加了一章关于行为经济学的内容，我认为这在这方面非常重要。
Has working in the private sector made you more or less sympathetic to behavioral economics?
在私营部门工作是否让您或多或少对行为经济学产生了同情？
I would say more.
我想说更多。
And which behavioral distortions, if one would call them that, do you see are the important ones?
您认为哪些行为扭曲（如果有人这么称呼的话）是重要的？
Well, you see a lot of things going on with the consumer’s behavior in terms of saving, in terms of self-control, in terms of just understanding a certain amount of complexity.
嗯，你会看到消费者的行为在储蓄、自我控制、理解一定程度的复杂性方面发生了很多变化。
The usual stuff shows up in behavior, and when you’re doing something like pricing, you want to think about the textbook view, and you want to think about a behavioral view, and maybe what you’re going to end up with is a blend of the two.
通常的东西会出现在行为中，当你在做定价之类的事情时，你想要考虑教科书的观点，你想要考虑行为的观点，也许你最终会得到两者的混合。
I see the endowment effect a great deal in worker behavior.
我在工人行为中看到了很大的禀赋效应。
Yes.
是的。
People think they have intrinsic rights to something they’ve been doing when they actually don’t.
人们认为他们对自己一直在做的事情拥有固有的权利，但实际上他们没有。
Yes.
是的。
Has the economics profession moved too far away from models?
经济学界是否已经离模型太远了？
Some people say there’s been a dearth of new and interesting theories since the mid ’90s.
有人说，自 90 年代中期以来，缺乏新的、有趣的理论。
True or false?
是真是假？
What’s happened since the mid ’90s is, we’ve seen this great flourishing of empirical work with a lot of the credibility revolution in terms of coming up with better econometric models.
自 20 世纪 90 年代中期以来发生的情况是，我们看到了实证工作的蓬勃发展，以及在提出更好的计量经济模型方面的大量可信度革命。
I will say, a lot of the work that I’ve done at Google has been in the econometrics area.
我想说，我在谷歌所做的很多工作都是在计量经济学领域。
That was one of my fields as a graduate student.
这是我作为研究生的领域之一。
And I’ve published articles in Journal of Econometrics over time, and just getting that — being able to develop coherent statistical reporting within an organization is critically important.
随着时间的推移，我在《计量经济学杂志》上发表了文章，并且意识到，能够在组织内开发连贯的统计报告至关重要。
And you’ve published in your academic career some articles that — at least to some people — would count as, I wouldn’t say obscure, but highly theoretical.
在你的学术生涯中，你发表了一些文章，这些文章——至少对某些人来说——我不会说晦涩难懂，但理论性很强。
You have a 1982 econometric piece, “The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis.” Did doing that kind of work also help you at Google?
您有一篇 1982 年的计量经济学文章，“需求分析的非参数方法”。做这类工作对你在 Google 也有帮助吗？
Believe or not, that very paper was the inspiration for the model I constructed of Google’s ad auction.
不管你信不信，那篇论文就是我构建的谷歌广告拍卖模型的灵感来源。
Because in the equilibrium conditions, basically, I reveal preference conditions that I would rather be in the position I am in and paying the price I’m paying than to be in some other positions.
因为在均衡条件下，基本上，我揭示了偏好条件，即我宁愿处于我所处的位置并支付我所支付的价格，也不愿处于其他位置。
So there’s a little inequality there.
所以那里存在一点不平等。
You manipulate those inequalities, very much like the paper you describe, and here you get this nice formula for what the price should look like.
你操纵这些不平等，就像你所描述的论文一样，在这里你得到了这个价格应该是什么样子的很好的公式。
But then you must think we’re not doing enough theory today.
但你一定认为我们今天做的理论还不够。
Or do you think it’s simply exhausted for a while?
或者你认为只是一时的疲惫？
Well, one area of theory that I’ve found very exciting is algorithmic mechanism design.
嗯，我发现非常令人兴奋的一个理论领域是算法机制设计。
With algorithmic mechanism design, it’s a combination of computer science and economics.
算法机制设计，是计算机科学和经济学的结合。
The idea is, you take the economic model, and you bring in computational costs, or show me an algorithm that actually solves that maximization problem.
这个想法是，你采用经济模型，并引入计算成本，或者向我展示一种真正解决最大化问题的算法。
Then on the other side, the computer side, you build incentives into the algorithms.
然后在另一侧，即计算机侧，您可以在算法中建立激励机制。
So if multiple people are using, let’s say, some communications protocol, you want them all to have the right incentives to have the efficient use of that protocol.
因此，如果多人正在使用某种通信协议，您希望他们所有人都有正确的激励措施来有效地使用该协议。
So that’s a case where it really has very strong real-world applications to doing this — everything from telecommunications to AdWords auctions.
因此，在这种情况下，它确实拥有非常强大的现实世界应用程序来做到这一点——从电信到 AdWords 拍卖的一切。
You once wrote as advice to graduate students, “Don’t look at the literature too soon.” Is that still true?
您曾经写信给研究生，“不要太早看文献。”这仍然是真的吗？
Yes.
是的。
And why not?
为什么不呢？
Because if you look at the literature, you’ll see this completely worked-out problem, and you’ll be captured by that person’s viewpoint.
因为如果你看文献，你会看到这个完全解决的问题，并且你会被那个人的观点所吸引。
Whereas, if you flounder around a little bit yourself, who knows?
然而，如果你自己也陷入困境，谁知道呢？
You might come across a completely different phenomenon.
你可能会遇到完全不同的现象。
Now, you do have to look at the literature.
现在，你必须看看文献。
I want to emphasize that.
我想强调这一点。
But it’s a good idea to wrestle with a problem a little bit on your own before you adopt the standard viewpoint.
但在采用标准观点之前，最好先自己解决一下问题。
I’m sure you’ve been on hiring committees at Berkeley and, earlier, Michigan, hiring economists.
我确信您曾在伯克利大学和密歇根州的招聘委员会任职，招聘经济学家。
At Google, of course, you’ve hired economists to work in your group.
当然，在谷歌，你聘请了经济学家在你的团队中工作。
You’re always looking for smart, hardworking people with good values.
您一直在寻找聪明、勤奋、具有良好价值观的人。
But what’s the difference in how you choose the best applicants in those two settings?
但是在这两种环境中选择最佳申请人的方式有什么不同呢？
When you are hiring a faculty member, then what happens is, they’re all coming in as assistant professors.
当你雇用一名教员时，会发生的事情是，他们都会以助理教授的身份进来。
But when you’re hiring at a business, you may have senior people, junior people, experienced people, fresh-out-of-school people, and so on.
但当你在企业招聘时，你可能会有高级人员、初级人员、有经验的人员、刚从学校毕业的人员等等。
There’s a role that you’ve imagined for them, and part of the issue is to match up the applicant with that role.
您为他们想象了一个角色，而问题的一部分是将申请人与该角色相匹配。
You might have a really outstanding candidate, but they don’t fit the particular position that you’re recruiting for at that time.
您可能有一位非常出色的候选人，但他们不适合您当时正在招聘的特定职位。
But the fresh-out people — what would make someone good for Google but not so great for Berkeley?
但对于刚入行的人来说，什么会让一个人对谷歌很有用，但对伯克利却不太好呢？
Well, it’s a question, if you look at what would make them good for Google, they should have better-than-average computer skills because they’re going to have to deal with the infrastructure we have there, which is a pretty powerful infrastructure but also quite complex.
好吧，这是一个问题，如果你看看什么能让他们对谷歌有利，他们应该拥有高于平均水平的计算机技能，因为他们将不得不处理我们在那里的基础设施，这是一个非常强大的基础设施，但也相当复杂。
And that would be a strong requirement.
这将是一个强烈的要求。
Not only having the skills in, let’s say, statistical analysis, but also the skills in terms of computer operation.
不仅要有统计分析的能力，还要有计算机操作的能力。
In the United States, how big a problem is internet congestion today?
在美国，当今的互联网拥堵问题有多大？
Today, I would say, in the US, it’s pretty good because we’ve got quite a bit of fiber out there.
今天，我想说，在美国，这非常好，因为我们有相当多的光纤。
When we move to the spectrum, then I think there are issues where we’re going to be encountering more and more congestion, and 5G is hopefully going to come along and rescue us there.
当我们转向频谱时，我认为我们将遇到越来越多的拥塞问题，而 5G 希望能够出现并拯救我们。
How will 5G change my world?
5G将如何改变我的世界？
Basically, you should think of 5G as Wi-Fi everywhere so that you’ve got a high-speed communication without having to go through any sort of special operations.
基本上，您应该将 5G 视为无处不在的 Wi-Fi，这样您就可以进行高速通信，而无需进行任何特殊操作。
But will it save me seven seconds a week, or will it deliver some new and exciting product that I haven’t thought of yet?
但它会每周为我节省七秒钟，还是会提供一些我还没有想到的新的、令人兴奋的产品？
When you look at technologies like autonomous vehicles and things like that, they’re dealing with vast amounts of information.
当你观察自动驾驶汽车等技术时，你会发现它们正在处理大量信息。
It’s often stored and manipulated locally, but sometimes it needs to be shared.
它通常在本地存储和操作，但有时需要共享。
Doing that kind of sharing will be easier if you have high-bandwidth 5G technology.
如果您拥有高带宽 5G 技术，那么进行此类共享将会更容易。
But realistically speaking, for most of what you’re going to be doing, it will just save you a small amount of time.
但实际上，对于您要做的大部分事情来说，它只会节省您少量的时间。
Why isn’t there more spam?
为什么没有更多垃圾邮件？
It’s striking to me.
这对我来说很引人注目。
I’ve always had spam, but it’s never been so much that I felt entirely defeated by it.
我一直都收到垃圾邮件，但从来没有这么多到让我感到完全被它打败了。
It stayed within a relatively narrow range.
它保持在一个相对狭窄的范围内。
If I think about it theoretically, I wouldn’t expect that to be the equilibrium.
如果我从理论上思考，我不会期望这是均衡。
I would think of it as an arms race, where for a long time it might be no spam, and then for a year, it’d be spam so awful, I almost couldn’t use the internet.
我会认为这是一场军备竞赛，很长一段时间可能没有垃圾邮件，然后一年，垃圾邮件会变得非常糟糕，我几乎无法使用互联网。
But it stayed in this narrow band.
但它仍停留在这个狭窄的范围内。
How do we think about that?
我们对此有何看法？
Or how do we model it?
或者我们如何对其进行建模？
There’s a nice article in the Journal of Economic Perspectives on “The Economics of Spam.” David Reiley was one of the co-authors.
《经济展望》杂志上有一篇关于“垃圾邮件经济学”的好文章。大卫·雷利是合著者之一。
There were a couple other authors as well.
还有其他几位作者。
And they had something of an opposite impression.
他们的印象却截然相反。
They said there was a huge amount of spam.
他们说有大量垃圾邮件。
It was quite costly, and it was a major externality that we’ve never really been able to control effectively.
这是相当昂贵的，而且是我们从未真正能够有效控制的主要外部因素。
Now, companies like Google and other email providers had developed algorithms that identify spam quite well.
现在，谷歌和其他电子邮件提供商等公司已经开发出可以很好地识别垃圾邮件的算法。
And normally, it’s not really a huge annoyance to people because we’ve been able to do the spam recognition technologies.
通常，这对人们来说并不是一个很大的烦恼，因为我们已经能够实现垃圾邮件识别技术。
But why is it you always win the arms race?
但为什么军备竞赛总是你赢呢？
That, to me, is what’s surprising.
对我来说，这才是令人惊讶的。
There’s never been a three-month period where you’ve lost the arms race.
从来没有在三个月的时间内你输掉了军备竞赛。
And it’s not just Google.
不仅仅是谷歌。
George Mason has a Microsoft-based system.
乔治梅森大学有一个基于微软的系统。
It’s not quite as good as Google, arguably, but it works fine for spam.
可以说，它不如谷歌那么好，但它对于垃圾邮件的处理效果很好。
I waste 30 seconds a week fighting spam.
我每周浪费 30 秒来对抗垃圾邮件。
Yeah, I have my private account, and I have my Google account.
是的，我有我的私人帐户，我有我的 Google 帐户。
My Google account — basically there’s no spam on it.
我的 Google 帐户 — 基本上没有垃圾邮件。
My private account — my email address is here and there, and so I do tend to get more spam.
我的私人帐户 — 我的电子邮件地址随处可见，因此我确实会收到更多垃圾邮件。
And they’re all those mailing lists that somehow you got on and now find they’re not that useful.
它们都是那些你不知何故加入的邮件列表，现在发现它们没有那么有用。
That shows up in my private inbox too.
这也显示在我的私人收件箱中。
I don’t know a good answer to your question.
我不知道你的问题的好答案。
I think, as long as it’s under control from the users’ point of view, then we don’t see a big uprising.
我认为，只要从用户的角度来看，它是受到控制的，那么我们就不会看到大的起义。
By the way, we do see, of course, a lot of resistance to robocalls, which are much more annoying than spam in my experience.
顺便说一句，我们当然看到了很多对自动呼叫的抵制，根据我的经验，这比垃圾邮件更烦人。
And likely there’ll be some regulations trying to control this.
很可能会有一些法规试图控制这一点。
Well, there’s been regulation, but it hasn’t worked, right?
嗯，监管是有的，但是没起到作用，对吧？
Yeah.
是的。
I’m on the Do Not Call list.
我在谢绝来电名单上。
I get seven or eight robocalls a day.
我每天都会接到七八个机器人电话。
If I’m at home, maybe more.
如果我在家的话，可能会更多。
So, there’s Nomorobo.
所以，就有了Nomorobo。
Have you seen this?
你见过这个吗？
This was a contest that the FTC sponsored to come up with the best system for handling these robocalls.
这是联邦贸易委员会主办的一场竞赛，旨在找出处理这些机器人电话的最佳系统。
In fact, I put it on our phones, and it seems to work pretty well.
事实上，我把它放在我们的手机上，看起来效果很好。
So it’s worth a try.
所以值得一试。
How should we improve the underlying governance and architecture of the internet?
我们应该如何完善互联网的底层治理和架构？
Well, this is a very controversial issue, of course.
当然，这是一个非常有争议的问题。
One side says, “The US created the internet.
一方面说：“美国创造了互联网。
We’ve been overseeing it, managing it in a way that’s been valuable for the entire world.” But other countries say, “No. No. No. We should have more control than we have now.”
我们一直在监督它，以对全世界有价值的方式进行管理。”但其他国家则表示：“不，不，不。我们应该拥有比现在更多的控制权。”
And this goes back and forth over time.
随着时间的推移，这种情况会反复出现。
We’ve been seeing these examples of countries that really have cut off access to the outside world except under very specific conditions.
我们已经看到了这些国家的例子，除非在非常特殊的情况下，否则实际上已经切断了与外界的联系。
I think it’s quite clear there’s going to be some fragmentation of the internet in the next several years.
我认为很明显，未来几年互联网将会出现一些碎片化。
How many fragments will it be?
会有多少碎片？
Will it be two or three or more?
是两个还是三个或者更多？
The Saudis, arguably, are another fragment on the way.
可以说，沙特是路上的另一个碎片。
Yeah.
是的。
I’m thinking of a half dozen.
我想到了六个。
Something like that.
类似的事情。
And we can name some examples but —
我们可以举出一些例子，但是——
But we all know who they are.
但我们都知道他们是谁。
— we don’t have to.
— 我们不必这样做。
We all know who they are, yes.
我们都知道他们是谁，是的。
Will there be a killer app, finally, for blockchain other than gray- and black-market transactions?
除了灰市和黑市交易之外，区块链最终还会出现杀手级应用程序吗？
Yeah.
是的。
I would like to separate the blockchain from just cryptographic protocols in general.
我想将区块链与一般的加密协议分开。
There’s a huge demand for various kinds of cryptography.
对各种密码学的需求巨大。
Blockchain seems to be, by its nature, relatively inefficient.
从本质上来说，区块链似乎效率相对较低。
As an economist, I don’t like this proof of work that this is.
作为一名经济学家，我不喜欢这种工作量证明。
I don’t like the fact that there’s one version of the blockchain that has to keep being updated.
我不喜欢区块链的一个版本必须不断更新这一事实。
I don’t like the fact that it’s so slow.
我不喜欢它这么慢。
There are lots of things that you could fix, and I expect to see them fixed in the future, but I would say, crypto in general — big deal.
有很多事情可以解决，我希望看到它们在未来得到解决，但我想说，加密货币总体来说是大事。
Blockchain — not so much.
区块链 —— 没那么多。
When you say crypto — big deal, do you mean cryptocurrency?
当你说“加密货币”——“大事”时，你指的是加密货币吗？
No, I just mean things like —
不，我的意思只是——
It’s cryptography.
这是密码学。
— No, I’m thinking about cryptography in general.
— 不，我正在考虑一般的密码学。
Think about deepfakes.
想想深度造假。
How do you deal with deepfakes?
您如何处理深度造假？
You have to have cryptographically signed collections of bits so we can be assured that they really are created by Tyler Cowen or Hal Varian.
您必须拥有经过加密签名的位集合，这样我们才能确信它们确实是由 Tyler Cowen 或 Hal Varian 创建的。
That is almost certainly going to evolve.
这几乎肯定会发展。
And then there’ll be other ways that you can do proof of identity, and that kind of thing, that are more secure, more efficient than what we can do now.
然后还会有其他方法可以进行身份证明之类的事情，比我们现在可以做的更安全、更高效。
Bitcoin is now at $6,000 again, as you may know.
如您所知，比特币现在又回到了 6,000 美元。
As an economist, what’s the most useful model for thinking about how that price is determined?
作为一名经济学家，思考价格如何确定的最有用的模型是什么？
One can say supply and demand, but one needs more than that, right?
我们可以说供给和需求，但我们需要的还不止这些，对吗？
It’s sort of a currency of some kind that, arguably, could be worth zero.
它是某种货币，可以说它的价值可能为零。
I would say capital controls is what’s going on.
我想说资本管制就是正在发生的事情。
You have countries around the world where capital controls have been biting, and there are several places where people are very anxious about getting their money out of the country because of political instability or other things.
世界上有一些国家的资本管制一直在发挥作用，而且有几个地方的人们由于政治不稳定或其他原因非常担心将资金撤出该国。
I think that is really what’s driving the bitcoin price changes recently.
我认为这确实是最近推动比特币价格变化的原因。
So if every country were Denmark, it would be worth much less?
那么如果每个国家都是丹麦，它的价值会少得多吗？
I believe so.
我相信是这样。
Your book with Cal Shapiro, Information Rules — it came out in 1999.
您与 Cal Shapiro 合着的书《信息规则》——于 1999 年出版。
That’s now 20 years ago.
那已经是20年前的事了。
What in that book would you most want to update or revise, other than just adding material?
除了添加材料之外，您最想更新或修改书中的哪些内容？
What have you changed your mind about?
你改变主意了？
Ah, that’s a good question.
啊，这是个好问题。
One of the interesting things is, we used, as one of the prime examples of indirect network effects, was operating systems, right?
有趣的事情之一是，我们使用操作系统作为间接网络效应的主要例子之一，对吧？
There was a natural tendency to move towards a single operating system, we argued.
我们认为，向单一操作系统发展是一种自然趋势。
And I think there is a tendency to do that.
我认为有这样做的趋势。
But nowadays, we use, daily, five different operating systems easily.
但如今，我们每天可以轻松使用五种不同的操作系统。
There’s iOS.
有iOS。
There’s macOS.
有 macOS。
There’s Linux.
有Linux。
There’s Windows.
有窗户。
There’s Chrome OS, and there’s Android.
有 Chrome 操作系统，也有 Android。
So here are all these operating systems.
这是所有这些操作系统。
They all seem to work pretty well together.
他们看起来合作得很好。
Not as well as they would if it was designed from scratch, but people have made ways for these systems to relate to each other.
虽然不如从头开始设计的那么好，但人们已经为这些系统找到了相互关联的方法。
The user interface has become standardized.
用户界面已经标准化。
So actually, the importance of the operating system has retreated into the background compared to what it looked like 20 years ago.
事实上，与 20 年前相比，操作系统的重要性已经退到了幕后。
Is WeChat better than anything the West uses to organize its internet?
微信比西方用来组织互联网的任何东西都好吗？
I don’t really know the answer to that question because I don’t use WeChat, but it is —
我真的不知道这个问题的答案，因为我不使用微信，但它是——
But that’s endogenous, right?
但这是内生的，对吗？
Yeah, sure.
是的，当然。
And what’s happened is, of course, it evolved in a very specific environment, with a different regulatory structure and things like that.
当然，所发生的情况是，它是在一个非常特定的环境中演变的，具有不同的监管结构和类似的东西。
So you were able to get this kind of interoperation in a way that would be very hard to do in our economy, our country.
因此，你能够以一种在我们的经济、我们的国家很难做到的方式实现这种互操作。
Here’s a science fiction question: Do you ever think about a zero-marginal-cost society?
这是一个科幻问题：你是否想过零边际成本社会？
Say there’s a universal replicator with super cheap energy, and in essence, all wealth is held in the form of IP.
假设有一个具有超级廉价能源的通用复制器，从本质上讲，所有财富都以知识产权的形式持有。
Would that just be crazy?
那会很疯狂吗？
Or could it work somehow?
或者它能以某种方式起作用吗？
Well, there’s this wonderful book, a favorite of mine, called Midas World.
嗯，有一本很棒的书，我最喜欢的，叫做《迈达斯世界》。
I don’t know if you’ve ever read it, but I would recommend it.
我不知道你是否读过它，但我推荐它。
I think it’s out of print now.
我想现在已经绝版了。
But it’s about a world where, basically, robots have become so efficient and produce so much stuff that people are assigned consumption quotas.
但这是关于一个世界，基本上，机器人已经变得如此高效并生产如此多的东西，以至于人们被分配了消费配额。
You have to consume a certain number of shoes per month.
你每个月必须消耗一定数量的鞋子。
You have to consume a certain amount of food and a certain amount of this.
你必须消耗一定数量的食物和一定数量的食物。
And the poorer you are, the bigger your consumption quota is, which I think is nice, obviously satirical.
而且你越穷，你的消费额度就越大，我觉得这很好，显然是讽刺。
But it’s a very entertaining book because they work through this premise of how this all goes.
但这是一本非常有趣的书，因为他们探讨了这一切如何进行的前提。
I was about to tell you how it all worked out, but I’m afraid it will be a spoiler.
我本来想告诉你这一切是如何进行的，但我担心这会剧透。
So I’ll leave that for your discovery later on.
所以我会把它留给你稍后发现。
Which feature of the 19th century do you think about or admire most often?
您最常思考或欣赏 19 世纪的哪个特征？
The 19th century, yes.
19世纪，是的。
Well, I have to say I read a bit in that area.
嗯，我不得不说我在这个领域读过一些书。
There is a wonderful book called From the American System to Mass Production —
有一本很棒的书，叫《从美国体系到大规模生产》——
Yes, great book.
是的，很棒的书。
— which describes this development of interchangeable parts, and, of course, the explosion of innovation that took place in the 19th century was truly remarkable.
— 描述了可互换零件的发展，当然，19 世纪发生的创新爆炸确实令人瞩目。
I’ll tell you, an expert — my grandfather, who was a farmer in Ohio — told me one time, “I was born when people got around on horse and buggies, and I lived to watch men walk on the moon.”
我告诉你，一位专家——我的祖父，俄亥俄州的一名农民——有一次告诉我，“当人们骑着马和四轮车出行时，我出生了，我活着是为了看着人们在月球上行走。”
And that was 70 years.
那是70年。
It’s amazing what happened during that period.
那段时期发生的事情真是令人惊奇。
Now, I grant you, that’s the 20th century, but we also saw huge technological progress preceding that in the 19th century.
现在，我承认，那是 20 世纪，但我们在 19 世纪之前也看到了巨大的技术进步。
Let’s say you could be sent to the past, protected against disease, with whatever languages you would need.
假设你可以被传送到过去，免受疾病的侵害，并且可以使用你需要的任何语言。
Any previous historical era, and you would live there for six months and observe and learn.
任何以前的历史时代，你都会在那里生活六个月并观察和学习。
Where would you choose and why?
您会选择哪里以及为什么？
By the way, I have to tell you that’s a premise of another science fiction book.
顺便说一句，我必须告诉你这是另一本科幻小说的前提。
Of course.
当然。
That’s a great one I like very much.
这是我非常喜欢的伟大作品。
Great favorite of mine.
我最喜欢的。
That is Lest Darkness Fall.
那就是以免黑暗降临。
Several books, yeah.
几本书，是的。
Yeah.
是的。
The American tourist is sent back to Rome around 400 AD, and he takes as his mission the prevention of the sack of Rome and the, basically, destruction of civilization for a thousand years.
公元 400 年左右，这位美国游客被送回罗马，他的使命是阻止罗马被洗劫，以及一千年以来文明的毁灭。
What period would I like to see?
我想看什么时期的？
I guess I would be interested in that period because that would be a double goal.
我想我会对那个时期感兴趣，因为那将是一个双重目标。
Ancient Rome.
古罗马。
Yeah.
是的。
The Republic.
共和国。
The collapse of Rome.
罗马的崩溃。
Yeah, the collapse of Rome.
是的，罗马的崩溃。
And, again, this idea of what would you do?
再说一遍，你会做什么？
How would you acquire resources?
你将如何获取资源？
How could you put together a system that could prevent that collapse?
如何建立一个可以防止崩溃的系统？
It’s a clever story.
这是一个聪明的故事。
I’ve thought about it many times, actually.
其实我已经想过很多次了。
I think I would pick pre-conquest Mexico because we have so few written records.
我想我会选择征服前的墨西哥，因为我们的书面记录很少。
We know a fair amount about Rome, obviously.
显然，我们对罗马了解相当多。
Yeah.
是的。
And much less about the Americas before the Europeans came.
更不用说欧洲人到来之前的美洲了。
Yeah.
是的。
Do we need to worry more about algorithmic price collusion, not done by humans, possibly not intended as collusion in any way, but nonetheless, in a modeled sense, being quite a bit like collusion?
我们是否需要更多地担心算法价格共谋，不是由人类完成的，可能无意以任何方式共谋，但尽管如此，从模型的意义上来说，有点像共谋？
And what should the law do?
法律应该做什么？
Well, you have these examples like rapid-response equilibrium.
嗯，你有这些例子，比如快速反应平衡。
We have built in this assumption that the consumers move faster than the firms in our textbook models.
我们在教科书模型中建立了这样的假设：消费者的行动速度比公司快。
What happens is, you see two gas stations competing with each other.
发生的情况是，您看到两个加油站相互竞争。
One gas station cuts its price.
一家加油站降价。
All the consumers flow to the lower-price station, and we get this great competition.
所有的消费者都流向价格较低的车站，我们面临着巨大的竞争。
But it could be a different model.
但它可能是一个不同的模型。
It could be a situation where the gas stations move more rapidly than the consumers, and one cuts its price.
这可能是这样一种情况：加油站的行动速度比消费者快，并且加油站会降低价格。
The other immediately matches the price, so there’s been no benefit from price cutting, and the consumers haven’t had a chance to respond.
另一个则立即匹配价格，因此降价并没有带来任何好处，消费者也没有机会做出反应。
There, we end up with an equilibrium model where you can sustain a super competitive price.
在那里，我们最终得到了一个均衡模型，您可以在其中维持超级有竞争力的价格。
I think there are situations where you can have algorithmic price discrimination.
我认为在某些情况下你可能会存在算法价格歧视。
You could think about the —
你可以考虑一下——
But not just collusion.
但不仅仅是勾结。
Collusion.
共谋。
Sorry.
对不起。
Say I build a smart AI.
假设我构建了一个智能人工智能。
I just tell it to maximize profits.
我只是告诉它利润最大化。
I don’t intend anything illegal.
我无意做任何违法的事情。
And then it, in essence, colludes with the other smart AIs, and they keep prices high, restrict output.
然后，它本质上与其他智能人工智能勾结，它们保持高价格，限制产量。
And I’m just there as an owner.
我只是作为所有者存在。
I don’t even know this is happening.
我什至不知道这正在发生。
Right, but again, then there’s somebody that’s outside of that little duopoly, and there’s a triopoly and a quadropoly and so on and so on.
是的，但同样，还有一些人不属于这个小双头垄断，还有三头垄断和四头垄断等等。
It gets harder and harder to coordinate all of those activities, especially if you’ve got an agent on the consumer side who’s looking for the lowest price all the time.
协调所有这些活动变得越来越困难，特别是如果您在消费者方面有一个一直在寻找最低价格的代理商。
So you’ve got to think of these markets where you may have active price setting on the viewpoint of the AIs, but you’ve also got active search and active choice on the part of the consumers.
因此，你必须考虑这些市场，从人工智能的角度来看，你可能可以主动定价，但消费者也可以主动搜索和主动选择。
I think it’s an interesting area for research, for sure.
我认为这无疑是一个有趣的研究领域。
Now, you, of course, started off as an academic, an economist.
现在，你当然是从一名学者、一名经济学家开始的。
How did you acquire or learn the kind of managerial intelligence required to succeed at Google?
您是如何获得或学习在 Google 取得成功所需的管理智慧的？
I’m not sure if I’ve ever learned the managerial intelligence there.
我不确定我是否在那里学到了管理智慧。
But because Google really started out as an academic spin-off itself — as you know, the Google search engine page rank came out of a National Science Foundation digital libraries grant.
但因为谷歌本身实际上是一个学术衍生品——正如你所知，谷歌搜索引擎的页面排名来自于美国国家科学基金会数字图书馆的资助。
In fact, when I was at Berkeley, I worked on that digital libraries initiative.
事实上，当我在伯克利时，我参与了数字图书馆计划。
It spawned three search engines: Inktomi, Lycos, and Google.
它催生了三个搜索引擎：Inktomi、Lycos 和 Google。
There was a lot of interest in that topic.
人们对这个话题很感兴趣。
Google — when I joined when they were about 300 people, I don’t know that there was a whole lot of management intelligence.
Google ——当我加入时，他们大约有 300 人，我不知道他们有很多管理智慧。
Larry—
拉里——
Something went right.
事情进展顺利。
Well, Eric Schmidt came.
嗯，埃里克·施密特来了。
He described his job as adult supervision, and there is some truth to that.
他将自己的工作描述为成人监督，这有一定道理。
But I will say that you just had a very creative group of people who were doing very interesting work.
但我想说的是，你们有一群非常有创造力的人，他们正在做非常有趣的工作。
What was exciting about it was, the intellectual environment there was so thrilling.
令人兴奋的是，那里的学术环境是如此令人兴奋。
It’s true that at some point, Brin and Page offered to sell the page rank algorithm to Yahoo for a million dollars?
确实，在某个时候，布林和佩奇提出以一百万美元的价格将页面排名算法出售给雅虎？
I think it was Excite.
我认为这是兴奋。
I’ve heard the story about Yahoo, but the most definitive story I’ve seen, I think, was Excite.
我听说过有关雅虎的故事，但我认为我见过的最明确的故事是 Excite。
And the claim in this source was that they wanted to sell their algorithm.
该消息来源声称他们想出售他们的算法。
They wanted to get back to graduate school and have the life of a graduate student plus $1 million.
他们想回到研究生院，过研究生的生活，再加上100万美元。
But the trouble is, they couldn’t really reach an agreement with Excite.
但问题是，他们无法真正与 Excite 达成协议。
Not so much on the price, but on what kind of technology would be used in the search engine.
与其说是价格，不如说是搜索引擎将使用什么样的技术。
And who showed them the algorithm was actually so valuable?
谁向他们展示了该算法实际上如此有价值？
Who showed them that the algorithm was valuable?
谁向他们展示了该算法的价值？
Yes.
是的。
Back in those days, when you looked at the results from existing search engines plus the Google page rank, it was immediately apparent that the Google system was significantly better than the competition.
那时，当您查看现有搜索引擎的结果加上 Google 页面排名时，您会立即发现 Google 系统明显优于竞争对手。
Google has done many things that economists have advised or recommended.
谷歌做了许多经济学家建议或推荐的事情。
How about the design of the accounting system?
会计制度的设计如何？
Have economists had any input into that?
经济学家对此有什么贡献吗？
Or are we just worthless when it comes to accounting?
或者我们在会计方面就毫无价值？
Well, which accounting?
那么，哪个会计？
Just keeping the books.
只是保留书籍。
Oh, keeping the books.
哦，保留书籍。
Yeah.
是的。
That’s just ruled by regulation and law, and economists are useless?
那只是法规和法律规定的，经济学家就没用了？
Well, at one point, there was some discussion about building our own accounting system.
嗯，有一次，有人讨论过建立我们自己的会计系统。
Finally, that was abandoned because one of the things that accounting systems do — the commercial accounting systems — is they keep being updated based on how the law or the accounting practices or regulations and so on evolve.
最后，这一点被放弃了，因为会计系统所做的事情之一——商业会计系统——是它们根据法律、会计实践或法规等的发展不断更新。
So the system itself, as a computer system, is not really very complex.
所以系统本身作为一个计算机系统，并不是非常复杂。
It’s just keeping up with a regulatory environment that’s provided by the accounting software provider.
它只是跟上会计软件提供商提供的监管环境。
Say you were deregulated or regulated more flexibly.
假设您放松了管制或更灵活地进行了管制。
Would there be a lot of mechanism design in accounting systems?
会计系统里会不会有很多机制设计？
Or do you think it would look more or less like how accounting is done today?
或者您认为这或多或少类似于今天的会计工作方式？
Well, the trouble is, with accounting, there’re always these gray areas.
嗯，问题是，在会计方面，总是存在这些灰色地带。
What’s a good and what’s a service?
什么是好的，什么是服务？
Or things like that, where there could be a blending from one into another.
或者类似的事情，其中可能存在从一种到另一种的混合。
There is considerable debate about how you should do this, and then there’ll be some kind of reconciliation where people agree, “Yes.
关于如何做到这一点存在相当多的争论，然后就会出现某种和解，人们会同意：“是的。
That’s a reasonable procedure.”
这是一个合理的程序。”
But I don’t think there is ground truth out there anywhere.
但我认为任何地方都不存在基本事实。
I think there are lots of choices that are made to resolve some particular situation that’s come up.
我认为可以做出很多选择来解决出现的某些特定情况。
Let’s say I’ve read all the usual magazine articles about Alphabet/Google.
假设我已经阅读了所有有关 Alphabet/Google 的常见杂志文章。
What’s the thing I’m least likely to know about its culture that matters or is interesting?
关于其文化，我最不可能了解的重要或有趣的事情是什么？
Hmm, what are you least likely to know about the culture?
嗯，关于这种文化，你最不可能了解的是什么？
Everyone knows about the playrooms, right?
大家都知道游戏室吧？
Yeah.
是的。
Everyone knows about the interview questions.
每个人都知道面试问题。
Yeah.
是的。
What am I least likely to know?
我最不可能知道什么？
Boy, that’s a good question.
男孩，这是个好问题。
Everybody knows about the mini kitchens.
每个人都知道迷你厨房。
One thing that’s happened in the cafeterias — everybody knows about the free food, but one of the recent complaints was that there was too much kale being served.
自助餐厅里发生了一件事——每个人都知道免费食物，但最近的抱怨之一是提供的羽衣甘蓝太多了。
Complaints from employees?
员工投诉？
Complaints from employees, yes, about there’s a bit of paternalism that goes on.
是的，员工抱怨存在一些家长作风。
They want to give you snacks that are good for you and food that’s healthy.
他们想为您提供对您有益的零食和健康的食物。
Well, that’s great, but it can be imposed with a light hand or a heavy hand.
嗯，这很好，但可以用轻手或重手来施加。
Some people have argued maybe it’s heavier than necessary.
有些人认为它可能比必要的重。
Is there a way to price privacy as a product or feature?
有没有办法将隐私作为产品或功能定价？
I get how it works now.
我现在明白它是如何工作的了。
It doesn’t personally bother me very much, but as you know, this is an area of controversy.
就我个人而言，这并没有太大困扰，但如你所知，这是一个有争议的领域。
I think it’s certainly possible to offer choice, and if you, for example, don’t like the default settings on Google for privacy, you can go in and change those default settings.
我认为当然可以提供选择，例如，如果您不喜欢 Google 的默认隐私设置，您可以进入并更改这些默认设置。
Let’s take your interests, for example.
让我们以您的兴趣为例。
There’s something on interest-based advertising.
有一些关于基于兴趣的广告。
You can go look at your interests.
你可以去看看你的兴趣。
You can edit them.
您可以编辑它们。
You can delete them.
您可以删除它们。
You can add things.
你可以添加东西。
You can subtract things.
你可以减去一些东西。
You can opt out entirely, and that capability is completely under your control.
您可以完全选择退出，并且该功能完全在您的控制之下。
But it’s a lot of binary choices.
但这是很多二元选择。
There aren’t markets there, right?
那里没有市场，对吗？
Right.
正确的。
There aren’t markets.
没有市场。
And that seems strange.
这看起来很奇怪。
You could have some kind of mechanism design in privacy features.
你可以在隐私功能方面进行某种机制设计。
We hardly ever see it with any company.
我们几乎从未在任何公司看到过这种情况。
I don’t just mean Google.
我指的不仅仅是谷歌。
Well, we have seen it in the sense that you’ll find some vector of attack that hadn’t been thought of, and then there’ll be a way to control that vector of attack.
好吧，我们已经看到了这一点，即你会发现一些没有想到的攻击向量，然后就会有一种方法来控制该攻击向量。
For example, a few years ago, there was this question about whether government agencies were tapping into various data providers, but it turns out they were tapping into the telecom infrastructure.
例如，几年前，有人质疑政府机构是否正在利用各种数据提供商，但事实证明他们正在利用电信基础设施。
And once that was discovered, all of the communication among data centers became encrypted.
一旦发现这一点，数据中心之间的所有通信都将被加密。
That was the response to that particular attack.
这就是对那次特定攻击的回应。
There’s going to continue to be things of that sort.
类似的事情还会继续发生。
Now, users seem to like them both, but if I just look at the critics, why does it seem to me that Facebook is more hated than Google?
现在，用户似乎都喜欢它们，但如果我只看批评者，为什么在我看来 Facebook 比 Google 更令人讨厌？
Well, you know, I actually don’t use Facebook.
嗯，你知道，我实际上不使用 Facebook。
I don’t have any moral objection to it.
我对此没有任何道德上的反对意见。
I just don’t have the time to do it.
我只是没有时间去做。
There are other things of this sort that can end up soaking up a substantial amount of time.
还有其他类似的事情最终可能会占用大量时间。
I think that one of the reasons — and this is, of course, quite speculative — I think that one of the reasons people are most worried about Facebook is they don’t really understand the limits of what can be done at Facebook.
我认为原因之一 — 当然这是相当推测的 — 我认为人们最担心 Facebook 的原因之一是他们并不真正了解 Facebook 可以做的事情的局限性。
Whereas at Google, I think we’re pretty clear that we’re showing you ads.
而在谷歌，我认为我们很清楚我们正在向您展示广告。
We’re showing you ads that are targeted to one thing or another, but that’s how the information’s used.
我们向您展示的广告是针对某件事或另一件事，但这就是信息的使用方式。
So, you’ve got this specific application in our case.
所以，在我们的案例中您已经得到了这个特定的应用程序。
In Facebook’s case, it’s more amorphous, I think.
我认为 Facebook 的情况更加不稳定。
Wooster, Ohio — I believe you’re from there.
俄亥俄州伍斯特 — 我相信你来自那里。
Is it economically inefficient?
经济效率低下吗？
Should its population, over time, be reallocated to larger cities?
随着时间的推移，其人口是否应该重新分配到大城市？
It’s funny you mention that because I grew up on a farm — apple orchard — outside of Wooster, Ohio, which is a town of about 20,000 people, and they have a nice college there.
你提到的这件事很有趣，因为我是在俄亥俄州伍斯特郊外的一个农场 —— 苹果园 —— 长大的，那是一个约有 20,000 人的小镇，那里有一所很好的大学。
The College of Wooster.
伍斯特学院。
And it seems to be thriving.
而且它似乎正在蓬勃发展。
So, what happens when you look at these towns in the upper Midwest .
那么，当您观察中西部北部的这些城镇时，会发生什么？
.
。
.
。
if they have a hospital, they’ll probably survive.
如果他们有医院，他们可能会活下来。
If they don’t have a hospital, they’re in big trouble.
如果他们没有医院，他们就有大麻烦了。
In Wooster, Ohio, do you think the value of Facebook and Google, relative to per capita income, is higher or lower than in, say, midtown Manhattan?
在俄亥俄州伍斯特，您认为相对于人均收入而言，Facebook 和 Google 的价值是高于还是低于曼哈顿中城？
We have actually done a little research into this question but only on one aspect, namely, looking at online shopping.
我们实际上对这个问题做了一些研究，但只是在一个方面，即网上购物。
And I will tell you, if you live on a farm in the Midwest, you love online shopping.
我会告诉你，如果你住在中西部的农场，你喜欢网上购物。
If you’re living in Manhattan, you’ve got a lot of opportunities to go shopping in the physical world.
如果您住在曼哈顿，您就有很多机会在现实世界中购物。
Those rural residents really like the internet for just that reason.
正是因为这个原因，那些农村居民才真正喜欢互联网。
The shopping, access to content, all sorts of things.
购物，获取内容，各种各样的事情。
Given how much the world has changed, do our intuitions about antitrust, in any way, need to change?
鉴于世界已经发生了如此大的变化，我们对反垄断的直觉是否需要改变？
The laws themselves haven’t changed, but obviously, court decisions evolve.
法律本身没有改变，但显然，法院的判决在变化。
But compared to 20 or 30 years ago, what more do we need to bring to that discussion?
但与20、30年前相比，我们还需要进行哪些讨论？
I think the existing legal infrastructure and antitrust in the US is pretty good.
我认为美国现有的法律基础设施和反垄断是相当好的。
One of the things that’s very useful here is that the DOJ and the FTC put out guidelines, like the merger guidelines, the intellectual property guidelines, and so on.
这里非常有用的一件事是，司法部和联邦贸易委员会制定了指导方针，例如合并指导方针、知识产权指导方针等。
If you look at the situation in Europe, it’s a less mature system.
如果你看看欧洲的情况，就会发现这是一个不太成熟的体系。
They don’t provide you with those sorts of guidelines, so you’re flying in the dark to a larger degree.
他们不会为你提供此类指导，所以你在很大程度上是在黑暗中飞行。
Why has copyright enforcement run so smoothly?
版权执法为何如此顺利？
And this reminds me a bit of the spam problem.
这让我想起了垃圾邮件问题。
So, the first Napster comes out.
于是，第一个Napster问世了。
You think, “My goodness, no one will ever sell music again.” And I understand the price of streaming is much lower.
你会想：“天哪，再也没有人会卖音乐了。”而且我知道流媒体的价格要低得多。
In part, that’s due to competition from piracy.
部分原因是来自盗版的竞争。
Yet it’s striking to me how few young people get most of their music from piracy.
然而令我惊讶的是，很少有年轻人的大部分音乐是从盗版中获得的。
Yes.
是的。
What did we fail to understand early on about Napster?
关于 Napster，我们早期未能理解的是什么？
As you know, there are two very nice recent books on this.
如您所知，最近有两本关于此的非常好的书。
One is Joel Waldfogel, who wrote a book called The Digital Renaissance, which looks into exactly the question you were describing.
其中一个是乔尔·沃尔德福格尔（Joel Waldfogel），他写了一本名为《数字文艺复兴》的书，该书准确地探讨了您所描述的问题。
The other book, by Michael D.
另一本书，作者：Michael D.
Smith, is Streaming, Sharing, and Stealing.
史密斯，是流媒体、共享和窃取。
I think what they found was that having a well-organized, high-quality, readily available complete access to music was much more attractive than cobbling something together using some sort of back doors and other things of that sort.
我认为他们发现，拥有一个组织良好、高质量、随时可用的完整音乐访问权限比使用某种后门和其他类似的东西拼凑在一起更具吸引力。
It’s very clear that people are willing to pay $10 a month to be able to get a very smooth access to the content they want to listen to.
很明显，人们愿意每月支付 10 美元，以便能够非常顺利地访问他们想听的内容。
Will local news find a business model in the same way that is other than being owned by very wealthy people?
当地新闻是否会找到一种不同于非常富有的人拥有的商业模式？
Yeah, this is the thing that surprises me — that nobody seems to be able to crack that nut yet.
是的，这就是令我惊讶的事情——似乎还没有人能够破解这个难题。
There’s clearly a demand for local news in terms of just what happened at the high school basketball game or what special offers the supermarket has today, et cetera.
显然，人们对当地新闻有需求，比如高中篮球比赛中发生的事情或者超市今天有什么特价商品等等。
People are experimenting with all sorts of different services, and my guess is that something will catch on.
人们正在尝试各种不同的服务，我猜有些东西会流行起来。
It’s a little surprising it’s taken so long for that to happen.
花了这么长时间才发生这有点令人惊讶。
What’s your view of Robert Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice?
您如何看待罗伯特·诺齐克的正义权利理论？
Well, I knew Robert Nozick.
嗯，我认识罗伯特·诺齐克。
As did I.
我也一样。
He was a friend of mine, and he was, I think, a fantastic guy to talk with and debate with.
他是我的朋友，我认为他是一个非常适合交谈和辩论的人。
I would say it was somewhat speculative.
我想说这有点投机。
I don’t think it would necessarily work out as well as Nozick argued it would work out.
我认为这不一定会像诺齐克所说的那样有效。
There would still be a lot of problems with his theory, in my view.
在我看来，他的理论仍然存在很多问题。
If you could make one reform to the economics profession, what would it be?
如果你可以对经济学专业进行一项改革，你会做什么？
I would like to see shorter review periods for journals.
我希望期刊的审稿周期能够缩短。
I’d like to see things get into print more quickly.
我希望看到这些东西更快地付诸印刷。
I think the whole journal enterprise now has been really bogged down, particularly compared to what goes on in other fields, like computer science.
我认为整个期刊事业现在确实陷入了困境，特别是与计算机科学等其他领域的情况相比。
Does tenure still make economic sense?
保有权仍然具有经济意义吗？
It doesn’t seem to on paper, right?
纸上似乎没有，对吧？
Yeah.
是的。
I think it’s going to get more and more difficult because there’s now this big push for enlarging educational access.
我认为这会变得越来越困难，因为现在正在大力推动扩大教育机会。
What does that mean?
这意味着什么？
It means you have to have more capacity in the universities to handle a greater number of students.
这意味着大学必须有更多的能力来容纳更多的学生。
So you’re going to see a situation where there’ll be a variety of roles, not just professor tenured and professor nontenured.
所以你会看到一种情况，其中会有各种各样的角色，而不仅仅是终身教授和非终身教授。
There might be people that are doing various kinds of intermediary activities as well.
可能还有人在从事各种中介活动。
Say, tutors, is an example.
老师说的，就是一个例子。
Last question.
最后一个问题。
Let’s say a very smart 18-year-old comes up to you and says they want to have a career in both economics and tech, but they’re not exactly sure what they want to be.
假设一个非常聪明的 18 岁年轻人走到你面前，说他们想在经济和科技领域都从事职业，但他们并不确定自己想做什么。
And they want advice from you.
他们需要你的建议。
Other than the obvious, “Work hard.
除了显而易见的事情之外，“努力工作。
Go to a good school” — or whatever — what would you tell that person?
去一所好学校” — 或者其他什么 — 你会告诉那个人什么？
They say, “I want to be the next Hal Varian.” In some manner.
他们说：“我想成为下一个哈尔·瓦里安。”以某种方式。
I would say get the basic skills down.
我想说的是，要掌握基本技能。
Maybe that’s obvious.
也许这是显而易见的。
Get the coding down.
把编码记下来。
Get the design down.
把设计记下来。
Get the basic economics down.
了解基本的经济学知识。
But then you really want to exercise your creativity.
但你真的想锻炼你的创造力。
That is, don’t just take the first way of looking at something or the conventional way of looking at something, but try to step back and see what the bigger picture is.
也就是说，不要只采用第一种方式或传统方式看待某事，而要尝试退后一步，看看更大的图景是什么。
Now, most of the time that’ll be a big flop.
现在，大多数时候这将是一个巨大的失败。
But every now and then, you’ll hit something that’s new and exciting and novel, and, of course, that’s a great feeling to be able to do that.
但时不时地，你会遇到一些新的、令人兴奋的、新颖的东西，当然，能够做到这一点是一种很棒的感觉。
Hal Varian, thank you very much.
哈尔·瓦里安，非常感谢你。
Thank you.
谢谢。