Matthew Ball on the Metaverse and Gaming (Ep. 154)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Conversations with Tyler.
大家好，欢迎回到《与泰勒对话》。
Today I am extremely honored to be chatting with Matthew Ball.
今天我非常荣幸能与马修·鲍尔聊天。
Matthew is the leading thinker on the metaverse and gaming, one of the leading thinkers on media.
马修是元宇宙和游戏领域的领先思想家，也是媒体领域的领先思想家之一。
He started as a firefighter, I believe.
我相信他最初是一名消防员。
He is the CEO of Epyllion, a metaverse-focused holding company.
他是 Epyllion 的首席执行官，这是一家专注于虚拟宇宙的控股公司。
His most impressive achievement, above all, is that he somehow managed to convince The Economist, the magazine, to let him review Star Wars movies for them.
最重要的是，他最令人印象深刻的成就是他设法说服《经济学人》杂志让他为《星球大战》电影评论。
Matt, welcome.
马特，欢迎。
Thank you for the introduction.
谢谢你的介绍。
Nice to be here.
很高兴来到这里。
A very simple question.
一个非常简单的问题。
I was born into a 3D world.
我出生在一个3D世界。
Then, starting about the early 1990s, I spent a lot of my time trying to get into a 2D world because it was better for me to work with online.
然后，从 20 世纪 90 年代初开始，我花了很多时间尝试进入 2D 世界，因为在线工作对我来说更好。
Why is reintroducing a third dimension so crucial to building out tech?
为什么重新引入三维对于构建技术如此重要？
I think there are a few different ways to unpack that.
我认为有几种不同的方法可以解决这个问题。
First and foremost, I need to emphasize that there’s a misconception that the metaverse means that everything we do will shift to 3D.
首先，我需要强调的是，存在一种误解，认为虚拟宇宙意味着我们所做的一切都将转向 3D。
It’s quite likely that many of the tasks we perform today with devices that are decades old, that are primarily based on 2D interaction, typing in text, will continue to do so.
我们今天使用几十年前的设备执行的许多任务（主要基于 2D 交互、输入文本）很可能将继续这样做。
Much like we would recognize we’re deep into the mobile and cloud era, and yet we still use personal computers, local storage.
就像我们认识到我们已经深入移动和云时代一样，但我们仍然使用个人电脑和本地存储。
Most data originates and terminates on a mobile device, and yet it’s transmitted through fixed-line networks.
大多数数据在移动设备上产生和终止，但它是通过固定线路网络传输的。
Don’t think of 3D as a replacement overall.
不要将 3D 视为整体的替代品。
The second point that I’d say is from a design perspective, an intuitive interaction model.
我要说的第二点是从设计的角度来看，直观的交互模型。
We didn’t evolve for thousands of years to tap 2D glass, to stare at a camera through a Zoom screen, not making eye contact with the recipient.
几千年来，我们并没有进化到点击 2D 玻璃，通过变焦屏幕盯着相机，而不与接收者进行眼神交流。
Grids of apps are not an intuitive way to interact with information.
应用程序网格并不是一种与信息交互的直观方式。
So, many believe that shifting into 3D is a more natural and better way to express some information in some use cases.
因此，许多人认为，在某些用例中，转向 3D 是表达某些信息的更自然、更好的方式。
The third thing that I would say is, if you take a look at the arc of what you just mentioned — the 2D internet — it began asynchronous with static files, text, no colors even.
我要说的第三件事是，如果你看一下你刚才提到的 —— 2D互联网 —— 它开始与静态文件、文本、甚至没有颜色异步。
It evolved into limited imagery, colors, sound files.
它演变成有限的图像、颜色、声音文件。
Today, in 2022, we embrace synchronous media — such as you and I right now — with rich interactive content.
今天，2022 年，我们拥抱同步媒体 ——就像现在的你我一样—— 拥有丰富的互动内容。
Younger demographics engage in constant streams of near-live or live content being shared.
年轻群体不断参与分享近实时或实时内容。
When you take a look at the youngest demographic today — Gen Alpha and Gen Z — they’re already embracing 3D-based platforms for socializing, increasingly for education at large.
当你观察当今最年轻的人群时——“Alpha 一代和 Z 世代”——他们已经开始采用基于 3D 的社交平台，越来越多地采用基于 3D 的平台进行社交活动。
When you observe that history, many — myself included — come to that conclusion.
当你观察这段历史时，许多人——包括我自己——都会得出这样的结论。
You have a new book out this July, The Metaverse: And How It Will Revolutionize Everything, in my opinion, the very best book on its topic.
你们今年七月出版了一本新书，《元宇宙：以及它将如何彻底改变一切》，在我看来，这是有关该主题的最好的书。
How exactly for us do you define the metaverse?
您对我们来说究竟如何定义元宇宙？
Tell us what that means.
告诉我们这意味着什么。
I actually try to describe the metaverse.
我实际上尝试描述虚拟宇宙。
You’ll find that a technical definition doesn’t illuminate much.
您会发现技术定义并不能说明太多问题。
If you look up the definition of the internet, it says the internet protocol suite.
如果你查一下互联网的定义，它会说互联网协议套件。
A description is more productive.
描述更有成效。
I describe it as a massively scaled and interoperable network of 3D-rendered, real-time virtual worlds, which can be experienced persistently and synchronously by an effectively unlimited number of users, each with an individual sense of presence.
我将其描述为一个由 3D 渲染的实时虚拟世界组成的大规模、可互操作的网络，可以由实际上无限数量的用户持续、同步地体验，每个用户都有自己的存在感。
What I am effectively describing is a virtual plane parallel to the physical world, which, in addition to being able to do many things that we can’t do in the real world, replicates it.
我有效地描述的是一个与物理世界平行的虚拟平面，它除了能够做许多我们在现实世界中无法做的事情之外，还可以复制它。
We all participate at the same time, with no cap to what we can do, and why we can do it, and how many people can participate.
我们都同时参与，我们能做什么、为什么能这样做以及有多少人可以参与，没有上限。
What’s the biggest disruptive innovation that we need on the interface side, if any, for the metaverse to become truly mainstream, not just stuck with the head thing on, but my aunt does the metaverse and calls me up and talks to me about it?
如果有的话，我们在界面方面需要的最大的颠覆性创新是什么，才能让虚拟世界成为真正的主流，而不是仅仅停留在头脑上，而是我阿姨做虚拟世界并打电话给我并和我谈论它？
What is missing?
缺什么？
This is a great question.
这是一个很好的问题。
Neal Stephenson, who, of course, coined the term metaverse in 1992, had a tweet storm on this the other day.
尼尔·斯蒂芬森 (Neal Stephenson) 在 1992 年创造了“元宇宙”一词，前几天在推特上掀起了一场风暴。
He remarks that it was a reasonable hypothesis, as a technologist, a sci-fi writer in the late ’80s, early ’90s, to assume that 3D existence required XR, extended reality, mixed reality, virtual reality, AR headsets.
他表示，作为 80 年代末、90 年代初的技术专家、科幻作家，假设 3D 存在需要 XR、扩展现实、混合现实、虚拟现实、AR 耳机，这是一个合理的假设。
But we actually have woken up in 2022 to find out hundreds of millions of people per day, billions of people per month, are interacting in virtual space using keyboards — W, A, S, D, forward, back, right, left — or a touch screen.
但事实上，我们在 2022 年醒来时发现，每天有数亿人、每月有数十亿人在虚拟空间中使用键盘（W、A、S、D、前、后、右、左）或触摸屏进行交互。
He makes the point that you would never have bet that, but path dependency is a thing.
他指出，你永远不会打赌，但路径依赖是一个问题。
Humans have trained into these devices.
人类已经接受过使用这些设备的训练。
So, we can look at extended-reality devices and assume that they’re required to extend the metaverse or 3D space to enrich some of what we do, but it’s not a technical requirement.
因此，我们可以考虑扩展现实设备，并假设它们需要扩展元宇宙或 3D 空间来丰富我们所做的一些工作，但这不是技术要求。
Instead, it’s more likely that bringing your parents or grandparents is much like the internet, which is, they come because of who is there.
相反，更有可能的是，带上你的父母或祖父母就像互联网一样，也就是说，他们来是因为谁在那里。
My parents joined Facebook, not to talk to their friends originally, but to see who my sister and I were friends with, to see our lives.
我父母加入Facebook，本来不是为了和朋友聊天，而是为了看看我和姐姐都和谁交朋友，看看我们的生活。
That’s likely here as well.
这也可能在这里。
I have an Oculus device.
我有一台 Oculus 设备。
The future version of that — how do we stop it from getting really hot?
未来版本 ——我们如何阻止它变得非常热？
It’s doing a lot.
它做了很多事情。
Energy creates heat — basic laws of physics.
能量产生热量 ——物理的基本定律。
How do we solve that problem?
我们如何解决这个问题？
This is fun.
这很有趣。
We’ve seen three times this decade, as in over the past two and a half years, that Facebook has kicked out its first consumer release of its augmented reality glasses.
与过去两年半一样，我们在这十年中已经三次看到 Facebook 推出了其首款消费者版本的增强现实眼镜。
In 2015, Mark Zuckerberg said that by the end of that decade, we would replace the portable supercomputer in our pocket with wearables.
2015 年，马克·扎克伯格表示，到这个十年结束时，我们将用可穿戴设备取代口袋里的便携式超级计算机。
This technology problem is extraordinary.
这个技术问题非同寻常。
You’re right.
你说得对。
Melting your face is a problem.
融化你的脸是一个问题。
Battery life is a problem.
电池寿命是一个问题。
Snap Spectacles, their augmented reality devices, last 30 minutes.
他们的增强现实设备 Snap Spectacles 可持续 30 分钟。
They augment less than 10 percent of your view at one-quarter of the resolution we think is needed and one-quarter of the frame rate.
它们以我们认为需要的分辨率的四分之一和帧速率的四分之一增强了不到 10% 的视野。
Just solving for optics and battery currently far exceeds our grasp.
目前仅解决光学和电池问题就远远超出了我们的能力范围。
Also, layering in wireless chips, having it be lightweight enough to not break your neck and be comfortable.
此外，无线芯片的分层，使其足够轻，不会折断你的脖子，而且很舒适。
Also, putting in complex computer processors — we’re far from that.
此外，安装复杂的计算机处理器 ——我们还远远没有做到这一点。
There are many who believe that until we achieve extraordinary advances in battery life that we’re not currently on a trajectory for, and/or solve for quantum computing, the vision of AR glasses won’t happen.
许多人认为，除非我们在电池寿命方面实现目前尚未实现的非凡进步，和/或解决量子计算问题，否则 AR 眼镜的愿景不会实现。
Size of device versus field of view — which is more important?
设备尺寸与视野 ——哪个更重要？
It depends on the function.
这取决于功能。
If you take a look at industrial AR — the weight of the device, how form-fitting it is — less important versus the functionality.
如果你看一下工业 AR ——设备的重量、它的合身程度——与功能相比，这些并不那么重要。
In the fall of last year, Johns Hopkins performed its first-ever live patient surgery using an AR and VR device.
去年秋天，约翰霍普金斯大学使用 AR 和 VR 设备进行了首次现场患者手术。
Those devices cost several thousand dollars.
这些设备花费数千美元。
They often require a physical link to a local computer.
它们通常需要与本地计算机的物理链接。
They’re not particularly sightly, and of course, they’re cumbersome overall.
它们并不是特别美观，当然，它们总体上也很笨重。
That function doesn’t matter.
这个功能并不重要。
The price point doesn’t matter.
价格点并不重要。
Frankly, the fact that it can’t sustain its own battery doesn’t matter either because it’s industrial.
坦率地说，它无法维持自己的电池这一事实也并不重要，因为它是工业性的。
It’s not mobile.
它不是移动的。
But when you’re taking a look at consumer wearables, certainly, we assume that aesthetics are going to matter a lot.
但是，当您考虑消费类可穿戴设备时，我们肯定会认为美观非常重要。
Smartwatches existed for a long time before the Apple Watch, and the Apple Watch wasn’t just a better interface.
智能手表在 Apple Watch 之前就已经存在了很长一段时间，而 Apple Watch 不仅仅是一个更好的界面。
It was aesthetics as well.
这也是美学的。
Now, you don’t know me personally, but you’ve read Marginal Revolution for quite some time, so you must know something about me.
现在，你个人并不认识我，但你读《边际革命》已经有一段时间了，所以你一定对我有所了解。
That blog is a reflection of what I actually do, believe it or not.
不管你信不信，那个博客反映了我实际所做的事情。
If you had to make a bet, the metaverse gets truly excellent, what am I most likely to enjoy doing in the metaverse?
如果你必须打赌，虚拟宇宙会变得非常出色，我最有可能喜欢在虚拟宇宙中做什么？
If you pick right, you get a million dollars.
如果你选对了，你将获得一百万美元。
What’s your pick?
你的选择是什么？
What’s your guess?
你的猜测是什么？
I’m a weirdo.
我是个怪人。
I’m not typical.
我不典型。
It’s not going to be gaming per se.
它本身不会是游戏。
I’m a big believer — having experienced it personally — that the fields of research and education that one struggles with — for the reasons that I mentioned earlier about 3D being a better learning environment — will be one of those places.
我非常相信——“亲身经历过”——“人们苦苦挣扎的研究和教育领域——”因为我之前提到的 3D 是一个更好的学习环境的原因——将是其中之一。
I’m a terrible chemist.
我是一个糟糕的化学家。
I’m good at math.
我数学很好。
I’m good at modeling.
我擅长建模。
I could never rock chemistry in high school.
我在高中时永远无法摇滚化学。
I firmly believe that if you’re trying to learn about astrophysics; physics at a primitive level; frankly, language — that finding these created environments for those who are curious will be like nothing we’ve ever experienced before.
我坚信，如果你想学习天体物理学；初级物理学；坦率地说，语言——为那些好奇的人找到这些创造的环境将是我们以前从未经历过的。
That may be too broad, so I’m interested to hear your answer.
这可能太宽泛了，所以我很想听听你的答案。
I don’t know.
我不知道。
I would consider a trip to Mars or Antarctica — or for that matter, North Korea if they would allow it — using the metaverse, so places I can’t get to in the normal ways.
我会考虑去火星或南极洲旅行——或者就此而言，朝鲜如果他们允许的话——使用虚拟宇宙，所以那些我无法以正常方式到达的地方。
Maybe, there aren’t many of them, but there are some of them.
也许，这样的人不多，但也有一些。
That would be my bet if it can be done.
如果可以的话，这就是我的赌注。
Well, this is a fun example.
嗯，这是一个有趣的例子。
I’m often asked which categories do you think are most likely to be disrupted and/or which are you personally most excited about?
我经常被问到您认为哪些类别最有可能被颠覆和/或您个人对哪些类别最兴奋？
Education is easily that answer, and I spoke about that, and there are three reasons why.
教育很容易就是这个答案，我也谈到过这一点，原因有三个。
First and foremost, it’s of critical importance, not just societally, but of course to the individual.
首先也是最重要的，它不仅对社会而且对个人都至关重要。
Second, we have long expected fundamental disruption in education like healthcare, but third, it hasn’t happened.
其次，我们长期以来一直预计医疗保健等教育领域将受到根本性破坏，但第三，这种情况并没有发生。
You’d know this.
你会知道这一点。
There are no actual measurable improvements in productivity in education since the internet came out.
自互联网问世以来，教育生产力并没有实际可衡量的提高。
In fact, it’s the single highest-cost category growth in the United States, 1200 to 1400 percent at the high school, and then the secondary level.
事实上，这是美国成本增长最高的类别，高中为 1200% 至 1400%，然后是中学。
Why is that?
这是为什么？
That’s because we haven’t figured out how to teach students with fewer resources.
那是因为我们还没有弄清楚如何用较少的资源来教学生。
We haven’t figured out how to teach students better with the same resources.
我们还没有弄清楚如何使用相同的资源更好地教学生。
We haven’t figured out how to teach faster.
我们还没有弄清楚如何更快地教学。
Yet, when you talk about 3D — I’ll get to your moon point in a second — things become interesting.
然而，当你谈论 3D —— 我马上就会谈到你的月亮点 —— 事情就变得有趣了。
I learned about physics with a textbook.
我通过教科书了解了物理。
I watched a NASA commander drop a feather and a hammer on the moon and then watched my teacher do the same thing to start to understand how gravity works and what the differences are.
我看到美国宇航局指挥官在月球上扔下一根羽毛和一把锤子，然后看到我的老师也做了同样的事情，开始了解重力是如何工作的以及其中的差异。
The ability to build, especially with others, a sophisticated Rube Goldberg machine on Earth, then on Mars, in the clouds of Venus and beyond, and then to modulate gravity, is fascinating to me.
在地球上，然后在火星上，在金星云层和更远的地方建造一台复杂的鲁布·戈德堡机器，特别是与其他人一起建造，然后调节重力的能力，对我来说很着迷。
Dissecting a feral cat was something I got to do that was hard for many, that most people can’t afford to do, but that you can do at no marginal cost in virtual environments.
解剖一只野猫是我必须做的事情，这对很多人来说都很困难，大多数人负担不起，但你可以在虚拟环境中以无边际成本的方式完成。
In fact, you can shrink down into the Magic School Bus and travel the circulatory system.
事实上，您可以缩小到神奇校车并游览循环系统。
I think we often think about this linear question of I’ll go to a place that I can’t today, but you think of it as you, Tyler, a human roughly 6 feet tall, not what would I do if I were atomic?
我想我们经常思考这个线性问题：我会去一个我今天去不了的地方，但你把它想象成你，泰勒，一个大约 6 英尺高的人，而不是如果我是原子我会做什么？
What if I could be in a place that if I were there for half a second, I would be crushed instantaneously?
如果我身处一个只要我呆上半秒就会瞬间被压垮的地方怎么办？
What that means for education can be a lot.
这对教育意味着很多。
Let’s consider dating.
让我们考虑一下约会。
Let’s say nothing’s going to happen, not even a goodnight kiss.
假设什么都不会发生，甚至连晚安之吻都不会发生。
What percentage value is a metaverse date compared to a real-world date in meatspace?
与现实世界中的真实日期相比，虚拟宇宙日期的百分比是多少？
70 percent, 10 percent, 120 percent?
70%、10%、120%？
I don’t know about the numbers.
我不知道数字。
What we can say is, certainly, I think we’ve been surprised over the past 20 years by the degree of connection that’s achievable just through text on Tinder or Hinge.
当然，我们可以说的是，我认为在过去 20 年里，仅通过 Tinder 或 Hinge 上的文本即可实现的联系程度让我们感到惊讶。
The idea that extending that into games, which most platforms already have .
将其扩展到游戏中的想法，大多数平台已经有了。
.
。
.
。
The new CEO of MatchGroup, which owns Tinder and Hinge, is the former COO and president of Zynga.
拥有 Tinder 和 Hinge 的 MatchGroup 的新任首席执行官是 Zynga 的前首席运营官兼总裁。
The idea that you can extend that to games into virtual environments, which bring a sense of safety — especially to those who don’t feel safe going on dates with those they don’t know — use that to explore exactly what you just mentioned: a shared belief, opportunity, whether that’s religious or educational.
你可以将其扩展到虚拟环境中的游戏，从而带来安全感 ——尤其是对于那些与陌生人约会感到不安全的人 ——用它来探索你刚才提到的：共同的信仰、机会，无论是宗教的还是教育的。
That all makes sense to me.
这对我来说很有意义。
Do I think it’s going to supplant physical contact?
我认为这会取代身体接触吗？
Certainly not, but of course, extended reality, especially as relates to sex and other wearables and haptics, is going to be a big opportunity for these companies.
当然不是，但当然，扩展现实，特别是与性和其他可穿戴设备和触觉相关的扩展现实，将成为这些公司的一个巨大机会。
And that may actually be the answer of, it’s not replacing meatspace in a bar; it might be replacing it elsewhere.
这实际上可能是答案，它并没有取代酒吧里的肉空间；它只是取代了酒吧里的肉食空间。它可能会在其他地方取代它。
As I read your book, The Metaverse, which again, I’ll recommend highly, I have the impression you’re pretty optimistic about interoperability within the metaverse and an ultimate lack of market power.
当我读到你的书《The Metaverse》时，我再次强烈推荐这本书，我的印象是你对 Metaverse 内的互操作性和市场力量的最终缺乏非常乐观。
Now, if I look around the internet — I mean, most obviously, the Apple Store but also a lot of gaming platforms — you see 30 percent fees, or something in that neighborhood, all over the place.
现在，如果我环顾互联网 ——我的意思是，最明显的是苹果商店，还有很多游戏平台 ——你会看到 30% 的费用，或者附近的东西，到处都是。
Will the metaverse have the equivalent of a 30 percent fee?
虚拟宇宙会收取相当于 30% 的费用吗？
Or is it a truly competitive market where everything gets competed down to marginal cost?
或者这是一个真正竞争激烈的市场，一切都竞争到边际成本？
I think neither/nor.
我认为都不是/也不是。
I wouldn’t say that market power diffuses.
我不会说市场力量扩散了。
There’s currently this ethos, especially in the Web3 community, that decentralization needs to win and that decentralization can win.
目前有这样一种风气，尤其是在 Web3 社区中，去中心化需要获胜，而且去中心化也能获胜。
It’s a question of where on the spectrum are we?
问题是我们处于这个范围的哪个位置？
The early internet was obviously held back by heavy decentralization.
早期的互联网显然受到严重去中心化的阻碍。
This is one of the reasons why AOL was, for so many people, the primary onboarding experience.
这就是为什么 AOL 对于很多人来说是主要的入职体验的原因之一。
It was easy, cohesive, visual, vertically integrated down to the software, the browser experience, and so forth.
它简单、有凝聚力、可视化，垂直集成到软件、浏览器体验等等。
But we believe that the last 15 years has been too centralized.
但我们认为过去 15 年过于集中。
At the end of the day, no matter how decentralized the underlying protocols of the metaverse are, no matter how popular blockchains are, there are multiple forms of centralization.
归根结底，无论元宇宙的底层协议如何去中心化，无论区块链如何流行，中心化的形式都有多种。
Habit is powerful.
习惯的力量是强大的。
Brand is powerful — the associated trust, intellectual property, the fundamental feedback loops of revenue and scale that drive better product investment for more engineers.
品牌是强大的——相关的信任、知识产权、收入和规模的基本反馈循环，可以为更多工程师带来更好的产品投资。
So I struggle to imagine the future isn’t some form of today, a handful of varyingly horizontal-vertical software and hardware-based platforms that have disproportionate share and even more influence.
因此，我很难想象未来不是今天的某种形式，而是少数不同的水平垂直软件和基于硬件的平台，它们拥有不成比例的份额甚至更大的影响力。
But that doesn’t mean that they’re going to be as powerful as today.
但这并不意味着他们会像今天一样强大。
The 30 percent fee is definitely going to come by the wayside.
30%的费用肯定会被半途而废。
We see this in the EU, whose legislation dropped yesterday.
我们在欧盟看到了这一点，欧盟的立法昨天被撤销。
I have absolute certainty that that is going to go away.
我绝对确信这种情况将会消失。
The question is the timeline.
问题是时间表。
A lawyer joked yesterday, Apple is going to fight the EU until the heat death of the universe, and that’s probably likely.
一位律师昨天开玩笑说，苹果将与欧盟对抗，直到宇宙热寂，这很有可能。
But Apple will find other ways to control and extract, as is their profit motive.
但苹果会找到其他方式来控制和榨取，这也是他们的利润动机。
Where is the most likely place for that partial market power or centralization to show up?
部分市场力量或集中化最有可能出现在哪里？
Is it in the IP rights, in the payment system, the hardware provider, a cross-platform engine, somewhere else?
是在知识产权、支付系统、硬件提供商、跨平台引擎还是其他地方？
What’s the most likely choke point?
最有可能的瓶颈是什么？
There seem to be two different answers to that.
对此似乎有两种不同的答案。
Number one is software distribution.
第一个是软件分发。
This is your classic discovery and distribution of virtual experiences.
这是虚拟体验的经典发现和分发。
Steam does that.
蒸汽就是这么做的。
Roblox does that.
罗布乐思就是这么做的。
Google does that, frankly, the search engine.
坦率地说，谷歌的搜索引擎就是这么做的。
That gateway to virtual experiences typically affords you the opportunity to be the dominant identity system, the dominant payment system, and so on and so forth.
通往虚拟体验的门户通常会让您有机会成为主导的身份系统、主导的支付系统等等。
The other option is hardware.
另一个选择是硬件。
We can think of the metaverse as a persistent network of experiences, but as with the internet, it may exist literally and in abstraction, but you can only access it through a device.
我们可以将虚拟宇宙视为一个持久的体验网络，但与互联网一样，它可能确实存在且抽象存在，但您只能通过设备访问它。
Those device operators have an ever-growing network of APIs, experiences, technologies, technical requirements, and controls through which they can shape it.
这些设备运营商拥有一个不断增长的 API、经验、技术、技术要求和控制网络，他们可以通过这些网络来塑造它。
Now, you mentioned the EU.
现在，您提到了欧盟。
If everything or most things are truly interoperable in that world, is there meaning to the right to be forgotten, the right to have data deleted?
如果在那个世界中一切或大多数事物都真正可以互操作，那么被遗忘的权利、删除数据的权利还有意义吗？
Because your data, your actions bleed out into all these different places along the metaverse.
因为你的数据、你的行为会渗透到虚拟宇宙中所有这些不同的地方。
How do you then control it or call it back?
那么你如何控制它或回调它呢？
Wouldn’t the metaverse, as you and perhaps I envision it, run counter to current EU regulation?
正如您（也许是我）所设想的那样，虚拟世界是否会与欧盟现行法规背道而驰？
Not inherently, but you are getting into some of the technical challenges here.
本质上不是这样，但您在这里遇到了一些技术挑战。
Matthew Prince, who’s the founder and CEO of Cloudflare, believes that the primary role of edge computing in the metaverse is going to be data custody, that governments are going to require important data be forever maintained and held within national borders, and that instead, what you’ll have is anonymized tokens that are basically — I’m simplifying here — be exposed when and where required, opted in by the user with a likely instant obligation by the end platform to then forget, delete, disconnect.
Cloudflare 的创始人兼首席执行官 Matthew Prince 认为，边缘计算在虚拟世界中的主要作用将是数据托管，政府将要求重要数据在国界内永久维护和保存，相反，您将拥有的是匿名代币，这些代币基本上是“在需要的时间和地点公开，由用户选择加入，终端平台可能有立即忘记的义务，删除，断开连接。
Now, we all know things aren’t that simple, just like deleting a file of a hard drive.
现在，我们都知道事情并不那么简单，就像删除硬盘上的文件一样。
It’s there until you essentially rewrite it 10 times.
它会一直存在，直到您将其重写 10 次为止。
But we certainly see increased scrutiny and, frankly, a lot more investment in this.
但我们确实看到了越来越多的审查，坦率地说，这方面的投资也越来越多。
Let me give you a good example.
让我给你举一个很好的例子。
Most Oculus devices right now have two or four external-facing cameras.
目前大多数 Oculus 设备都有两个或四个外部摄像头。
The Apple device, if you pay attention to rumors, says that there will be 12 across multiple spectral bands.
如果你留意传言，苹果设备称将有 12 个跨多个光谱带的设备。
They’re going to run constantly.
他们会不断地奔跑。
They will see what your eyes don’t because your eyes are going to be obscured.
他们会看到你的眼睛看不到的东西，因为你的眼睛会被遮挡。
Your vision’s obscured.
你的视线被遮挡了。
That means — and my apologies for the example, but I think it’s helpful — if your young son or daughter was running naked through in the living room, it will capture that information, and you might never know.
这意味着 ——我对这个例子表示歉意，但我认为这是有帮助的——如果你年幼的儿子或女儿在客厅里赤身裸体地跑来跑去，它会捕捉到这些信息，而你可能永远不会知道。
The amount of investment — and I mean this sincerely — that is happening about what is instantly discarded, what is only available local, is actually pretty significant here.
投资额 ——我的意思是真诚的—— 正在发生的那些被立即丢弃的东西，那些只能在本地获得的东西，在这里实际上是相当重要的。
I do think that governments are paying a lot more attention than I expected, but certainly, as much as I hoped.
我确实认为政府的关注比我预期的要多得多，但当然，正如我所希望的那样。
But take email — email is fairly interoperable.
但以电子邮件为例——电子邮件具有相当的互操作性。
You can send all sorts of people emails.
您可以向各种人发送电子邮件。
If you shouted to the clouds, “Delete all the emails I’ve sent,” nothing’s really going to happen.
如果你对着云端大喊“删除我发送的所有电子邮件”，那么什么也不会发生。
Maybe the EU would delete the emails you sent to the EU, but it’s out there.
也许欧盟会删除您发送给欧盟的电子邮件，但它就在那里。
Why won’t most of a fairly interoperable metaverse be like email, where there is no right to be forgotten, which by the way, I’m fine with, but the law is the law in the EU.
为什么大部分具有相当互操作性的元宇宙不会像电子邮件一样，没有被遗忘的权利，顺便说一句，我对此很满意，但法律就是欧盟的法律。
And aren’t they now hindering attempts to build a workable metaverse?
他们现在不是在阻碍建立可行的虚拟宇宙的尝试吗？
I wouldn’t say that they’re hindering.
我不会说他们在阻碍。
I think we’re coming up against the challenges of what’s a desired outcome and what’s a technically realizable outcome.
我认为我们正在面临什么是期望的结果以及什么是技术上可实现的结果的挑战。
For example, the EU is mandating interoperability of messaging services.
例如，欧盟正在强制要求消息服务的互操作性。
They’re saying, “iMessage, and WhatsApp, you have to interoperate.” That’s actually good.
他们说，“iMessage 和 WhatsApp，你必须互操作。”这其实很好。
The government’s doing exactly what they’re doing with electrical ports — standardizing outlets.
政府正在做的正是他们在电力端口方面所做的事情——标准化插座。
They’re now forcing Apple and others to use USB-C instead of Lightning — same thing.
他们现在迫使苹果和其他公司使用 USB-C 而不是 Lightning ——同样的事情。
Good.
好的。
Common languages for exchange of information.
用于信息交换的通用语言。
The flip side of that is, the EU is also requiring it to meet the same level of encryption and security as your own self-managed system.
另一方面是，欧盟还要求它满足与您自己的自我管理系统相同的加密和安全级别。
Most technologists come to the strict answer, which is these two things are not compatible.
大多数技术专家得出严格的答案，那就是这两件事是不兼容的。
You fundamentally can’t exchange information, least of all to multiple other parties whose servers you don’t own, with the same level of security.
从根本上讲，您无法以相同的安全级别交换信息，尤其是与不属于您的服务器的多个其他方交换信息。
So, we’re seeing some of these tensions right now.
所以，我们现在看到了一些紧张局势。
Now, I’ve known a few people who don’t have email and don’t have any plausible social media substitute, but it’s really very few people at this point, especially in wealthier countries.
现在，我认识一些人没有电子邮件，也没有任何合理的社交媒体替代品，但目前这样的人真的很少，尤其是在富裕国家。
What do you think is the most likely year where the same will be true for the metaverse?
您认为元宇宙最有可能出现同样情况的年份是哪一年？
Like, yeah, some people aren’t in it, but you more or less have to be in it to be doing things.
就像，是的，有些人不参与其中，但你或多或少必须参与其中才能做事。
What’s your point estimate?
您的预估点是多少？
I think the more important thing to observe is that they are on the internet.
我认为更重要的是要观察他们在互联网上。
They’re just not actively on it.
他们只是不积极参与其中。
When you walk into most buildings today, of course, closed-circuit camera television is not working that way anymore — it’s actually on IP.
当然，当你走进今天的大多数建筑物时，闭路电视已经不再那样工作了 ——它实际上是在 IP 上。
When you badge into a building, your passcode authentication is over IP.
当您进入建筑物时，您的密码身份验证是通过 IP 进行的。
The point-of-sale terminal is on the internet.
销售点终端位于互联网上。
Of course, most things that you do now require some form of digital identity, whether you manage it or not.
当然，您现在所做的大多数事情都需要某种形式的数字身份，无论您是否管理它。
This is important because there are many who believe that (a) they’re never going to want to play a game, (b) they’re never going to be interested in a VR headset, © they can’t see the practical applications of the metaverse, but most of it’s going to be behind the scenes.
这很重要，因为很多人认为（a）他们永远不会想玩游戏，（b）他们永远不会对 VR 耳机感兴趣，©他们看不到虚拟世界的实际应用，但大部分都将在幕后进行。
The Hong Kong international airport is now a real-time 3D simulation that is used to shape where you are in the airport.
香港国际机场现在是一个实时 3D 模拟，用于塑造您在机场的位置。
It’s tracking you in real-time.
它正在实时跟踪您。
So, that answer is actually 2020 if you went through that airport.
所以，如果您经过那个机场，答案实际上是 2020 年。
But most people don’t go through that airport.
但大多数人不会经过那个机场。
The world as a whole, the suburban housewife in southern Ohio, who was once the median voter — when will she just clearly be in the metaverse in a self-conscious way?
整个世界，俄亥俄州南部的郊区家庭主妇，曾经是中间选民 ——她什么时候才能以一种自我意识的方式清楚地处于虚拟宇宙中？
If you asked her, “Do you have email?” she would say yes.
如果你问她：“你有电子邮件吗？”她会说是的。
“Are you in the metaverse?” She would say yes.
“你在虚拟宇宙吗？”她会说是的。
Is that 2080?
那是2080年吗？
Is that 2040?
那是2040年吗？
The median person, I would kick this out more than 15 years.
对于中位数的人来说，我会把这个问题踢掉 15 年以上。
But I will say one of the easy indicators that we can see, without conflating Roblox to the internet — because that would be like saying AOL is the internet — three-quarters of kids in the United States, UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, three-quarters between the ages of 9 and 12 use Roblox, a single metaverse-style platform — only organized around consumer leisure — regularly.
但我会说我们可以看到的一个简单指标，而不是把 Roblox 与互联网混为一谈——因为这就像说 AOL 就是互联网一样——美国、英国、加拿大、新西兰、澳大利亚有四分之三的孩子，其中四分之三的 9 岁到 12 岁的孩子使用 Roblox，这是一个单一的虚拟世界风格的平台——只围绕消费者休闲而组织——定期进行。
That is actually just succession, generationally.
这实际上只是世代相传。
A few questions about gaming.
关于游戏的一些问题。
You must know plenty of gamers.
你一定认识很多游戏玩家。
Just observationally, how happy do you think professional gamers are?
观察一下，你认为职业玩家有多幸福？
Professional gamers are relatively few.
职业玩家相对较少。
The average income is not particularly high.
平均收入不是特别高。
The number of employees is not very high, but I’ll tell you, most of them treat it like a job.
员工数量不是很多，但我告诉你，他们大多数人都把它当成一份工作。
It’s hard.
这很难。
Ninja, for example, used to stream 8 to 10 hours per day, 6 days a week on Twitch.
例如，Ninja 过去每周 6 天、每天在 Twitch 上直播 8 到 10 小时。
If he stopped streaming for 48 hours, he’d lose tens of thousands of subscribers.
如果他停止直播 48 小时，他就会失去数万名订阅者。
He’d see, essentially, minute-by-minute income drops.
从本质上讲，他会看到收入每分钟都在下降。
Counter-strike players, I’ve seen, will sit in a room for five hours doing drills, not unlike Ronaldo on a soccer pitch.
我见过，反恐精英球员会在房间里坐五个小时进行训练，就像足球场上的罗纳尔多一样。
They will constantly turn virtual corners.
他们将不断地扭转虚拟的困境。
Then, in milliseconds, shoot with a mouse a specific brick on a wall, 12 feet high, and they will just do drills over and over, incredibly intensive.
然后，在几毫秒内，用鼠标射击 12 英尺高的墙上的特定砖块，他们就会一遍又一遍地进行练习，强度令人难以置信。
Are they happy?
他们幸福吗？
Well, if they can make ends meet, and they’re pleased with their performance, and they’re happy they’re doing what they’re doing, yes.
好吧，如果他们能够收支平衡，并且对自己的表现感到满意，并且很高兴自己正在做自己正在做的事情，那么是的。
But it’s a toll, like any professional athlete.
但这是一个代价，就像任何职业运动员一样。
Holding real income constant, what’s the number of hours a day, say, for five, six days a week, that you feel maximizes the happiness part of being part of gaming — metaverse, internet, whatever is going on at the moment.
保持实际收入不变，每天花多少小时，比如说，每周五、六天，你觉得参与游戏 ——元宇宙、互联网、无论当下发生的任何事情的幸福感最大化。
Like Nakamura, the chess player — he streams an incredible number of hours, probably more than he wants to, but yes, the income is important, but again, holding his income constant.
就像国际象棋棋手中村一样，他的直播时间令人难以置信，可能比他想要的要多，但是，收入确实很重要，但同样，要保持收入不变。
At what number of streaming hours are these people most happy?
这些人在直播时最开心的时间是多少？
Is it three or four?
是三个还是四个？
Or they love it at the ninth hour?
或者他们喜欢在第九个小时？
Most of them will say that, ideally, they would do two to three hours, four to five days a week.
他们中的大多数人会说，理想情况下，他们每周工作四到五天，工作两到三个小时。
I think the big hope — and we’re seeing this with a lot of new technologies — is that it’s still a broadcast model, and it’s still on time delay, which is to say, your audience is responding to what you did 5 to 30 seconds ago, and they have no real interaction beyond sending an emoji and cheering you on, perhaps voting on the next game that you play.
我认为最大的希望————我们在很多新技术中看到了这一点————它仍然是一种广播模式，而且仍然存在时间延迟，也就是说，你的观众正在对你 5 到 30 秒前所做的事情做出反应，除了发送表情符号和为你加油之外，他们没有真正的互动，也许会对你玩的下一款游戏进行投票。
There’s some hope that when you start to engage the audience more directly, that that mixes up the variety.
有人希望，当你开始更直接地吸引观众时，就会混合多样性。
Also creates more fun for the individual streamer who is otherwise essentially alone, talking to themselves, reading a scroll.
也为那些基本上是孤独的个人主播创造更多乐趣，自言自语，阅读卷轴。
A lot of people do a lot of gaming, as you’ve stressed.
正如您所强调的那样，很多人都玩很多游戏。
Gaming means stories, often wonderful, compelling stories in the most successful games.
游戏意味着故事，在最成功的游戏中通常都是精彩、引人入胜的故事。
Politically, how do you feel gaming shapes people’s attitudes?
从政治角度来说，您认为游戏如何影响人们的态度？
They’re competing a lot more.
他们的竞争更加激烈。
They’re in environments that are, at least in a micro sense, quite meritocratic.
他们所处的环境至少在微观意义上是相当精英化的。
How does it shape their overall worldview?
它如何塑造他们的整体世界观？
Well, I would start by saying that the fundamental innovation/discovery of the past 10 years is that the TAM for what we call games with game-like objectives was low.
好吧，我首先要说的是，过去 10 年的根本创新/发现是，我们所说的具有类游戏目标的游戏的 TAM 很低。
What’s a game-like objective?
什么是类似游戏的目标？
Win, kill, shoot, defeat, score, beat.
获胜、击杀、射击、失败、得分、击败。
What’s a non-game-like objective?
什么是非游戏目标？
Create, explore, collaborate, identify, express, design.
创造、探索、协作、识别、表达、设计。
If you ask most people what’s the best-selling exclusive title on the Nintendo Switch — Nintendo’s most successful console in 30 years — they would probably guess the Legend of Zelda, Super Mario.
如果你问大多数人，Nintendo Switch 上最畅销的独占游戏是什么——“任天堂 30 年来最成功的游戏机”——他们可能会猜测是《塞尔达传说》、《超级马里奥》。
The answer is Animal Crossing by about 50 percent in sales.
答案是《动物森友会》的销量增长了约 50%。
It’s nearly 50 percent penetrated in their 90 million user base.
它在 9000 万用户群中的渗透率接近 50%。
It’s virtual gardening.
这是虚拟园艺。
It’s virtual arts and crafts.
这是虚拟的艺术和工艺品。
Roblox alone exceeds the entire de-duplicated size of the PlayStation, Xbox, and Switch universe — just that platform.
Roblox 本身就超过了 PlayStation、Xbox 和 Switch 宇宙 的整个重复数据删除规模——仅此一个平台。
These games that are focused on socializing and creation are much, much bigger.
这些专注于社交和创造的游戏规模要大得多。
In hindsight, that seems obvious.
事后看来，这似乎是显而易见的。
How many people want to come home from a long day at work and play a zero-sum game of killing one another, of shooting?
有多少人想结束一天漫长的工作回到家，玩一场互相残杀、射击的零和游戏？
But it turns out, most game developers didn’t bet that, and they were wrong.
但事实证明，大多数游戏开发商并没有这么做，他们错了。
That focus seems more positive.
这种关注似乎更加积极。
So, it brings out homo ludens, the play in human beings.
因此，它带来了“homo ludens”，即人类的游戏。
Then, which attitudes in the real world does that shape, and how?
那么，这会塑造现实世界中的哪些态度，又是如何塑造的呢？
You play a lot more time than you used to because you can do it through the metaverse, and then you step into your normal life, and you’re different in which way because of that?
你玩游戏的时间比以前多了很多，因为你可以通过虚拟宇宙来玩，然后你就进入了正常的生活，因此你在哪些方面有所不同？
Tobi Lütke, who’s the founder of Shopify, talks about his time in StarCraft being one of the most important lessons in being a founder.
Shopify 的创始人 Tobi Lütke 谈到，他在《星际争霸》中的经历是作为创始人最重要的教训之一。
He actually says it’s more important than anything he learned in school because you have to learn how to make rapid decisions.
他实际上说这比他在学校学到的任何东西都重要，因为你必须学会如何快速做出决定。
This is StarCraft — it’s a specific game.
这就是《星际争霸》——这是一款特定的游戏。
You have to play strategically.
你必须有策略地玩。
You have to know how your teammates are likely to operate and what they’re likely to need before you have time to ask.
在你有时间询问之前，你必须知道你的队友可能会如何操作以及他们可能需要什么。
And you also need to understand that some of the things that you do are not for you, but they’re to distract your competitors.
而且你还需要明白，你所做的一些事情并不是为了你自己，而是为了分散你的竞争对手的注意力。
These are pretty good forms of education and learning.
这些都是很好的教育和学习形式。
If you believe your kids need to become better at listening, at collaborating, at having shared objectives, at perhaps doing not what they prefer to do, nor even what they’re best at, but a secondary role to support their broader team’s objectives, they’re essentially spending hours a day doing that in lieu of what they used to do, which was just watch TV alone, passively disengaged.
如果你认为你的孩子需要更好地倾听、合作、拥有共同的目标，也许不做他们喜欢做的事，甚至不做他们最擅长的事，而是扮演次要角色来支持更广泛的团队目标，那么他们基本上每天都会花几个小时来做这些事情，而不是像以前那样，只是被动地看电视，被动地闲逛。
Some forms of education we’ve gamified for quite a while, like learning chess online.
我们已经将某些形式的教育游戏化了很长一段时间，例如在线学习国际象棋。
It’s completely gamified.
它完全游戏化了。
It’s not new; it works extremely well.
这并不新鲜；它运作得非常好。
Not everyone does it, but it’s there.
不是每个人都这样做，但它就在那里。
Completely has passed a market test.
完全通过了市场检验。
The fact that it’s possible in some areas — does that imply it’s already maxed out?
事实上，在某些领域这是可能的 ——这是否意味着它已经达到极限了？
Are there other areas where you might hope it works?
您是否希望它在其他领域发挥作用？
Like, “Oh, we’re going to gamify learning in astronomy.” Maybe that has only modest potential because it’s already succeeded where it can work.
就像，“哦，我们要把天文学的学习游戏化。”也许这只有有限的潜力，因为它已经在可以发挥作用的地方取得了成功。
This is a fun and complex question.
这是一个有趣而复杂的问题。
I think part of the answer is, of course, we have gamified astronomy education.
我认为部分答案当然是我们已经游戏化了天文学教育。
We have gamified education.
我们有游戏化的教育。
To some extent, that’s what letter grades are in school systems where your grades don’t really matter, or at younger grades where that’s not actually how you’re scored at the end of the year.
在某种程度上，这就是学校系统中的字母成绩，你的成绩并不重要，或者在较低的年级，这实际上并不是你在年底的分数。
What do we think a gold star or triple gold star or a bronze star is?
我们认为金星、三重金星或铜星是什么？
That’s gamification.
这就是游戏化。
The idea that we have new forums to do so, perhaps new things to award, especially things that have more durability.
我们有新的论坛可以做到这一点，也许可以奖励新的东西，尤其是那些更耐用的东西。
A gold star — I don’t have my gold stars.
一颗金星 —— 我没有金星。
I can’t wear my gold stars now, but the idea that that has a little bit more continuity and lifespan to a younger consumer helps.
我现在不能戴金星了，但是对于年轻消费者来说，金星具有更多的连续性和寿命，这一想法有所帮助。
John Riccitiello, the founder and CEO of Unity, makes the point that gamifying education in a 3D space has all of the benefits of today’s custom AI-based tutorials, which is to say, “Tyler, you’re advanced.
Unity 创始人兼首席执行官 John Riccitiello 指出，3D 空间中的游戏化教育具有当今基于 AI 的定制教程的所有优势，也就是说，“Tyler，你很先进。
You’re learning very quickly.
你学得很快。
Let’s change the course,” but on another dimension with a lot richer detail.
让我们改变路线”，但在另一个维度上有更丰富的细节。
If we take young people who do not game — and I mean do not game at all, really — thinking of yourself as like a product market consultant, what is most typically the relevant obstacle, at the margin, for them not gaming?
如果我们把不玩游戏的年轻人——我的意思是根本不玩游戏，真的——将自己视为产品市场顾问，那么对于他们不玩游戏来说，最典型的相关障碍是什么？
Historically — and we just hit on this a bit — it was that games weren’t designed for them.
从历史上看——我们只是偶然发现了这一点——游戏并不是为他们设计的。
But if you take a look right now, as I mentioned, if you have 75 percent of children 9 to 12 in most Western markets playing a single title, the answer is, it was what was available.
但如果你现在看看，正如我提到的，如果大多数西方市场 75% 的 9 至 12 岁儿童都在玩一款游戏，那么答案就是，这就是可用的游戏。
To some extent, it was the tools that were available.
在某种程度上，这是可用的工具。
Again, Roblox is not just non-game-like, but it’s also organized around both playing things, but also creating your own things to play.
再说一次，Roblox 不仅不像游戏，而且它还围绕着玩的东西进行组织，而且还可以创建你自己的玩的东西。
That additionally diversifies what’s available.
这也使得可用的内容更加多样化。
The other thing that’s important here is, it’s often a question of who, not just what, not just which technology.
这里另一件重要的事情是，这通常是一个是谁的问题，而不仅仅是什么技术，不仅仅是哪种技术的问题。
Network effects or Metcalfe’s Law supposes that you have nonlinear improvements to a product as the number of people who engage with it or use it grows.
网络效应或梅特卡夫定律假设，随着参与或使用产品的人数增加，产品会出现非线性改进。
That might mean that a product, on itself, is not appealing enough to the average 8-year-old or 14-year-old.
这可能意味着产品本身对于普通 8 岁或 14 岁的孩子来说没有足够的吸引力。
But if three or four of their friends are now using it, which is the degree of saturation we’re now getting to, the product is technically unchanged, but its relevance and appeal to you might be multiples higher.
但是，如果他们的三四个朋友现在正在使用它，这就是我们现在达到的饱和程度，那么该产品在技术上没有变化，但它的相关性和对你的吸引力可能会高出几倍。
That seems to be the critical point.
这似乎是关键点。
Is the internet, on net, good for 12- to 14-year-old American girls right now?
现在的互联网对 12 到 14 岁的美国女孩来说有好处吗？
Tyler, can you say that again?
泰勒，你能再说一遍吗？
The internet.
互联网。
Use of the internet.
使用互联网。
Extensive use of the internet.
广泛使用互联网。
On net, is it a good thing for 12- to 14-year-old American girls right now, or a bad thing, on net?
网络对于现在12岁到14岁的美国女孩来说是好事还是坏事？
On net, I think it’s a good thing, but that doesn’t mean that we aren’t falling terribly short in many different areas.
在网络上，我认为这是一件好事，但这并不意味着我们在许多不同领域没有严重落后。
This is actually one of the reasons why I’m optimistic about the changes that might come into play as to which consumer services, platforms, brands are likely to lead in the future rather than the past.
这实际上是我对可能发生的变化持乐观态度的原因之一，这些变化可能会影响哪些消费者服务、平台、品牌可能在未来而不是过去发挥主导作用。
Let’s take, for example, the fact that Microsoft’s most expensive acquisition ever — indeed, the most expensive acquisition in big tech history — is of a gaming company, Activision Blizzard, $75 billion in enterprise value.
举个例子，微软有史以来最昂贵的收购——事实上，大型科技史上最昂贵的收购——是对一家游戏公司动视暴雪的收购，其企业价值为 750 亿美元。
When they made that acquisition, at the final line of the first draft, CEO Satya Nadella said it’s to provide the building blocks for the metaverse.
当他们在初稿的最后一行进行收购时，首席执行官 Satya Nadella 表示，这是为了为虚拟宇宙提供构建模块。
So, we know these companies are important, but how are they different?
所以，我们知道这些公司很重要，但它们有何不同？
Consider the issues of happiness, toxicity, and the role of algorithms in social media today versus video games.
考虑一下快乐、毒性以及算法在当今社交媒体与视频游戏中的作用等问题。
The rule sets are usually very binary around laws: abuse, toxicity, and harassment.
规则集通常围绕法律非常二元化：滥用、恶意和骚扰。
I swore at you, I encouraged self-harm, I used a racial term.
我向你发誓，我鼓励自残，我使用了种族术语。
That’s a bannable offense on a social media platform.
在社交媒体平台上，这是一种可被禁止的行为。
The perspective for gaming companies is very different.
游戏公司的观点截然不同。
Why?
为什么？
Because you’re only going to play a game if you are having fun.
因为只有当你玩得开心时，你才会玩游戏。
You might scroll a newsfeed out of a sense of sick addiction or compulsion, but you’re not going to play a game for hours that makes you feel bad, so they have a different approach to moderation.
你可能出于病态的成瘾或强迫感而滚动新闻源，但你不会玩几个小时让你感觉不好的游戏，所以他们有不同的节制方法。
They call it griefing.
他们称之为悲伤。
The ethos of griefing is whether or not you’re adversely affecting someone else’s sense of fun.
悲伤的精神是你是否对别人的乐趣产生了负面影响。
I might reply to every one of your tweets, Tyler, within ToS or terms of service, just to nitpick, just to bother you.
泰勒，我可能会在服务条款或服务条款内回复你的每一条推文，只是为了挑剔，只是为了打扰你。
I know that I can quibble over and over, point to an old tweet of yours and say, “Look, you were wrong.” That’s going to make you feel bad over time, but it’s not a bannable offense.
我知道我可以一遍又一遍地狡辩，指着你的一条旧推文说：“看，你错了。”随着时间的推移，这会让你感觉很糟糕，但这并不是一种可被禁止的罪行。
This is the world, of course.
当然，这就是世界。
It’s not you doing it, but it happens, yes.
不是你做的，但它确实发生了，是的。
Yes.
是的。
But in a video game, they moderate that.
但在电子游戏中，他们会调节这一点。
That’s a bannable offense.
这是一种可被禁止的罪行。
I’m not going to say that moving into a social forum, into politics, into greater economic concerns doesn’t make moderation easier.
我并不是说进入社会论坛、进入政治、进入更大的经济问题并不会让节制变得更容易。
Of course, it’s going to be harder.
当然，这会更难。
Fortnite and Roblox have a relatively easy time because this premise is leisure, not much more.
Fortnite 和 Roblox 的日子相对轻松，因为前提是休闲，仅此而已。
But their philosophy — what a game designer is trained for culturally for decades, what they optimize for — is actually very distinct from how a relatively static, impersonal algorithm and platform does.
但他们的理念——“游戏设计师几十年来接受的文化训练，他们优化的目标——”实际上与相对静态、客观的算法和平台的运作方式截然不同。
That gives me some hope that if the internet’s a force for good, on net, that the philosophies of the companies that seem to be at the forefront of the metaverse will be marginally better.
这给了我一些希望，如果互联网是一股向善的力量，那么那些似乎处于虚拟宇宙最前沿的公司的理念将会稍微好一些。
Are you up for a round of overrated versus underrated?
您准备好迎接一轮高估与低估的较量了吗？
Let’s do it.
我们开始做吧。
I’ll toss it out.
我会把它扔掉。
RSS feeds — overrated or underrated?
RSS 提要 — 被高估还是低估？
Marc Andreessen loves RSS.
马克·安德森 (Marc Andreessen) 喜欢 RSS。
He still does it.
他仍然这样做。
We learned this in a previous podcast.
我们在之前的播客中了解到了这一点。
What do you think?
你怎么认为？
I know.
我知道。
I listened to it.
我听了。
Interesting question.
有趣的问题。
I would say they’re overrated because, as much as I like them as an open-source technologist — I discovered Marginal Revolution back in the Google Reader days through its social feeds — no one uses them, and consumers seem pretty clear that they don’t want them.
我想说它们被高估了，因为尽管我作为一名开源技术专家很喜欢它们 —— 我在 Google Reader 时代通过其社交信息流发现了 Marginal Revolution —— 没有人使用它们，而且消费者似乎很清楚他们不想要它们。
That makes them overrated among those who talk about them.
这使得他们在谈论他们的人中被高估了。
The Nick Bostrom argument that probably we are living in a simulation.
尼克·博斯特罗姆认为我们可能生活在一个模拟中。
We’re already part of a game or someone’s metaverse.
我们已经是游戏或某人的虚拟世界的一部分。
True or false?
是真是假？
I’d say false, but every day we get more confirmatory evidence that someone has fallen asleep at the keyboard and the simulation has gone quite, quite wrong.
我想说这是假的，但我们每天都会得到更多确凿的证据，表明有人在键盘上睡着了，而模拟已经完全错误了。
The new Disney+ show, Obi-Wan Kenobi, if you’ve seen it.
新的迪士尼+节目《欧比旺·克诺比》，如果你看过的话。
Terrible.
糟糕的。
Why terrible?
为什么可怕？
It shouldn’t exist, and it never justifies its existence and actually seems relatively indifferent in trying to answer that question.
它不应该存在，而且它从不证明其存在的合理性，而且在试图回答这个问题时实际上似乎相对漠不关心。
In terms of recent Star Wars creations, what’s the one you would recommend, if any?
就最近的《星球大战》创作而言，您会推荐哪一个（如果有的话）？
The Mandalorian gets closest.
曼达洛人离得最近。
What do you like about that?
你喜欢那个什么？
It tells, or told, the most stand-alone character, and that’s freeing.
它讲述了，或者说，讲述了最独立的角色，这就是自由。
It’s a mid-cool, yes, but it’s not really in service of any narrative that we’ve seen before, nor, of course, the same old soap opera of the Skywalkers.
是的，这是一部中等酷的作品，但它并不是真正为我们以前看过的任何叙事服务，当然也不是天行者的老肥皂剧。
There’s a guy on Twitter.
推特上有一个人。
I think his name is Carnivore Aurelius.
我认为他的名字是食肉动物奥勒留。
He recommends sunning your genitals.
他建议晒生殖器。
Overrated or underrated?
被高估还是被低估？
Probably underrated, if just because of American stigmas as towards genitalia.
可能被低估了，如果只是因为美国人对生殖器的耻辱。
I’ll tell you something funny as a producer in TV and film.
作为电视和电影制片人，我会告诉你一些有趣的事情。
If you’ve watched most new scripted drama series, you’ll note that the tolerance of violence at a PG level has become quite, quite high.
如果你看过最新的剧本电视剧，你会发现 PG 级别的暴力容忍度已经变得非常非常高。
I think of Stranger Things, for example.
例如，我想到了《怪奇物语》。
Have you seen the most recent season of Stranger Things?
你看过最新一季的《怪奇物语》吗？
No, I haven’t, but I know what it is.
不，我没有，但我知道那是什么。
A bunch of high schoolers are possessed, and, quite visibly, all four of their limbs are broken multiple times.
一群高中生被附身，而且很明显，他们的四个肢体都被多次折断。
Their eyes are shattered, or they explode and they bleed.
他们的眼睛被打碎，或者爆炸并流血。
It’s a PG or PG-13 ranking.
这是 PG 或 PG-13 排名。
There’s actually very, very little you can do in Hollywood violence-wise to get above a PG-13 rating.
实际上，在好莱坞暴力方面，你几乎无能为力才能获得 PG-13 级以上的评级。
But you get anywhere close to genitals, and it does not matter, you’re going up in rating.
但当你接近生殖器时，这并不重要，你的评分会上升。
Second Life — the older version of a kind of metaverse.
《第二人生》——一种元宇宙的旧版本。
Better or worse than we used to think?
比我们想象的更好还是更糟？
Do we look back and it’s like, “Wow, they were so far ahead of their time,” or do we look back and it’s like, “They really didn’t do very much with that one”?
当我们回首往事时，我们是否会觉得，“哇，他们远远领先于他们的时代”，或者我们回首往事时，会觉得，“他们真的没有在那个方面做太多事情”？
I would say underrated because the number of strange, emergent behaviors on that platform are undercovered.
我想说被低估是因为该平台上奇怪的、紧急的行为数量未被发现。
Why?
为什么？
Because not enough of us used it, and in fact, if you compare it to most metaverse-style platforms today, there was a very laissez-faire approach.
因为我们没有足够多的人使用它，事实上，如果你将它与当今大多数元宇宙风格的平台进行比较，就会发现这是一种非常自由放任的方法。
The “government” didn’t actually intermediate transactions.
“政府”实际上并不中介交易。
You and I could make a direct purchase.
你和我可以直接购买。
You could create a business, and much like the US government, they don’t really know it exists.
你可以创建一家企业，就像美国政府一样，他们并不真正知道它的存在。
They just know that you’re paying tax, so to speak.
可以这么说，他们只知道你正在纳税。
That led to all of these strange outcomes.
这导致了所有这些奇怪的结果。
There was a point in time in which most of the citizens actually rebelled, claiming that the tax rate was too high.
曾经有一段时间，大多数公民确实反抗，声称税率太高。
So, because of how open it was, and because of the early adopters to virtual worlds in 2003 to 2006, you had a very strange collective of users.
因此，由于它的开放性，并且由于 2003 年至 2006 年虚拟世界的早期采用者，您拥有了一群非常奇怪的用户。
There are a lot of odd lessons that today’s platforms seem actually devolved, not evolved, from.
今天的平台似乎实际上是从许多奇怪的教训中继承下来的，而不是进化而来的。
Sex in the metaverse — are we expecting too much or too little from it?
虚拟宇宙中的性 ——我们对它的期望是过高还是过低？
Too little.
太少了。
Too little.
太少了。
What’s the thing we’re most likely to do that most people haven’t thought of yet?
我们最有可能做但大多数人还没有想到的事情是什么？
I don’t mean act.
我的意思不是行动。
You don’t have to describe it graphically, but conceptually, how would you explain it?
你不必用图形来描述它，但从概念上来说，你会如何解释它？
You’re really putting me in a tough spot here, Tyler.
你真的让我陷入了困境，泰勒。
Well, let’s start from the following.
好吧，我们就从下面开始吧。
I talk a lot in my book about the way in which the hegemony of Apple and Google adversely affects the digital economy at large.
我在书中谈到了苹果和谷歌的霸权对整个数字经济产生不利影响的方式。
The 30 percent tax or fee is a really clear example of that, but separate is how they legislate the technologies you can and cannot use, the business models you can and cannot deploy, and frankly, a degree of puritanism.
30% 的税收或费用就是一个非常明显的例子，但单独的是他们如何立法你可以使用和不能使用的技术、你可以或不能部署的商业模式，以及坦率地说，一定程度的清教主义。
We know that, basically, the five most popular pornography sites, including OnlyFans, are among the 50 most visited websites globally in nearly every market.
我们知道，基本上，包括 OnlyFans 在内的 5 个最受欢迎的色情网站几乎在每个市场都跻身全球访问量最大的 50 个网站之列。
None of them are allowed an application, not one, because we know that Steve Jobs did not believe in it.
他们中没有人被允许申请，一个也没有，因为我们知道史蒂夫·乔布斯不相信它。
Of course, if you’ve read Walter Isaacson’s book on Steve, you know that his personal views are not particularly aligned with his sense of custody over children on the platform, but of course, that’s fine.
当然，如果你读过沃尔特·艾萨克森（Walter Isaacson）关于史蒂夫的书，你就会知道他的个人观点与他对平台上孩子的监护权并不是特别一致，但这当然没关系。
Pornography videos, images play fine in the web browser.
色情视频、图像在网络浏览器中可以正常播放。
But if you want to do something in haptics, in sensors, with Bluetooth devices, or you want to do something in 3D, you need an app.
但如果您想在触觉、传感器、蓝牙设备方面做一些事情，或者您想在 3D 方面做一些事情，您需要一个应用程序。
Why?
为什么？
Because you need to access local APIs.
因为你需要访问本地API。
Notice how you hate watching Netflix in a web browser on your iPhone.
请注意，您多么讨厌在 iPhone 上的网络浏览器中观看 Netflix。
You’d rather do it in an app.
您宁愿在应用程序中执行此操作。
That’s because apps perform better.
那是因为应用程序性能更好。
Well, you basically can’t run sophisticated XR hardware or 3D in the browser by design.
好吧，你基本上无法在设计上在浏览器中运行复杂的 XR 硬件或 3D。
Actually, what we might or might not want to do in the metaverse when it comes to sex is essentially all blocked right now.
事实上，当涉及到性时，我们在虚拟宇宙中可能想做或可能不想做的事情现在基本上都被阻止了。
It’s not an option, can’t do it, won’t be allowed.
这不是一个选择，不能这样做，也不会被允许。
It’s partly, to be fair, because the platforms don’t want to take a fee on sex work, as you can understand.
公平地说，部分原因是平台不想收取性工作费用，正如你可以理解的那样。
But of course, they also don’t want to provide exceptions to more and more business cases, so they just block it outright.
但当然，他们也不想为越来越多的业务案例提供例外，所以他们只是直接阻止它。
Most states, county, city governments — they outlaw prostitution, escort services.
大多数州、县、市政府都禁止卖淫、陪护服务。
Will that still hold for the metaverse, do you think?
你认为这对于虚拟宇宙仍然适用吗？
Just as a legal prediction, not how well they’ll enforce it.
就像法律预测一样，而不是他们执行得如何。
Will there be an actual attempt to stop people from trading some kind of haptic sex for money through internet, metaverse, whatever it is we have set up?
是否会真正尝试阻止人们通过互联网、虚拟宇宙或我们建立的任何东西来交易某种触觉性爱以换取金钱？
Will there be an attempt?
会有尝试吗？
Unquestionable.
毫无疑问。
But a pretty successful attempt?
但这是一次相当成功的尝试吗？
Like 48 of 50 states have passed this law, and they at least try to enforce it a bit.
50 个州中有 48 个州通过了这项法律，并且他们至少尝试稍微执行一下。
Very unlikely.
不太可能。
Why is that?
这是为什么？
Well, partly because you come into the fundamental question of what exactly are you blocking?
好吧，部分原因是你遇到了一个基本问题：你到底在阻止什么？
Again, Tyler, you’re putting me in a weird spot here, but of course, there are applications right now that you can use an adult toy that allows you to press a button on your iPhone that sends a sensation to a partner who may be using another device a thousand miles away.
泰勒，你再次让我陷入了一个奇怪的境地，但是当然，现在有一些应用程序可以让你使用成人玩具，让你按下 iPhone 上的按钮，向可能在一千英里外使用另一台设备的伴侣发送一种感觉。
That actually doesn’t require a sex act by the person pressing the button.
这实际上并不需要按下按钮的人进行性行为。
So, these fundamental questions — it kind of requires a classification of sex act that is very hard to describe, despite prior Supreme Court efforts to do so by abstraction.
因此，这些基本问题需要对性行为进行分类，而这种分类很难描述，尽管最高法院之前曾努力通过抽象来进行分类。
Extending that into specific instantiation of people thousands of miles apart, using devices that aren’t connected to one another, where the actual motion need not at all correspond to the receiving sensation — I think is going to be challenging.
将其扩展到相距数千英里的人们的特定实例，使用彼此不连接的设备，其中实际运动根本不需要对应于接收感觉 - 我认为这将是具有挑战性的。
What’s the most underrated city in Canada?
加拿大最被低估的城市是哪座？
Most underrated .
最被低估的。
.
。
.
。
I’ll say it’s Ottawa, which I love, and people forget it.
我会说这是渥太华，我喜欢它，但人们忘记了它。
That’s where my father’s from.
那是我父亲的家乡。
Montreal’s wonderful, but everyone knows it’s wonderful.
蒙特利尔很棒，但每个人都知道它很棒。
Toronto’s still underrated, but I’ll say Ottawa.
多伦多仍然被低估，但我会说渥太华。
Vancouver’s too beautiful to be underrated.
温哥华太美丽了，不容低估。
It deserves to be highly rated.
值得给予高度评价。
I think you’re right.
我认为你是对的。
What I would do is I would say Atlantic Canada.
我会做的是我会说加拿大大西洋地区。
Every American thinks of Banff because, obviously, Banff is incredible and beautiful.
每个美国人都会想到班夫，因为显然班夫令人难以置信且美丽。
They think of New England — also beautiful.
他们认为新英格兰——也很美丽。
Atlantic Canada is its own peculiar, different, esoteric culture, but absolutely worth visiting.
加拿大大西洋地区有其独特、不同、深奥的文化，但绝对值得一游。
Halifax is a lot of fun.
哈利法克斯很有趣。
There’s excellent seafood there, I can attest to.
我可以证明，那里有美味的海鲜。
Quite.
相当。
Will crypto be the money of the metaverse?
加密货币会成为虚拟世界的货币吗？
The money?
钱？
No. Is it likely to get —
不。是否有可能得到 ——
A money of significance?
一笔重要的钱？
Probably.
大概。
Why?
为什么？
Because failing absolute bans, it’s likely that there is a meaningful contingent.
因为如果绝对禁令失败，很可能会出现一些有意义的情况。
Now, we might just be talking about several million people who are using it.
现在，我们可能只是在谈论数百万人正在使用它。
As we’ve seen over the past year and a half, that several million people can drive a very large amount of trading volume.
正如我们在过去一年半中所看到的，数百万人可以推动大量的交易量。
Now, we can talk about if that TAM doesn’t grow, then the speculation effect eases, and therefore, the interest that is there steeps aside.
现在，我们可以讨论如果 TAM 不增长，那么投机效应就会减弱，因此，那里的兴趣就会急剧下降。
But if you were to say that we’re actually talking about tokenomics as opposed to just Bitcoin, which I’m not personally a believer in, then some form of that is likely to be popular and endure.
但如果你说我们实际上谈论的是代币经济，而不仅仅是比特币（我个人并不相信比特币），那么某种形式的比特币可能会流行并持久。
So, there’ll be tokens for games, and the tokens will be liquid, and they’ll be money-like, even if they’re maybe not monies in every single way.
因此，游戏将会有代币，这些代币将具有流动性，并且它们将像金钱一样，即使它们可能不是在各个方面都是金钱。
Is that the right model?
这是正确的模型吗？
Yes, but I would modify to say that I’m not yet convinced that it’s going to have a relevant role within games per se.
是的，但我想修改一下，我还不相信它会在游戏本身中发挥相关作用。
I think the Marc Andreessen or Chris Dixon perspective of saying that it can be a construct for a new form of LLC — which, of course, many states, most notably Wyoming, which was the first LLC state, is legalizing — that seems more important.
我认为马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）或克里斯·迪克森（Chris Dixon）的观点是，它可以成为一种新形式的有限责任公司（LLC）的构建——当然，许多州，尤其是第一个有限责任公司州怀俄明州，正在将其合法化——这似乎更重要。
That abstraction — to say we’re actually talking about a smarter digital system for the rapid accumulation of resources, financial and otherwise, which exists in virtual space, predominantly for virtual means — that is likely to endure, whether or not, frankly, it’s using blockchain.
这种抽象——也就是说，我们实际上正在谈论一个更智能的数字系统，用于快速积累资源、金融和其他资源，它存在于虚拟空间中，主要用于虚拟手段——坦率地说，无论它是否使用区块链，它都可能会持续存在。
Now, you’ve been global head of strategy for Amazon Studios.
现在，您已成为亚马逊工作室的全球战略主管。
Why, in your opinion, are Hollywood movies at a nadir today, or would you challenge the premise?
在您看来，为什么好莱坞电影如今处于最低点，或者您会挑战这个前提吗？
To me, they’re mostly boring.
对我来说，它们大多很无聊。
I think that they have become more boring, at least when it comes to the theatrical box office, but I would say that we only have more and more evidence that this is indeed what the people want.
我认为他们已经变得更无聊了，至少在戏剧票房方面是这样，但我想说的是，我们只有越来越多的证据表明这确实是人们想要的。
I think it’s funny, especially on the coast — there’s this perspective that Hollywood won’t make what we want anymore.
我认为这很有趣，尤其是在沿海地区——有一种观点认为好莱坞不会再制作我们想要的东西了。
What’s interesting is, if you go back to the end of the last decade — and I’m not talking about 2010; I’m talking about 2018, 2017 — there were 700, 800 movies coming out per year to more than 25 screens.
有趣的是，如果你回到过去十年末 —— 我说的不是 2010 年；而是 2010 年。我说的是 2018 年、2017 年 ——每年有 700、800 部电影在超过 25 块银幕上映。
Most of those screens are in the coastal cities.
这些屏幕大部分位于沿海城市。
We had more indie films widely distributed than ever.
我们拥有比以往更多广泛发行的独立电影。
The screen availability was higher than ever.
屏幕的可用性比以往任何时候都高。
No one really went to those films.
没有人真正去看那些电影。
One of the funny things that’s happening with the Marvel movies right now — we have Thor coming out this weekend with Taika Waititi.
漫威电影现在正在发生的有趣的事情之一是——我们将在本周末与塔伊卡·维迪提一起上映《雷神》。
We had Chloe Zhao’s Eternals.
我们有赵薇的《永恒族》。
Last fall, we had Sam Raimi’s Dr. Strange.
去年秋天，我们看到了山姆·雷米饰演的《奇异博士》。
Marvel seems to be now hiring directors to bring their own visual and creative flair, as opposed to saying, “Just make in the house style.” And audiences are actually rejecting it.
漫威现在似乎正在聘请导演来带来他们自己的视觉和创意天赋，而不是说“只是按照自己的风格制作”。而观众实际上是在拒绝它。
They seem least interested in seeing artistic takes on their famous properties.
他们似乎对看到自己著名房产的艺术表现最不感兴趣。
So, boring or not, more anodyne than ever, it does seem to be the audience speaking.
所以，无论无聊与否，比以往任何时候都更加镇痛，似乎是观众在说话。
Was Top Gun: Maverick any good?
《壮志凌云：特立独行》好看吗？
I haven’t seen it yet.
我还没看到。
I didn’t love it.
我不喜欢它。
It’s okay, but it did not feel creative and vital to me.
没关系，但对我来说它没有创意和活力。
Given the whack to the share price of Netflix recently, should we still think they can succeed at gaming?
鉴于最近 Netflix 股价的大幅波动，我们是否还应该认为他们能够在游戏领域取得成功？
Netflix went through what many would argue to be the best-executed disruptive strategy of its scale over a 12-, 13-year history than we’ve essentially ever seen.
Netflix 在 12、13 年的历史中经历了许多人认为是其规模中执行得最好的颠覆性战略，这比我们基本上见过的还要多。
Yet, if you take a look at what may be their single biggest mistake, it was not spending their equity like a drunken sailor over the past year.
然而，如果你看一下他们最大的错误是什么，你就会发现，过去一年里，他们没有像醉酒的水手一样花掉他们的股权。
They could have gone out and bought Viacom, CBS, or Paramount Global for effectively half of what the current value of Netflix is, but at the time, it would’ve been one-tenth diluter.
他们本可以出手收购维亚康姆、哥伦比亚广播公司或派拉蒙全球公司，其价格实际上是 Netflix 当前价值的一半，但在当时，这只是稀释剂的十分之一。
They could have rolled up two or three of the largest video game publishers on Earth.
他们本可以联合地球上两三个最大的视频游戏发行商。
All of those options are gone.
所有这些选项都消失了。
The reason why I say this is, Netflix’s opportunity in gaming is hard.
我之所以这么说，是因为Netflix在游戏领域的机会很难。
They don’t have any of the technology systems for social play.
他们没有任何社交游戏的技术系统。
They don’t have micro transactions, which are essentially all of the upsides in gaming.
他们没有微交易，而这本质上是游戏的所有优点。
They have to do a big technical transformation.
他们必须进行重大的技术改造。
That will take a decade or more.
这将需要十年或更长时间。
I’m not as concerned about the temporary or even enduring share price compression as the primary problem there.
我并不担心暂时的甚至持久的股价压缩，而是担心那里的主要问题。
It’s that they’re a late entrant, and they’re used to being an early entrant.
而是他们是后来者，也习惯了先入者。
But the only flip side is, were the share price much higher — even half of what it was last year — they would be able to do pretty aggressive M&A to ensure relevance, and that’s gone.
但唯一的另一面是，如果股价大幅上涨——甚至是去年的一半——他们将能够进行相当积极的并购以确保相关性，而这种情况就消失了。
If I think about the HBO library, there’s a number of shows in it that I haven’t seen, but I could imagine, this year and next year, going back and trying to watch them, like Deadwood.
如果我想想 HBO 图书馆，里面有很多我没看过的节目，但我可以想象，今年和明年，我会回去尝试观看它们，比如《戴德伍德》。
Maybe I’ll love it, I don’t know, but it’s there.
也许我会喜欢它，我不知道，但它就在那里。
If I think of the Netflix library, I couldn’t name a single show of that kind.
如果我想到 Netflix 图书馆，我就无法说出任何此类节目的名称。
Is that a mistake Netflix has made?
这是 Netflix 犯的错误吗？
Or have they actually pursued an optimal strategy to just toss a lot of content out there, get people watching, keep on watching, subscribe to Netflix, and not really care that it depreciates at such a rapid rate in value?
还是他们实际上追求的是一种最佳策略，只是将大量内容扔到外面，让人们观看、继续观看、订阅 Netflix，而并不真正关心它的价值以如此快的速度贬值？
It’s not a mistake, but it is a problem.
这不是一个错误，但却是一个问题。
I mean that because it’s not an active choice.
我的意思是因为这不是一个主动的选择。
I wrote a piece back in 2020 — this is actually when I last held Netflix stock; I missed most of the COVID run-up — called “Content, Cars, and Comparisons.” I was making this esoteric argument that accounting principles did a disservice.
我在 2020 年写过一篇文章——这实际上是我最后一次持有 Netflix 股票的时候；我错过了大部分新冠疫情预热期的内容——“内容、汽车和比较”。我提出了一个深奥的论点：会计原则造成了损害。
Why?
为什么？
Because we don’t have GAAP (Generally Accepted Account Principles) rules to really say how do you depreciate?
因为我们没有 GAAP（公认会计原则）规则来真正说明如何折旧？
What’s the useful life of content?
内容的使用寿命是多少？
And therefore, the average series, whether it was canceled 30 days after its premiere, whether it was outstanding, whether it was IP or not, is effectively amortized the same way.
因此，平均水平的剧集，无论首播30天后被取消，无论它是否优秀，无论是否是IP，都以同样的方式有效摊销。
Yet, we all know that if HBO were to create a space opera, or Disney+ were to create a new spin-off space opera from Star Wars, or Netflix were to create a spin-off at the same budget, we could probably accurately guess different popularity, different relevance in the years to come.
然而，我们都知道，如果 HBO 要制作一部太空歌剧，或者 Disney+ 要制作一部新的《星球大战》衍生太空歌剧，或者 Netflix 要以相同的预算制作一部衍生作品，我们可能可以准确地猜测出未来几年不同的受欢迎程度和不同的相关性。
So, we had an industry problem, where all of the content spend was being capitalized equivalently.
因此，我们遇到了一个行业问题，即所有内容支出都被同等资本化。
Yet the actual capital assets on a service-by-service basis as your team two were quite different.
然而，作为两个团队，在每个服务的基础上的实际资本资产却截然不同。
When you’re in a period of hypergrowth as we were, it’s easy to overlook that because humans love video.
当你像我们一样处于高速增长时期时，很容易忽视这一点，因为人们喜欢视频。
We were excited to have all of it, but over time we are seeing those returns start to play out.
我们很高兴能拥有这一切，但随着时间的推移，我们看到这些回报开始发挥作用。
HBO would famously make the point that everyone should watch their library but no one did, but we know that Sopranos blew up last year.
HBO 曾提出一个著名的观点，即每个人都应该观看他们的图书馆，但没有人这样做，但我们知道《黑道家族》去年爆发了。
We know that the Sex in the Cities’ catalog blew up.
我们知道《都市欲望》的目录引爆了。
We know that True Blood blew up.
我们知道《真爱如血》爆炸了。
We’re starting to see that actual GAAP failure being proven out in new revenue growth.
我们开始看到，公认会计准则的实际失败在新的收入增长中得到了证明。
But to answer your question, yes, Deadwood you’ll love.
但要回答你的问题，是的，你会喜欢戴德伍德。
Extraordinary.
非凡的。
Now, if I think of the Cowen household, we subscribe to Disney, to Hulu, to Apple, HBO, other things.
现在，如果我想到考恩一家，我们就会订阅迪士尼、Hulu、苹果、HBO 等其他节目。
I can’t even name them all.
我什至无法说出他们所有人的名字。
I feel that can’t last forever.
我觉得这不可能永远持续下去。
Maybe we subscribe to them all because it’s a pain to cancel them.
也许我们全部订阅它们是因为取消它们很痛苦。
Other households are willing to go through the pain of canceling to save some money, maybe more than we are.
其他家庭愿意承受取消预订的痛苦以节省一些钱，也许比我们更多。
What does the equilibrium look like there?
那里的平衡是什么样的？
How many streaming services are there going to be?
将会有多少流媒体服务？
Is there a stable market equilibrium?
是否存在稳定的市场均衡？
Or is it like the airlines, where they always just keep on going bankrupt?
还是像航空公司一样，总是不断破产？
Or how do you view the economics of that sector?
或者您如何看待该行业的经济状况？
Well, the economics are an interesting question.
嗯，经济学是一个有趣的问题。
If you go from 2005 to 2015, let’s say the heyday of television financially, it was in the top decile of EBITDA margins nationally.
如果从 2005 年到 2015 年，假设是电视财务的鼎盛时期，它的 EBITDA 利润率在全国排名前十分之一。
The median was around 12 percent to 15 percent.
中位数约为 12% 至 15%。
TV’s EBITDA margin was 40 percent, 45 percent.
TV 的 EBITDA 利润率为 40%、45%。
What was beside it in that stack rank?
在该堆栈排名中，它旁边是什么？
Renewables, oil and gas, heavy fixed-cost businesses that had really, really high marginal costs, and therefore, EBITDA looks pretty good.
可再生能源、石油和天然气以及固定成本较高的业务的边际成本非常非常高，因此 EBITDA 看起来相当不错。
That was never sustainable.
这永远是不可持续的。
There’s no good argument for why television was going to have margins 3X the median.
没有充分的理由解释为什么电视的利润率会是中位数的三倍。
We’re seeing that right now.
我们现在就看到了这一点。
It had them because there was almost a communitarian approach.
它之所以有它们，是因为几乎有一种社群主义的方法。
Everyone fought together.
大家一起战斗。
You and I would compete in the time slot, Tyler, but you could never fail out, and we’d have different cascades of renewals with different providers at different times for different channels.
泰勒，你和我会在时间段上竞争，但你永远不会失败，而且我们会在不同时间针对不同渠道与不同提供商进行不同的续订。
It was a perfect system.
这是一个完美的系统。
When you’re talking about what the future looks like, it’s likely that those margins stay much, much lower.
当你谈论未来时，这些利润率很可能会低得多。
Most people are thinking 20 percent right now.
大多数人现在的想法是 20%。
But I want to stress that it’s easy to underestimate the TAM in video.
但我想强调的是，人们很容易低估视频中的 TAM。
There are 300 million Americans who watch video every day.
有 3 亿美国人每天观看视频。
The average American watches five and a half hours of television, streaming or otherwise, but excluding TikTok and YouTube.
美国人平均观看五个半小时的电视节目（无论是流媒体还是其他形式），但不包括 TikTok 和 YouTube。
That is so, so much.
就是这样，这么多。
We think about this — I subscribe to five services, but you really should be thinking my family watches 250 hours of TV a month.
我们想一想 — 我订阅了五项服务，但你真的应该想到我的家人每个月看 250 小时的电视。
Your earlier career as a firefighter — how has it shaped how you analyze media, gaming, and the metaverse?
您早期作为消防员的职业生涯 ——它如何影响了您分析媒体、游戏和虚拟宇宙的方式？
There’s a unity to it all, right?
这一切都是统一的，对吧？
I suppose the best and closest answer would be, look, I did firefighting because I believed that I was going to spend most of my life in an office.
我想最好、最接近的答案是，看，我从事消防工作，因为我相信我将在办公室里度过我一生的大部分时间。
I’ve been fortunate that that isn’t true, but I love the outdoors, and I was excited to preserve that time.
我很幸运，事实并非如此，但我喜欢户外活动，我很高兴能保留那段时光。
At the same time, despite that real shared interest in the outdoors, I had very little in common with my colleagues there.
与此同时，尽管我对户外活动有着真正的共同兴趣，但我和那里的同事却没有什么共同点。
I have watched so many episodes of Cops and an old MTV show called Yo Momma, where people met on rooftops in New York City and did rap battles that were really yo momma jokes.
我看过很多集《警察》和一部名为《Yo Momma》的老 MTV 节目，人们在纽约市的屋顶上见面，进行说唱大战，这确实是你妈妈的笑话。
That was legitimately horror to fit in.
这确实是令人恐惧的。
I would say, when you’re spending 16, 20 hours in a forward operating base, sitting out in the woods, sleeping in a tent — we didn’t have cell phones, and you’re just there for two weeks — learning how to work, get along with, and trust those you have very little in common with is an enduring skill universally applicable.
我想说，当你在前沿作战基地待上 16、20 个小时，坐在树林里，睡在帐篷里时——我们没有手机，而你只在那里待两周——学习如何与那些与你没有共同点的人一起工作、相处和信任，是一项普遍适用的持久技能。
Now that you’re doing so much venture capital, what are you learning about talent?
既然您进行了如此多的风险投资，那么您对人才有何了解？
You have discussions with people making pitches to you.
您与向您推销的人进行讨论。
Obviously, you want them to be smart, hardworking, know their areas, but what about talent is underrated?
显然，你希望他们聪明、勤奋、了解自己的领域，但人才被低估了怎么办？
What do you look for that’s maybe different than everyone else — what they look for?
你所寻找的东西可能与其他人不同 ——他们所寻找的是什么？
My favorite type of entrepreneur by far are those who were essentially paid to try and solve a problem that matters to the future, but their company was never going to see through because they’re coming out 10 years with so much learning that doesn’t sit on the cap table.
到目前为止，我最喜欢的企业家类型是那些基本上靠报酬去尝试解决对未来至关重要的问题的企业家，但他们的公司永远不会成功，因为他们在 10 年里学到了很多东西，而这些知识并不存在于股权结构表上。
You’re coming out with so much pent-up energy.
你带着那么多被压抑的能量出来了。
You’re coming up with a little bit of dissatisfaction over what they’ve achieved over the past five years, and they’re usually coming at the future with a network of people with that shared experience.
你会对他们过去五年所取得的成就感到有点不满，而他们通常会在未来与拥有共同经历的人组成网络。
Their ability to go out and change the world is incredible.
他们走出去改变世界的能力令人难以置信。
I learn a ton from that.
我从中学到了很多。
I don’t think that I’m the best at spotting a 22-year-old who doesn’t have much work experience but sees clearly.
我不认为我最擅长发现一个22岁的人，他没有太多工作经验，但看得很清楚。
But that crop of first-time entrepreneur, long-time executive who just deeply needs to pull something off that they haven’t — great.
但是，对于那些首次创业、长期担任高管的人来说，他们非常需要实现一些他们还没有做到的事情——太棒了。
Incredible.
极好的。
What’s your favorite unusual interview question to get at those or other qualities?
为了了解这些或其他品质，你最喜欢的不寻常的面试问题是什么？
My favorite unusual interview question .
我最喜欢的不寻常的面试问题。
.
。
.
。
I don’t know, Tyler.
我不知道，泰勒。
Let me ask you if there’s any common thread around the interviews that you’ve done.
让我问一下您所做的采访是否有任何共同点。
What type of question usually has the least satisfying answer to you?
哪种类型的问题通常得不到令您满意的答案？
The two questions I find most useful are, “How ambitious are you?” This is for people who are trying to be leaders, not for ordinary workers, and everyone is thrown off base by that, but it’s hard for them to fake ambition if they don’t have it.
我发现最有用的两个问题是“你的野心有多大？”这是为那些想成为领导者的人准备的，而不是为普通工人准备的，每个人都会因此而大错特错，但如果他们没有野心，就很难假装有野心。
Then I like to ask something like, “What are the open browser tabs on your computer right now?” It gives you a sense of how they spend their time and what they really care about.
然后我喜欢问这样的问题：“您的计算机上现在打开的浏览器选项卡是什么？”它让您了解他们如何度过时间以及他们真正关心的事情。
Often people are flustered by that as well.
人们常常也对此感到困惑。
Someone not doing well on a question, to me, is them doing well because there’s a lot of variation and, thus, a lot of information.
对我来说，一个人在某个问题上做得不好，是因为存在很多变化，因此也有很多信息。
The questions that everyone does well on, like, “Tell us about a mistake you made at your previous workplace” — everyone’s prepped for that.
每个人都做得很好的问题，比如“告诉我们你在以前的工作场所犯的一个错误”——每个人都为此做好了准备。
Everyone has a decent answer, but it’s nothing.
每个人都有一个不错的答案，但什么也不是。
You just learn whether or not they’ve prepared something that’s not bad enough to be self-critical but not too negative.
你只需了解他们是否准备了一些还不错的自我批评但又不太消极的东西。
Firstly, thank you for that out.
首先，感谢您的发言。
I don’t know what the weirdest question I’ve been asked for.
我不知道我被问到的最奇怪的问题是什么。
The number of tabs I have open are in the hundreds.
我打开的选项卡数量有数百个。
I have hundreds of open articles on my phone, and then I use a tab extension on my PC so that I can collapse all the open tabs without destroying the RAM on my computer.
我的手机上有数百篇打开的文章，然后我在电脑上使用选项卡扩展，这样我就可以折叠所有打开的选项卡，而不会破坏计算机上的 RAM。
I can read you that.
我可以读给你听。
That list is in the thousands.
该列表有数千个。
But ambitious — not that you directly asked that — the book is a good example.
但雄心勃勃的 ——并不是你直接问的—— 这本书就是一个很好的例子。
I didn’t have an ambition to be a writer, to ever make a book.
我没有成为一名作家、出书的野心。
I deeply love writing.
我深深热爱写作。
My ambition is to do the best of what was possible.
我的抱负是尽一切可能做到最好。
I really blitzed myself in the fall and early spring writing this book.
在秋天和早春写这本书时，我真的很兴奋。
I deeply underestimated how much time it was going to take, how much time marketing, how many interviews I’d do.
我严重低估了需要花多少时间，花多少时间进行营销，花多少时间进行采访。
The ambition is a desire to not feel like I fell short of something I could pull off, and that has continuously shifted.
雄心是一种不让自己感觉自己无法实现目标的愿望，而这种愿望一直在不断变化。
You seem to me very much like a hundreds-of-open-browser-tabs sort of guy.
在我看来，你很像一个打开数百个浏览器选项卡的人。
So, I would, in fact, hire you for the jobs you’ve had or have now.
所以，事实上，我会根据你曾经或现在的工作聘用你。
You’re doing polymathic types of things with a lot of references, a lot of learning, but a lot of practical experience across a number of different areas: metaverse, gaming, film, internet, marketing, venture capital, right?
你正在做博学的事情，有大量的参考资料、大量的学习，而且在多个不同领域拥有大量的实践经验：元宇宙、游戏、电影、互联网、营销、风险投资，对吧？
All of that.
所有这些。
It’s definitely a lot of browser tabs.
肯定有很多浏览器选项卡。
Well, thank you.
嗯，谢谢。
I don’t know that I could do my job without Twitter, but half the time, Twitter ends up distracting me for days from said job.
我不知道如果没有 Twitter，我能否完成我的工作，但有一半的时间，Twitter 最终会让我分心好几天。
Last question, and really, I’m asking for a sincere answer here.
最后一个问题，实际上，我在这里要求一个真诚的答案。
How do you think about why it is that you wrote this book?
您如何看待写这本书的原因？
Again, it’s The Metaverse: And How It Will Revolutionize Everything.
再说一次，这就是虚拟宇宙：以及它将如何彻底改变一切。
There are so many things you could have done.
有很多事情你可以做。
You have an extensive audience online where you can write.
您在网上拥有广泛的受众，您可以在那里写作。
It’s ungated — not always, but typically, everyone can read it.
它是非门控的——并不总是如此，但通常情况下，每个人都可以阅读它。
And now you’ve written a book.
现在你已经写了一本书。
Why did you write the book?
你为什么写这本书？
And why should we read the book?
我们为什么要读这本书？
It is easy to think that the metaverse is a buzzword.
人们很容易认为虚拟宇宙是一个流行词。
We’ve been here before: 3D TVs, autonomous driving, messaging bots, drone internet.
我们以前经历过：3D 电视、自动驾驶、消息机器人、无人机互联网。
We’re familiar with terms that are hyped long before they’re possible or turn out to have been little more than a name change.
我们很熟悉那些在成为可能之前就被大肆宣传的术语，或者最终证明只不过是更名而已。
Yet, I would argue that what we’re seeing here is unprecedented.
然而，我认为我们在这里看到的情况是前所未有的。
No one renamed themselves “3D TV platforms,” not least of all, the seventh-largest company on Earth.
没有人将自己重新命名为“3D 电视平台”，尤其是地球第七大公司。
This year, McKinsey estimates that the big five tech companies will spend $30 billion on metaverse investments; that venture capital, private equity, and big tech will spend $130 billion.
麦肯锡估计，今年五大科技公司将在元宇宙投资上花费 300 亿美元；风险投资、私募股权和大型科技公司将花费 1300 亿美元。
I believe deeply that this transition is real.
我深信这种转变是真实的。
I also believe that we’re coming out of 15 years in the mobile and cloud era dissatisfied with many things.
我还相信，我们在经历了 15 年的移动和云时代之后，对很多事情都不满意。
Dis- and misinformation, radicalization, harassment, toxicity, happiness, the role of algorithms in our lives, regulation, platform power, data rights, data security, data literacy.
虚假信息和错误信息、激进化、骚扰、毒性、幸福、算法在我们生活中的作用、监管、平台权力、数据权利、数据安全、数据素养。
And I believe that most of those challenges will become harder in the metaverse.
我相信大多数挑战在虚拟宇宙中都会变得更加困难。
But I also believe that when these platform shifts occur, we have an unprecedented, or rather, very rare opportunity as users, as voters, consumers, developers, to affect that outcome.
但我也相信，当这些平台转变发生时，我们作为用户、选民、消费者、开发者将拥有前所未有的，或者更确切地说，非常难得的机会来影响这一结果。
We have agency, we pick who leads when, why, and how, with which philosophies.
我们有代理机构，我们选择由谁领导、何时领导、为何领导、如何领导、采用何种理念。
I wrote this book because I’ve spent five years thinking about the theme — what matters, what doesn’t, what we need, what we want, what will happen automatically and what won’t.
我写这本书是因为我花了五年时间思考这个主题——什么重要，什么不重要，我们需要什么，我们想要什么，什么会自动发生，什么不会。
And releasing a book nationally that is in bookstores, that reaches those I don’t interact with daily, that hits those who believe it’s a thing but don’t know exactly how, was the best way to have that outcome.
在全国范围内的书店发行一本书，接触到那些我不常接触的人，接触到那些相信这是一件事但不知道具体如何发生的人，是实现这一结果的最佳方式。
Matthew Ball, thank you very much.
马修·鲍尔，非常感谢你。
Thank you.
谢谢。