Neal Stephenson on Depictions of Reality (Ep. 71)
I am here today with Neal Stephenson, who is arguably the world’s greatest author of speculative fiction and science fiction.
今天我和尼尔·斯蒂芬森一起来到这里，他可以说是世界上最伟大的推理小说和科幻小说作家。
Welcome, Neal.
欢迎，尼尔。
It’s good to be here.
很高兴来到这里。
Thanks for having me on your program.
谢谢你让我参加你的节目。
Let me start with some general questions about tech.
让我从一些有关技术的一般性问题开始。
We will get to your new book.
我们将开始阅读您的新书。
How will physical surveillance evolve?
物理监控将如何发展？
There’s facial surveillance, gait surveillance in China that’s coming to many airports.
中国的许多机场都配备了面部监控、步态监控。
What’s your vision for this?
您对此有何愿景？
When you say physical surveillance, you just mean —
当你说物理监视时，你的意思只是——
They record your face, they know who you are, they track your movements.
他们记录你的脸，他们知道你是谁，他们跟踪你的动作。
Actually recording you while you’re wandering around somewhere, as opposed to tapping your phone, that kind of thing.
当你在某个地方闲逛时，实际上会记录你的情况，而不是窃听你的手机之类的事情。
And if you jaywalk, they’ll fine your bank account, and you’ll get a text message two minutes later.
如果你乱穿马路，他们会罚款你的银行账户，两分钟后你会收到一条短信。
Right.
正确的。
Well, I think it’s just going to be based on what people are willing to tolerate and put up with.
嗯，我认为这只是基于人们愿意容忍和忍受的事情。
There’s already something of a backlash going on over the use of facial recognition in some cities in this country.
在这个国家的一些城市，人们对面部识别的使用已经产生了强烈的反对。
I think people just have to be diligent and be aware of what’s happening in that area and push back against it.
我认为人们必须勤奋，了解该地区正在发生的事情并予以抵制。
Is there a positive scenario for its spread?
它的传播有积极的前景吗？
For it spreading?
为了它传播？
Right.
正确的。
Is it possible it will make China a more cooperative place, a more orderly place, and in the longer run, they’ll be freer?
有没有可能它会让中国成为一个更加合作的地方，一个更加有序的地方，从长远来看，他们会更加自由？
Or is that just not in the cards?
或者这根本就不可能发生？
I’m not sure if cooperative, orderly, and freer are compatible concepts, right?
我不确定合作、有序和自由是否是兼容的概念，对吗？
Cooperative and orderly, definitely.
绝对是合作和有序的。
People who are in internment camps are famously cooperative and orderly, but .
集中营里的人们以合作和秩序井然着称，但是。
.
。
.
。
Freedom is a funny word.
自由是一个有趣的词。
It’s a hard thing to talk about because to a degree, if this kind of thing cuts down, let’s say, on random crime, then it’s going to make people effectively freer.
这是一件很难谈论的事情，因为在某种程度上，如果这种事情减少了，比如说，随机犯罪，那么它将实际上让人们更加自由。
Especially if you’re a woman or someone who is vulnerable to being the victim of random crime, and some kind of surveillance system renders that less likely to happen, then, effectively, you’ve been granted a freedom that you didn’t have before.
特别是如果你是一名女性或容易成为随机犯罪受害者的人，并且某种监视系统使这种情况发生的可能性降低，那么，实际上，你已经获得了以前没有的自由。
But it’s not the kind of statutory freedom that we tend to talk about when we’re talking about politics and that kind of thing.
但这不是我们在谈论政治之类的事情时倾向于谈论的那种法定自由。
Other than satellites, which are already quite proven, what do you think is the most plausible economic value to space?
除了已经得到充分证实的卫星之外，您认为太空最有可能的经济价值是什么？
It’s tough making a really solid economic argument for space.
为太空提出真正可靠的经济论证是很困难的。
There’s a new book out by Daniel Suarez called Delta-V, in which he’s advancing a particular argument, which is a pretty abstract idea based on how debt works and what you have to do in order to keep an economy afloat.
丹尼尔·苏亚雷斯 (Daniel Suarez) 出版了一本名为《Delta-V》的新书，其中他提出了一个特定的论点，这是一个非常抽象的概念，基于债务如何运作以及为了保持经济运转必须采取的措施。
But I think it’s a thing that people need to do because they want to do it, as opposed to because there’s a sound business argument for it.
但我认为这是人们需要做的事情，因为他们想要这样做，而不是因为有合理的商业理由。
Do you think, socially, we’re less willing or able to do it psychologically than, say, in the 1960s?
你是否认为，在社交方面，我们在心理上比 20 世纪 60 年代更不愿意或更有能力这样做？
Well, the ’60s was funny because it was a Cold War propaganda effort on both sides.
嗯，六十年代很有趣，因为那是双方的冷战宣传努力。
The whole story of how that came about is a really wild story that begins with World War II, when Hitler wants to bomb London.
整个故事是如何发生的，这是一个非常疯狂的故事，始于第二次世界大战，当时希特勒想要轰炸伦敦。
But it’s too far away, so he has to build big rockets to do it with.
但它太远了，所以他必须建造大型火箭才能做到这一点。
So rockets advance way beyond where they would have advanced had he not done that.
因此，如果他没有这样做，火箭的进步将远远超出他们本来可以进步的水平。
Then we grab the technology, and suddenly we need it to drop H bombs on the other side of the world.
然后我们掌握了技术，突然我们需要它来向世界的另一端投掷氢弹。
So again, trillions of dollars of money go into it, and then it becomes so dangerous that we can’t actually use it for that.
同样，数万亿美元的资金投入其中，然后它变得如此危险，以至于我们实际上无法将其用于此目的。
Instead, we use that rocket technology to compete in the propaganda sphere.
相反，我们使用火箭技术在宣传领域进行竞争。
I once knew a grizzled old veteran of that ’60s space program who said that the Apollo moon landings were communism’s greatest triumph.
我曾经认识一位参与过 60 年代太空计划的头发花白的老兵，他说阿波罗登月是共产主义最伟大的胜利。
So that’s how that all happened, and it happened way earlier than any kind of rational economic argument could be made for it.
这就是这一切发生的原因，而且它发生的时间远远早于任何理性的经济论证。
I still think it’s the case that, if we’re going to do things in space, it’s more for psychological reasons than it is for money reasons.
我仍然认为，如果我们要在太空中做事，更多的是出于心理原因，而不是出于金钱原因。
If we had a Mars colony, how politically free do you think it would be?
如果我们有一个火星殖民地，你认为它的政治自由度如何？
Or would it just be like perpetual martial law?
还是就像永久戒严一样？
Like living on a nuclear submarine?
就像住在核潜艇上一样？
I think it would be a lot like living on a nuclear submarine because you can’t — being in space is almost like being in an intensive care unit in a hospital, in the sense that you’re completely dependent on a whole bunch of machines working in order to keep you alive.
我认为这很像生活在核潜艇上，因为你不能——在太空中几乎就像在医院的重症监护室里一样，从某种意义上说，你完全依赖一大堆机器来维持生命。
A lot of what we associate with freedom, with personal freedom, becomes too dangerous to contemplate in that kind of environment.
我们与自由、个人自由联系在一起的很多东西，在那种环境下变得太危险而无法思考。
Is there any Heinlein-esque-like scenario — Moon is a Harsh Mistress, where there’s a rebellion?
有没有类似海因莱因式的场景 —— 月亮是一个严厉的女主人，那里有叛乱？
People break free from the constraints of planet Earth.
人们摆脱了地球的束缚。
They chart their own institutions.
他们绘制了自己的机构图。
It becomes like the settlements in the New World were.
它变得就像新世界的定居点一样。
Well, the settlements in the New World, I don’t think are a very good analogy because there it was possible — if you’re a white person in the New World and you have some basic skills, you can go anywhere you want.
嗯，我认为新世界的定居点不是一个很好的类比，因为那里有可能 ——如果你是新世界的白人并且你有一些基本技能，你可以去任何你想去的地方。
An unheralded part of what happened there is that, when those people got into trouble, a lot of times, they were helped out by the indigenous peoples who were already there and who knew how to do stuff.
那里发生的事情的一个不为人知的部分是，当这些人遇到麻烦时，很多时候，他们得到了已经在那里并且知道如何做事的土著人民的帮助。
None of those things are true in a space colony kind of environment.
在太空殖民地的环境中，这些事情都不是真的。
You don’t have indigenous people who know how to get food and how to get shelter.
你没有知道如何获得食物和如何获得住所的土著人民。
You don’t have that ability to just freely pick up stakes and move about.
你没有那种能力可以随意拿起木桩并四处走动。
On social media
在社交媒体上
You saw some of the downsides of social media earlier than most people did in Seveneves.
在《Seveneves》中，你比大多数人更早地看到了社交媒体的一些缺点。
It’s also in your new book, Fall.
它也出现在你的新书《秋天》中。
What’s the worst-case scenario for how social media evolved?
社交媒体发展的最坏情况是什么？
And what’s the institutional failure?
制度上的失败是什么？
Why do many people think they’re screwing things up?
为什么很多人认为他们把事情搞砸了？
I think we’re actually living through the worst-case scenario right now, so look about you, and that’s what we’ve got.
我认为我们现在实际上正在经历最坏的情况，所以看看你，这就是我们所拥有的。
Our civil institutions were founded upon an assumption that people would be able to agree on what reality is, agree on facts, and that they would then make rational, good-faith decisions based on that.
我们的民事机构建立在这样一个假设之上：人们能够就现实是什么、事实达成一致，然后他们会据此做出理性、善意的决定。
They might disagree as to how to interpret those facts or what their political philosophy was, but it was all founded on a shared understanding of reality.
他们可能在如何解释这些事实或他们的政治哲学是什么方面存在分歧，但这一切都建立在对现实的共同理解之上。
And that’s now been dissolved out from under us, and we don’t have a mechanism to address that problem.
现在这个问题已经从我们的领导下消失了，我们没有解决这个问题的机制。
But what’s the fundamental problem there?
但根本问题是什么？
Is it that decentralized communications media intrinsically fail because there are too many voices?
去中心化的通讯媒体本质上失败是因为声音太多吗？
Is there something about the particular structure of social media now?
现在的社交媒体有什么特殊的结构吗？
The problem seems to be the fact that it’s algorithmically driven, and that there are not humans in the loop making decisions, making editorial, sort of curatorial decisions about what is going to be disseminated on those networks.
问题似乎在于它是由算法驱动的，并且没有人在循环中做出决策，做出社论，对将在这些网络上传播的内容做出某种策展决策。
As such, it’s very easy for people who are acting in bad faith to game that system and produce whatever kind of depiction of reality best suits them.
因此，那些不怀好意的人很容易玩弄这个系统，并产生最适合他们的对现实的描述。
Sometimes that may be something that drives people in a particular direction politically, but there’s also just a completely nihilistic, let-it-all-burn kind of approach that some of these actors are taking, which is just to destroy people’s faith in any kind of information and create a kind of gridlock in which nobody can agree on anything.
有时，这可能会驱使人们在政治上朝着特定的方向发展，但也有一些行为者采取了一种完全虚无主义、放任不管的做法，这只是为了摧毁人们对任何信息的信心，并造成一种僵局，让任何人都无法就任何事情达成一致。
If we go back to the world of 2006, where there’s Google Reader, there’s plenty of blogs, RSS is significant, algorithms are much, much less important — does that work well in your view?
如果我们回到 2006 年的世界，那里有 Google Reader，有大量的博客，RSS 很重要，算法则不那么重要 —— 您认为这有效吗？
Or is the problem more deeply rooted than that?
或者问题比这更根深蒂固？
Well, I think, at the end of the day, people are not going to agree on facts unless there’s a reason for them to do so.
好吧，我认为，归根结底，人们不会就事实达成一致，除非有理由这样做。
I’ve been talking about a really interesting book called A Culture of Fact by Barbara Shapiro, which is a sort of academic-style book that discusses how the idea of facts entered our minds in the first place because we didn’t always have it.
我一直在谈论一本非常有趣的书，名叫《事实文化》，作者是芭芭拉·夏皮罗（Barbara Shapiro），这是一本学术风格的书，讨论了事实的概念是如何进入我们的脑海的，因为我们并不总是拥有它。
Procedures were developed that would enable people to agree on what was factual, and that had a huge impact on culture and on the economy and everything else.
制定的程序将使人们能够就事实达成一致，这对文化、经济和其他一切都产生了巨大影响。
And now that’s, as I said, going away, and the only way to bring it back is, first, to have a situation where people need and want to agree on facts.
正如我所说，现在这种情况正在消失，而将其带回来的唯一方法是，首先，让人们需要并希望就事实达成一致。
On what the future will look like
关于未来会是什么样子
Your idea of this smart book, which is in Diamond Age — do you think that will ever happen?
您对《钻石时代》这本智能书的想法——您认为这会发生吗？
There will be a primer that people use, and it’s online, and it will educate them and teach them how to be more disciplined?
人们会使用一本入门读物，它是在线的，它会教育他们并教他们如何更加自律？
A lot of different people have taken inspiration from The Diamond Age and worked on various aspects of the problem.
许多不同的人都从钻石时代中获得了灵感，并致力于解决该问题的各个方面。
It’s always interesting to talk to them because it’s sort of a classic “six blind men and the elephant” thing, where I’ll hear from someone who says, “Oh, I’m working on something inspired by The Diamond Age.” And I ask them what that means to them, and it’s always a little different.
与他们交谈总是很有趣，因为这有点像经典的“六盲人和大象”的事情，我会听到有人说，“哦，我正在研究受钻石时代启发的东西。”我问他们这对他们意味着什么，他们的答案总是有点不同。
Sometimes it’s how do we physically build something that could do what that book does?
有时候，问题在于我们如何实际构建一些可以实现本书功能的东西？
Sometimes it’s how do we organize knowledge, how do we set up curricula that are adaptable to the needs of a particular reader?
有时，问题在于我们如何组织知识，如何设置适合特定读者需求的课程？
It’s really not just one technology.
这实际上不仅仅是一项技术。
It’s a whole basket of different hardware and software technologies, and people are definitely coming at that from various angles right now.
这是一整套不同的硬件和软件技术，人们现在肯定会从不同的角度来看待它。
What do you think stops it from happening?
你认为什么可以阻止它发生？
We don’t have the tech?
我们没有技术？
Or just users aren’t interested, or what?
或者只是用户不感兴趣，或者什么？
What’s the constraint?
有什么限制？
It’s just kind of distributed among a large number of different projects.
它只是分布在大量不同的项目中。
There’s not any one big, centralized, this-is-it version of the thing, which isn’t necessarily bad.
没有任何一个大型的、中心化的、就是这样的版本，这并不一定是坏事。
That’s a great way for people to spawn a lot of ideas and do a lot of decentralized work on a project, but nothing is pulling it together into the primer.
对于人们来说，这是一个很好的方式，可以在一个项目上产生很多想法并做很多分散的工作，但没有什么可以将它们整合到入门中。
In your early novels, like Snow Crash, Diamond Age, there’s a sense that states often have become quite weak.
在你早期的小说中，比如《雪崩》、《钻石时代》，有一种感觉，国家常常变得相当软弱。
Do you think in reality, the state has ended up staying more powerful, for reasons which are surprising?
您认为在现实中，国家最终会因为令人惊讶的原因而变得更加强大吗？
Or you foresaw that?
或者你预见到了这一点？
I certainly didn’t foresee anything.
我当然没有预见到任何事情。
In Snow Crash, in Diamond Age, I’m kind of riffing on a way of thinking that I saw quite a bit among basically libertarian-minded techies during the ’80s and the ’90s that was all about getting rid of the nation-state and reducing the power of nation-states.
在《钻石时代》的《雪崩》中，我有点重复了一种思维方式，我在 80 年代和 90 年代在基本上具有自由意志主义思想的技术人员中看到过很多这种思维方式，那就是摆脱民族国家并削弱民族国家的力量。
If that was happening, I think it got flipped in the other direction, basically, by 9/11.
如果这种情况真的发生了，我认为事情基本上会在 9/11 之前发生逆转。
When something like that happens, it immediately creates a desire in a lot of people’s minds to return to a more centralized, authoritarian nation-state arrangement, and that’s the trajectory that we’ve been on ever since.
当这样的事情发生时，很多人会立即产生一种渴望，想要回到更加集权、专制的民族国家安排，这就是我们从那时起一直走的轨迹。
One of your very early books was called In the Beginning .
你很早期的一本书叫做《In the Beginning》。
.
。
.
。
Was the Command Line, about software.
是关于软件的命令行。
How do you think that’s held up?
您认为这如何维持？
Well, if you keep in mind when it was written, I think it’s held up OK.
好吧，如果你还记得它是什么时候写的，我认为它还可以。
A lot of what’s in there is somewhat perishable.
里面的很多东西都有些容易腐烂。
For example, I talk about an operating system called BeOS, which isn’t really a player anymore.
例如，我谈论一个名为 BeOS 的操作系统，它不再是真正的播放器。
So in that sense, parts of it are dated, but it’s good for what it is.
所以从这个意义上说，它的某些部分已经过时了，但它本身是好的。
What will people wear in the future?
未来人们会穿什么？
Say a hundred years from now, will clothing evolve at all?
假设一百年后，服装会进化吗？
I think clothing is pretty highly evolved, right?
我认为服装是相当高度进化的，对吧？
If you look at, yeah, at any garment, say, a shirt — I was ironing a shirt today in my hotel room, and it is a frickin’ complicated object.
如果你看，是的，任何衣服，比如说一件衬衫——我今天在酒店房间里熨烫一件衬衫，它是一个非常复杂的物体。
We take it for granted, but you think about the fabric, the way the seams are laid out.
我们认为这是理所当然的，但你会想到面料、接缝的布置方式。
That’s just one example, of course, but you take any — shirts, shoes, any kind of specific item of clothing you want to talk about — once you take it apart and look at all the little decisions and innovations that have gone into it, it’s obvious that people have been optimizing this thing for hundreds or thousands of years.
当然，这只是一个例子，但是你拿任何一件——衬衫、鞋子、任何一种你想谈论的特定服装——一旦你把它拆开并看看其中的所有小决定和创新，很明显人们已经优化这个东西数百年或数千年了。
New materials come along that enable people to do new kinds of things with clothing, but overall, I don’t think that a lot is going to change.
新材料的出现使人们能够用衣服做新的事情，但总的来说，我认为不会有太多改变。
Is there anything you would want smart clothing to do for you that, say, a better iPad could not?
您是否希望智能服装能够为您做一些更好的 iPad 无法做到的事情？
The thing about clothing is that you change your clothes all the time.
关于服装的问题是你总是要换衣服。
So if you become dependent on a particular technology that’s built into your shirt, that’s great as long as you’re wearing that shirt, but then as soon as you change to a different shirt, you don’t have it.
因此，如果您变得依赖于衬衫中内置的特定技术，那么只要您穿着那件衬衫就很好，但是一旦您换上另一件衬衫，您就不再拥有它了。
So what are you going to do?
那么你要做什么？
Are you going to make sure that every single one of your shirts has that same technology built into it?
您是否要确保您的每一件衬衫都采用相同的技术？
It seems easier to have it separate from the clothing that you wear, so that you don’t have to think about all those complications.
将它与你穿的衣服分开似乎更容易，这样你就不必考虑所有这些并发症。
How bullish are you on Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies?
您对比特币和加密货币有多看好？
Do they have some kind of killer application?
他们有某种杀手级应用程序吗？
Or are they a novelty?
或者它们是新奇事物？
So far, it seems like they’re a bit of a solution in search of a problem.
到目前为止，它们似乎是寻找问题的解决方案。
I think that the nonmonetary applications of distributed ledgers seem to be more interesting than just making money.
我认为分布式账本的非货币应用似乎比仅仅赚钱更有趣。
When people want to talk to me about a new cryptocurrency, I tend not to be super interested in continuing that conversation.
当人们想和我谈论一种新的加密货币时，我往往不太有兴趣继续这种对话。
But when they want to talk to me about using distributed ledgers to enable some other kind of initiative, then frequently, it can get very interesting indeed.
但是，当他们想和我谈论使用分布式账本来实现其他类型的计划时，那么经常，这确实会变得非常有趣。
When people want to talk to me about a new cryptocurrency, I tend not to be super interested in continuing that conversation.
当人们想和我谈论一种新的加密货币时，我往往不太有兴趣继续这种对话。
But when they want to talk to me about using distributed ledgers to enable some other kind of initiative, then frequently, it can get very interesting indeed.
但是，当他们想和我谈论使用分布式账本来实现其他类型的计划时，那么经常，这确实会变得非常有趣。
I just had a conversation last night with a friend of mine here who’s looking at a really cool possible new application of distributed ledgers.
昨晚我刚刚和我的一位朋友进行了交谈，他正在研究分布式账本的一个非常酷的新应用程序。
Whether that distributed ledger is based on blockchain, I think, is a separate question.
我认为分布式账本是否基于区块链是一个单独的问题。
Blockchain seems to be a pretty complicated and expensive way of doing that.
区块链似乎是一种相当复杂且昂贵的方式。
Here’s a reader question, and I quote: “Are you, in part or in whole, Satoshi Nakamoto?”
这是一个读者问题，我引用一下：“你是中本聪的一部分还是全部？”
No. I saw that article last week on this topic, and I realized that the guy who’s writing it is largely just goofing, but I hope nobody takes it seriously.
不。我上周看到了关于这个主题的那篇文章，我意识到写这篇文章的人很大程度上只是在开玩笑，但我希望没有人认真对待它。
It’s flattering that anyone imagines I’ve got the mathematical know-how needed to make something like blockchain.
令人受宠若惊的是，有人认为我拥有制作区块链之类的东西所需的数学知识。
But if you look at how that system works, it requires a very high degree of cryptographic knowledge and coding skill that is beyond my abilities, certainly.
但如果你看看这个系统是如何工作的，它需要非常高程度的密码知识和编码技能，这当然超出了我的能力。
And I definitely do not have the lifestyle of a person who has that much money.
我绝对不具备有那么多钱的人的生活方式。
On storytelling
关于讲故事
Now, you’re Neal Stephenson.
现在，你是尼尔·史蒂芬森。
What is the fundamental unique ability you have that maybe others do not?
你拥有而别人可能没有的基本独特能力是什么？
I think it starts with storytelling and the ability to tell stories in prose.
我认为这始于讲故事和用散文讲故事的能力。
Then the particular angle that I bring to that is having some background in science, math, engineering, that enables me to write stories that are driven by those kinds of ideas and that can take advantage of inherently interesting things that I stumble across in those areas.
然后，我带来的特殊角度是拥有一些科学、数学、工程背景，这使我能够写出由这些想法驱动的故事，并且可以利用我在这些领域偶然发现的固有有趣的东西。
How did you train yourself to learn storytelling?
你是如何训练自己学习讲故事的？
I think that part of it begins with empathy because, in order to tell somebody a thing, you need to know and understand what it’s like to not already know that thing, which seems kind of obvious.
我认为这部分始于同理心，因为为了告诉别人一件事，你需要知道并理解还不知道那件事是什么感觉，这似乎是显而易见的。
Little bit of a tangent here.
这里有点切线。
For a while, my kid was on a soccer team, and we had a group of parents who would organize going to these different soccer games all over the city, each one at a different field.
有一段时间，我的孩子在一支足球队，我们有一群家长，他们会组织去全城各地观看不同的足球比赛，每场比赛在不同的场地进行。
These different parents would write emails.
这些不同的父母会写电子邮件。
This was before mapping systems were good, so parents would take turns writing emails, telling you how to get to the soccer field.
那是在地图系统还没有完善之前，所以父母会轮流写电子邮件，告诉你如何到达足球场。
The range of skill was amazing.
技能的范围是惊人的。
You would get people who just couldn’t do it, couldn’t make a very simple description of how to go from point A to point B, and others who wrote these amazing, almost like little short stories about it.
有些人就是做不到，无法对如何从 A 点到 B 点进行非常简单的描述，而其他人却写下了这些令人惊叹的、几乎就像关于它的小短篇故事。
I started thinking about it then, and thinking that the thing that distinguished the people who were good at it was that they were capable of putting themselves in the shoes of somebody who didn’t know how to find that field and imagining what it would be like to try to navigate that route.
从那时起我开始思考这个问题，并认为擅长这一领域的人的与众不同之处在于，他们能够设身处地为那些不知道如何找到那个领域的人着想，并想象尝试探索这条道路会是什么样子。
And those people were good at it.
这些人很擅长。
So I think that storytelling does begin with that kind of empathy.
所以我认为讲故事确实始于这种同理心。
Then there’s more related skills that you can pick up over time by practice, just having to do with how you organize words on a page, how you edit, how you paste things, and so on.
然后，随着时间的推移，您可以通过练习掌握更多相关技能，这些技能涉及如何在页面上组织单词、如何编辑、如何粘贴内容等等。
It seems we’ve entered an age of permanent secular innovation starvation.
我们似乎已经进入了一个长期长期创新匮乏的时代。
Why did that happen?
为什么会发生这种事？
I think there are a lot of institutional barriers that have arisen.
我认为出现了很多制度性障碍。
A lot of it, I think, seems to be well intentioned, but somebody was pointing out to me a little while back that the Golden Gate Bridge was built in a shockingly brief period of time compared to almost anything that we try to build today.
我认为，其中很多似乎都是出于好意，但不久前有人向我指出，与我们今天尝试建造的几乎所有东西相比，金门大桥的建造时间短得令人震惊。
Another good example would be the Hoover Dam, which went up in no time.
另一个很好的例子是胡佛水坝，它很快就建成了。
It also killed a lot of people, so as we become more cautious about not killing people, let’s say, during a given project, and not creating other bad side effects, that slows things down pretty radically.
它也杀死了很多人，所以当我们变得更加谨慎，不杀人，比方说，在一个特定的项目中，并且不产生其他不良的副作用，这会从根本上减慢事情的速度。
There are institutional systems in place now — most places — to limit those kinds of bad side effects, so it’s kind of a mixed bag.
现在已经有制度体系来限制这些不良副作用，所以这是一个鱼龙混杂的情况。
If someone says, “Well, tying everyone together with smartphones that you can Google to any piece of information within seconds, that that was a big project.
如果有人说：“好吧，用智能手机将每个人联系在一起，你可以在几秒钟内通过谷歌搜索到任何信息，那是一个大项目。
It’s quite new.
这是很新的。
We succeeded at it rather spectacularly.
我们取得了相当惊人的成功。
There’s not actually innovation starvation.” What’s your response?
实际上并不存在创新匮乏。”你的回应是什么？
Well, you’re talking about a project that I worked on a couple years ago called Hieroglyph, which was all about this topic.
嗯，你说的是我几年前参与的一个名为 Hieroglyph 的项目，它就是关于这个主题的。
My general stance on it is that yeah, when it comes to networks, computers, and so on, the amount of innovation has been unbelievable.
我对此的总体立场是，是的，当涉及到网络、计算机等时，创新的数量令人难以置信。
It’s just been spectacular, and it’s because there’s so little friction.
这真是太壮观了，因为摩擦很少。
When you want to innovate in those areas, if you know what you’re doing, you can sit down and you can write some code.
当你想在这些领域进行创新时，如果你知道自己在做什么，你就可以坐下来编写一些代码。
You can achieve great things just on your own or just with a small team.
您可以独自或与一个小团队一起取得伟大的成就。
Then the cost of shipping — that manufacturing and shipping is basically zero because bits are free.
那么运输成本 ——制造和运输成本基本上为零，因为比特是免费的。
So, innovation in those areas is definitely amazing, but I think it’s had the side effect that if you are an innovation-minded person and you want to do something new, you always end up finding your way, sooner or later, into implementing whatever it is in software.
所以，这些领域的创新绝对是令人惊奇的，但我认为它有一个副作用，如果你是一个有创新意识的人并且你想做一些新的事情，那么你迟早总会找到自己的方法来实现软件中的任何内容。
And if you can’t do it in software, then things slow to a crawl, comparatively, and you’ve got to be ready for a lot of frustration and obstacles.
如果你不能用软件来做到这一点，那么相对而言，事情就会变得缓慢，而且你必须准备好面对很多挫折和障碍。
Will the arrival of some future general-purpose technology fix that?
未来某种通用技术的到来会解决这个问题吗？
Say robots?
说机器人？
Or is that just how the world will be forever?
或者这世界将永远如此？
Well, we have to make innovation in the physical sphere into something that we’re good at, and I think that is happening.
嗯，我们必须将物理领域的创新变成我们擅长的事情，我认为这正在发生。
I personally enjoy working with modern makerish technologies, like 3-D printers, and other .
我个人喜欢使用现代制造技术，例如 3D 打印机等。
.
。
.
。
let’s call them physical technologies that have been greatly enhanced and sped up by mixing software into the tool chain.
我们称它们为物理技术，通过将软件混合到工具链中，这些技术得到了极大的增强和加速。
So that is definitely going on, but it seems to me, sometimes, that hobbyists — people who do things, who build things because they’re passionate about it — can get a lot done in a hurry.
所以这种情况肯定会发生，但在我看来，有时，业余爱好者 ——那些做事、建造东西的人，因为他们对它充满热情——可以很快完成很多事情。
But as soon as you start to involve capital and profit-and-loss statements and so on, that, again, the rate of progress can slow down quite a bit just because people are so concerned about patents and protecting IP and how do we turn a profit from this, how do we create shareholder value?
但一旦开始涉及资本和损益表等，进展速度就会再次放缓，因为人们如此关心专利和保护知识产权，以及我们如何从中获利，我们如何创造股东价值？
Given your focus on the Puritans and the Baroque Cycle, do you think Christianity was a fundamental driver of the Industrial Revolution and the Scientific Revolution, and that’s why it occurred in northwestern Europe?
鉴于您对清教徒和巴洛克周期的关注，您是否认为基督教是工业革命和科学革命的根本驱动力，这就是它发生在西北欧的原因？
Or not?
或不？
One of the things that comes up in the books you’re talking about is the existence of a certain kind of out-communities that were weirdly overrepresented among people who created new economic systems, opened up new trade routes, and so on.
你所谈论的书中提到的一件事是存在某种特定的外部社区，这些外部社区在创建新经济体系、开辟新贸易路线等的人们中所占的比例奇怪地过高。
I’m talking about Huguenots, who were the Protestants in France who suffered a lot of oppression.
我说的是胡格诺派，他们是法国的新教徒，遭受了很多压迫。
I’m talking about the Puritans in England, who were not part of the established church and so also came in for a lot of oppression.
我说的是英国的清教徒，他们不属于国教，因此也遭受了很多压迫。
Armenians, Jews, Parsis, various other minority communities that, precisely because of their outsider minority status, were forced to form long-range networks and go about things in an unconventional, innovative way.
亚美尼亚人、犹太人、帕西人以及其他各种少数民族社区，正是由于他们的局外少数民族身份，被迫形成远程网络，并以非常规、创新的方式做事。
So I guess my answer is sort of, cautiously, yes, but maybe not in the way you’re thinking.
所以我想我的回答是谨慎的，是的，但可能不是你想的那样。
It’s not the big, established churches that necessarily led to this, and it’s not Christianity per se, because not all of these people were Christians.
这不一定是大型、成熟的教会造成的，也不是基督教本身，因为并非所有这些人都是基督徒。
But it’s the circumstances that made it possible for these weird outsider groups to find footholds in various niches and do new things.
但正是环境使得这些奇怪的局外人群体能够在不同的领域找到立足点并做新的事情。
Why did God knock down the Tower of Babel?
上帝为什么要拆掉巴别塔？
And if we build a very, very tall building today, will he do the same again?
如果我们今天建造一座非常非常高的建筑，他会再次这样做吗？
I don’t think so.
我不这么认为。
It could fall over for a number of reasons, but probably not because God knocks it down, although there’s only one way to find out.
它可能会因多种原因而倒塌，但可能不是因为上帝把它撞倒了，尽管只有一种方法可以找到答案。
I think we should totally build that tower.
我认为我们完全应该建造那座塔。
I have to use this opportunity to quote danah boyd.
我必须利用这个机会引用达纳·博伊德的话。
She’s a researcher at Microsoft Research.
她是微软研究院的研究员。
I was corresponding with her last week, and she made the point that .
我上周与她通信，她指出了这一点。
.
。
.
。
Snow Crash talks specifically about the Tower of Babel myth, and danah was saying that a lot of people who started tech companies were inspired and wanted to build something like the Metaverse in Snow Crash, but it turns out that, instead, they built the Tower of Babel.
《Snow Crash》特别谈到了巴别塔的神话，达纳说，很多创办科技公司的人受到启发，想要建造像《Snow Crash》中的元宇宙这样的东西，但事实证明，他们建造了巴别塔。
They created a situation in which we’re unable to talk to each other.
他们造成了我们无法互相交谈的情况。
Here’s another reader question, and I quote: “The major Stephenson trope seems to me to be the single person or small group that is wise to tech or science overcoming large, tech-based adversaries, who are blind to their vulnerabilities, from the hero of Zodiac to the raiding team in Anathem, with many others in between.
这是另一个读者问题，我引用一下：“在我看来，史蒂芬森的主要比喻是一个人或一个小团体，他们以技术或科学的智慧战胜了大型的、以技术为基础的对手，这些对手对自己的弱点视而不见，从《十二宫》的英雄到《Anathem》的突袭队，还有介于两者之间的许多其他人。
What is his theory of why large organizations are so bad at managing the low-level tech?
对于大型组织为何如此不擅长管理低级技术，他的理论是什么？
Or is it just a literary device that does not hold true in practice?”
或者这只是一种文学手段，在实践中并不适用？”
I think it’s largely the latter.
我认为主要是后者。
It’s a great literary device.
这是一个很棒的文学手段。
It’s hard to write a compelling story about a giant organization.
很难写一个关于大型组织的引人入胜的故事。
It’s a lot easier to write one about a small group, where you’ve got different personalities interacting with each other, and you get to know them as individuals.
写一篇关于一个小团体的文章要容易得多，在这个团体中，不同性格的人互相交流，你可以作为个体来了解他们。
I think actual real-world examples of that happening are somewhat few and far between.
我认为现实世界中发生这种情况的例子很少而且相距甚远。
On things under- and overrated
关于被低估和高估的事情
Now, in the middle of all these conversations, we have a segment, overrated versus underrated.
现在，在所有这些对话的中间，我们有一个部分，被高估与被低估。
I’ll toss out some nominations.
我会放弃一些提名。
You give us your response.
您给我们您的回应。
You’re free to pass, but the first one is Leibniz as a philosopher.
你可以随意通过，但第一个是作为哲学家的莱布尼茨。
I have to say underrated on the whole, mostly because of the backlash that he got from people like Voltaire, who didn’t get him, and Kant, who kind of took him down.
我不得不说总体上被低估了，主要是因为他受到了像伏尔泰这样的人的强烈反对，伏尔泰没有理解他，而康德则把他打倒了。
I think he’s enjoyed a resurgence more recently, but definitely underrated in the couple of centuries after he died.
我认为他最近经历了一次复兴，但在他去世后的几个世纪里肯定被低估了。
But given that today there seems to be no coherent theory of quantum gravity, is it possible that his core hypothesis of windowless monads to solve cosmology .
但考虑到今天似乎没有连贯的量子引力理论，他的无窗单子的核心假设是否有可能解决宇宙学问题。
.
。
.
。
could it in some way turn out to just be correct?
它会在某种程度上被证明是正确的吗？
There are physicists who are working on ideas that are inspired by that.
有些物理学家正在研究受此启发的想法。
It’s not an idea that he reduced to a mathematical theory in the way Newton did with his.
他并没有像牛顿那样将这个想法简化为数学理论。
So you have to question whether it’s really a theory at all or just a cool idea that could lead to a theory, but I guess time will tell.
所以你必须质疑它是否真的是一个理论，或者只是一个可以导致理论的很酷的想法，但我想时间会证明一切。
Survivalists — overrated or underrated?
生存主义者 — 被高估还是低估？
There’s plenty in America, plenty in the Pacific Northwest, right?
美国有很多，太平洋西北部也有很多，对吗？
Yeah.
是的。
It depends on what aspect of them we’re rating here.
这取决于我们在这里对它们的哪个方面进行评级。
I know some, and they definitely have got a wide range of skills above and beyond just shooting things with guns, but I don’t necessarily agree with their overall take on just about anything.
我认识一些人，他们肯定拥有广泛的技能，不仅仅是用枪射击，但我不一定同意他们对任何事情的总体看法。
The Charles Dickens novel Bleak House.
查尔斯·狄更斯的小说《荒凉山庄》。
I would say underrated because it’s got just crazy, random stuff in it that you almost can’t believe that you’re reading it.
我想说它被低估了，因为它里面有一些疯狂的、随机的东西，你几乎不敢相信你正在读它。
There’s a case of spontaneous combustion in it.
里面有自燃的情况。
There’s a character who, with no warning, just dies from spontaneous combustion.
有一个角色在没有任何警告的情况下就因自燃而死亡。
No explanation.
没有解释。
It just happens.
它就这样发生了。
Is Dickens an influence on you?
狄更斯对你有影响吗？
Oh yeah, he’s totally an influence as a prose stylist, and as someone who’s .
哦，是的，作为散文文体家和散文文体家，他完全具有影响力。
.
。
.
。
We think of Victorian novels as a kind of stodgy, old-school way of writing, but he was all over the map in terms of nutty, random things that he would put into his books.
我们认为维多利亚时代的小说是一种古板、老派的写作方式，但他在书中加入的疯狂、随意的东西却无处不在。
The science fiction writer Olaf Stapledon — underrated or overrated?
科幻小说作家奥拉夫·斯塔普尔顿（Olaf Stapledon）——被低估还是高估？
Pass.
经过。
The novels of Robert Heinlein.
罗伯特·海因莱因的小说。
Are they still readable today, or are they simply of their time?
它们今天仍然可读，还是只是属于那个时代？
Well, they’re certainly of their time, but I find that of all of the science fiction writers that I read when I was a kid, his stuff has stayed with me more than others because he had this knack for capturing little moments, little human interactions, and images that produced really vivid memories in my head that are still with me.
嗯，他们当然是属于他们那个时代的，但我发现，在我小时候读过的所有科幻小说作家中，他的作品比其他人更让我印象深刻，因为他有捕捉微小瞬间、微小的人际互动和图像的技巧，这些图像在我的脑海中产生了真正生动的记忆，这些记忆仍然伴随着我。
Morse code — overrated or underrated?
摩尔斯电码 — 被高估还是低估？
Currently underrated, I guess, because people aren’t really using it much, but very important in its time.
我想，目前它被低估了，因为人们并没有真正使用它，但它在当时非常重要。
Which ideas, or which areas of life, do you feel right now are not sufficiently thought about?
您现在觉得哪些想法或生活的哪些领域没有得到充分考虑？
Not enough pondered?
还不够深思熟虑吗？
People have a hard, hard time — even pretty fairly educated, smart people have a really hard time with statistical thinking and probability.
人们的日子很难过——即使是受过良好教育的聪明人在统计思维和概率方面也很难过。
There’s any number of .
有任意数量的。
.
。
.
。
Well, a classic example is global climate change, where people have a hard time distinguishing between climate and weather.
一个典型的例子是全球气候变化，人们很难区分气候和天气。
But that’s just one example of a really common thing, which is that there are a lot of things that, really, the only rational way to think about them is to think about them in terms of statistics, but that just doesn’t come naturally to people.
但这只是一个非常常见的事情的一个例子，那就是，有很多事情，实际上，思考它们的唯一理性方式就是从统计角度来思考它们，但这对人们来说并不自然。
Why are so many people so lonely today, as David Brooks often suggests?
正如大卫·布鲁克斯经常说的那样，为什么今天有这么多人如此孤独？
We have the internet.
我们有互联网。
There’s more people than ever before.
人比以前多了。
More people live in cities or populous suburbs.
更多的人居住在城市或人口稠密的郊区。
Yet —
然而——
I guess I’m not convinced, necessarily, that they are more lonely than they were before.
我想我不一定相信他们比以前更孤独。
That might be true.
这可能是真的。
It sounds plausible, but I don’t know that for a fact.
这听起来似乎有道理，但我不知道事实是否如此。
Definitely, more traditional societies — you’re kind of living together in more crowded places with family and community, which is all well and good if you happen to like those people and they treat you well.
当然，更传统的社会 ——你与家人和社区一起生活在更拥挤的地方，如果你碰巧喜欢这些人并且他们对你很好，那一切都很好。
Many cases in which that doesn’t happen, and if that’s the situation you’re in, then being able to live alone may be a big improvement.
在很多情况下，这种情况不会发生，如果这就是你所处的情况，那么能够独自生活可能是一个很大的进步。
When a society becomes more secular, as has been happening, what replaces religion for the average person, if anything?
当一个社会变得更加世俗时，正如正在发生的那样，对于普通人来说，什么可以取代宗教（如果有的话）？
Superhero movies.
超级英雄电影。
And are those good — superhero movies?
那些是优秀的超级英雄电影吗？
Well, they’re not all good, but they .
好吧，它们并不都是好的，但是它们。
.
。
.
。
I seriously think that pop culture, Lord of the Rings is —
我认真地认为流行文化，《指环王》是——
Neal Stephenson, perhaps?
也许是尼尔·史蒂芬森？
Well, I don’t know about him, but the Lord of the Rings — that whole world has become something approaching a secular religion for a lot of people.
好吧，我不了解他，但是《指环王》——对于很多人来说，整个世界已经变成了一种接近世俗宗教的东西。
It’s not that they literally .
这并不是字面上的意思。
.
。
.
。
Well, some kind of literally believe it, but even those who don’t, draw from it a lot of the same lessons and inspirations that, say, a devout Christian might draw from reading the Bible.
好吧，有些人确实相信它，但即使是那些不相信它的人，也能从中汲取很多相同的教训和灵感，例如，虔诚的基督徒可能会从阅读圣经中汲取教训和灵感。
In your new book, Fall; or, Dodge in Hell, what do you see is the implicit theology of that book?
在你的新书《秋天》中；或者，《躲避地狱》，你认为那本书隐含的神学是什么？
It’s based on the question of, could it be the case that the world we live in is a digital simulation, which is something that people have pondered.
这是基于这样一个问题：我们生活的世界是否是一个数字模拟的世界，这是人们一直在思考的问题。
What happens in the book is that a new digital simulation is created as a sort of digital afterlife for people to live in, and it raises the question of, is it turtles all the way down?
书中发生的事情是，创建了一种新的数字模拟，作为人们居住的一种数字来世，它提出了一个问题：它是海龟吗？
Are we living in a digital simulation and creating our own digital simulations inside of it?
我们是否生活在数字模拟中并在其中创建我们自己的数字模拟？
And if so, how deep does that stack go?
如果是这样，该堆栈有多深？
What happens when these dead people begin to create a virtual world to live in in the afterlife is that they end up recapitulating a lot of the myths and the legends and the religious tropes that they dimly remember from this world.
当这些死去的人开始创造一个来世生活的虚拟世界时，他们最终会重述他们在这个世界上依稀记得的许多神话、传说和宗教比喻。
It gets to the question of, do we have a psychological need for those things, such that when they’re taken away from us, we have to kind of rebuild them from scratch?
这就涉及到一个问题，我们是否对这些东西有心理上的需求，以至于当它们从我们身边被夺走时，我们必须从头开始重建它们？
What do you think of the Bayesian argument that we probably are, in fact, living in a simulation; that if every society of a sufficiently advanced level creates a large number of simulations, and you work back, using the Bayesian calculus, then we’re probably in one.
您如何看待贝叶斯论点，即我们实际上可能生活在模拟中？如果每个足够先进水平的社会都创建大量模拟，并且您使用贝叶斯微积分进行回溯，那么我们可能就处于其中。
We’re more likely simulated than a future simulator.
我们更有可能被模拟，而不是未来的模拟器。
Or maybe we’re both, but at least we are in a simulation.
或者也许我们都是，但至少我们处于模拟之中。
Well, I’m not sure if it makes a difference.
好吧，我不确定这是否有什么不同。
We’re definitely here either way, so it’s definitely an interesting notion.
不管怎样，我们肯定会在这里，所以这绝对是一个有趣的想法。
In a way, it’s the jumping-off point for Fall; or, Dodge in Hell.
在某种程度上，这是秋季的起点；或者，在地狱中躲避。
I also drew a lot of ideas from a book by David Deutsch called The Fabric of Reality, which talks about a number of things.
我还从大卫·多伊奇（David Deutsch）的一本名为《现实的结构》（The Fabric of Reality）的书中汲取了很多想法，书中谈到了很多事情。
But one of the things he talks about is how much computing power would be needed to simulate the universe that we see around us to a full level of fidelity, such that we never see glitches, we never see anything that’s imperfectly rendered.
但他谈到的一件事是需要多少计算能力来模拟我们周围看到的宇宙以完全保真度，这样我们就永远不会看到故障，我们永远不会看到任何不完美渲染的东西。
He sort of heads in the direction of saying that it would take the entire universe to do that.
他有点倾向于说需要整个宇宙才能做到这一点。
That’s, in essence, like the medieval cosmological argument that we’re all a simulation in the mind of God, and that is the universe, and it’s all devoted to a kind of calculation of what we are, ontologically so and necessarily so.
从本质上讲，这就像中世纪的宇宙论论证一样，即我们都是上帝心目中的模拟，这就是宇宙，而这一切都致力于对我们的本质进行某种计算，无论是本体论上的，还是必然的。
Yeah, so it’s that, kind of recast in a more physics-based, computer science–based mold.
是的，就是这样，以一种更加基于物理、基于计算机科学的模式进行了重铸。
And if you were somehow convinced that was true, or thought it very likely to be true, would it change anything in your behavior?
如果你以某种方式确信这是真的，或者认为它很可能是真的，它会改变你的行为吗？
I don’t know.
我不知道。
A lot of this kind of philosophizing can just have the effect of pulling you back, zooming out from the day-to-day particulars of your life, and thinking about things in a more detached, let’s say, maybe calmer frame of mind.
很多这样的哲学思考只会产生让你退缩的效果，让你远离生活中的日常细节，并以一种更超然、或许更平静的心态来思考事物。
What’s your favorite poem by John Milton?
您最喜欢约翰·弥尔顿的哪首诗？
Well, Paradise Lost is the basis, really, for Fall; or, Dodge in Hell, so that’s the big one.
嗯，《失乐园》实际上是《秋季》的基础；或者，在地狱中躲避，所以这是最重要的。
It almost seems weird to call it just a poem because it’s a book-length poem, but it is a poem.
仅仅称其为一首诗似乎很奇怪，因为它是一首长达一本书的诗，但它确实是一首诗。
And he was a really interesting cat, John Milton.
他是一只非常有趣的猫，约翰·米尔顿。
Had a very strange life and produced a really strange and interesting poem.
过着非常奇怪的生活，并创作了一首非常奇怪而有趣的诗。
Do you agree that Satan has all the best lines in the poem and that he’s a pretty sympathetic character?
你是否同意撒旦拥有这首诗中所有最好的诗句并且他是一个非常富有同情心的角色？
Well, that’s what makes the Paradise Lost so interesting, is that Milton was a sincere Christian, and yet, when you read the thing, Satan and the other fallen angels are highly relatable.
嗯，这就是《失乐园》如此有趣的原因，因为弥尔顿是一位真诚的基督徒，然而，当你读到这本书时，撒旦和其他堕落天使是高度相关的。
They talk and act and are motivated by considerations that we all can recognize and sympathize with.
他们的言行和行动都是出于我们都能认可和同情的考虑。
And the good guys — God and Jesus and so on up in Heaven — are kind of boring.
而好人——“天堂里的上帝和耶稣等等”——有点无聊。
As they would be, I mean, how do you —
就像他们会的那样，我的意思是，你如何——
Jesus doesn’t even seem that important in the book.
耶稣在书中似乎并不那么重要。
Yeah.
是的。
For an English Christian of that time.
对于当时的英国基督徒来说。
Right.
正确的。
He hasn’t been born yet, so it’s a very strange .
他还没有出生，所以这很奇怪。
.
。
.
。
It’s thousands of years in the future that Jesus is going to become Jesus.
几千年后，耶稣才会成为耶稣。
He’s a son of God who hangs out in Heaven, and we kind of know — spoiler alert — who he’s going to end up being, but in Paradise Lost, he doesn’t have a lot to do.
他是上帝的儿子，在天堂里闲逛，我们知道他最终会成为谁，但在《失乐园》中，他没有太多事情可做。
Samuel Johnson once said that when you read Paradise Lost, there is no man who wishes it were longer than it is.
塞缪尔·约翰逊曾经说过，当你读《失乐园》时，没有人会希望它比实际长度更长。
Basically, he was happy when it finished.
基本上，完成后他很高兴。
Even if you think it’s a great work, do you agree with Johnson?
即使你认为这是一部伟大的作品，你同意约翰逊的观点吗？
Yeah, I think that’s a fair statement.
是的，我认为这是一个公平的说法。
It’s work.
这是工作。
It’s not just a beach read by any stretch of the imagination.
这不仅仅是一个可以任意发挥想象力的海滩。
Beads of sweat pop out on your forehead as you make your way through this thing.
当你穿过这个东西时，你的额头上会冒出汗珠。
To really get it, you’ve got to appreciate all of the beautiful language that he’s using, and it is beautiful, but you’ve got to read the thing line by line.
为了真正理解它，你必须欣赏他使用的所有美丽的语言，它很美，但你必须逐行阅读。
Now, both philanthropy and the idea of being frozen or held in suspended animation are themes in the book.
现在，慈善事业和被冷冻或假死的想法都是这本书的主题。
Is it a problem if there’s a future world where you’ve saved some assets, you simply freeze yourself in some manner, turn off for 400 years, and you wake up, and you’re a mega-trillionaire?
如果在未来的世界里，你存了一些资产，你只是以某种方式冻结自己，关闭 400 年，然后你醒来，你是一个超级亿万富翁，这会是一个问题吗？
Is that a sustainable equilibrium if a lot of people are doing it?
如果很多人都这样做的话，这是一个可持续的平衡吗？
Or is it just a wonderful thing — we all get to be mega-trillionaires?
或者这只是一件美妙的事情 ——我们都会成为亿万富翁？
Yeah, why not?
是啊，为什么不呢？
Why not just do that, right?
为什么不直接这样做，对吧？
And then just take a little time out and wake up and be rich.
然后花一点时间休息一下，醒来就会变得富有。
Well, it gets to the question of excess wealth in general, and what is it good for?
好吧，这涉及到一般财富过剩的问题，它有什么好处？
We’re hearing now what we’ve all suspected, which is that wealthy individuals and corporations have amassed just enormous amounts of cash that, in a lot of cases, is just sitting around not doing anything because you can only spend money so fast.
我们现在听到了我们都怀疑的事情，那就是富有的个人和企业已经积累了大量现金，在很多情况下，这些现金只是坐在那里不做任何事情，因为你只能这么快地花钱。
Beyond a certain point, having more of it doesn’t really change your life.
超过某一点，拥有更多并不会真正改变你的生活。
Even if you want to give it all away, you need to do that in a thoughtful and competent, an accountable way.
即使你想放弃一切，你也需要以深思熟虑、有能力、负责任的方式做到这一点。
And that means you’ve got to find people that you can trust to handle that responsibility, and there aren’t enough of those people.
这意味着你必须找到你可以信任的人来承担这项责任，但这样的人还不够。
But maybe the privilege of the future will be the wealthy become sleepers, and they become far wealthier.
但也许未来的特权将是富人成为沉睡者，并且他们变得更加富有。
Someone still has to keep on working for the rate of return on their assets to be positive, but that would be the new split in society, a bit like Wells’s Morlocks, the people living above and below the earth.
有人仍然必须继续工作才能获得正的资产回报率，但这将是社会的新分裂，有点像威尔斯的莫洛克人，即生活在地球之上和之下的人们。
But it would be sleepers versus nonsleepers, and the nonsleepers would always be wanting to rebel, and the sleepers would have to set up something to control them before they went asleep.
但这将是睡眠者与非睡眠者的对抗，非睡眠者总是想要反抗，而睡眠者必须在他们入睡之前设置一些东西来控制他们。
Right, there’s definitely room for a Kafka-esque novel there about someone who’s working as an accountant, an asset manager for a bunch of dead people, and that’s their whole existence.
是的，卡夫卡式的小说肯定有空间，讲述一个人作为会计师、一群死人的资产经理，而这就是他们的全部存在。
But there was a similar question that was raised a few months ago.
但几个月前也有人提出过类似的问题。
A bunch of these super wealthy people had started thinking about how to make preparations for the fall of civilization.
一群超级富豪开始思考如何为文明的衰落做好准备。
“We can build bunkers.
“我们可以建造掩体。
We can stockpile supplies and weapons and kind of set up a survivalist system to live in.
我们可以储存物资和武器，并建立一个生存系统来居住。
But at the end of the day, we have to have people to help.
但归根结底，我们必须有人提供帮助。
We have to have soldiers.
我们必须有士兵。
We need manpower.”
我们需要人力。”
And how do you — if you’re that rich person — how do you make sure that they don’t just take all your stuff?
你如何 —— 如果你是那个富人 —— 你如何确保他们不会拿走你所有的东西？
There’s not an obvious answer to that.
对此没有明显的答案。
Are there any of your fictional worlds you actually would want to live in?
有没有你真正想生活在的虚构世界中？
Hmm.
唔。
Well, I’d find it fascinating to go back to the era of the Baroque Cycle just because so much was going on there.
嗯，我觉得回到巴洛克自行车时代很有趣，因为那里发生了很多事情。
I’d want to definitely take all my vaccinations and bring some antibiotics with me if I could, but that would be a really cool world to see.
如果可以的话，我绝对希望接种所有疫苗并随身携带一些抗生素，但这将是一个非常酷的世界。
But if your first choice is to go back to this world of extreme poverty, does that mean that you, too, are a kind of dystopian writer in a way that you’ve said other people have created dystopias?
但如果你的第一选择是回到这个极端贫困的世界，这是否意味着你也是一个反乌托邦作家，就像你所说的其他人创造了反乌托邦一样？
Dystopia is an interesting idea because a lot of times, what science fiction writers are really doing is writing a kind of metaphorical story about the present.
反乌托邦是一个有趣的想法，因为很多时候，科幻小说作家真正做的是写一种关于当下的隐喻故事。
I think that we’re in a dystopia now in a lot of ways.
我认为我们现在在很多方面都处于反乌托邦之中。
A lot of things have gotten better, but what’s happening politically right now, what’s happening socially, is definitely trending in a dystopian way.
很多事情都变得更好了，但是现在政治上发生的事情，社会上发生的事情，肯定是在以反乌托邦的方式发展。
That’s what we should be, I think, concerned about right now.
我认为这就是我们现在应该关心的。
Dystopia is an interesting idea because a lot of times, what science fiction writers are really doing is writing a kind of metaphorical story about the present.
反乌托邦是一个有趣的想法，因为很多时候，科幻小说作家真正做的是写一种关于当下的隐喻故事。
I think that we’re in a dystopia now in a lot of ways.
我认为我们现在在很多方面都处于反乌托邦之中。
A lot of things have gotten better, but what’s happening politically right now, what’s happening socially, is definitely trending in a dystopian way.
很多事情都变得更好了，但是现在政治上发生的事情，社会上发生的事情，肯定是在以反乌托邦的方式发展。
That’s what we should be, I think, concerned about right now.
我认为这就是我们现在应该关心的。
What’s the thing that’s getting worse socially?
社会上什么事情变得越来越糟？
Just the fragmentation — the thing we talked about earlier.
只是碎片化——我们之前谈到的事情。
The people no longer having a common basis to have conversations with each other.
人们不再有共同的基础来相互交谈。
But is that kind of fragmentation bad?
但这种碎片化是不好的吗？
If we can run a society on less consensus because it somehow is more robust, say.
比如说，如果我们能够以更少的共识来管理一个社会，因为它在某种程度上更加强大。
We all get transfers from a central authority, we don’t want to knock over the apple cart, and then we each go our own merry ways, and we talk to people who are in our niche, but otherwise, there’s no common conversation like on network TV.
我们都从中央机构获得转移，我们不想打翻苹果车，然后我们各自走自己的快乐之路，我们与属于我们的利基市场的人交谈，但除此之外，没有像网络电视上那样的共同对话。
Does that have to be so bad?
有必要这么糟糕吗？
Well, I guess we’re going to find out because that’s where we’re going.
好吧，我想我们会找到答案的，因为那就是我们要去的地方。
It is an odd thing that we’ve seen the normal expectations and standards of how the constitutional system of checks and balances is supposed to work, that’s completely .
奇怪的是，我们看到了宪法制衡体系应该如何运作的正常期望和标准，这完全是这样。
.
。
.
。
The wheels have just come off in the last couple of years, and no one in a position of power seems to be capable or willing to do anything about it.
在过去的几年里，车轮刚刚脱落，似乎没有一个有权势的人有能力或愿意对此采取任何行动。
Yet, day-to-day life seems to go on without any obvious change.
然而，日常生活似乎仍在继续，没有任何明显的变化。
You can read that as we’re in the calm before the storm, and it’s all going to just collapse pretty soon.
你可以读到这一点，因为我们正处于暴风雨前的平静，一切很快就会崩溃。
Or maybe this is how things are now, that DC is just a kind of sideshow, and it doesn’t matter.
或者也许现在的情况就是这样，DC只是一种余兴节目，这并不重要。
You grew up in Ames, Iowa.
你在爱荷华州艾姆斯长大。
Is that correct?
这是正确的吗？
That’s correct.
这是正确的。
When it comes to the midwestern college town, has that, itself, become a dystopia?
说到中西部大学城，它本身是否已经成为一个反乌托邦？
Some critics charge, “Well, they’re engines of inequality.
一些批评者指责说：“嗯，它们是不平等的引擎。
They’re more racially segregated than they used to be, college towns.” Or is the midwestern college town a dream that’s still pretty much alive and well?
大学城的种族隔离程度比以前更加严重。”或者说，中西部的大学城是一个仍然存在的梦想吗？
I think it’s as close to a utopian society as I’m aware of actually happening.
我认为这与我所知道的实际发生的乌托邦社会最接近。
It’s fair to say that the racial balance doesn’t reflect that of the country as a whole, but it’s more racially diverse than the surrounding countryside, let’s say.
公平地说，种族平衡并不能反映整个国家的平衡，但可以说，它比周围的乡村更具种族多样性。
When I was growing up there, it was a very flat income distribution.
当我在那里长大时，收入分配非常平坦。
There were a few people that were considered to be wealthy because they drove Cadillacs instead of Chevrolets.
有一些人被认为是富有的，因为他们开的是凯迪拉克而不是雪佛兰。
Maybe sometimes they would go to Colorado and go skiing.
也许有时他们会去科罗拉多州滑雪。
That was extreme wealth where I grew up.
那是我长大的地方的极度财富。
And the emphasis on education was transformative of that whole culture in those towns.
对教育的重视改变了这些城镇的整个文化。
Everything’s pretty simple, everything’s cheap, everything’s easy in a lot of ways, and a lot of those towns still have those characteristics.
一切都很简单，一切都很便宜，一切在很多方面都很容易，而且很多城镇仍然具有这些特征。
For our final segment, we turn to what I call the Neal Stephenson production function — your life, how you got to be what you are.
在我们的最后一部分，我们转向我所说的尼尔·斯蒂芬森生产函数——你的生活，你如何成为你现在的样子。
How did partaking in construction work help your writing?
参与建筑工作对你的写作有何帮助？
By taking my mind off of writing for several hours a day.
每天花几个小时把注意力从写作上转移开。
It’s an activity that requires focus and attention.
这是一项需要集中注意力的活动。
You can’t just drift off while you’re doing it, so it occupies the front room of your brain for a while and allows interesting, creative things to happen in the back.
你不能在做的时候就睡着了，所以它会占据你大脑的前室一段时间，并让有趣的、有创意的事情在后室发生。
Did driving a funeral car help your writing?
开殡仪车对你的写作有帮助吗？
Well, that was before I was doing a lot of writing.
嗯，那是在我进行大量写作之前。
I was delivering chairs, rental chairs for a funeral home, and kind of rattling around town in a 1948 Chevy pickup.
我当时正在运送椅子，为殡仪馆出租椅子，还开着一辆 1948 年的雪佛兰皮卡在城里嘎嘎作响。
This was in the late 1970s, so it was a pretty old vehicle.
那是在 20 世纪 70 年代末，所以这是一辆相当旧的车辆。
It did give me freedom to roam around and to interact with a bunch of people, basically anybody in town who needed to rent chairs.
它确实让我可以自由地四处闲逛并与一群人互动，基本上是镇上任何需要租用椅子的人。
When it comes to swords, what is your dream?
说到剑，你的梦想是什么？
My dream is to be good at it, which I’m not.
我的梦想是擅长它，但我不是。
It’s actually been a really interesting thing to pursue in that it’s informative to spend so much time working on something and still be so bad at it.
这实际上是一件非常有趣的事情，因为花这么多时间在某件事上，但仍然做得很糟糕，这是很有信息性的。
What would you do if you didn’t write?
如果你不写，你会做什么？
I would probably have ended up working in some kind of tech company.
我可能最终会在某种科技公司工作。
I would probably have ended up writing code somewhere, and then over time, I would have migrated into something that was a little more physical — actually building robots or something that had code in it.
我可能最终会在某个地方编写代码，然后随着时间的推移，我会迁移到更实际的东西 ——实际上构建机器人或其中包含代码的东西。
And if you meet a tech person, and they’re thinking of becoming a writer, what’s the question they should ask themselves as to whether they should do tech or writing?
如果你遇到一个技术人员，并且他们正在考虑成为一名作家，那么他们应该问自己什么问题，即他们应该从事技术还是写作？
How much money is in your bank account?
你的银行账户里有多少钱？
It’s a terrible choice economically.
从经济上来说，这是一个糟糕的选择。
If you’ve got an actual career in tech, then that probably means financial security and then some.
如果你在科技领域有一份真正的职业，那么这可能意味着财务安全等等。
It’s extremely unlikely that you’ll be able to have anything like that level of income if you’re starting out as a writer.
如果你刚开始当作家，你就不太可能有这样的收入水平。
As a writer of speculative fiction, you almost certainly have a very large number of white male nerds as your fans.
作为一名推理小说作家，你几乎肯定有大量的白人男性书呆子作为你的粉丝。
It would appear so.
看来是这样。
But that aside, what do you think is a common element that binds a lot of your readers together, either demographically or mentally or emotionally?
但除此之外，您认为将许多读者联系在一起的共同元素是什么，无论是在人口统计上、精神上还是情感上？
It seems to be this desire and willingness to spend a lot of time in a big story world.
似乎就是这种在大故事世界里度过大量时间的渴望和意愿。
I see a lot of people in the military who are readers of these books.
我看到很多军队里的人都是这些书的读者。
I signed a copy of Snow Crash last night that had been around the world a couple of times in nuclear submarines.
昨晚我签署了一份《雪崩》的副本，这本书已经乘坐核潜艇绕行世界好几次了。
I’ve talked to people who read these books in Afghanistan.
我和在阿富汗读过这些书的人交谈过。
They’re big books.
它们是大书。
There’s a lot in them.
其中有很多内容。
You need to have the time and the willingness to sit back for a while and be immersed in a big story universe in order to enjoy these books.
您需要有时间并愿意坐下来沉浸在一个宏大的故事世界中，才能享受这些书。
And what else do you think that’s correlated with — that desire to spend a lot of time in a story world?
您认为还有什么与“渴望在故事世界中花费大量时间”相关？
What are the other empirical correlates?
其他经验相关因素是什么？
So, people in the military, maybe people in nuclear submarines.
所以，军队里的人，也许是核潜艇里的人。
Yeah.
是的。
People in tech.
从事科技行业的人。
I think it’s just people who think about things, who have a kind of complicated inner life, and who derive satisfaction from reading big stories with lots of ideas in them.
我认为只有那些会思考事物的人，他们有一种复杂的内心生活，他们从阅读有很多想法的大故事中获得满足感。
A lot of writers, and also science fiction authors — they seem to become less visionary as they age.
很多作家，还有科幻作家——随着年龄的增长，他们的远见似乎变得越来越少。
That doesn’t seem to have happened to you.
这似乎没有发生在你身上。
How would you account for that?
你会如何解释这一点？
Well, it may be economic pressures in some ways.
嗯，在某些方面可能是经济压力。
If your livelihood derives from working on a particular series of books, and there’s an expectation from your publisher that that’s what you’re going to do, then that’s what you’re going to do.
如果你的生计来自于编写特定系列的书籍，并且你的出版商期望这就是你要做的事情，那么这就是你要做的事情。
You might still be a visionary, but that’s not where the money is, so that might be part of it.
你可能仍然是一个有远见的人，但这不是钱的所在，所以这可能是其中的一部分。
But beyond that, it’s hard to speculate.
但除此之外，就很难推测了。
What’s the worst aspect of marketing a book?
营销一本书最糟糕的方面是什么？
I actually enjoy book tours more than people assume that I do, so it’s not that.
事实上，我比人们想象的更喜欢巡回售书，所以事实并非如此。
None of it’s terrible, but if you’re asking me to pick out one thing that doesn’t agree with me, it’s that there’s a lot of — in the run-up to the publication of the book — there’s a lot of little interruptions that happen, that basically make it impossible for me to work on writing the next book.
这些都不可怕，但如果你要我挑出一件与我不一致的事情，那就是有很多 ——在这本书出版之前 ——发生了很多小干扰，这基本上让我无法继续写下一本书。
Last two questions.
最后两个问题。
First, what is your most unusual writing habit?
首先，你最不寻常的写作习惯是什么？
I don’t know if it’s unusual, but a peculiarity is that when I stop writing for the day, which usually happens at something like 11 in the morning, and I —
我不知道这是否不寻常，但有一个特点是，当我停止当天的写作时（通常发生在早上 11 点左右），我——
And you’re starting around when?
你什么时候开始？
Oh, maybe eight.
哦，也许八个。
Okay.
好的。
As I’m walking around for the next 15 minutes or so, sentences will come into my head.
在接下来的 15 分钟左右的时间里，当我四处走动时，我的脑海中就会浮现出一些句子。
By and large, they’re the best sentences, so I’ve learned to carry a recorder with me — now it’s just the voice recorder app on my phone — because I know that if I jump in the car and start driving somewhere, I’m going to have a few of these lines that I don’t want to lose.
总的来说，它们是最好的句子，所以我学会了随身携带录音机 ——现在它只是我手机上的录音机应用程序 ——因为我知道，如果我跳进车里开始开车去某个地方，我会录下一些我不想丢失的台词。
And finally, what is it you think you’ll do next?
最后，您认为下一步会做什么？
Writing-wise, I’ve got a couple of ideas that I’ve been working on for a while.
在写作方面，我有一些想法，我已经研究了一段时间了。
What I need to do is go home and calm down.
我需要做的就是回家冷静一下。
It takes a while.
这需要一段时间。
After my first book tour, I think it was six months before my eyelids stopped twitching.
在我第一次巡回售书之后，我想六个月后我的眼皮才停止抽搐。
So I need to calm down, get back to normal, and then take a good look at this project I’ve been thinking about and figure out how to reboot it.
所以我需要冷静下来，恢复正常，然后好好审视一下我一直在思考的这个项目，想办法重新启动它。
Neal Stephenson, thank you very much.
尼尔·史蒂芬森，非常感谢你。
It was good to be here.
很高兴来到这里。
Thanks.
谢谢。