Sam Bankman-Fried on Arbitrage and Altruism (Ep. 145)

I think what they center around is, “Here is a messy thing.” The world is very messy.

我认为他们的中心思想是“这是一件混乱的事情。”世界非常混乱。

Math might look clean, but anytime that you jump out into how things really work, there are always going to be factors that you can’t consider, but there’s a huge amount of power in being quantitative.

数学可能看起来很简单，但每当你跳入事物真正的运作方式时，总会有一些你无法考虑的因素，但定量的力量却很大。

There’s huge power in thinking about things, not just from a qualitative angle, but putting numbers on things, building statistical models.

思考事物有巨大的力量，不仅从定性的角度思考，而且用数字来思考事物，建立统计模型。

Doing that in a world where you know you’re forgetting an enormous number of factors — how do you do that?

在一个你知道自己会忘记大量因素的世界中这样做——你该如何做到这一点？

I think that is one of the core things here — getting quantitative, numerical, when it’s really hard to do so.

我认为这是这里的核心内容之一——“当确实很难做到这一点时，进行定量、数字化。”

You can do whatever thinking you want, whatever you think is helpful to get you to make the right moves, but in the end, what matters is making the best moves that you can, given whatever uncertainty that you have.

你可以做任何你想做的事情，任何你认为有助于让你采取正确行动的事情，但最终，重要的是考虑到你有任何不确定性，尽可能采取最好的行动。

You’re constantly, implicitly making probabilistic decisions, but in a world where you know you can’t calculate everything out.

你不断地、隐含地做出概率决策，但在一个你知道你无法计算出一切的世界中。

You need to make sure to include the important factors, and not to spend all of your time worrying about factors that don’t matter, and balancing those reasonably.

你需要确保包括重要的因素，而不是把所有的时间都花在担心不重要的因素上，并合理地平衡这些因素。

I think that’s one piece of this.

我认为这就是其中的一部分。

Another thing that I would say was really important for trading is really, really grinding until you do a good job.

我想说的另一件事对于交易来说非常重要，那就是真的非常磨砺，直到你做得很好。

Thinking of it in terms of my goal in the end here is to do a good job.

从我的最终目标来看，就是要把工作做好。

My goal isn’t “Check this box.” My goal isn’t “Send this email to this person, telling them to do this thing.” My goal is, I need to make the money from having done the trade, whatever that takes, and do everything that it takes to get there.

我的目标不是“选中此框”。我的目标不是“向这个人发送这封电子邮件，告诉他们做这件事”。我的目标是，我需要从完成交易中赚钱，无论付出什么代价，并尽一切努力实现这一目标。

When you think about some of the trades — especially in crypto — that we did, half of it was operational, and half of it was really annoying.

当你想到我们所做的一些交易（尤其是加密货币交易）时，一半是可操作的，一半是非常烦人的。

You had to jump through some really bizarre, Byzantine hoops in order to get where you needed to go.

你必须跳过一些非常奇怪的拜占庭式的障碍才能到达你需要去的地方。

That meant that you had to fight through bureaucracies.

这意味着你必须与官僚机构作斗争。

You could never let them get the best of you.

你永远不能让他们打败你。

You had to keep being creative and pushing for more and more solutions until you could get there.

你必须不断发挥创造力并推动越来越多的解决方案，直到你能够实现这一目标。

That’s tenacity.

这就是坚韧。

An ability to think of potential solutions to problems and try them out is another really important piece of it.

思考问题的潜在解决方案并尝试它们的能力是另一个非常重要的部分。

It might be really messy to get there, but that thought of trying to take a messy system and do the best things you can when ultimately you care about some quantitative property, even if you can never be sure that you’re calculating it right, you do the best you can.

到达那里可能真的很混乱，但是当你最终关心一些定量属性时，尝试采用一个混乱的系统并尽你所能做最好的事情，即使你永远不能确定你计算是否正确，你也会尽力而为。

If you ask a random financial regulator somewhere in the world today, “What fraction of your time do you spend thinking about crypto?” “Ah, 50 percent,” an enormous fraction.

如果你随机询问当今世界某个地方的金融监管机构，“你花多少时间考虑加密货币？” “啊，50%”，这是一个很大的分数。

You look at discourse.

你看话语。

If I tell you that the Senate is having a hearing on something related to finance today, what do you think the odds are that it’s about blockchain?

如果我告诉你参议院今天正在就与金融相关的事情举行听证会，你认为与区块链有关的可能性有多大？

Yes, 50–50.

是的，50-50。

It’s an enormous fraction of the discourse in the policy world and in the regulatory world in a way that it wasn’t.

它在政策界和监管界的讨论中占据了很大一部分，但事实并非如此。

What that means is that a huge fraction of the industry and of our business right now is understanding the nuances of the regulatory system, understanding the intentions of regulators, understanding which directions it might go in, understanding what would solve for the various things that people care about, and trying to find ways to get there in a really messy world.

这意味着，目前行业和我们业务的很大一部分正在了解监管体系的细微差别，了解监管机构的意图，了解监管可能的发展方向，了解如何解决人们关心的各种问题，并试图找到在一个真正混乱的世界中实现这一目标的方法。

Again, where there are — how many countries are there, 200 countries, roughly, in the world?

再一次，世界上有多少个国家，大约200个国家？

That’s a lot of countries, and each one of them is trying to figure out what they’re going to do to regulate cryptocurrencies.

有很多国家，每个国家都在试图弄清楚他们将采取什么措施来监管加密货币。

It’s not like you just read that one law book on cryptocurrencies, and you’re done.

这并不是说你只要读完一本关于加密货币的法律书就可以了。

There are 200 of them, and half haven’t been written yet.

一共200篇，还有一半还没有写完。

Half the law book is effectively empty, but that doesn’t mean that there’s no regulatory framework.

一半的法律书实际上是空的，但这并不意味着没有监管框架。

It means that they’re still thinking about it, but you can’t just ignore it and assume everything’s going to be okay.

这意味着他们仍在考虑这件事，但你不能忽视它并假设一切都会好起来的。

It’s just — from a large number of perspectives — incredibly messy right now, and also, just incredibly important for our business and the future of the industry to manage that process well.

它只是 —— 从很多角度来看 —— 现在非常混乱，而且，良好地管理这个流程对于我们的业务和行业的未来来说非常重要。

I was pretty good at making things happen, talking to people about what they were doing, motivation, things like that.

我非常擅长让事情发生，与人们谈论他们正在做的事情、动机等等。

As soon as sh-t hit the fan, I had no idea what the f-ck to do.

当事情发生时，我不知道该做什么。

I had no idea what do you do when two employees just vehemently disagree with each other about what to do, and no amount of talking causes those disagreements to come together.

我不知道当两名员工对于该做什么存在强烈分歧，而且无论再多的谈话也无法使这些分歧聚集在一起时，你该怎么办。

Before you get into management disputes and things like that, understand what the truth is.

在陷入管理纠纷之类的事情之前，请先了解真相是什么。

That is legitimately, I think, the biggest weakness of a lot of managers.

我认为，这确实是许多管理者的最大弱点。

They jump straight into how to manage without first thinking, “Well, what’s the right answer in terms of the object-level problem we’re trying to solve?

他们直接跳到如何管理，而不首先思考：“那么，就我们试图解决的对象级问题而言，正确的答案是什么？

What coding practices should we use?

我们应该使用哪些编码实践？

Should we run this advertisement?” Whatever the question is, first of all, find the right answer.

我们应该投放这个广告吗？”无论问题是什么，首先要找到正确的答案。

Do whatever research you need to do to find that answer.

做任何你需要做的研究来找到答案。

Then a thing that is really important — at least in how we function — is having a company culture that that is what matters, and making it clear that in the end, that’s what we care about.

那么，真正重要的一件事——至少在我们的运作方式上——就是拥有一种重要的公司文化，并明确表明这才是我们所关心的。

That’s what we’re going to push on, and we’re going to be pretty ruthless on that.

这就是我们要推动的事情，而且我们对此会非常无情。

Caring about making the right ultimate decision, and no other argument is going to win over that one when push comes to shove, and everyone has to be aligned on that fact.

关心做出正确的最终决定，在紧要关头，没有其他论据能够胜过这个决定，每个人都必须在这一事实上保持一致。

But then put that aside for a second.

但先把它放在一边。

Okay, you’ve done that.

好吧，你已经做到了。

Now, what do you do to actually resolve disputes if there is a dispute?

那么，如果出现争议，您会如何实际解决争议呢？

One thing that I didn’t realize at the beginning was that, first of all, it’s great if everyone’s aligned and if everyone thinks the same things.

我一开始没有意识到的一件事是，首先，如果每个人都一致并且每个人都有相同的想法，那就太好了。

But in the end, there has to be some process by which everyone agrees you’re going to come to a conclusion.

但最终，必须有一个让每个人都同意你才能得出结论的过程。

There’s some way to ultimately resolve these disputes.

有某种方法可以最终解决这些争议。

There’s some person, odd number of people, probably 1 percent, honestly, who ultimately makes that final call, and everyone knows it.

有一些人，奇数的人，老实说，可能是 1%，最终做出了最后的决定，每个人都知道这一点。

If a civil war were to break out, everyone could just look at how it’s going to end, and now there’s no civil war.

如果爆发内战，大家就看怎么收场，现在没有内战了。

There are downsides to that, but I think they’re outweighed by the upsides from it.

这样做有一些缺点，但我认为它的优点抵消了这些缺点。

That’s one important piece of this, and that’s something that I’ve changed my thoughts on a lot over time and become a lot more cognizant of.

这是其中一个重要的部分，随着时间的推移，我的想法发生了很大的改变，并且变得更加认识。

The Patriots are probably the most notable example of that, and I think everyone knows it’s about Belichick and the staff that he’s built and the culture that he’s built, centered around outthinking some other coaches.

爱国者队可能是其中最著名的例子，我想每个人都知道这与贝利切克和他建立的员工队伍以及他建立的文化有关，其核心是超越其他一些教练。

But also, a big thing there is doing the right thing.

而且，最重要的是做正确的事。

What’s he known for?

他以什么闻名？

Being gruff, but in the end, he’ll make the right play.

虽然态度粗鲁，但最终他会做出正确的选择。

He’ll come up with wacky new formations that will be good, and he doesn’t care that much what’s popular.

他会想出古怪的新阵型，这会很好，而且他不太关心流行什么。

He doesn’t care that much about how things are done.

他不太关心事情是如何完成的。

He cares about, “What’s the play that will optimize our chances of winning, and how do we do that?” You can see that in a lot of areas.

他关心的是，“什么样的玩法可以提高我们获胜的机会，我们该如何做到这一点？”你可以在很多领域看到这一点。

Look at the running backs that New England has employed over the years.

看看新英格兰队这些年来雇佣的跑卫。

It’s this random, motley crew of people who everyone would have said are randos and unlikely to be that good or important, and then they lead the league in rushing.

就是这些随机的、杂七杂八的人，每个人都会说他们是随机的，不太可能那么优秀或重要，然后他们在冲球方面领先于联盟。

Then those running backs go get some payday somewhere else, and they have some new running back no one’s ever heard of, and again, they lead the league in yards per carry at least, or some tandem of them.

然后这些跑卫会去其他地方获得一些发薪日，他们有一些没人听说过的新跑卫，而且，他们至少在每次冲球码数上领先联盟，或者其中一些。

There’s a lot of things going on there.

那里发生了很多事情。

I think that that’s an important piece of this, and frankly, I think for sports teams in general, a lot of the fruit is low hanging.

我认为这是其中很重要的一部分，坦率地说，我认为对于整个运动队来说，很多成果都是唾手可得的。

It’s consistently picking the low-hanging fruit, doing a good job, thinking carefully about what the right thing to do is, not getting too sidetracked by what the convention is for what to do somewhere.

它始终如一地采摘唾手可得的果实，做好工作，仔细思考什么是正确的事情，而不是被惯例所束缚。

I think that gets you a lot of the way.

我认为这会让你受益匪浅。

I think that there needs to be more innovation in ways to spend money before there’s going to be the capacity to spend the amount of money that effective altruism is going to have, but I also think that innovation is happening.

我认为，在有能力花费有效利他主义所拥有的金钱之前，需要在花钱方式上进行更多创新，但我也认为创新正在发生。

It will happen, and so, I just think there’s billions a year that I can see spent extremely effectively.

它会发生，所以，我只是认为每年有数十亿美元可以非常有效地花费。

That’s one thing I’ll say, but to the extent that it is funding-constrained — and it certainly is more so now than it was before — I think a big piece of that is that basically, the biggest thing that’s missing is a weird .

这是我要说的一件事，但在某种程度上，它受到资金限制 ——而且现在肯定比以前更严重 ——我认为其中很大一部分是基本上，缺少的最大的东西是一个奇怪的东西。

.

。

.

。

If it’s not funding-constrained, then it has to be something-else-constrained.

如果它不受资金限制，那么它一定受到其他因素的限制。

That’s the basic question: What is the limiting factor on growth of the movement?

这是一个基本问题：运动发展的限制因素是什么？

And I think people will say “people.” You could talk a lot about effective altruists who aren’t sure what they should do with their life, which makes you wonder what “people” means exactly.

我认为人们会说“人”。你可以谈论很多有效的利他主义者，他们不确定自己应该做什么，这让你想知道“人”到底意味着什么。

It’s not that there aren’t people anywhere.

并不是说哪里都没有人。

There’s maybe another thing, which is a little bit of a variant on that, but I think may be an interesting variant, which is a constraint on everyone getting together and doing the thing.

也许还有另一件事，这有点变体，但我认为可能是一个有趣的变体，它限制了每个人聚在一起做这件事。

What’s it take for a new project to start up, a new altruistically minded project?

一个新项目的启动需要什么，一个新的利他主义项目？

It takes funding.

这需要资金。

It takes founders.

这需要创始人。

It takes employees.

它需要员工。

It takes ideas, and they all have to come together at the same place and the same time and meet up.

这需要想法，而且他们都必须在同一地点、同一时间聚集在一起并会面。

I actually think that that is quite hard and quite difficult, and often that is actually what is blocking something.

我实际上认为这非常困难，而且通常这实际上是阻碍某些事情的原因。

The funding is there.

资金就在那里。

The people are there.

人们就在那里。

Maybe the founders are even there somewhere.

也许创始人就在某个地方。

I think sometimes they are, but what happens is they — I don’t know, they cross paths in the night, so to speak.

我想有时他们是这样，但发生的事情是他们 —— 我不知道，可以这么说，他们在夜间交叉。

“This is happening tomorrow in Redwood City, and the funding is there.

“这将于明天在雷德伍德城举行，资金已经到位。

I know it will be there.

我知道它会在那里。

I guarantee it is there.

我保证它就在那里。

And I found a person, and he will be there because I’m going to make him be there.” And thus, “I know it’s happening.

我找到了一个人，他会在那里，因为我会让他在那里。”因此，“我知道它正在发生。

I can prove it’s happening.” And when you do that, the interesting thing is, everyone shows up.

我可以证明它正在发生。”当你这样做时，有趣的是，每个人都会出现。

I think that there’s a little bit of this getting everyone to take that leap together that’s necessary for a project to really start up.

我认为，有一点可以让每个人一起迈出这一步，这是项目真正启动所必需的。

Let’s talk about great answers.

让我们来谈谈精彩的答案。

What would be something that I think would go above and beyond what people can usually think of to do with money?

我认为什么事情会超越人们通常对金钱的想象？

I think there are things there, but to some extent, I think that they need more than just money.

我认为那里有一些东西，但在某种程度上，我认为他们需要的不仅仅是钱。

I think money is an important piece of it, but it’s not the only piece.

我认为钱是其中很重要的一部分，但它不是唯一的部分。

They also need that drive to exist and to happen and to happen right and well.

他们还需要这种动力来存在、发生、正确、良好地发生。

What I think I would do is one of two things, and I don’t want to say these are the causes that necessarily matter the most, long term.

我认为我会做的只是两件事之一，我不想说这些是最重要的、长期的原因。

I do think that they’re the most important for the long term of humanity maybe right now, but others might develop really great ways to innovate soon.

我确实认为它们对于人类的长远发展来说可能是最重要的，但其他人可能很快就会开发出真正伟大的创新方法。

Right now, the things I’m most excited about — one of them is pandemic preparedness.

现在，我最兴奋的事情就是大流行病的防范。

This is probably the one I’ve been thinking about the most recently.

这可能是我最近一直在思考的一个问题。

I think the single clearest takeaway from COVID is that we don’t have our sh-t together as a world.

我认为从新冠疫情中最明显的一个收获是，我们作为一个世界并没有团结在一起。

That’s what’s become clearest, is that there is no magical wizard behind the curtain who makes everything go okay.

最清楚的是，幕后并没有魔法师让一切顺利进行。

It’s actually a mess, and everyone can agree that we screwed up the COVID response in every possible way.

这实际上是一团糟，每个人都同意我们以各种可能的方式搞砸了新冠疫情应对措施。

But I think one of the more depressing things is, it also seems like we’re not really ready for next time.

但我认为更令人沮丧的事情之一是，我们似乎还没有真正为下一次做好准备。

I don’t think we’d be ready for that one either.

我认为我们也没有为此做好准备。

I think we’d fall on our face just as much, but death tolls could be way higher.

我想我们也会同样摔倒，但死亡人数可能会更高。

You could imagine something destabilizing for society.

你可以想象一些破坏社会稳定的事情。

I’m still not sure we’d get our sh-t together on it.

我仍然不确定我们是否能在这件事上团结一致。

We seem to have only one mode, and that mode is freak out and do some stuff in a disorganized way, like shut the economy down.

我们似乎只有一种模式，这种模式让人抓狂，以一种无组织的方式做一些事情，比如关闭经济。

We’re good at that, and that we’re really good at dragging on, in particular, as long as possible.

我们很擅长这一点，而且我们真的很擅长拖延，特别是尽可能拖延。

We can eventually make a vaccine.

我们最终可以制造出疫苗。

Actually, we can make vaccines quickly, but it still takes a year to get them out, which is fast by vaccine standards but slow by everyone-is-dying-right-now standards.

事实上，我们可以很快地生产出疫苗，但仍然需要一年的时间才能生产出来，以疫苗的标准来看这是很快的，但以“现在每个人都在死去”的标准来看却很慢。

If it was actually that type of scenario, a year is not necessarily okay.

如果真的是这种情况的话，一年也不一定可以。

I don’t know, you don’t really have any —

我不知道，你真的没有任何 ——

The other thing that I would be really excited by — and this one, I don’t have an organization name for — but it’s funding efforts to build up vaccine capacity, vaccine stockpiles, distribution networks, early detection systems, and other things that could be done rapidly, that could be done within a couple days of a new pandemic appearing.

另一件令我感到非常兴奋的事情是——这件事，我没有组织名称——但它是为建立疫苗能力、疫苗库存、分销网络、早期检测系统以及其他可以迅速完成的事情提供资金，这些事情可以在新的大流行出现后几天内完成。

Maybe over the next year, I’ll have more actual organization names on that one, none for now.

也许在明年，我会得到更多关于该组织的实际名称，但目前还没有。

That’s one of the things that I would like heavily to think about doing, and in fact, am doing right now with that marginal dollar or marginal million dollars.

这是我非常想考虑做的事情之一，事实上，我现在正在用边际美元或边际百万美元做这件事。

On the birth subsidy side, there are a lot of things you can do to try to influence population rates up or down.

在生育补贴方面，您可以采取很多措施来尝试影响人口率的上升或下降。

I actually want to look into that a little bit more and develop a more refined opinion on it.

我实际上想对此进行更多研究并形成更完善的意见。

I will say that at some point, feedback mechanisms might start kicking in.

我想说，在某个时候，反馈机制可能会开始发挥作用。

At some point, you might have some births replacing others.

在某些时候，你可能会用一些出生代替其他出生。

At some point, you have to think hard about the factors in both directions there, and what does it do to international coordination?

到了某个时候，你要认真思考这两个方向的因素，对国际协调有什么影响？

I don’t know the answer to this.

我不知道这个问题的答案。

I will say that whenever companies start to get bigger, they become a sh-tshow.

我想说的是，每当公司开始变得更大时，它们就会变成“sh-tshow”。

Probably, that really shouldn’t necessarily mean that that’s true of the world or countries.

也许，这并不一定意味着世界或国家也是如此。

The other thing is if — and this is an if — but if you think that the next few years are extremely crucial for the world — the next 20 years, the next 30 years — anything relating to birth is going to be delayed by 25 years in impact on the world.

另一件事是如果 —— 这是一个如果 —— 但如果你认为未来几年对世界极其重要 ——未来20年、未来30年—— 任何与出生有关的事情对世界的影响都会推迟25年。

Depending on what your timelines are for earth-changing technology, that’ll influence, to some extent, how much of a discount rate you apply on that.

根据您对改变地球的技术的时间表，这将在某种程度上影响您对此应用的折扣率。

I don’t think it’s obvious what the right number is there.

我认为正确的数字是多少并不明显。

Basically, each day, I’d go to the cafeteria and be like, “What good vegetarian thing do I want to eat?” Think for four minutes, and then get a steak and cheese sandwich.

基本上，每天我都会去自助餐厅问，“我想吃什么好吃的素食？”想四分钟，然后吃一份牛排和奶酪三明治。

That didn’t go so well.

进展不太顺利。

Then, finally, one day I was with my friend who had just gone vegetarian.

最后，有一天我和我刚刚吃素的朋友在一起。

A mutual friend said, “Oh, hey, are you vegetarian now?” To them they said, “Yes.” I was eating tofu that night, and she said, “Oh, you’re a vegetarian, too?” I said, “Yes.” I’d had a burger for lunch that day, so “yes” was not a factually supported answer at that time, but I have not eaten meat since.

一位共同的朋友说：“哦，嘿，你现在吃素了吗？”他们对他们说：“是的。”那天晚上我正在吃豆腐，她说：“哦，你也是素食主义者吗？”我说：“是的。”那天我午餐吃了一个汉堡，所以当时“是”并不是一个得到事实支持的答案，但从那以后我就没有吃过肉了。

It was way easier for me once I went cold turkey than it was for me to try to wean myself off it because the cognitive load of every time that I went to eat, having to decide what I could and couldn’t eat and should and shouldn’t eat was just overwhelming me.

一旦我戒掉火鸡，对我来说比尝试戒掉它要容易得多，因为每次我去吃饭时，必须决定我能吃什么、不能吃什么、应该吃什么和不应该吃什么，这种认知负担让我不知所措。

It’s way easier to say, “Yeah, I don’t eat meat.”

说“是的，我不吃肉”要容易得多。

It’s a similar thing here.

这里也是类似的事情。

I don’t want to have to sit down at the dinner table and think for 30 minutes about what life a particular animal lived and whether it was net positive or net negative.

我不想坐在餐桌前花 30 分钟思考特定动物过着什么样的生活，以及它是净积极还是净消极。

For me, in particular, that’s a big cost.

尤其是对我来说，这是一笔很大的成本。

I would prefer just not to eat meat than to have to go through that process.

我宁愿不吃肉也不愿经历这个过程。

But I don’t, in principle, have a problem with that.

但原则上我对此没有问题。

The other thing I will say is that — and this is specific to the environment today; this needn’t be true — but today, almost all meat is inhumane meat.

我要说的另一件事是 — 这是针对当今环境的；这不一定是真的——但今天，几乎所有的肉都是不人道的肉。

If you look by count, a very, very tiny fraction of it is actually happy.

如果你仔细观察，就会发现其中只有非常非常小的一部分实际上是快乐的。

Again, that doesn’t need to be true necessarily.

再说一遍，这不一定是真的。

You could imagine a world where most meat was happy meat.

你可以想象一个大多数肉都是快乐肉的世界。

We just don’t happen to live in it.

我们只是碰巧没有生活在其中。

That’s another reason that, right now, it just wouldn’t buy you that much.

这是现在它不会给你买那么多东西的另一个原因。

That might change in 20 years.

20年后这种情况可能会改变。

I think there are real interesting questions like, between humanely raised meat, synthetic meat, and fake meat products — what the race between those three will look like.

我认为存在一些真正有趣的问题，例如，人道饲养的肉、合成肉和假肉制品之间 ——这三者之间的竞争会是什么样子。

All this math works really nicely as long as all the numbers are finite.

只要所有数字都是有限的，所有这些数学运算就非常有效。

As soon as you say, “What are the odds that there’s a way to be infinitely happy?

一旦你说：“有一种方法可以让你获得无限快乐的可能性有多大？

What if infinite utility is a possibility?” You can figure out what that would do to expected values.

如果无限效用是可能的怎么办？”您可以计算出这会对预期值产生什么影响。

Now, all of a sudden, we’re comparing hierarchies of infinity.

现在，突然之间，我们正在比较无穷大的层次结构。

Linearity breaks down a little bit here.

线性在这里有点崩溃。

Adding two things together doesn’t work so well.

将两个东西加在一起效果不太好。

A lot of really nasty things happen when you go to infinite numbers from an expected-value point of view.

当您从期望值的角度考虑无限数时，会发生很多非常令人讨厌的事情。

There are some people who have thought about this.

有一些人思考过这个问题。

To my knowledge, no one has thought about this and come away feeling good about where they ended.

据我所知，没有人考虑过这一点，并在离开时对自己的结局感到满意。

People generally think about this and come away feeling more confused.

人们通常会想到这一点，然后感到更加困惑。

It’s a mess because there’s no clear regulatory framework for them to fit into and to have oversight of that.

这是一团糟，因为没有明确的监管框架让他们适应并对其进行监督。

So, part of my answer there is, basically, yes, I think that framework would solve the current problems that people have in a pretty clean way.

所以，我的部分答案基本上是，是的，我认为该框架将以一种非常干净的方式解决人们当前遇到的问题。

But you have a good point there, which is, how about PayPal?

但你有一个很好的观点，那就是 PayPal 怎么样？

There are all these things that we don’t call stablecoins right now, that we call something else.

所有这些东西我们现在不称之为稳定币，我们称之为其他东西。

I think there would be a big improvement over the current world, where it’s the same thing but without regulatory oversight and with a lot of random drama because of this.

我认为，与当前的世界相比，将会有很大的进步，在当前的世界中，情况是一样的，但没有监管监督，并且因此有很多随机的戏剧性事件。

But I do think that it gets to this question of, “Wait, but banks are allowed to rehypothecate dollars.

但我确实认为这涉及到这样一个问题：“等等，但是银行可以重新抵押美元。

Banks are allowed to do all manner of wacky things with their deposits.” Are stablecoin companies allowed to?

银行可以用存款做各种奇怪的事情。”稳定币公司可以这样做吗？

If not, is it obvious they shouldn’t be allowed to?

如果不是，是否显然不应该允许他们这样做？

And how should that be governed and regulated?

应该如何治理和监管？

Maybe the answer is, whatever: The banks will do that on their behalf, the banks where they hold their assets, and then pay them interest for the right to do that — although, of course, right now banks aren’t actually paying interest, really .

也许答案是，无论如何：银行将代表他们（他们持有资产的银行）这样做，然后向他们支付利息以获得这样做的权利——当然，现在银行实际上并没有支付利息。

.

。

.

。

I think that’d be a reasonable thing to think, but if you put that aside for a second, you say, “No, absolutely not.” Here’s one difference between that and the stablecoin, which I think is relevant, is that a stablecoin is not just stable in one direction.

我认为这是一个合理的想法，但如果你把它放在一边，你会说，“不，绝对不是。”我认为它与稳定币之间的一个区别是，稳定币不仅仅在一个方向上稳定。

It’s stable in both directions.

它在两个方向上都很稳定。

In particular, if you’re an investor, and you buy a stablecoin, you have downside risk but not upside.

特别是，如果您是投资者，并且购买了稳定币，那么您就有下行风险，但没有上行风险。

If somehow the stablecoin company makes money, you’re probably not going to get any of that, but if it loses money, somehow, you’re probably on the hook for that.

如果稳定币公司以某种方式赚钱，你可能不会得到任何钱，但如果它亏损，不知何故，你可能会为此承担责任。

So, there is something a little asymmetric going on here for the consumer.

因此，对于消费者来说，这里存在一些不对称的情况。

I think it wouldn’t be crazy from that perspective to think that there should be some protection here and that maybe there should be regulation if consumers are only given one side of exposure, but I don’t think that’s obviously true.

我认为从这个角度来看，认为应该有一些保护，如果消费者只受到一侧暴露，也许应该有监管，这并不疯狂，但我认为这显然不是真的。

I think you’re making a decent point.

我认为你的观点很不错。

One thing you could do is look for a similar thing in crypto.

你可以做的一件事就是在加密货币中寻找类似的东西。

You could look for OTC transactions.

您可以寻找场外交易。

You could look for OTC swaps that live on.

您可以寻找继续存在的场外掉期交易。

You could look at OTC borrow-lending.

你可以看看场外借贷。

Those are in crypto.

这些都是加密货币。

Are they in DeFi?

他们在 DeFi 吗？

It’s sort of ambiguous — they touch all areas of the crypto ecosystem.

这有点模棱两可——它们涉及加密生态系统的所有领域。

But that’s an area where I think there’s some dubiously accounted-for leverage.

但我认为在这个领域存在一些可疑的杠杆作用。

I think that’s one answer to that question.

我认为这是这个问题的一个答案。

Where else is there leverage that sort of is implicit?

还有什么地方存在这种隐含的杠杆作用呢？

Rehypothecation sometimes, although in DeFi, because it’s all on-chain, it has to be pretty explicit if it’s going to be rehypothecated, but you’re not .

有时会进行再抵押，尽管在 DeFi 中，因为它都是在链上的，所以如果要进行再抵押，就必须非常明确，但你没有。

.

。

.

。

In general, people actually often do know whether each protocol individually can rehypothecate, which is a separate question from whether they, as a group, can or whether they are or something.

一般来说，人们实际上经常知道每个协议是否可以单独进行再抵押，这与他们作为一个群体是否可以或是否可以进行再抵押是一个单独的问题。

But in fact, most of these aren’t.

但事实上，大多数都不是。

Most DeFi protocols are not doing things beyond what they literally say they’re doing, and so the amount of leverage they introduce into the system mostly is what they say they are.

大多数 DeFi 协议并没有做超出其字面上所说的事情，因此它们引入系统的杠杆量大多是它们所说的。

But here are some hidden things.

但这里有一些隐藏的事情。

First of all, you take one leverage thing, you put in another leverage thing, so DAI.

首先，你拿一个杠杆，然后投入另一个杠杆，即 DAI。

DAI is an algorithmic stablecoin.

DAI 是一种算法稳定币。

Like other algorithmic stablecoins, it is not perfectly stable.

与其他算法稳定币一样，它并不完全稳定。

It’s not perfectly stable because it’s not backed by the US dollar.

它并不完全稳定，因为它没有美元支持。

It’s backed by crypto assets that could have price movements.

它由可能发生价格变动的加密资产支持。

It’s very overcollateralized.

这是非常过度抵押的。

DAI can then be used as collateral on some borrow-lending protocols in crypto.

然后，DAI 可以用作某些加密借贷协议的抵押品。

That’s one form of rehypothecation in DeFi markets that you can trace through.

这是您可以追踪的 DeFi 市场中的一种再抵押形式。

It is, in theory, public, but it’s not super easy, necessarily, to trace through.

从理论上讲，它是公开的，但追踪起来并不容易。

I think that’s one example of a place where there is no pretense anymore that there is any real sense of how do you price this thing other than supply and demand, like memes versus — I don’t know — anti-memes?

我认为这是一个例子，不再假装除了供需之外，你如何对这个东西进行定价，就像模因与 - 我不知道 - 反模因？

I think that more generally, though, that’s happened to a lot of assets.

不过，我认为更普遍的是，很多资产都发生了这种情况。

It’s just less explicit in a lot of them.

只是其中很多内容不太明确。

What is Elon Musk’s greatest product ever, or what’s his most successful product ever?

埃隆·马斯克有史以来最伟大的产品是什么，或者他有史以来最成功的产品是什么？

I don’t think it’s an electric car.

我不认为这是一辆电动汽车。

I don’t think it’s a rocket ship.

我不认为这是一艘火箭飞船。

I think one product of his has outperformed all of his other products in demand, and that’s TSLA, the ticker.

我认为他的一款产品的表现优于他所有其他产品的需求，那就是特斯拉（TSLA）。

That is his masterpiece.

那是他的杰作。

How is that priced?

那价格如何？

I don’t know, it’s worth Tesla.

我不知道，这值得特斯拉。

It’s a product people want, Tesla stock.

这是人们想要的产品，特斯拉股票。

It’s a pretty straightforward answer that you look at Tesla, you look at a lot of stocks right now, you think about what determines their market cap — the discounted cash flow?

这是一个非常简单的答案，你看看特斯拉，你现在看看很多股票，你想想是什么决定了它们的市值 ——贴现现金流？

Yeah, sort of, that plays a role in it.

是的，在某种程度上，这在其中发挥了作用。

That’s 30 percent of the answer.

这就是答案的 30%。

It’s when we look at the meme stocks and the meme coins that we feel like we can see the answer for ourselves for the first time, but it was always there in the other stocks as well, and social media has been amplifying this all over the place.

当我们看到模因股票和模因币时，我们感觉自己第一次看到了答案，但它也始终存在于其他股票中，而社交媒体一直在到处放大这一点。

I think that if you told me that Bitcoin was currently trading at 1 percent of gold, I would just be like, “F-ck it, I’m going to buy.” I don’t need to know anything else.

我认为，如果你告诉我比特币目前的交易价格是黄金的 1%，我会说，“管它，我要买。”我不需要知道任何其他事情。

What are the odds Bitcoin becomes a new gold?

比特币成为新黄金的可能性有多大？

Is it 1 percent?

是百分之一吗？

No, it’s more than 1 percent.

不，超过百分之一。

I don’t know what the percentage is, but one isn’t the right number.

我不知道百分比是多少，但一个不是正确的数字。

So there’s that, and that’s one piece of this.

就是这样，这就是其中的一部分。

If you told me that it was worth 10 golds right now — 10 times what gold was — what would I think?

如果你告诉我它现在值 10 枚黄金 —— 黄金的 10 倍 —— 我会怎么想？

I think I’d be like, “I don’t know.

我想我会说：“我不知道。

Maybe.” I can’t just prove that.

也许吧。”我不能仅仅证明这一点。

It’s no longer just filling the role gold filled — that’s certainly true.

它不再只是扮演黄金角色——这确实是事实。

I think that is how we think about it.

我想这就是我们的想法。

And maybe another thing to think about is, Bitcoin is about as important as what world’s currency?

也许另一件事需要考虑的是，比特币与世界上哪种货币一样重要？

When you think about impact on the world, I think they sounded like a wacky investigation two years ago, and I worry that some people still think it’s a wacky investigation because they haven’t bothered to recompute whether it’s bizarre, but actually, it totally makes sense.

当你想到对世界的影响时，我认为它们听起来像是两年前的一项古怪的调查，我担心有些人仍然认为这是一项古怪的调查，因为他们没有费心去重新计算它是否奇怪，但实际上，它完全有道理。

I don’t know, Swiss franc or Bitcoin — which do you think has more impact on the world right now?

我不知道，瑞士法郎还是比特币 ——你认为现在哪个对世界影响更大？

I just don’t think it’s crazy to say Bitcoin.

我只是觉得说比特币并不疯狂。

Pick your favorite big thing — I don’t know — big internet thing.

选择你最喜欢的大事 — 我不知道 — 互联网大事。

You could say Twitter or Facebook.

你可以说 Twitter 或 Facebook。

You could say New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ.

你可以说纽约证券交易所或纳斯达克。

Say Visa, say Google — I don’t know — Amazon.

说 Visa，说 Google — 我不知道 — 亚马逊。

Whatever you say, how many things per second does it have to compute?

不管你说什么，它每秒必须计算多少东西？

Answering it varies some, but you’re generally going to hear answers that sound like a million, somewhere like 100,000 and 10 million, depending on which thing we’re thinking about, and it makes sense.

答案有所不同，但你通常会听到听起来像一百万、十万和一千万的答案，这取决于我们正在考虑的事情，这是有道理的。

If you have a billion users, for instance, which is the kind of thing you might expect of a gigantically successful internet thing —

例如，如果你有十亿用户，这就是你所期望的一个巨大成功的互联网事物 ——

Then you say, “Well, okay, what’s that mean for a blockchain?” Well, it means that if you want a blockchain to really get to a truly global scale, you want that blockchain to be processing millions of transactions a second.

然后你说，“好吧，这对区块链意味着什么？”好吧，这意味着如果您希望区块链真正达到真正的全球规模，您希望该区块链每秒处理数百万笔交易。

That’d be great if you could do that.

如果你能做到的话那就太好了。

What does that require, then?

那么这需要什么呢？

Well, straightforwardly, it requires technology that can parse that, and we don’t have that on very many blockchains right now.

好吧，简单地说，它需要能够解析它的技术，而我们目前在很多区块链上还没有这种技术。

If you look at most blockchains today, they cannot support millions of transactions per second.

如果你看看今天的大多数区块链，它们无法支持每秒数百万笔交易。

Ethereum cannot support millions of transactions per second.

以太坊无法支持每秒数百万笔交易。

Today, it can support ten.

如今，它可以支持十个。

Ten is the number of transactions per second it can support.

十是它每秒可以支持的事务数。

Ten is off by six orders of magnitude from where it needs to get.

10 比它需要达到的值相差了 6 个数量级。

It’s not close.

还不是很近。

Now, it’s going to get operated to Eth2 sometime over the next few years, let’s say, at which point it’s going to get to something like thousands of transactions per second, per shard.

现在，它将在未来几年的某个时候在 Eth2 上运行，比方说，届时它将达到每个分片每秒数千笔交易的水平。

The first point I want to make is thousands is still not nearly enough.

我想说的第一点是，数千仍然远远不够。

Thousands would mean that it could not host a single active order book on FTX for the entire blockchain, let alone Facebook.

数千意味着它无法在 FTX 上托管整个区块链的单个活跃订单簿，更不用说 Facebook 了。

So, thousands isn’t going to get you there, but it’s going to shard.

所以，成千上万的人不会让你到达那里，但它会分裂。

What sharding means, basically, is there’s going to be a bunch of them running in parallel and periodically syncing up with each other.

基本上，分片意味着将有一堆并行运行并定期相互同步。

If you had a hundred of those, if you had a thousand of those, I guess, you’re at millions of transactions a second collectively, but they don’t talk to each other super well.

如果你有一百个这样的东西，如果你有一千个这样的东西，我想，你每秒总共会处理数百万笔交易，但它们彼此之间的交流并不是很好。

So you’ve got a single-digit thousands per shard, millions overall.

因此，每个分片有数千个个位数，总共有数百万个。

Does that work?

那有用吗？

Is that enough?

够了吗？

Maybe.

或许。

I would be pretty nervous about that, and the reason is that, basically, you can’t take a single order book and shard it.

我对此会非常紧张，原因是，基本上，你不能拿一个订单簿并将其分片。

You can’t have two people trying to lift the same offer from different shards, and 30 minutes later figure out what happened.

你不可能让两个人尝试从不同的分片中获取相同的报价，而 30 分钟后才知道发生了什么。

In fact, if you tweet, and I was like, “Ah, I can’t see your tweet.” I’m on Twitter shard number 78.

事实上，如果你发推文，我就会说，“啊，我看不到你的推文。”我的 Twitter 分片编号为 78。

You’re on Twitter shard number 331.

您所在的 Twitter 分片编号为 331。

Of course, I can’t see your tweet.

当然，我看不到你的推文。

It’s not a great user experience.

这不是一个很好的用户体验。

Certainly companies, and maybe even industries — you want on a single shard, so I think you want millions of TPS per shard if you are going to shard it.

当然，公司，甚至行业 ——你想要单个分片，所以我认为如果你要对其进行分片，你需要每个分片达到数百万的 TPS。

And that, basically, gets me to where I am, which is, when you’re looking at the type of things that could scale to support gigantic billion-person applications online, I think you’re looking at a very limited number of blockchains that are focusing very heavily on their scaling.

基本上，这让我明白了我现在的处境，也就是说，当你在寻找可以扩展以支持巨大的十亿人在线应用程序的事物类型时，我认为你看到的是数量非常有限的区块链，它们非常关注其扩展性。

I hope that we can have a lot of really positive impact on the economy and the people here more generally.

我希望我们能够对经济和这里的人民产生很多真正积极的影响。

We’re investing a lot in the island, in the schools, and in the health infrastructure here.

我们在岛上、学校和卫生基础设施上投入了大量资金。

The biggest things that I would say, other than those — really, health infrastructure is a big one.

我要说的最重要的事情，除了这些之外——确实，卫生基础设施是一个很大的问题。

Massively operating it on all fronts would go a long way towards improving quality of life for everyone here and make it an international hub while also helping the population a ton.

在各个方面进行大规模运营将大大提高这里每个人的生活质量，使其成为国际中心，同时也为人民提供大量帮助。

That’s maybe the single biggest thing I’d say.

这可能是我要说的最重要的事情。

Then the other thing is, if the Bahamas closes their borders for COVID.

另一件事是，如果巴哈马因新冠病毒而关闭边境。

In general, border closing for COVID, I’m not a huge fan of.

总的来说，我不太喜欢因新冠病毒而关闭边境。

But especially, I think it just would kill a lot of what makes it special here — and they’re not doing that, to be clear, and I’m pretty excited about that fact.

但尤其是，我认为这只会扼杀这里的很多特色 ——而且他们并没有这样做，澄清一下，我对此感到非常兴奋。

But it’s the combination of a nimble, small state that has a lot going for it, a lot to offer, and also is robustly democratic, which is fairly powerful.

但这是一个灵活的小国家的结合，它有很多好处，有很多东西可以提供，而且是强大的民主国家，相当强大。

People here are really nice — that’s cool.

这里的人真的很好 —— 这很酷。

It is just such a stark difference from a lot of other places that I’ve been, and conveniently located.

这与我去过的许多其他地方有很大的不同，而且位置便利。

It really is a 30-minute flight from Miami.

距离迈阿密仅 30 分钟航程。

The infrastructure here is pretty decent, and it is getting better pretty quickly.

这里的基础设施相当不错，而且改善得很快。

I think working out the healthcare infrastructure, or obviously — and especially with the world we’re in — direct cash transfers are always within an order of magnitude of the best thing you could do.

我认为解决医疗基础设施问题，或者显然 ——尤其是在我们所处的世界中—— 直接现金转移总是在你能做的最好事情的一个数量级之内。

Those are pretty effective in just giving to Bahamians.

这些对于向巴哈马人的捐赠非常有效。

We’ve spent some money buying COVID-relief supplies for the island, and we’re monitoring what their stockpiles look like.

我们花了一些钱为岛上购买新冠疫情救援物资，并且正在监测他们的库存情况。

If that becomes a limiting factor, we’ll put more into it, although I think it’s looking okay from a stockpile perspective right now.

如果这成为一个限制因素，我们将投入更多资金，尽管我认为目前从库存角度来看还不错。