Marc Andreessen: How Risk Taking, Innovation & Artificial Intelligence Transform Human Experience

Andrew Huberman: Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools for everyday life.

Andrew Huberman：欢迎来到 Huberman 实验室播客，我们在这里讨论科学和基于科学的日常生活工具。

I'm Andrew Huberman, and I'm a professor of neurobiology and ophthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine.

我是安德鲁·胡伯曼，斯坦福大学医学院神经生物学和眼科教授。

Today, my guest is Marc Andreessen.

今天，我的嘉宾是马克·安德森。

Marc Andreessen is a software engineer and an investor in technology companies.

马克·安德森 (Marc Andreessen) 是一名软件工程师和科技公司的投资者。

He cofounded and developed Mosaic, which was one of the first widely used web browsers.

他共同创立并开发了 Mosaic，这是最早广泛使用的网络浏览器之一。

He also cofounded and developed Netscape, which was one of the earliest widespread-used web browsers.

他还共同创立并开发了 Netscape，这是最早广泛使用的网络浏览器之一。

And he cofounded and is a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, one of the most successful Silicon Valley venture capital firms.

他是硅谷最成功的风险投资公司之一安德森霍洛维茨公司的联合创始人并担任普通合伙人。

All of that is to say that Mark Andreessen is one of the most successful innovators and investors ever.

所有这些都表明马克·安德森是有史以来最成功的创新者和投资者之一。

I was extremely excited to record this episode with Marc for several reasons.

出于几个原因，我非常高兴能与马克一起录制这一集。

First of all, he himself is an incredible innovator.

首先，他本人是一位令人难以置信的创新者。

Second of all, he has an uncanny ability to spot the innovators of the future.

其次，他具有发现未来创新者的不可思议的能力。

And third, Marc has shown over and over again the ability to understand how technologies not yet even developed are going to impact the way that humans interact at large.

第三，马克一次又一次地展示了理解尚未开发的技术将如何影响人类互动方式的能力。

Our conversation starts off by discussing what makes for an exceptional innovator, as well as what sorts of environmental conditions make for exceptional innovation and creativity more generally.

我们的对话首先讨论什么造就了杰出的创新者，以及什么样的环境条件造就了更广泛的杰出创新和创造力。

In that context, we talk about risk taking, not just in terms of risk taking in one's profession, but about how some people, not all, but how some people who are risk takers and innovators in the context of their work also seem to take a lot of risks in their personal life, and some of the consequences that can bring.

在这种情况下，我们谈论冒险，不仅仅是在一个人的职业中承担风险，而是谈论一些人，而不是全部，而是一些在工作中承担风险和创新的人如何在他们的个人生活中似乎也承担了很多风险，以及可能带来的一些后果。

Then we discuss some of the most transformative technologies that are now emerging, such as novel approaches to developing clean energy, as well as AI, or artificial intelligence.

然后我们讨论一些目前正在兴起的最具变革性的技术，例如开发清洁能源的新方法，以及人工智能。

With respect to AI, Marc shares his views as to why AI is likely to greatly improve human experience, and we discuss the multiple roles that AI is very likely to have in all of our lives in the near future.

关于人工智能，马克分享了他对人工智能为何可能极大改善人类体验的看法，我们讨论了人工智能在不久的将来很可能在我们所有人的生活中扮演的多重角色。

Marc explains how not too long from now, all of us are very likely to have AI assistants, for instance, assistants that give us highly informed health advice, highly informed psychological advice.

马克解释说，在不久的将来，我们所有人都很可能拥有人工智能助手，例如，为我们提供高度知情的健康建议、高度知情的心理建议的助手。

Indeed, it is very likely that all of us will soon have AI assistants that govern most, if not all, of our daily decisions.

事实上，我们所有人很可能很快就会拥有人工智能助手来管理我们大部分（如果不是全部）日常决策。

And Marc explains how, if done correctly, this can be a tremendously positive addition to our life.

马克解释说，如果做得正确，这可以为我们的生活带来巨大的积极影响。

In doing so, Marc provides a stark argument for those that argue that AI is going to diminish human experience.

通过这样做，马克为那些认为人工智能将削弱人类体验的人提供了一个鲜明的论据。

So if you're hearing about and or concerned about the ways that AI is likely to destroy us today, you are going to hear about the many different ways that AI technologies now in development are likely to enhance our human experience at every level.

因此，如果您听说或担心人工智能今天可能会以何种方式摧毁我们，您将会听到目前正在开发的人工智能技术可能以多种不同方式在各个层面增强我们人类的体验。

What you'll soon find is that while today's discussion does center around technology and technology development, it is really a discussion about human beings and human psychology.

你很快就会发现，虽然今天的讨论确实围绕技术和技术发展，但它实际上是关于人类和人类心理的讨论。

So whether you have an interest in technology development and/or AI, I'm certain that you'll find today's discussion to be an important and highly lucid view into what will soon be the future that we all live in.

因此，无论您对技术开发和/或人工智能感兴趣，我相信您都会发现今天的讨论是对我们所有人生活的未来的重要且高度清晰的看法。

Before we begin, I'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford.

在开始之前，我想强调一下，这个播客与我在斯坦福大学的教学和研究角色是分开的。

It is, however, part of my desire and effort to bring zero-cost-to-consumer information about science and science-related tools to the general public.

然而，我的愿望和努力的一部分是将有关科学和科学相关工具的零成本消费者信息带给公众。

In keeping with that theme, I'd like to thank the sponsors of today's podcast.

为了与这个主题保持一致，我要感谢今天播客的赞助商。

Our first sponsor is LMNT.

我们的第一个赞助商是LMNT。

LMNT is an electrolyte drink that has everything you need and nothing you don't.

LMNT 是一种电解质饮料，拥有您需要的一切，没有您不需要的东西。

That means plenty of the electrolytes sodium, magnesium and potassium in the correct ratios, but no sugar.

这意味着大量电解质中钠、镁和钾的比例正确，但不含糖。

The electrolytes and hydration are absolutely key for mental health, physical health and performance.

电解质和水合作用对于心理健康、身体健康和表现绝对关键。

Even a slight degree of dehydration can impair our ability to think, our energy levels and our physical performance.

即使是轻微程度的脱水也会损害我们的思考能力、能量水平和身体表现。

LMNT makes it very easy to achieve proper hydration, and it does so by including the three electrolytes in the exact ratios they need to be present.

LMNT 可以非常容易地实现适当的水合，并且它通过以所需存在的精确比例包含三种电解质来实现这一点。

I drink LMNT first thing in the morning when I wake up.

我早上起床后第一件事就是喝 LMNT。

I usually mix it with about 16 to 32oz of water.

我通常将其与大约 16 至 32 盎司的水混合。

If I'm exercising, I'll drink one while I'm exercising, and I tend to drink one after exercising as well.

如果我在运动，我会在运动时喝一瓶，而且我也倾向于在运动后喝一瓶。

Now, many people are scared off by the idea of ingesting sodium because obviously we don't want to consume sodium in excess.

现在，许多人对摄入钠的想法感到害怕，因为显然我们不想摄入过量的钠。

However, for people that have normal blood pressure, and especially for people that are consuming very clean diets, that is consuming not so many processed foods or highly processed foods, oftentimes we are not getting enough sodium, magnesium and potassium, and we can suffer as a consequence.

然而，对于血压正常的人来说，尤其是那些饮食非常清洁的人，即食用较少加工食品或高度加工食品的人，我们常常无法摄入足够的钠、镁和钾，因此我们可能会遭受痛苦。

And with LMNT, simply by mixing in water, it tastes delicious.

而LMNT，只需与水混合，味道就很美味。

It's very easy to get that proper hydration.

获得适当的水分非常容易。

If you'd like to try LMNT, you can go to drinklmnt, that's L-M-N-T, .com/huberman to claim a free element sample pack with your purchase.

如果您想尝试 LMNT，可以前往 Drinklmnt（即 L-M-N-T, .com/huberman）在购买时索取免费元素样品包。

Again, that's drinklmnt.com/huberman.

再说一遍，这是 Drinklmnt.com/huberman。

Today's episode is also brought to us by Eight Sleep.

今天的节目也是八觉给我们带来的。

Eight Sleep makes smart mattress covers with cooling, heating and sleep-tracking capacity.

八睡眠公司生产具有冷却、加热和睡眠跟踪功能的智能床垫套。

I've spoken many times before on this podcast about the fact that sleep, that is getting a great night's sleep, is the foundation of all mental health, physical health and performance.

我之前在这个播客上多次谈到过这样一个事实：睡眠，即睡个好觉，是所有心理健康、身体健康和表现的基础。

When we're sleeping well, everything goes far better.

当我们睡得好时，一切都会变得更好。

And when we are not sleeping well or enough, everything gets far worse at the level of mental health, physical health and performance.

当我们睡眠质量不佳或睡眠不足时，心理健康、身体健康和表现都会变得更糟。

Now, one of the key things to getting a great night's sleep and waking up feeling refreshed is that you have to control the temperature of your sleeping environment.

现在，要想睡个好觉并醒来时感觉神清气爽，关键之一是您必须控制睡眠环境的温度。

And that's because in order to fall and stay deeply asleep, you need your core body temperature to drop by about one to three degrees.

这是因为为了入睡并保持深度睡眠，您的核心体温需要下降约一到三度。

And in order to wake up feeling refreshed and energized, you want your core body temperature to increase by about one to three degrees.

为了醒来时感觉神清气爽、精力充沛，您希望您的核心体温升高约一到三度。

With Eight Sleep, it's very easy to induce that drop in core body temperature by cooling your mattress early and throughout the night and warming your mattress toward morning.

通过“八睡眠”，可以很容易地通过在整个晚上冷却床垫并在早晨加热床垫来降低核心体温。

I started sleeping on an Eight Sleep mattress cover a few years ago, and it has completely transformed the quality of the sleep that I get.

几年前，我开始睡在八睡床罩上，它彻底改变了我的睡眠质量。

So much so that I actually loathe traveling because I don't have my Eight Sleep mattress cover when I travel.

以至于我实际上讨厌旅行，因为旅行时我没有八睡床垫套。

If you'd like to try Eight Sleep, you can go to eightsleep.com/huberman and you'll save up to $150 off their Pod 3 Cover.

如果您想尝试八睡眠，可以访问八睡眠.com/huberman，购买 Pod 3 Cover 最多可节省 150 美元。

Eight Sleep currently ships in the U.S.A., Canada, U.K., select countries in the E.U.

八睡眠目前在美国、加拿大、英国和欧盟部分国家/地区发货。

and Australia.

和澳大利亚。

Again, that's eightsleep.com/huberman.

再说一遍，这是八睡眠.com/huberman。

And now for my discussion with Marc Andreessen.

现在我与马克·安德森进行讨论。

Marc, welcome.

马克，欢迎。

Marc Andreessen: Hey, thank you.

马克·安德森：嘿，谢谢。

Andrew Huberman: Delighted to have you here and have so many questions for you about innovation, AI, your view of the landscape of tech, and humanity in general.

Andrew Huberman：很高兴您来到这里，我们有很多关于创新、人工智能、您对技术景观和人类的看法的问题要问您。

I want to start off by talking about innovation from three different perspectives.

我想首先从三个不同的角度来谈谈创新。

There's the inner game, so to speak, or the psychology of the innovator, or innovators, things like their propensity for engaging in conflict or not, their propensity for having a dream or a vision, and in particular, their innovation as it relates to some psychological trait or expression.

可以说，有一个内在的游戏，或者一个或多个创新者的心理，比如他们是否参与冲突的倾向，他们有梦想或愿景的倾向，特别是他们的创新，因为它与某些心理特征或表达有关。

So we'll get to that in a moment.

我们稍后会讨论这个问题。

The second component that I'm curious about is the outer landscape around innovators, who they place themselves with, the sorts of choices that they make and also the sorts of personal relationships that they might have or not have.

我好奇的第二个组成部分是创新者周围的外部环境，他们将自己置于谁的身边，他们做出什么样的选择，以及他们可能拥有或不拥有什么样的个人关系。

And then the last component is this notion of the larger landscape that they happen to find themselves in.

最后一个组成部分是他们碰巧发现自己所处的更大景观的概念。

What time in history?

历史上什么时期？

What's the geography?

地理情况如何？

Bay Area, New York, Dubai, etc. So to start off, is there a common trait of innovators that you think is absolutely essential as a seed to creating things that are really impactful?

湾区、纽约、迪拜等。那么首先，您认为创新者是否有一个共同特征，作为创造真正有影响力的事物的种子，这是绝对必要的？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

So I'm not a psychologist, but I've picked up some of the concepts and some of the terms.

所以我不是心理学家，但我已经掌握了一些概念和术语。

And so it was a great moment of delight in my life when I learned about the Big Five personality traits, because I was like, aha, there's a way to actually describe the answer to this question in at least reasonably scientific terms.

因此，当我了解“大五人格特征”时，这是我生命中一个伟大的喜悦时刻，因为我想，啊哈，有一种方法可以至少用合理的科学术语来实际描述这个问题的答案。

And so I think what you're looking for, when you're talking about real innovators, like people who actually do really creative breakthrough work, I think you're talking about a couple of things.

因此，我认为，当您谈论真正的创新者时，例如真正从事真正创造性突破性工作的人，我认为您正在寻找一些东西。

So one is very high in what's called trait openness, which is one of the Big Five, which is basically just like, flat out open to new ideas.

因此，一个人在所谓的特质开放性方面非常高，这是五大特质之一，基本上就是对新想法持开放态度。

And of course, the nature of trait openness is trait openness means you're not just open to new ideas in one category, you're open to many different kinds of new ideas.

当然，特质开放性的本质是特质开放性意味着你不仅对某一类别的新想法持开放态度，而且对许多不同种类的新想法持开放态度。

And so we might talk about the fact that a lot of innovators also are very creative people in other aspects of their lives, even outside of their specific creative domain.

因此，我们可以谈论这样一个事实：许多创新者在生活的其他方面也是非常有创造力的人，甚至在他们特定的创意领域之外。

So that's important.

所以这很重要。

But of course, just being open is not sufficient, because if you're just open, you could just be curious and explore and spend your entire life reading and doing, talking to people and never actually create something.

但当然，仅仅开放是不够的，因为如果你只是开放，你可能只是好奇和探索，一生都在阅读、做事、与人交谈，却从未真正创造过东西。

So you also need a couple of other things.

所以你还需要一些其他的东西。

You need a high level of conscientiousness, which is another one of the Big Five.

你需要高度的责任心，这是五大要素之一。

You need somebody who's really willing to apply themselves, and in our world, typically over a period of many years to be able to accomplish something great.

你需要一个真正愿意奉献自己的人，在我们的世界中，通常需要花费很多年才能完成伟大的事情。

They typically work very hard.

他们通常工作非常努力。

That often gets obscured because the stories that end up getting told about these people are, it's just like this kid, and he just had this idea, and it was like a stroke of genius.

这常常被掩盖，因为最终讲述这些人的故事是，就像这个孩子，他只是有了这个想法，这就像天才的灵光一现。

And it was like a moment in time and was just like, oh, he was so lucky.

那一刻就像是，哦，他太幸运了。

And it's like, no, for most of these people, it's years and years and years of applied effort.

就好像，不，对于这些人中的大多数人来说，这是年复一年的努力。

And so you need somebody with an extreme, basically, willingness to defer gratification and really apply themselves to a specific thing for a long time.

因此，你需要一个具有极端的、基本上愿意推迟满足感并真正长期专注于某一特定事物的人。

And of course, this is why there aren't very many of these people, there aren't many people who are high in openness and high in conscientiousness because to a certain extent, they're opposed traits.

当然，这就是为什么这样的人并不多，开放性高、责任性高的人并不多，因为在某种程度上，他们是对立的特质。

And so you need somebody who has both of those.

所以你需要一个同时具备这两者的人。

Third is you need somebody high in disagreeableness, which is the third of the Big Five.

第三，你需要一个非常不讨人喜欢的人，这是五大因素中的第三个。

So you need somebody who's just basically ornery, because if they're not ornery, then they'll be talked out of their ideas by people who will be like, oh, well, because the reaction most people have new ideas is, oh, that's dumb.

所以你需要一个基本上脾气暴躁的人，因为如果他们不脾气暴躁，那么他们的想法就会被那些会说，哦，好吧，因为大多数人有新想法的人的反应是，哦，那是愚蠢的。

And so somebody who's too agreeable will be easily dissuaded to not pursue, not pulling the thread anymore.

因此，过于随和的人很容易被劝说不再追求，不再牵线。

So you need somebody highly disagreeable.

所以你需要一个非常不讨人喜欢的人。

Again, the nature of disagreeableness is they tend to be disagreeable about everything.

再说一次，不愉快的本质是他们往往对一切事情都不满意。

So they tend to be these very sort of iconoclastic kind of renegade characters.

所以他们往往是那种反传统的叛逆人物。

And then there's just a table stakes component, which is they just also need to be high IQ.

然后还有一个关键因素，那就是他们还需要高智商。

They just need to be really smart because it's hard to innovate in any category if you can't synthesize large amounts of information quickly.

他们只需要非常聪明，因为如果不能快速综合大量信息，就很难在任何类别中进行创新。

And so those are four basically high spikes, very rare traits that basically have to come together.

所以这四个基本上是高峰值，非常罕见的特征基本上必须结合在一起。

You could probably also say they probably at some point need to be relatively low on neuroticism, which is another of the Big Five, because if they're too neurotic, they probably can't handle the stress.

你也可能会说，他们可能在某些时候需要相对较低的神经质，这是五巨头中的另一个，因为如果他们太神经质，他们可能无法应对压力。

Right.

正确的。

So it's kind of this dial in there.

所以这就是里面的这个表盘。

And then, of course, if you're into the sort of science of the Big Five, basically these are all people who are on the far outlying kind of point on the normal distribution across all these traits.

当然，如果你对五巨头的科学感兴趣，基本上这些人都是在所有这些特征的正态分布上处于遥远的边缘的人。

And then that just gets you to, I think, the sort of hardest topic of all around this whole concept, which there are very few of these people.

然后，我认为，这就是围绕整个概念的最难的话题，而这样的人很少。

Andrew Huberman: Do you think they're born with these traits?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：你认为他们生来就有这些特征吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, they're born with the traits.

马克·安德森：是的，他们天生就有这些特质。

And then, of course, the traits are not genetics, are not destiny, and so the traits are not deterministic in the sense of that just because they have those personality traits doesn't mean they're going to deliver great creativity, but they need to have those properties because otherwise they're just not either going to be able to do the work or they're not going to enjoy it.

当然，这些特征不是遗传，不是命运，所以这些特征不是确定性的，仅仅因为他们拥有这些人格特征并不意味着他们会提供伟大的创造力，但他们需要拥有这些属性，因为否则他们要么无法完成这项工作，要么他们不会享受它。

Right.

正确的。

I mean, look, a lot of these people are highly capable, competent people.

我的意思是，你看，这些人中有很多都是非常有能力、有能力的人。

It's very easy for them to get, like, high-paying jobs in traditional institutions and get lots of traditional awards and end up with big paychecks.

他们很容易在传统机构找到高薪工作，获得大量传统奖项，最终获得高薪。

And there's a lot of people at big institutions that you and I know well, and I deal with many of these, where people get paid a lot of money and they get a lot of respect and they go for 20 years and it's great and they never create anything new, right?

在大型机构里有很多你我都熟悉的人，我和其中的很多人打过交道，在那里人们得到很多钱，他们得到很多尊重，他们工作了 20 年，这很棒，他们从来没有创造任何新东西，对吧？

There's a lot of administrators, a lot of them end up in administrative jobs, and that's fine, that's good.

有很多管理员，其中很多人最终从事行政工作，这很好，很好。

The world needs that also, right?

世界也需要这个，对吗？

The innovators can't run everything because the rate of change would be too high.

创新者无法掌控一切，因为变化率太高。

Society, I think, probably wouldn't be able to handle it.

我认为社会可能无法应对。

So you need some people who are on the other side who are going to kind of keep the lights on and keep things running.

所以你需要一些在另一边的人来维持一切正常运转。

But there is this decision that people have to make, which is okay, if I have the sort of latent capability to do this, is this actually what I want to spend my life doing?

但人们必须做出这个决定，这没关系，如果我有潜在的能力做到这一点，这真的是我想用一生去做的事情吗？

And do I want to go through the stress and the pain and the trauma and anxiety and the risk of failure?

我想承受压力、痛苦、创伤、焦虑和失败的风险吗？

And so, do I really want to?

那么，我真的愿意吗？

Once in a while you run into somebody who's just like, can't do it any other way.

偶尔你会遇到一个人，他就像，无法以任何其他方式做到这一点。

They just have to.

他们只是必须这样做。

Andrew Huberman: Who's an example of that?

Andrew Huberman：谁是这方面的例子？

Marc Andreessen: I mean, Elon's the paramount example of our time, and I bring him up in part because he's such an obvious example, but in part because he's talked about this in interviews where he basically says, he's like, I can't turn it off.

马克·安德森：我的意思是，埃隆是我们这个时代最重要的例子，我提到他的部分原因是他是一个如此明显的例子，但部分原因是他在采访中谈到了这一点，他基本上说，他就像，我无法将其关闭。

The ideas come, I have to pursue them, right?

想法来了，我就得去追求，对吗？

It's why he's like running five companies at the same time and like working on a sixth.

这就是为什么他喜欢同时经营五家公司，又喜欢在第六家公司工作。

It's just like he can't turn it off.

就好像他无法将其关闭一样。

Look, there's a lot of other people who probably had the capability to do it, who ended up talking themselves into or whatever events conspired to put them in a position where they did something else.

看，还有很多其他人可能有能力做到这一点，但他们最终说服了自己，或者发生了任何事件，使他们陷入了做其他事情的境地。

Obviously, there are people who try to be creative, who just don't have the capability.

显然，有些人试图发挥创造力，但他们没有能力。

And so, there's some Venn diagram there of determinism through traits, but also choices in life, and then also, of course, the situation in which they're born, the context within which they grow up, culture, what their parents expect of them, and so forth.

因此，这里有一些维恩图，通过特质来决定论，但也包括生活中的选择，当然还有他们出生的情况、他们成长的背景、文化、父母对他们的期望等等。

And so to kind of get all the way through this, you have to thread all these needles kind of at the same time.

因此，为了彻底解决这个问题，你必须同时穿好所有这些针。

Andrew Huberman: Do you think there are folks out there that meet these criteria who are disagreeable but that can feign agreeableness, you know that can...?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：你认为有些人符合这些标准，他们虽然令人不快，但可以假装和蔼可亲，你知道可以……吗？

For those just listening, Marc just raised his right hand.

对于那些正在听的人来说，马克只是举起了右手。

In other words, they can sort of, phrase that comes to mind maybe because I can relate to it a little bit, they sneak up through the system, meaning they behave ethically as it relates to the requirements of the system.

换句话说，他们可能会想到这样的短语，也许是因为我对此有一点联系，他们潜入系统，这意味着他们的行为符合道德，因为这与系统的要求有关。

They're not breaking laws or breaking rules, in fact, quite the opposite, they're paying attention to the rules and following the rules until they get to a place where being disagreeable feels less threatening to their overall sense of security.

他们并没有违反法律或规则，事实上，恰恰相反，他们关注规则并遵守规则，直到他们感到不愉快对他们整体安全感的威胁较小。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, I mean, look, the really highly competent people don't have to break laws, right?

马克·安德森：是的，我的意思是，看，真正有能力的人不必违法，对吗？

There was this myth that happened around the movie "The Godfather," and then there was this character, Meyer Lansky, who's like, ran basically the Mafia 50, 60, 70 years ago.

围绕电影《教父》有一个神话，然后有一个角色，迈耶·兰斯基，他基本上是 50、60、70 年前黑手党的统治者。

And there was this great line of like, well, if Meyer Lansky had only applied himself to running General Motors, he would have been the best CEO of all time.

有这样一句伟大的台词，好吧，如果迈耶·兰斯基只致力于经营通用汽车，他将成为有史以来最好的首席执行官。

It's like, no, not really, right?

就像，不，不是真的，对吧？

The people who are great at running the big companies, they don't have to be mob bosses.

擅长经营大公司的人不一定是黑帮老大。

They don't have to break laws.

他们不必违反法律。

They're smart and sophisticated enough to be able to work inside the system.

它们足够聪明和复杂，能够在系统内部工作。

They don't need to take the easy out.

他们不需要轻易出去。

So, I don't think there's any implication that they have to break laws.

所以，我不认为他们必须违法。

That said, they have to break norms, right?

也就是说，他们必须打破规范，对吗？

And specifically, this is probably the thing that gets missed the most, because the process of innovating, the process of creating something new, once it works, the stories get retconned, as they say in comic books.

具体来说，这可能是最容易被错过的事情，因为创新的过程，创造新事物的过程，一旦成功，故事就会被重新讲述，就像漫画书中所说的那样。

So the stories get adapted to where it's like it was inevitable all along.

因此，这些故事被改编成似乎一直都是不可避免的事情。

Everybody always knew that this was a good idea.

每个人都知道这是一个好主意。

The person has won all these awards, society embraced them.

这个人赢得了所有这些奖项，社会接受了他们。

And invariably, if you were with them when they were actually doing the work, or if you actually get a couple of drinks into them and talk about it, it'd be like, no, that's not how it happened at all.

而且总是，如果你在他们实际工作时和他们在一起，或者如果你真的给他们喝了几杯酒并谈论它，你会说，不，事情根本不是这样发生的。

They faced a wall of skepticism, just like a wall of basically social, essentially, denial.

他们面临着一堵怀疑的墙，就像一堵基本上是社会的、本质上的否认的墙。

No, this is not going to work.

不，这是行不通的。

No, I'm not going to join your lab.

不，我不会加入你的实验室。

No, I'm not going to come work for your company.

不，我不会去你们公司工作。

No, I'm not going to buy your product, right?

不，我不会购买你的产品，对吗？

No, I'm not going to meet with you.

不，我不会和你见面。

And so they get just like tremendous social resistance.

因此他们受到了巨大的社会阻力。

They're not getting positive feedback from their social network the way that more agreeable people need to have, right?

他们没有从社交网络中获得积极的反馈，而更友善的人需要这种方式，对吧？

And this is why agreeableness is a problem for innovation.

这就是为什么宜人性是创新的一个问题。

If you're agreeable, you're going to listen to the people around you.

如果你同意，你就会倾听周围人的意见。

They're going to tell you that new ideas are stupid, end of story.

他们会告诉你，新想法很愚蠢，故事结束了。

You're not going to proceed.

你不会继续下去。

And so I would put it more on like, they need to be able to deal with, they need to be able to deal with social discomfort to the level of ostracism, or at some point they're going to get shaken out and they're just going to quit.

所以我更想说的是，他们需要能够处理，他们需要能够处理社会不适到排斥的程度，或者在某些时候他们会被震动，然后他们就会退出。

Andrew Huberman: Do you think that people that meet these criteria do best by banding with others that meet these criteria early?

Andrew Huberman：您认为符合这些标准的人是否通过与早期符合这些标准的其他人联合起来表现最好？

Or is it important that they form this deep sense of self, like the ability to cry oneself to sleep at night or lie in the fetal position, worrying that things aren't going to work out and then still get up the next morning and get right back out there.

或者说，形成这种深刻的自我意识是否重要，比如晚上哭着入睡或以胎儿的姿势躺着，担心事情不会顺利，然后第二天早上仍然起床并立即回到那里的能力。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

So, Sean Parker has the best line, by the way, on this.

顺便说一下，肖恩·帕克在这方面有最好的说法。

He says being an entrepreneur or being a creator is like getting punched in the face over and over again.

他说，作为一名企业家或创造者就像一次又一次地被打在脸上。

He said, eventually you start to like the taste of your own blood.

他说，最终你会开始喜欢自己血的味道。

And I love that line because it makes everybody massively uncomfortable, but it gives you a sense of how basically painful the process is.

我喜欢这句话，因为它让每个人都感到非常不舒服，但它让你感觉到这个过程是多么痛苦。

If you talk to any entrepreneur who's been through it about that, they're like, oh, yeah, that's exactly what it's like.

如果你和任何经历过这件事的企业家交谈，他们会说，哦，是的，事情就是这样。

So, there is a big individual component to it.

所以，它有一个很大的个体组成部分。

But look, it can be very lonely and especially very hard, I think, to do this if nobody around you is trying to do anything even remotely similar.

但是，我认为，如果你周围没有人尝试做任何类似的事情，那么做这件事可能会非常孤独，尤其是非常困难。

And if you're getting just universally negative responses, like very few people, I think very few people have the ego strength to be able to survive that for years.

如果你得到普遍的负面反应，就像极少数人一样，我认为很少有人有自我力量能够在这种情况下生存多年。

So I do think there's a huge advantage, and this is why you do see clusters.

所以我确实认为这有一个巨大的优势，这就是为什么你会看到集群。

There's a huge advantage to clustering.

集群有一个巨大的优势。

Throughout history, you've had this clustering effect.

纵观历史，这种集群效应一直存在。

You had clustering of the great artists and sculptors in Renaissance Florence, you had the clustering of the philosophers of Greece.

文艺复兴时期的佛罗伦萨聚集了伟大的艺术家和雕塑家，希腊哲学家聚集在一起。

You had the clustering of tech people in Silicon Valley.

硅谷有大量的科技人员。

You have the clustering of know, arts, movie, TV people in Los Angeles, and so forth.

洛杉矶聚集了知识、艺术、电影、电视人士等等。

And so, know, there's always a scene, right?

所以，知道吗，总有一个场景，对吧？

There's always, like a nexus and a place where people come together for these kinds of things.

总有一个纽带和一个地方，人们可以为了这些事情而聚集在一起。

So, generally speaking, if somebody wants to work in tech, innovate in tech, they're going to be much better off being around a lot of people who are trying to do that kind of thing than they are in a place where nobody else is doing it.

所以，一般来说，如果有人想在科技领域工作，在科技领域进行创新，那么他们周围有很多尝试做这类事情的人会比他们在没有其他人做这件事的地方要好得多。

Having said that, the clustering can have downsides, it can have side effects.

话虽如此，集群也有缺点，它可能会产生副作用。

And you put any group of people together, and you do start to get groupthink, even among people who are individually very disagreeable.

当你把任何一群人放在一起时，你确实会开始产生群体思维，即使是在那些个人非常不愉快的人中也是如此。

And so these same clusters where you get these very idiosyncratic people, they do have fads and trends just like every place else.

因此，在这些相同的集群中，你会遇到这些非常独特的人，他们确实像其他地方一样有时尚和趋势。

And so they get wrapped up in their own social dynamics.

因此，他们陷入了自己的社会动态之中。

The good news is the social dynamic in those places is usually very forward looking, and so it's usually like, I don't know, it's like a herd of iconoclasts looking for the next big thing.

好消息是这些地方的社会动态通常非常具有前瞻性，所以通常就像，我不知道，就像一群反传统者在寻找下一件大事。

So iconoclasts looking for the next big thing.

因此，传统破坏者正在寻找下一件大事。

That's good.

那挺好的。

The herd part.

牛群部分。

That's what you've got to be careful of.

这就是你必须小心的。

So even when you're in one of these environments, you have to be careful that you're not getting sucked into the groupthink too much.

因此，即使您处于其中一种环境中，您也必须小心，不要过多地陷入群体思维中。

Andrew Huberman: When you say groupthink, do you mean excessive friction?

安德鲁·休伯曼：当你说群体思维时，你的意思是过度摩擦吗？

Do you do pressure testing each other's ideas to the point where things just don't move forward?

你们是否会对彼此的想法进行压力测试，直至事情无法进展？

Or are you talking about groupthink, where people start to form a consensus?

或者你在谈论群体思维，人们开始形成共识？

Or the self-belief that, gosh, we are so strong because we are so different?

或者是自信，天哪，我们之所以如此强大，是因为我们如此不同？

Can we better define groupthink?

我们能否更好地定义群体思维？

Marc Andreessen: It's actually less either one of those things — both happen.

马克·安德森：实际上这两种情况都不是其中之一——两者都会发生。

Those are good.

这些都很好。

Those are good.

这些都很好。

The part of groupthink I'm talking about is just like, we all basically zero in, we just end up zeroing in on the same ideas.

我所说的群体思维部分就像是，我们基本上都归零，我们最终都集中在相同的想法上。

Right.

正确的。

In Hollywood, there's this classic thing.

在好莱坞，有这样一个经典的事情。

There are years where all of a sudden there's like a lot of volcano movies.

有好几年突然出现了很多火山电影。

It's like, why are there all these volcano movies?

就像，为什么会有这些火山电影？

And it's just like there was just something in the gestalt, right?

就好像格式塔中有一些东西，对吧？

There was just something in the air.

空气中有什么东西。

Look, Silicon Valley has this.

看，硅谷有这个。

There are moments in time where you'll have these.

有时你会拥有这些。

It's like the old thing.

这就像旧事一样。

What's the difference between a fad and a trend?

时尚和趋势有什么区别？

Fad is the trend that doesn't last.

时尚是不会持久的趋势。

Right.

正确的。

And so Silicon Valley is subject to both fads and trends, just like any place.

因此，硅谷就像任何地方一样，都会受到时尚和趋势的影响。

In other words, you take smart, disagreeable people, you cluster them together, they will act like a herd.

换句话说，你把聪明但不讨人喜欢的人聚集在一起，他们就会表现得像一群人。

They will end up thinking the same things unless they try very hard not to.

他们最终会想到同样的事情，除非他们非常努力地不这样做。

Andrew Huberman: You've talked about these personality traits of great innovators before, and we're talking about them now.

安德鲁·休伯曼：您之前谈到过伟大创新者的这些人格特质，我们现在正在讨论它们。

You invest in innovators, you try and identify them, and you are one.

你投资创新者，尝试识别他们，然后你就是其中之一。

So you can recognize these traits here.

所以你可以在这里认出这些特征。

I'm making the presumption that you have these traits.

我假设你具有这些特征。

Indeed you do.

确实如此。

We'll just get that out of the way.

我们会把它解决掉。

Have you observed people trying to feign these traits, and are there any specific questions or behaviors that are a giveaway that they're pretending to be the young Steve Jobs or that they're pretending to be the young Henry Ford?

您是否观察到人们试图假装这些特征？是否有任何具体问题或行为表明他们假装是年轻的史蒂夫·乔布斯或年轻的亨利·福特？

Pick your list of other names that qualify as authentic, legitimate innovators.

选择符合真实、合法创新者资格的其他名字的列表。

We won't name names of people who have tried to disguise themselves as true innovators.

我们不会点出那些试图将自己伪装成真正创新者的人的名字。

But what are some of the litmus tests?

但试金石有哪些呢？

And I realize here that we don't want you to give these away to the point where they lose their potency.

我在这里意识到，我们不希望您将这些放弃，以致它们失去效力。

But if you could share a few of those.

但如果你能分享其中一些。

Marc Andreessen: Good, we're actually a pretty open book on this.

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：很好，我们实际上是一本关于这方面的非常开放的书。

First of all, yes, so there are people who definitely try to come in and basically present as being something that they're not, and they've read all the books.

首先，是的，所以有些人肯定会试图进来并基本上表现出他们不是的东西，而且他们已经读过所有的书。

They will have listened to this interview.

他们会听过这次采访。

They study everything and they construct a facade, and they come in and present as something they're not.

他们研究一切并构建一个外观，然后他们进来并呈现出他们不是的东西。

I would say the amount of that varies exactly, correlated to the NASDAQ.

我想说的是，其金额与纳斯达克指数相关，完全不同。

And so when stock prices are super low, you actually get the opposite.

因此，当股价超低时，你实际上会得到相反的结果。

When stock prices are super low, people get too demoralized.

当股价超低时，人们会变得士气低落。

And people who should be doing it basically give up because they just think that the industry is over, the trend is over, whatever.

应该这样做的人基本上放弃了，因为他们只是认为行业已经结束，趋势已经结束，等等。

It's all hopeless.

一切都没有希望了。

And so you get this flushing thing.

所以你会得到这种潮红的东西。

So nobody ever shows up at a stock market low and says, like, I'm the new next big thing and doesn't really want to do it because there are higher status, the kinds of people who do the thing that you're talking about, they're fundamentally oriented for social status.

因此，没有人会在股市低位时出现并说，比如，我是下一个新的大事，但实际上并不想这样做，因为有更高的地位，做你所说的事情的人从根本上来说是以社会地位为导向的。

They're trying to get the social status without actually the substance.

他们试图在没有实际物质的情况下获得社会地位。

And there are always other places to go to get social status.

而且总是有其他地方可以去获得社会地位。

So after 2000, the joke was, when I got to Silicon Valley in '93, '94, the Valley was dead.

所以 2000 年之后，有一个笑话是，当我在 93 年、94 年到达硅谷时，硅谷已经死了。

We can talk about that.

我们可以谈谈这个。

By '98, it was roaring, and you had a lot of these people showing up, who were, you basically had a lot of people showing up with these kind of stories.

到了 98 年，它风靡一时，有很多人出现，基本上有很多人带着这类故事出现。

2000, the market crashed.

2000年，市场崩溃。

By 2001, the joke was that there were these terms, B to C and B to B.

到了 2001 年，有人开玩笑说出现了 B to C 和 B to B 等术语。

And in 1998, they meant...

1998 年，他们的意思是……

B to C meant business to consumer, and B to B meant business to business, which is two different kinds of business models for internet companies.

B to C即企业对消费者，B to B即企业对企业，这是互联网公司两种不同的商业模式。

By 2001, B to B meant back to banking and B to C meant back to consulting, which is the high status people who, the people oriented to status, who showed up to be in tech were like, yeah, screw it.

到了 2001 年，B to B 意味着回到银行业，而 B to C 意味着回到咨询业，这些高地位的人，那些以地位为导向的人，出现在科技行业，他们就像是，是的，管它呢。

This is over.

这已经结束了。

Stick a fork in it.

把叉子插在里面。

I'm going to go back to Goldman Sachs or go back to McKinsey, where I can be high status.

我要回到高盛或者麦肯锡，在那里我可以享有很高的地位。

And so you get this flushing kind of effect that happens in a downturn.

所以你会得到这种在经济低迷时期发生的脸红效应。

That said, in a big upswing, yeah, you get a lot of people showing up with a lot of kind of, let's say, public persona without the substance to back it up.

也就是说，在一次大的上升过程中，是的，你会看到很多人带着很多公众形象出现，但没有实质的支持。

So the way we stress that, you can actually say exactly how we test for this, because the test exactly addresses the issue in a way that is impossible to fake.

因此，我们强调这一点的方式，您实际上可以准确地说出我们如何对此进行测试，因为该测试以一种不可能伪造的方式准确地解决了该问题。

And it's actually the same way homicide detectives try to find out if you've actually, like, if you're innocent or whether you've killed somebody.

这实际上就像凶杀案侦探试图查明你是否真的是无辜的或者你是否杀了人一样。

It's the same tactic, which is, you ask increasingly detailed questions, right?

这是同样的策略，即你提出越来越详细的问题，对吧？

And so the way the homicide cop does this is, what were you doing last night?

凶杀案警察的做法是，你昨晚在做什么？

Oh, I was at a movie.

哦，我当时正在看电影。

Which movie?

哪部电影？

Which theater?

哪个剧院？

Okay, which seat did you sit in?

好吧，你坐的是哪个座位？

Okay, what was the end of the movie?

好吧，电影的结局是什么？

And you ask increasingly detailed questions and people have trouble.

当你提出越来越详细的问题时，人们就会遇到麻烦。

At some point, people have trouble making up and things just fuzz into just kind of obvious bullshit.

在某些时候，人们很难和好，事情就会变得模糊不清，变成明显的废话。

And basically, fake founders basically have the same problem.

而且基本上，假冒创始人基本上也有同样的问题。

They're able to relay a conceptual theory of what they're doing that they've kind of engineered, but as they get into the details, it just fuzzes out.

他们能够传达他们正在做的事情的概念理论，这些理论是他们设计的，但当他们深入细节时，它就变得模糊了。

Whereas the true people that you want to back that can do it, basically what you find is they've spent five or 10 or 20 years obsessing on the details of whatever it is they're about to do.

虽然你想要支持的真正的人可以做到这一点，但基本上你会发现他们花了五年、十年或二十年的时间痴迷于他们即将要做的事情的细节。

And they're so deep in the details that they know so much more about it than you ever will.

他们对细节的了解如此之深，以至于他们比你了解得更多。

And in fact, the best possible reaction is when they get mad, which is also what the homicide cops say.

事实上，最好的反应是当他们生气时，这也是凶杀案警察所说的。

What you actually want is you want the emotional response of like, I can't believe that you're asking me questions this detailed and specific and picky, and they kind of figure out what you're doing and then they get upset.

你真正想要的是你想要这样的情感反应，我不敢相信你问我的问题如此详细、具体和挑剔，他们有点明白你在做什么，然后他们就感到不安。

That's good, that's perfect, right?

这很好，这很完美，对吧？

But then they have to have proven themselves in the sense of, they have to be able to answer the questions in great detail.

但他们必须证明自己，他们必须能够详细回答问题。

Andrew Huberman: Do you think that people that are able to answer those questions in great detail have actually taken the time to systematically think through the if/ands of all the possible implications of what they're going to do and they have a specific vision in mind of how things need to turn out or will turn out?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：你是否认为那些能够详细回答这些问题的人实际上已经花时间系统地思考了他们将要做的事情的所有可能影响的“如果/与”，并且他们对事情需要如何或将如何结果有一个具体的愿景？

Or do you think that they have a vision and it's a no matter what, it will work out because the world will sort of bend around it?

或者你认为他们有一个愿景，并且无论如何，它都会成功，因为世界会围绕它弯曲？

I mean, in other words, do you think that they place their vision in context or they simply have a vision and they have that tunnel vision of that thing and that's going to be it?

我的意思是，换句话说，你认为他们是把自己的愿景放在背景中，还是他们只是有一个愿景，他们对那件事有狭隘的愿景，就这样了？

Let's use you for an example with Netscape.

让我们以 Netscape 为例。

That's how I first came to know your name.

这就是我第一次知道你的名字。

When you were conceiving Netscape, did you think, okay, there's this search engine and this browser and it's going to be this thing that looks this way and works this way and feels this way, did you think that?

当你构思 Netscape 时，你有没有想过，好吧，有这个搜索引擎和这个浏览器，它会是这样的东西，看起来是这样的，工作方式是这样的，感觉也是这样的，你想过吗？

And also think about that there was going to be a gallery of other search engines and it would fit into that landscape of other search engines?

还要考虑一下，将会有一个其他搜索引擎的画廊，并且它会适合其他搜索引擎的景观吗？

Or were you just projecting your vision of this thing as this unique and special brainchild?

或者你只是将你对这件事的愿景投射为这个独特而特殊的创意？

Marc Andreessen: Let me give the general answer, and then we can talk about the specific example.

Marc Andreessen：我先给出一般性的答案，然后我们再讨论具体的例子。

So the general answer is what?

那么一般答案是什么呢？

Entrepreneurship, creativity, innovation is what economists call decision making under uncertainty.

企业家精神、创造力、创新就是经济学家所说的不确定性下的决策。

In both parts, those are important decision making.

在这两个部分中，这些都是重要的决策。

Like, you're going to make a ton of decisions because you have to decide what to do, what not to do.

就像，你将做出大量决定，因为你必须决定做什么、不做什么。

And then uncertainty, which is like, the world's a complicated place.

然后是不确定性，就像世界是一个复杂的地方。

And in mathematical terms, the world is a complex adaptive system with feedback loops.

用数学术语来说，世界是一个具有反馈循环的复杂自适应系统。

And Isaac Asimov wrote in his novels, he wrote about this field called psychohistory, which is the idea that there's like a supercomputer that can predict the future of human affairs, right?

艾萨克·阿西莫夫在他的小说中写道，他写了一个叫做心理史学的领域，这个领域的想法是，就像一台超级计算机可以预测人类事务的未来，对吗？

And it's like, we don't have that.

就像我们没有那样。

Not yet.

还没有。

Andrew Huberman: Not yet.

安德鲁·休伯曼：还没有。

We'll get to that later.

我们稍后会讨论这个问题。

Marc Andreessen: We certainly don't have that yet.

Marc Andreessen：我们当然还没有。

And so you're just dealing, you know, military commanders call this the fog of war, right?

所以你只是在处理，你知道，军事指挥官称之为战争迷雾，对吗？

You're just dealing with a situation where the number of variables are just off the charts.

您正在处理变量数量超出图表的情况。

It's all these other people who are inherently unpredictable, making all these decisions in different directions.

所有这些其他人本质上是不可预测的，他们朝着不同的方向做出所有这些决定。

And then the whole system is combinatorial, which is these people are colliding with each other, influencing their decisions.

然后整个系统是组合的，也就是说这些人互相冲突，影响他们的决定。

And so, I mean, look, the most straightforward kind of way to think about this is, it's amazing.

所以，我的意思是，看，最直接的思考方式是，这太神奇了。

Like, anybody who believes in economic central planning, it always blows my mind because it's just like, try opening a restaurant.

就像，任何相信经济中央计划的人，它总是让我大吃一惊，因为它就像，尝试开一家餐馆。

Try just opening a restaurant on the corner down here.

尝试在这里的拐角处开一家餐馆。

And like 50/50 odds the restaurant is going to work.

餐厅开张的可能性是 50/50。

And all you have to do to run a restaurant is have a thing and serve food.

经营一家餐厅你所要做的就是拥有一件事并提供食物。

And it's like most restaurants fail, right?

好像大多数餐馆都失败了，对吧？

People who run restaurants are pretty smart.

开餐馆的人都很聪明。

They usually think about these things very hard, and they all want to succeed, and it's hard to do that.

他们通常很努力地思考这些事情，他们都想成功，但很难做到。

And so to start a tech company or to start an artistic movement or to fight a war, you're just going into this basically conceptual battleground, or in military terms, real battleground, where there's just like incredible levels of complexity, branching future paths, and so there's nothing predictable.

因此，要创办一家科技公司，或者发起一场艺术运动，或者打一场战争，你只是进入了这个基本概念性的战场，或者用军事术语来说，真正的战场，那里的复杂程度令人难以置信，未来的道路分支，所以没有什么可预测的。

And so what we look for is basically the really good innovators.

所以我们寻找的基本上是真正优秀的创新者。

They've got a drive to basically be able to cope with that and deal with that.

他们有动力基本上能够应对并解决这个问题。

And they basically do that in two steps.

他们基本上分两步完成。

So one is they try to preplan as much as they possibly can, and we call that the process of navigating the, what we call the idea maze.

因此，一是他们尝试尽可能多地预先计划，我们称之为导航的过程，我们称之为想法迷宫。

And so the idea maze basically is, I've got this general idea, and it might be, the internet is going to work or search or whatever, and then it's like, okay, in their head, they have thought through of like, okay, if I do it this way, that way, this third way, here's what will happen.

所以想法迷宫基本上是，我有了这个总体想法，可能是，互联网将会工作或搜索或其他什么，然后就像，好吧，在他们的头脑中，他们已经想好了，好吧，如果我这样做，那样做，这第三种方式，这就是会发生的事情。

Then I have to do that, then I have to do this, then I have to bring in somebody to do that.

然后我必须这样做，然后我必须这样做，然后我必须找人来做那件事。

Here's the technical challenge I'm going to hit.

这是我要面对的技术挑战。

And they got in their heads as best anybody could, they've got as complete a sort of a map of possible futures as they could possibly have.

他们尽可能地在自己的头脑中，尽可能完整地绘制了一幅可能的未来地图。

And this is where I say, when you ask them increasingly detailed questions, that's what you're trying to kind of get them to kind of chart out, is, okay, how far ahead have you thought, and how much are you anticipating all of the different twists and turns that this is going to take?

这就是我说的，当你问他们越来越详细的问题时，这就是你试图让他们制定图表的地方，好吧，你想到了多远，以及你对这将要发生的所有不同的曲折有多少预期？

Okay, so then they start on day one, and then, of course, what happens is now they're in it, now they're in the fog of war, right?

好吧，那么他们从第一天开始，然后，当然，现在发生的事情是他们现在身处其中，现在他们处于战争迷雾中，对吗？

They're in future uncertainty.

他们面临着未来的不确定性。

And now that idea maze is maybe not helpful practically, but now they're going to be basically constructing it on the fly, day by day, as they learn and discover new things and as the world changes around them.

现在这个想法迷宫实际上可能没有什么帮助，但现在他们基本上会在学习和发现新事物以及周围世界发生变化的过程中日复一日地快速构建它。

And of course, it's a feedback loop, because if their thing starts to work, it's going to change the world.

当然，这是一个反馈循环，因为如果他们的东西开始发挥作用，它将改变世界。

And then the fact the world is changing is going to cause their plan to change as well.

世界正在发生变化的事实也会导致他们的计划发生变化。

And so, yeah, the great ones, basically, the great ones course-correct every single day.

所以，是的，伟大的人，基本上，伟大的人每天都在正确方向。

They take stock of what they've learned.

他们评估他们所学到的东西。

They modify the plan.

他们修改计划。

The great ones tend to think in terms of hypotheses, right?

伟大的人往往会根据假设来思考，对吧？

Like a scientific sort of mentality, which is they tend to think, okay, I'm going to try this.

就像一种科学心态，他们倾向于认为，好吧，我要尝试一下。

I'm going to go into the world, I'm going to announce that I'm doing this for sure.

我要走进这个世界，我要宣布我肯定会这样做。

I'm going to say, this is my plan.

我想说，这就是我的计划。

I'm going to tell all my employees that, and I'm going to tell all my investors that, and I'm going to put a stake in there, and it's my plan, and then I'm going to try it, and even though I sound like I have complete certainty, I know that I need to test to find out whether it's going to work.

我要告诉我所有的员工，我要告诉我所有的投资者，我要在那里投入股份，这是我的计划，然后我要尝试一下，尽管我听起来我有完全的把握，但我知道我需要测试看看它是否会起作用。

And if it's not, then I have to go back to all those same people and have to say, well, actually, we're not going left, we're going right.

如果不是，那么我必须回到所有这些人那里，不得不说，好吧，实际上，我们不会向左走，我们会向右走。

And they have to run that loop thousands of times to get through the other side.

他们必须运行这个循环数千次才能通过另一边。

And this led to the creation of this great term pivot, which has been very helpful in our industry because the word, when I was young, the word we used was fuck up, and pivot sounds like so much better, sounds like so much more professional.

这导致了这个伟大术语“枢轴”的创建，它对我们的行业非常有帮助，因为这个词，当我年轻的时候，我们使用的词是操蛋，枢轴听起来好多了，听起来更专业。

But, yeah, you make mistakes.

但是，是的，你会犯错误。

It's just too complicated to understand.

实在是太复杂了，难以理解。

You course-correct, you adjust, you evolve.

你纠正方向、调整、发展。

Often these things, at least in business, the businesses that end up working really well tend to be different than the original plan, but that's part of the process of a really smart founder basically working their way through reality as they're executing their plan.

通常这些事情，至少在商业上，最终运作良好的企业往往与最初的计划不同，但这是一个真正聪明的创始人在执行计划时基本上通过现实工作的过程的一部分。

Andrew Huberman: The way you're describing this has parallels to a lot of models in biology and the practice of science, random walks, but that aren't truly random, pseudo-random walks in biology, etc. But one thing that is becoming clear from the way you're describing this is that I could imagine a great risk to early success.

Andrew Huberman：你描述这一点的方式与生物学和科学实践中的许多模型、随机游走有相似之处，但这并不是生物学中真正的随机、伪随机游走等。但从你描述的方式中可以清楚地看出一件事，我可以想象早期成功的巨大风险。

So, for instance, somebody develops a product, people are excited by it, they start to implement that product, but then the landscape changes, and they don't learn how to pivot, to use the less profane version of it.

举例来说，有人开发了一种产品，人们对此感到兴奋，他们开始实施该产品，但随后情况发生了变化，他们不学会如何调整，如何使用它的不那么亵渎的版本。

They don't learn how to do that.

他们不学习如何做到这一点。

In other words, and I think of everything these days, or most everything, in terms of reward schedules and dopamine reward schedules, because that is the universal currency of reward.

换句话说，我现在想到的一切，或者说几乎所有的事情，都是奖励计划和多巴胺奖励计划，因为那是奖励的通用货币。

And so when you talk about the Sean Parker quote of learning to enjoy the taste of one's own blood, that is very different than learning to enjoy the taste of success, right?

因此，当您谈论肖恩·帕克（Sean Parker）的名言“学习享受自己血液的味道”时，这与学习享受成功的味道有很大不同，对吗？

It's about internalizing success as a process of being self-determined and less agreeable, etc. In other words, building up of those five traits becomes the source of dopamine, perhaps in a way that's highly adaptive.

它是将成功内在化为一个自我决定和不太令人愉快的过程，等等。换句话说，这五种特质的建立成为多巴胺的来源，也许是以一种高度适应性的方式。

So on the outside, we just see the product, the end product, the iPhone, the MacBook, the Netscape, etc. But I have to presume, and I'm not a psychologist, but I have done neurophysiology and I've studied the dopamine system enough to know that what's being rewarded in the context of what you're describing sounds to be a reinforcement of those five traits, rather than, oh, it's going to be this particular product, or the company is going to look this way, or the logo is going to be this or that.

所以从外面看，我们只看到产品、最终产品、iPhone、MacBook、Netscape 等。但我必须假设，我不是心理学家，但我研究过神经生理学，并且对多巴胺系统进行了足够的研究，知道在你所描述的背景下得到的奖励听起来是对这五个特征的强化，而不是，哦，这将是这个特定的产品，或者公司将看起来像这样方式，或者徽标将是这个或那个。

That all seems like the peripheral to what's really going on, that great innovators are really in the process of establishing neural circuitry that is all about reinforcing the me and the process of being.

这一切似乎都是真正发生的事情的外围，伟大的创新者实际上正在建立神经回路的过程，这一切都是为了加强我和存在的过程。

Marc Andreessen: So this is like extrinsic versus intrinsic motivation.

马克·安德森：这就像外在动机与内在动机的对比。

So, the Steve Jobs kind of Zen version of this, right?

那么，这是史蒂夫·乔布斯的禅宗版本，对吧？

Or the sort of hippie version of this, was the journey is the reward.

或者说是嬉皮士版本，旅程就是奖励。

He always told his employees that.

他总是这样告诉他的员工。

It's like, look, everybody thinks in terms of these big public markers, like the stock price or the IPO or the product launch or whatever.

就像，看，每个人都会根据这些重大的公共标志来思考，比如股价、首次公开募股、产品发布等等。

He's like, no, it's actually the process itself is the point.

他说，不，实际上过程本身才是重点。

Right to your point, if you have that mentality, then that's an intrinsic motivation, not an extrinsic motivation.

就你的观点而言，如果你有这种心态，那么这就是内在动机，而不是外在动机。

And so that's the kind of intrinsic motivation that can keep you going for a long time.

这就是一种可以让你长期坚持下去的内在动力。

Another way to think about it is competing against yourself, right?

另一种思考方式是与自己竞争，对吗？

It's like, can I get better at doing this?

就像，我可以做得更好吗？

And can I prove to myself that I can get better?

我能向自己证明我可以变得更好吗？

There's also a big social component to this, and this is one of the reasons why Silicon Valley punches so far above its weight as a place.

这其中还有很大的社会因素，这也是硅谷作为一个地方的影响力远远超出其实力的原因之一。

There's a psychological component which also goes to the comparison set.

心理因素也属于比较组。

So a phenomenon that we've observed over time is the leading tech company in any city will aspire to be as large as the previous leading tech company in that city, but often not larger, right?

因此，我们随着时间的推移观察到的一个现象是，任何城市的领先科技公司都会渴望与该城市之前的领先科技公司一样大，但通常不会更大，对吗？

Because they have a model of success.

因为他们有成功的典范。

And as long as they beat that level of success, they've kind of checked the box like they've made it.

只要他们取得了这样的成功，他们就好像已经成功了一样。

But then, in contrast, you're in Silicon Valley, and you look around and it's just like Facebook and Cisco and Oracle and Hewlett Packard and--

但相比之下，你在硅谷，环顾四周，它就像 Facebook、思科、甲骨文和惠普，而且——

Andrew Huberman: --Gladiators--

安德鲁·休伯曼：——角斗士——

Marc Andreessen: --Yeah.

马克·安德森：——是的。

And you're just, like, looking at these giants.

你只是看着这些巨人。

Many of them are still, Mark Zuckerberg, still going to work every day.

马克·扎克伯格，他们中的许多人仍然每天去工作。

And so these people are, like, the role models are, like, alive.

所以这些人就像榜样一样，还活着。

They're, like, right there, and it's so clear how much better they are and how much bigger their accomplishments are.

他们就在那里，很明显他们有多好，他们的成就有多大。

And so what we find is young founders in that environment have much greater aspirations.

因此我们发现，在这种环境下的年轻创始人有着更大的抱负。

Because, again, at that point, maybe it's the social status, maybe there's an extrinsic component to that, or maybe it helps calibrate that internal system to basically say, actually, no, the opportunity here is not to build what you may call a local maximum form of success, but let's build to a global maximum form of success, which is something as big as we possibly can.

因为，在这一点上，也许是社会地位，也许有一个外在的组成部分，或者也许它有助于校准内部系统，基本上说，实际上，不，这里的机会不是建立你所谓的局部最大成功形式，而是让我们建立一个全球最大成功形式，这是我们尽可能大的东西。

Ultimately, the great ones are probably driven more internally than externally when it comes down to it.

最终，归根结底，伟大的人可能更多地受到内部驱动，而不是外部驱动。

And that is where you get this phenomenon where you get people who are extremely successful and extremely wealthy who very easily could punch out and move to Fiji and just call it, and they're still working 16-hour days.

这就是出现这种现象的原因，那些非常成功、非常富有的人很容易就可以搬到斐济，然后就可以打电话了，而且他们仍然每天工作 16 小时。

Obviously something explains that that has nothing to do with external rewards, and I think it's an internal thing.

显然，有一些东西解释了这与外部奖励无关，我认为这是内部的事情。

Andrew Huberman: As many of you know, I've been taking AG1 daily since 2012, so I'm delighted that they're sponsoring the podcast.

Andrew Huberman：正如你们很多人所知，自 2012 年以来我一直每天服用 AG1，所以我很高兴他们赞助这个播客。

AG1 is a vitamin-mineral-probiotic drink that's designed to meet all of your foundational nutrition needs.

AG1 是一种维生素-矿物质-益生菌饮料，旨在满足您的所有基本营养需求。

Now, of course, I try to get enough servings of vitamins and minerals through whole food sources that include vegetables and fruits every day.

当然，现在我尝试每天通过包括蔬菜和水果在内的天然食物来源获取足够的维生素和矿物质。

But oftentimes I simply can't get enough servings.

但很多时候我根本吃不到足够的份量。

But with AG1, I'm sure to get enough vitamins and minerals and the probiotics that I need.

但有了 AG1，我肯定能获得足够的维生素和矿物质以及我需要的益生菌。

And it also contains adaptogens to help buffer stress.

它还含有适应原来帮助缓解压力。

Simply put, I always feel better when I take AG1.

简而言之，当我服用 AG1 时，我总是感觉更好。

I have more focus and energy, and I sleep better.

我的注意力更加集中，精力更加充沛，睡眠质量也更好。

And it also happens to taste great.

而且它的味道也很棒。

For all these reasons, whenever I'm asked if you could take just one supplement, what would it be?

出于所有这些原因，每当我被问到是否可以只服用一种补充剂时，我会选择什么？

I answer AG1.

我回答AG1。

If you'd like to try AG1, go to drinkag1.com/huberman to claim a special offer.

如果您想尝试 AG1，请访问 Drinkag1.com/huberman 以获得特别优惠。

They'll give you five free travel packs plus a year's supply of Vitamin D3K2.

他们将为您提供五个免费旅行包以及一年的维生素 D3K2 供应。

Again, that's drinkag1.com/huberman.

再说一遍，这是 Drinkag1.com/huberman。

I've heard you talk a lot about the inner landscape, the inner psychology of these folks, and I appreciate that.

我听你谈论了很多关于这些人的内心景观和内心心理，我对此表示赞赏。

We're going even deeper into that today.

今天我们将更深入地探讨这一点。

And we will talk about the landscape around whether or not Silicon Valley or New York, whether or not there are specific cities that are ideal for certain types of pursuits.

我们将讨论周围的景观，无论是硅谷还是纽约，是否有特定的城市适合某些类型的追求。

I think there was an article written by Paul Graham some years ago about the conversations that you overhear in a city will tell you everything you need to know about whether or not you belong there in terms of your professional pursuits.

我认为保罗·格雷厄姆几年前写过一篇文章，内容是你在一个城市无意中听到的对话，它会告诉你你需要知道的一切，关于你的职业追求是否属于那里。

Some of that's changed over time, and now we should probably add Austin to the mix because it was written some time ago.

随着时间的推移，其中一些内容发生了变化，现在我们可能应该将奥斯汀添加到其中，因为它是不久前写的。

In any event, I want to return to that, but I want to focus on an aspect of this intrinsic versus extrinsic motivators in terms of something that's a bit more cryptic, which is one's personal relationships.

无论如何，我想回到这一点，但我想重点关注这种内在动机与外在动机的一个方面，即一个人的人际关系，这一点比较神秘。

If I think about the catalog of innovators in Silicon Valley, some of them, like Steve Jobs, had complicated personal lives, romantic personal lives early on, and it sounds like he worked it out.

如果我想想硅谷的创新者名单，他们中的一些人，比如史蒂夫·乔布斯，早期的个人生活很复杂，也很浪漫，而且听起来他已经解决了这个问题。

I don't know.

我不知道。

I wasn't their couple's therapist.

我不是他们夫妇的治疗师。

But when he died, he was in a marriage that for all the world seemed like a happy marriage.

但当他去世时，他的婚姻在全世界看来都是幸福的婚姻。

You also have examples of innovators who have had many partners, many children with other partners.

还有一些创新者的例子，他们有很多合作伙伴，有很多与其他合作伙伴生的孩子。

Elon comes to mind.

我想到了埃隆。

I don't think I'm disclosing anything that isn't already obvious.

我认为我不会透露任何尚不明显的事情。

Those could have been happy relationships and just had many of them.

这些本来可以是幸福的关系，而且只是有很多。

But the reason I'm asking this is you can imagine that for the innovator, the person with these traits, who's trying to build up this thing, whatever it is, that having someone, or several people in some cases, who just truly believe in you when the rest of the world may not believe in you yet or at all, could be immensely powerful.

但我问这个问题的原因是你可以想象，对于创新者、具有这些特征的人、试图建立这个东西的人来说，无论它是什么，在世界其他地方可能还不相信或根本不相信你的时候，有一个人，或者在某些情况下有几个人真正相信你，可能会非常强大。

And we have examples from cults that embody this.

我们有来自邪教的例子就体现了这一点。

We have examples from politics.

我们有政治方面的例子。

We have examples from tech innovation and science.

我们有技术创新和科学的例子。

And I've always been fascinated by this because I feel like it's the more cryptic and yet very potent form of allowing someone to build themselves up.

我一直对此着迷，因为我觉得这是一种更神秘但又非常有效的形式，可以让人们自我提升。

It's a combination of inner psychology and extrinsic motivation.

这是内在心理和外在动机的结合。

Because obviously, if that person were to die or leave them or cheat on them or pair up with some other innovator, which we've seen several times recently and in the past, it can be devastating to that person.

因为显然，如果那个人死了，或者离开他们，或者欺骗他们，或者与其他创新者合作，我们最近和过去已经多次看到这种情况，这对那个人来说可能是毁灭性的。

But what are your thoughts on the role of personal, and in particular, romantic relationship as it relates to people having an idea and their feeling that they can really bring that idea to fruition in the world?

但是，您对个人关系，特别是浪漫关系的作用有何看法，因为它与人们有一个想法以及他们认为自己可以真正在世界上实现该想法的感觉有关？

Marc Andreessen: So it's a real mixed bag.

Marc Andreessen：所以这是一个真正的鱼龙混杂的情况。

You have lots of examples in all directions, and I think it's something like...

你在各个方面都有很多例子，我认为这就像......

Something like the following.

像下面这样的东西。

So first, we talked about the personality traits of these people.

首先，我们讨论了这些人的性格特征。

They tend to be highly disagreeable.

他们往往非常令人不愉快。

Andrew Huberman: Doesn't foster a good romantic relationship.

安德鲁·胡伯曼（Andrew Huberman）：不能培养良好的浪漫关系。

Marc Andreessen: Highly disagreeable people can be difficult to be in a relationship.

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：非常不愉快的人可能很难建立关系。

Andrew Huberman: I may have heard of that once or twice before.

Andrew Huberman：我以前可能听说过一两次。

A friend may have given me that example.

一位朋友可能给了我这个例子。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Right.

正确的。

And maybe you just need to find the right person who compliments that and is willing to, there's a lot of relationships where it's always this question about relationships, right?

也许你只需要找到合适的人来赞美这一点并且愿意，有很多关系总是关于关系的问题，对吗？

Which is, do you want to have the same personality growth profile, the same behavioral traits, basically, as your partner, or do you actually want to have, is it an opposite thing?

也就是说，你想要拥有与你的伴侣相同的人格成长特征、相同的行为特征，还是你实际上想要拥有，这是相反的事情吗？

I'm sure you've seen this.

我相信你已经看过这个。

There are relationships where you'll have somebody who's highly disagreeable, who's paired with somebody who's highly agreeable, and it actually works out great because one person just gets to be on their soapbox all the time, and the other person is just like, okay, it's fine.

在某些关系中，你会遇到一个非常不愉快的人，与一个非常令人愉快的人配对，这实际上效果很好，因为一个人总是在他们的肥皂盒上，而另一个人只是说，好吧，没关系。

Right?

正确的？

It's fine.

没关系。

It's good.

很好。

You put two disagreeable people together, maybe sparks fly and they have great conversations all the time, and maybe they come to hate each other.

你把两个性格不合的人放在一起，也许会擦出火花，他们总是聊得很开心，也许他们会互相憎恨。

Anyway, so these people, if you're going to be with one of these people, you're fishing out of the disagreeable end of the pond.

无论如何，所以这些人，如果你要和这些人中的一个在一起，你就从令人不快的池塘一端钓鱼了。

And again, when I say disagreeable, I don't mean these are normal distributions.

再说一次，当我说令人不快时，我并不是说这些是正态分布。

I don't mean, like 60% disagreeable or 80% disagreeable.

我并不是说 60% 不同意或者 80% 不同意。

The people we're talking about are 99.99% disagreeable.

我们谈论的人99.99%都是令人讨厌的。

So these are ordinary people.

所以这些都是普通人。

So part of it's that.

所以部分原因就是这样。

And then, of course, they have the other personality traits.

当然，他们还有其他的性格特征。

They're super conscientious.

他们超级认真。

They're super driven.

他们超级有动力。

As a consequence, they tend to work really hard.

因此，他们往往工作非常努力。

They tend to not have a lot of time for family vacations or other things.

他们往往没有太多时间与家人一起度假或做其他事情。

Then they don't enjoy them if they're forced to go on them.

如果他们被迫继续下去，他们就不会喜欢它们。

And so, again, that kind of thing can fray at a relationship.

因此，这种事情会再次破坏一段关系。

So there's a fair amount in there that's loaded.

所以里面已经装载了相当多的东西。

Like, somebody who's going to partner with one of these people needs to be signed up for the ride.

比如，想要与其中一个人合作的人需要报名参加这一行程。

And that's a hard thing.

这是一件很难的事情。

That's a hard thing to do.

这是一件很难做到的事情。

Or you need a true partnership of two of these, which is also hard to do.

或者你需要其中两个真正的合作伙伴关系，这也很难做到。

So I think that's part of it.

所以我认为这是其中的一部分。

And then, look, I think a big part of it is people achieve a certain level of success, and either in their own minds or publicly, and then they start to be able to get away with things, right?

然后，你看，我认为其中很大一部分是人们取得了一定程度的成功，无论是在他们自己的想法中还是在公开场合，然后他们开始能够逃脱惩罚，对吧？

And they start to be able to.

他们开始能够做到了。

It's like, well, okay, now we're rich and successful and famous, and now I deserve, and this is where you get into...

就像，好吧，现在我们富有、成功、出名，现在我应得的，这就是你进入的地方......

I view this now in the realm of personal choice.

我现在在个人选择的范围内看待这一点。

You get into this thing where people start to think that they deserve things, and so they start to behave in very bad ways, and then they blow up their personal worlds as a consequence.

当人们开始认为他们应得的东西时，他们开始做出非常糟糕的行为，然后他们的个人世界因此而被毁。

And maybe they regret it later, and maybe they don't.

也许他们后来会后悔，也许他们不会。

Right?

正确的？

It's always a question.

这始终是一个问题。

I think there's that.

我想就是这样。

And then, I don't know, maybe the other part of it is that some people just need more emotional support than others.

然后，我不知道，也许另一部分是有些人只是比其他人需要更多的情感支持。

And I don't know that that's a big, I don't know that that tilts either way.

我不知道那是一个大的，我不知道它会向哪个方向倾斜。

I know some of these people who have great, loving relationships and seem to draw very much on having this kind of firm foundation to rely upon.

我认识其中一些人，他们拥有良好的、充满爱的关系，并且似乎非常依赖这种坚实的基础来依赖。

And then I know other people who are just like, their personal lives are just a continuous train wreck.

然后我知道其他人就像，他们的个人生活只是一场连续的火车失事。

And it doesn't seem to matter, like, professionally, they just keep doing what they're doing.

这似乎并不重要，就像，在专业上，他们只是继续做他们正在做的事情。

And maybe we could talk here about whatever is the personality trait for risk taking.

也许我们可以在这里讨论冒险的性格特征。

Some people are so incredibly risk prone that they need to take risk in all aspects of their lives at all times.

有些人非常容易冒险，以至于他们需要随时在生活的各个方面承担风险。

And if part of their life gets stable, they find a way to blow it up.

如果他们生活的一部分变得稳定，他们就会想办法把它炸毁。

And that's some of these people you could describe in those terms also.

您也可以用这些术语来描述其中的一些人。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, let's talk about that.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，我们来谈谈这个问题。

Because I think risk taking and sensation seeking is something that fascinates me for my own reasons and in my observations of others.

因为我认为冒险和寻求感觉是让我着迷的事情，因为我自己的原因和我对他人的观察。

Does it dovetail with these five traits in a way that can really serve innovation, in ways that can benefit everybody?

它是否与这五个特征相吻合，能够真正服务于创新，使每个人受益？

The reason I say to benefit everybody is because there is a view of how we're painting this picture of the innovator as this really cruel person.

我之所以说要让每个人受益，是因为我们有一种观点，即我们如何将创新者描绘成一个非常残酷的人。

But oftentimes, what we're talking about are innovations that make the world far better for billions of people.

但很多时候，我们谈论的是让世界变得更加美好、造福数十亿人的创新。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, that's right.

马克·安德森：是的，没错。

And by the way, everything we're talking about also is not just in tech or science or in business.

顺便说一句，我们谈论的一切也不只是在技术、科学或商业领域。

Everything we're also talking about is true for the arts.

我们所谈论的一切都适用于艺术。

The history of artistic expression.

艺术表现的历史。

You have people with all these same kinds of traits.

这里有具有所有这些相同特征的人。

Andrew Huberman: Well, I was thinking about Picasso and his regular turnover of lovers and partners, and he was very open about the fact that it was one of the sources of his productivity, creativity.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：嗯，我想到了毕加索和他定期更换情人和伴侣，他非常坦率地承认这是他生产力和创造力的源泉之一。

He wasn't shy about that.

他对此并不害羞。

I suppose if he were alive today, it might be a little bit different.

我想，如果他今天还活着，情况可能会有所不同。

He might be judged a little differently.

人们对他的评价可能会有所不同。

Marc Andreessen: Or that was his story for behaving in a pattern that was very awful for the people around him, and he didn't care.

马克·安德森：或者这就是他的行为模式对他周围的人来说非常糟糕，但他不在乎。

Andrew Huberman: Right, maybe they left him?

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，也许他们离开了他？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Who knows?

谁知道？

Right?

正确的？

Puts and takes to all this, but no. Okay, so I have a theory.

把这一切都放在一起，但没有。好吧，我有一个理论。

So here's a theory.

所以这是一个理论。

This is one of these, I keep a list of things that will get me kicked out of a dinner party and topics at any given point in time.

这就是其中之一，我保留了一份清单，列出了在任何特定时间点都会让我被踢出晚宴和话题的事情。

Andrew Huberman: Do you read it before you go in?

Andrew Huberman：你进去之前读过它吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

On auto recall, so that I can get out of these things.

自动召回，这样我就可以摆脱这些事情了。

Here's the thing that can get me kicked out of a dinner party, especially these days.

这就是可能让我被赶出晚宴的事情，尤其是现在。

So think of the kind of person where it's very clear that they're super high, to your point, this is somebody who's super high output in whatever domain they're in.

因此，想想那种人，他们非常清楚地表现出极高的水平，就你的观点而言，这是在他们所处的任何领域都具有超高输出的人。

They've done things that have fundamentally changed the world.

他们所做的事情从根本上改变了世界。

They've brought new, whether it's businesses or technologies or works of art, entire schools of creative expression, in some cases to the world.

他们给世界带来了新的东西，无论是商业、技术还是艺术作品，甚至整个创意表达流派。

And then at a certain point, they blow themselves to smithereens, right?

然后在某个时刻，他们会把自己炸成碎片，对吗？

And they do that either through a massive financial scandal.

他们要么通过大规模的财务丑闻来做到这一点。

They do that through a massive personal breakdown.

他们通过严重的个人崩溃来做到这一点。

They do that through some sort of public expression that causes them a huge amount of problems.

他们通过某种公开表达来做到这一点，这给他们带来了很多问题。

They say the wrong thing, maybe not once, but several hundred times, and blow themselves to smithereens.

他们说错话，也许不是一次，而是几百次，然后把自己炸成碎片。

There's this moral arc that people kind of want to apply, which it's like the Icarus flying too close to the sun and he had it coming and he needed to keep his ego under control.

人们想要应用这种道德弧线，就像伊卡洛斯飞得太靠近太阳一样，他已经到来了，他需要控制自己的自我。

And you get kind of this judgment that applies.

你会得到一种适用的判断。

So I have a different theory on this.

所以我对此有不同的理论。

So the term I use to describe these people, and by the way, a lot of other people who don't actually blow themselves up but get close to it, which is a whole 'nother set of people, I call them martyrs to civilizational progress.

所以我用这个词来形容这些人，顺便说一句，还有很多其他人，他们实际上并没有自爆，但接近它，这是一群完全不同的人，我称他们为文明进步的烈士。

We're backwards, civilizational progress.

我们落后了，文明进步了。

So look, the only way civilization gets moved forward is when people like this do something new.

所以看，文明前进的唯一途径就是像这样的人做一些新的事情。

Because civilization as a whole does not do new things.

因为文明作为一个整体并没有做新的事情。

Groups of people do not do new things.

一群人不会做新事物。

These things don't happen automatically.

这些事情不会自动发生。

By default nothing changes.

默认情况下没有任何改变。

The only way civilizational change on any of these axes ever happens is because one of these people stands up and says, no, I'm going to do something different than what everybody else has ever done before.

在这些轴上发生文明变革的唯一方式是因为其中一个人站起来说，不，我要做一些与其他人以前做过的不同的事情。

So, this is progress, like, this is actually how it happens.

所以，这就是进步，就像，这实际上就是它发生的方式。

Sometimes they get lionized or awarded.

有时他们会受到崇拜或奖励。

Sometimes they get crucified.

有时他们会被钉在十字架上。

Sometimes the crucifixion is literal.

有时钉十字架是字面上的。

Sometimes it's just symbolic.

有时这只是象征性的。

But they are those kinds of people, and then martyrs when they go down in flames and again, this is where it really screws the people's moral judgments because everybody wants to have the sort of super clear story of like, okay, he did a bad thing and he was punished.

但他们就是这样的人，然后当他们在火焰中倒下时成为烈士，这才是真正扭曲人们道德判断的地方，因为每个人都希望有那种超级清晰的故事，比如，好吧，他做了一件坏事，他受到了惩罚。

And I'm like, no, he was the kind of person who was going to do great things and also was going to take on a level of risk and take on a level of sort of extreme behavior such that he was going to expose himself to flying too close to the sun, wings melt and crash to ground.

我想，不，他是那种会做伟大事情的人，也会承担一定程度的风险，采取一定程度的极端行为，这样他就会让自己飞得离太阳太近，翅膀融化并坠落到地面。

But it's a package deal.

但这是一揽子交易。

The reason you have the Picassos and the Beethovens and all these people is because they're willing to take these extreme level of risks.

之所以有毕加索和贝多芬以及所有这些人，是因为他们愿意承担这些极端的风险。

They are that creative and original, not just in their art or their business, but in everything else that they do that they will set themselves up to be able to fail psychologically.

他们富有创造力和原创性，不仅在他们的艺术或生意上，而且在他们所做的其他一切事情上，他们都会让自己在心理上失败。

A psychologist would probably, or psychiatrist would probably say maybe.

心理学家可能会说，或者精神病学家可能会说可能。

To what extent do they actually have a death wish at some point.

他们在某种程度上实际上有死亡的愿望。

Do they want to punish themselves?

他们想惩罚自己吗？

Do they want to fail?

他们想失败吗？

That I don't know.

我不知道。

But you see this.

但你看到这个了。

They deliberately move themselves too close to the sun, and you can see it when it's happening, because if they get too far away from the sun, they deliberately move back towards it.

它们故意让自己离太阳太近，当它发生时你可以看到它，因为如果它们离太阳太远，它们就会故意向太阳移动。

Right.

正确的。

They come right back, and they want the risk anyway.

他们马上回来，无论如何他们都想要冒险。

So martyrs to civilizational progress.

所以烈士是为了文明进步。

This is how progress happens.

进步就是这样发生的。

When these people crash and burn, the natural inclination is to judge them morally.

当这些人崩溃和燃烧时，自然的倾向是从道德上评判他们。

I tend to think we should basically say, look, and I don't even know if this means, like, giving them a moral pass or whatever, but it's like, look, this is how civilization progresses, and we need to at least understand that there's a self-sacrificial aspect to this that may be tragic and often is tragic, but it is quite literally self-sacrificial.

我倾向于认为我们基本上应该说，看，我什至不知道这是否意味着，比如，给他们道德通行证或其他什么，但它就像，看，这就是文明进步的方式，我们至少需要明白，这其中有一个自我牺牲的方面，这可能是悲剧性的，而且常常是悲剧性的，但它实际上是自我牺牲的。

Andrew Huberman: Are there any examples of great innovators who were able to compartmentalize their risk taking to such a degree that they had what seemed to be a morally impeccable life in every domain except in their business pursuits?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：有没有伟大的创新者的例子，他们能够将自己的风险划分到这样的程度，以至于除了商业追求之外，他们在每个领域都过着道德上无可挑剔的生活？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, that's right.

马克·安德森：是的，没错。

So some people are very highly controlled like that.

所以有些人就是这样受到高度控制的。

Some people are able to very narrowly, and I don't really want to set myself an example on a lot of this, but I will tell you as an example, I will never use debt in business, number one.

有些人的能力非常有限，我真的不想在很多方面为自己树立榜样，但我会告诉你作为一个例子，我永远不会在商业中使用债务，第一。

Number two, I have the most placid personal life you can imagine.

第二，我拥有你能想象到的最平静的个人生活。

Number three, I'm the last person in the world who is ever going to do an extreme sport.

第三，我是世界上最后一个从事极限运动的人。

I mean, I'm not even going to go in the sauna or the ice bath.

我的意思是，我什至不会去桑拿或冰浴。

I'm not doing any of this.

我不做这些事。

I'm not tele skiing.

我不是远程滑雪。

Andrew Huberman: No obligation.

安德鲁·休伯曼：没有义务。

Marc Andreessen: I'm not on the Titan.

马克·安德森：我不在泰坦上。

I'm not going down to see the Titanic.

我不会去看泰坦尼克号。

Goodness, you weren't doing any of this.

天哪，你什么都没做。

I'm not doing any of this stuff.

我不做这些事。

I have no interest.

我没有兴趣。

I don't play golf.

我不打高尔夫球。

I don't ski.

我不会滑雪。

I have no interest in any of this stuff, right?

我对这些东西一点兴趣都没有，对吧？

And I know people like this, right, who are very high achievers.

我认识这样的人，他们都是非常有成就的人。

It's just like, yeah, they're completely segmented.

就像，是的，它们是完全分割的。

They're extreme risk takers.

他们是极端的冒险家。

In business, they're completely buttoned down on the personal side, they're completely buttoned down financially.

在商业上，他们在个人方面完全按部就班，在财务方面也完全按部就班。

They're scrupulous with following every rule and law you can possibly imagine, but they're still fantastic innovators.

他们严格遵守你能想象到的每一条规则和法律，但他们仍然是出色的创新者。

And then I know many others who are just like their life is on fire all the time, in every possible way.

然后我认识很多其他人，他们的生活一直在以各种可能的方式着火。

And whenever it looks like the fire is turning into embers, they figure out a way to relight the fire, and they just really want to live on the edge.

每当火看起来要化为余烬时，他们就会想办法重新点燃火，他们只是真的想生活在边缘。

And so I think that's an independent variable.

所以我认为这是一个自变量。

And again, I would apply the same thing.

我会再一次应用同样的事情。

I think the same thing applies to the arts.

我认为同样的事情也适用于艺术。

Classical music as an example.

以古典音乐为例。

I think Bach was, as an example, one of the best musicians of all time, had just a completely sedate personal life, never had any aberrant behavior at all in his personal life.

举个例子，我认为巴赫是有史以来最好的音乐家之一，他的个人生活完全平静，在他的个人生活中从来没有任何异常行为。

Family man, tons of kids, apparently pillar of the community.

有家室的男人，有很多孩子，显然是社区的支柱。

Right.

正确的。

And so if Bach could be Bach and yet not burn his way through 300 mistresses or whatever, maybe you can, too.

因此，如果巴赫可以成为巴赫，但又不会在 300 个情妇之类的事情上大放异彩，也许你也可以。

Andrew Huberman: So in thinking about these two different categories of innovators, those that take on tremendous risk in all domains of their life and those that take on tremendous risk in a very compartmentalized way, I don't know what the percentages are, but I have to wonder if in this modern age of the public being far less forgivable, what I'm referring to is cancel culture.

安德鲁·休伯曼：因此，在考虑这两类不同的创新者时，那些在生活的各个领域承担巨大风险的创新者和那些以非常分散的方式承担巨大风险的创新者，我不知道百分比是多少，但我不得不想知道，在公众越来越不可原谅的现代时代，我指的是取消文化。

Do you think that we are limiting the number of innovations in total by just simply frightening or eliminating an enormous category of innovators because they don't have the confidence or the means or the strategies in place to regulate?

您是否认为我们只是通过吓唬或消除一大批创新者来限制创新总量，因为他们没有信心、没有手段或没有适当的监管策略？

So they're just either bowing out or they're getting crossed off, they're getting canceled one by one.

所以他们要么退出，要么被划掉，被一一取消。

Marc Andreessen: So do you think the public is less tolerant than they used to be or more tolerant?

马克·安德森：那么你认为公众的宽容度比以前更差了还是更宽容了？

Andrew Huberman: Well, the systems that, I'm not going to be careful here.

Andrew Huberman：嗯，我不会在这里小心的系统。

I think the large institution systems are not tolerant of what the public tells them they shouldn't be tolerant of.

我认为大型机构系统不会容忍公众告诉他们不应该容忍的事情。

And so if there's enough noise, there's enough noise in the mob.

因此，如果有足够的噪音，暴民中就会有足够的噪音。

I think institutions bow out.

我认为机构会退出。

And here I'm referring not just to, they essentially say, okay, let the cancellation proceed.

在这里我指的不仅仅是，他们本质上是说，好吧，让取消继续进行。

Maybe they're the gavel that comes down, but they're not the lever that got the thing going.

也许它们是敲下的木槌，但它们不是推动事情进行的杠杆。

And so I'm not just thinking about universities.

所以我不仅仅考虑大学。

I'm also thinking about advertisers.

我也在考虑广告商。

I'm thinking about the big movie houses that cancel a film that a given actor might be in because they had something in their personal life that's still getting worked out.

我在想一些大电影院取消了某个演员可能出演的电影，因为他们的个人生活中有一些事情仍在解决。

I'm thinking about people who are in a legal process that's not yet resolved, but the public has decided they're a bad person, etc.

我正在考虑那些处于尚未解决的法律程序中的人，但公众已经认定他们是坏人，等等。

Marc Andreessen: My question is, are we really talking about the public?

马克·安德森：我的问题是，我们真的在谈论公众吗？

I agree with your question, and I'm going to come back to it, but I'm going to examine one part of your question, which is, is this really the public we're talking about.

我同意你的问题，我将回到这个问题，但我将检查你问题的一部分，即，这真的是我们正在谈论的公众吗？

And I would just say Exhibit A is who is the current frontrunner for the Republican nomination today?

我只想说，证据 A 是目前共和党提名的领跑者是谁？

The public, at least on one side of the political aisle, seems very on board.

公众，至少在政治阵营的一侧，似乎非常赞同。

Number two, like, look, there's a certain musician who flew too close to the sun, blew himself to smithereens.

第二，看，有一位音乐家飞得太靠近太阳，结果把自己炸成了碎片。

He's still hitting all time highs on music streams every month.

他每个月的音乐流媒体数量仍然创下历史新高。

The public seems fine.

大众看来还好。

I would argue the public is actually more open to these things than it actually maybe ever has been.

我认为公众实际上对这些事情比以往任何时候都更加开放。

And we could talk about why that's the case.

我们可以讨论为什么会出现这种情况。

I think it's a differentiation, and this is what your question was aiming at, but it's a differentiation between the public and the elites.

我觉得这是一个区别，这也是你提问的目的，但这是公众和精英之间的区别。

My view is everything that you just described is an elite phenomenon.

我的观点是你刚才描述的一切都是精英现象。

And actually, the public is very much not on board with it.

事实上，公众对此并不认同。

So what's actually happening is what's happened is the public and the elites have gapped out.

所以实际发生的情况是公众和精英之间出现了分歧。

The public is more forgiving of what previously might have been considered kind of aberrant and extreme behavior, right?

公众对以前可能被认为是异常和极端的行为更加宽容，对吗？

F.

F。

Scott Fitzgerald, "there are no second acts in American lives," turns out was completely wrong.

斯科特·菲茨杰拉德（Scott Fitzgerald）说，“美国人的生活中没有第二幕”，事实证明这是完全错误的。

Turns out there are second acts, third acts, fourth acts.

原来还有第二幕、第三幕、第四幕。

Apparently you can have an unlimited number of acts.

显然你可以有无限数量的行为。

The public is actually up for it.

公众实际上对此表示欢迎。

Yeah.

是的。

Andrew Huberman: I mean, I think of somebody like Mike Tyson, right?

安德鲁·休伯曼：我的意思是，我想到了像迈克·泰森这样的人，对吧？

I feel like his life exemplifies everything.

我觉得他的生活体现了一切。

That's amazing and great and also terrible about America.

对于美国来说，这是令人惊奇的、伟大的，同时也是可怕的。

Marc Andreessen: If we took Mike Tyson to dinner tonight at any restaurant anywhere in the United States, what would happen?

马克·安德森：如果我们今晚带迈克·泰森在美国任何地方的任何一家餐厅吃饭，会发生什么？

Andrew Huberman: He would be loved.

安德鲁·休伯曼：他会被爱的。

Marc Andreessen: Oh, he would be like, the outpouring of enthusiasm and passion and love would be incredible.

马克·安德森：哦，他会想，热情、激情和爱的倾注将是令人难以置信的。

It would be unbelievable.

这将是令人难以置信的。

This is a great example.

这是一个很好的例子。

And again, I'm not even going to draw more.

再说一次，我什至不打算画更多。

I'm not even going to say I agree with that or disagree with that.

我什至不会说我同意或不同意。

I think we all intuitively know that the public is just like, 100%, absolutely.

我想我们都凭直觉知道公众是 100% 绝对的。

He's a legend.

他是一个传奇。

He's a living legend.

他是一个活着的传奇人物。

He's like a cultural touchstone.

他就像一块文化试金石。

Absolutely.

绝对地。

And you see it when he shows up in movies, right?

当他出现在电影中时你会看到这一点，对吗？

I don't remember the, I mean, the big breakthrough where I figured this out with respect to him because I don't really follow sports, but when he showed up in that, it was that first "Hangover" movie, and he shows up and I was in a theater and the audience just goes bananas, crazy.

我不记得，我的意思是，我对他的认识的重大突破，因为我并不真正关注体育运动，但当他出现在其中时，那是第一部“宿醉”电影，他出现了，我在电影院里，观众们都疯了，疯狂了。

They're so excited to see him.

他们很高兴见到他。

Andrew Huberman: He evokes delight.

安德鲁·休伯曼：他唤起了快乐。

I always say that Mike Tyson is the only person I'm aware of that can wear a shirt with his own name on it, and it somehow doesn't seem wrong.

我总是说迈克·泰森是我所知道的唯一一个可以穿着印有他自己名字的衬衫的人，这似乎并没有错。

In fact, it just kind of makes you like him more.

事实上，这只是让你更喜欢他。

His ego feels very contoured in a way that he knows who he is and who he was, and yet there's a humbleness woven in, maybe as a consequence of all that he's been through.

他的自我意识非常明确，他知道自己是谁，曾经是谁，但又交织着一种谦虚，也许是他所经历的一切的结果。

I don't know.

我不知道。

But, yeah, people love Mike.

但是，是的，人们喜欢迈克。

Marc Andreessen: Public loves him now.

马克·安德森：公众现在喜欢他。

Exactly.

确切地。

Now, if he shows up to lecture at Harvard, right, I think you're probably going to get a different reaction?

现在，如果他出现在哈佛大学演讲，对吧，我想你可能会得到不同的反应？

Andrew Huberman: I don't know.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我不知道。

I don't know!

我不知道！

You know, the guy who wrote "The Wire" gave a talk at Harvard, and it sounded to me, based on his report of that, which is very interesting, in fact, that people adore people who are connected to everybody in that way.

你知道，写《火线》的人在哈佛做了一次演讲，根据他的报告，我觉得这很有趣，事实上，人们喜欢那些以这种方式与每个人都有联系的人。

I feel like everybody loves Mike.

我觉得每个人都喜欢迈克。

From above his status, the sides below his status, he occupies this halo of love and adoration.

从他的地位之上，从他的地位之下，他都占据着这个爱与崇拜的光环。

Marc Andreessen: Okay.

马克·安德森：好的。

Andrew Huberman: All right.

安德鲁·休伯曼：好的。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Look, the other side of this is the elites, and you kind of alluded to this, of the institution.

看，另一面是精英，你也提到了这一点，机构的精英。

So basically, it's like the people who are at least nominally in charge or feel like that they should be in charge.

所以基本上，这就像那些至少在名义上负责或感觉自己应该负责的人。

Andrew Huberman: I want to make sure we define elite.

Andrew Huberman：我想确保我们对精英的定义。

So you're not necessarily talking about people who are wealthy.

所以你不一定是在谈论有钱人。

You're talking about people who have authority within institutions.

您谈论的是在机构内拥有权威的人。

Marc Andreessen: So the ultimate definition of an elite is who can get who fired, right?

马克·安德森：所以精英的最终定义是谁能解雇谁，对吧？

That's the ultimate test.

这就是最终的考验。

Who can get who fired, boycotted, blacklisted, ostracized.

谁能把谁解雇、抵制、列入黑名单、排斥。

Like when push, prosecuted, jailed, like when push comes to shove.

就像被逼迫、被起诉、被监禁一样，就像当逼迫到了紧要关头时。

I think that's always the question, who can destroy whose career?

我认为这始终是个问题，谁能毁掉谁的职业生涯？

And of course, you'll notice that that is heavily asymmetric when these fights play out.

当然，你会注意到，当这些战斗发生时，这是严重不对称的。

Like, it's very clear which side can get the other side fired and which side can't.

就像，很清楚哪一方可以让另一方开火，哪一方不能。

And so, yeah, so, look, I think we live in a period of time where the elites have gotten to be extreme in a number of dimensions.

所以，是的，所以，你看，我认为我们生活在一个精英们在很多方面都变得极端的时代。

I think it's characterized by, for sure, extreme groupthink, extreme sanctimony, extreme moral, I would say dudgeon, this weird sort of modern puritanism, and then an extreme sort of morality of punishment and terror against their perceived enemies.

我认为它的特点当然是极端的集体思维、极端的道貌岸然、极端的道德，我想说的是dudgeon，这种奇怪的现代清教主义，然后是一种针对他们所认为的敌人的极端的惩罚和恐怖道德。

But I want to go through that because I actually think that's a very different phenomenon.

但我想详细讨论一下，因为我实际上认为这是一个非常不同的现象。

I think what's happening at the elites is very different than what's happening in the population at large.

我认为精英阶层所发生的事情与广大民众所发生的事情非常不同。

And then, of course, I think there's a feedback loop in there, which is, I think the population at large is not on board with that program.

当然，我认为其中存在一个反馈循环，也就是说，我认为广大民众并不支持该计划。

Right.

正确的。

I think the elites are aware that the population is not on board with that program.

我认为精英们意识到民众并不支持该计划。

I think they judge the population negatively as a consequence, that causes the elites to harden their own positions.

我认为他们因此对民众做出负面评价，导致精英们强化自己的立场。

That causes them to be even more alienating to the population.

这导致他们更加疏远民众。

And so they're in sort of an oppositional negative feedback loop.

因此它们处于某种对立的负反馈循环中。

But again, it's a sort of question, okay, who can get who fired?

但这又是一个问题，好吧，谁能解雇谁？

And so elites are really good at getting normal people fired.

因此，精英们非常擅长解雇普通人。

Ostracized, banned, hit pieces in the press, like, whatever.

被排斥、被禁止、被媒体抨击，诸如此类。

For normal people to get elites fired, they have to really band together, right.

对于普通人来说，要让精英被解雇，他们必须真正团结起来，对吧。

And really mount a serious challenge, which mostly doesn't happen, but might be starting to happen in some cases.

并真正提出一个严峻的挑战，这通常不会发生，但在某些情况下可能会开始发生。

Andrew Huberman: Do you think this power of the elites over, stemmed from social media sort of going against its original purpose?

安德鲁·休伯曼：你认为精英的这种权力是否源于社交媒体违背其最初目的？

I mean, when you think social media, you think you're giving each and every person their own little reality TV show, their own voice.

我的意思是，当你想到社交媒体时，你会认为你正在为每个人提供自己的小型真人秀节目、自己的声音。

And yet we've seen a dramatic uptick in the number of cancellations and firings related to immoral behavior based on things that were either done or amplified on social media.

然而，我们已经看到，与社交媒体上所做或放大的不道德行为相关的取消和解雇数量急剧增加。

It's almost as if the public is holding the wrong end of the knife.

就好像公众拿错了刀子一样。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, so the way I describe it, I use these two terms, and they're somewhat interchangeable, but elites and institutions.

马克·安德森：是的，所以我描述它的方式，我使用这两个术语，它们在某种程度上可以互换，但精英和机构。

And then they're somewhat interchangeable because who runs the institutions?

然后它们在某种程度上可以互换，因为谁管理这些机构？

The elites, right?

精英们，对吧？

And so it's sort of a self-reinforcing thing.

所以这是一种自我强化的事情。

And institutions of all kinds.

及各类机构。

Institutions, everything from the government, bureaucracies, companies, nonprofits, foundations, NGOs, tech companies, on and on and on.

机构，包括政府、官僚机构、公司、非营利组织、基金会、非政府组织、科技公司等等。

Like people who are in charge of big complexes and that carry a lot of, basically, power and influence and capability and money as a consequence of their positional authority.

就像那些负责大型综合体的人一样，他们由于地位的权威而拥有大量的权力、影响力、能力和金钱。

So the head of a giant foundation may never have done anything in their life that would cause somebody to have a high opinion of them as a person.

因此，一个大型基金会的负责人一生中可能从未做过任何会让别人对他们有很高评价的事情。

But they're in charge of this gigantic, multibillion-dollar complex and have all this power.

但他们掌管着这个耗资数十亿美元的庞大建筑群，并拥有所有这些权力。

And so that's just defined terms, at least in institutions.

所以这只是定义术语，至少在机构中是这样。

So, it's actually interesting.

所以，这实际上很有趣。

Gallup has been doing polls on the following on the question of trust in institutions, which is sort of therefore a proxy for trust in elites, basically since the early 1970s.

基本上自 20 世纪 70 年代初以来，盖洛普就一直在就对机构的信任问题进行以下民意调查，因此机构信任在某种程度上代表了对精英的信任。

And they do this across all the categories of big institutions, basically everyone.

他们在所有类别的大型机构（基本上是每个机构）中都这样做。

I just talked about a bunch of others.

我刚刚谈到了其他一些事情。

Big business, small business, banks, newspapers, broadcast television, the military, police.

大企业、小企业、银行、报纸、广播电视、军队、警察。

So they've got like 30 categories or something.

所以他们有大约 30 个类别之类的。

And basically what you see is almost all the categories basically started in the early '70s at like 60 or 70% trust.

基本上你所看到的几乎所有类别基本上都是在 70 年代初开始的，信任度约为 60% 或 70%。

And now almost across the board, they've just had a complete, basically linear slide down for 50 years, basically my whole life.

现在几乎全面地，他们刚刚经历了一个完整的、基本上线性的下滑，持续了 50 年，基本上是我的一生。

And they're now bottoming out.

他们现在正在触底。

Congress and journalists bottom out at like 10%.

国会和记者的支持率最低为 10% 左右。

The two groups everybody hates are Congress and journalists.

每个人都讨厌的两个群体是国会和记者。

And then it's like a lot of other big institutions are like, in their 20s, 30s, 40s.

就像很多其他大型机构在 20 多岁、30 多岁、40 多岁的时候一样。

Actually, big business actually scores fairly high.

事实上，大企业的得分确实相当高。

Tech actually scores quite high.

科技实际上得分相当高。

The military scores quite high.

军事分数相当高。

But basically everything else has really caved in.

但基本上其他一切都已经屈服了。

This is sort of my fundamental challenge to everybody who basically says, and you didn't do this, but you'll hear the simple form of this, which is social media caused the current trouble.

这是我对每个人的基本挑战，基本上说，你没有这样做，但你会听到这种简单的形式，这是社交媒体造成了当前的麻烦。

And let's call this an example, collapse in faith in institutions and elites.

让我们将此称为一个例子：对机构和精英的信心崩溃。

Let's call that part of the current trouble.

让我们把这称为当前麻烦的一部分。

Everybody's like, well, social media caused that.

每个人都说，好吧，社交媒体造成了这种情况。

I was like, well, no, social media, social media is new, right?

我当时想，嗯，不，社交媒体，社交媒体是新的，对吧？

In the last...

在最后...

social media is effectively new, practically speaking, since 2010, 2012 is when it really took off.

实际上，社交媒体自 2010 年以来一直是新事物，2012 年才是它真正起飞的时候。

And so, if the trend started in the early 1970s and has been continuous, then we're dealing with something broader.

因此，如果这一趋势始于 20 世纪 70 年代初并且一直持续，那么我们正在处理更广泛的问题。

Martin Gurri wrote, I think, the best book on this, called the "Revolt of the Public," where he goes through this in detail.

我认为马丁·古里（Martin Gurri）写了这方面最好的书，名为《公众的反抗》，他在书中详细介绍了这一点。

He does say that social media had a lot to do with what's happened in the last decade.

他确实说社交媒体与过去十年发生的事情有很大关系。

But he says, yeah, if you go back, you look further, it was basically two things coinciding.

但他说，是的，如果你回头看，你会看得更远，这基本上是两件事同时发生。

One was just a general change in the media environment.

其中之一只是媒体环境的总体变化。

And in particular, the 1970s is when you started to, and especially in the 1980s, is when you started to get specifically talk radio, which was a new outlet.

特别是 20 世纪 70 年代，尤其是 80 年代，人们开始专门收听谈话广播，这是一个新的渠道。

And then you also got cable television.

然后你还有有线电视。

And then you also, by the way, it's actually interesting in that you had paperback books, which was another one of these, which was an outlet.

顺便说一句，实际上很有趣的是，你有平装书，这是其中的另一本，它是一个出口。

So you had like a fracturing in the media landscape that started in the '50s through the, then, of course, the internet blew it wide open.

所以，从 20 世纪 50 年代开始，媒体格局就出现了裂痕，然后，当然，互联网将其彻底打开了。

Having said that, if the elites and the institutions were fantastic, you would know it more than ever.

话虽如此，如果精英和机构都很棒，你会比以往任何时候都更了解这一点。

Information is more accessible.

信息更容易获取。

And so the other thing that he says, and I agree with, is the public is not being tricked into thinking the elites and institutions are bad.

因此，他说的另一件事（我同意）是，公众没有被欺骗，认为精英和机构是坏的。

They're learning that they're bad, and therefore, the mystery of the Gallup poll is why those numbers aren't all just zero, which is arguably, in a lot of cases, where they should be.

他们正在认识到自己很糟糕，因此，盖洛普民意调查的谜团在于为什么这些数字不全是零，可以说，在很多情况下，它们应该是零。

Andrew Huberman: I think one reason that--

安德鲁·休伯曼：我认为原因之一是——

Marc Andreessen: --By the way, he thinks this is bad.

马克·安德森：——顺便说一句，他认为这很糟糕。

So he and I have a different view.

所以我和他有不同的看法。

So here's where he and I disagree.

这就是我和他的分歧所在。

He thinks this is bad.

他认为这很糟糕。

So he basically says, you can't replace elites with nothing.

所以他基本上是说，你不能用任何东西来取代精英。

You can't replace institutions with nothing, because what you're just left with is just going to be wreckage.

你不能用任何东西来取代机构，因为你留下的只是废墟。

You're going to be left with a completely, basically atomized, out of control society that has no ability to marshal any sort of activity in any direction.

你将面临一个完全、基本上原子化、失控的社会，没有能力在任何方向上组织任何类型的活动。

It's just going to be a dog-eat-dog awful world.

这将是一个狗咬狗的可怕世界。

I have a very different view on that which we can talk about.

我对我们可以讨论的问题有非常不同的看法。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, I'd love to hear your views on that.

Andrew Huberman：是的，我很想听听您对此的看法。

I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge our sponsor, InsideTracker.

我想稍微休息一下并感谢我们的赞助商 InsideTracker。

InsideTracker is a personalized nutrition platform that analyzes data from your blood and DNA to help you better understand your body and help you meet your health goals.

InsideTracker 是一个个性化营养平台，可分析您的血液和 DNA 数据，帮助您更好地了解您的身体并帮助您实现健康目标。

I'm a big believer in getting regular blood work done for the simple reason that many of the factors that impact your immediate and long-term health can only be analyzed from a quality blood test.

我坚信定期进行血液检查，原因很简单，影响您当前和长期健康的许多因素只能通过高质量的血液测试来分析。

However, with a lot of blood tests out there, you get information back about blood lipids, about hormones and so on, but you don't know what to do with that information.

然而，通过大量的血液测试，您可以获得有关血脂、激素等的信息，但您不知道如何处理这些信息。

With InsideTracker, they have a personalized platform that makes it very easy to understand your data, that is, to understand what those lipids, what those hormone levels, etc. mean, and behavioral supplement, nutrition and other protocols to adjust those numbers to bring them into the ranges that are ideal for your immediate and long-term health.

借助 InsideTracker，他们拥有一个个性化平台，可以非常轻松地了解您的数据，即了解那些血脂、激素水平等的含义，以及行为补充、营养和其他方案来调整这些数字，使其达到适合您近期和长期健康的理想范围。

InsideTracker's ultimate plan now includes measures of both APO B and of insulin, which are key indicators of cardiovascular health and energy regulation.

InsideTracker 的最终计划现在包括 APO B 和胰岛素的测量，它们是心血管健康和能量调节的关键指标。

If you'd like to try InsideTracker, you can visit insidetracker.com/huberman to get 20% off any of InsideTracker's plans.

如果您想尝试 InsideTracker，可以访问 insidetracker.com/huberman，享受任何 InsideTracker 计划 20% 的折扣。

Again, that's insidetracker.com/huberman to get 20% off.

同样，在 insidetracker.com/huberman 上可以获得 20% 的折扣。

The quick question I was going to ask before we go there is, I think that one reason that I and many other people sort of reflexively assume that social media caused the demise of our faith and institutions is, well, first of all, I wasn't aware of this lack of correlation between the decline in faith in institutions and the rise of social media.

在我们去那里之前我要问的一个简单问题是，我认为我和许多其他人条件反射地认为社交媒体导致了我们的信仰和机构的消亡，原因之一是，首先，我没有意识到对机构的信心下降与社交媒体的兴起之间缺乏相关性。

But secondarily that we've seen some movements that have essentially rooted themselves in tweets, in comments, in posts that get amplified, and those tweets and comments and posts come from everyday people.

但其次，我们看到一些运动本质上植根于推文、评论、被放大的帖子，而这些推文、评论和帖子都来自普通人。

In fact, I can't name one person who initiated a given cancellation or movement because it was the sort of dogpiling or mob adding-on to some person that was essentially anonymous.

事实上，我无法说出发起特定取消或运动的某个人的名字，因为这是一种对本质上匿名的人的围攻或暴徒附加。

So I think that for many of us, we have the, to use neuroscience language, as sort of a bottom-up perspective, oh, someone sees something in their daily life or experiences something in their daily life, and they tweet about it or they comment about it or they post about it, and then enough people dogpile on the accused that it picks up force, and then the elites feel compelled, obligated to cancel somebody.

所以我认为，对于我们许多人来说，我们可以使用神经科学语言，作为一种自下而上的视角，哦，有人在日常生活中看到了一些东西，或者在日常生活中经历了一些东西，他们在推特上谈论它，他们评论它，或者他们发布关于它的文章，然后足够多的人聚集在一起指责它，它获得了力量，然后精英们感到有必要，有义务取消某人。

That tends to be the narrative.

这往往就是叙述。

And so I think the logical conclusion is, oh, social media allows for this to happen.

所以我认为合乎逻辑的结论是，哦，社交媒体允许这种情况发生。

Whereas normally someone would just be standing on the corner shouting or calling lawyers that don't have faith in them, and you've got the Erin Brockovich model that turns into a movie.

而通常情况下，有人会站在街角大喊大叫或打电话给对他们不信任的律师，而你已经把艾琳·布罗科维奇的模型变成了电影。

But that's a rare case of this lone woman who's got this idea in mind about how a big institution is doing wrong or somebody is doing wrong in the world and then can leverage the big institution, excuse me.

但这是一个罕见的例子，这个孤独的女人心里有这样的想法，一个大机构如何做错了，或者世界上有人做错了，然后可以利用这个大机构，对不起。

But the way that you describe it is that the elites are leading this shift.

但你描述的方式是，精英正在引领这一转变。

So what is the role of the public in it?

那么公众在其中扮演什么角色呢？

Just to give it a concrete example, if, for instance, no one tweeted or commented a me too, or no one tweeted or commented about some ill behavior of some, I don't know, university faculty member or businessperson, would the elite have come down on them?

举个具体的例子，如果没有人也发推文或评论我，或者没有人发推文或评论一些我不知道的大学教员或商人的不良行为，精英会贬低他们吗？

Marc Andreessen: Anyway, what's happening?

马克·安德森：无论如何，发生了什么事？

Based on what I've seen over the years, there is so much astroturfing right now.

根据我多年来的观察，现在有很多人造草皮。

There are entire categories of people who are paid to do this.

有很多类别的人是受薪来做这件事的。

Some of them we call journalists, some of them we call activists, some of them we call NGO, nonprofit.

其中一些我们称之为记者，其中一些我们称之为活动家，其中一些我们称之为非政府组织、非营利组织。

Some of them we call university professors, some of them we call grad students, whatever, they're paid to do this.

他们中的一些人我们称之为大学教授，一些人我们称之为研究生，不管怎样，他们是有报酬做这件事的。

I don't know if you've ever looked into the misinformation industrial complex?

不知道大家有没有调查过误传产业综合体？

There's this whole universe of basically these funded groups that basically do misinformation.

基本上这些受资助的团体基本上都是在传播错误信息。

And they're constantly mounting these kinds of attacks.

他们不断发起此类攻击。

They're constantly trying to gin up this kind of basically panic to cause somebody to get fired.

他们不断地试图煽动这种基本的恐慌，以导致某人被解雇。

Andrew Huberman: So it's not a grassroots--

安德鲁·休伯曼：所以这不是草根——

Marc Andreessen: --No. It's the opposite of grassroots.

马克·安德森：——不。这与草根相反。

No. Almost always going to trace these things back.

不，几乎总是要追溯这些事情。

It was a journalist, it was an activist, it was a public figure of some kind.

他是一名记者，一名活动人士，还是某种公众人物。

These are entrepreneurs in a sort of a weird way.

这些企业家的方式有点奇怪。

Basically their job, mission calling, is all wrapped up together like they're true believers, but they're also getting paid to do it.

基本上，他们的工作，即使命召唤，就像他们是真正的信徒一样，都被包裹在一起，但他们也为此获得报酬。

And there's a giant funding, I mean, there's a very large funding complex for this coming from certain high profile people who put huge amounts of money into this.

我的意思是，有一笔巨大的资金，来自某些投入巨额资金的知名人士。

Andrew Huberman: Is this well-known?

安德鲁·休伯曼：这是众所周知的吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yes.

马克·安德森：是的。

Well, it is in my world.

嗯，它就在我的世界里。

So this is what the social media companies have been on the receiving end of for the last decade.

这就是社交媒体公司在过去十年中一直受到的影响。

It's basically a political media activism complex with very deep pockets behind it.

它基本上是一个政治媒体激进主义综合体，背后有雄厚的财力。

And you've got people who basically, literally have people who sit all day and watch the TV network on the other side or watch the Twitter feeds on the other side, and they basically wait.

基本上，确实有人整天坐着看另一边的电视网络或另一边的推特，他们基本上都是在等待。

It's like every politician, this has been the case for a long time now.

就像每个政客一样，这种情况已经存在很长时间了。

Every politician who goes out and gives stump speeches, you'll see there's always somebody in the crowd with a camcorder or now with a phone recording them.

每一位外出发表巡回演讲的政客，你都会看到人群中总有人拿着摄像机，或者现在拿着手机录制演讲。

And that's somebody from the other campaign who's paid somebody to just be there and record every single thing the politician says.

那是来自其他竞选团队的人，他们付钱让某人在那里记录政客所说的每一句话。

So that when a Mitt Romney says, whatever, the 47% thing, they've got it on tape, and then they clip it, and they try to make it viral.

因此，当米特·罗姆尼 (Mitt Romney) 说，不管怎样，47% 的事情时，他们都会把它录下来，然后剪辑，并试图让它像病毒一样传播。

And again, look, these people believe what they're doing.

再一次，看，这些人相信他们正在做的事情。

I'm not saying it's even dishonest.

我并不是说这是不诚实的。

Like, these people believe what they're doing.

就像，这些人相信他们正在做的事情。

They think they're fighting a holy war.

他们认为他们正在打一场圣战。

They think they're protecting democracy.

他们认为他们是在保护民主。

They think they're protecting civilization.

他们认为他们正在保护文明。

They think they're protecting whatever it is they're protecting.

他们认为他们正在保护他们所保护的一切。

And then they know how to use the tools, and so they know how to try to gin up the outrage.

然后他们知道如何使用这些工具，因此他们知道如何试图激起愤怒。

And then, by the way, sometimes it works in social cascades.

顺便说一句，有时它会在社交级联中发挥作用。

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

有时有效，有时无效。

Sometimes they cascade, sometimes they don't.

有时它们会级联，有时则不会。

But if you follow these people on Twitter, this is what they do every day.

但如果你在 Twitter 上关注这些人，就会发现这就是他们每天所做的事情。

They're constantly trying to, like, light this fire.

他们不断地试图点燃这把火。

Andrew Huberman: I assume that it was really bottom up, but it sounds like it's sort of middle level, and that it captures the elites, and then the thing takes on a life of its own.

Andrew Huberman：我认为它确实是自下而上的，但听起来像是中等水平，它吸引了精英，然后事情就有了自己的生命。

Marc Andreessen: By the way, it also intersects with the trust and safety groups at the social media firms who are responsible for figuring out who gets promoted and who gets banned across this.

马克·安德森：顺便说一句，这也与社交媒体公司的信任和安全小组有交叉，他们负责确定谁会得到晋升，谁会被禁止。

And you'll notice one large social media company has recently changed hands and has implemented a different kind of set of trust and safety.

您会注意到一家大型社交媒体公司最近易手并实施了一套不同的信任和安全措施。

And all of a sudden, a different kind of boycott movement has all of a sudden started to work that wasn't working before that.

突然间，一种不同类型的抵制运动突然开始发挥作用，而此前这种运动是行不通的。

And another kind of boycott movement is not working as well anymore.

另一种抵制运动已经不再有效。

And so, for sure, there's an intermediation happening.

因此，可以肯定的是，存在中介作用。

Look, the stuff that's happening in the world today is being intermediated through social media, because social media is the defining media of our time.

看，当今世界上发生的事情正在通过社交媒体进行中介，因为社交媒体是我们这个时代的定义媒体。

But there are people who know how to do this and do this for a living.

但有些人知道如何做到这一点并以此为生。

No, I view very much the cancellation wave, like, this whole thing, it's an elite phenomenon, and when it appears to be a grassroots thing, it's either grassroots among the elites, which is possible because there's a fairly large number of people who are signed up for that particular crusade, but there's also a lot of astroturfing that's taking place inside that.

不，我非常看重取消浪潮，就像整个事情一样，这是一个精英现象，当它看起来是一个草根现象时，它要么是精英中的草根，这是可能的，因为有相当多的人报名参加了那个特定的十字军东征，但其中也发生了很多阿斯特草根运动。

The question is, okay, at what point does the population at large get pulled into this?

问题是，好吧，一般人在什么时候会被卷入其中？

And maybe there are movements, certain points in time where they do get pulled in, and then maybe later they get disillusioned.

也许有一些运动，在某些时间点他们确实被吸引了，然后也许后来他们的幻想破灭了。

And so then there's some question there.

那么这里就有一些问题了。

And then there's another question of like, well, if the population at large is going to decide what these movements are, are they going to be the same movements that the elites want?

然后还有另一个问题，如果广大民众要决定这些运动是什么，它们是否会是精英们想要的运动？

And how are the elites going to react when the population actually fully expresses itself?

当民众真正充分表达自己的意见时，精英们将如何反应？

Like I said, there's a feedback loop between these where the more extreme the elites get, they tend to push the population to more extreme views on the other side and vice versa.

就像我说的，这些之间存在一个反馈循环，精英越极端，他们往往会推动另一方民众采取更极端的观点，反之亦然。

So it ping pongs back and forth.

所以它来回乒乓球。

And so, yeah, this is our world.

所以，是的，这就是我们的世界。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, this explains a lot.

Andrew Huberman：是的，这解释了很多。

Marc Andreessen: I want to make sure that Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, a bunch of these guys have done a lot of work.

马克·安德森：我想确保谢伦伯格、马特·泰比等人做了很多工作。

If you just look into what's called the misinformation industrial complex, you'll find a network of money and power that is really quite amazing.

如果你仔细研究一下所谓的错误信息产业综合体，你就会发现一个非常惊人的金钱和权力网络。

Andrew Huberman: I've seen more and more Shellenberger showing up.

Andrew Huberman：我看到越来越多的谢伦伯格出现。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

And he's just, look, he's just on this stuff.

他只是，看，他只是在做这些事情。

He, and just, they're literally just like tracking money.

他，他们实际上就像追踪金钱一样。

It's very clear how the money flows, including a remarkable amount of money out of the government, which is, of course, in theory, very concerning.

资金的流向非常清楚，其中包括大量资金从政府流出，这在理论上当然是非常令人担忧的。

Andrew Huberman: Very interesting.

安德鲁·休伯曼：非常有趣。

Marc Andreessen: The government should not be funding programs that take away people's constitutional rights.

马克·安德森：政府不应该资助剥夺人们宪法权利的项目。

And yet somehow that is what's been happening.

但不知何故，这就是正在发生的事情。

Andrew Huberman: Very interesting.

安德鲁·休伯曼：非常有趣。

I want to make sure that I hear your ideas about why the decline in confidence in institutions is not necessarily problematic.

我想确保我听到了你们关于为什么对机构信心下降不一定有问题的想法。

Is this going to be a total destruction, burning down of the forest that will lead to new life?

这是否会是一场彻底的破坏，烧毁森林，从而带来新的生命？

Is that your view?

这是你的看法吗？

Marc Andreessen: Well, so this is the thing.

马克·安德森：嗯，事情就是这样。

And look, there's a question if you're, there's a couple of questions in here, which is like, how bad is it really?

听着，有一个问题，如果你是，这里有几个问题，就像，情况到底有多糟糕？

How bad are they?

他们有多糟糕？

Right.

正确的。

And I think they're pretty bad.

我认为他们很糟糕。

A lot of them are actually pretty bad.

其中很多实际上都很糟糕。

So that's one big question.

这是一个大问题。

And then, yeah, look, the other question is like, okay, if the institution has gone bad or a group of elites have gone bad, it's this wonderful word, reform, right?

然后，是的，看，另一个问题是，好吧，如果这个机构变坏了，或者一群精英变坏了，改革这个词真是太棒了，对吧？

Can they be reformed?

他们可以改革吗？

And everybody always wants to reform everything, and yet somehow nothing ever quite ever gets reformed.

每个人总是想改革一切，但不知何故，什么都没有得到改革。

And so people are trying to reform housing policy in the Bay Area for decades, and we're not building.

因此，几十年来人们一直在试图改革湾区的住房政策，但我们却没有进行建设。

We're building fewer houses than ever before.

我们建造的房屋比以往任何时候都少。

So somehow reform movements seem to lead to just more bad stuff.

因此，不知何故，改革运动似乎只会导致更多糟糕的事情。

But anyway, yeah.

但无论如何，是的。

So if you have an existing institution, can it be reformed?

那么如果现有的机构可以改革吗？

Can it be fixed from the inside?

可以从里面固定吗？

What's happened in universities?

大学里发生了什么？

There are professors at Stanford, as an example, who very much think that they can fix Stanford.

例如，斯坦福大学的一些教授非常认为他们可以修复斯坦福大学。

Like, I don't know what you think.

比如说，我不知道你怎么想。

It doesn't seem like it's going in productive directions right now.

目前看来它并没有朝着富有成效的方向发展。

Andrew Huberman: Well, I mean, there are many things about Stanford that function extremely well.

安德鲁·休伯曼：嗯，我的意思是，斯坦福大学有很多东西运作得非常好。

It's a big institution.

这是一个大机构。

It's certainly got its issues like any other place.

和其他地方一样，它肯定也有问题。

They're also my employer, Marc's giving me some interesting looks.

他们也是我的雇主，马克用有趣的眼神看着我。

He wants me to get a little more vocal.

他希望我能多发声一点。

Marc Andreessen: I didn't mean to put you on the spot.

马克·安德森：我并不是故意让你难堪的。

Yeah.

是的。

Andrew Huberman: I mean, one of the things about being a researcher at a big institution like Stanford is, well, first of all, it meets the criteria that you described before.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：我的意思是，作为斯坦福大学这样的大机构的研究员，首先，它符合你之前描述的标准。

You know, you look to the left, you look to the right or anywhere above or below you, and you have excellence.

你知道，你向左看，向右看，或者在你上方或下方的任何地方，你都会表现出色。

Right?

正确的？

I mean, I've got a Nobel Prize winner below me whose daddy also won a Nobel Prize, and his scientific offspring is likely to win.

我的意思是，我下面有一位诺贝尔奖获得者，他的父亲也获得了诺贝尔奖，他的科学后代很可能获奖。

I mean, it inspires you to do bigger things than one ordinarily would, no matter what.

我的意思是，无论如何，它都会激励你去做比平常更伟大的事情。

So there's that, and that's great.

就是这样，那就太好了。

And that persists.

这种情况仍然存在。

There's all the bureaucratic red tape about trying to get things done and how to implement decisions is very hard, and there are a lot of reasons for that.

试图把事情做好的所有官僚主义繁文缛节以及如何实施决策都非常困难，其中有很多原因。

And then, of course, there are the things that many people are aware of.

当然，还有很多人都知道的事情。

There are public accusations about people in positions of great leadership, and that's getting played out.

人们对担任重要领导职务的人提出了公开指控，而这种指控正在得到证实。

And the whole thing becomes kind of overwhelming and a little bit opaque when you're just trying to run your lab or live your life.

当你只是想经营你的实验室或过你的生活时，整个事情变得有点势不可挡，有点不透明。

And so I think one of the reasons for this lack of reform that you're referring to is because there's no position of reformer, right?

所以我认为你所指的缺乏改革的原因之一是因为没有改革者的立场，对吧？

So deans are dealing with a lot of issues.

所以院长们正在处理很多问题。

Provosts are dealing with a lot of issues.

教务长正在处理很多问题。

Presidents are dealing with a lot of issues, and then some, in some cases.

总统们正在处理很多问题，在某些情况下还需要处理一些问题。

And so we don't have a dedicated role of reformer, someone to go in and say, listen, there's just a lot of fat on this and we need to trim it or we need to create this or do that.

因此，我们没有专门的改革者角色，没有人进去说，听着，这上面有很多脂肪，我们需要修剪它，或者我们需要创造这个或做那个。

There just isn't a system to do that.

只是没有一个系统可以做到这一点。

And that's, I think in part, because universities are built on old systems, and it's like the New York subway.

我认为部分原因是大学是建立在旧系统之上的，就像纽约地铁一样。

It's amazing it still works as well as it does, and yet it's got a ton of problems also.

令人惊奇的是它仍然工作得很好，但也存在很多问题。

Marc Andreessen: So the point, we could debate the university specifically, but the point is like, look, if you do think institutions are going bad, and then you have to make it number one.

马克·安德森：所以，重点是，我们可以具体讨论大学，但重点是，看，如果你确实认为机构正在恶化，那么你必须将其列为第一。

You have to figure out if you think institutions are going bad.

你必须弄清楚你是否认为机构正在变坏。

The population largely does think that at the very least, the people who run institutions ought to really think hard about what that means.

大多数人确实认为，至少，管理机构的人应该认真思考这意味着什么。

Andrew Huberman: But people still strive to go to these places.

Andrew Huberman：但是人们仍然努力去这些地方。

And I still hear from people who, for instance, did not go to college, are talking about how a university degree is useless.

例如，我仍然听到那些没有上过大学的人谈论大学学位是如何毫无用处的。

They'll tell you how proud they are that their son or daughter is going to Stanford or is going to UCLA or is going to Urbana-Champaign.

他们会告诉你，他们为自己的儿子或女儿要去斯坦福大学、加州大学洛杉矶分校或厄巴纳-香槟分校而感到多么自豪。

I mean, it's almost like, to me, that's always the most shocking contradiction, is like, these institutions don't matter.

我的意思是，对我来说，这总是最令人震惊的矛盾，就像这些机构并不重要。

But then when people want to hold up a card that says why their kid is great, it's not about how many pushups they can do or that they started their own business.

但当人们想要举起一张卡片来说明为什么他们的孩子很棒时，这并不是关于他们能做多少俯卧撑或者他们开始​​了自己的事业。

Most of the time it's they're going to this university.

大多数时候他们都会去这所大学。

And I think, well, what's going on here?

我想，好吧，这是怎么回事？

Marc Andreessen: So do you think the median voter in the United States can have their kid go to Stanford?

马克·安德森：那么你认为美国的中间选民可以让他们的孩子去斯坦福大学吗？

Andrew Huberman: No.

安德鲁·休伯曼：不。

Marc Andreessen: Do you think the median voter in the United States could have their kid admitted to Stanford, even with a perfect SAT?

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：你认为美国的中间选民能让他们的孩子进入斯坦福大学，即使 SAT 成绩很完美吗？

Andrew Huberman: No, no. In this day and age, the competition is so fierce that it requires more.

安德鲁·休伯曼：不，不。在当今这个时代，竞争如此激烈，对它的要求也越来越高。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

So first of all, again, we're dealing here.

首先，我们再次在这里进行交易。

Yes.

是的。

We're dealing with a small number of very elite institutions.

我们正在与少数非常精英的机构打交道。

People may admire them or not.

人们可能钦佩他们，也可能不钦佩他们。

Most people have no connectivity to them whatsoever.

大多数人与他们没有任何联系。

In the statistics, in the polling, universities are not doing well.

在统计数据和民意调查中，大学的表现并不好。

The population at large, yeah, they may have fantasies about their kid going to Stanford, but the reality of it is they have a very collapsing view of these institutions.

是的，大多数人可能幻想自己的孩子能去斯坦福大学，但现实是他们对这些机构的看法非常崩溃。

So anyway, this actually goes straight to the question of alternatives then, right?

无论如何，这实际上直接涉及替代方案的问题，对吗？

Which is like, okay, if you believe that there's collapsing faith in the institutions, if you believe that it is merited, at least in some ways, if you believe that reform is effectively impossible, then you are faced...

这就像，好吧，如果你相信对机构的信心正在崩溃，如果你相信这是值得的，至少在某些方面，如果你相信改革实际上是不可能的，那么你将面临......

We could debate each of those, but the population at large seems to believe a lot of that.

我们可以对每一个都进行辩论，但大多数人似乎都相信这一点。

Then there's a question of like, okay, can it be replaced?

那么就有一个问题，好吧，可以更换吗？

And if so, are you better off replacing these things basically while the old things still exist?

如果是这样，在旧东西仍然存在的情况下，你是否最好基本上更换这些东西？

Or do you actually need to basically clear the field to be able to have the new thing exist?

或者你真的需要基本上清理这个领域才能让新事物存在吗？

The universities are a great case study of this because of how student loans work, right?

由于学生贷款的运作方式，大学是一个很好的研究案例，对吧？

And the way student loans work is to be an actual competitive university and compete, you need to have access to federal student lending.

学生贷款的运作方式是成为一所真正具有竞争力的大学并参与竞争，您需要获得联邦学生贷款。

Because if you don't, everybody has to pay out of pocket.

因为如果你不这样做，每个人都必须自掏腰包。

And it's completely out of reach for anybody other than a certain class of either extremely rich or foreign students.

除了某个极其富有的阶层或外国学生之外，这对任何人来说都是完全遥不可及的。

So you need access to a federal student loan facility.

因此，您需要获得联邦学生贷款设施。

To get access to a federal student loan facility, you need to be an accredited university.

要获得联邦学生贷款设施，您需要是一所经过认可的大学。

Guess who runs the accreditation council?

猜猜谁是认证委员会的负责人？

Andrew Huberman: I don't know.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我不知道。

Marc Andreessen: The existing universities, right?

Marc Andreessen：现有的大学，对吧？

So it's a self-laundering machine.

所以它是一个自动清洗机。

Like they decide who the new universities are.

就像他们决定新大学是谁一样。

Guess how many new universities get accredited each year to be able...

猜猜每年有多少新大学获得认证，能够......

Andrew Huberman: Zero.

安德鲁·休伯曼：零。

Marc Andreessen: Zero, right?

马克·安德森：零，对吗？

And so as long as that system is in place, and as long as they have the government wired the way that they do, and as long as they control who gets access to federal student loan funding, of course there's not going to be any competition.

因此，只要该系统到位，只要政府按照他们的方式进行连接，只要他们控制谁可以获得联邦学生贷款资金，当然就不会有任何竞争。

Of course there can't be a new institution that's going to be able to get to scale.

当然，不可能有一个能够扩大规模的新机构。

It's not, not possible.

这不可能，不可能。

And so if you actually wanted to create a new system that was better in, you know, I would argue dozens or hundreds of ways, it could obviously be better if you were starting it today.

因此，如果你真的想创建一个在方面更好的新系统，我会认为有数十种或数百种方法，那么如果你今天就开始它显然会更好。

It probably can't be done as long as the existing institutions are actually intact.

只要现有机构实际上完好无损，这可能就无法完成。

And this is my counter to Martin, which is like, yeah, look, if we're going to tear down the old, there may be a period of disruption before we get to the new, but we're never going to get to the new if we don't tear down the old.

这是我对马丁的反驳，就像，是的，看，如果我们要推倒旧的，在我们进入新的之前可能会有一段时间的中断，但如果我们不推倒旧的，我们永远不会达到新的。

Andrew Huberman: When you say counter to Martin, you're talking about the author of "The Revolt of the Public"?

安德鲁·休伯曼：当你说反对马丁时，你指的是《公众的反抗》的作者吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, Martin Gurri.

马克·安德森：是的，马丁·古里。

What Martin Gurri says is like, look, he said basically as follows, the elites deserve contempt, but the only thing worse than these elites that deserve contempt would be no elites at all.

马丁·古里（Martin Gurri）所说的就像是，你看，他基本上是这样说的，精英应该受到蔑视，但唯一比这些值得蔑视的精英更糟糕的是根本就不是精英。

And he basically says on the other side of the destruction of the elites and the institutions is nihilism.

他基本上说，破坏精英和机构的另一面是虚无主义。

You're basically left with nothing.

你基本上一无所有。

And by the way, there is a nihilistic streak.

顺便说一下，这里有一种虚无主义倾向。

I mean, there's a nihilistic streak in the culture and the politics today.

我的意思是，当今的文化和政治中有一种虚无主义倾向。

There are people who basically would just say, yeah, just tear the whole system down without any particular plan for what follows.

有些人基本上只会说，是的，只需拆除整个系统即可，而对接下来的事情没有任何特定的计划。

And so I think he makes a good point and that you want to be careful that you actually have a plan on the other side that you think is actually achievable.

所以我认为他说得很好，你要小心，你实际上在另一边有一个你认为实际上可以实现的计划。

But again, the counterargument to that is if you're not willing to actually tear down the old, you're not going to get to the new.

但同样，对此的反驳是，如果你不愿意真正拆除旧的，你就不会得到新的。

Now, what's interesting, of course, is this is what happens every day in business, right?

当然，有趣的是，这就是商业中每天都会发生的事情，对吧？

So the entire way, how do you know that the capitalist system works?

那么整个过程中，你怎么知道资本主义制度是有效的呢？

The way that you know is that the old companies, when they're no longer like the best at what they do, they get torn down and then they ultimately die and they get replaced by better companies.

你知道的方式是，当老公司不再是他们所做的事情中最好的时候，他们就会被拆除，然后最终消亡，并被更好的公司取代。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, I haven't seen a Sears in a while.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，我有一段时间没见过西尔斯百货了。

Marc Andreessen: Exactly.

马克·安德森：没错。

And we know what's so interesting is we know in capitalism, in a market economy, we know that's the sign of health, that's the sign of how the system is working properly.

我们知道，有趣的是，在资本主义、市场经济中，我们知道这是健康的标志，这是系统如何正常运作的标志。

And in fact, we get actually judged by antitrust authorities in the government on that basis.

事实上，我们实际上是根据这个基础受到政府反垄断机构的评判的。

It's like the best defense against antitrust charges is, no, people are coming to kill us and they're doing a really good job of it.

这就好像针对反垄断指控的最佳辩护是，不，人们会来杀掉我们，而且他们做得非常好。

That's how we know we're doing our job.

这就是我们知道我们正在做我们的工作的方式。

And in fact, in business we are specifically, it is specifically illegal for companies in the same industry to get together and plot and conspire and plan and have things like these accreditation bureaus.

事实上，在我们的商业领域，同行业的公司聚集在一起密谋、密谋和计划并拥有像这些认证机构这样的东西是特别非法的。

If I created the equivalent in my companies of the kind of accreditation bureau that the universities have, I'd get sent straight to federal prison and a trust violation, Sherman Act.

如果我在我的公司中建立与大学相同的认证机构，我会被直接送进联邦监狱，并违反信托法，即《谢尔曼法案》。

Straight to prison.

直接进监狱。

People have been sent to prison for that.

人们因此被送进监狱。

So in the business world, we know that you want everything subject to market competition.

所以在商业世界中，我们知道你希望一切都受到市场竞争的影响。

We know that you want creative destruction.

我们知道你想要创造性的破坏。

We know that you want replacement of the old with superior new.

我们知道您希望用优质的新产品替换旧的。

It's just once we get outside of business, we're like, oh, we don't want any of that.

一旦我们不再做生意，我们就会想，哦，我们不想要这些。

We want basically stagnation and log-rolling and basically institutional, incestuous, like, entanglements and conflicts of interest as far as the eye can see, and then we're surprised by the results.

我们希望基本上是停滞和滚动，基本上是制度化的、乱伦的，就像肉眼所见的纠缠和利益冲突，然后我们对结果感到惊讶。

Andrew Huberman: So let's play it out as a bit of a thought experiment.

Andrew Huberman：所以让我们将其作为一个思想实验来进行。

So let's say that one small banding together of people who want to start a new university where there is free exchange of open ideas, where unless somebody has egregious behavior, violent behavior, truly sexually inappropriate behavior against somebody that is committing a crime, they're allowed to be there.

因此，假设有一小群人想要创办一所新大学，在那里可以自由地交流开放的思想，除非有人对犯罪者有恶劣的行为、暴力行为、真正的不恰当的性行为，否则他们就被允许在那里。

They're allowed to be a student or a faculty member or administrator.

他们可以是学生、教职人员或管理人员。

And let's just say this accreditation bureau allowed student loans for this one particular university.

假设这个认证局允许为这所特定的大学提供学生贷款。

Or let's say that there was an independent source of funding for that university such that students could just apply there.

或者假设该大学有独立的资金来源，学生可以直接申请那里。

They didn't need to be part of this elite, accredited group, which sounds very mafia-like, frankly, not necessarily violent, but certainly coercive in the way that it walls people out.

他们不需要成为这个精英的、经过认可的团体的一部分，坦率地说，这听起来很像黑手党，不一定是暴力的，但肯定是以强制的方式将人们拒之门外的。

Let's say that then there were 20 or 30 of those, or 40 of those.

假设当时有 20 个或 30 个，或者 40 个。

Do you think that over time, that model would overtake the existing model?

您认为随着时间的推移，该模型会取代现有模型吗？

Marc Andreessen: Isn't it interesting that those don't exist?

Marc Andreessen：这些并不存在，这不是很有趣吗？

Remember Sherlock Holmes, the dog that didn't bark?

还记得夏洛克·福尔摩斯，那只不叫的狗吗？

Andrew Huberman: It is interesting that they don't exist.

Andrew Huberman：有趣的是它们并不存在。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

So there's two possibilities.

所以有两种可能性。

One is like, nobody wants that, which I don't believe.

一种是，没有人想要那样，我不相信。

And then the other is like, the system is wired in a way that will just simply not allow it.

然后另一个就像，系统的连接方式根本不允许它发生。

And you did a hypothetical in which the system would allow it.

你做了一个系统允许的假设。

And my response to that is, no, of course the system won't allow that.

我对此的回答是，不，系统当然不允许这样做。

Andrew Huberman: Or the people that band together have enough money or get enough resources to say, look, we can afford to give loans to 10,000 students per year.

Andrew Huberman：或者那些联合起来的人有足够的钱或有足够的资源来说，看，我们每年有能力向 10,000 名学生提供贷款。

10,000 isn't a trivial number when thinking about the size of a university.

考虑到大学的规模，10,000 并不是一个小数字。

And most of them hopefully will graduate in four years and there'll be a turnover.

他们中的大多数人有望在四年内毕业，并且会有人员流动。

Do you think that the great future innovators would tend to orient toward that model more than they currently do toward the traditional model?

您认为未来伟大的创新者会比目前的传统模式更倾向于这种模式吗？

What I'm trying to get back to here is how do you think that the current model thwarts innovation, as well as maybe some ways that it still supports innovation?

我想回到这里的是，您认为当前的模式如何阻碍创新，以及它仍然支持创新的某些方式？

Certainly cancellation and the risk of cancellation, from the way that we framed it earlier, is going to discourage risk takers of the category of risk takers that take risk in every domain that really like to fly close to the sun and sometimes into the sun or are--

当然，从我们之前构建的方式来看，取消和取消的风险将阻止那些真正喜欢飞近太阳、有时飞入太阳或在每个领域冒险的冒险者。

Marc Andreessen: --Doing research that is just not politically palatable.

马克·安德森：——所做的研究在政治上是不可接受的。

Andrew Huberman: Right, that we can't even talk about on this podcast, probably without causing a distraction of what we're actually trying to talk about.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，我们甚至不能在这个播客上谈论这个问题，可能不会分散我们真正想要谈论的内容。

Marc Andreessen: That gives up the whole game right there.

马克·安德森：这就放弃了整场比赛。

Exactly.

确切地。

Andrew Huberman: I keep a file, and it's a written file because I'm afraid to put it into electronic form, of all the things that I'm afraid to talk about publicly because I come from a lineage of advisors where all three died young, and I figure, if nothing else, I'll die, and then I'll make it into the world and let's say five, 10 years, 20 years, and if not, I know a certainty I'm going to die at some point, and then we'll see where all those issues stand.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我保留了一份文件，这是一份书面文件，因为我害怕将其转化为电子形式，所有我害怕公开谈论的事情，因为我来自一个顾问世系，他们三人都英年早逝，我想，如果不出意外的话，我会死，然后我会进入这个世界，比如说五年、十年、二十年，如果没有，我知道我肯定会在某个时候死去，然后我们会看看所有这些问题的具体情况。

In any event--

无论如何——

Marc Andreessen: --is that list getting longer over time or shorter?

Marc Andreessen：——随着时间的推移，这个列表会变长还是变短？

Andrew Huberman: Oh, it's definitely getting longer.

Andrew Huberman：哦，它肯定变得更长了。

Marc Andreessen: Isn't that interesting?

马克·安德森：这不是很有趣吗？

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, it's getting much longer.

Andrew Huberman：是的，它变得越来越长。

I mean, there are just so many issues that I would love to explore on this podcast with experts and that I can't explore, just even if I had a panel of them, because of the way that things get soundbited and segmented out and taken out of context, it's like the whole conversation is lost.

我的意思是，有很多问题我想在这个播客上与专家一起探讨，但我无法探索，即使我有一个小组，因为事情被原声剪辑、分段和断章取义，就好像整个对话都丢失了。

And so, unfortunately, there are an immense number of equally interesting conversations that I'm excited to have, but it is a little disturbing.

因此，不幸的是，我很高兴能进行大量同样有趣的对话，但这有点令人不安。

Marc Andreessen: Do you remember Lysenkoism?

马克·安德森：你还记得李森科主义吗？

Andrew Huberman: No.

安德鲁·休伯曼：不。

Marc Andreessen: Famous in the history of the Soviet Union.

马克·安德森：在苏联历史上著名。

This is the famous thing.

这就是著名的事情了。

So there was a geneticist named Lysenko.

于是就有了一位名叫李森科的遗传学家。

Andrew Huberman: That's why it sounds familiar, but I'm not calling to--

Andrew Huberman：这就是为什么它听起来很熟悉，但我打电话不是为了--

Marc Andreessen: --Well, he was the guy who did communist genetics.

马克·安德森：——嗯，他是研究共产主义遗传学的人。

The field of genetics, the Soviets did not approve of the field of genetics because, of course, they believed in the creation of the new man and total equality, and genetics did not support that.

在遗传学领域，苏联人不赞成遗传学领域，因为他们当然相信新人类的创造和完全平等，而遗传学并不支持这一点。

And so if you were doing traditional genetics, you were going to, know, at the very least be fired, if not killed.

因此，如果你从事传统遗传学研究，你知道，即使没有被杀，至少也会被解雇。

And so this guy Lysenko stood up and said, oh, I've got Marxist genetics, right?

所以李森科这个家伙站起来说，哦，我有马克思主义遗传学，对吧？

I've got, like a whole new field of genetics that basically is politically compliant.

我已经拥有了一个全新的遗传学领域，基本上是符合政治要求的。

And then they actually implemented that in the agriculture system of the Soviet Union.

然后他们实际上在苏联的农业系统中实施了这一点。

And it's the origin of one of the big reasons that the Soviet Union actually fell, which was they ultimately couldn't feed themselves.

这也是苏联真正解体的重要原因之一，那就是他们最终无法养活自己。

Andrew Huberman: So create a new notion of biology as it relates to genetics.

Andrew Huberman：因此，创建一个与遗传学相关的新生物学概念。

Marc Andreessen: Politically correct biology, right?

马克·安德森：政治上正确的生物学，对吧？

They not only created it, they taught it, they mandated it, they required it, and then they implemented it in agriculture.

他们不仅创造了它，还教授了它，规定了它，要求它，然后在农业中实施了它。

Andrew Huberman: Interesting.

安德鲁·休伯曼：有趣。

Marc Andreessen: I never understood.

马克·安德森：我一直不明白。

There was a bunch of things in history I never understood until the last decade, and that's one of them.

历史上有很多事情我直到过去十年才理解，这就是其中之一。

Andrew Huberman: Well, I censor myself at the level of deleting certain things, but I don't contort what I do talk about.

安德鲁·休伯曼：嗯，我在删除某些内容的层面上审查自己，但我不会扭曲我所谈论的内容。

So I tend to like to play on lush, open fields.

所以我倾向于在郁郁葱葱、开阔的场地上打球。

Just makes my life a lot easier.

只是让我的生活变得更轻松。

Marc Andreessen: But this goes to the rot.

马克·安德森：但这会导致腐烂。

This goes to the rot, and I'll come back to your question, but this goes to the rot in the existing system, which is, by the way, I'm no different.

这就是问题所在，我会回到你的问题，但这会导致现有系统的问题，顺便说一句，我也没有什么不同。

I'm just like you.

我和你一样。

Like, I'm trying not to light myself on fire either.

就像，我也努力不让自己着火。

But the rot in the existing system, and by system, I mean the institutions and the elites, the rot is that the set of things that are no longer allowed.

但现有体系中的腐烂，我所说的制度，是指机构和精英，腐烂是指不再允许的一系列事情。

I mean, that list is obviously expanding over time, and that's real, historically speaking, that doesn't end in good places.

我的意思是，随着时间的推移，这个列表显然在扩大，这是真实的，从历史上看，它并没有以好的地方结束。

Andrew Huberman: Is this group of a particular generation that we can look forward to the time when they eventually die off.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我们可以期待这一代人最终消亡的那一天吗？

Marc Andreessen: It's a third of the Boomers plus the Millennials.

马克·安德森：这是婴儿潮一代加上千禧一代的三分之一。

Andrew Huberman: So, got a while.

安德鲁·休伯曼：所以，有一段时间了。

Marc Andreessen: Good news, bad news.

马克·安德森：好消息，坏消息。

Gen X is weird, right?

X世代很奇怪，对吧？

I'm Gen X.

我是 X 世代。

Gen X is weird because we kind of slipped in the middle.

X世代很奇怪，因为我们有点陷入了中间。

We were kind of the, I don't know how to describe it.

我们是这样的，我不知道如何形容。

We were the kind of nonpolitical generation kind of sandwiched between the Boomers and the Millennials.

我们是夹在婴儿潮一代和千禧一代之间的非政治一代。

Gen Z is a very, I think, open question right now which way they go.

我认为 Z 世代现在的发展方向是一个非常悬而未决的问题。

I could imagine them being actually much more intense than the Millennials on all these issues.

我可以想象他们在所有这些问题上实际上比千禧一代更加强烈。

I could also imagine them reacting to the Millennials and being far more open-minded.

我还可以想象他们对千禧一代的反应并且思想更加开放。

Andrew Huberman: We don't know which way it's going to go.

Andrew Huberman：我们不知道它会朝哪个方向发展。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, it's going to go.

马克·安德森：是的，它会消失。

It might be different groups of them.

他们可能是不同的群体。

Andrew Huberman: I'm Gen X also — I'm 47, you're...?

Andrew Huberman：我也是 X 一代 — 我 47 岁，你是……？

Marc Andreessen: Fifty two.

马克·安德森：五十二。

Andrew Huberman: So I grew up with some John Hughes films and so where the jocks and the hippies and the punks and...

安德鲁·休伯曼：我是看着约翰·休斯的一些电影长大的，那里的运动员、嬉皮士、朋克……

were all divided and they were all segmented, but then it all sort of mishmashed together a few years later.

一切都被分裂了，它们都被分割了，但几年后一切都混杂在一起了。

And I think that had a lot to do with, like you said, the sort of apolitical aspect of our generation.

正如你所说，我认为这与我们这一代人的非政治倾向有很大关系。

Marc Andreessen: The Gen X just knew the Boomers were nuts, right?

马克·安德森：X 一代就知道婴儿潮一代很疯狂，对吧？

Like, one of the great sitcoms of the era was "Family Ties," right?

就像，那个时代最伟大的情景喜剧之一是“家庭纽带”，对吧？

With the character Michael P.

角色迈克尔·P.

Keaton.

基顿。

And he was just like, this guy is just like, yeah, my Boomer hippie parents are crazy.

他就像，这家伙就像，是的，我的婴儿潮一代嬉皮父母很疯狂。

I'm just going to go into business and actually do something productive.

我只是要开始做生意，真正做一些富有成效的事情。

There was something iconic about that character in our culture.

在我们的文化中，这个角色有一些标志性的东西。

And people like me were like, yeah, obviously you go into business, you don't go into political activism.

像我这样的人就像，是的，显然你进入商业，你不会进入政治活动。

And then it's just like, man, that came whipping back around with the next generation.

然后就像，伙计，下一代又回来了。

So just to touch real quick on the university thing.

所以我想快速谈谈大学的事情。

So, look, there are people trying to do, and I'm actually going to do a thing this afternoon with the University of Austin, which is one of these.

所以，看，有人试图做，今天下午我实际上要和奥斯汀大学一起做一件事，这就是其中之一。

And so there are people trying to do new universities.

因此有人试图建立新的大学。

Like, I would say it's certainly possible.

就像，我想说这当然是可能的。

I hope they succeed.

我希望他们成功。

I'm pulling for them.

我正在为他们拉力气。

I think it'd be great.

我想那就太好了。

I think it'd be great if there were a lot more of them.

我认为如果有更多的人就太好了。

Andrew Huberman: Who founded this university?

安德鲁·休伯曼：这所大学是谁创办的？

Marc Andreessen: This is a whole group of people.

马克·安德森：这是一群人。

I don't want to freelance on that because I don't know originally who the idea was--

我不想做自由职业者，因为我不知道这个想法最初是谁——

Andrew Huberman: --University of Austin, not UT Austin.

Andrew Huberman：——奥斯汀大学，而不是德州大学奥斯汀分校。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

So this is not UT Austin.

所以这不是德州大学奥斯汀分校。

It's called the University of Austin.

它的名字叫奥斯汀大学。

Or they call it.

或者他们这么称呼它。

I think it's UATX?

我觉得是UATX？

And it's a lot of very sharp people associated with it.

有很多非常敏锐的人与之相关。

They're going to try, very much exactly like what you described.

他们会尝试，非常像你所描述的那样。

They're going to try to do a new one.

他们将尝试做一件新的事情。

I would just tell you the wall of opposition that they're up against is profound.

我只想告诉你，他们所面临的反对之墙是深远的。

And part of it is economic, which is can they ever get access to federal student lending?

其中一部分是经济方面的，即他们能否获得联邦学生贷款？

And I hope that they can, but it seems nearly inconceivable the way the system is rigged today.

我希望他们能做到，但以今天的系统操纵方式来看，这几乎是不可想象的。

And then the other is just like they already have come under, I mean, anybody who publicly associates with them who is in traditional academia immediately gets lit on fire, and there's, you know, cancellation campaigns.

然后另一个就像他们已经受到了影响一样，我的意思是，任何在传统学术界公开与他们有联系的人都会立即被点燃，并且有，你知道的，取消活动。

So they're up against a wall of social ostracism.

所以他们面临着社会排斥的围墙。

Andrew Huberman: Wow.

安德鲁·休伯曼：哇。

Marc Andreessen: They're up against a wall of press attacks.

马克·安德森：他们面临着媒体的攻击。

They're up against a wall of people just like doing the thing, pouncing on, anytime anybody says anything, they're going to try to burn the place down.

他们就像做事一样，靠着一堵人墙猛扑过去，只要有人说任何话，他们就会试图烧毁这个地方。

Andrew Huberman: This reminds me of Jerry Springer episodes and Geraldo Rivera episodes where it's like if a teen listened to Danzig or Marilyn Manson-type music or Metallica, that they were considered a devil worshiper.

安德鲁·休伯曼：这让我想起杰瑞·斯普林格和杰拉尔多·里维拉的剧集，就像一个青少年听但泽或玛丽莲·曼森类型的音乐或金属乐队一样，他们被认为是魔鬼崇拜者。

Now we just laugh, right?

现在我们只是笑，对吧？

We're like, that's crazy, right?

我们说，这太疯狂了，对吧？

People listen to music with all sorts of lyrics and ideas and looks.

人们聆听带有各种歌词、想法和外观的音乐。

That's crazy.

太疯狂了。

But there were people legitimately sent to prison.

但也有人被合法送进监狱。

I think it was a West Memphis three, right?

我认为那是西孟菲斯三人组，对吧？

These kids out in West Memphis that looked different, acted different, were accused of murders that eventually was made clear they clearly didn't commit, but they were in prison because of the music they listened to.

这些西孟菲斯的孩子看起来不同，行为不同，被指控犯有谋杀罪，最终被澄清他们显然没有犯罪，但他们因为听的音乐而入狱。

I mean, this sounds very similar to that.

我的意思是，这听起来很相似。

And I remember seeing bumperstickers, "Free the West Memphis Three!" And I thought this was some crazy thing.

我记得看到保险杠贴纸，“释放西孟菲斯三人组！”我认为这是一件疯狂的事情。

And you look into it and this isn't, it's a little bit niche, but these are real lives.

你仔细观察就会发现，这不是，这有点小众，但这些都是真实的生活。

And there was an active witch-hunt for people that looked different and acted different.

人们对那些外表和行为不同的人进行了积极的政治迫害。

And yet now we're sort of in this inverted world where on the one hand we're all told that we can express ourselves however we want, but on the other hand, you can't get a bunch of people together to take classes where they learn biology and sociology and econ in Texas.

然而现在我们正处在一个颠倒的世界里，一方面我们都被告知我们可以随心所欲地表达自己，但另一方面，你无法让一群人聚集在一起在德克萨斯州上学习生物学、社会学和经济学的课程。

Wild.

荒野。

Marc Andreessen: Yes.

马克·安德森：是的。

Well, so the simple explanation is this is Puritanism, right?

好吧，简单的解释就是这是清教主义，对吧？

So this is the original American Puritanism that just works itself out through the system in different ways at different times.

所以这就是原始的美国清教主义，它只是在不同的时间以不同的方式通过系统发挥作用。

There's a religious phenomenon in America called the Great Awakenings.

美国有一种宗教现象，称为“大觉醒”。

There will be these periods in American history where there's basically religiosity fades and then there will be this snapback effect where you'll have basically this frenzy, basically, of religion.

在美国历史上会有这样的时期，宗教信仰基本上会消失，然后就会出现这种快速恢复效应，基本上会出现宗教狂热。

In the old days, it would have been tent revivals and people speaking in tongues and all this stuff.

在过去，人们会复兴帐篷、说方言等等。

And then in the modern world, it's of the form that we're living through right now.

然后在现代世界，这就是我们现在所经历的形式。

And so, yeah, it's just basically these waves of sort of American religious, and remember, religion in our time, religious impulses in our time don't get expressed because we live in more advanced times.

所以，是的，这基本上就是美国宗教的浪潮，记住，我们这个时代的宗教，我们这个时代的宗教冲动并没有得到表达，因为我们生活在更先进的时代。

We live in scientifically informed times.

我们生活在科学知识丰富的时代。

And so religious impulses in our time don't show up as overtly religious.

因此，我们这个时代的宗教冲动并不会表现得明显是宗教性的。

They show up in a secularized form, which, of course, conveniently, is therefore not subject to the First Amendment separation of church and state.

它们以世俗化的形式出现，当然，方便的是，这种形式不受第一修正案政教分离的约束。

As long as the church is secular, there's no problem.

只要教会是世俗的，就没有问题。

But we're acting out these kind of religious scripts over and over again, and we're in the middle of another religious frenzy.

但我们一遍又一遍地表演这些宗教剧本，我们正处于另一场宗教狂热之中。

Andrew Huberman: There's a phrase that I hear a lot, and I don't necessarily believe it, but I want your thoughts on it, which is, "the pendulum always swings back."

Andrew Huberman：有一句话我经常听到，我不一定相信它，但我想听听你对它的看法，那就是“钟摆总是会向后摆动”。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, not quite.

马克·安德森：是的，不完全是。

Andrew Huberman: So that's how I feel, too, because--

安德鲁·休伯曼：我也是这么想的，因为——

Marc Andreessen: --Boy, that would be great.

马克·安德森：——天啊，那太好了。

Andrew Huberman: Take any number of things that we've talked about, and, gosh, it's so crazy the way things have gone with institutions, or it's so crazy the way things have gone with social media, or it's so crazy, fill in the blank, and people will say, well, the pendulum always swings back like it's the stock market or something.

安德鲁·休伯曼：就我们讨论过的许多事情而言，天哪，机构的发展方式太疯狂了，社交媒体的发展方式太疯狂了，或者填补空白，人们会说，好吧，钟摆总是会向后摆动，就像股票市场或其他什么东西一样。

After every crash, there'll be an eventual boom and vice versa.

每次崩溃之后，最终都会出现繁荣，反之亦然。

Marc Andreessen: By the way, that's not true either.

马克·安德森：顺便说一句，这也不是真的。

Most stock markets we have are, of course, survivorship.

当然，我们拥有的大多数股票市场都是幸存者市场。

It's all survivorship.

这都是幸存者。

Everything is survivor.

一切都是幸存者。

Everything you just said is obviously survivorship bias.

你刚才所说的一切显然都是幸存者偏差。

Right.

正确的。

So if you look globally, most stock markets over time crash and burn and never recover.

因此，如果你放眼全球，大多数股票市场都会随着时间的推移崩溃并燃烧，并且永远不会恢复。

The American stock market hasn't always recovered.

美国股市并非总能复苏。

Andrew Huberman: I was referring to the American stock market.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我指的是美国股市。

Marc Andreessen: Globally, but the reason everybody refers to the American stock market is because it's the one that doesn't do that, the other 200, or whatever, crash and burn and never recover.

Marc Andreessen：在全球范围内，但每个人都提到美国股市的原因是因为它没有做到这一点，其他 200 只股票，或者其他什么，崩溃并烧毁，永远无法恢复。

Let's go check in on the Argentina stock market right now.

我们现在去看看阿根廷股市。

I don't think it's coming back anytime soon.

我认为它不会很快回来。

Andrew Huberman: My father is Argentine and immigrated to the U.S. in the 1960s, so he would definitely agree with you.

Andrew Huberman：我父亲是阿根廷人，在 20 世纪 60 年代移民到美国，所以他肯定会同意你的观点。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

When their stocks crash, they don't come back.

当他们的股票崩盘时，他们就不会再回来了。

And then Lysenkoism, like, the Soviet Union never recovered from Lysenkoism, it never came back.

然后李森科主义，就像苏联从未从李森科主义中恢复过来，它再也没有回来。

It led to the end of the country, you know, literally.

从字面上看，它导致了国家的灭亡。

The things that took down the Soviet Union were oil and wheat.

推翻苏联的是石油和小麦。

And the wheat thing, you can trace the crisis back to Lysenkoism.

至于小麦问题，你可以将这场危机追溯到李森科主义。

No, look, pendulum swings back is true only in the cases where the pendulum swings back, everybody just conveniently forgets all the other circumstances where that doesn't happen.

不，看，钟摆向后摆动仅在钟摆向后摆动的情况下才是正确的，每个人只是方便地忘记了所有其他不会发生这种情况的情况。

One of the things people, you see this in business also, people have a really hard time confronting really bad news.

其中一件事，人们在商业中也看到了这一点，人们很难面对真正的坏消息。

I don't know if you've noticed that.

我不知道你是否注意到了这一点。

I think every doctor who's listening right now is like, yeah, no shit.

我想现在每个在听的医生都会说，是的，没什么。

But have you seen in business, there are situations, that "Star Trek," remember "Star Trek"?

但你在商业中见过，有这样的情况，“星际迷航”，还记得“星际迷航”吗？

The Kobayashi Maru simulator, right?

小林丸模拟器吧？

So the big lesson to become a "Star Trek" captain is you had to go through the simulation called the Kobayashi Maru, and the point was, there's no way to win.

因此，成为《星际迷航》队长的重要教训是，你必须经历名为“小林丸”的模拟，而重点是，没有办法获胜。

It's a no-win scenario.

这是一个双赢的局面。

And then it turned out like, Captain Kirk was the only person to ever win the scenario.

然后事实证明，柯克船长是唯一赢得该场景的人。

And the way that he did it was he went in ahead of time and hacked the simulator.

他的做法是提前侵入模拟器。

It was the only way to actually get through.

这是真正通过的唯一方法。

And then there was a debate whether to fire him or make him a captain.

然后就出现了关于是解雇他还是任命他为队长的争论。

So they made him a captain.

所以他们任命他为队长。

You know, the problem is, in real life, you do get the Kobayashi Maru on a regular basis.

你知道，问题是，在现实生活中，你确实经常得到小林丸。

Like, there are actual no-win situations that you can't work your way out of.

就像，确实有一些双赢的情况是你无法摆脱的。

And as a leader, you can't ever cop to that, right?

作为领导者，你永远无法应对这一点，对吗？

Because you have to carry things forward, and you have to look for every possible choice you can.

因为你必须推动事情向前发展，你必须寻找每一个可能的选择。

But every once in a while, you do run into a situation where it's really not recoverable.

但每隔一段时间，你就会遇到确实无法恢复的情况。

And at least I've found people just cannot cope with that.

至少我发现人们无法应对这一点。

What happens is they basically, then they basically just exclude it from their memory that it ever happened.

他们基本上会发生什么，然后他们基本上就把它从他们的记忆中排除，它曾经发生过。

Andrew Huberman: I'm glad you brought up simulators, because I want to make sure that we talk about the new and emerging landscape of AI, artificial intelligence.

Andrew Huberman：我很高兴你提到了模拟器，因为我想确保我们谈论人工智能的新兴领域。

And I could try and smooth our conversation of a moment ago with this one by creating some clever segue, but I'm not going to, except I'm going to ask, is there a possibility that AI is going to remedy some of what we're talking about?

我可以尝试通过创建一些巧妙的转折来平滑我们刚才的对话，但我不会这样做，除非我要问，人工智能是否有可能纠正我们正在谈论的一些问题？

Let's make sure that we earmark that for discussion a little bit later.

让我们确保稍后再讨论这个问题。

But first off, because some of the listeners of this podcast might not be as familiar with AI as perhaps they should be.

但首先，因为这个播客的一些听众可能并不像他们应该的那样熟悉人工智能。

We've all heard about artificial intelligence.

我们都听说过人工智能。

People hear about machine learning, etc. But it'd be great if you could define for us what AI is.

人们听说过机器学习等。但如果你能为我们定义人工智能是什么，那就太好了。

People almost immediately hear AI and think, okay, robots taking over.

人们几乎立即听到人工智能并想，好吧，机器人接管了。

I'm going to wake up, and I'm going to be strapped to the bed and my organs are going to be pulled out of me.

我会醒来，我会被绑在床上，我的器官会被从我身上拉出来。

The robots are going to be in my bank account.

机器人将存入我的银行账户。

They're going to kill all my children, and dystopia for most.

他们会杀死我所有的孩子，对大多数人来说都是反乌托邦。

Clearly, that's not the way it's going to go if you believe that machines can augment human intelligence, and human intelligence is a good thing.

显然，如果你相信机器可以增强人类智能，而人类智能是一件好事，那么事情就不会这样发展。

So tell us what AI is and where you think it can take us, both good and bad.

请告诉我们人工智能是什么，以及你认为它可以带我们去往何处，无论好坏。

Marc Andreessen: So, there was a big debate when the computer was first invented, which is in the 1930s, 1940s, people like Alan Turing and John von Neumann and these people.

Marc Andreessen：所以，当计算机第一次发明时，也就是 20 世纪 30 年代、1940 年代，像阿兰·图灵和约翰·冯·诺依曼这样的人，发生了一场大争论。

And the big debate at the time was because they knew they wanted to build computers.

当时的大争论是因为他们知道自己想要制造计算机。

They had the basic idea, and there had been, like, calculating machines before that, and there had been these looms that you basically programmed to punch cards.

他们有基本的想法，在那之前就有了计算机，还有这些织机，你基本上可以通过编程来打孔卡。

And so there was a prehistory to computers that had to do with building sort of increasingly complex calculating machines.

因此，计算机的史前史与建造日益复杂的计算机器有关。

So they were kind of on a track, but they knew they were going to be able to build, they called it a general purpose computer that could basically, you could program in the way that you program computers today.

所以他们有点走上正轨，但他们知道他们将能够建造，他们称之为通用计算机，基本上，你可以像今天的计算机编程方式一样进行编程。

But they had a big debate early on, which is, should the fundamental architecture of the computer be based on either A, like calculating machines, like cash registers and looms and other things like that, or should it be based on a model of the human brain?

但他们很早就进行了一场大辩论，那就是，计算机的基本架构应该基于A，就像计算机器、收银机、织布机之类的东西，还是应该基于人脑模型？

And they actually had this idea of computers modeled on the human brain back then, and this is this concept of so-called neural networks.

他们当时确实有这种模仿人脑的计算机的想法，这就是所谓的神经网络的概念。

And it's actually fairly astonishing from a research standpoint.

从研究的角度来看，这实际上相当令人惊讶。

The original paper on neural networks actually was published in 1943.

关于神经网络的原始论文实际上发表于 1943 年。

So they didn't have our level of neuroscience, but they actually knew about the neuron, and they actually had a theory of neurons interconnecting and synapses and information processing in the brain even back then.

所以他们没有我们的神经科学水平，但他们实际上了解神经元，甚至在那时他们实际上就有神经元互连、突触和大脑信息处理的理论。

And a lot of people at the time basically said, you know what?

当时很多人基本上都会说，你知道吗？

We should basically have the computer from the start be modeled after the human brain, because if the computer could do everything that the human brain can do, that would be the best possible general purpose computer.

我们基本上应该让计算机从一开始就模仿人脑，因为如果计算机可以做人脑可以做的所有事情，那将是最好的通用计算机。

And then you could have it do jobs, and you could have it create art, and you could have it do all kinds of things like humans can do.

然后你可以让它做工作，你可以让它创造艺术，你可以让它像人类一样做各种事情。

It turns out that didn't happen.

事实证明这并没有发生。

In our world, what happened instead was the industry went in the other direction.

在我们的世界里，行业却走向了另一个方向。

It went basically in the model of the calculating machine or the cash register.

它基本上采用计算机或收银机的模型。

And I think, practically speaking, that kind of had to be the case, because that was actually the technology that was practical at the time.

我认为，实际上，情况必须如此，因为这实际上是当时实用的技术。

But that's the path and so what we all have experiences with, up to and including the iPhone in our pocket, is computers built on that basically calculating machine model, not the human brain model.

但这就是道路，所以我们所有人所经历的，包括我们口袋里的iPhone，都是建立在基本计算机模型之上的计算机，而不是人脑模型。

And so what that means is computers, as we have come to understand them, they're basically like mathematical savants at best.

所以这意味着计算机，正如我们逐渐理解的那样，它们充其量基本上就像数学专家一样。

So they're really good at doing lots of mathematical calculations.

所以他们真的很擅长做大量的数学计算。

They're really good at executing these extremely detailed computer programs.

他们非常擅长执行这些极其详细的计算机程序。

They're hyperliteral.

他们是超文字的。

One of the things you learn early when you're a programmer is, as the human programmer, you have to get every single instruction you give the computer correct because it will do exactly what you tell it to do.

当你是一名程序员时，你早期学到的一件事是，作为人类程序员，你必须让你给计算机的每一条指令都正确，因为它会完全按照你告诉它的去做。

And bugs in computer programs are always a mistake on the part of the programmer.

计算机程序中的错误始终是程序员的错误。

Interesting.

有趣的。

You never blame the computer.

你永远不会责怪计算机。

You always blame the programmer because that's the nature of the thing that you're dealing with.

你总是责怪程序员，因为这就是你正在处理的事情的本质。

Andrew Huberman: One downscore off and the whole thing--

安德鲁·休伯曼：一分落后，整个事情——

Marc Andreessen: --Yeah, and it's the programmer's fault.

Marc Andreessen：——是的，这是程序员的错。

And if you talk to any programmer, they'll agree with this.

如果你和任何程序员交谈，他们都会同意这一点。

They'll be like, yeah, if there's a problem, it's my fault.

他们会说，是的，如果有问题，那是我的错。

I did it.

我做到了。

I can't blame the computer.

我不能责怪电脑。

The computer has no judgment.

电脑没有判断能力。

It has no ability to interpret, synthesize, develop an independent understanding of anything.

它没有能力解释、综合、发展对任何事物的独立理解。

It's literally just doing what I tell it to do step by step.

它实际上只是按照我告诉它的一步一步去做。

So for 80 years we've had this, just this very kind of hyperliteral kind of model computers.

80 年来，我们一直拥有这种超文字模型计算机。

Technically, these are what are called von Neumann machines, based after the mathematician John von Neumann.

从技术上讲，这些就是所谓的冯·诺依曼机，以数学家约翰·冯·诺依曼为基础。

They run in that way, and they've been very successful and very important, and our world has been shaped by them.

他们以这种方式运作，他们非常成功，非常重要，我们的世界也是由他们塑造的。

But there was always this other idea out there, which is, okay, how about a completely different approach, which is based much more on how the human brain operates, or at least our kind of best understanding of how the human brain operates, right?

但总是有另一种想法，那就是，好吧，一种完全不同的方法怎么样，这种方法更多地基于人脑的运作方式，或者至少是我们对人脑运作方式的最佳理解，对吗？

Because those aren't the same thing.

因为这些不是同一件事。

It basically says, okay, what if you could have a computer instead of being hyperliteral?

它基本上是说，好吧，如果你可以拥有一台计算机而不是超级文字怎么办？

What if you could have it actually be conceptual and creative and able to synthesize information and able to draw judgments and able to behave in ways that are not deterministic but are rather creative?

如果你能让它实际上具有概念性和创造性，能够综合信息，能够做出判断，能够以非确定性但相当有创造性的方式行事，会怎么样？

And the applications for this, of course, are endless.

当然，这方面的应用是无穷无尽的。

And so, for example, the self-driving car, the only way that you cannot program a computer with rules to make it a self-driving car, you have to do what Tesla and Waymo and these other companies have done.

所以，比如说自动驾驶汽车，你不能用规则对计算机进行编程使其成为自动驾驶汽车的唯一方法，你必须做特斯拉和 Waymo 以及其他公司所做的事情。

Now you have to use, right, you have to use this other architecture, and you have to basically teach them how to recognize objects in images at high speeds, basically the same way the human brain does.

现在你必须使用，对，你必须使用另一种架构，你必须基本上教他们如何高速识别图像中的物体，基本上与人脑的方式相同。

And so those are so-called neural networks running inside.

这些就是在内部运行的所谓神经网络。

Andrew Huberman: So, essentially, let the machine operate based on priors.

Andrew Huberman：所以，本质上，让机器根据先验进行操作。

We almost clipped a boulder going up this particular drive, and so therefore, this shape that previously the machine didn't recognize as a boulder, it now introduces to its catalog of boulders.

我们几乎在这个特定的驱动器上夹住了一块巨石，因此，以前机器无法识别为巨石的这种形状，现在被引入到其巨石目录中。

Is that a good example?

这是一个很好的例子吗？

Marc Andreessen: Let's even make it even starker for a self-driving car.

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：我们甚至可以让自动驾驶汽车变得更加严峻。

There's something in the road.

路上有东西。

Is it a small child or a plastic shopping bag being blown by the wind?

是小孩子还是塑料购物袋被风吹动？

Very important difference.

非常重要的区别。

If it's a shopping bag, you definitely want to go straight through it, because if you deviate off course, you're going to make a fast...

如果它是一个购物袋，你肯定想直接穿过它，因为如果你偏离路线，你就会快速...

it's the same challenge we have when we're driving.

这与我们开车时面临的挑战是一样的。

You don't want to swerve to avoid a shopping bag because you might hit something that you didn't see on the side.

您不想突然转向避开购物袋，因为您可能会撞到侧面您没有看到的东西。

But if it's a small child for sure you want to swerve, right?

但如果是个小孩子，你肯定想转弯，对吗？

But in that moment, small children come in different shapes and descriptions and are wearing different kinds of clothes.

但在那一刻，小孩子们有着不同的形状和描述，穿着不同种类的衣服。

Andrew Huberman: They might tumble onto the road the same way a bag would tumble.

安德鲁·休伯曼：它们可能会像袋子翻倒一样跌倒在路上。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, they might look like they're tumbling.

马克·安德森：是的，他们可能看起来像在翻滚。

And by the way, they might be wearing a Halloween mask.

顺便说一句，他们可能戴着万圣节面具。

Right.

正确的。

They might not have a recognizable human face.

他们可能没有一张可辨认的人脸。

It might be a kid with one leg.

可能是一个只有一条腿的孩子。

You definitely want to not hit those.

你绝对不想碰那些。

This is what basically we figured out is you can't apply the rules-based approach of a Von Neumann machine to basically real life and expect the computer to be in any way understanding or resilient, to change to basically things happening in real life.

这就是我们基本上发现的，你不能将冯·诺依曼机器基于规则的方法应用到现实生活中，并期望计算机以任何方式理解或有弹性，以改变现实生活中发生的基本事情。

And this is why there's always been such a stark divide between what the machine can do and what the human can do.

这就是为什么机器能做的事情和人类能做的事情之间总是存在如此明显的鸿沟。

And so, basically, what's happened is in the last decade, that second type of computer, the neural network-based computer, has started to actually work.

因此，基本上，在过去十年中发生的事情是，第二种类型的计算机，即基于神经网络的计算机，已经开始实际工作。

It started to work, actually, first, interestingly, in vision, recognizing objects and images, which is why the self-driving car is starting to work.

实际上，有趣的是，它首先在视觉、识别物体和图像方面开始发挥作用，这就是自动驾驶汽车开始发挥作用的原因。

Andrew Huberman: Face recognition.

安德鲁·休伯曼：人脸识别。

Marc Andreessen: Face recognition.

马克·安德森：人脸识别。

Andrew Huberman: I mean, when I started off in visual neuroscience, which is really my original home in neuroscience, the idea that a computer or a camera could do face recognition better than a human was like a very low probability event based on the technology we had at the time, based on the understanding of the face recognition cells and the fusiform gyrus.

Andrew Huberman：我的意思是，当我开始研究视觉神经科学时，这确实是我最初的神经科学领域，计算机或相机可以比人类更好地进行面部识别的想法就像一个非常低概率的事件，基于我们当时拥有的技术，基于对面部识别细胞和梭状回的理解。

Now, you would be smartest to put all your money on the machine.

现在，您最明智的做法是将所有资金都投入到机器上。

You want to find faces in airports, even with masks on and at profile versus straight on, machines can do it far better than almost all people.

你想在机场找到人脸，即使戴着口罩，从侧面看，还是直接戴口罩，机器都能比几乎所有人做得更好。

I mean, they're the super recognizers.

我的意思是，他们是超级识别者。

But even they can't match the best machines.

但即使它们也无法与最好的机器相媲美。

Now, ten years ago, what I just said was the exact reverse, right?

现在，十年前，我刚才说的恰恰相反，对吗？

Marc Andreessen: That's right, yeah.

马克·安德森：没错，是的。

So faces, handwriting, and then voice, being able to understand voice just as a user.

因此，面孔、笔迹，然后是语音，能够像用户一样理解语音。

If you use Google Docs, it has a built-in voice transcription.

如果您使用 Google 文档，它有内置的语音转录功能。

They have sort of the best industry-leading kind of voice transcription.

他们拥有行业领先的最佳语音转录方式。

If you use a voice transcription in Google Docs, it's breathtakingly good.

如果您在 Google 文档中使用语音转录，效果会非常好。

You just speak into it and it just types what you're saying.

你只需对它说话，它就会输入你所说的内容。

Andrew Huberman: Well, that's good, because in my phone, every once in a while, I'll say I need to go pick up a few things and it'll say, I need to pick up a few thongs.

Andrew Huberman：嗯，那很好，因为在我的手机中，每隔一段时间，我会说我需要去拿一些东西，它会说，我需要拿一些丁字裤。

And so Apple needs to get on board.

因此苹果需要加入进来。

Whatever the voice recognition is that Google's using--

无论谷歌使用什么语音识别——

Marc Andreessen: --Maybe it knows you better than you think.

马克·安德森：——也许它比你想象的更了解你。

Andrew Huberman: That was not the topic I was avoiding discussing.

Andrew Huberman：这不是我回避讨论的话题。

Marc Andreessen: No. So that's on the list, right?

Marc Andreessen：没有。所以这在名单上，对吧？

That's on your...

那是在你的...

Actually, there's a reason, actually, why Google's so good and Apple is not right now at that kind of thing.

事实上，谷歌如此出色而苹果目前在这方面表现不佳是有原因的。

And it actually goes to actually an ideological thing, of all things.

它实际上涉及到意识形态问题。

Apple does not permit pooling of data for any purpose, including training AI, whereas Google does.

苹果不允许出于任何目的收集数据，包括训练人工智能，而谷歌则允许。

And Apple's just like stake their brand on privacy.

苹果就像把自己的品牌押在隐私上。

And among that is sort of a pledge that they don't pool your data.

其中之一是他们不会汇集您的数据的承诺。

And so all of Apple's AI is like AI that has to happen locally on your phone.

因此，Apple 的所有人工智能都类似于必须在手机本地进行的人工智能。

Whereas Google's AI can happen in the cloud.

而谷歌的人工智能可以在云端进行。

Right?

正确的？

It can happen across pool data.

它可能发生在池数据中。

Now, by the way, some people think that that's bad because they think pooling data is bad.

顺便说一句，现在有些人认为这很糟糕，因为他们认为汇集数据很糟糕。

But that's an example of the shift that's happening in the industry right now, which is you have this separation between the people who are embracing the new way of training AIs and the people who basically, for whatever reason, are not.

但这是行业目前正在发生的转变的一个例子，即接受人工智能培训新方式的人和基本上（无论出于何种原因）不接受的人之间存在着这种分离。

Andrew Huberman: Excuse me, you say that some people think it's bad because of privacy issues or they think it's bad because of the reduced functionality of that AI.

Andrew Huberman：对不起，你说有些人认为它不好是因为隐私问题，或者他们认为它不好是因为人工智能的功能减少了。

Marc Andreessen: Oh, no. So you're definitely going to get...

马克·安德森：哦，不。所以你肯定会得到...

there's three reasons AIs have started to work.

人工智能开始发挥作用有三个原因。

One of them is just simply larger data sets, larger amounts of data.

其中之一就是更大的数据集、更大的数据量。

Specifically, the reason why objects and images are now, the reason machines are now better than humans at recognizing objects, images or recognizing faces is because modern facial-recognition AIs are trained across all photos on the internet of people.

具体来说，现在物体和图像的原因，机器现在在识别物体、图像或识别面部方面比人类更好的原因是因为现代面部识别人工智能是在人们互联网上的所有照片上进行训练的。

Billions and billions and billions of photos, right?

数十亿张照片，对吗？

Unlimited number of photos of people on the internet.

互联网上的人物照片数量不受限制。

Attempts to train facial recognition systems.

尝试训练面部识别系统。

Ten or 20 years ago, they'd be trained on thousands or tens of thousands of photos.

十年或二十年前，他们会接受数千或数万张照片的训练。

Andrew Huberman: So the input data is simply much more vast.

Andrew Huberman：所以输入数据要庞大得多。

Marc Andreessen: Much larger.

马克·安德森：大得多。

This is the reason to get to the conclusion on this.

这就是得出这个结论的原因。

This is the reason why ChatGPT works so well.

这就是 ChatGPT 如此出色的原因。

One of the reasons ChatGPT works so well is it's trained on the entire internet of text.

ChatGPT 如此出色的原因之一是它在整个文本互联网上进行了训练。

And the entire internet of text was not something that was available for you to train an AI on until it came to actually exist itself, which is new in the last basically decade.

整个文本互联网并不是你可以用来训练人工智能的东西，直到它真正存在本身，这在过去十年里是新的。

Andrew Huberman: So in the case of face recognition, I could see how having a much larger input data set would be beneficial if the goal is to recognize Marc Andreessen's face, because you are looking for signal to noise against everything else, right?

Andrew Huberman：因此，在人脸识别的情况下，如果目标是识别 Marc Andreessen 的脸，我可以看到拥有更大的输入数据集将是多么有益，因为您正在寻找针对其他所有内容的信噪比，对吗？

But in the case of ChatGPT, when you're pooling all text on the internet and you ask ChatGPT to, say, construct a paragraph about Marc Andreessen's prediction of the future of human beings over the next ten years and the likely to be most successful industries, give ChatGPT that.

但就 ChatGPT 而言，当您汇集互联网上的所有文本并要求 ChatGPT 构建一段有关 Marc Andreessen 对未来十年人类未来以及可能成为最成功行业的预测的段落时，请将其提供给 ChatGPT。

If it's pooling across all text, how does it know what is authentically Marc Andreessen's text?

如果它汇集所有文本，它如何知道什么是真正的马克·安德森的文本？

Because in the case of face recognition, you've got a standard to work from a verified image versus everything else.

因为在人脸识别的情况下，你有一个标准可以根据经过验证的图像而不是其他任何东西来工作。

In the case of text, you have to make sure that what you're starting with is verified text from your mouth, which makes sense if it's coming from video.

就文本而言，您必须确保开始的内容是经过验证的来自您口中的文本，如果它来自视频，则这是有意义的。

But then if that video is deep-faked, all of a sudden, what's true?

但如果该视频突然被深度伪造，那么真实的又是什么呢？

Your valid Marc Andreessen is of question.

你的有效马克·安德森有问题。

And then everything ChatGPT is producing, that is then of question.

然后 ChatGPT 所产生的一切，那就是问题了。

Marc Andreessen: So I would say there's a before and after thing here.

Marc Andreessen：所以我想说这里有一个之前和之后的事情。

There's like a before ChatGPT and after GPT question, because the existence of GPT itself changes the answer.

这就像一个 ChatGPT 之前和 GPT 之后的问题，因为 GPT 本身的存在改变了答案。

So before ChatGPT.

所以在 ChatGPT 之前。

So the version you're using today is trained on data up till September 2021.

因此，您今天使用的版本是根据 2021 年 9 月之前的数据进行训练的。

Their cut-off with the training set.

他们与训练集的截止。

Up till September 2021, almost all text on the internet was written by a human being.

截至 2021 年 9 月，互联网上几乎所有文本都是由人类撰写的。

And then most of that was written by people under their own names.

然后大部分都是人们用自己的名字写的。

Some of it wasn't, but a lot of it was.

有些不是，但很多是。

And why do you know it's from me is because it was published in a magazine under my name, or it's a podcast transcript and it's under my name.

你为什么知道它是我写的，因为它是以我的名义在一本杂志上发表的，或者它是一个播客记录，并且是以我的名义。

And generally speaking, if you just did a search on what are things Marc Andreessen has written and said, 90% plus of that would be correct, and somebody might have written a fake parody article or something.

一般来说，如果你只是搜索一下 Marc Andreessen 所写和所说的内容，其中 90% 以上都是正确的，并且有人可能写了一篇虚假的模仿文章或其他内容。

Like that.

就这样。

But not that many people were spending that much time writing fake articles about things that I said.

但并没有多少人花那么多时间写关于我所说的事情的虚假文章。

Andrew Huberman: Right now, so many people can pretend to be you.

Andrew Huberman：现在，很多人都可以冒充你。

Marc Andreessen: Exactly right.

马克·安德森：完全正确。

And so, generally speaking, you can kind of get your arms around the idea that there's a corpus of material associated with me.

所以，一般来说，你可以接受这样一个想法：有一个与我相关的材料库。

Or by the way, same thing with you.

或者顺便说一下，你也有同样的情况。

There's a corpus of YouTube transcripts and other, your academic papers and talks you've given, and you can kind of get your hands around that.

这里有一个包含 YouTube 成绩单和其他内容、你的学术论文和演讲的语料库，你可以轻松掌握这些内容。

And that's how these systems are trained.

这就是这些系统的训练方式。

They take all that data collectively, they put it in there.

他们将所有这些数据集中起来，然后放在那里。

And that's why this works as well as it does.

这就是为什么它如此有效。

And that's why if you ask ChatGPT to speak or write like me or like you or like somebody else, it will actually generally do a really good job because it has all of our prior text in its training data.

这就是为什么如果你要求 ChatGPT 像我、你或其他人一样说话或写作，它通常会做得非常好，因为它的训练数据中包含了我们之前的所有文本。

That said, from here on out, this gets harder.

也就是说，从现在开始，这变得更加困难。

And of course, the reason this gets harder is because now we have AI that can create text, and we have AI that can create text at industrial scale.

当然，这变得更困难的原因是因为现在我们拥有可以创建文本的人工智能，并且我们拥有可以工业规模创建文本的人工智能。

Andrew Huberman: Is it watermarked as AI-generated text?

Andrew Huberman：它是否带有人工智能生成文本的水印？

Marc Andreessen: No.

马克·安德森：没有。

Andrew Huberman: How hard would it be to do that?

Andrew Huberman：这样做有多难？

Marc Andreessen: I think it's impossible.

马克·安德森：我认为这是不可能的。

I think it's impossible.

我认为这是不可能的。

There are people who are trying to do that.

有人正在尝试这样做。

This is a hot topic in the classroom.

这是课堂上的热门话题。

I was just talking to a friend who's got like a 14-year-old kid in a class, and there's like these recurring scandals.

我刚刚和一个朋友聊天，他在班上就像一个 14 岁的孩子，而且总是有这样的丑闻。

Every kid in the class is using ChatGPT to write their essays or to help them write their essays, and then the teacher is using one of, there's a tool that you can use that purports to be able to tell you whether something was written by ChatGPT.

班上的每个孩子都在使用 ChatGPT 来写论文或帮助他们写论文，然后老师正在使用其中一种工具，你可以使用它，声称能够告诉你某些东西是否是由 ChatGPT 写的。

But it's like only right like 60% of the time.

但只有 60% 的时间是正确的。

And so there was this case where the student wrote an essay where their parent sat and watched them write the essay, and then they submitted it, and this tool got the conclusion incorrect.

所以有这样的情况，学生写了一篇论文，他们的父母坐在旁边看着他们写论文，然后他们提交了论文，而这个工具得出的结论是错误的。

And then the student feels outraged because he got unfairly cheated.

然后学生因为受到不公平的欺骗而感到愤怒。

But the teacher is like, well, you're all using the tool.

但老师说，好吧，你们都在使用这个工具。

Then it turns out there's another tool that basically you feed in text, and they call it a summarizer.

然后事实证明，还有另一种工具，基本上可以输入文本，他们称之为摘要器。

But what it really is is it's a cheating mechanism to basically just shuffle the words around enough so that it sheds whatever characteristics were associated with AI.

但它实际上是一种作弊机制，基本上只是对单词进行足够的洗牌，以便它摆脱与人工智能相关的任何特征。

So, there's like an arms race going on in educational settings right now around this exact question.

因此，现在教育界正在围绕这个问题展开一场军备竞赛。

I don't think it's possible to do.

我认为这是不可能的。

There are people working on the watermarking.

有人在研究水印。

I don't think it's possible to do the watermarking.

我认为不可能加水印。

And I think it's just kind of obvious why it's not possible to do that, which is you can just read the output for yourself.

我认为为什么不可能这样做的原因很明显，那就是你可以自己阅读输出。

It's really good.

真的很好。

How are you actually going to tell the difference between that and something that a real person wrote?

您实际上如何区分它和真人写的东西之间的区别？

And then, by the way, you can also ask ChatGPT to write in different styles, right?

然后，顺便说一句，你也可以要求 ChatGPT 以不同的风格来书写，对吧？

So you can tell it, like, write in the style of a 15-year-old.

所以你可以说，就像用 15 岁孩子的风格写作一样。

You can tell it to write in the style of a nonnative English speaker.

您可以告诉它以非英语母语人士的风格写作。

Or if you're a nonnative English speaker, you can tell it to write in the style of an English speaker, native English speaker.

或者，如果您的母语不是英语，您可以告诉它以英语为母语的人的风格来写作。

And so the tool itself will help you evade.

所以这个工具本身会帮助你逃避。

I think there's a lot of people who are going to want to distinguish "real" versus fake.

我认为有很多人想要区分“真”与假。

I think those days are over.

我想那些日子已经结束了。

Andrew Huberman: Genie's out of the bottle.

安德鲁·休伯曼：精灵已经从瓶子里出来了。

Marc Andreessen: Genie is completely out of the bottle.

马克·安德森：精灵已经完全脱离了瓶子。

And by the way, I actually think this is good.

顺便说一句，我实际上认为这很好。

This doesn't map to my worldview of how we use this technology anyway, which we can come back to.

无论如何，这并不符合我对如何使用这项技术的世界观，我们可以回到这一点。

So there's that, and then there's the problem, therefore of the so-called deepfake problem.

所以这就是问题所在，也就是所谓的深度造假问题。

So then there's the problem of, like, deliberate basically manipulation.

那么就存在一个问题，比如故意操纵。

And that's like one of your many enemies, one of your increasingly long list of enemies like mine, who basically is like, wow, I know how I'm going to get him, right?

这就像你的众多敌人之一，你像我一样越来越长的敌人名单之一，他基本上就像，哇，我知道我要如何得到他，对吧？

I'm going to use it to create something that looks like a Huberman transcript and I'm going to have him say all these bad things.

我将用它来创建一些看起来像休伯曼笔录的东西，我会让他说出所有这些坏话。

Andrew Huberman: Or a video.

安德鲁·休伯曼：或者视频。

Marc Andreessen: Or a video, or a video.

马克·安德森：或者一个视频，或者一个视频。

Andrew Huberman: I mean, Joe Rogan and I were deepfaked in a video.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我的意思是，乔·罗根和我在一段视频中被深度伪造了。

I don't want to flag people to it, so I won't talk about what it was about, but where it, for all the world looked like a conversation that we were having, and we never had that specific conversation.

我不想让人们注意到它，所以我不会谈论它的内容，但它在哪里，对于整个世界来说，看起来就像我们正在进行的一场对话，而我们从未进行过那种具体的对话。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, that's right.

马克·安德森：是的，没错。

So that's going to happen for sure.

所以这肯定会发生。

So what there's going to need to be is there need to be basically registries where basically, in your case, you will submit your legitimate content into a registry under your unique cryptographic key, right.

因此，需要有一个基本上的注册表，基本上，在您的情况下，您将在您唯一的加密密钥下将合法内容提交到注册表中，对吧。

And then basically there will be a way to check against that registry to see whether that was the real thing.

然后基本上会有一种方法来检查该注册表，看看这是否是真实的。

And I think this needs to be done for sure.

我认为这确实需要完成。

For public figures, it needs to be done for politicians, it needs to be done for music.

对于公众人物，需要为政客这样做，需要为音乐这样做。

Andrew Huberman: What about taking what's already out there and being able to authenticate it or not in the same way that many times per week, I get asked, is this your account, about a direct message that somebody got on Instagram?

Andrew Huberman：如何利用已有的内容并能够以相同的方式对其进行验证或不进行验证，每周都会多次有人问我，这是你的帐户吗？关于某人在 Instagram 上收到的直接消息？

And I always tell them, look, I only have the one account, this one verified account.

我总是告诉他们，看，我只有一个帐户，这是一个经过验证的帐户。

Although now, with the advent of pay-to-play, verification makes it a little less potent as a security blanket for knowing if it's not this account, then it's not me.

尽管现在，随着付费游戏的出现，验证作为安全毯的效力有所减弱，因为它无法确定不是这个帐户，那么就不是我。

But in any case, these accounts pop up all the time pretending to be me.

但无论如何，这些账户总是冒充我。

And I'm relatively low on the scale.

而且我的等级相对较低。

Not low, but relatively low on the scale to say, like a Beyoncé, or something like that, who has hundreds of millions of followers.

不低，但可以说规模相对较低，就像碧昂丝或类似的人，拥有数亿粉丝。

So is there a system in mind where people could go in and verify text, click yes or no. This is me.

那么是否有一个系统可供人们进入并验证文本，单击“是”或“否”。这就是我。

This is not me.

这不是我。

And even there, there's the opportunity for people to fudge, to eliminate things about themselves that they don't want out there, by saying, no, that's not me.

即使在那里，人们也有机会捏造事实，通过说“不，那不是我”来消除自己不想要的东西。

I didn't actually say that.

我实际上并没有这么说。

Or create that.

或者创造那个。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, no, that's right.

马克·安德森：是的，不，没错。

Technologically, it's actually pretty straightforward.

从技术上来说，这实际上非常简单。

So the way to implement this technologically is with a public key.

因此，从技术上实现这一点的方法是使用公钥。

It's called public key cryptography, which is the basis for how cryptography information is secured in the world today.

它称为公钥密码学，是当今世界保护密码学信息安全的基础。

And so basically, the implementation form of this would be, you would pick whatever is your most trusted channel, and let's say it's your YouTube channel as an example, where just everybody just knows that it's you on your YouTube channel because you've been doing it for ten years or whatever, and it's just obvious.

基本上，这个的实现形式是，你会选择你最信任的频道，假设这是你的 YouTube 频道作为例子，每个人都知道你在你的 YouTube 频道上，因为你已经这样做了十年或其他什么，而且这是显而易见的。

And you would just publish in the About Me page on YouTube, you would just publish your public cryptographic key that's unique to you.

您只需在 YouTube 上的“关于我”页面中发布，您只需发布您独有的公共加密密钥。

Right.

正确的。

And then anytime anybody wants to check to see whether any piece of content is actually you, they go to a registry in the cloud somewhere, and they basically submit.

然后，每当有人想要检查任何内容是否确实是您时，他们都会前往云中某处的注册表，然后基本上提交。

They basically say, okay, is this him?

他们基本上会说，好吧，这是他吗？

And then they can basically see whether somebody with your public key, you had actually certified that this was something that you made.

然后他们基本上可以看到某人是否拥有您的公钥，您实际上已经证明这是您制作的东西。

Now, who runs that registry is an interesting question.

现在，谁运行该注册表是一个有趣的问题。

If that registry is run by the government, we will call that the Ministry of Truth.

如果该登记处由政府管理，我们将称之为真理部。

I think that's probably a bad idea.

我认为这可能是个坏主意。

If that registry is run by a company, we would call that basically the equivalent of, like, a credit bureau or something like that.

如果该登记处由一家公司运营，我们会称其基本上相当于信用局或类似的机构。

Maybe that's how it happens.

也许事情就是这样发生的。

The problem with that is that company now becomes hacking target number one, right, of every bad person on Earth.

问题是，该公司现在成为地球上每个坏人的头号黑客目标，对吧。

Because if anybody breaks into that company, they can fake all kinds of things.

因为如果有人闯入该公司，他们就可以伪造各种东西。

Andrew Huberman: They own the truth.

安德鲁·休伯曼：他们拥有真相。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

They own the truth.

他们拥有真理。

And by the way, insider threat, also, their employees can monkey with it.

顺便说一句，内部威胁，他们的员工也可以利用它。

So you have to really trust that company.

所以你必须真正信任那家公司。

The third way to do it is with a blockchain.

第三种方法是使用区块链。

And so this, with the crypto blockchain technology, you could have a distributed system, basically, a distributed database in the cloud that is run through a blockchain.

因此，通过加密区块链技术，您可以拥有一个分布式系统，基本上是通过区块链运行的云中的分布式数据库。

And then it implements this cryptography and this certification process.

然后它实现这个加密和这个认证过程。

Andrew Huberman: What about quantum internet?

Andrew Huberman：量子互联网怎么样？

Is that another way to encrypt these things?

这是加密这些东西的另一种方法吗？

I know most of our listeners are probably not familiar with quantum internet, but put simply, it's a way to secure communications on the internet.

我知道我们的大多数听众可能不熟悉量子互联网，但简单地说，这是一种保护互联网通信安全的方法。

Let's just leave it at that.

我们就这样吧。

It's sophisticated, and we'll probably do a whole episode about this at some point.

它很复杂，我们可能会在某个时候为此制作一整集。

But maybe you have a succinct way of describing quantum internet, but that would be better.

但也许你有一种简洁的方式来描述量子互联网，但那会更好。

And if so, please offer it up.

如果是这样，请提供。

But is quantum internet going to be one way to secure these kinds of data and resources?

但量子互联网会成为保护此类数据和资源的一种方式吗？

Marc Andreessen: Maybe in the future, years in the future?

马克·安德森：也许在未来，几年后？

We don't yet have working quantum computers in practice, so it's not currently something you could do, but maybe in a decade or two?

我们在实践中还没有可用的量子计算机，所以目前这不是你可以做的事情，但也许在一两年内？

Andrew Huberman: Tell me.

安德鲁·休伯曼：告诉我。

I'm going to take a stab at defining quantum internet in one sentence.

我将尝试用一句话来定义量子互联网。

It's a way in which if anyone were to try and peer in on a conversation on the internet, it essentially would be futile because of the way that quantum internet changes the way that the communication is happening so fast and so many times in any one conversation, essentially changing the translation or the language so fast that there's just no way to keep up with it.

通过这种方式，如果有人试图窥视互联网上的对话，本质上是徒劳的，因为量子互联网改变了沟通方式，在任何一次对话中如此快速且多次地发生，本质上改变了翻译或语言，速度如此之快，以至于根本没有办法跟上它。

Is that more or less accurate?

这或多或少准确吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, conceivably not yet, but someday.

马克·安德森：是的，可以想象还没有，但有一天。

Andrew Huberman: So, going back to AI, most people who hear about AI are afraid of AI.

Andrew Huberman：那么，回到人工智能，大多数听说人工智能的人都害怕人工智能。

Marc Andreessen: Well?

马克·安德森：嗯？

Andrew Huberman: I think most people who aren't informed--

安德鲁·休伯曼：我认为大多数不知情的人——

Marc Andreessen: --This goes back to our elites versus masses thing.

马克·安德森：——这可以追溯到我们的精英与大众的问题。

Andrew Huberman: Oh, interesting.

安德鲁·休伯曼：哦，有趣。

Well, I heard you say that, and this is from a really wonderful tweet thread that we will link in the show note captions that you put out not long ago and that I've read now several times, and that everyone really should take the time to read it.

好吧，我听到你这么说，这是来自一条非常精彩的推文，我们将在你不久前发布的节目注释标题中链接它，我现在已经读了好几遍了，每个人都应该花时间阅读它。

Probably takes about 20 minutes to read it carefully and to think about each piece, and I highly recommend it.

仔细阅读并思考每一篇文章大概需要20分钟左右，我强烈推荐它。

But you said, and I'm quoting here, "Let's address the fifth, the one thing I actually agree with, which is AI will make it easier for bad people to do bad things."

但你说，我在这里引用，“让我们解决第五个问题，我实际上同意的一件事，那就是人工智能将使坏人更容易做坏事。”

Marc Andreessen: First of all, there is a general freakout happening around AI.

Marc Andreessen：首先，人工智能周围普遍存在着异常现象。

I think it's primarily, it's one of these, again, it's an elite-driven freakout.

我认为这主要是其中之一，再次强调，这是精英驱动的疯狂行为。

I don't think the man in the street knows, cares, or feels one way or the other.

我不认为街上的人知道、关心或感受这一点。

It's just not a relevant concept, and it probably just sounds like science fiction.

这不是一个相关的概念，而且可能听起来像科幻小说。

So I think there's an elite-driven freakout that's happening right now.

所以我认为现在正在发生精英驱动的恐慌。

I think that elite-driven freakout has many aspects to it that I think are incorrect, which is not surprising.

我认为精英驱动的疯狂有很多我认为不正确的方面，这并不奇怪。

I would think that, given that I think the elites are incorrect about a lot of things, but I think they're very wrong about a number of things they're saying about AI.

我认为，鉴于我认为精英们在很多事情上都是错误的，但我认为他们对人工智能所说的很多事情都是非常错误的。

But that said, look, this is a very powerful new technology, right?

但话虽如此，你看，这是一项非常强大的新技术，对吧？

This is like a new general purpose, thinking technology.

这就像一种新的通用思维技术。

So what if machines could think?

那么如果机器能够思考呢？

And what if you could use machines that think, and what if you could have them think for you?

如果你可以使用会思考的机器，如果你可以让它们为你思考会怎么样？

There's obviously a lot of good that could come from that.

显然，这可以带来很多好处。

But also, people, look, criminals could use them to plan better crimes.

而且，犯罪分子可以利用它们来策划更好的犯罪。

Terrorists could use them to plan better terror attacks and so forth.

恐怖分子可以利用它们来策划更好的恐怖袭击等等。

And so these are going to be tools that bad people can use to do bad things, for sure.

因此，这些肯定会成为坏人可以用来做坏事的工具。

Andrew Huberman: I can think of some ways that AI could be leveraged to do fantastic things.

Andrew Huberman：我可以想到一些可以利用人工智能来做奇妙事情的方法。

Like in the realm of medicine, an AI pathologist, perhaps, can scan 10,000 slides of histology and find the one microtumor, cellular aberration, that would turn into a full-blown tumor, whereas the even mildly fatigued or well rested human pathologists, as great as they come, might miss that.

就像在医学领域一样，人工智能病理学家也许可以扫描 10,000 张组织学切片，并找到一个微肿瘤，即细胞畸变，它会变成一个成熟的肿瘤，而即使是轻微疲劳或休息良好的人类病理学家，尽管他们很出色，也可能会错过这一点。

And perhaps the best solution is for both of them to do it, and then for the human to verify what the AI has found and vice versa, right?

也许最好的解决方案是他们俩都这样做，然后由人类验证人工智能发现了什么，反之亦然，对吗？

Marc Andreessen: That's right.

马克·安德森：没错。

Andrew Huberman: And that's just one example.

Andrew Huberman：这只是一个例子。

I mean, I can come up with thousands of examples where this would be wonderful.

我的意思是，我可以举出数千个这样的例子，这会很棒。

Marc Andreessen: I'll give you another one, by the way, medicine.

马克·安德森：顺便说一句，我会给你另一种药物。

So you're talking about an analytic result, which is good and important.

所以你谈论的是一个分析结果，这是好的而且重要的。

The other is like, the machines are going to be much better at bedside manner.

另一个是，机器在床边的表现会更好。

They're going to be much better at dealing with the patient.

他们会更好地与病人打交道。

And we already know there's already been a study.

我们已经知道已经有一项研究。

There's already been a study on this.

对此已经有一项研究。

So there was already a study done on this where there was a study team that scraped thousands of medical questions off of an internet forum, and then they had real doctors answer the questions, and then they had basically GPT-4 answer the questions, and then they had another panel of doctors score the responses.

因此，已经对此进行了一项研究，其中有一个研究团队从互联网论坛上收集了数千个医学问题，然后他们让真正的医生回答问题，然后他们基本上让 GPT-4 回答问题，然后他们让另一个医生小组对答案进行评分。

So there were no patients experimented on here.

所以这里没有病人做实验。

This was a test contained within the medical world.

这是医学界的一项测试。

The judges, the panel of doctors who are the judges, scored the answers in both factual accuracy and on bedside manner, on empathy.

评委们，也就是由医生组成的评审团，根据事实的准确性和床边的态度以及同理心对答案进行评分。

And the GPT-4 was equal or better on most of the factual questions analytically already, and it's not even a specifically trained medical AI, but it was overwhelmingly better on empathy.

GPT-4 在大多数事实问题的分析上已经达到相同或更好的水平，它甚至不是经过专门训练的医疗人工智能，但它在同理心方面要好得多。

Andrew Huberman: Amazing,

安德鲁·休伯曼：太棒了，

Marc Andreessen: Right?

马克·安德森：对吗？

Do you treat patients directly in your work?

您在工作中直接治疗病人吗？

You don't?

你不这么认为吗？

Andrew Huberman: No, I don't.

安德鲁·休伯曼：不，我不知道。

We run clinical trials.

我们进行临床试验。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

Andrew Huberman: But I don't do any direct clinical work.

Andrew Huberman：但我不做任何直接的临床工作。

Marc Andreessen: I've no direct experience with this.

Marc Andreessen：我对此没有直接经验。

But from the surgeons, if you talk to surgeons or you talk to people who train surgeons, what they'll tell you is surgeons need to have an emotional remove from their patients in order to do a good job with the surgery.

但对于外科医生来说，如果你与外科医生或培训外科医生的人交谈，他们会告诉你，外科医生需要消除患者的情绪，才能做好手术。

The side effect of that, and by the way, look, it's a hell of a job to have to go in and tell somebody that they're going to die or that they have...

这样做的副作用，顺便说一句，你看，必须进去告诉某人他们将要死或者他们已经……是一项艰巨的工作。

so you're never going to recover, they're never going to walk again or whatever it is.

所以你永远不会康复，他们永远不会再走路或者无论什么。

And so there's sort of something inherent in that job where they need to keep an emotional reserve from the patient to be able to do the job.

因此，这项工作有一种固有的特点，他们需要对病人保持一定的情感储备，才能完成这项工作。

And it's expected of them as professionals.

人们对他们作为专业人士的期望。

The machine has no such limitation.

本机则无此限制。

The machine can be as sympathetic as you want it to be for as long as you want it to be.

机器可以像你想要的那样有同情心，只要你想要它有多久。

It can be infinitely sympathetic.

可以让人无限同情。

It's happy to talk to you at four in the morning.

很高兴凌晨四点能和你聊天。

It's happy to sympathize with you.

它很高兴能同情你。

And by the way, it's not just sympathizing with you in the way that, oh, it's just making up words to lie to you to make you feel good.

顺便说一句，这不仅仅是同情你，哦，这只是编造一些话来欺骗你，让你感觉良好。

It can also sympathize with you in terms of helping you through all the things that you can actually do to improve your situation.

它还可以同情你，帮助你完成所有你实际上可以做的事情来改善你的处境。

And so, boy, can you keep a patient actually on track with a physical therapy program.

所以，孩子，你能让病人真正遵循物理治疗计划吗？

Can you keep a patient on track with a nutritional program?

您能让患者遵循营养计划吗？

Can you keep a patient off of drugs or alcohol?

你能让病人远离毒品或酒精吗？

And if they have a machine medical companion that's with them all the time that they're talking to all the time, that's infinitely patient, infinitely wise, infinitely loving, and it's just going to be there all the time and it's going to be encouraging and it's going to be, you know, you did such a great job yesterday, I know you can do this again today.

如果他们有一个机器医疗伴侣一直陪伴在他们身边，一直与他们交谈，那是无限的耐心，无限的智慧，无限的爱，它会一直在那里，它会令人鼓舞，它会是，你知道，你昨天做得很好，我知道你今天可以再做一次。

Cognitive behavioral therapy is an obvious fit here.

认知行为疗法显然适合这里。

These things are going to be great at CBT and that's already starting.

这些事情在 CBT 中将会很棒，而且这已经开始了。

You can already use ChatGPT as a CBT therapist if you want.

如果您愿意，您已经可以使用 ChatGPT 作为 CBT 治疗师。

It's actually quite good at it.

它实际上非常擅长。

There's, there's a universe here that's, it goes to what you said, there's a universe here that's opening up, which is what I believe is it's partnership between man and machine.

这里有一个宇宙，正如你所说，这里有一个正在开放的宇宙，我相信这就是人与机器之间的伙伴关系。

It's a symbiotic relationship, not an adversarial relationship.

这是一种共生关系，而不是敌对关系。

And so the doctor is going to pair with the AI to do all the things that you described, but the patient is also going to pair with the AI.

因此，医生将与人工智能配对来完成您所描述的所有事情，但患者也将与人工智能配对。

And I think this partnership that's going to emerge is going to lead, among other things, to actually much better health outcomes.

我认为这种即将出现的伙伴关系将带来实际上更好的健康结果。

Andrew Huberman: I've relied for so much of my life on excellent mentors from a very young age, and still now, in order to make the best decisions possible with the information I had, and rarely were they available at four in the morning — sometimes, but not on a frequent basis.

Andrew Huberman：从很小的时候起，我就一直依赖优秀的导师，直到现在，为了利用我所掌握的信息做出最佳决策，他们很少在凌晨四点出现——有时，但不是经常。

And they fatigue like anybody else, and they have their own stuff like anybody else, baggage, events in their life, etc. What you're describing is a sort of AI coach or therapist of sorts, that hopefully would learn to identify our best self and encourage us to be our best self.

他们和其他人一样会疲劳，他们也像其他人一样有自己的东西、包袱、生活中的事件等等。你所描述的是一种人工智能教练或治疗师，希望能够学会识别我们最好的自我，并鼓励我们成为最好的自己。

And when I say best self, I don't mean that in any kind of pop psychology way.

当我说最好的自己时，我并不是以任何流行心理学的方式来表达这个意思。

I could imagine AI very easily knowing how well I slept the night before and what types of good or bad decisions I tend to make at two o'clock in the afternoon when I've only had five hours of sleep, or maybe just less REM sleep the night before.

我可以想象人工智能很容易知道我前一天晚上的睡眠质量如何，以及当我只睡了五个小时，或者前一天晚上的快速眼动睡眠时间较少时，我在下午两点倾向于做出什么类型的好或坏的决定。

It might encourage me to take a little more time to think about something.

它可能会鼓励我多花一点时间思考一些事情。

Might give me a little tap on the wrist through a device that no one else would detect to refrain from something.

可能会通过一个其他人无法检测到的设备轻轻敲击我的手腕，以阻止我做某事。

Marc Andreessen: Never going to judge you.

马克·安德森：永远不会评判你。

It's never going to be resentful.

永远不会有怨恨。

It's never going to be upset that you didn't listen to it.

你永远不会因为没有听而感到沮丧。

It's never going to go on vacation.

它永远不会去度假。

It's going to be there for you.

它会在你身边。

I think this is the way people are going to live.

我认为这就是人们的生活方式。

It's going to start with kids, and then over time it's going to be adults.

将从孩子开始，然后随着时间的推移，它会扩展到成人。

I think the way people are going to live is they're going to have a friend, therapist, companion, mentor, coach, teacher, assistant.

我认为人们的生活方式是他们会有朋友、治疗师、同伴、导师、教练、老师、助理。

Or, by the way, maybe multiple of those.

或者，顺便说一句，也许是其中的多个。

It may be that we're actually talking about six, like, different personas interacting, which is a whole 'nother possibility, but they're going to have--

也许我们实际上正在谈论六个不同的角色进行交互，这是一个完整的“另一种可能性，但他们将会——

Andrew Huberman: --A committee!

安德鲁·休伯曼：——一个委员会！

Marc Andreessen: A committee, yeah, exactly.

马克·安德森：是的，确实是一个委员会。

Actually different personas.

其实性格不同。

And maybe, by the way, when there are difficult decisions to be made in your life, maybe what you want to hear is the argument among the different personas.

顺便说一句，当你的生活中需要做出艰难的决定时，也许你想听到的是不同角色之间的争论。

And so you're just going to grow up, you're just going to have this in your life and you're going to always be able to talk to it and always be able to learn from it and always be able to help it make, it's going to be a symbiotic relationship.

所以你就会长大，你的生活中就会有这个，你将永远能够与它交谈，永远能够从中学习，永远能够帮助它建立，这将是一种共生关系。

I think it's going to be a much better way to live.

我认为这将是一种更好的生活方式。

I think people are going to get a lot out of it.

我认为人们会从中受益匪浅。

Andrew Huberman: What modalities will it include?

Andrew Huberman：它将包括哪些模式？

So I can imagine my phone has this engine in it, this AI companion, and I'm listening in headphones as I walk into work.

所以我可以想象我的手机里有这个引擎，这个人工智能伴侣，当我走进工作场所时，我正在戴着耳机听。

And it's giving me some, not just encouragement, some warnings, some thoughts that things that I might ask Marc Andreessen today that I might not have thought of, and so on.

它给了我一些，而不仅仅是鼓励，一些警告，一些我今天可能会问马克·安德森的想法，但我可能没有想到，等等。

I could also imagine it having a more human form.

我还可以想象它有一个更人性化的形态。

I could imagine it being tactile, having some haptic, so tapping to remind me so that it's not going to enter our conversation in a way that interferes or distracts you.

我可以想象它是有触觉的，有一些触觉，所以点击来提醒我，这样它就不会以干扰或分散你注意力的方式进入我们的谈话。

But I would be aware.

但我会知道的。

Oh, right.

哦，对了。

Things of that sort.

诸如此类的事情。

I mean, how many different modalities are we going to allow these AI coaches to approach us with?

我的意思是，我们将允许这些人工智能教练通过多少种不同的方式来接近我们？

And is anyone actually thinking about the hardware piece right now?

现在有人真正在考虑硬件吗？

Because I'm hearing a lot about the software piece.

因为我听说了很多有关该软件的信息。

What does the hardware piece look like?

硬件部件是什么样的？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, so this is where Silicon Valley is going to kick in.

马克·安德森：是的，这就是硅谷将发挥作用的地方。

So the entrepreneurial community is going to try all of those, right?

所以创业界将会尝试所有这些，对吧？

By the way, the big companies and startups are going to try all those.

顺便说一句，大公司和初创公司都会尝试所有这些。

And so obviously there's big companies that are working, the big companies that have talked about a variety of these, including heads up displays, AR, VR kinds of things.

显然，有一些大公司正在努力，这些大公司已经讨论了各种各样的技术，包括平视显示器、AR、VR 之类的东西。

There's lots of people doing voice.

有很多人在做语音。

Thing is, voice is a real possibility.

事实是，语音确实是可能的。

It may just be an earpiece.

它可能只是一个耳机。

There's a new startup that just unveiled a new thing where they actually project.

有一家新的初创公司刚刚推出了他们实际项目的新产品。

So you'll have like a pendant you wear on like a necklace, and it actually projects, literally, it'll project images on your hand or on the table or on the wall in front of you.

所以你会有一个像项链一样佩戴的吊坠，它实际上可以投影，从字面上看，它会将图像投影到你的手上、桌子上或你面前的墙上。

So maybe that's how it shows up.

所以也许这就是它的表现方式。

Yeah.

是的。

There are people working on so-called haptic or touch-based kinds of things.

有人致力于所谓的触觉或基于触摸的事物。

There are people working on actually picking up nerve signals, like out of your arm.

有人致力于实际采集神经信号，比如从你的手臂发出的信号。

There's some science for being able to do basically like subvocalization.

有一些科学可以让你基本上能够像默读一样进行。

So maybe you could pick up that way by bone conduction.

所以也许你可以通过骨传导来拾取这种方式。

These are all going to be tried.

这些都是要尝试的。

So that's one question is the physical form of it, and then the other question is the software version of it, which is like, okay, what's the level of abstraction that you want to deal with these things in right now?

所以，第一个问题是它的物理形式，然后另一个问题是它的软件版本，这就像，好吧，你现在想要处理这些东西的抽象级别是多少？

It's like a question/answer paradigm, so called chatbot, like, ask a question, get an answer, ask a question, get an answer.

这就像一个问题/答案范式，所谓的聊天机器人，就像问一个问题，得到一个答案，问一个问题，得到一个答案。

Well, you want that to go for sure to more of a fluid conversation.

好吧，你肯定希望谈话更加流畅。

You want it to build up more knowledge of who you are, and you don't want to have to explain yourself a second time and so forth.

您希望它能更多地了解您是谁，并且您不想再次解释自己等等。

And then you want to be able to tell it things like, well, remind me this, that, or be sure and tell me when X.

然后你希望能够告诉它一些事情，比如，提醒我这个、那个，或者确定并告诉我什么时候 X。

But then maybe over time, more and more, you want it actually deciding when it's going to talk to you, right?

但也许随着时间的推移，你越来越希望它真正决定何时与你交谈，对吧？

And when it thinks it has something to say, it says it, and otherwise it stays silent.

当它认为有话要说时，它就会说出来，否则它就会保持沉默。

Andrew Huberman: Normally, at least in my head, unless I make a concerted effort to do otherwise, I don't think in complete sentences.

安德鲁·休伯曼：通常情况下，至少在我的脑海中，除非我齐心协力去做其他事情，否则我不会用完整的句子来思考。

So presumably these machines could learn my style of fragmented internal dialogue.

所以想必这些机器可以学习我碎片化的内部对话风格。

And maybe I have an earpiece, and I'm walking in and I start hearing something, but it's some advice, etc., encouragement, discouragement.

也许我有一个耳机，当我走进去时，我开始听到一些东西，但这是一些建议等，鼓励，劝阻。

But at some point, those sounds that I hear in an earphone are very different than seeing something or hearing something in the room.

但在某些时候，我在耳机中听到的声音与在房间里看到或听到的声音非常不同。

We know this based on the neuroscience of musical perception and language perception.

我们根据音乐感知和语言感知的神经科学知道这一点。

Hearing something in your head is very different.

听到你脑海中的声音是非常不同的。

And I could imagine at some point that the AI will cross a precipice where if it has inline wiring to actually control neural activity in specific brain areas, and I don't mean very precisely, even just stimulating a little more prefrontal cortical activity, for instance, through the earpiece, a little ultrasound wave now can stimulate prefrontal cortex in a noninvasive way that's being used clinically and experimentally, that the AI could decide that I need to be a little bit more context aware.

我可以想象，在某个时刻，人工智能将跨越一个悬崖，如果它具有内联线路来实际控制特定大脑区域的神经活动，我的意思不是很精确，即使只是刺激更多的前额皮质活动，例如通过耳机，一点超声波现在可以以非侵入性的方式刺激前额皮质，这种方式正在临床和实验中使用，人工智能可以决定我需要更多的上下文感知。

This is something that is very beneficial for those listening that are trying to figure out how to navigate through life.

这对于那些试图找出如何度过人生的聆听者来说是非常有益的。

It's like, you know, the context you're in and know the catalog of behaviors and words that are appropriate for that situation and not, you know, this would go along with agreeableness, perhaps, but strategic agreeableness, right.

这就像，你知道，你所处的环境，知道适合该情况的行为和言语目录，而不是，你知道，这可能会伴随着宜人性，但战略宜人性，对吧。

Context is important.

背景很重要。

There's nothing diabolical about that.

这并没有什么可怕的。

Context is important, but I could imagine the AI recognizing we're entering a particular environment.

背景很重要，但我可以想象人工智能认识到我们正在进入一个特定的环境。

I'm now actually going to ramp up activity in prefrontal cortex a little bit in a certain way that allows you to be more situationally aware of yourself and others, which is great, unless I can't necessarily short circuit that influence, because at some point, the AI is actually then controlling my brain activity and my decision-making and my speech.

我现在实际上将以某种方式稍微增强前额皮质的活动，让你能够更加了解自己和他人的情况，这很好，除非我不一定能短路这种影响，因为在某些时候，人工智能实际上正在控制我的大脑活动、我的决策和我的演讲。

I think that's what people fear is that once we cross that precipice that we are giving up control to the artificial versions of our human intelligence.

我认为人们担心的是，一旦我们跨过悬崖，我们就会放弃对人类智能的人工版本的控制。

Marc Andreessen: And look, I think we have to decide, we collectively, and we as individuals, I think, have to decide exactly how to do that.

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：我认为我们必须做出决定，我们集体，以及我们作为个人，我认为，必须确切地决定如何做到这一点。

And this is the big thing that I believe about AI.

这就是我对人工智能的信念。

That's just a much more, I would say, practical view of the world than a lot of the panic that you hear.

我想说，这只是一种更实际的世界观，而不是你听到的许多恐慌。

It's just like, these are machines.

就像，这些都是机器。

They're able to do things that increasingly are like the things that people can do in some circumstances.

他们能够做的事情越来越像人们在某些情况下可以做的事情。

But these are machines.

但这些都是机器。

We built a machine, means we decide how to use the machines.

我们制造了一台机器，意味着我们决定如何使用机器。

When we want the machines turned on, they're turned on, we want them turned off, they're turned off.

当我们希望机器打开时，它们就打开，我们希望它们关闭时，它们就关闭。

I think that's absolutely the kind of thing that the individual person should always be in charge of.

我认为这绝对是个人应该始终负责的事情。

Andrew Huberman: Everyone was.

安德鲁·休伯曼：每个人都是。

And I have to imagine some people are still afraid of CRISPR, of gene editing.

我不得不想象有些人仍然害怕 CRISPR，害怕基因编辑。

But gene editing stands to revolutionize our treatment of all sorts of disease, you know, inserting and deleting particular genes in adulthood.

但基因编辑将彻底改变我们对各种疾病的治疗，你知道，在成年期插入和删除特定基因。

Not having to recombine in the womb.

不必在子宫里重新结合。

A new organism is an immensely powerful tool.

新的有机体是一个非常强大的工具。

And yet the Chinese scientist who did CRISPR on humans, this has been done, actually did his postdoc at Stanford with Steve Quake, then went to China, did CRISPR on babies.

然而，那位在人类身上进行 CRISPR 的中国科学家实际上已经完成了，他在斯坦福大学与 Steve Quake 一起完成了博士后工作，然后去了中国，在婴儿身上进行了 CRISPR。

Mutated something.

变异了一些东西。

I believe it was one of the HIV receptors.

我相信它是艾滋病毒受体之一。

I'm told it was with the intention of augmenting human memory.

我听说这是为了增强人类记忆。

It had very little to do, in fact, with limiting susceptibility to HIV per se, to do with the way that receptor is involved in human memory.

事实上，它与限制艾滋病毒本身的易感性无关，与受体参与人类记忆的方式无关。

The world demonized that person.

世界妖魔化了那个人。

We actually don't know what happened to them.

我们实际上不知道他们发生了什么。

Whether or not they have a laboratory now or they're sitting in jail, it's unclear.

目前还不清楚他们现在是否拥有实验室，或者他们是否正在监狱里。

But in China and elsewhere, people are doing CRISPR on humans.

但在中国和其他地方，人们正在对人类进行 CRISPR 治疗。

We know this.

我们知道这一点。

It's not legal in the U.S. and other countries, but it's happening.

这在美国和其他国家并不合法，但它正在发生。

Do you think it's a mistake for us to fear these technologies so much that we back away from them and end up 10, 20 years behind other countries that could use it for both benevolent or malevolent reasons?

你认为我们对这些技术如此恐惧，以至于放弃它们，最终落后于其他可能出于仁慈或恶意原因使用这些技术的国家 10 到 20 年，这是错误的吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, the details matter.

马克·安德森：是的，细节很重要。

So it's technology by technology.

所以这是逐个技术的技术。

But I would say there's two things you always have to think about in these questions, I think, in terms of counterfactuals and opportunity cost.

但我想说，在这些问题中，有两件事你必须始终考虑，即反事实和机会成本。

CRISPR is an interesting one.

CRISPR 是一项有趣的技术。

CRISPR manipulates the human genome.

CRISPR 操纵人类基因组。

Nature manipulates the human, like, in all kinds of ways.

大自然以各种方式操纵人类。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的。

Marc Andreessen: When you pick a spouse and you--

马克·安德森：当你选择配偶时，你——

Andrew Huberman: --Have a child with that spouse--

安德鲁·休伯曼：——与配偶生一个孩子——

Marc Andreessen: --Oh, boy--

马克·安德森：——哦，天哪——

Andrew Huberman: --You're doing genetic recombination.

安德鲁·休伯曼：——你正在进行基因重组。

Marc Andreessen: Yes, you are.

马克·安德森：是的，你是。

Quite possibly, if you're Genghis Khan, you're determining the future of humanity by those mutations.

如果你是成吉思汗，你很可能会通过这些突变来决定人类的未来。

This is the old question of, basically, this is all state of nature, state of grace, basically.

这是一个老问题，基本上，这基本上都是自然状态，恩典状态。

Is nature good?

大自然好吗？

And then therefore, artificial things are bad, which is kind of shot.

因此，人造的东西是不好的，这是一种射击。

A lot of people have ethical views like that.

很多人都有这样的道德观点。

I'm always of the view that nature is a bitch and wants us dead.

我一直认为大自然是个婊子，想让我们死。

Nature is out to get us, man.

大自然正在抓捕我们，伙计。

Nature wants to kill us, right?

大自然想要杀死我们，对吗？

Like, nature wants to evolve all kinds of horrible viruses.

就像，大自然想要进化出各种可怕的病毒。

Nature wants plagues.

大自然想要瘟疫。

Nature wants to do weather.

大自然想要做天气。

Nature wants to do all kinds of stuff.

大自然想要做各种各样的事情。

I mean, look, nature religion was the original religion, right?

我的意思是，看，自然宗教是原始宗教，对吗？

Like, that was the original thing people worshipped.

就像，那是人们最初崇拜的东西。

And the reason was because nature was the thing that was out to get you, right, before you had scientific and technological methods to be able to deal with it.

原因是因为在你拥有能够处理它的科学和技术方法之前，自然就来抓你了，对吧。

So, the idea of not doing these things, to me, is just saying, oh, we're just going to turn over the future of everything to nature.

所以，对我来说，不做这些事情的想法只是说，哦，我们只是要把一切的未来交给自然。

And I think that there's no reason to believe that that leads in a particularly good direction or that that's not a value-neutral decision.

我认为没有理由相信这会带来一个特别好的方向，或者这不是一个价值中立的决定。

And then the related thing that comes from that is always this question around what's called the precautionary principle, which shows up in all these conversations on things like CRISPR, which basically is this principle that basically says, the inventors of a new technology should be required to prove that it will not have negative effects before they roll it out.

由此产生的相关问题始终是围绕所谓预防原则的问题，该原则出现在所有有关 CRISPR 等事物的对话中，基本上就是这个原则，基本上是说，一项新技术的发明者应该被要求证明它在推出之前不会产生负面影响。

This, of course, is a very new idea.

当然，这是一个非常新的想法。

This is actually a new idea in the 1970s.

这实际上是20世纪70年代的一个新想法。

It's actually invented by the German Greens.

它实际上是德国绿党发明的。

The 1970s.

20 世纪 70 年代。

Before that, people didn't think in those terms.

在此之前，人们并没有这样思考。

People just invented things and rolled them out.

人们只是发明了一些东西并推出了它们。

And we got all of modern civilization by people inventing things and rolling them out.

我们所有的现代文明都是通过人们发明事物并推出它们而获得的。

The German Greens came up with the precautionary principle for one specific purpose.

德国绿党出于一个特定目的提出了预防原则。

I'll bet you can guess what it is.

我敢打赌你能猜到那是什么。

It was to prevent...?

是为了阻止……？

Andrew Huberman: Famine?

安德鲁·休伯曼：饥荒？

Marc Andreessen: Nuclear power.

马克·安德森：核电。

It was to shut down attempts to do civilian nuclear power.

这是为了阻止民用核电的尝试。

And if you fast forward 50 years later, you're like, wow, that was a big mistake.

如果你快进 50 年后，你会想，哇，那是一个很大的错误。

So what they said at the time was, you have to prove that nuclear reactors are not going to melt down and cause all kinds of problems.

所以他们当时说的是，你必须证明核反应堆不会熔化并导致各种问题。

And, of course, as an engineer, can you prove that will never happen?

当然，作为一名工程师，你能证明这永远不会发生吗？

You can't.

你不能。

You can't rule out things that might happen in the future.

你不能排除未来可能发生的事情。

And so that philosophy was used to stop nuclear power by the way, not just in Europe, but also in the U.S. and around much of the rest of the world.

因此，这种理念被用来阻止核电，不仅在欧洲，而且在美国和世界其他许多地方。

If you're somebody who's concerned about carbon emissions, of course, this is the worst thing that happened in the last 50 years in terms of energy.

如果你关心碳排放，当然，这是过去 50 年来能源领域发生的最糟糕的事情。

We actually have the silver bullet answer to unlimited energy with zero carbon emissions, nuclear power.

事实上，我们有解决无限能源、零碳排放的灵丹妙药，那就是核能。

We choose not to do it.

我们选择不这样做。

Not only do we choose not to do it, we're actually shutting down the plants that we have now in California.

我们不仅选择不这样做，而且实际上关闭了加州现有的工厂。

We just shut down the big plant.

我们刚刚关闭了那个大工厂。

Germany just shut down their plants.

德国刚刚关闭了他们的工厂。

Germany is in the middle of an energy war with Russia that, we are informed, is existential for the future of Europe.

德国正与俄罗斯展开一场能源战争，据我们所知，这场战争关系到欧洲的未来。

Andrew Huberman: But unless the risk of nuclear power plant meltdown has increased, and I have to imagine it's gone the other way, what is the rationale behind shutting down these plants and not expanding?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：但是，除非核电站熔毁的风险增加，而且我不得不想象情况已经相反，否则关闭这些核电站而不扩建的理由是什么？

Marc Andreessen: Because nuclear is bad.

马克·安德森：因为核电不好。

Right.

正确的。

Nuclear is icky.

核太恶心了。

Nuclear has been tagged.

核已被标记。

Andrew Huberman: It just sounds bad.

安德鲁·休伯曼：听起来很糟糕。

Nuclear.

核。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Andrew Huberman: Go nuclear.

安德鲁·休伯曼：发展核能。

Marc Andreessen: Well, so what happened?

马克·安德森：那么，发生了什么？

Andrew Huberman: We didn't shut down postal offices and you hear go postal.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：我们没有关闭邮局，你听到的是邮政。

Marc Andreessen: So what happened was, so nuclear technology arrived on planet Earth as a weapon, right?

马克·安德森：核技术作为武器来到地球，对吗？

So it arrived in the form of...

所以它以......的形式出现。

The first thing they did was in the middle of World War II.

他们做的第一件事是在第二次世界大战中期。

The first thing they did was the atomic bomb they dropped on Japan.

他们做的第一件事就是向日本投下原子弹。

And then there were all the debates that followed around nuclear weapons and disarmament.

接下来就是围绕核武器和裁军展开的所有辩论。

And there's a whole conversation to be had, by the way, about that, because there's different views you could have on that.

顺便说一句，关于这个问题还有一个完整的对话，因为你对此可能有不同的看法。

And then it was in the...

然后它就在...

Where they started to roll out civilian nuclear power.

他们在那里开始推广民用核电。

And then there were accidents.

然后发生了事故。

There was like, Three Mile Island melted down, and then Chernobyl melted down in the Soviet Union, and then even recently, Fukushima melted down.

就像，三哩岛融化了，然后苏联的切尔诺贝利融化了，甚至最近，福岛也融化了。

And so there have been meltdowns.

因此出现了崩溃。

And so I think it was a combination of it's a weapon.

所以我认为它是一种武器的组合。

It is sort of icky scientists sometimes with the ick factor, right.

这是有点讨厌的科学家，有时有讨厌的因素，对吧。

It glows green.

它发出绿光。

And by the way, it becomes like a mythical fictional thing.

顺便说一句，它变得像一个神话般的虚构事物。

And so you have all these movies of horrible supervillains powered by nuclear energy and all this stuff.

所以你就有了所有这些由核能和所有这些东西驱动的可怕超级恶棍的电影。

Andrew Huberman: Well, the intro to the Simpsons, right.

安德鲁·休伯曼：嗯，是《辛普森一家》的介绍，对吧。

Is the nuclear power plant and the three-eyed fish and all the negative implications of this nuclear power plant run by, at least in the Simpsons, idiots.

是核电站和三眼鱼以及这个核电站的所有负面影响是由白痴经营的，至少在辛普森一家中是这样。

And that is the dystopia, where people are unaware of just how bad it.

这就是反乌托邦，人们没有意识到它有多糟糕。

Marc Andreessen: Is and who owns the nuclear power plant.

马克·安德森：核电站的所有者是谁？

Right.

正确的。

This evil capitalist.

这个万恶的资本家。

Right.

正确的。

So it's connected to capitalism.

所以它与资本主义有关。

Right.

正确的。

Andrew Huberman: We're blaming Matt Groening for the demise of a particular--

安德鲁·休伯曼：我们将某个人的死亡归咎于马特·格罗宁——

Marc Andreessen: --He certainly didn't help.

马克·安德森：——他当然没有帮助。

But it's literally, this amazing thing where if you're just like, thinking.

但从字面上看，这是一件令人惊奇的事情，如果你只是想的话。

If you're just thinking rationally, scientifically, you're like, okay, we want to get rid of carbon.

如果你只是理性、科学地思考，你会想，好吧，我们想要摆脱碳。

This is the obvious way to do it.

这是显而易见的方法。

Okay, fun fact.

好吧，有趣的事实。

Richard Nixon did two things that really mattered on this.

理查德·尼克松在这方面做了两件真正重要的事情。

So one is he defined in 1971 something called Project Independence, which was to create 1000 new, state-of-the-art nuclear plants, civilian nuclear plants, in the U.S. by 1980.

因此，他在 1971 年定义了一项名为“独立计划”的项目，即到 1980 年在美国建造 1000 座新的、最先进的核电站，即民用核电站。

And to get the U.S. completely off of oil and cut the entire U.S. energy grid over to nuclear power, electricity, cut over to electric cars, the whole thing, like, detach from carbon.

为了让美国完全摆脱石油，并将整个美国能源网转向核电、电力、电动汽车，整个事情就像脱离碳一样。

You'll notice that didn't happen.

你会注意到这并没有发生。

Why did that not happen?

为什么那没有发生？

Because he also created the EPA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which then prevented that from happening.

因为他还创建了美国环保署和核管理委员会，从而阻止了这种情况的发生。

Right.

正确的。

And the Nuclear Regulatory Commission did not authorize a new nuclear plant in the U.S. for 40 years.

美国核管理委员会已有 40 年没有批准在美国建设新核电站。

Andrew Huberman: Why would he hamstring himself like that?

安德鲁·休伯曼：他为什么要那样伤自己的腿筋？

Marc Andreessen: He got distracted by Watergate and Vietnam.

马克·安德森：水门事件和越南战争让他分心了。

Andrew Huberman: I think Ellsberg just died recently, right?

安德鲁·胡伯曼：我想艾尔斯伯格最近刚刚去世，对吧？

The guy who released the Pentagon papers.

公布五角大楼文件的人​​。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Andrew Huberman: So complicated.

安德鲁·休伯曼：太复杂了。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, exactly.

马克·安德森：是的，完全正确。

It's this thing.

就是这个东西。

He left office shortly thereafter.

此后不久他就离任了。

He didn't have time to fully figure this out.

他没有时间完全弄清楚这一点。

I don't know whether he would have figured it out or know.

我不知道他是否会明白或者知道。

Look, Ford could have figured it out.

听着，福特本可以想出办法的。

Carter could have figured it out.

卡特本来可以想出办法的。

Reagan could have figured it out.

里根本来可以想出办法的。

Any of these guys could have figured it out.

这些人中的任何一个都可以想出办法。

It's like the most obvious.

这就像最明显的一样。

Knowing what we know today, it's the most obvious thing in the world.

就我们今天所知，这是世界上最明显的事情。

The Russia thing is the amazing thing.

俄罗斯的事情是一件了不起的事情。

It's like Europe is literally funding Russia's invasion of Ukraine by paying them for oil, right?

这就像欧洲实际上是通过向俄罗斯支付石油费用来资助俄罗斯入侵乌克兰，对吗？

And they can't shut off the oil because they won't cut over to nuclear, right?

他们无法关闭石油，因为他们不会切换到核能，对吗？

And then, of course, what happens?

然后，当然，会发生什么？

Okay, so then here's the other kicker of what happens, right?

好的，那么接下来会发生另外一个问题，对吧？

Which is they won't do nuclear, but they want to do renewables, right?

他们不会发展核能，但他们想做可再生能源，对吧？

Sustainable energy.

可持续能源。

And so what they do is they do solar and wind.

所以他们所做的是太阳能和风能。

Solar and wind are not reliable because it sometimes gets dark out and sometimes the wind doesn't blow.

太阳能和风能并不可靠，因为有时天会黑，有时又不刮风。

And so then what happens is they fire up the coal plants, right?

那么接下来发生的事情就是他们点燃燃煤电厂，对吧？

And so the actual consequence of the precautionary principle for the purpose it was invented is a massive spike in use of coal.

因此，出于其发明目的而采取的预防原则的实际后果是煤炭使用量的大幅增加。

Andrew Huberman: That's taking us back over 100 years.

Andrew Huberman：这让我们回到了 100 多年前。

Marc Andreessen: Yes.

马克·安德森：是的。

Correct.

正确的。

That is the consequence of the cautionary principle.

这就是谨慎原则的结果。

That's the consequence of that mentality.

这就是这种心态的结果。

And so it's a failure of a principle on its own merits for the thing it was designed.

因此，就其设计目的而言，这是一项原则的失败。

Then, you know, there's a whole movement of people who want to apply it to every new thing.

然后，你知道，人们发起了一场运动，希望将其应用到每一个新事物中。

And this is the hot topic on AI right now in Washington, which is like, oh my God, these people have to prove that this can never get used for bad things.

这是华盛顿目前关于人工智能的热门话题，就像，天哪，这些人必须证明人工智能永远不会被用来做坏事。

Andrew Huberman: Sorry, I'm hung up on this nuclear thing.

安德鲁·休伯曼：抱歉，我对核问题很着迷。

And I wonder, can it just be?

我想知道，真的可以吗？

I mean, there is something about the naming of things.

我的意思是，事物的命名是有一定道理的。

We know this in, I mean, you know, Lamarckian evolution and things like that.

我们在拉马克进化论和类似的事情中知道这一点。

These are bad words in biology.

这些都是生物学中的坏话。

But we had a guest on this podcast, Oded Rechavi, who's over in Israel, who's shown inherited traits.

但我们的播客中有一位嘉宾，奥德·雷查维 (Oded Rechavi)，他在以色列，表现出了遗传特征。

But if you talk about his Lamarckian, then it has all sorts of negative implications.

但如果你谈论他的拉马克，那么它就会产生各种负面影响。

But his discoveries have important implications for everything from inherited trauma to treatment of disease.

但他的发现对从遗传性创伤到疾病治疗的各个方面都具有重要意义。

I mean, there's all sorts of positives that await us if we are able to reframe our thinking around something that, yes, indeed, could be used for evil, but that has enormous potential and that is in agreement with nature, right?

我的意思是，如果我们能够围绕某些东西重新构建我们的思维，是的，确实可以用于邪恶，但它具有巨大的潜力并且符合​​自然，对吧？

This fundamental truth that at least to my knowledge, no one is revising in any significant way anytime soon.

至少据我所知，没有人会很快以任何重大方式修改这一基本事实。

So what if it were called something else?

那么如果它被称为其他名称又如何呢？

It could be nuclear.

它可能是核的。

It's called sustainable, right?

这就是所谓的可持续发展吧？

I mean, it's amazing how marketing can shift our perspective of robots, for instance.

我的意思是，例如，营销如何改变我们对机器人的看法是令人惊奇的。

Or anyway, I'm sure you can come up with better examples than I can, but is there a good, solid PR firm working from the nuclear side?

或者无论如何，我相信你能想出比我更好的例子，但是有没有一家在核方面工作的优秀、可靠的公关公司呢？

Marc Andreessen: Thunbergian.

马克·安德森：通伯格式。

Greta Thunberg.

格蕾塔·通伯格。

Andrew Huberman: Thunbergian.

安德鲁·休伯曼：桑伯格式。

Marc Andreessen: Thunbergian.

马克·安德森：通伯格式。

Like if she was in favor of it, which by the way, she's not.

就像她赞成那样，顺便说一句，她不赞成。

She's dead set against it.

她坚决反对。

Andrew Huberman: She said that 100%.

Andrew Huberman：她百分百这么说。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Andrew Huberman: Based on.

安德鲁·休伯曼：基于。

Marc Andreessen: Based on Thunbergian principles.

Marc Andreessen：基于桑伯格原则。

The prevailing ethic in environmentalism for 50 years is that nuclear is evil.

50 年来环保主义盛行的观念是核是邪恶的。

Like, they won't consider it.

就像，他们不会考虑它。

There are, by the way, certain environmentalists who disagree with this.

顺便说一句，有些环保主义者不同意这一点。

And so Stuart Brand is the one that's been the most public, and he has impeccable credentials in the space.

因此，斯图尔特·布兰德 (Stuart Brand) 是最受公众关注的人，他在该领域拥有无可挑剔的资历。

Andrew Huberman: And he wrote "Whole Earth Catalog".

安德鲁·休伯曼：他写了《全球目录》。

Marc Andreessen: "Whole Earth Catalog" guy.

马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）：《全球概览》的作者。

Yeah.

是的。

And he's written a whole bunch of really interesting books since.

从那以后他写了一大堆非常有趣的书。

And he wrote a recent book that goes through in detail.

他最近写了一本详细介绍的书。

He's like, yes, obviously the correct environmental thing to do is nuclear power.

他说，是的，显然正确的环保措施是核能。

And we should be implementing project independence.

我们应该实行项目独立性。

We should be building a thousand.

我们应该建造一千个。

Specifically, he didn't say this, but this is what I would say.

具体来说，他没有这么说，但我会这么说。

We should hire Charles Koch.

我们应该聘请查尔斯·科赫。

We should hire Koch Industries and they should build us a thousand nuclear power plants, and then we should give them the Presidential Medal of Freedom for saving the environment.

我们应该雇用科赫工业公司，他们应该为我们建造一千座核电站，然后我们应该授予他们拯救环境的总统自由勋章。

Andrew Huberman: And that would put us independent of our reliance on oil.

安德鲁·休伯曼：这将使我们摆脱对石油的依赖。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Then we're done with.

然后我们就完成了。

We're just, think about what happens.

我们只是，想想会发生什么。

We're done with oil, zero emissions, we're done with the Middle East.

我们已经受够了石油、零排放，我们也受够了中东。

We're done.

我们完成了。

We're done.

我们完成了。

We're not drilling on American land anymore.

我们不再在美国土地上钻探。

We're not drilling on foreign land.

我们不是在外国土地上钻探。

Like, we have no military entanglements in places where we're not despoiling Alaska.

就像，我们在不掠夺阿拉斯加的地方没有军事纠葛。

We're not, nothing.

我们什么都不是，什么都不是。

No offshore rigs, no nothing.

没有海上钻井平台，什么也没有。

We're done.

我们完成了。

And basically just you build state-of-the-art plants, engineered properly, you have them just completely contained.

基本上，只要你建造最先进的工厂，并进行适当的设计，你就可以完全控制它们。

When there's nuclear waste, you just entomb the waste in concrete.

当存在核废料时，只需将废料埋在混凝土中即可。

So it just sits there forever.

所以它就永远坐在那里。

It's just a very small footprint kind of thing.

这只是一种占地面积非常小的事情。

And you're just done.

你就完成了。

And so to me, it's like scientifically, technologically, this is just like the most obvious thing in the world.

所以对我来说，就像科学、技术上一样，这就像世界上最明显的事情。

It's a massive tell on the part of the people who claim to be pro-environment that they're not in favor of this.

对于那些自称支持环境的人来说，他们不赞成这样做，这是一个巨大的信号。

Andrew Huberman: And if I were to, say, tweet that I'm pro nuclear power because it's the more sustainable form of power, if I hypothetically did that today, what would happen to me in this.

安德鲁·休伯曼：如果我在推特上说我支持核电，因为它是更可持续的电力形式，如果我今天这样做，我会发生什么。

Marc Andreessen: You'd be a cryptofascist.

马克·安德森：你会成为一个加密法西斯主义者。

]LAUGHS] Dirty, evil, capitalist monster.

]笑]肮脏、邪恶的资本主义怪物。

How dare you?

你怎么敢？

Andrew Huberman: I'm unlikely to run that experiment.

Andrew Huberman：我不太可能进行那个实验。

I was just curious.

我只是好奇。

That was what we call a Gedankin experiment.

这就是我们所说的格丹金实验。

Marc Andreessen: Andrew, you're a terrible human being.

马克·安德森：安德鲁，你是一个可怕的人。

We were looking for evidence that you're a terrible human being, and now we know it.

我们一直在寻找证据证明你是一个可怕的人，现在我们知道了。

This is a great example of the, I gave Andrew a book on the way in here with this, my favorite new book.

这是一个很好的例子，我在来这里的路上给了安德鲁一本书，这是我最喜欢的新书。

The title of it is "When Reason Goes on Holiday," and this is a great example of it is, the people who simultaneously say they're environmentalists and say they're anti nuclear power.

它的标题是“当理性去度假时”，这就是一个很好的例子，那些同时说自己是环保主义者又说自己反对核能的人。

Like the positions just simply don't reconcile.

就像立场根本不协调一样。

But that doesn't bother them at all.

但这根本不困扰他们。

So be clear.

所以要清楚。

I predict none of this will happen.

我预测这一切都不会发生。

Andrew Huberman: Amazing.

安德鲁·休伯曼：太棒了。

I need to learn more about nuclear power.

我需要更多地了解核能。

Marc Andreessen: Long coal.

马克·安德森：长煤。

Andrew Huberman: Long coal.

安德鲁·休伯曼：长煤。

Marc Andreessen: Long coal.

马克·安德森：长煤。

Invest in coal.

投资煤炭。

Andrew Huberman: Because you think we're just going to revert?

Andrew Huberman：因为你认为我们会恢复原样？

Marc Andreessen: It's the energy source of the future.

马克·安德森：这是未来的能源。

Well, because it can't be solar and wind, because they're not reliable.

嗯，因为它不能是太阳能和风能，因为它们不可靠。

So you need something.

所以你需要一些东西。

If it's not nuclear, it's going to be either like oil, natural gas, or coal.

如果不是核能，那么它要么像石油、天然气，要么像煤炭。

Andrew Huberman: And you're unwilling to say bet on nuclear because you don't think that the sociopolitical elitist trends that are driving against nuclear are likely to dissipate anytime soon.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：你不愿意说押注于核能，因为你认为反对核能的社会政治精英主义趋势可能不会很快消散。

Marc Andreessen: Not a chance.

马克·安德森：没有机会。

I can't imagine it would be great if they did.

我无法想象如果他们这样做该多好。

But the powers that be are very locked in on this as a position.

但当权者对此的立场非常坚定。

And look, they've been saying this for 50 years, and so they'd have to reverse themselves off of a bad position they've had for 50 years.

瞧，这句话他们已经说了 50 年了，所以他们必须扭转自己 50 年来的糟糕处境。

And people really don't like to do that.

人们真的不喜欢这样做。

Andrew Huberman: One thing that's good about this and other podcasts is that young people listen and they eventually will take over.

安德鲁·休伯曼：这个播客和其他播客的好处之一是年轻人会听，并且他们最终会接管。

Marc Andreessen: And by the way, I will say also there are nuclear entrepreneurs.

马克·安德森：顺便说一句，我想说还有核企业家。

So on the point of young kids, there are a bunch of young entrepreneurs who are basically not taking no for an answer.

因此，就年幼的孩子而言，有一群年轻的企业家基本上不会接受“不”的答案。

And they're trying to develop, in particular, there's people trying to develop new, very small-form factor nuclear power plants with a variety of possible use cases.

他们正在努力开发，特别是有人试图开发具有各种可能用例的新型小型核电站。

So, look, maybe they show up with a better mousetrap and people take a second look, but we'll see.

所以，看，也许他们带着更好的捕鼠器出现，人们会再看一眼，但我们会看到的。

Andrew Huberman: Just rename it.

Andrew Huberman：重命名即可。

So, my understanding is that you think we should go all in on AI with the constraints that we discover we need in order to rein in safety and things of that sort.

所以，我的理解是，你认为我们应该全力投入人工智能，并限制我们发现我们需要的限制，以控制安全和类似的事情。

Not unlike social media, not unlike the internet.

与社交媒体不同，与互联网不同。

Marc Andreessen: Not unlike what we should have done with nuclear power.

马克·安德森：这与我们应该对核电所做的事情没有什么不同。

Andrew Huberman: And in terms of the near infinite number of ways that AI can be envisioned to harm us, how do you think we should cope with that psychologically?

Andrew Huberman：就人工智能可能以近乎无限多种方式伤害我们而言，您认为我们应该如何从心理上应对？

Because I can imagine a lot of people listening to this conversation are thinking, okay, that all sounds great, but there are just too many what-ifs that are terrible, right?

因为我可以想象很多人听了这段对话后都会想，好吧，这一切听起来都很棒，但是有太多的假设情况很糟糕，对吧？

What if the machines take over?

如果机器接管怎么办？

What if the silly example I gave earlier, but what if one day I could log into my hard-earned bank account and it's all gone?

如果我之前举的那个愚蠢的例子，但如果有一天我可以登录我辛苦赚来的银行账户，然后一切都消失了怎么办？

The AI version of myself ran off with someone else, and with all my money, my AI coach abandoned me for somebody else.

我的人工智能版本和别人私奔了，我的人工智能教练带着我所有的钱抛弃了我，去找了别人。

After it learned all the stuff that I taught it.

当它学会了我教它的所有东西之后。

It took off with somebody else stranded.

它起飞了，而其他人则被困。

And it has my bank account numbers, like this kind of thing.

它有我的银行帐号，就像这样的东西。

Marc Andreessen: You could really make this scenario horrible, right, if you kept going?

马克·安德森：如果你继续这样下去，你真的会让这个场景变得可怕，对吧？

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, well, we can throw in a benevolent example as well to counter it, but it's kind of fun to think about where the human mind goes, right?

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，我们也可以举一个仁慈的例子来反驳它，但思考人类思维的去向是很有趣的，对吧？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

So first I say we've got to separate the real problems from the fake problems.

所以首先我说我们必须区分真正的问题和假问题。

And so there's a lot.

所以有很多。

A lot of the science fiction scenarios I think are just not real.

我认为很多科幻场景都不是真实的。

And the ones that you decided as an example, like, it's.

您决定作为示例的那些，例如，它是。

That's not what is going to happen.

但这不会发生。

And I can explain why that's not what's going to happen.

我可以解释为什么这不会发生。

There's a set of fake ones, and the fake ones are the ones that just aren't, I think, technologically grounded, that aren't rational.

有一系列假的，我认为假的就是那些没有技术基础、不合理的东西。

It's the AI is going to wake up and decide to kill us all.

人工智能将会醒来并决定杀死我们所有人。

It's going to develop the kind of agency where it's going to steal our money and our spouse and everything else, our kids.

它将发展出一种机构，它将窃取我们的钱、我们的配偶和其他一切，我们的孩子。

That's not how it works.

事情不是这样的。

And then there's also all these concerns, destruction-of-society concerns.

还有所有这些担忧，对社会破坏的担忧。

And this is misinformation, hate speech, deepfakes, like all that stuff, which I don't think is actually a real problem.

这是错误信息、仇恨言论、深度造假，就像所有这些东西，我认为这实际上不是一个真正的问题。

And then people have a bunch of economic concerns around what's going to take all the jobs and all those kinds of things.

然后，人们对经济问题产生一系列担忧，担心什么会夺走所有工作岗位和诸如此类的事情。

We could talk about that.

我们可以谈谈这个。

I don't think that's actually the thing that happens.

我不认为这实际上是发生的事情。

But then there are two actual real concerns that I actually do very much agree with.

但有两个真正令人担忧的问题我确实非常同意。

And one of them is what you said, which is bad people doing bad things.

其中之一就是你说的，就是坏人做坏事。

And there's a whole set of things to be done inside there.

里面有很多事情要做。

The big one is we should use AI to build defenses against all the bad things, right?

最重要的是我们应该使用人工智能来防御所有坏事，对吗？

And so, for example, there's a concern AI is going to make it easier for bad people to build pathogens, design pathogens in labs, which bad scientists can do today, but this is going to make it easier, easier to do.

例如，有人担心人工智能会让坏人更容易在实验室中制造病原体、设计病原体，而坏科学家今天就可以做到这一点，但这将使事情变得更容易、更容易做到。

Well, obviously, we should have the equivalent of an Operation Warpspeed, operating in perpetuity anyway.

嗯，显然，我们应该有相当于曲速行动的东西，无论如何都要永久运作。

But then we should use AI to build much better biodefenses.

但我们应该使用人工智能来建立更好的生物防御。

And we should be using AI today to design, like, for example, full-spectrum vaccines against every possible form of pathogen.

今天我们应该使用人工智能来设计，例如针对每种可能形式的病原体的全谱疫苗。

So defensive mechanism hacking, you can use AI to build better defense tools, right?

那么防御机制黑客，你可以利用AI来构建更好的防御工具，对吗？

And so you should have a whole new kind of security suite wrapped around you, wrapped around your data, wrapped around your money, where you're having AI repel attacks, disinformation, hate speech, deepfakes, all that stuff.

因此，你应该拥有一种全新的安全套件，围绕着你、围绕着你的数据、围绕着你的钱，让人工智能抵御攻击、虚假信息、仇恨言论、深度造假等等。

You should have an AI filter when you use the internet, where you shouldn't have to figure out whether it's really me or whether it's a made-up thing.

当你使用互联网时，你应该有一个人工智能过滤器，你不应该弄清楚这是真的我还是一个编造的东西。

You should have an AI assistant that's doing that for you.

你应该有一个人工智能助手来为你做这件事。

Andrew Huberman: Oh, yeah.

安德鲁·休伯曼：哦，是的。

I mean, these little banners and cloaks that you see on social media like "this has been deemed misinformation." If you're me, you always click because you're like, what's behind the scrim?

我的意思是，你在社交媒体上看到的这些小横幅和斗篷，比如“这已被视为错误信息”。如果你是我，你总是会点击，因为你会想，稀松布背后是什么？

I don't always look at "this image is gruesome" type thing.

我并不总是看“这张照片太可怕了”之类的东西。

Sometimes I just pass on that.

有时我只是传递这一点。

But if it's something that seems debatable, of course you look well.

但如果这件事看起来有争议，那你当然看起来不错。

Marc Andreessen: And you should have an AI assistant with you when you're on the internet.

Marc Andreessen：当你上网时，你应该有一个人工智能助手陪伴你。

And you should be able to tell that AI assistant what you want, right?

你应该能够告诉人工智能助手你想要什么，对吧？

So, yes, I want the full experience.

所以，是的，我想要完整的体验。

Show me everything.

让我看看一切。

I want it from a particular point of view.

我想要从特定的角度来看它。

And I don't want to hear from these other people who I don't like, by the way.

顺便说一句，我不想​​听到那些我不喜欢的人的意见。

It's going to be, my eight-year-old is using this.

我八岁的孩子正在使用这个。

I don't want anything that's going to cause a problem.

我不想要任何会引起问题的事情。

And I want everything filtered and AI-based filters like that that you program and control are going to work much better and be much more honest and straightforward and clear and so forth than what we have today.

我希望所有经过过滤的东西以及基于人工智能的过滤器（例如您编程和控制的过滤器）将比我们今天的过滤器更好地工作，并且更加诚实、直接和清晰等等。

Anyway, basically, what I want people to do is think, every time you think of a risk of how it can be used, just think of like, okay, we can use it to build a countermeasure.

无论如何，基本上，我希望人们做的就是思考，每当你想到如何使用它的风险时，就想，好吧，我们可以用它来制定对策。

And the great thing about the countermeasures is they can not only offset AI risks, they can offset other risks.

这些对策的伟大之处在于它们不仅可以抵消人工智能风险，还可以抵消其他风险。

Right?

正确的？

Because we already live in a world where pathogens are a problem, right?

因为我们已经生活在一个病原体成为问题的世界，对吗？

We ought to have better vaccines anyway.

无论如何，我们应该有更好的疫苗。

We already live in a world where there's cyberhacking and cyberterrorism.

我们已经生活在一个充满网络黑客和网络恐怖主义的世界。

They already live in a world where there's bad content on the internet.

他们已经生活在一个互联网上充斥着不良内容的世界里。

And we have the ability now to build much better AI-powered tools to deal with all those things.

我们现在有能力构建更好的人工智能工具来处理所有这些事情。

Andrew Huberman: I also love the idea of the AI physicians.

Andrew Huberman：我也喜欢人工智能医生的想法。

Getting decent health care in this country is so difficult, even for people who have means or insurance.

在这个国家获得体面的医疗保健非常困难，即使对于有经济能力或有保险的人来说也是如此。

I mean, the number of phone calls and waits that you have to go through to get a referral to see a specialist, it's absurd.

我的意思是，为了获得推荐去看专科医生，您必须经过多少次电话和等待，这太荒谬了。

The process is absurd.

这个过程是荒谬的。

I mean, it makes one partially or frankly ill just to go through the process of having to do all that.

我的意思是，仅仅经历必须做这一切的过程就会使人部分或坦率地生病。

I don't know how anyone does it.

我不知道有人怎么做到的。

And granted, I don't have the highest degree of patience, but I'm pretty patient, and it drives me insane to even just get remedial care.

当然，我没有最高程度的耐心，但我很有耐心，即使只是接受治疗也会让我发疯。

So I can think of a lot of benevolent uses of AI.

所以我能想到人工智能的很多善意用途。

And I'm grateful that you're bringing this up, and here, and that you've tweeted about it in that thread.

我很感激你在这里提出这个问题，并且你在该帖子中发布了有关它的推文。

Again, we'll refer people to that.

再次，我们将向人们推荐这一点。

And that you're thinking about this.

而且你正在考虑这个。

I have to imagine that in your role as investor nowadays, that you're also thinking about AI quite often in terms of all these roles.

我必须想象，在你现在作为投资者的角色中，你也经常从所有这些角色的角度思考人工智能。

And so does that mean that there are a lot of young people who are really bullish on AI and are going for it?

那么这是否意味着有很多年轻人真正看好人工智能并为之奋斗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Okay.

好的。

Andrew Huberman: This is here to stay.

Andrew Huberman：这种情况将会持续下去。

Marc Andreessen: Okay.

马克·安德森：好的。

Andrew Huberman: Unlike CRISPR, which is sort of in this liminal place where biotech companies aren't sure if they should invest or not in CRISPR because it's unclear whether or not the governing bodies are going to allow gene editing, just like it was unclear 15 years ago if they were going to allow gene therapy.

Andrew Huberman：与 CRISPR 不同，CRISPR 处于一种有限的状态，生物技术公司不确定是否应该投资 CRISPR，因为不清楚管理机构是否会允许基因编辑，就像 15 年前不清楚他们是否会允许基因治疗一样。

But now we know they do allow gene therapy and immunotherapy.

但现在我们知道它们确实允许基因疗法和免疫疗法。

Marc Andreessen: Okay, so there is a fight.

马克·安德森：好的，所以有一场战斗。

Having said that, there is a fight.

话虽如此，有一场战斗。

There's a fight happening in Washington right now over exactly what should be legal or not legal.

华盛顿现在正在就什么应该合法或不合法的问题展开一场争论。

And there's quite a bit of risk, I think, attached to that fight right now because there are some people in there that are telling a very effective story to try to get people to either outlaw AI or specifically limit it to a small number of big companies, which I think is potentially disastrous.

我认为，现在这场斗争存在相当大的风险，因为有些人正在讲述一个非常有效的故事，试图让人们要么取缔人工智能，要么专门将其限制在少数大公司范围内，我认为这可能是灾难性的。

By the way, the E.U.

顺便说一句，欧盟

also is, like, super negative.

也是超级消极的。

The EU has turned super negative on basically all new technology, so they're moving to try to outlaw AI, which if they outlaw AI, flat out don't want it.

欧盟对基本上所有新技术都变得非常消极，因此他们正在努力禁止人工智能，如果他们禁止人工智能，他们绝对不想要它。

Andrew Huberman: But that's like saying you're going to outlaw the internet.

Andrew Huberman：但这就像说你要取缔互联网一样。

I don't see how you can stop this train.

我不明白你怎么能阻止这列火车。

Marc Andreessen: And frankly, they're not a big fan of the internet either.

马克·安德森：坦率地说，他们也不是互联网的忠实粉丝。

So I think they regret the E.U.

所以我认为他们对欧盟感到遗憾

has a very, especially the E.U.

有一个非常，特别是欧盟。

bureaucrats, the people who run the E.U.

官僚，管理欧盟的人

in Brussels have a very negative view on a lot of modernity.

布鲁塞尔的人们对很多现代性持非常负面的看法。

Andrew Huberman: But what I'm hearing calls to mind things that I've heard people like David Goggins say, which is, you know, there's so many lazy, undisciplined people out there that nowadays it's easier and easier to become exceptional.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：但是我听到的让我想起了我听大卫·戈金斯这样的人说过的话，那就是，你知道，外面有很多懒惰、不守纪律的人，现在越来越容易变得与众不同。

I've heard him say something to that extent.

我曾听他说过这样的话。

It almost sounds like there's so many countries that are just backing off of particular technologies because it just sounds bad from the PR perspective that it's creating great, kind of, low-hanging fruit, opportunities for people to barge forward and countries to barge forward.

听起来似乎有很多国家正在放弃某些特定技术，因为从公关的角度来看，这听起来很糟糕，因为它正在创造伟大的、容易实现的成果，为人们和国家提供前进的机会。

If they're willing to embrace this stuff.

如果他们愿意接受这些东西。

Marc Andreessen: It is, but number one, you have to have a country that wants to do that.

马克·安德森：是的，但第一，你必须有一个国家愿意这样做。

Those exist, and there are countries like that.

这些是存在的，而且也有这样的国家。

And then the other is, look, they need to be able to withstand the attack from stronger countries that don't want them to do it, right?

另一个是，你看，他们需要能够承受来自不希望他们这样做的强大国家的攻击，对吧？

So the E.U., the E.U.

所以欧盟，欧盟。

has nominal control over whatever it is, 27 or whatever member countries.

对 27 个或任何成员国都有名义上的控制权。

So even if you're like, whatever the Germans get all fired up about, whatever, Brussels can still, in a lot of cases, just like flat out, basically control them and tell them not to do it.

因此，即使你想，无论德国人为何如此激动，无论如何，布鲁塞尔在很多情况下仍然可以，就像全力以赴一样，基本上控制他们并告诉他们不要这样做。

And then the U.S., you know, we have a lot of control over a lot of the world.

然后美国，你知道，我们对世界很多地方都有很大的控制权。

Andrew Huberman: But it sounds like we sit somewhere sort of in between.

Andrew Huberman：但听起来我们介于两者之间。

Like right now, people are developing AI technologies in U.S. companies, right?

就像现在，美国公司正在开发人工智能技术，对吗？

So it is happening.

所以它正在发生。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, today it's happening.

马克·安德森：是的，今天它正在发生。

But like I said, there's a set of people who are very focused in Washington right now about trying to either ban it outright or trying to, as I said, limit it to a small number of big companies.

但正如我所说，现在华盛顿有一群人非常关注试图彻底禁止它，或者像我所说的那样，将其限制在少数大公司范围内。

And then, look, China's got a whole, the other part of this is China's got a whole different kind of take on this than we do.

然后，看，中国有一个整体，另一部分是中国对此的看法与我们完全不同。

And so they're, of course, going to allow it for sure, but they're going to allow it in the ways that their system wants it to happen.

所以他们当然会允许它发生，但他们会以他们的系统希望它发生的方式允许它发生。

Right.

正确的。

Which is much more for population control and to implement authoritarianism.

这对于控制人口和实行独裁主义来说更重要。

And then, of course, they are going to spread their technology and their vision of how society should run across the world.

然后，当然，他们将传播他们的技术和他们对社会应该如何在世界各地运行的愿景。

So we're back in a Cold War dynamic like we were with the Soviet Union, where there are two different systems that have fundamentally different views on issues, concepts like freedom and individual choice and freedom of speech.

因此，我们又回到了冷战动态，就像我们与苏联一样，那里有两个不同的体系，对问题、自由、个人选择和言论自由等概念有着根本不同的看法。

And so, you know, we know where the Chinese stand.

所以，你知道，我们知道中国人的立场。

We're still figuring out where we stand.

我们仍在弄清楚我们的立场。

I'm having specifically a lot of schizophrenic conversations with people in D.C. right now, where if I talk to them and China doesn't come up, they just hate tech.

我现在正在与华盛顿特区的人们进行很多精神分裂的对话，如果我和他们交谈而没有提到中国，他们只是讨厌科技。

They hate American tech companies, they hate AI, they hate social media, they hate this, they hate that, they hate crypto, they hate everything, and they just want to punish and ban, and they're just very negative.

他们讨厌美国科技公司，他们讨厌人工智能，他们讨厌社交媒体，他们讨厌这个，他们讨厌那个，他们讨厌加密货币，他们讨厌一切，他们只想惩罚和禁止，他们只是非常消极。

But then if we have a conversation a half hour later and we talk about China, then the conversation is totally different.

但如果半小时后我们谈论中国，那么谈话就完全不同了。

Now we need a partnership between the U.S. government and American tech companies to defeat China.

现在我们需要美国政府和美国科技公司之间的合作来击败中国。

It's like the exact opposite discussion.

这就像完全相反的讨论。

Right?

正确的？

Andrew Huberman: Is that fear or competitiveness on China specifically in terms of the U.S. response in, you know, you bring up these technologies, know, I'll lump CRISPR in there, things like CRISPR, nuclear power, AI.

Andrew Huberman：这是对中国的恐惧还是竞争力，特别是在美国的反应方面，你知道，你提出了这些技术，我会把 CRISPR 放在其中，比如 CRISPR、核能、人工智能。

It all sounds very cold, very dystopian to a lot of people.

对于很多人来说，这一切听起来非常冷酷、非常反乌托邦。

And yet there are all these benevolent uses as we've been talking about.

然而正如我们一直在谈论的那样，还有所有这些仁慈的用途。

And then you say you raise the issue of China and then it sounds like this big dark cloud emerging.

然后你说你提出了中国问题，然后听起来就像是一片巨大的乌云正在浮现。

And then all of a sudden, we need to galvanize and develop these technologies to counter their effort.

然后突然之间，我们需要激励和开发这些技术来对抗他们的努力。

So is it fear of them or is it competitiveness or both?

那么是对他们的恐惧还是竞争，或者两者兼而有之？

Marc Andreessen: Well, so without them in the picture, you just have this.

马克·安德森：嗯，所以照片中没有他们，你就只有这个了。

Basically there's an old Bedouin saying as "me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin, me and my brother and my cousin against the world." It's actually, it's evolution in action, I think we'd think about it, is if there's no external threat, then the conflict turns inward, and then at that point, there's a big fight between specifically, tech, and then I was just say, generally politics.

基本上有一句古老的贝都因人的说法是“我反对我的兄弟，我和我的兄弟反对我的表弟，我和我的兄弟和我的表弟反对世界。”实际上，这是行动中的演变，我想我们会考虑一下，如果没有外部威胁，那么冲突就会转向内部，然后在这一点上，具体来说，技术之间会发生一场激烈的斗争，然后我只是说，一般来说是政治之间。

And my interpretation of that fight is it's a fight for status.

我对这场斗争的解释是，这是一场争夺地位的斗争。

It's fundamentally a fight for status and for power, which is like, if you're in politics, you like the status quo of how power and status work in our society.

从根本上说，这是一场争夺地位和权力的斗争，就像，如果你从政，你喜欢权力和地位在我们社会中运作的现状。

You don't want these new technologies to show up and change things, because change is bad, right?

你不希望这些新技术出现并改变事物，因为改变是不好的，对吧？

Change threatens your position.

变化威胁到你的地位。

It threatens the respect that people have for you and your control over things.

它威胁到人们对你的尊重以及你对事物的控制。

And so I think it's primarily a status fight, which we could talk about.

所以我认为这主要是一场地位之争，我们可以讨论这一点。

But the China thing is just like a straight up geopolitical us versus them.

但中国问题就像是美国与他们之间的直接地缘政治冲突。

Like I said, it's like a Cold War scenario.

就像我说的，这就像冷战场景。

And look, 20 years ago, the prevailing view in Washington was, we need to be friends with China, right?

看，20年前，华盛顿的普遍观点是，我们需要与中国成为朋友，对吗？

And we're going to be trading partners with China.

我们将成为中国的贸易伙伴。

And yes, they're a totalitarian dictatorship, but if we trade with them, over time, they'll become more democratic.

是的，他们是一个极权独裁国家，但如果我们与他们进行贸易，随着时间的推移，他们会变得更加民主。

In the last five to 10 years, it's become more and more clear that that's just not true.

在过去的五到十年里，人们越来越清楚地看到事实并非如此。

And now there's a lot of people in both political parties in D.C. who very much regret that and want to change too much, more of a sort of a Cold War footing.

现在，华盛顿两党都有很多人对此感到非常遗憾，并且想要改变太多，更像是一种冷战的基础。

Andrew Huberman: Are you willing to comment on TikTok and technologies that emerge from China that are in widespread use within the U.S., like how much you trust them or don't trust them?

Andrew Huberman：您是否愿意对 TikTok 以及来自中国、在美国广泛使用的技术发表评论，比如您对它们的信任程度或不信任程度？

I can go on record myself by saying that early on, when TikTok was released, we were told, as Stanford faculty, that we should not and could not have TikTok accounts nor WeChat accounts.

我可以亲自说，早在 TikTok 发布时，我们作为斯坦福大学的教员就被告知，我们不应该也不可能拥有 TikTok 帐户或微信帐户。

Marc Andreessen: So to start with, there are a lot of really bright Chinese tech entrepreneurs and engineers who are trying to do good things.

马克·安德森：首先，中国有很多非常聪明的科技企业家和工程师正在努力做好事。

I'm totally positive about that.

我对此完全肯定。

So I think many of the people mean very well, but the Chinese have a specific system, and the system is very clear and unambiguous.

所以我认为很多人的本意都很好，但是中国人有一个特定的制度，而且这个制度是非常明确和明确的。

And the system is, everything in China is owned by the party.

而且制度是，中国的一切都是党所有。

It's not even owned by the state.

它甚至不属于国家所有。

It's owned by the party.

它是属于党的。

It's owned by the Chinese Communist Party.

它是中国共产党所有的。

So the Chinese Communist Party owns everything, and they control everything.

所以中国共产党拥有一切，他们控制着一切。

By the way, it's actually illegal to this day.

顺便说一句，直到今天这实际上仍然是非法的。

It's illegal for an investor to buy equity in a Chinese company.

投资者购买中国公司的股权是违法的。

There's all these basically legal machinations that people do to try to do something that's like the economic equivalent to that, but it's actually still illegal to do that.

人们所做的所有这些基本上合法的阴谋都试图做一些与经济相当的事情，但实际上这样做仍然是非法的。

The Chinese Communist Party has no intention of letting foreigners own any of China.

中国共产党无意让外国人拥有中国。

Like, zero intention of that.

就像，零意图。

And they regularly move to make sure that that doesn't happen.

他们会定期采取行动，以确保这种情况不会发生。

So they own everything.

所以他们拥有一切。

They control everything.

他们控制一切。

Andrew Huberman: Sorry to interrupt you, but people in China can invest in American companies all the time.

安德鲁·休伯曼：很抱歉打断你，但中国人一直可以投资美国公司。

Marc Andreessen: Well, they can, subject to U.S. government constraints.

马克·安德森：嗯，他们可以，但要受到美国政府的限制。

There is a U.S. government system that attempts to mediate that called CFIUS, and there are more and more limitations being put on that.

美国有一个试图进行调解的政府系统，即 CFIUS，并且对此施加了越来越多的限制。

But if you can get through that approval process, then legally you can do that, whereas the same is not true with respect to China.

但如果你能通过这个审批程序，那么你就可以合法地做到这一点，但对于中国来说却并非如此。

So they just have a system.

所以他们只有一个系统。

And so if you're the CEO of a Chinese company, it's not optional.

因此，如果你是一家中国公司的首席执行官，这不是可选的。

If you're the CEO of ByteDance, CEO of Tencent, your relationship with the Chinese Communist Party is not optional, it's required.

如果你是字节跳动的首席执行官、腾讯的首席执行官，你与中国共产党的关系不是可有可无的，而是必须的。

And what's required is you are a unit of the party, and you and your company do what the party says.

要求的是你是党的单位，你和你的公司按照党的要求去做。

And when the party says we get full access to all user data in America, you say yes.

当该党说我们可以完全访问美国的所有用户数据时，你就说是。

When the party says you change the algorithm to optimize to a certain social result, you say whatever.

当一方说你改变算法以优化某个社交结果时，你说什么都可以。

It's whatever Xi Jinping and his party cadres decide, and that's what gets implemented.

习近平和他的党员干部决定了什么，就执行什么。

If you're the CEO of a Chinese tech company, there is a political officer assigned to you who has an office down the hall.

如果你是一家中国科技公司的首席执行官，就会有一名政治官员分配给你，他的办公室就在大厅里。

And at any given time, he can come down the hall, he can grab you out of your staff meeting or board meeting, and he can take you down the hall and he can make you sit for hours and study Marxism and Xi Jinping thought and quiz you on it and test you on it, and you'd better pass the test, Right?

在任何特定的时间，他都可以从大厅下来，他可以把你从员工会议或董事会会议中带走，他可以带你到大厅，他可以让你坐几个小时，学习马克思主义和习近平思想，对你进行测验，对你进行测试，你最好通过测试，对吗？

So it's like a straight political control thing.

所以这就像一个直接的政治控制。

And then, by the way, if you get crossways with them, like...

然后，顺便说一下，如果你与他们产生分歧，比如......

Andrew Huberman: So when we see tech founders getting called up to Congress for what looks like interrogation, but it's probably pretty light interrogation compared to what happens in other countries.

安德鲁·休伯曼：所以，当我们看到科技创始人被传唤到国会进行看似审讯的事情时，但与其他国家发生的情况相比，这可能是相当轻微的审讯。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, it's state power.

马克·安德森：是的，这是国家权力。

They just have this view of top-down state power, and they view it's that their system, and they view that it's necessary for lots of historical and moral reasons that they've defined, and that's how they run.

他们只是对自上而下的国家权力有这种看法，他们认为这就是他们的制度，他们认为出于他们所定义的许多历史和道德原因，这是必要的，这就是他们的运作方式。

And then they've got a view that says how they want to propagate that vision outside the country.

然后他们就有了一个观点，表明他们希望如何在国外传播这一愿景。

And they have these programs like Belt and Road that basically are intended to propagate kind of their vision worldwide.

他们有像“一带一路”这样的计划，基本上是为了在全世界传播他们的愿景。

And so they are who they are.

所以他们就是他们。

I will say that they don't lie about it.

我会说他们不会对此撒谎。

They're very straightforward.

他们非常简单。

They give speeches, they write books.

他们发表演讲，他们写书。

You can buy Xi Jinping speeches.

你可以买习近平的讲话。

He goes through the whole thing.

他经历了整个事情。

They have their tech 2025 plan.

他们有自己的科技 2025 计划。

This is like ten years ago.

这就像十年前一样。

Their whole AI agenda, it's all in there.

他们的整个人工智能议程都在那里。

Andrew Huberman: And is their goal that in 200 years, 300 years, that China is the superpower controlling everything?

Andrew Huberman：他们的目标是在200年、300年内，中国成为控制一切的超级大国吗？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Or 20 years, 30 years, or two years, three years.

或者20年，30年，或者两年，三年。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, but they've got a shorter horizon.

Andrew Huberman：是的，但他们的视野较短。

Marc Andreessen: I don't know.

马克·安德森：我不知道。

Everybody's a little bit like this, I guess, but, yeah, they want to win.

我想每个人都有点像这样，但是，是的，他们想赢。

Andrew Huberman: Well, the CRISPR in humans example that I gave earlier was interesting to me because, first of all, I'm a neuroscientist and they could have edited any genes, but they chose to edit the genes involved in the attempt to create super memory babies, which presumably would grow into super memory adults.

Andrew Huberman：嗯，我之前给出的人类 CRISPR 例子对我来说很有趣，因为首先，我是一名神经科学家，他们可以编辑任何基因，但他们选择编辑涉及尝试创造超级记忆婴儿的基因，这些婴儿可能会成长为超级记忆成年人。

And whether or not they succeeded in that isn't clear.

他们是否成功还不清楚。

Those babies are alive and presumably by now, walking, talking.

那些婴儿现在还活着，想必会走路、说话。

As far as I know, whether or not they have super memories isn't clear.

据我所知，他们是否拥有超强记忆还不清楚。

But China is clearly unafraid to augment biology in that way.

但中国显然并不害怕以这种方式增强生物学。

And I believe that that's inevitable, that's going to happen elsewhere, probably first for the treatment of disease.

我相信这是不可避免的，这会在其他地方发生，可能首先是为了治疗疾病。

But at some point, I'm assuming people are going to augment biology to make smarter kids, not always, but often will select mates based on the traits they would like their children to inherit.

但在某些时候，我假设人们会增强生物学能力来培养更聪明的孩子，虽然并不总是如此，但通常会根据他们希望孩子继承的特征来选择伴侣。

So this happens far more frequently than could be deemed bad.

因此，这种情况发生的频率远高于被认为是糟糕的情况。

Either that or people are bad, because people do this all the time, selecting mates that have physical and psychological and cognitive traits that you would like your offspring to have.

要么是这样，要么是人很坏，因为人们总是这样做，选择具有你希望你的后代拥有的身体、心理和认知特征的伴侣。

CRISPR is a more targeted approach.

CRISPR 是一种更有针对性的方法。

Of course, the reason I'm kind of giving this example and examples like it is that I feel like so much of the way that governments and the public react to technologies is to just take that first glimpse.

当然，我之所以举出这个例子以及类似的例子，是因为我觉得政府和公众对技术的反应方式很大程度上只是第一眼看到的。

And it just feels scary.

感觉很可怕。

You think about the old Apple ad of the 1984 ad.

你想想 1984 年苹果公司的旧广告。

I mean, there was one very scary version of the personal computer and computers and robots taking over and everyone like automatons.

我的意思是，有一个非常可怕的个人电脑版本，计算机和机器人接管了一切，每个人都喜欢机器人。

And then there was the Apple version where it's all about creativity, love and peace, and it had the pseudo-psychedelic, California thing going for it.

然后是苹果版本，一切都是关于创造力、爱与和平，并且有伪迷幻的加州风格。

Again, great marketing seems to convert people's thinking about technology such that what was once viewed as very scary and dangerous and dystopian is like an oasis of opportunity.

再次，伟大的营销似乎改变了人们对技术的看法，使曾经被视为非常可怕、危险和反乌托邦的东西变成了机遇的绿洲。

So why are people so afraid of new technologies?

那么为什么人们如此害怕新技术呢？

Marc Andreessen: So this is the thing I've tried to understand for a long time, because the history is so clear and the history basically is that every new technology is greeted by what's called a moral panic.

马克·安德森：所以这是我长期以来一直试图理解的事情，因为历史是如此清晰，而且历史基本上是每一项新技术都会受到所谓的道德恐慌的欢迎。

And so it's basically this hysterical freakout of some kind that causes people to basically predict the end of the world.

所以基本上就是这种歇斯底里的疯狂导致人们基本上预测世界末日。

And you go back in time, and actually, this is a historical sort of effect, it happens even in things now where you just look back and it's ludicrous.

你回到过去，实际上，这是一种历史效应，即使在现在的事情上，你只要回顾过去，它也会发生，这是可笑的。

And so you mentioned earlier the Satanic panic of the '80s, the concern around, like, heavy metal music.

所以你之前提到了 80 年代的撒旦恐慌，以及对重金属音乐等的担忧。

Before that, there was, like, a freakout around comic books in the '50s, there was a freakout around jazz music in the '20s and '30s — it's devil music.

在此之前，就像 50 年代的漫画书一样，二十世纪 20 年代和 30 年代的爵士乐也很流行——这是魔鬼音乐。

There was a freakout, the arrival of bicycles caused a moral panic in the, like, 1860s, 1870s.

自行车的到来引起了 20 世纪 60 年代、1870 年代的道德恐慌。

Bicycles?

自行车？

Bicycles, yeah.

自行车，是的。

So there was this thing at the time.

所以当时就有了这个事情。

So bicycles were the first.

所以自行车是最早出现的。

They were the first very easy to use personal transportation thing that basically let kids travel between towns quickly without any overhead.

它们是第一个非常易于使用的个人交通工具，基本上可以让孩子们在城镇之间快速旅行，而无需任何开销。

You have to take care of a horse.

你必须照顾一匹马。

You just jump on a bike and go.

你只要跳上自行车就可以走了。

And so there was a historical panic, specifically around at the time, young women, who for the first time, were able to venture outside the confines of the town to maybe go have a boyfriend, another town.

因此，出现了一种历史性的恐慌，特别是在当时，年轻女性第一次能够冒险走出城镇的范围，也许去另一个城镇交一个男朋友。

And so the magazines at the time read all these stories on this phenomenon, medical phenomenon, called bicycle face.

所以当时的杂志读了所有关于这种现象的故事，医学现象，称为自行车脸。

And the idea of bicycle face was the exertion caused by pedaling a bicycle would cause your face.

而自行车脸的概念是，骑自行车时所产生的用力会导致你的脸。

Your face would grimace, and then if you were on the bicycle for too long, your face would lock into place.

你的脸会做鬼脸，然后如果你骑自行车太久，你的脸就会锁定到位。

Andrew Huberman: Sorry.

安德鲁·休伯曼：抱歉。

Marc Andreessen: And then you would be unattractive, and therefore, of course, unable to then get married.

马克·安德森：然后你就会变得没有吸引力，因此当然无法结婚。

Cars, there was a moral panic around red flag laws.

汽车方面，红旗法引起了道德恐慌。

There are all these laws that created the automobile.

所有这些法律都创造了汽车。

Automobiles freaked people out.

汽车让人们感到害怕。

So there are all these laws in the early days of the automobile, in a lot of places, you would take a ride in an automobile and automobiles, they broke down all the time.

所以在汽车的早期就有了所有这些法律，在很多地方，你会乘坐汽车和汽车，它们总是出故障。

So only rich people had automobiles.

所以只有有钱人才有汽车。

It'd be you and your mechanic in the car.

车里就是你和你的机械师。

Right, for when it broke down.

是的，当它崩溃的时候。

And then you had to hire another guy to walk 200 yards in front of the car with a red flag, and he had to wave the red flag.

然后你必须雇另一个人拿着红旗在车前走200码，他必须挥舞红旗。

And so you could only drive as fast as he could walk because the red flag was to warn people that the car was coming.

所以你只能开得和他走的一样快，因为红旗是为了警告人们汽车即将到来。

I think it was Pennsylvania.

我认为那是宾夕法尼亚州。

They had the most Draconian version, which was they were very worried about the car scaring the horses.

他们有最严厉的版本，那就是他们非常担心汽车吓到马。

And so there was a law that said if you saw a horse coming, you needed to stop the car.

所以有一条法律规定，如果你看到一匹马过来，你需要停车。

You had to disassemble the car, and you had to hide the pieces of the car behind the nearest hay bale, wait for the horse to go by, and then you could put your car back together.

你必须把汽车拆开，把汽车的碎片藏在最近的干草堆后面，等马过去，然后你才能把汽车装回去。

Anyways, an example is electric lighting.

无论如何，一个例子是电照明。

There was a panic around, like, whether this is going to become complete ruin.

周围一片恐慌，好像这是否会彻底毁灭。

This is going to completely ruin the romance of the dark.

这将彻底毁掉黑暗的浪漫。

And it was going to cause a whole new kind of terrible civilization where everything is always brightly lit.

它将导致一种全新的可怕文明，一切事物总是灯火通明。

So there's just all these examples.

所以只有所有这些例子。

And so it's like, okay, what on earth is happening?

所以这就像是，好吧，到底发生了什么？

That this is always what happens?

这总是会发生吗？

And so I finally found this book that I think has a good model for it.

所以我终于找到了这本书，我认为它有一个很好的模型。

A book is called "Men, Machines, and Modern Times." And it's written by this MIT professor, like, 60 years ago.

一本书的名字叫《人、机器和现代》。它是由这位麻省理工学院的教授在 60 年前写的。

So it predates the internet, but it uses a lot of historical examples.

所以它早于互联网，但它使用了很多历史例子。

And what he says, basically, is, he says there's actually a three-stage response.

他所说的基本上是，他说实际上有一个三阶段的反应。

There's a three-stage societal response to new technologies.

社会对新技术的反应分为三个阶段。

It's very predictable.

这是非常可预测的。

He said, stage one is basically just denial.

他说，第一阶段基本上只是否认。

Just ignore.

忽略即可。

Like, we just don't pay attention to this.

就像，我们只是不关注这一点。

Nobody takes it seriously.

没有人认真对待它。

There's just a blackout on the whole topic.

整个话题都陷入了停顿。

He says, that's stage one.

他说，那是第一阶段。

Stage two is rational counterargument.

第二阶段是理性反驳。

So stage two is where you line up all the different reasons why this can't possibly work.

因此，在第二阶段，您将列出该方法行不通的所有不同原因。

It can't possibly ever get cheap, or this, that it's not fast enough, or whatever the thing is.

它不可能变得便宜，或者说，它不够快，或者不管是什么。

And then he says, stage three, he says, is when the name-calling begins.

然后他说，第三阶段，他说，是谩骂开始的时候。

So he says, stage three is like when they fail to ignore it and they've failed to argue society out of it.

所以他说，第三阶段就像他们未能忽视它，也未能说服社会不要这样做。

Andrew Huberman: I love it.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我喜欢它。

Marc Andreessen: They move to the name-calling.

马克·安德森：他们转向谩骂。

And what's the name-calling?

还有叫什么名字？

The name-calling is, this is evil.

骂人就是，这是邪恶的。

This is moral panic.

这是道德恐慌。

This is evil.

这是邪恶的。

This is terrible.

这太可怕了。

This is awful.

这太糟糕了。

This is going to destroy everything.

这会毁掉一切。

Don't you understand?

你不明白吗？

All this is horrifying.

这一切都令人恐惧。

And you, the person working on it, are being reckless and evil and all this stuff, and you must be stopped.

而你，从事这项工作的人，却鲁莽、邪恶以及所有这些事情，你必须被阻止。

And he said the reason for that is because, basically, fundamentally, what these things are is they're a war over status.

他说，原因是，从根本上来说，这些事情是一场关于地位的战争。

It's a war over status, and therefore a war over power.

这是一场关于地位的战争，因此也是一场关于权力的战争。

And then, of course, ultimately money.

当然，最终还是金钱。

But human status is the thing, because what he says is, what is the societal impact of a new technology?

但人类的地位才是问题所在，因为他说的是，新技术的社会影响是什么？

The societal impact of a new technology is it reorders status in the society.

新技术的社会影响在于它重新调整了社会地位。

So the people who are specialists in that technology become high status, and the people who are specialists in the previous way of doing things become low status.

因此，在该技术方面是专家的人地位很高，而在以前的做事方式方面是专家的人地位较低。

And generally, people don't adapt.

一般来说，人们不会适应。

Generally, if you're the kind of person who is high status because you're an evolved adaptation to an existing technology, you're probably not the kind of person that's going to enthusiastically try to replant yourself onto a new technology.

一般来说，如果你是那种因为对现有技术的进化适应而享有很高地位的人，那么你可能不是那种会热情地尝试将自己重新植入新技术的人。

This is like every politician who's just like in a complete state of panic about social media.

这就像每个政客对社交媒体都处于完全恐慌的状态一样。

Like, why are they so freaked out about social media?

比如，为什么他们对社交媒体如此害怕？

Is, because they all know that the whole nature of modern politics has changed.

是，因为他们都知道现代政治的整个本质已经改变了。

The entire battery of techniques that you use to get elected before social media are now obsolete.

在社交媒体之前用来当选的整套技术现在已经过时了。

Obviously, the best new politicians of the future are going to be 100% creations of social media.

显然，未来最好的新政客将100%由社交媒体创造。

Andrew Huberman: And podcasts.

安德鲁·休伯曼：还有播客。

Marc Andreessen: And podcasts.

马克·安德森：还有播客。

Andrew Huberman: And we're seeing this now as we head towards the next presidential election.

安德鲁·休伯曼：当我们即将迎来下一次总统选举时，我们现在就看到了这一点。

That podcasts clearly are going to be featured very heavily in that next election, because long-form content is a whole different landscape.

播客显然将在下一次选举中占据重要地位，因为长篇内容是一个完全不同的景观。

Marc Andreessen: Rogan's had, like, what?

马克·安德森：罗根有什么？

He's had, like Bernie, he's had like Tulsi, he's had like a whole series.

他有，就像伯尼，他有像图尔西，他有整个系列。

Andrew Huberman: Of RFK most recently.

Andrew Huberman：最近是 RFK。

And that's created a lot of controversy.

这引起了很多争议。

Marc Andreessen: A lot of controversy.

马克·安德森：有很多争议。

But also my understanding, I'm sure he's invited everybody.

但据我了解，我确信他邀请了所有人。

I'm sure he'd love to have Biden on.

我确信他很乐意让拜登上场。

I'm sure he'd love to have Trump on.

我确信他很乐意让特朗普上场。

Andrew Huberman: I'm sure he'd have to ask him.

Andrew Huberman：我确信他必须问他。

I mean, I think every podcaster has their own ethos around who they invite on and why and how.

我的意思是，我认为每个播客在邀请谁、为什么以及如何邀请方面都有自己的风格。

So I certainly can't speak for him, but I have to imagine that any opportunity to have true, long-form discourse that would allow people to really understand people's positions on things, I have to imagine that he would be in favor of that sort of thing.

所以我当然不能代表他说话，但我必须想象，任何机会进行真实的、长篇的话语，让人们真正了解人们对事物的立场，我必须想象他会赞成这种事情。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah.

马克·安德森：是的。

Or somebody else would, right?

或者其他人会这么做，对吗？

Some other top podcaster would.

其他一些顶级播客会的。

Exactly.

确切地。

I totally agree with you.

我完全同意你的观点。

But my point is, if you're a politician, if you're a legacy politician, you have the option of embracing the new technology.

但我的观点是，如果你是一名政治家，如果你是一名传统政治家，你可以选择接受新技术。

You can do it anytime you want.

您可以随时进行。

Right.

正确的。

But you don't.

但你没有。

They're not, they won't.

他们不是，他们不会。

They won't do it.

他们不会这么做。

And why won't they do it?

他们为什么不这样做呢？

Well, okay, first of all, they want to ignore it.

好吧，首先，他们想忽略它。

They want to pretend that things aren't changing.

他们想假装事情没有改变。

Second is they want to have rational counterarguments for why the existing campaign system works the way that it does, and this and that and the existing media networks.

其次，他们希望对为什么现有的竞选系统如此运作，以及这个、那个和现有的媒体网络进行理性的反驳。

And here's how you do things, and here's how you give speeches, and here's the clothes you wear and the tie and the thing and the pocket square, and you've, that.

这就是你做事的方式，这就是你如何发表演讲的方式，这就是你穿的衣服、领带、东西和口袋方巾，这些都是你的。

It's how you succeeded was coming up through that system.

这就是你通过该系统取得成功的方式。

So you've got all your arguments as to why that won't work anymore.

所以你已经得到了关于为什么这不再有效的所有论据。

And then we've now proceeded to the name-calling phase, which is now it's evil, right?

然后我们现在进入了谩骂阶段，现在这是邪恶的，对吧？

Now it's evil for somebody to show up on a stream, God forbid, for three hours and actually say what they think.

现在，有人在直播中出现三个小时并说出他们的想法，这是邪恶的，上帝禁止。

It's going to destroy society, right?

这会破坏社会，对吗？

So it's exactly like, it's a classic example of this pattern.

所以它就像，这是这种模式的一个经典例子。

Anyway, so Morrison says in the book, basically, this is the forever pattern.

不管怎样，莫里森在书中说，基本上，这就是永远的模式。

This will never change.

这永远不会改变。

This is one of those things where you can learn about it and still nothing, the entire world could learn about this, and still nothing changes.

这是你可以了解它但仍然一无所获的事情之一，整个世界都可以了解这一点，但仍然没有任何改变。

Because at the end of the day, it's not the tech that's the question, it's the reordering of status.

因为归根结底，问题不是技术，而是状态的重新排序。

Andrew Huberman: I have a lot of thoughts about the podcast component.

Andrew Huberman：我对播客组件有很多想法。

I'll just say this because I want to get back to the topic of innovation of technology.

我这么说是因为我想回到技术创新这个话题。

But on a long-form podcast, there's no safe zone.

但在长篇播客中，没有安全区。

The person can get up and walk out.

该人可以站起来并走出去。

But if the person interviewing them, and certainly Joe is the best of the very best, if not the most skilled podcaster in the entire universe at continuing to press people on specific topics when they're trying to bob and weave and wriggle out, he'll just keep either drilling or alter the question somewhat in a way that forces them to finally come up with an answer of some sort.

但是，如果采访他们的人，当然乔是最好的，即使不是整个宇宙中最熟练的播客，在人们试图摇摆、编织和蠕动时继续向人们施压特定主题，他就会继续钻研或以某种方式改变问题，迫使他们最终想出某种答案。

And I think that probably puts certain people's cortisol levels through the roof, such that they just would never go on there.

我认为这可能会使某些人的皮质醇水平达到顶峰，以至于他们永远不会继续下去。

Marc Andreessen: I think there's another deeper question also, or another question along with that, which is how many people actually have something to say.

马克·安德森：我认为还有另一个更深层次的问题，或者随之而来的另一个问题，那就是有多少人实际上有话要说。

Andrew Huberman: Real substance.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：真正的实质内容。

Marc Andreessen: Right.

马克·安德森：对。

Like how many people can actually talk in a way that's actually interesting to anybody else for any length of time.

就像有多少人能够以其他人真正感兴趣的方式说话，无论时间长短。

How much substance is there, really?

到底有多少物质？

And a lot of historical politics was to be able to manufacture a facade where you honestly, as far as you can't tell how deep the thoughts are, even if they have deep thoughts, it's kept away from you.

很多历史政治就是能够制造一个假象，让你老实说，至于你无法说出思想有多深，即使他们有深刻的思想，它也远离你。

They would certainly never cop to it.

他们肯定永远不会承认这一点。

Andrew Huberman: It's going to be an interesting next, what is it, about 20 months or so.

Andrew Huberman：接下来会很有趣，大约 20 个月左右。

Marc Andreessen: So panic and the name-calling have already started?

马克·安德森：那么恐慌和谩骂已经开始了吗？

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, I was going to say this list of three things, denial, the counterargument, and name-calling.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，我想说这三件事：否认、反驳和谩骂。

It seems like with AI, it's already just jumped to numbers two and three.

看起来人工智能已经跃升至第二和第三位。

Marc Andreessen: Yes, correct.

马克·安德森：是的，正确。

Andrew Huberman: We're already at two and three, and it's kind of leaning three.

Andrew Huberman：我们已经是第二名和第三名了，而且有点倾向于第三名。

Marc Andreessen: That's correct.

马克·安德森：是的。

AI is unusual just because new technologies that take off, they almost always have a prehistory.

人工智能之所以不同寻常，是因为新技术的兴起几乎总是有一个史前史。

They almost always have a 30- or 40-year history where people tried and failed to get them to work before they took off.

它们几乎总是有 30 或 40 年的历史，在它们起飞之前，人们试图让它们发挥作用，但都以失败告终。

AI has an 80-year prehistory, so it has a very long one.

人工智能有80年的史前史，所以它的历史很长。

And then it all of a sudden started to work dramatically well, seemingly overnight.

然后它突然开始发挥作用，似乎一夜之间就变得非常顺利。

And so it went from basically, as far as most people were concerned, it went from it doesn't work at all to it works incredibly well in one step, and that almost never happens.

因此，就大多数人而言，基本上，它从根本不起作用，到一步就工作得非常好，而这种情况几乎从未发生过。

I actually think that's exactly what's happening.

我实际上认为这正是正在发生的事情。

I think it's actually speed running this progression just because if you use Midjourney or you use GPT or any of these things for five minutes, you're just like, wow, obviously this thing is going to be like, obviously in my life, this is going to be the best thing ever.

我认为这实际上是快速运行这个进程，因为如果你使用 Midjourney 或 GPT 或任何这些东西五分钟，你就会想，哇，显然这件事会是这样，显然在我的生命中，这将是有史以来最好的事情。

This is amazing.

这太棒了。

There's all these ways that I can use it.

我可以使用它的所有这些方式。

And then therefore, immediately you're like, oh my God, this is going to transform everything.

因此，你立刻就会想，天哪，这将改变一切。

Therefore, step three, straight to the name-calling.

因此，第三步，直接骂人。

Andrew Huberman: In the face of all this.

安德鲁·休伯曼：面对这一切。

There are innovators out there.

那里有创新者。

Maybe they are aware they are innovators.

也许他们意识到自己是创新者。

Maybe they are already starting companies, or maybe they are just some young or older person who has these five traits in abundance or doesn't, but knows somebody who does and is partnering with them in some sort of idea.

也许他们已经在创办公司，或者也许他们只是一些年轻或年长的人，他们拥有或不具备这五个特征，但知道有人拥有并正在与他们以某种想法合作。

And you have an amazing track record at identifying these people.

您在识别这些人方面有着惊人的记录。

I think in part because you have those same traits yourself.

我认为部分原因是你自己也有这些相同的特征。

I've heard you say the following: "The world is a very malleable place.

我听你说过这样的话：“世界是一个非常具有可塑性的地方。

If you know what you want and you go for it with maximum energy and drive and passion, the world will often reconfigure itself around you much more quickly and easily than you would think." That's a remarkable quote because it says at least two things to me.

如果你知道自己想要什么，并以最大的能量、动力和热情去追求它，那么你周围的世界往往会比你想象的更快、更容易地重新配置。”这是一句非凡的话，因为它至少对我说了两件事。

One is that you have a very clear understanding of the inner workings of these great innovators.

一是你对这些伟大创新者的内部运作有非常清晰的了解。

We talked a little bit about that earlier, these five traits, etc., but that also you have an intense understanding of the world landscape.

我们之前谈过一点，这五个特征等等，但你也对世界格局有深入的了解。

And the way that we've been talking about it for the last hour or so is that it is a really intense and kind of oppressive landscape.

在过去一个小时左右的时间里，我们一直在谈论它，这是一个非常激烈且令人压抑的景观。

You've got countries and organizations and elites and journalists that are trying to, not necessarily trying, but are suppressing the innovation process.

有些国家、组织、精英和记者正在努力，但不一定是在努力，而是在压制创新过程。

I mean, that's sort of the picture that I'm getting.

我的意思是，这就是我得到的图片。

So it's like we're trying to innovate inside of a vise that's getting progressively tighter.

所以这就像我们试图在逐渐变得更紧的虎钳内部进行创新。

And yet this quote argues that it is the person, the boy or girl, man or woman, who says, well, you know what?

然而这句话认为，是那个人，男孩或女孩，男人或女人，说，好吧，你知道吗？

That all might be true, but my view of the world is the way the world's going to bend, or I'm going to create a dent in that vise that allows me to exist the way that I want.

这一切可能都是真的，但我对世界的看法是世界将会弯曲的方式，或者我会在虎钳上留下凹痕，让我能够以我想要的方式存在。

Or you know what, I'm actually going to uncurl the vise in the other direction.

或者你知道吗，我实际上要向另一个方向展开虎钳。

And so I'm at once picking up a sort of pessimistic, glass-half-empty view of the world, as well as a glass-half-full view.

因此，我立即对世界产生了一种悲观的、半空的世界观，以及半满的世界观。

So tell me about that.

那么请告诉我这一点。

Could you tell us about that from the perspective of someone listening who is thinking, I've got an idea, and I know it's a really good one, because I just know I might not have the confidence of extrinsic reward yet, but I just know there's a seed of something.

你能否从一个正在思考的倾听者的角度告诉我们，我有一个想法，我知道这是一个非常好的想法，因为我只知道我可能还没有外在奖励的信心，但我只知道有一个种子。

What does it take to foster that?

需要什么来促进这一点？

And how do we foster real innovation in the landscape that we're talking about?

我们如何在我们正在谈论的领域培育真正的创新？

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, so part is, I think, one of the ways to square it is, I think you as the innovator need to be signed up to fight the fight, right?

马克·安德森：是的，我认为，解决这一问题的方法之一是，我认为你作为创新者需要报名参加这场战斗，对吗？

And again, this is where the fictional portrayals of startups, I think, take people off course, or even scientists or whatever, because when there's great success stories, they get kind of prettified after the fact and they get made to be cute and fun, and it's like, yeah, no, if you talk to anybody who actually did any of these, like, these things are always just like brutal exercises and just like sheer willpower and fighting forces that are trying to get you.

再说一次，我认为，这就是对初创公司的虚构描述，让人们偏离轨道，甚至科学家或其他什么的，因为当有伟大的成功故事时，它们会在事后被美化，变得可爱又有趣，就像，是的，不，如果你和任何真正做过这些的人交谈，就像，这些事情总是像残酷的练习一样，就像纯粹的意志力和战斗力，试图抓住你。

So part of it is you have to be signed up for the fight.

所以其中一部分是你必须报名参加战斗。

And this kind of goes to the conscientiousness thing we're talking also.

这也涉及到我们正在谈论的责任心。

My partner, Ben, uses the term courage a lot, which is some combination of just stubbornness, but coupled with a willingness to take pain and not stop and have people think very bad things of you for a long time until it turns out you hopefully prove yourself correct.

”

And so you have to be willing to do that.

所以你必须愿意这样做。

It's a contact sport.

这是一项接触性运动。

These aren't easy roads, right?

这些路并不好走，对吧？

It's a contact sport, so you have to be signed up for the fight.

这是一项接触性运动，因此您必须报名参加比赛。

The advantage that you have as an innovator is that at the end of the day, the truth actually matters.

作为创新者的优势在于，归根结底，真相确实很重要。

And all the arguments in the world, the classic Victor Hugo quote is, "There's nothing more powerful in the world than an idea whose time has come." If it's real, right?

世界上所有的争论，维克多·雨果的经典名言是：“世界上没有什么比时机已到的想法更强大的了。”如果是真的的话，对吗？

And this is just pure substance, if the thing is real, if the idea is real, if it's a legitimately good scientific discovery about how the nature works, if it's a new invention, if it's a new work of art, and if it's real, then you do, at the end of the day, you have that on your side.

这只是纯粹的物质，如果这个东西是真实的，如果这个想法是真实的，如果它是关于自然如何运作的一个合法的好的科学发现，如果它是一个新的发明，如果它是一个新的艺术作品，如果它是真实的，那么你就做到了，到最后，你就站在你这一边了。

And all of the people who are fighting you and arguing with you and telling you no, they don't have that on their side.

所有那些与你对抗、与你争论并告诉你不的人，他们都没有站在他们这一边。

It's not that they're showing up with some other thing and they're like, my thing is better than your thing.

并不是说他们带着其他东西出现，然后他们就说，我的东西比你的东西更好。

That's not the main problem.

这不是主要问题。

The main problem is, I have a thing.

主要问题是，我有一件事。

I'm convinced; everybody else is telling me it's stupid, wrong, it should be illegal, whatever the thing is.

我坚信；其他人都告诉我这是愚蠢的、错误的、应该是非法的，无论是什么。

But at the end of the day, I still have the thing, right?

但到最后，我仍然拥有那东西，对吗？

So at the end of the day, the truth really matters.

所以归根结底，真相真的很重要。

The substance really matters if it's real.

如果内容是真实的，那么它确实很重要。

I'll give you an example.

我给你举个例子。

It's really hard historically to find an example of a new technology that came into the world that was then pulled back.

从历史上看，很难找到新技术出现后又被撤回的例子。

Nuclear is maybe an example of that.

核能也许就是一个例子。

But even still, there are still nuclear plants, like, running today.

但即便如此，仍然有像今天这样的核电站在运行。

That still exists.

那仍然存在。

I would say the same thing as scientific, at least I may ask you this.

我会说与科学相同的事情，至少我可能会问你这个。

I don't know of any scientific discovery that was made, and then people like, I know there are areas of science that are not politically correct to talk about today, but every scientist knows the truth.

我不知道有什么科学发现，然后人们喜欢，我知道今天谈论某些科学领域在政治上不正确，但每个科学家都知道真相。

The truth is still the truth.

事实仍然是事实。

I mean, even the geneticists in the Soviet Union who were forced to buy in, like, knew the whole time that it was wrong.

我的意思是，即使是被迫接受的苏联遗传学家，也一直知道这是错误的。

That I'm completely convinced of.

我对此深信不疑。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, they couldn't delude themselves, especially because the basic training that one gets in any field establishes some core truths upon which even the crazy ideas have to rest.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，他们不能欺骗自己，特别是因为一个人在任何领域接受的基本训练都建立了一些核心真理，即使是疯狂的想法也必须建立在这些核心真理之上。

And if they don't, as you pointed out, things fall to pieces.

如果他们不这样做，正如你所指出的，事情就会崩溃。

I would say that even the technologies that did not pan out and in some cases were disastrous, but that were great ideas at the beginning, are starting to pan out.

我想说的是，即使是那些没有成功、在某些情况下是灾难性的技术，但一开始是伟大的想法，现在也开始成功。

So the example I'll give is that most people are aware of the Elizabeth Holmes Theranos debacle, to put it lightly, analyzing what's in a single drop of blood as a way to analyze hormones and disease and antibodies, etc. I mean, that's a great idea, it's a terrific idea.

所以我要举的例子是，大多数人都知道伊丽莎白·霍姆斯·希拉洛斯的惨败，简单地说，通过分析一滴血液中的成分来分析激素、疾病和抗体等。我的意思是，这是一个好主意，这是一个了不起的主意。

As opposed to having a phlebotomist come to your house or you have to go in and you get tapped and then pulling vials and the whole thing.

与让抽血医生到你家或你必须进去并接受窃听然后拉出小瓶和整个事情相反。

There's now a company born out of Stanford that is doing exactly what she sought to do, except that at least the courts ruled that she fudged the thing, and that's why she's in jail right now.

现在有一家诞生于斯坦福大学的公司正在做她想做的事情，只不过法院至少裁定她捏造了这件事，这就是她现在入狱的原因。

But the idea of getting a wide array of markers from a single drop of blood is an absolutely spectacular idea.

但从一滴血中获取多种标记物的想法绝对是一个了不起的想法。

The biggest challenge that company has is going to confront is the idea that it's just the next Theranos.

该公司面临的最大挑战是认为自己只是下一个希拉洛斯。

But if they've got the thing and they're not fudging it, as apparently Theranos was, I think everything will work out ala Victor Hugo.

但如果他们掌握了这个东西，并且不会像希拉洛斯那样捏造事实，我想一切都会像维克多·雨果那样顺利。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, exactly.

马克·安德森：是的，完全正确。

Because who wants to go back if they get to the work, if it's real?

因为如果他们真的去上班了，谁愿意回去呢？

This is the thing.

就是这样。

The opponents, they're not bringing their own ideas.

对手们，他们没有提出自己的想法。

They're not bringing their, oh, my idea is better than yours.

他们没有带来他们的，哦，我的想法比你的好。

That's not what's happening.

事实并非如此。

They're bringing the silence or counterargument or name-calling.

他们带来的是沉默、反驳或谩骂。

Andrew Huberman: Well, this is why I think people who need to be loved probably stand a reduced chance of success.

安德鲁·休伯曼：嗯，这就是为什么我认为需要被爱的人成功的机会可能会减少。

And maybe that's also why having people close to you that do love you and allowing that to be sufficient can be very beneficial.

也许这也是为什么有一个真正爱你的亲近的人并让这一切变得足够是非常有益的。

This gets back to the idea of partnership and family around innovators, because if you feel filled up by those people local to you in your home, then you don't need people on the internet saying nice things about you or your ideas, because you're good and you can forge forward.

这又回到了创新者周围的伙伴关系和家庭的想法，因为如果你觉得家里有你本地的人，那么你就不需要人们在互联网上对你或你的想法说好话，因为你很优秀，你可以不断前进。

Another question about innovation is the teams that you assemble around you, and you've talked before about the sort of small squadron model, sort of David and Goliath examples as well, where a small group of individuals can create a technology that frankly outdoes what a giant like Facebook might be doing or what any other large company might be doing.

关于创新的另一个问题是你在你周围组建的团队，你之前谈到过那种小中队模型，也是大卫和歌利亚的例子，其中一小群人可以创造出一种技术，坦率地超越像 Facebook 这样的巨头可能正在做的事情或任何其他大公司可能正在做的事情。

There are a lot of theories as to why that would happen, but I know you have some unique theories.

关于为什么会发生这种情况有很多理论，但我知道你们有一些独特的理论。

Why do you think small groups can defeat large organizations?

为什么你认为小团体可以打败大组织？

Marc Andreessen: So the conventional explanation is, I think, correct, and it's just that large organizations have a lot of advantages, but they just have a very hard time actually executing anything because of all the overhead.

马克·安德森：所以我认为传统的解释是正确的，只是大型组织有很多优势，但由于所有的开销，他们实际上很难执行任何事情。

So large organizations have combinatorial communication overhead.

因此大型组织有组合通信开销。

The number of people who have to be consulted, who have to agree on things, gets to be staggering.

需要征求意见、必须就事情达成一致的人数是惊人的。

The amount of time it takes to schedule the meeting gets to be staggering.

安排会议所需的时间非常惊人。

You get these really big companies and they have some issue they're dealing with, and it takes like a month to schedule the pre-meeting, to plan for the meeting, which is going to happen two months later, which is then going to result in a post-meeting, which will then result in a board presentation, which will then result in a planning off site.

这些非常大的公司，他们正在处理一些问题，需要大约一个月的时间来安排会前，计划两个月后的会议，然后将导致会后会议，然后将导致董事会演示，然后将导致场外计划。

Andrew Huberman: I thought academia was bad.

安德鲁·休伯曼：我认为学术界很糟糕。

But what you're describing is giving me hives.

但你所描述的情况让我得了荨麻疹。

Marc Andreessen: Kafka was a documentary.

马克·安德森：《卡夫卡》是一部纪录片。

Yeah.

是的。

Look, you'd have these organizations — at 100,000 people or more like you're more of a nation state than a company.

看，你会有这些组织——有 100,000 人或更多，就像你更像是一个民族国家而不是一家公司。

And you've got all these competing internal, it's the Bedouin thing I was saying before.

你有所有这些内部竞争，这是我之前说过的贝都因人的事情。

You've got all these internal, at most big companies, your internal enemies are way more dangerous to you than anybody on the outside.

在大多数大公司，你的内部敌人对你来说比外部的任何人都危险得多。

Andrew Huberman: Can you elaborate on that?

安德鲁·休伯曼：你能详细说明一下吗？

Marc Andreessen: Oh, yeah.

马克·安德森：哦，是的。

At a big company, the big competition is for the next promotion, right?

在大公司，激烈的竞争是为了下一次晋升，对吧？

And the enemy for the next promotion is the next executive over in your company.

下一次晋升的敌人是公司的下一位高管。

That's your enemy.

那是你的敌人。

The competitor on the outside is like an abstraction.

外部的竞争对手就像一个抽象的东西。

Like, maybe they'll matter someday, whatever.

就像，也许有一天它们会变得重要，无论如何。

I've got to beat that guy inside my own company.

我必须打败我自己公司里的那个人。

Right?

正确的？

And so the internal warfare is at least as intense as the external warfare.

因此，内部战争至少与外部战争一样激烈。

This is just all the iron law of all these big bureaucracies and how they function.

这就是所有这些大官僚机构及其运作方式的铁律。

So if a big bureaucracy ever does anything productive, I think it's like a miracle.

因此，如果一个大官僚机构做出了任何富有成效的事情，我认为这就像一个奇迹。

It's like a miracle to the point where there should be like a celebration, there should be parties, there should be like ticker tape parades for big, large organizations that actually do things.

这就像一个奇迹，应该有一个庆祝活动，应该有聚会，应该有一个真正做事的大型组织的游行。

That's great because it's so rare.

这太棒了，因为它非常罕见。

It doesn't happen very often anyway.

无论如何，这种情况并不经常发生。

So that's the conventional explanation, whereas, look, small companies, small teams, there's a lot that they can't do because they're not operating at scale and they don't have global coverage and all these kind of, they don't have the resources and so forth.

这是传统的解释，而小公司、小团队，有很多事情他们做不到，因为他们没有大规模运营，没有全球覆盖范围，等等，他们没有资源等等。

But at least they can move quickly, right?

但至少他们可以快速行动，对吗？

They can organize fast.

他们可以快速组织起来。

If there's an issue today, they can have a meeting today, they can solve the issue today.

如果今天有问题，他们今天可以开会，今天就可以解决问题。

And everybody they need to solve the issue is in the room today.

今天他们需要解决问题的所有人都在场。

So they can just move a lot faster.

所以他们可以移动得更快。

I think that's part of it.

我认为这是其中的一部分。

But I think there's another deeper thing underneath that, that people really don't like to talk about.

但我认为这背后还有另一个更深层次的事情，人们真的不喜欢谈论。

That takes us back full circle to where we started, which is just the sheer number of people in the world who are capable of doing new things is just a very small set of people.

这让我们回到了起点，即世界上有能力做新事物的人只是极少数。

And so you're not going to have 100 of them in a company or 1000 or 10,000.

因此，一家公司不会有 100 名、1000 名或 10,000 名这样的人。

You're going to have three, eight or 10, maybe.

也许你会有三个、八个或十个。

Andrew Huberman: And some of them are flying too close to the sun.

安德鲁·休伯曼：其中一些飞得离太阳太近。

Marc Andreessen: Some of them are blowing themselves up, right?

马克·安德森：他们中的一些人正在自爆，对吧？

Some of them are.

其中一些是。

So IBM.

所以IBM。

I actually first learned this at IBM.

事实上，我是在 IBM 第一次了解到这一点的。

My first actual job job was at IBM when IBM was still on top of the world right before it caved in the early '90s.

我的第一份实际工作是在 IBM，当时 IBM 在 90 年代初陷入衰退之前仍处于世界之巅。

And so when I was there it was 440,000 employees which, and again if you inflation adjust like today for that same size of business, inflation adjusted, market size adjusted, it would be its equivalent today of like a two- or three-million-person organization.

所以当我在那里的时候，有 440,000 名员工，如果你像今天一样对同样规模的企业进行通货膨胀调整，调整通货膨胀，调整市场规模，那么它相当于今天一个拥有两百万或三百万人的组织。

It was a nation state.

这是一个民族国家。

There were 6000 people in my division and we were next door to another building that had another 6000 people in another division.

我的部门有 6000 人，而我们隔壁的另一栋大楼还有另一个部门的 6000 人。

So you could work there for years and never meet anybody who didn't work for IBM.

因此，您可以在那里工作多年，却永远不会遇到任何不在 IBM 工作过的人。

The first half of every meeting was just IBMers introducing themselves to each other.

每次会议的前半部分都是 IBM 员工互相自我介绍。

It was just mind boggling, the level of complexity.

其复杂程度令人难以置信。

But they were so powerful that they had four years before I got there in 1985, they were 80% of the market capitalization of the entire tech industry.

但他们的实力非常强大，在我 1985 年到达那里之前的四年里，他们就占据了整个科技行业 80% 的市值。

So they were at a level of dominance that even Google or Apple today is not even close to at the time.

因此，他们当时的统治地位甚至连今天的谷歌或苹果都无法企及。

So that's how powerful they were.

所以说他们的实力是多么的强大。

And so they had a system and it worked really well for like 50 years.

所以他们有一个系统，并且它运行了大约 50 年。

They had a system which was most of the employees in the company were expected to basically follow rules.

他们有一个制度，要求公司的大多数员工基本上遵守规则。

So they dressed the same, they acted the same, they did everything out of the playbook.

所以他们穿着一样，举止也一样，一切都按照剧本进行。

They were trained very specifically, but they had this category of people they called wild ducks.

他们接受了非常专门的训练，但他们有这样的人，他们称之为野鸭。

And this was an idea that the founder Thomas Watson had come up with, wild ducks.

这是创始人托马斯·沃森（Thomas Watson）提出的一个想法：野鸭。

And the wild ducks were, they often had the formal title of an IBM fellow, and they were the people who could make new things and there were eight of them.

而野鸭子，他们往往拥有 IBM 研究员的正式头衔，他们是能够创造新事物的人，一共有八个人。

And they got to break all the rules and they got to invent new products.

他们必须打破所有规则并发明新产品。

They got to go off and work on something new.

他们必须离开去从事新的事情。

They didn't have to report back.

他们不必回报。

They got to pull people off of other projects to work with them.

他们必须从其他项目中抽调人员来与他们合作。

They got budget when they needed it.

他们在需要时获得预算。

They reported directly to the CEO, they got whatever they needed.

他们直接向首席执行官汇报，他们得到了他们需要的一切。

He supported them in doing it.

他支持他们这样做。

And they were glass breakers.

他们是玻璃破碎者。

And the one in Austin at the time was this guy Andy Heller.

当时在奥斯汀的那个人是安迪·海勒（Andy Heller）。

And he would show up in jeans and cowboy boots and amongst an ocean of men in blue suits, white shirts, red ties and put his cowboy boots up on the table, and it was fine for Andy Heller to do that.

他会穿着牛仔裤和牛仔靴出现在一大群穿着蓝色西装、白衬衫、红色领带的男人中间，把他的牛仔靴放在桌子上，安迪·海勒这样做很好。

And it was not fine for you to do that, right.

你这样做不太好，对吧。

And so they very specifically identified, we have almost like an aristocratic class within our company that gets to play by different rules.

因此，他们非常明确地指出，我们公司内部几乎就像一个贵族阶层，可以按照不同的规则行事。

Now the expectation is they deliver, right?

现在的期望是他们交付，对吗？

Their job is to invent the next breakthrough product.

他们的工作是发明下一个突破性产品。

But we, IBM management, know that the 6000-person division is not going to invent the next product.

但我们，IBM 管理层，知道这个 6000 人的部门不会发明下一个产品。

We know it's going to be crazy Andy Heller in his cowboy boots.

我们知道穿着牛仔靴的安迪·海勒 (Andy Heller) 一定会很疯狂。

And so I was always very impressed.

所以我总是印象深刻。

Again, ultimately IBM had its issues, but that model worked for 50 years.

同样，最终 IBM 也遇到了问题，但这种模式运行了 50 年。

Right?

正确的？

Like, worked incredibly well.

就像，工作得非常好。

And I think that's basically the model that works.

我认为这基本上就是有效的模型。

But it's a paradox, right?

但这是一个悖论，对吧？

Which is like, how do you have a large, bureaucratic, regimented organization, whether it's academia or government or business or anything, that has all these rule followers in it and all these people who are jealous of their status and don't want things to change, but then still have that spark of creativity?

这就像，你如何拥有一个庞大的、官僚的、严格的组织，无论是学术界、政府、企业还是其他什么，里面有所有这些规则追随者，所有这些人都嫉妒自己的地位，不希望事情发生改变，但仍然有创造力的火花？

I would say mostly it's impossible.

我想说大部分是不可能的。

Mostly it just doesn't happen.

大多数情况下它不会发生。

Those people get driven out.

那些人就被赶出去了。

And in tech, what happens is those people get driven out because we will fund them.

在科技领域，发生的情况是那些人被赶出，因为我们将为他们提供资金。

These are the people we fund.

这些是我们资助的人。

Andrew Huberman: I was going to say, rather, that you are in the business of finding and funding the wild ducks.

安德鲁·胡伯曼：我想说的是，你们的工作是寻找并资助野鸭。

Marc Andreessen: The wild ducks.

马克·安德森：野鸭。

That's exactly right.

完全正确。

And actually, this is actually, close the loop.

事实上，这实际上是闭环。

This is actually, I think, the simplest explanation for why IBM ultimately caved in, and then HP sort of in the '80s also caved in.

我认为，这实际上是 IBM 最终屈服的最简单解释，然后 HP 在 80 年代也屈服了。

IBM and HP kind of were these incredible, monolithic, incredible companies for 40 or 50 years, and then they kind of both caved in in the '80s and '90s.

IBM 和 HP 在 40 或 50 年间都是令人难以置信的、整体性的、令人难以置信的公司，然后他们在 80 年代和 90 年代都屈服了。

I actually think it was the emergence of venture capital, it was the emergence of a parallel funding system where the wild ducks, or in HP's case, their superstar technical people, could actually leave and start their own companies, and again, it goes back to the university discussion we're having is like, this is what doesn't exist at the university level.

我实际上认为这是风险投资的出现，这是一个平行融资系统的出现，在这个系统中，野鸭子，或者在惠普的例子中，他们的超级明星技术人员，实际上可以离开并创办自己的公司，这又回到了我们正在进行的大学讨论，这在大学层面是不存在的。

This certainly does not exist at the government level.

这在政府层面肯定不存在。

Andrew Huberman: And until recently in media, it didn't exist until there's this thing that we call podcasts.

Andrew Huberman：直到最近，媒体领域才出现了我们称之为播客的东西。

Marc Andreessen: Exactly right.

马克·安德森：完全正确。

Andrew Huberman: Which clearly have picked up some momentum, and I would hope that these other wild duck models will move quickly.

Andrew Huberman：这显然已经取得了一些进展，我希望其他野鸭模型能够迅速发展。

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, but the one thing you know, and you know this, the one thing you know is the people on the other side are going to be mad as hell.

马克·安德森：是的，但是你知道的一件事，你知道这一点，你知道的一件事是另一边的人会发疯。

Andrew Huberman: Yeah, they're going to, well, I think they're past denial.

安德鲁·休伯曼：是的，他们会，嗯，我认为他们已经不再否认了。

The counterarguments continue.

反驳仍在继续。

The name-calling is prolific.

谩骂之事屡见不鲜。

Marc Andreessen: Name-calling is fully underway.

马克·安德森：谩骂正在全面展开。

Andrew Huberman: Well, Marc, we've covered a lot of topics, but as with every time I talk to you, I learn oh, so very much.

安德鲁·休伯曼：嗯，马克，我们讨论了很多话题，但就像每次我和你谈话一样，我学到了很多东西。

I'm so grateful for you taking the time out of your schedule to talk about all of these topics in depth with us.

我非常感谢您抽出时间与我们深入讨论所有这些主题。

I'd be remiss if I didn't say that.

如果我不这么说那就是我的失职。

It is clear to me now that you are hyper realistic about the landscape, but you are also intensely optimistic about the existence of wild ducks and those around them that support them and that are necessary for the implementation of their ideas at some point.

现在我很清楚，你对景观非常现实，但你也对野鸭和它们周围支持它们的人的存在非常乐观，这对于在某个时候实现它们的想法是必要的。

And that also, you have a real rebel inside you.

而且，你内心也有一个真正的叛逆者。

So that is oh, so welcome on this podcast.

所以哦，非常欢迎这个播客。

And it's also needed in these times and every time.

在这个时代和每一次都需要它。

So on behalf of myself and the rest of us here at the podcast, and especially the listeners, thank you so much.

因此，我代表我自己和播客中的其他人，特别是听众，非常感谢你们。

Marc Andreessen: Thanks for having me.

马克·安德森：谢谢你邀请我。

Andrew Huberman: Thank you for joining me for today's discussion with Marc Andreessen.

Andrew Huberman：感谢您参加今天与 Marc Andreessen 的讨论。

If you're learning from and or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe to our YouTube channel.

如果您正在学习或喜欢此播客，请订阅我们的 YouTube 频道。

That's a terrific, zero-cost way to support us.

这是支持我们的绝佳且零成本的方式。

In addition, please subscribe to the podcast on both Spotify and Apple.

此外，请在 Spotify 和 Apple 上订阅该播客。

And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review.

在 Spotify 和 Apple 上，您都可以给我们五星级的评价。

If you have questions for me or comments about the podcast or guests that you'd like me to consider hosting on the Huberman Lab podcast, please put those in the comments section on YouTube.

如果您对我有疑问或对您希望我考虑在 Huberman Lab 播客上主持的播客或嘉宾有意见，请将这些意见放在 YouTube 的评论部分。

I do read all the comments.

我确实阅读了所有评论。

Please also check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning and throughout today's episode.

另请查看今天节目开头和整个节目中提到的赞助商。

That's the best way to support this podcast, not on today's podcast, but on many previous episodes of the Huberman Lab podcast, we discuss supplements.

这是支持这个播客的最佳方式，不是在今天的播客上，而是在休伯曼实验室播客的许多以前的剧集中，我们讨论了补充。

While supplements aren't necessary for everybody, many people derive tremendous benefit from them for things like improving sleep, hormone support and focus.

虽然补充剂并不是每个人都需要的，但许多人从它们中获得了巨大的好处，例如改善睡眠、激素支持和注意力集中。

The Huberman Lab podcast has partnered with Momentous Supplements.

Huberman Lab 播客与 Momentous Supplements 合作。

If you'd like to access the supplements discussed on the Huberman Lab podcast, you can go to livemomentous, spelled O-U-S.

如果您想访问 Huberman Lab 播客上讨论的补充内容，您可以访问 livemomentous，拼写为 O-U-S。

So it's livemomentous.com/huberman, and you can also receive 20% off.

所以它是 livemomentous.com/huberman，您还可以获得 20% 的折扣。

Again, that's livemomentous, spelled O-U-S, .com/huberman.

再说一遍，这很生动，拼写为 O-U-S，.com/huberman。

If you haven't already subscribed to our Neural Network newsletter, our Neural Network newsletter is a completely zero-cost monthly newsletter that includes summaries of podcast episodes as well as protocols, that is, short PDFs describing, for instance, tools to improve sleep, tools to improve neuroplasticity.

如果您还没有订阅我们的神经网络时事通讯，我们的神经网络时事通讯是完全零成本的每月时事通讯，其中包括播客剧集和协议的摘要，即描述改善睡眠的工具、改善神经可塑性的工具等的简短 PDF。

We talk about deliberate cold exposure, fitness, various aspects of mental health, again, all completely zero-cost.

我们再次谈论刻意的寒冷暴露、健身、心理健康的各个方面，所有这些都是完全零成本的。

And to sign up, you simply go to hubermanlab.com, go over to the menu in the corner, scroll down to Newsletter, and provide your email.

要注册，您只需访问 hubermanlab.com，转到角落的菜单，向下滚动到新闻通讯，然后提供您的电子邮件。

We do not share your email with anybody.

我们不会与任何人分享您的电子邮件。

If you're not already following me on social media, I am Huberman Lab on all platforms.

如果您还没有在社交媒体上关注我，我是所有平台上的 Huberman Lab。

So that's Instagram, Twitter, Threads, LinkedIn, and Facebook.

这就是 Instagram、Twitter、Threads、LinkedIn 和 Facebook。

And at all of those places I talk about science and science-related tools, some of which overlaps with the content of the Huberman Lab podcast, but much of which is distinct from the content of the Huberman Lab podcast.

在所有这些地方，我都谈论科学和与科学相关的工具，其中一些与胡伯曼实验室播客的内容重叠，但其中大部分与胡伯曼实验室播客的内容不同。

Again, it's Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.

同样，所有社交媒体平台上都是 Huberman Lab。

Thank you once again for joining me for today's discussion with Marc Andreessen.

再次感谢您参加今天与马克·安德森的讨论。

And last but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.

最后但并非最不重要的一点是，感谢您对科学的兴趣。