The science of product, big bets, and how AI is impacting the future of music | Gustav Söderström

Gustav Söderström: The internet started with curation, often user curation.

Gustav Söderström：互联网始于策展，通常是用户策展。

So you took something, some good like people or books or music, and you digitize it and you put it online and then you ask users to curate it.

所以你拿了一些东西，一些好的东西，比如人、书籍或音乐，你把它数字化，然后把它放到网上，然后你要求用户来策划它。

And that was your Facebook, Spotify, and so forth.

那就是你的 Facebook、Spotify 等等。

And then after a while, the world switched from curation to recommendation, where instead of people doing that work, you had algorithms.

过了一段时间，世界从策展转向推荐，不再是由人来做这项工作，而是由算法来完成。

And that was a big change that required us and others to actually rethink the entire user experience and sometimes the business model as well.

这是一个巨大的变化，需要我们和其他人真正重新思考整个用户体验，有时甚至是商业模式。

And I think what we're entering now is we're going from your curation to recommendation to generation.

我认为我们现在要进入的是从你的策划到推荐再到生成。

And I suspect it will be as big of a shift that you will eventually have to rethink your products.

我怀疑这将是一个巨大的转变，你最终将不得不重新考虑你的产品。

We have to rethink the user interface and the experience for recommendation first era.

我们必须重新思考推荐第一时代的用户界面和体验。

And so what does that mean in the generative era?

那么这在生成时代意味着什么呢？

No one really knows yet.

目前还没有人真正知道。

Lenny: Welcome to Lenny's Podcast where I interview world-class product leaders and growth experts to learn from their hard one experiences building and growing today's most successful products.

莱尼：欢迎来到莱尼的播客，我在这里采访了世界一流的产品领导者和增长专家，从他们构建和发展当今最成功产品的艰辛经验中学习。

Today, my guest is Gustav Söderström.

今天，我的嘉宾是古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦。

Gustav is a product legend and he's now the co-president, chief product and chief technology officer at Spotify, where he's responsible for Spotify's global product and technology strategy and oversees the product design data and engineering teams at the company.

Gustav 是一位产品传奇人物，他现在是 Spotify 的联席总裁、首席产品和首席技术官，负责 Spotify 的全球产品和技术战略，并监督公司的产品设计数据和工程团队。

I've had Gustav on my wish list of dream guests to have on this podcast since the day I launched the podcast and I'm so happy we made it happen.

自从我推出这个播客的那天起，我就将古斯塔夫列入了我的梦想嘉宾名单上，我很高兴我们实现了这一目标。

Lenny: In our conversation, we dig into what Gustav has learned about taking big bets and what to do when they don't work out, how Spotify moved away from squads and how they structure their teams now, how AI is already impacting their product, and also the future of music generated by AI.

Lenny：在我们的谈话中，我们深入探讨了 Gustav 学到的关于大赌注的经验以及当赌注失败时该怎么办、Spotify 如何摆脱小队以及他们现在如何构建团队、人工智能已经如何影响他们的产品，以及人工智能生成的音乐的未来。

Also, why all great products need to pull some magic trick, how accurately succession represents Swedish business culture, and his hilarious analogy of peeing in your pants.

此外，为什么所有伟大的产品都需要施展一些魔术，继承如何准确地代表瑞典的商业文化，以及他在裤子里撒尿的搞笑比喻。

Enjoy this episode with Gustav Söderström after a short word from our sponsors.

在我们的赞助商简短致辞后，请与 Gustav Söderström 一起欣赏这一集。

Lenny: This episode is brought to you by Microsoft Clarity, a free easy to use tool that captures how real people are actually using your site.

Lenny：本集由 Microsoft Clarity 为您带来，这是一款易于使用的免费工具，可以捕获真实的人们如何实际使用您的网站。

You can watch live session replays to discover where users are breezing through your flow and where they struggle.

您可以观看实时会话重播，以发现用户在您的流程中哪些地方表现得轻松，哪些地方遇到了困难。

You can view instant heat maps to see what parts of your page users are engaging with and what content they're ignoring.

您可以查看即时热图，以了解用户正在参与页面的哪些部分以及他们忽略了哪些内容。

You can also pinpoint what's bothering your users with really cool frustration metrics like rage clicks and dead clicks and much more.

您还可以通过非常酷的挫折指标（例如愤怒点击和死点击等）来查明困扰用户的问题。

If you listen to this podcast, you know how often we talk about the importance of knowing your users, and by seeing how users truly experience your product, you can identify product opportunities, conversion wins, and find big gaps between how you imagine people using your product and how they actually use it.

如果您收听此播客，您就会知道我们经常谈论了解用户的重要性，通过了解用户如何真实体验您的产品，您可以识别产品机会、转化成功，并发现您想象的人们如何使用您的产品与他们实际使用产品的方式之间的巨大差距。

Lenny: Microsoft Clarity makes it all possible with a simple yet incredibly powerful set of features.

Lenny：Microsoft Clarity 通过一组简单但极其强大的功能使这一切成为可能。

You'll be blown away by how easy Clarity is to use and it's completely free forever.

您一定会对 Clarity 的易用性和永久免费感到震惊。

You'll never run into traffic limits or be forced to upgrade to a paid version.

您永远不会遇到流量限制或被迫升级到付费版本。

It also works across both apps and websites.

它还适用于应用程序和网站。

Stop guessing, get Clarity.

停止猜测，弄清楚。

Check out Clarity at clarity.microsoft.com.

请访问 Clearity.microsoft.com 查看 Clarity。

Lenny: This episode is brought to you by Eppo.

Lenny：这一集是 Eppo 为您带来的。

Eppo is a next generation AB testing platform built by Airbnb alums for modern growth teams.

Eppo 是 Airbnb 校友为现代增长团队打造的下一代 AB 测试平台。

Companies like DraftKings, Zapier, ClickUp, Twitch, and Cameo rely on Eppo to power their experiments.

DraftKings、Zapier、ClickUp、Twitch 和 Cameo 等公司依靠 Eppo 来支持他们的实验。

Wherever you work, running experiments is increasingly essential, but there are no commercial tools that integrate with a modern grow team stack.

无论您在哪里工作，运行实验都变得越来越重要，但是没有可以与现代种植团队堆栈集成的商业工具。

This leads to waste of time building internal tools or trying to run your own experiments through a clunky marketing tool.

这会导致浪费时间构建内部工具或尝试通过笨重的营销工具进行自己的实验。

When I was at Airbnb, one of the things that I loved most about working there was our experimentation platform, where I was able to slice and dice data by device types, country, user stage.

当我在 Airbnb 工作时，我最喜欢在那里工作的事情之一就是我们的实验平台，在这里我能够按设备类型、国家/地区、用户阶段对数据进行切片和切块。

Eppo does all that and more delivering results quickly, avoiding knowing prolonged analytic cycles, and helping you easily get to the root cause of any issue you discover.

Eppo 可以完成所有这些工作，并快速提供结果，避免延长分析周期，并帮助您轻松找到所发现问题的根本原因。

Lenny: Eppo lets you go beyond basic click-through metrics and instead use your north star metrics like activation, retention, subscription, and payments.

Lenny：Eppo 可以让您超越基本的点击指标，而是使用北极星指标，例如激活、保留、订阅和付款。

Eppo supports test on front end, on the backend, email marketing, even machine learning claims.

Eppo 支持前端、后端、电子邮件营销、甚至机器学习声明的测试。

Check out Eppo at getE-P-P-O.com.

请访问 getE-P-P-O.com 查看 Eppo。

That's geteppo.com.

那是geteppo.com。

And 10X, your experiment velocity.

10X，你的实验速度。

Lenny: Gustav, welcome to the podcast.

莱尼：古斯塔夫，欢迎来到播客。

Gustav Söderström: Thanks for having me, Lenny.

Gustav Söderström：谢谢你邀请我，Lenny。

Pleasure to be here.

很高兴来到这里。

Lenny: It's my pleasure to have you on.

莱尼：很高兴你能来。

So at this point, you've been at Spotify for over 14 years, which is a rare feat in the tech world, and you've held a lot of different roles while you've been at Spotify.

到目前为止，您已经在 Spotify 工作超过 14 年，这在科技界是一项罕见的壮举，并且您在 Spotify 期间担任过许多不同的角色。

Can you just start off by giving us a sense of what these various roles and what you've done over the years at Spotify and then just what are you up to these days?

您能否首先向我们介绍一下这些不同的角色以及这些年来您在 Spotify 所做的事情，然后您最近在做什么？

What are you responsible for now?

你现在负责什么？

Gustav Söderström: So I came into Spotify in early 2009, late 2008.

Gustav Söderström：所以我在 2009 年初、2008 年底加入了 Spotify。

And my job then, I had been an entrepreneur, started some of my own companies in the, back then, very, very early feature phone, smartphone space.

当时我的工作是一名企业家，在当时非常非常早期的功能手机、智能手机领域创办了一些自己的公司。

So I had a bunch of knowledge there.

所以我在那里有很多知识。

I had sold the company to Yahoo in the mobile space.

我已将移动领域的公司卖给了雅虎。

I worked there for a while.

我在那里工作了一段时间。

I came back to Sweden and then I met through a mutual friend, Daniel Ek, the CEO and co-founder of Spotify.

我回到瑞典，然后通过一位共同的朋友认识了 Spotify 的首席执行官兼联合创始人丹尼尔·埃克 (Daniel Ek)。

And they had built the desktop product already, the free streaming desktop product, and it was amazing and I could try it, but they needed someone to figure out what to do with mobile.

他们已经构建了桌面产品，免费的流媒体桌面产品，这太棒了，我可以尝试一下，但他们需要有人弄清楚如何处理移动设备。

And because I had been an entrepreneur in that space, I got that job.

因为我曾是该领域的企业家，所以我得到了那份工作。

Gustav Söderström: So my job was to head up mobile for Spotify and figure out what the mobile offering would be, which was a challenge because, obviously, Spotify desktop was a free on-demand streaming application and back then, specifically with edge networks, you couldn't really stream at all in real time.

Gustav Söderström：所以我的工作是负责 Spotify 的移动业务并弄清楚移动产品是什么，这是一个挑战，因为很明显，Spotify 桌面版是一款免费的点播流媒体应用程序，而在当时，特别是在边缘网络中，你根本无法真正进行实时流媒体播放。

The performance wasn't there and also you couldn't fund that with an ads model.

效果不存在，而且你也无法通过广告模型为其提供资金。

So it was a product and business model innovation that was a lot of fun.

所以这是一个非常有趣的产品和商业模式创新。

So that's how I started.

我就是这样开始的。

Then after a few years, I took on all of product development for Spotify.

几年后，我承担了 Spotify 的所有产品开发工作。

And then a few years later, I actually took on the technology responsibility, the CTO role for Spotify as well.

几年后，我实际上承担了 Spotify 的技术责任和首席技术官的角色。

And recently, my official title is co-president of Spotify together with Alex Nordstrom.

最近，我的正式头衔是与 Alex Nordstrom 共同担任 Spotify 联合总裁。

So we run half of the company each.

所以我们各管理一半的公司。

I run the product and technology side and he runs for the business and content side.

我负责产品和技术方面，他负责业务和内容方面。

So that's the super fast version.

这就是超快版本。

Gustav Söderström: Aside from getting more responsibilities taking on the technology department, it has been the same job by title.

Gustav Söderström：除了在技术部门承担更多职责之外，头衔上的工作是一样的。

I've always reported to Daniel, but because Spotify's grown so much every six to 12 months, it's been starting at a new company.

我一直向 Daniel 汇报工作，但由于 Spotify 每 6 到 12 个月就成长了很多，所以它已经成立了一家新公司。

First, it was sort of a Swedish Nordic challenge and then it was a European challenge and then it was getting into the US and then we became a public company.

首先，这是瑞典北欧的挑战，然后是欧洲的挑战，然后进入美国，然后我们成为一家上市公司。

So it's as if I had jumped around between a lot of jobs actually, even though it was largely the same title and role.

因此，就好像我实际上在很多工作之间跳来跳去，尽管头衔和角色基本上相同。

Lenny: Your story makes me think of the classic be careful what you're good at because you end up taking on more and more.

莱尼：你的故事让我想起了经典，要小心你擅长的事情，因为你最终会承担越来越多的任务。

And clearly, you've been given more and more responsibility over the years and so clearly things are going well and you're doing well.

显然，这些年来你被赋予了越来越多的责任，所以显然事情进展顺利，你也做得很好。

Lenny: Shifting a little bit.

莱尼：稍微改变一下。

So you're on my podcast currently.

所以你现在在我的播客上。

You actually have your own podcast, which was this limited series on the product story of Spotify, which I listened to and loved, and it's surreal to listen to your voice in real time because I've been listening to that recently in preparation for this conversation.

你实际上有自己的播客，这是关于 Spotify 产品故事的有限系列，我听了并且很喜欢，实时收听你的声音是超现实的，因为我最近一直在听，为这次对话做准备。

Two questions, just what made you decide to launch your own podcast knowing you had a full-time job and a lot going on and the production value for your podcast was very high for what I could tell?

有两个问题，是什么让你决定推出自己的播客，因为你知道自己有一份全职工作，还有很多事情要做，而且据我所知，你的播客的制作价值非常高？

And then two, just what did you learn from that experience in terms of the product you ended up a building and just empathizing with the podcast creator side of?

然后第二个问题，你从那次经历中学到了什么，你最终构建了一个产品，并与播客创作者产生了共鸣？

Gustav Söderström: There were a bunch of different reasons why I did that.

Gustav Söderström：我这样做有很多不同的原因。

One is, and not a small one, I think, like you, I love writing and I have this secret creator dream in me.

其中一个是，而且不是一个小问题，我想，像你一样，我喜欢写作，并且我内心有这个秘密创造者的梦想。

I used to write blog posts a long time ago and I write internally a lot.

我很早以前就写过博客文章，而且我内部写了很多。

You can't write that much externally when you work at a company like this.

在这样的公司工作，你不可能在外部写那么多东西。

Gustav Söderström: But I love writing and talking and presenting.

Gustav Söderström：但我喜欢写作、演讲和演讲。

So there was certainly that.

所以肯定是这样的。

And then no small part was, from a product point of view, to empathize with one of our main constituents, the podcast creator.

然后，从产品的角度来看，很大一部分是要同情我们的主要组成部分之一，即播客创作者。

I'm, unfortunately, not a great musician.

不幸的是，我不是一个伟大的音乐家。

I try to play instruments and so forth, but I don't have any records.

我尝试演奏乐器等，但我没有任何唱片。

I don't sing very well.

我唱歌不太好。

But I decided to make a podcast and that taught me a huge amount about what it's like to be a creator, creating different styles of podcast.

但我决定制作一个播客，这教会了我很多关于成为一名创作者、创作不同风格的播客的感觉。

Gustav Söderström: For example, we wanted to do a higher production cost podcast with music and then right away you run into a bunch of problems as Spotify is actually pretty well positioned to solve, but still, it's really hard to have music in a podcast from a rights perspective.

Gustav Söderström：例如，我们想要制作一个制作成本更高的音乐播客，然后马上就会遇到一堆问题，因为 Spotify 实际上已经很好地解决了，但从权利的角度来看，在播客中加入音乐确实很难。

So you understand all these problems that podcasters have and you can be better at solving them.

因此，您了解播客所面临的所有这些问题，并且可以更好地解决它们。

But the biggest benefit and the real reason for doing the public podcast was that I have actually done an internal podcast through a hack where we could gate the podcast-only employees.

但做公共播客的最大好处和真正原因是，我实际上通过黑客做了一个内部播客，我们可以控制只播客的员工。

And I tried to figure out internally how to build more culture around Spotify and help define for new employees and existing employees, who we are, the mistakes we did, the successes we had, and how we think about strategy specifically in product strategy because we were quite well known externally for technology and the squads and all of these things, not so much for product strategy.

我试图在内部弄清楚如何围绕 Spotify 建立更多的文化，并帮助新员工和现有员工定义我们是谁，我们犯过的错误，我们取得的成功，以及我们如何思考具体在产品战略中的战略，因为我们在外部以技术和团队以及所有这些事情而闻名，而不是在产品战略方面。

Gustav Söderström: And because I love storytelling more than Google Docs, I decided to do an internal podcast and I went around and I interviewed actually Daniel's direct reports.

Gustav Söderström：因为我比 Google Docs 更喜欢讲故事，所以我决定做一个内部播客，我到处采访了 Daniel 的直接下属。

So the CMO, the CHRO and CFO.

因此，首席营销官、首席人力资源官和首席财务官。

And just ask them about a bunch of stuff.

只是问他们一些事情。

And the idea was to make them more approachable for employees because I felt listening to podcasts, even these people that have no idea who I am because I've never met them, I feel like I know them, I feel like I know how they think and I just like them much more.

我们的想法是让他们对员工来说更平易近人，因为我觉得听播客，即使是那些不知道我是谁的人，因为我从未见过他们，我觉得我了解他们，我觉得我知道他们的想法，我只是更喜欢他们。

So the secret idea was, what if you could get to know your leaders much better than you do through occasional meetings or some town hall?

所以秘密的想法是，如果你能比通过偶尔的会议或市政厅更好地了解你的领导者会怎么样？

So I did that internally, and because I'm a product person, we ended up talking a lot about product and product strategy.

所以我在内部这样做了，因为我是一名产品人员，所以我们最终讨论了很多关于产品和产品策略的内容。

And people internally really like that.

内部人士真的很喜欢这样。

Gustav Söderström: So next time, the question was, what if people that don't even work at Spotify yet could feel as if they knew people at Spotify?

Gustav Söderström：所以下一次，问题是，如果那些甚至不在 Spotify 工作的人也能感觉好像他们认识 Spotify 的人呢？

That'd be great because most leaders in most companies are very opaque and appear as some otherworldly creatures that aren't really real, I think, when you see them in business papers or something.

那就太好了，因为大多数公司的大多数领导者都非常不透明，当你在商业报纸或其他东西上看到他们时，我认为他们看起来像是一些不真实的超凡脱俗的生物。

So what if you have heard them talk for an hour or so?

如果你听他们讲了一个小时左右又怎么样？

So that was general idea.

这就是总体想法。

So a combination of recruitment tool, sharing more about how we think about product strategy and just because I think it was a lot of fun.

这是招聘工具的组合，更多地分享了我们对产品策略的看法，因为我认为这很有趣。

I got to interview a bunch of smart and interesting people both externally and internally.

我采访了一群外部和内部的聪明而有趣的人。

Lenny: Did it have the effect that you were hoping after looking back?

Lenny：回过头来看，有达到你希望的效果吗？

Gustav Söderström: I think it did.

Gustav Söderström：我认为是的。

The podcast did well and, no, we did not give it our own promotion.

播客做得很好，不，我们没有自己推广它。

I had to compete as everyone else, which also gives you a lot of empathy for the problem of like, okay, now you have a product, what about user acquisition?

我必须像其他人一样竞争，这也让你对这样的问题有很多同理心，好吧，现在你有了产品，那么用户获取呢？

How do you actually get people to listen to it?

你如何真正让人们听它？

So it did achieve what I wanted in the sense that we have this thing called intradays where especially in the past few years when we've hired a lot, we actually fly people to Stockholm for an onboarding session to learn about Spotify.

所以它确实实现了我想要的，因为我们有一种叫做“intradays”的东西，特别是在过去几年，当我们雇佣了很多人时，我们实际上会带人们去斯德哥尔摩参加入职会议来了解 Spotify。

And the leadership is on stage, talking about what they do and the departments and strategy and so forth.

领导层在台上，谈论他们的工作、部门和战略等等。

And it's very common that people come and tell me that, "Oh, I listened to this podcast or this and the episode and it's at least one of the key reasons why I joined or sometimes the reason why I joined." So it's anecdotal, but it may be in the many tens of people, at least, who have said it.

人们经常来告诉我，“哦，我听了这个播客或这个和这一集，这至少是我加入的关键原因之一，有时也是我加入的原因之一。”所以这只是轶事，但至少可能有数十人说过这样的话。

So that seems to work.

所以这似乎有效。

Lenny: That's really interesting.

莱尼：这真的很有趣。

Just again, and this comes up a few times on the podcast, is just the power of content in all these different ways for hiring for culture building.

再说一次，这在播客中出现了几次，这就是内容以所有这些不同方式招聘文化建设的力量。

And it sounds like the original goal was just internally build this clinic culture and strategy.

听起来最初的目标只是在内部建立这种诊所文化和策略。

Gustav Söderström: That was the original goal, make senior leadership more approachable and reduce the distance and then also share more of the thinking in an entertaining way rather than just through docs that people end up not reading.

Gustav Söderström：这是最初的目标，让高层领导更平易近人，缩短距离，然后以一种有趣的方式分享更多的想法，而不仅仅是通过人们最终不阅读的文档。

Lenny: I love that.

莱尼：我喜欢这个。

So I was listening to it, as I said, and what was really interesting is I think episode four was actually all about AI, and I think your first attempts at leveraging machine learning in AI within Spotify.

所以我正在听它，正如我所说，真正有趣的是我认为第四集实际上都是关于人工智能的，我认为你在 Spotify 中首次尝试利用人工智能中的机器学习。

And I think that's what led to Discover Weekly and a few other tools.

我认为这就是《Discover Weekly》和其他一些工具诞生的原因。

And that was years ago.

那是几年前的事了。

And it's interesting listening to it now where AI is, again, a huge deal.

现在听它很有趣，人工智能再次成为一件大事。

And so I'm curious very tactically on the product team what you advise product managers and product teams on how to think about AI in their product thinking and also just in their day-to-day work.

因此，我非常好奇产品团队在战术上对产品经理和产品团队如何在产品思维以及日常工作中思考人工智能有何建议。

Gustav Söderström: I can give a few examples there and I don't know that we're more sophisticated than anyone else, but we'll be doing at least the traditional machine learning for quite a long time.

Gustav Söderström：我可以举几个例子，我不知道我们比其他人更复杂，但我们至少会在相当长的一段时间内进行传统的机器学习。

And I think in the podcast, I think I talked about the journey of the internet in stages.

我想在播客中，我想我分阶段谈论了互联网的旅程。

And one way to think about it is that the internet started with curation of the user curation.

一种思考方式是，互联网始于用户管理的管理。

So you took something, some good, like people or books or music and you digitize it and you put it online, and then you ask users to curate it.

所以你拿了一些东西，一些好的东西，比如人、书籍或音乐，你把它数字化，然后把它放到网上，然后你要求用户来策划它。

And that was your Facebook, Spotify and so forth.

那就是你的 Facebook、Spotify 等等。

And then after a while, the world switched from curation to recommendation, where instead of people doing that work, you had algorithms.

过了一段时间，世界从策展转向推荐，不再是由人来做这项工作，而是由算法来完成。

And that was a big change that required us and others to actually rethink the entire user experience and sometimes the business model as well.

这是一个巨大的变化，需要我们和其他人真正重新思考整个用户体验，有时甚至是商业模式。

Gustav Söderström: And I think what we're entering now is we're going from your curation to recommendation to generation.

Gustav Söderström：我认为我们现在正在进入的是从您的策展到推荐再到生成。

And I suspect it will be as big of a shift that you will eventually have to rethink your products.

我怀疑这将是一个巨大的转变，你最终将不得不重新考虑你的产品。

So that's one lens.

这就是一个镜头。

So I tend to talk to my teams about, even though it's all machine learning, I ask them to think of this as something completely different.

因此，我倾向于与我的团队讨论，尽管这都是机器学习，但我要求他们将其视为完全不同的东西。

The recommendation error was one type of machine learning.

推荐错误是机器学习的一种。

The generation error is a different type, so don't think of it as just more of the same, think of it as something actually completely new instead.

生成错误是一种不同的类型，因此不要将其视为完全相同，而应将其视为实际上全新的东西。

And what we learned in ...

我们在...中学到了什么

Well, a few things.

嗯，有几件事。

So if you look at this new era of large language models and the fusion models and so forth, there are two types of applications.

因此，如果你看看这个大语言模型和融合模型等的新时代，就会发现有两种类型的应用程序。

As I said for the recommendation error, we had to rethink the user interface and the experience for recommendation first error.

正如我针对推荐错误所说，我们必须重新考虑用户界面和推荐第一错误的体验。

Gustav Söderström: And so what does that mean in the generative area?

Gustav Söderström：那么这在生成领域意味着什么呢？

No one really knows yet.

目前还没有人真正知道。

As usual, there are a bunch of iterative improvements.

与往常一样，有很多迭代改进。

So we use these large language models to improve our recommendations.

因此我们使用这些大型语言模型来改进我们的推荐。

You can have bigger vectors that can have more cultural knowledge.

你可以拥有更大的载体，从而拥有更多的文化知识。

You can use it for safety classification on podcasts that no one has listened to yet and so forth.

您可以使用它对尚未有人收听的播客进行安全分类等。

So there's lots of obvious improvements and we're doing those.

所以有很多明显的改进，我们正在做这些。

But so far, we've only really done one real generative product in the hard definition, which is a product that couldn't have existed without generative AI, and that is the AI DJ.

但到目前为止，我们在硬定义上只真正做了一个真正的生成产品，这是一个没有生成人工智能就不可能存在的产品，那就是AI DJ。

So that's a concept that we've been thinking about for a very long time.

所以这是我们很长时间以来一直在思考的一个概念。

And the AI DJ is you press a button, a digitized person, there's a real person named X, digitized X.

而AI DJ就是你按一个按钮，一个数字化的人，有一个真人叫X，数字化的X。

So he's now an AI, comes on and talks to you about music that you like and suggests music, and you can listen to it.

所以他现在是一个人工智能，会和你谈论你喜欢的音乐并推荐音乐，你可以听。

And if you don't like it, you can just call him back and he says, "Okay, now, let's listen to something maybe from a few summers ago," or "Here's some new stuff that were trending yesterday in The Last of Us episode or something like that."

如果你不喜欢，你可以给他回电话，他会说，“好吧，现在，让我们听一些可能是几年前夏天的东西”，或者“这是昨天《最后生还者》剧集中流行的一些新东西或类似的东西。”

Gustav Söderström: So that product couldn't have existed without generative AI, both generating the voice and generating the content of what the voice says.

Gustav Söderström：如果没有生成式人工智能，该产品就不可能存在，既生成语音，又生成语音所说的内容。

So you can have individualized, personalized voice at the scale of half a billion people.

因此，您可以为 5 亿人提供个性化、个性化的声音。

And so we had the use case we have seen for many, many years.

因此，我们拥有了很多年以来见过的用例。

Sometimes people call it the radio use case.

有时人们将其称为无线电用例。

We called it the zero intent use case internally when you actually don't know what you want to listen to at all.

当您实际上根本不知道自己想听什么时，我们在内部将其称为零意图用例。

Gustav Söderström: Spotify wasn't that good.

Gustav Söderström：Spotify 没那么好。

Spotify was good when, at least roughly, you knew the use case of what you want to do, if it was a workout or dinner.

当你至少大致知道你想做的事情的用例（例如锻炼或晚餐）时，Spotify 就很好。

We had lots of options for all of those.

对于所有这些，我们有很多选择。

But if you really didn't know at all, it was hard to open Spotify and stare at it.

但如果你真的一无所知，就很难打开 Spotify 并盯着它看。

And people used to say longingly that this was the one thing that radio was good at.

人们曾经渴望地说，这就是广播所擅长的一件事。

Radio was quite bad, to be honest.

老实说，收音机很糟糕。

I mean, it's not personalized to you at all.

我的意思是，它根本不是为你量身定制的。

It's not on demand.

这不是按需的。

You come in in the middle of things, it's actually terrible in many ways.

当你陷入困境时，这在很多方面实际上都很糟糕。

But people still often say that there was something good about it.

但人们仍然经常说它有一些好处。

And I think that's something was the fact that you had a knob and you could just switch between contexts.

我认为这就是因为你有一个旋钮，你可以在上下文之间切换。

It's like no, boring, boring, boring, boring, okay, this is good.

就像不，无聊，无聊，无聊，无聊，好吧，这很好。

Gustav Söderström: And Spotify never had that mode of, I don't know what I want, but I want to cycle through things until I find something that I like.

Gustav Söderström：Spotify 从来没有这种模式，我不知道我想要什么，但我想循环浏览事物，直到找到我喜欢的东西。

And I think with the AI DJ, that's actually the use case we managed to solve.

我认为通过 AI DJ，这实际上是我们设法解决的用例。

So X comes on and says, "I'm going to suggest something to you that you can listen to." And if you like it, you can keep listening, but if you don't like it, you bring him back again and you change channel.

于是 X 过来说道：“我要向你推荐一些你可以听的东西。”如果你喜欢，你可以继续听，但如果你不喜欢，你可以把他带回来，然后换频道。

And for one reason or another, we tried to solve that for many times for a long time, but just starting to play a random song without any context as to why you would hear this, it just never worked.

由于这样或那样的原因，我们在很长一段时间内多次尝试解决这个问题，但只是开始随机播放一首歌曲，没有任何背景说明为什么你会听到这个，它从来没有奏效。

So that was our first foray into a product that couldn't exist before.

所以这是我们第一次涉足以前不可能存在的产品。

And I think to your question of principles around that, there are a few pretty distinct principles that we've learned.

我认为对于你提出的原则问题，我们学到了一些非常独特的原则。

Gustav Söderström: One that I really like that is not my principle at all, I think it is straight from Chris Dixon, is the principle of fault-tolerant user interfaces.

Gustav Söderström：我真正喜欢的一个原则根本不是我的原则，我认为它直接来自 Chris Dixon，那就是容错用户界面的原则。

So I can't say how many times during the early machine learning era when we said we're moving from curation to recommendation.

因此，我无法说出在早期机器学习时代有多少次我们说我们正在从策展转向推荐。

I saw a design sketch that was a single big play button because clearly that is the simplest user interface you can do, but if you don't understand the performance of your machine learning, you can't design for it.

我看到了一个设计草图，它是一个大的播放按钮，因为显然这是您可以做的最简单的用户界面，但如果您不了解机器学习的性能，您就无法为其进行设计。

The quality of your machine learning, if you're going to have a single play button, needs to be literally 100% or zero prediction error, and that's never the case.

如果您想要一个播放按钮，那么机器学习的质量就需要达到 100% 或零预测误差，但事实并非如此。

So let's say that you have a one in five hits, four out of five things are done, then you need a UI that probably at least shows five things at the same time on screen.

假设您有五分之一的点击率，五分之四的事情已经完成，那么您需要一个可能至少在屏幕上同时显示五件事的 UI。

So you have a one in five of something being relevant on screen.

所以屏幕上有五分之一的内容是相关的。

Gustav Söderström: So you need to understand the performance of your machine learning to design for it.

Gustav Söderström：因此，您需要了解机器学习的性能才能为其进行设计。

It needs to be fault tolerant and often you need an escape hatch for the user.

它需要具有容错能力，并且通常您需要为用户提供逃生舱口。

So you make a prediction.

所以你做出一个预测。

But if you were wrong, it needs to be super easy for the user say, "No, you're wrong, I want to go to my library or to this or to that." So we have that principle of having fault-tolerant user interface and a user interface that corresponds to the current performance of your algorithms.

但如果你错了，用户就必须非常容易地说：“不，你错了，我想去我的图书馆，或者这个那个。”因此，我们的原则是拥有容错的用户界面和与算法当前性能相对应的用户界面。

And I think that is going to be true for generative machine learning as well.

我认为对于生成机器学习来说也是如此。

I think a very clear example actually is Mid Journey.

我认为一个非常明显的例子就是《中途之旅》。

If you think about the early Mid Journey user interface inside the Discord channel, actually generating an image was very, very slow.

如果您考虑一下 Discord 频道内的早期 Mid Journey 用户界面，实际上生成图像的速度非常非常慢。

Gustav Söderström: It took a long time to generate high-quality image and they could have built the silver button thing where you put in a prompt, you wait for minutes, you get an image, and I think one out of four times, it's going to be bad.

Gustav Söderström：生成高质量图像需要很长时间，他们可以构建银色按钮，您可以在其中输入提示，等待几分钟，然后获得图像，我认为四分之一的时间会很糟糕。

So you would've been disappointed three out of four times and it's a minute each, so like four minutes later, you'd be, "This is a shitty product." What they did was they generated four simultaneous low-res images very quickly and you could say, "So apparently, their performance was probably one in four, that's why they showed four and not six." And so one in four was usually pretty good.

所以四分之三你会感到失望，每次都是一分钟，所以四分钟后，你会说，“这是一个糟糕的产品。”他们所做的是非常快速地同时生成四张低分辨率图像，你可以说，“很明显，他们的表现可能是四分之一，这就是为什么他们显示了四张而不是六张。”所以四分之一通常就相当不错了。

You click that one and either continue to iterate or scale it up.

您单击该按钮，然后继续迭代或扩大规模。

So that's also an example of, I think, people understanding where the performance of generative AI was when they built the UI.

我认为，这也是人们在构建 UI 时了解生成式 AI 性能的一个例子。

So that's something that I would be inspired by.

这就是我会受到启发的事情。

Gustav Söderström: And for the AI DJ specifically, another principle is to try to avoid this urge of just wanting to show off the technology and then have this voice that talk and talk and talk and talk.

Gustav Söderström：特别对于 AI DJ 来说，另一个原则是尽量避免这种只想炫耀技术，然后拥有不断说话、说话、说话的声音的冲动。

You have to remember that people came there for the music.

你必须记住，人们来这里是为了音乐。

So the principle for the AI DJ coming from the team, by the way, this was a bottoms-up product actually, it required a lot of support.

所以AI DJ的原理来自团队，顺便说一句，这实际上是一个自下而上的产品，它需要很多支持。

We actually acquired big companies and so forth to be able to build it.

我们实际上收购了大公司等等才能建造它。

But the idea had been built by teams bottom up.

但这个想法是由团队自下而上建立的。

So the principle there was literally to do as little as possible and get out of the way.

所以原则就是尽可能少做事并​​避开。

And I think that was really helpful.

我认为这真的很有帮助。

It's not telling you what the weather is and what happened in the news and going on and on and on about this band.

它不会告诉你天气如何、新闻中发生了什么以及关于这个乐队的不断发生的事情。

It is trying to get you to the music and I think that's why it's working because it is working very well for us.

它试图让你融入音乐，我认为这就是它起作用的原因，因为它对我们来说非常有效。

Lenny: I love this distinction between recommendation and generation.

Lenny：我喜欢推荐和生成之间的区别。

And this begs the question of, there's this trend that I imagine you're seeing of people autogenerating music using artists catalog.

这就引出了一个问题，我想你会看到人们使用艺术家目录自动生成音乐的趋势。

There's this Drake and The Weeknd thing that came out a week or two ago.

一两周前出现了《Drake and The Weeknd》。

Where do you think this ends up going and how do you think artists adjust to this world where music can just be autogenerated?

您认为这最终会走向何方？您认为艺术家如何适应这个音乐可以自动生成的世界？

This play button is all of it is generated versus just like the DJ in between the songs.

这个播放按钮是全部生成的，就像歌曲之间的 DJ 一样。

Gustav Söderström: First, big caveat, this is just super early.

Gustav Söderström：首先，需要注意的是，现在还为时过早。

No one knows anything about how this is going to play out or the legal landscape and so forth, but I think it's going to have a lot of impact.

没有人知道这将如何发展或法律环境等等，但我认为这将产生很大的影响。

And I think if we talk about two things, one is what it could do for music, the other is the right situation, and if rights-holders are getting compensated and so forth.

我认为如果我们谈论两件事，一是它可以为音乐做什么，另一件事是正确的情况，以及权利持有者是否得到补偿等等。

So we talk about the first thing in isolation.

所以我们先孤立地谈谈第一件事。

I think an interesting example is right about when I grew up, Avicii came along.

我认为一个有趣的例子是正确的，当我长大时，Avicii 出现了。

And it's interesting to think about because Avicii was not really considered by the existing music industry as a real artist because he couldn't really play an instrument and he couldn't sing, and he was just sitting with this computer in this DAW, digital audio workstation.

想想就很有趣，因为 Avicii 并没有真正被现有的音乐行业视为真正的艺术家，因为他不会真正演奏乐器，也不会唱歌，他只是坐在这个 DAW 数字音频工作站中的电脑旁。

And so it wasn't really considered real music.

所以它并没有真正被认为是真正的音乐。

And I think now all of us consider it very real music and that he had tremendous real musical talent.

我想现在我们所有人都认为这是非常真实的音乐，并且他拥有巨大的真正的音乐天赋。

Gustav Söderström: So I think right now, we're probably in the face where people say this isn't real music and it's somehow fake.

Gustav Söderström：所以我认为现在，我们可能面临着人们说这不是真正的音乐，而且在某种程度上是假的。

I think the way to think about these diffusion models if and when they get good enough at generating music is probably the same like an instrument.

我认为思考这些扩散模型是否以及当它们在生成音乐方面足够优秀时的方式可能与乐器相同。

It's just a much more powerful instrument and we'll probably see a new type of creator that wasn't proficient at any instrument and they couldn't assemble a full orchestra and do the thing that they had in their head and they can now generate very new things.

它只是一种更强大的乐器，我们可能会看到一种新型的创作者，他们不精通任何乐器，他们无法组建一个完整的管弦乐队并做他们头脑中的事情，但他们现在可以产生非常新的东西。

I also think, by the way, that there is this distinction between AI music and real music that doesn't exist.

顺便说一句，我还认为人工智能音乐和真实音乐之间不存在这种区别。

For sure, very talented real musicians are using AI to get better and to help create new ideas.

当然，非常有才华的真正音乐家正在使用人工智能来变得更好并帮助创造新的想法。

So that distinction doesn't really exist.

所以这种区别实际上并不存在。

It's all going to be AI.

这一切都将是人工智能。

The question is what percentage, which makes the problem harder because you can't talk about if it should exist or not.

问题是百分比是多少，这使得问题变得更加困难，因为你无法谈论它是否应该存在。

Gustav Söderström: You have to talk about what percentage should exist and who gets to use it or not.

Gustav Söderström：你必须讨论应该存在多少百分比以及谁可以使用它或不使用它。

But I think the way to think about it is probably as an instrument and that could help create a huge amount of art.

但我认为思考它的方式可能是作为一种工具，这可以帮助创造大量的艺术。

And I think this is not news to you who probably use these things a lot, but I think if you don't use these generative models, there is the perception that you tell it to create a hit and you will get that.

我认为这对于那些可能经常使用这些东西的人来说并不是什么新闻，但我认为如果你不使用这些生成模型，就会有人认为你告诉它创造一个热门产品，你就会得到它。

That's not how it works.

事情不是这样的。

Actually, what these models do is because they've been listening to a lot of music, they are very good at doing something that sounds very similar to what already exists.

实际上，这些模型所做的事情是因为他们听了很多音乐，他们非常擅长做一些听起来与已经存在的非常相似的事情。

Actually being original is very hard.

事实上，原创是非常困难的。

And from one point of view, as it now gets easier to create more generic music, it will actually be more difficult than ever to be truly unique.

从一个角度来看，随着现在创作更通用的音乐变得更加容易，实际上要真正做到独一无二会比以往任何时候都更加困难。

Gustav Söderström: So I still think there would be tremendous skill in creating something truly unique.

Gustav Söderström：所以我仍然认为创造真正独特的东西需要巨大的技巧。

And my hope would be that what happened with the DAW and that technology jump was you got a whole new genre like EDM that you couldn't really produce it with an orchestra or live.

我希望 DAW 和技术飞跃所发生的事情是你能得到像 EDM 这样的全新流派，而你无法真正用管弦乐队或现场制作它。

And maybe we'll see completely new music styles with these technologies.

也许我们会看到这些技术带来的全新音乐风格。

I think that would be very exciting.

我认为那会非常令人兴奋。

So that's on the positive side, but then you have the rights issue, which I have a lot of empathy for.

这是积极的一面，但是还有配股问题，我对此深表同情。

And Spotify specifically has seen this before.

Spotify 之前就已经看到过这一点。

So we had a different technology shift like this, which was the technology shift to online downloads of music and piracy and peer to peer.

所以我们有一个不同的技术转变，就像这样，这是技术转变到在线下载音乐和盗版以及点对点。

So first, it was a big technology shift in peer to peer and it was exciting for consumers.

首先，这是点对点技术的重大转变，令消费者兴奋不已。

More consumers started listening to more music than ever.

更多的消费者开始聆听比以往更多的音乐。

And I think that's where we are now with generative AI.

我认为这就是我们现在的生成式人工智能的发展方向。

Gustav Söderström: There's a new technology, but it also required a new business model before creators and industry could actually participate and benefit from this.

Gustav Söderström：这是一项新技术，但它还需要一种新的商业模式，创作者和行业才能真正参与并从中受益。

And that's, obviously, self-serving to say because we were a big part of innovating that business model.

显然，这是自私的说法，因为我们是创新商业模式的重要组成部分。

But I still think that's what's necessary and I hope that that's what I and we could be part of.

但我仍然认为这是必要的，我希望这就是我和我们可以参与的一部分。

So I think we've seen the first part, the technology shift, and there will probably be a lot of discussion and chaos here which have a lot of empathy for, but I think we haven't seen the second part yet.

所以我认为我们已经看到了第一部分，即技术转变，这里可能会有很多讨论和混乱，有很多同情心，但我认为我们还没有看到第二部分。

What is a model where this could be a benefit?

什么是可以带来好处的模型？

What actually happened after piracy is that the music industry got bigger than ever, not just as big but bigger than ever.

盗版之后实际发生的事情是，音乐产业变得比以往任何时候都更大，不仅是那么大，而且比以往任何时候都更大。

And I think that could happen with this technology as well.

我认为这项技术也可能实现这一点。

But we're right in the beginning.

但我们才刚刚开始。

Lenny: So along the same lines, something else you teach is this idea of all truly great products have to pull some magic trick.

莱尼：所以，沿着同样的思路，你教导的另一件事是，所有真正伟大的产品都必须施展一些魔法。

This comes up in your podcast a lot and I think you mentioned this other places, and thinking about all the stuff you're talking about here, it feels like, in a sense, everything's going to feel like magic because AI's baked into it.

这在你的播客中经常出现，我想你在其他地方也提到过这一点，想想你在这里谈论的所有东西，从某种意义上说，一切都会感觉像魔法，因为人工智能融入其中。

Gustav Söderström: I think when we did the AI DJ, we did a small version of that.

Gustav Söderström：我认为当我们做 AI DJ 时，我们做了一个小版本。

When people first listened to it, we could see that reaction in use of testing when they've wondered ...

当人们第一次听到它时，我们可以看到当他们想知道时使用测试时的反应......

So the magic trick there was that how could they record this person saying so many different things because it's talking about my music.

所以神奇的是，他们怎么能记录这个人说这么多不同的话，因为它在谈论我的音乐。

So the magic trick was, obviously, didn't record a person saying, it's generated, and that magic trick wears off.

所以，显然，这个魔术并没有记录一个人说，它已经生成了，然后那个魔术就消失了。

You hear it all the time now and so forth, but it was one of those magic tricks.

你时常会听到它，但它是那些魔术之一。

So I still think that concept is important and it seems to correlate with products going viral and taking off.

所以我仍然认为这个概念很重要，它似乎与产品的病毒式传播和腾飞相关。

Gustav Söderström: And I think it was the same using something like Dall-E or Stable Diffusion or Mid Journey the first time.

Gustav Söderström：我认为第一次使用 Dall-E、Stable Diffusion 或 Mid Journey 之类的东西是一样的。

It completely seemed like a magic trick.

这完全像是一个魔术。

And, obviously, there is no magic, it's just data and statistics.

显然，这并没有什么魔法，只是数据和统计数据。

But I think getting to that point and iterating a product to the point where it feels like magic the first time is very helpful.

但我认为达到这一点并迭代产品直到第一次感觉就像魔法一样非常有帮助。

And it's often a question of just getting the performance to a certain level, scoping down, removing things.

这通常是一个将性能提升到一定水平、缩小范围、删除一些东西的问题。

There's a lot of fine-tuning, I think, that makes you cross that line from it's cool and impressive but not magic to it feels like magic.

我认为，有很多微调可以让你跨越从“酷、令人印象深刻但不神奇”到“感觉像魔术”的界限。

I don't understand how this could be done.

我不明白这是怎么做到的。

Lenny: Yeah, it reminds me of the launch of GBT which ended up being the biggest, most fastest growing product in history, and it's like the epitome of a magic trick.

Lenny：是的，这让我想起 GBT 的推出，它最终成为历史上规模最大、增长最快的产品，就像魔术的缩影。

It feels like actual magic.

感觉就像真正的魔法。

Gustav Söderström: Absolutely, absolutely.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特罗姆：绝对，绝对。

And to most people, it is still very ...

而对于大多数人来说，这仍然是非常...

Actually to a lot of ascent, even to researchers, it's a little bit magical.

实际上对于很多人来说，甚至对于研究人员来说，这都有点神奇。

No one really understands fully.

没有人真正完全理解。

So I guess there's maybe some magic left in the world.

所以我想世界上可能还剩下一些魔法。

Lenny: Absolutely.

莱尼：当然。

And I think a lot of people are worried about not understanding what's going on there.

我认为很多人都担心不了解那里发生的事情。

Shifting to the way you all build product at Spotify.

转变为大家在 Spotify 构建产品的方式。

So Spotify is famous for popularizing this idea of squads and tribes.

因此，Spotify 因推广小队和部落的理念而闻名。

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you guys have moved away from that approach.

如果我错了，请纠正我，但你们已经放弃了这种方法。

Lenny: Okay.

莱尼：好的。

So I'd love to understand just why you shifted and what you learned from that approach to building product, and then just like how do you organize the teams now?

所以我很想了解你为什么要转变以及你从这种构建产品的方法中学到了什么，然后就像你现在如何组织团队一样？

What do you do now?

你现在做什么？

Gustav Söderström: This was something that we focused a lot on early and it turned out to be smart of us to name these things into squads and chapters and so forth.

Gustav Söderström：这是我们早期非常关注的事情，事实证明我们很聪明，将这些东西命名为小队和章节等。

It wasn't really ...

原来不是真的...

Well, maybe it was deliberately branding, but it wasn't for purposes of branding that we made it up.

好吧，也许这是故意品牌化，但我们编造它并不是为了品牌化。

We made it up because we thought it was a good structure to use and we needed names for things and this was the early internet eras you were allowed to make things up.

我们编造它是因为我们认为这是一个很好使用的结构，我们需要为事物命名，而这是早期的互联网时代，你可以编造事物。

And so it was very good for where we were at the time and it certainly helped us in recruiting.

所以这对于我们当时的情况来说非常好，而且它肯定对我们的招聘有帮助。

It's become a little bit of a cost to us because people still think that we organize that way and it's not a very efficient way of being organized at this scale or maybe even if you started over right now because we've learned more.

这对我们来说有点成本，因为人们仍然认为我们以这种方式组织，这不是一种非常有效的组织方式，或者即使你现在重新开始，因为我们学到了更多。

Gustav Söderström: But I think the big difference is the idea with the squad specifically was twofold.

Gustav Söderström：但我认为最大的区别是球队的想法是双重的。

They were supposed to be small and full stack.

它们应该是小而全栈的。

So squad should be about seven people and it should have front and backend, mobile, QA, agile coaches and so forth, and it should be very autonomous was the idea.

所以团队应该有七个人左右，应该有前端和后端、移动、QA、敏捷教练等等，而且应该非常自主。

And that's really what we shifted.

这确实是我们所改变的。

So, first of all, as you grow the company, scaling in increments of seven engineers just creates a ton of overhead.

因此，首先，随着公司的发展，增加七名工程师只会产生大量的开销。

So, obviously, our teams now tend to be much bigger, maybe two, three times that at least per manager to maybe have 14 or something instead of seven and just less overhead roles.

所以，很明显，我们的团队现在往往规模更大，可能是两倍、三倍，至少每个经理可能有 14 名或更多的人，而不是 7 名，管理职位也更少。

So that's one.

这就是其中之一。

It looks more traditional as you learn more and is reasonable as you scale.

随着你了解的越多，它看起来就越传统，随着你规模的扩大，它看起来就越合理。

The second big thing I think we struggle with was back then when I joined, the average age at Spotify was ...

我认为我们遇到的第二件大事是当我加入时，Spotify 的平均年龄是......

I mean, I was the oldest and this was 14 years ago.

我的意思是，我是年龄最大的，那是 14 年前的事了。

So I think the average age was probably under 30 or something and it wasn't most tech companies.

所以我认为平均年龄可能在 30 岁以下，而且不是大多数科技公司。

Gustav Söderström: And so we had coming from Sweden, which is a different culture than the US, and I love a lot of things about Swedish culture and I think we managed to keep the best parts, but Sweden is a very bottoms-up autonomous culture.

Gustav Söderström：我们来自瑞典，这是一种与美国不同的文化，我喜欢瑞典文化的很多东西，我认为我们设法保留了最好的部分，但瑞典是一种非常自下而上的自治文化。

There's this famous drawing on how you make decisions in Sweden.

有一张著名的图画展示了在瑞典如何做决定。

In the US, I think it's just a hierarchy.

在美国，我认为这只是一个等级制度。

In Sweden, it's a circle.

在瑞典，它是一个圆圈。

It's in a circle, no one is in the middle, there is no leader and so forth.

它围成一个圆圈，中间没有人，没有领导者等等。

Gustav Söderström: So I think by culture, we're very inspired by this super autonomous thing.

Gustav Söderström：所以我认为从文化角度来说，我们受到这种超级自主事物的启发。

And I think the idea with autonomy is very reasonable and the right one, which is we work and we are hiring the smartest people we can find and we pay high salaries for that.

我认为自治的想法是非常合理和正确的，那就是我们工作，我们正在雇用我们能找到的最聪明的人，我们为此支付高薪。

So if you're hiring smart people, one way to think about it is you're renting brain power.

因此，如果你要雇佣聪明人，一种思考方式就是你在租用脑力。

Gustav Söderström: So if you're renting all of this expensive brain power and then you give them no room to think for themselves, that doesn't sound smart, then you should actually hire less smart people and keep your costs down or something.

Gustav Söderström：所以，如果你租用了所有这些昂贵的脑力，然后你没有给他们自己思考的空间，这听起来并不明智，那么你实际上应该雇佣不太聪明的人，并降低你的成本之类的。

So I think you have to give a bunch of autonomy to actually maximize the value of the investment you're making.

所以我认为你必须给予一定的自主权才能真正最大化你所做投资的价值。

So that's very reasonable that you would give a lot of space for people to use as much of their talent and capacity as possible.

因此，为人们提供足够的空间来尽可能多地发挥他们的才能和能力是非常合理的。

But the problem with that is if you put autonomy very far towards the leaves of the organization, and also if you combine that with having a very junior organization, which we did back then, there's a fair chance that you're just going to produce heat.

但问题是，如果你把自治权放在组织的叶子上，而且如果你把它与一个非常初级的组织结合起来，就像我们当时所做的那样，你很有可能只会产生热量。

You're going to have a hundred squads with a hundred strategies running in a hundred directions.

你将有一百个小队，有一百种策略，向一百个方向奔跑。

And Spotify has been there in that camp.

Spotify 也属于这一阵营。

Gustav Söderström: I mean, we managed to get somewhere, for sure, in spite of this, but I'd struggle to say we were efficient in doing that.

Gustav Söderström：我的意思是，尽管如此，我们确实还是取得了一些进展，但我很难说我们在这方面做得很高效。

So we've done a few things.

所以我们做了一些事情。

The team structure is more traditional, larger teams, less overhead.

团队结构更传统，团队规模更大，开销更少。

And we've been specifically working with where in the org do we put the autonomy because the extremes are at the leaves and we were there.

我们一直在专门研究如何将自主权放在组织中的哪个位置，因为极端的情况是在叶子上，而我们就在那里。

The other extreme may be at the top, let's say maybe some Twitter, there's one person.

另一个极端可能是在顶部，比方说，也许有一些 Twitter，有一个人。

Both have problems.

两者都有问题。

If you have it at the leaves, you're going to produce a lot of heat.

如果它长在叶子上，就会产生大量的热量。

If you have it at the top, you need someone with a lot of capacity and Elon has a lot of capacity, but you are, by definition, going to bottleneck.

如果你处于最高层，你需要一个有能力的人，埃隆也有很多能力，但根据定义，你会遇到瓶颈。

All decisions have to go through there.

所有决定都必须经过那里。

And Daniel, it's not his personality that he even wants to make all the decisions.

而丹尼尔，他甚至不想做出所有的决定，这不是他的个性。

Gustav Söderström: He wants to maximize throughput rather than to bottleneck the throughput.

Gustav Söderström：他希望最大化吞吐量，而不是限制吞吐量。

So the question is, if it's not at the top and not at the very bottom, where do you put it?

那么问题来了，如果它不在顶部也不在最底部，那你把它放在哪里呢？

And what we've found, which I don't think is very contrarian at all, I think this is the case in most companies, is around the VP level.

我们发现，我认为这根本不是非常逆向的，我认为大多数公司都是这种情况，围绕着副总裁级别。

So if you have Daniel, then you have the C level, myself and others, then you have the VP level, that is a good mix of instead of having one person in the company think, so only Daniel then and the rest just do, you have on the VP level in the company this many tens to maybe hundreds of people that have a lot of autonomy to think.

因此，如果你有丹尼尔，那么你有 C 级别，我和其他人，然后你有副总裁级别，这是一个很好的组合，而不是让公司中的一个人思考，所以只有丹尼尔和其他人去做，你在公司的副总裁级别上有几十到可能数百人，他们有很大的自主权来思考。

So you get a good amount of freedom of thought and people thinking in different directions, but it's not like 8,000 people.

所以你可以获得很大的思想自由，人们可以从不同的方向思考，但这不像 8,000 人。

And these people on the VP level are both quite a lot of them, but they're also usually quite senior.

而且这些副总裁级别的人虽然数量不少，但级别也一般都比较高。

They have a lot of pattern recognition.

他们有很多模式识别能力。

Gustav Söderström: So I think that solves for, it's a good ...

Gustav Söderström：所以我认为这解决了，这是一个很好的......

If you think of it as an optimization problem, it's a good optimization space.

如果你把它看作一个优化问题，那么它就是一个很好的优化空间。

So the autonomy level in Spotify now tends to be quite high at the VP level and then lower around those levels.

因此，Spotify 的自治级别现在在 VP 级别往往相当高，然后在这些级别附近较低。

Lenny: And when you say autonomy, what does that actually mean?

莱尼：当你说自治时，它实际上意味着什么？

Is it the VP of, say, the podcasting product has a lot of say over what happens and there's not a ton of ...

比如说，播客产品的副总裁对所发生的事情有很多发言权，但没有太多……

I don't know how involved are people above?

不知道上面的人参与程度如何？

And I know Maya's the VP of product, I believe, for the podcast product.

我知道玛雅是播客产品的产品副总裁。

Lenny: Who I think is going to come on the podcast someday.

莱尼：我认为有一天他会出现在播客上。

What does that mean in terms of Tommy for her, what practically?

对于汤米来说，这意味着什么？实际上意味着什么？

Gustav Söderström: So it means that I would ask Maya to define a strategy for what we do in podcasting, how are we going to be different, why would a podcaster want to be here?

Gustav Söderström：所以这意味着我会要求 Maya 为我们在播客领域所做的事情定义一个策略，我们如何与众不同，为什么播客想来这里？

Whereas another company, I will make that strategy or another company, Daniel would make that strategy.

而另一家公司，我会制定该策略，或者另一家公司，丹尼尔会制定该策略。

Same with ...

与...相同

The AI DJ, for example, came from our personalization team.

例如，AI DJ 来自我们的个性化团队。

And so that was a bet that they made.

这就是他们打的赌。

So they have autonomy to make those kinds of bets and define strategies.

因此，他们有自主权进行此类赌注并制定策略。

Same with the user interface, we have an experienced team, can talk about the org structure later, but I put a lot of autonomy on the VP of experience to define and suggest what it is that we want to do.

与用户界面相同，我们有一个经验丰富的团队，可以稍后讨论组织结构，但我给经验副总裁很大的自主权来定义和建议我们想要做什么。

And in other companies, I would define all of that myself, for example.

例如，在其他公司，我会自己定义所有这些。

Lenny: Just going even a little bit further here, I know you have just strong opinions on the way to organize teams and how the organization helps you optimize for specific things.

Lenny：稍微更进一步，我知道您对组织团队的方式以及组织如何帮助您优化特定事物有强烈的看法。

What are your just thoughts along those lines and what have you learned about how the impact of organization and what you're optimizing for?

您对这些方面的想法是什么？您对组织的影响以及您正在优化的目标有何了解？

Gustav Söderström: Yeah.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：是的。

So I talk about an idealized spectrum or maybe not idealized but exaggerated spectrum.

所以我谈论的是理想化的频谱，或者可能不是理想化但夸张的频谱。

Nothing is really true, but you create extremes to make a point.

没有什么是真的，但你会创造极端来表达观点。

So on one spectrum, you have something like Amazon, which is known for two-pizza teams, no dependencies.

因此，在一个范围内，你可以看到像亚马逊这样的东西，它以两个披萨团队而闻名，没有依赖性。

You try to minimize dependencies so you can run in parallel.

您尝试最小化依赖性，以便可以并行运行。

Teams compete with each other even on the same project and so forth.

团队甚至在同一个项目上也会相互竞争等等。

But they have direct access to the user.

但他们可以直接访问用户。

Gustav Söderström: And so the benefit here is if you have an idea, the time to get the user is very low and it has worked for them.

Gustav Söderström：所以这里的好处是，如果你有一个想法，那么获得用户的时间非常短，而且对他们来说很有效。

It's produced Kindle, it produced Alexa, it's produced a lot of very novel things.

它生产了 Kindle，它生产了 Alexa，它生产了很多非常新奇的东西。

There are a few interesting downsides here.

这里有一些有趣的缺点。

One downside that I'm extremely impressed with Jeff Bezos' foreseeing is if you have teams that compete with each other, the incentives are to hide your results, hide your code.

杰夫·贝佐斯的预见给我留下了深刻印象的一个缺点是，如果你有相互竞争的团队，那么动机就是隐藏你的结果，隐藏你的代码。

And that should make for an organization that gets no platform leverage because no one's corporating.

这应该会导致组织无法获得平台影响力，因为没有人参与合作。

And I think either he had that insight or because he saw this, he had to do this, but he's well known for pushing extremely hard on hard APIs.

我认为要么他有这种洞察力，要么因为他看到了这一点，他必须这样做，但他以极力推动硬 API 而闻名。

If you don't create hard APIs to your technology, you're out.

如果你不为你的技术创建硬 API，你就出局了。

And if you think about it, it has to be that way because otherwise no one would do it.

如果你想一想，事情一定是这样的，否则没有人会这么做。

Lenny: And a hard API is essentially everyone knows how to use this API and connect to this team to interface with.

Lenny：硬 API 本质上是每个人都知道如何使用这个 API 并连接到这个团队进行交互。

Gustav Söderström: Exactly.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：没错。

You have to expose your technology to others.

您必须向他人公开您的技术。

You have to maintain those APIs and they have to be very structured because otherwise the whole thing would collapse as everyone's supposed to compete because there are no incentives.

你必须维护这些 API，而且它们必须非常结构化，否则整个事情就会崩溃，因为没有激励措施，每个人都应该竞争。

You have to centrally force that.

你必须集中强制这一点。

And interestingly, even though theoretically then they're the worst position to have a structured platform, I think, because they forced it so hard, they were the ones who did Amazon Web Services because they had such hard defined APIs because of this rule that it was easier for them to turn it inside out and expose it the rest of the world.

有趣的是，尽管从理论上讲，他们在拥有结构化平台方面处于最差的地位，但我认为，因为他们强迫得如此之紧，他们才是做亚马逊网络服务的人，因为他们有如此严格定义的 API，因为这条规则让他们更容易将其彻底翻转并将其暴露给世界其他地方。

Whereas if you look at someone like Google, I think they struggled more with externalizing their APIs maybe because it is so friendly and soft.

然而，如果你看看像 Google 这样的公司，我认为他们在 API 外部化方面遇到了更多的困难，也许是因为它是如此友好和柔软。

So they didn't need as hard APIs on the inside because there was no competition.

因此，他们不需要内部那么硬的 API，因为没有竞争。

People could just go into each other's code.

人们可以直接进入彼此的代码。

Gustav Söderström: So it's interesting anecdote around it, but the main point is you're faster there, but it's going to be hard to corporate.

Gustav Söderström：这是一个有趣的轶事，但要点是你在那里速度更快，但很难合作。

And so you will see something like maybe exaggerating a bit.

所以你会看到一些可能有点夸张的东西。

Sometimes you'll see multiple search boxes on the same page from different teams.

有时您会在同一页面上看到来自不同团队的多个搜索框。

And this has been true in Spotify, by the way, as well.

顺便说一下，Spotify 也是如此。

You've seen multiple toasters on the Now Playing view coming up from different teams because they're working.

您已经在“正在播放”视图中看到来自不同团队的多个烤面包机，因为它们正在工作。

When we were in the autonomous mode, everyone running.

当我们处于自主模式时，每个人都在奔跑。

And then ...

然后...

So you get the benefit of speed, but you get the drawback of shipping your org chart and shipping complexity to the end user.

因此，您可以获得速度的好处，但也面临着向最终用户传送组织结构图和传送复杂性的缺点。

But clearly, that's been the right choice for Amazon because they're a trillion-dollar company.

但显然，这对亚马逊来说是正确的选择，因为他们是一家价值数万亿美元的公司。

But then on the other spectrum, you have something like Apple who's also a trillion-dollar company.

但另一方面，像苹果这样的公司也是一家价值数万亿美元的公司。

So clearly, both models work, where you would never see two search boxes from the same team popping up on an iPhone.

很明显，这两种模型都有效，你永远不会看到来自同一团队的两个搜索框在 iPhone 上弹出。

That is centrally organized by something that is close to single individual.

这是由接近单个个体的事物集中组织的。

Gustav Söderström: So they are instead in what is probably the world's biggest largest functional org, they're doing as much.

Gustav Söderström：所以他们在可能是世界上最大的职能组织中，他们正在做同样多的事情。

If you think about what goes into the Apple, I mean, they certainly do everything we do.

如果你想想苹果公司的内部结构，我的意思是，他们肯定做了我们所做的一切。

They have music service, podcast service, audiobooks, and they have a billion other services.

他们有音乐服务、播客服务、有声读物，还有十亿种其他服务。

So it's not like they have an easier problem.

所以他们的问题并不容易。

And yet they build something that feels more like it was built by a single developer for a single user.

然而，他们构建的东西更像是由单个开发人员为单个用户构建的。

So they centralize and they have this bottlenecking function that everything has to go through and be decided how it fits with everything else.

因此，它们是集中化的，并且具有瓶颈功能，一切都必须经过并决定它如何与其他一切相适应。

And so that has the benefit of the user experience being simpler and not shipping the org chart and increasing complexity.

因此，这样做的好处是用户体验更简单，并且不需要发布组织结构图并增加复杂性。

But it also has the drawback of speed without having facts on it.

但它也有速度快、没有事实依据的缺点。

I've heard people working at Apple have said, "Yeah, it took seven years to get that thing to market," because you just had to wait in the pipeline.

我听苹果工作人员说过，“是的，花了七年时间才把这个东西推向市场”，因为你只需要在管道中等待。

Gustav Söderström: So you have these extremes.

Gustav Söderström：所以你有这些极端。

And I think the most interesting example, I think, to think about is when you double click the power button on an iPhone, the Apple Pay comes up.

我认为最有趣的例子是，当你双击 iPhone 上的电源按钮时，Apple Pay 就会出现。

That decision, how did that happen?

这个决定，是怎么发生的？

You can imagine that all the services team would like to pop up when you double click that button.

您可以想象，当您双击该按钮时，所有服务团队都会弹出。

And so someone had to decide, should music come up, should payments come up, should something else come up?

因此必须有人做出决定，是否应该出现音乐、是否应该出现付款、是否应该出现其他问题？

And so they have a different structure there.

所以他们有不同的结构。

And on that spectrum of centralized versus decentralized, because of our strategy, which is we're a single application, trying to add or not trying to, we have added multiple types of content with actually very different business models on the backend, rev shares and royalties and book deals and so forth into single user experience.

在集中式与分散式的范围内，由于我们的策略，即我们是一个单一的应用程序，无论尝试添加还是不尝试，我们都在后端添加了多种类型的内容，这些内容实际上具有非常不同的业务模式，收益份额、版税和图书交易等都融入到单一用户体验中。

That is our strategy.

这就是我们的策略。

We think the user experience in keeping that simple is the most important thing.

我们认为保持简单的用户体验是最重要的。

Gustav Söderström: So we've chosen more of the centralized model, where these different vertical businesses, if you think about it, the music business, podcast, audiobooks business, they have it to go through a single recommendation organization because that's another problem.

Gustav Söderström：所以我们选择了更多的集中化模式，这些不同的垂直业务，如果你想一想，音乐业务、播客、有声读物业务，他们必须通过一个单一的推荐组织，因为这是另一个问题。

Which one do you recommend to which user?

您向哪个用户推荐哪一个？

Should be a book or podcast or music?

应该是一本书、播客还是音乐？

And how do you weigh them against each other?

您如何权衡它们？

And also the user interface could easily get incredibly complicated if everyone built their own UI.

而且，如果每个人都构建自己的用户界面，用户界面很容易变得异常复杂。

The music team built their UI and then someone added features on top.

音乐团队构建了他们的用户界面，然后有人在上面添加了功能。

So that's how we chose to optimize.

这就是我们选择优化的方式。

But it is based on our strategy and I think both models work.

但这是基于我们的战略，我认为这两种模式都有效。

Lenny: This episode is brought to you by Eco.

莱尼：这一集是艾柯给你带来的。

Last month, Eco users earned an average of $84 in cashback rewards.

上个月，Eco 用户平均获得 84 美元的现金返还奖励。

How?

如何？

With Eco, the future of personal finance.

Eco，个人理财的未来。

Eco is the update to a misaligned financial system.

生态是对失调的金融体系的更新。

Providing an app that works just like your bank but removes almost all of the middleman, helping even the best money optimizers optimize in less time automatically.

提供一个像银行一样工作的应用程序，但消除了几乎所有中间商，甚至可以帮助最好的资金优化器在更短的时间内自动优化。

What if you earn rewards for paying your rent or got rewarded for ordering food and shopping online or even earn rewards for saving each month?

如果您通过支付房租获得奖励，或者通过订购食品和网上购物获得奖励，甚至每月通过储蓄获得奖励，该怎么办？

And then imagine if you got rewarded again just for getting rewarded.

然后想象一下，如果您仅仅因为获得奖励而再次获得奖励。

With Eco, you can spend at some of your favorite merchants and automatically get 5% cashback, plus Eco's APY rewards look more like $80, not 80 cents.

通过 Eco，你可以在一些你最喜欢的商家消费并自动获得 5% 的现金返还，而且 Eco 的 APY 奖励看起来更像是 80 美元，而不是 80 美分。

And then there are Eco points, the world's first open reward system.

还有生态积分，这是世界上第一个开放的奖励系统。

You earn them whenever you do almost anything in the Eco app.

只要您在 Eco 应用程序中执行几乎任何操作，您就可以获得它们。

Lenny: Eco is working to make these points the most rewarding points ever.

莱尼：艾柯正在努力使这些积分成为有史以来最有价值的积分。

So it pays to be early.

所以早点是值得的。

Sound too good to be true?

听起来好得令人难以置信？

Go to eco.com/lenny, sign up for an onboarding and find out why it isn't.

访问 eco.com/lenny，注册加入并了解为什么没有加入。

Lenny's Podcast listeners who attend an Eco welcome session will get an exclusive 4% APY on deposits over $1,000.

参加 Eco 欢迎会的 Lenny 播客听众存款超过 1,000 美元即可获得 4% 的独家年利率。

Learn more at eco.com/lenny, that's E-C-O.com/lenny.

如需了解更多信息，请访问 eco.com/lenny，即 E-C-O.com/lenny。

Lenny: It's interesting these two examples you gave, Apple and Amazon, they're two of the biggest companies in the world and they're like at the extremes of these two into the spectrum.

莱尼：你举的这两个例子很有趣，苹果和亚马逊，它们是世界上最大的两家公司，而且它们处于这两家公司的极端。

And it's interesting, most companies are somewhere in the middle.

有趣的是，大多数公司都处于中间位置。

I wonder if there's just a benefit to being in an extreme and that ends up being really important.

我想知道处于极端状态是否有好处，而这最终非常重要。

Gustav Söderström: I think so.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：我想是的。

In almost all industries, you have this smiling curve concept, where you want to be at the extremes on the smiling curve, and that's where big business opportunities are but not in the middle.

几乎在所有行业中，都有这种微笑曲线的概念，你希望处于微笑曲线的极端，这就是巨大的商机所在，但不是中间。

So it's probably true in terms of organizational models as well.

因此，就组织模式而言，这可能也是正确的。

Lenny: Speaking of extremes, I want to talk a bit about taking big bets.

莱尼：说到极端，我想谈谈大赌注。

So you guys had this big launch event recently where you basically redesigned the whole primary feed of Spotify to make it feel more like where apps are going, like TikTok reels feel of just stream, and you start hearing videos and music starts playing and some people loved it, some people did not.

你们最近举办了一场大型发布会，基本上重新设计了 Spotify 的整个主要提要，使其感觉更像应用程序的发展方向，就像 TikTok 卷轴的感觉一样，您开始听到视频和音乐开始播放，有些人喜欢它，有些人不喜欢。

And I'm curious as a product leader, how you think about thinking long term and dealing with people that are just like, "What the hell's ...

我很好奇，作为一名产品负责人，你如何看待长期思考以及与那些“到底是什么......”的人打交道。

I hate change, stop changing things." How do you think about that?

我讨厌改变，别再改变了。”您对此有何看法？

Who do you listen to?

你听谁的？

Who do you ignore?

你忽略谁？

How do you know to stay the course?

你怎么知道要坚持到底？

How do you approach that?

你如何处理这个问题？

Gustav Söderström: Yeah, you're being very kind.

Gustav Söderström：是的，你非常友善。

There was a lot of negative feedback on Twitter on some of that.

Twitter 上对此有很多负面反馈。

So let me actually dig into some detail because I think for product people listening to this, this is an interesting lesson that I think few companies talk about because you want talk about everything that went exactly as you thought they would and you don't want to talk about the things that didn't go exactly as you thought they would.

因此，让我真正深入研究一些细节，因为我认为对于聆听此内容的产品人员来说，这是一个有趣的教训，我认为很少有公司会谈论，因为你想谈论一切完全按照你的想法进行的事情，而你不想谈论那些不完全按照你的想法进行的事情。

Gustav Söderström: So I'll go through what we are trying to achieve and what we learned.

Gustav Söderström：所以我将介绍一下我们正在努力实现的目标以及我们学到的东西。

So Spotify is mainly a background application, and for a long time, we've been considered very good at background music and podcast recommendation.

所以Spotify主要是一个后台应用，长期以来，我们一直被认为非常擅长背景音乐和播客推荐。

When the phone is in your pocket and you're listening to an EDM playlist or pop playlist or something, we're really good at inserting another EDM track there or another pop track there or something like that in the background.

当手机放在口袋里并且您正在收听 EDM 播放列表或流行音乐播放列表或其他内容时，我们非常擅长在其中插入另一首 EDM 曲目或另一首流行曲目或类似的背景音乐。

Gustav Söderström: What we hear from users again and again, though, is that they say that they get trapped in a taste bubble.

Gustav Söderström：不过，我们一次又一次从用户那里听到的是，他们说自己陷入了味觉泡沫。

So I love my Spotify, I love this, but I'm a little bit bored with EDM now and Spotify's not suggesting something completely new.

所以我爱我的 Spotify，我喜欢这个，但我现在对 EDM 有点厌倦，而且 Spotify 并没有建议一些全新的东西。

And if you think about that problem, it may sound similar to the recommendation problem, it's just another recommendation problem, but it's actually fundamentally different because when you're recommending another EDM track inside the EDM playlist, you have a lot of signal from that user that they like EDM.

如果你考虑这个问题，它可能听起来与推荐问题类似，这只是另一个推荐问题，但实际上有根本的不同，因为当你在 EDM 播放列表中推荐另一个 EDM 曲目时，你会从该用户那里得到很多他们喜欢 EDM 的信号。

But if you're going to recommend a completely new genre, by definition, you have no idea.

但如果你要推荐一种全新的类型，根据定义，你就不知道了。

Because if you had an idea, it wasn't new to them.

因为如果你有一个想法，对他们来说并不新鲜。

So you can't know anything.

所以你什么都不可能知道。

So back to hit rate, your hit rate is going to be incredibly low when you suggest something completely new to the user.

所以回到命中率，当你向用户推荐一些全新的东西时，你的命中率将会非常低。

Gustav Söderström: So this problem of helping people get out of the taste bubble isn't that easy as it sounds.

Gustav Söderström：所以帮助人们摆脱味觉泡沫的问题并不像听起来那么容易。

And we can't really take some genre that maybe isn't typical.

我们不能真正采用一些可能不典型的类型。

So I'm a big fan of Reggaeton, for example.

例如，我是雷鬼音乐的忠实粉丝。

It's not typically ...

这通常不是...

It's not that common in Sweden.

这在瑞典并不常见。

And if you would look the rest of my profile, it's EDM heaviness, you probably wouldn't have guessed it.

如果你看看我的个人资料的其余部分，你可能不会猜到它是 EDM 的重度。

And Spotify wouldn't have guessed it.

Spotify 也不会猜到这一点。

So if I'm listening to my favorite EDM playlist in the background or maybe my metal playlist, metal is very big in Sweden, it's really hard for us to just insert a Reggaeton track in the middle of that.

因此，如果我在后台听我最喜欢的 EDM 播放列表，或者可能是我的金属播放列表，金属在瑞典非常流行，我们很难在其中插入雷鬼音轨。

Most people are going to think Spotify's broken.

大多数人都会认为 Spotify 已经破产了。

Gustav Söderström: What the hell are they thinking?

Gustav Söderström：他们到底在想什么？

So that doesn't really work.

所以这实际上不起作用。

So in order to help people break out of their taste bubbles, you need something different.

因此，为了帮助人们打破味觉泡沫，你需要一些不同的东西。

You need something where your hit ratio can be very low and you need people to expect it to be very low.

你需要一些命中率可能非常低的东西，并且你需要人们对它的期望非常低。

Gustav Söderström: So when we recommend things in the background, our hit ratio needs to be at least nine out of 10, maybe one dud is okay, but if you get five duds, you're going to think we broke your playlist and your session.

Gustav Söderström：因此，当我们在后台推荐内容时，我们的命中率至少需要达到十分之九，也许一个失败就可以了，但如果你得到五个失败，你就会认为我们破坏了你的播放列表和会话。

We need something where one out of 10 is a success.

我们需要十分之一的成功率。

If you find one gem out of 10 tries, you're very happy.

如果您在 10 次尝试中找到了一颗宝石，您就会非常高兴。

So you need a completely different paradigm.

所以你需要一个完全不同的范例。

And you also need to be able to go through many candidates quickly because the hit rate is so low.

而且你还需要能够快速筛选出许多候选人，因为命中率很低。

You can't take three minutes per item.

每个项目你不能花三分钟。

It's like, "Okay, I didn't like this," and it's still like two minutes left before the next one comes on.

就像，“好吧，我不喜欢这个”，距离下一场比赛还剩两分钟。

You need to quickly say, "No, no, no." So the obvious candidates for this are these feed-type experience, where you can go through lots of content, you're expecting the hit ratio to be much lower.

你需要快速说：“不，不，不。”因此，明显的候选者是这些提要类型的体验，您可以在其中浏览大量内容，但您预计命中率会低得多。

And if you don't like it, the cost is very low, you just swipe.

而且如果你不喜欢，成本很低，刷一下就可以了。

Gustav Söderström: And then this is the reason why people have been ...

Gustav Söderström：这就是为什么人们......

When they want to break out of their taste bubbles or when they come into Spotify and listen to something completely new, it is usually because they found it on one of these services, like a TikTok or YouTube or something, where they get exposed to lots of new content.

当他们想要打破自己的味觉泡沫，或者当他们进入 Spotify 并聆听一些全新的内容时，通常是因为他们在其中一项服务上找到了它，例如 TikTok 或 YouTube 等，在那里他们接触到了大量新内容。

So people were asking us for these tools and so that's what we wanted to solve for.

所以人们向我们索要这些工具，这就是我们想要解决的问题。

And so we built a bunch of features, feed-like structures, where you can go through either a new genre with many tracks or a podcast channel with genre with many episodes or even full playlists.

因此，我们构建了一系列功能，类似于提要的结构，您可以在其中浏览包含许多曲目的新流派，也可以浏览包含许多剧集甚至完整播放列表的流派的播客频道。

And we implemented those and we put them in something called subfeeds.

我们实现了这些，并将它们放入称为子提要的东西中。

So in the current experience, and this is roll out worldwide, if you click the podcast subfeed, you get a feed of podcast episodes.

因此，在当前的体验中，并且这是在全球范围内推出的，如果您单击播客子提要，您将获得播客剧集的提要。

Click the music subfeeds, you get a feed of playlists where you can go through many playlists.

单击音乐子源，您将获得播放列表的源，您可以在其中浏览许多播放列表。

And if you don't understand the name, you can quickly hear what they sound like and check out a few tracks and understand if this is for you.

如果您不明白这个名字，您可以快速听到它们的声音，并检查一些曲目并了解这是否适合您。

And if you go through the search and browse page, you can find completely new genres that you can quickly go through.

如果您浏览搜索和浏览页面，您可以找到可以快速浏览的全新流派。

Gustav Söderström: And so those are working as we intended.

Gustav Söderström：所以这些正在按我们的预期进行。

People go to them when they want to find new music.

当人们想要寻找新音乐时就会去找他们。

They browse through them and they save new songs.

他们浏览这些歌曲并保存新歌曲。

So they're working as we intended.

所以他们正在按我们的预期工作。

The thing that didn't work as we intended was when users asked us for this again and again, we took the sum of these things and we put it on Home because people ask so much about discovery and we can see clearly how correlated discoveries with retention on Spotify and so forth.

事情并没有按照我们的预期进行，当用户一次又一次地向我们询问时，我们将这些内容汇总起来，然后将其放在首页上，因为人们对发现问题提出了很多要求，而我们可以清楚地看到发现与 Spotify 等上的保留之间的相关性。

But what we misjudged or failed or rather learned about our own homepage is that the way it works right now, and this is what you can see in the Twitter comment, if you remove the angry voices and try to see what they're saying, they're saying the following, which is actually quite clear in the quantitative data as well, that if you look at what people do on Spotify's homepage, the current one, it is almost 90% what we call recall.

但我们对自己主页的误判或失败，或者更确切地说，我们了解到的是它现在的运作方式，这就是你可以在 Twitter 评论中看到的，如果你去掉愤怒的声音并尝试看看他们在说什么，他们会说以下内容，这在定量数据中实际上也很清楚，如果你看看人们在 Spotify 主页上所做的事情，即当前的主页，几乎 90% 都是我们所说的回忆。

Gustav Söderström: So it is either getting to a session that you're already in or a specific playlist that you know you want to get to or at least a specific use case.

Gustav Söderström：因此，要么进入您已经参加的会话，要么进入您知道想要进入的特定播放列表，或者至少进入一个特定的用例。

So you come in with a high intent, you actually knew what you wanted, and maybe only 10% of the time as a true discovery, like I don't know what I want.

所以你带着很高的意图进来，你实际上知道你想要什么，也许只有 10% 的时间是真正的发现，就像我不知道我想要什么一样。

So if you think about, that is 90% recall and 10% discovery.

所以如果你想一想，那就是 90% 的召回率和 10% 的发现率。

When we tested the design ...

当我们测试设计时...

So the subfeeds were working and not working, but when we tested some of them on Home, we switched it from 90/10 to 10/90.

因此，子馈送要么工作，要么不起作用，但是当我们在 Home 上测试其中一些子馈送时，我们将其从 90/10 切换到 10/90。

So 10% recall, 90% discovery.

所以 10% 回忆，90% 发现。

And while people want discovery, they probably don't want 90% discovery, instead of 90% recall.

虽然人们想要发现，但他们可能不想要 90% 的发现，而不是 90% 的回忆。

So if you then look at the comments on Twitter, what they're saying is like, "Hey, I can't find my playlists anymore.

因此，如果你查看 Twitter 上的评论，你会发现他们的意思是：“嘿，我再也找不到我的播放列表了。

Where are these things?"

这些东西在哪里？”

Gustav Söderström: They're not really complaining about the discovery, they're complaining about the things they don't get anymore.

Gustav Söderström：他们并不是真的在抱怨这一发现，而是在抱怨他们不再得到的东西。

And we can see this in the quant data as well.

我们也可以在量化数据中看到这一点。

And you can see traffic shifting from home into search and into library, which is a clear sign people are trying to find the things they can't find anymore.

您可以看到流量从家庭转移到搜索和图书馆，这是人们试图找到他们再也找不到的东西的明显迹象。

And you can even see people then trying to use these discovery tools which are optimized for quickly understanding new things to do the recall.

您甚至可以看到人们尝试使用这些发现工具，这些工具经过优化，可以快速了解新事物来进行召回。

Where's that workout playlist I know I want?

我想要的锻炼播放列表在哪里？

And it's actually very bad UI for recall, it's like a slot machine, right?

实际上，它的用户界面非常糟糕，就像老虎机一样，对吧？

Very unpredictable if you ever get to that workout playlist.

如果您进入该锻炼播放列表，则非常难以预测。

It was optimized for finding new things, not for recall of existing things.

它被优化用于发现新事物，而不是回忆现有事物。

When you do recall, you want the dense UI with many items on screen because you know what it is you're looking for.

当您回想起来时，您会希望屏幕上有很多项目的密集 UI，因为您知道自己在寻找什么。

So you don't need a lot of real estate when you're doing discovery of new things.

因此，当您发现新事物时，您不需要太多的空间。

You want a lot of pixels and you probably want sound because you don't know what it is.

您需要大量像素，并且可能需要声音，因为您不知道它是什么。

Gustav Söderström: So what we learn about our UI, and I think there's maybe a little bit of product jealousy here, you always look at other experiences.

Gustav Söderström：所以我们对 UI 的了解，我认为这里可能有一点产品嫉妒，你总是会关注其他体验。

And if you look around, it could be forgiven for thinking that most other products, if you look at something like YouTube, for example, their homepage is exactly that.

如果你环顾四周，你会发现大多数其他产品（例如 YouTube）的主页就是这样，这是情有可原的。

It's a huge single-item discovery feed with only new items.

这是一个巨大的单项发现提要，仅包含新项。

And people don't seem to tweet angrily about how angry they are at you to say they love YouTube and it's a big product.

人们似乎不会在推特上愤怒地表达他们对你说他们喜欢 YouTube 并且它是一个大产品的愤怒。

And I think what we discovered was that we actually did something really well on our homepage, which was supporting you being inside a multiple sessions at the same time.

我认为我们发现我们实际上在主页上做了一些非常好的事情，它支持您同时进入多个会话。

So you could be in the middle of two podcasts and an audiobook and also them actually I just want to get to that workout playlist.

所以你可能正在听两个播客和一本有声读物，实际上我只想进入锻炼播放列表。

I don't remember the name of it, but I know it's workout.

我不记得它的名字，但我知道它是锻炼。

Gustav Söderström: We actually did that part really well.

Gustav Söderström：实际上我们这部分做得非常好。

I would venture just say much better than the other experiences where you literally have to go to some tab and into library and start browsing to get back to where you were.

我敢说比其他体验要好得多，在其他体验中，你实际上必须进入某个选项卡并进入图书馆，然后开始浏览才能回到原来的位置。

And so maybe it's path dependent.

所以也许它是路径依赖的。

Because we have done recall pretty well, people got, I think, reasonably upset when they couldn't do the recall anymore.

因为我们的召回做得很好，所以我认为，当人们无法再进行召回时，他们会感到相当沮丧。

And we didn't want lose that because it was one of the things we did well and underestimated.

我们不想失去这一点，因为这是我们做得很好但被低估的事情之一。

And my takeaway is actually we do it better than other experiences.

我的收获实际上是我们比其他体验做得更好。

So we certainly want to keep that.

所以我们当然想保留这一点。

So what we did was now we're just updating their hypothesis to achieve the same goal, which is these things are working and when people want to discover, they use them and they seem to work, they can also get better.

所以我们现在所做的只是更新他们的假设以实现相同的目标，即这些东西正在发挥作用，当人们想要发现时，他们使用它们并且它们似乎有效，它们也可以变得更好。

Gustav Söderström: You're on this hill-climbing journey from a machine learning point of view, but the question is, how do you make sure that whenever people feel that they are in that I'm trapped in my taste bubble, they understand that these things are there and they're easy to use?

Gustav Söderström：从机器学习的角度来看，你正处于爬山之旅，但问题是，你如何确保每当人们感觉他们陷入我的味觉泡沫中时，他们就会明白这些东西就在那里并且它们很容易使用？

So now we have a version of Home that we are also testing, obviously, where these things are very available but voluntary and you can still do all of the recall.

因此，现在我们有了一个正在测试的 Home 版本，显然，这些东西非常可用，但是自愿的，您仍然可以进行所有召​​回。

And so from my point of view, this is the reason we A/B test because you want to be scientific about it and you want to learn as much as possible about your own product and your users.

因此，从我的角度来看，这就是我们进行 A/B 测试的原因，因为你想要科学地对待它，并且你想要尽可能多地了解你自己的产品和用户。

And now I'm sharing a lot of the learnings.

现在我正在分享很多经验教训。

Maybe we should keep them to ourselves, but my hunch is that it's going to make it a much better product.

也许我们应该把它们留给自己，但我的预感是，这将使它成为一个更好的产品。

Gustav Söderström: But what I told my teams when we went into this, because I've done this a few times, agree to signing, I think there are two fundamentally different types of product development.

Gustav Söderström：但是当我们进入这个阶段时，我告诉我的团队，因为我已经这样做过几次，同意签署，我认为有两种根本不同类型的产品开发。

One is designing a new feature.

其中一个正在设计一项新功能。

It is hard, but it's voluntary for people to use.

它很难，但是人们自愿使用。

So you do the AI DJ.

所以你来做 AI DJ。

Some people love it, that's fine.

有人喜欢，那很好。

If you don't like it, it didn't make it worse for you.

如果你不喜欢它，它不会让你的情况变得更糟。

But when you redesign, it is much more tricky because it's not voluntary to participate in the redesign.

但当你重新设计时，就棘手得多，因为参与重新设计并不是自愿的。

So there's a cost even for people who don't like it.

所以即使对于不喜欢它的人来说也是有代价的。

Then you have a very tricky problem here, which is there are going to be two types of feedback.

那么这里就有一个非常棘手的问题，那就是会有两种类型的反馈。

One is you did something and it was right, but people are upset because you changed stuff.

一是你做了一些事情并且它是正确的，但是人们因为你改变了东西而感到不安。

The other is you did something and it wasn't right, and people are also upset but for good reasons.

另一个是你做了一些不对的事，人们也会感到不安，但有充分的理由。

Gustav Söderström: And so how do you separate these two?

Gustav Söderström：那么如何区分这两者呢？

Because I think I explained this to ...

因为我想我解释这一点是为了......

When we talk through this with my teams, I think the analogy to think about is you have your desktop, your physical desktop, you have your computer in one place, you have your pencil over here, you have your notebook over there, and I come in and I just rearrange all of it.

当我们与我的团队讨论这个问题时，我认为要考虑的类比是，你有你的桌面，你的物理桌面，你的计算机在一个地方，你的铅笔在这里，你的笔记本在那里，我进来，我只是重新排列所有这些。

And you have spent, in our case, maybe 12 years with that setup.

在我们的例子中，您可能已经在这个设置上花费了 12 年的时间。

It doesn't matter if I have a lot of quantitative data that my new setup is better, you're going to get upset because you are effective in this old setup.

即使我有大量定量数据表明我的新设置更好，也没关系，你会感到不安，因为你在旧设置中很有效。

And it's hard to tell those apart.

很难区分它们。

The most classic use case is the Facebook newsfeed, which people are very upset about when it became a single newsfeed.

最经典的用例是 Facebook 新闻源，当它成为单一新闻源时，人们感到非常不安。

But it turned out to solve a lot of user problems that you didn't have to run around all of Facebook collecting events yourself.

但事实证明它解决了很多用户问题，你不必自己跑遍所有 Facebook 收集事件。

Gustav Söderström: So there are some ways of understanding if you made it better, but people's habits are broken or if it's not better.

Gustav Söderström：所以有一些方法可以理解你是否做得更好，但人们的习惯被打破了或者是否没有更好。

And one thing is, for example, to look at new user cohorts that don't have that behavior versus all user cohorts and so forth.

例如，一件事是查看没有这种行为的新用户群体与所有用户群体等。

So we went through all of this with the teams.

所以我们和团队一起经历了这一切。

Before we did it, I said, "This is going to be painful." There's probably going to be a lot of tweets because chances that we get it exactly right are very low.

在我们这样做之前，我说：“这会很痛苦。”可能会有很多推文，因为我们完全正确的机会非常低。

So for that reason, it hasn't been very hard on the team.

因此，这对团队来说并不困难。

It is hard ...

这很难...

You want to respond to people, but the right way to do it is to listen, understand, try new hypothesis to really figure out what's going on.

你想对人们做出回应，但正确的方法是倾听、理解、尝试新的假设，以真正弄清楚正在发生的事情。

So I think I've done it maybe three or four times now.

所以我想我现在可能已经做过三四次了。

Three maybe.

也许是三个。

One unsuccessful, two successfully.

一个不成功，两个成功。

So kind of knew what I was getting into.

所以有点知道我要做什么。

Gustav Söderström: So it's almost like you punish yourself, very painful, but also the most exciting things.

Gustav Söderström：所以这几乎就像你惩罚自己，非常痛苦，但也是最令人兴奋的事情。

And I think any product person knows that the easiest, the most straightforward thing to do is to iterate around where you are.

我认为任何产品人员都知道，最简单、最直接的事情就是迭代你所处的位置。

There's no risk.

没有风险。

You're not going to get fired, no user is going to get angry.

你不会被解雇，没有用户会生气。

But everyone also knows that eventually if you don't adapt new technologies, new paradigms, et cetera, you're going to get replaced.

但每个人也都知道，如果你不适应新技术、新范式等，最终你就会被取代。

You have to find this balance of trying new things.

你必须在尝试新事物中找到平衡。

And when you work in software, you have this tool of A/B testing and being scientific about it.

当您从事软件工作时，您可以使用 A/B 测试工具并对其进行科学测试。

When you build hardware, it's worse.

当你构建硬件时，情况会更糟。

If you're wrong, you're wrong.

如果你错了，那你就错了。

You can't update.

你无法更新。

Lenny: I love this story.

莱尼：我喜欢这个故事。

I so appreciate you sharing it.

我非常感谢你分享它。

I imagine also with a big launch like this, you can't actually A/B test it ahead of time because of the press season.

我想，对于这样的大型发布，由于新闻季的原因，你实际上无法提前进行 A/B 测试。

They're like, "Oh my God, look what Spotify's doing." And so you're limited there.

他们就像是，“天哪，看看 Spotify 在做什么。”所以你在那里受到限制。

Imagine, right?

想象一下，对吗？

You couldn't really test this ahead of time.

你无法提前真正测试这一点。

Gustav Söderström: The hardest thing about this is if you're trying something completely new, the MVP needs to be very big so you can build a new IU, but if you didn't do algorithms for single item feed, you can't tell if it was the right idea but poor machine learning, right?

Gustav Söderström：最难的事情是，如果你正在尝试一些全新的东西，MVP 需要非常大，这样你就可以构建一个新的 IU，但如果你没有为单个项目提要做算法，你就无法判断这是否是正确的想法，但机器学习很差，对吗？

UI poor machine learning.

UI 机器学习较差。

Or you have to build a lot and that gets quite expensive.

或者你必须建造很多东西，这会变得相当昂贵。

That's actually ...

这其实是...

The biggest why it's painful is not really the feedback from the outside.

令人痛苦的最大原因并不是来自外界的反馈。

It is the cost you have to take on the inside.

这是你必须承担的内部成本。

You incur a lot of costs as you're really hoping you're right.

因为你真的希望自己是对的，所以你付出了很多代价。

Gustav Söderström: And in our cases, the changes on the homepage aren't that hard for us to do.

Gustav Söderström：就我们而言，主页上的更改对我们来说并不难。

The important thing is that the underlying hypothesis of, can we help you break out of your taste bubble actually works and then you update the acquisition funnels into that experience.

重要的是，我们能否帮助您打破品味泡沫的基本假设确实有效，然后您将获取渠道更新为该体验。

But I think the problem is that you need to get so many things in place to be able to say, "You might get a false negative," just because you didn't do it well or not.

但我认为问题在于，你需要把很多事情都落实到位，才能仅仅因为你做得不好或做得不好而说“你可能会得到假阴性”。

That's the biggest challenge, I think, with these big rewrites where everyone has to update everything before you can know if you're right or wrong.

我认为，这是最大的挑战，在这些重大重写中，每个人都必须更新所有内容，然后才能知道自己是对还是错。

Lenny: What was that process like of helping you understand what is not working and what is working and what you wanted to change?

莱尼：帮助您了解什么不起作用、什么起作用以及您想要改变什么的过程是什么样的？

I imagine there's a bunch of data you're looking at, some tweets, things like that.

我想你正在查看一堆数据，一些推文，诸如此类的东西。

What was the tactical, "Oh, shoot, something's not going the way we expected, here's what we should do?"

战术是什么，“哦，天哪，事情没有按我们预期的方式发展，这就是我们应该做的？”

Gustav Söderström: Well, the feeds, we tested, but the home feed, we rolled out and tested afterwards.

Gustav Söderström：嗯，我们测试了 feed，但是我们随后推出并测试了家庭 feed。

And we tested out on users, a few different variants of it.

我们对用户进行了测试，它的几个不同变体。

And then we got the data back and we looked more at the quantitative data.

然后我们拿回数据，我们更多地关注定量数据。

And we do a lot of user research where people sit and use the feeds to understand and build our own theorem mind of what is working and what is not working.

我们做了很多用户研究，人们坐下来并使用提要来理解和建立我们自己的定理思维，了解什么是有效的，什么是无效的。

And then, obviously, you look at user feedback, of course, and some users are very good at expressing what is of it that isn't working, others are not as good as expressing what isn't working.

然后，显然，你会查看用户反馈，当然，有些用户非常擅长表达不起作用的内容，而另一些用户则不擅长表达不起作用的内容。

So it can be hard to parse that, but certainly, that's a factor as well.

因此，很难解析这一点，但当然，这也是一个因素。

Gustav Söderström: And so then once you do that, then you have quantitative data to look at.

Gustav Söderström：一旦你这样做了，你就可以查看定量数据。

And then you sit in recent through, what do you think is right and wrong?

然后你最近坐下来，你认为什么是对的，什么是错的？

What are the different hypotheses?

有哪些不同的假设？

What is working, what is not working?

什么有效，什么无效？

And then just update and test again and again until you prove or disprove your hypothesis.

然后一次又一次地更新和测试，直到证明或反驳你的假设。

Trying to be as scientific as possible about it.

尝试尽可能科学地对待它。

And also I think the biggest risk also when you've invested so much time in something is getting precious about things.

而且我认为，当你在某件事上投入如此多的时间时，最大的风险就是变得越来越珍贵。

You have to just be brutal.

你必须残忍。

You have to believe in things 100% until the data says no and then you believe in something else 100%.

你必须百分百相信某些事情，直到数据说不，然后你百分百相信其他事情。

That sounds easy.

听起来很容易。

It's very hard to do, to the extent that people get upset when you do it because, for some reason, people don't like when people change their minds.

这很难做到，以至于当你这样做时人们会感到不安，因为出于某种原因，人们不喜欢人们改变主意。

It is what we should want from everyone.

这是我们应该从每个人那里得到的。

I would love a politician who said, "I'd looked at the data and I realized actually this is right and now I believe this." But we hate politicians that do that.

我喜欢一位政客说：“我查看了数据，我意识到这实际上是正确的，现在我相信这一点。”但我们讨厌这样做的政客。

They feel untrustworthy and we ridicule them.

他们觉得不值得信任，我们嘲笑他们。

Gustav Söderström: So I think that's the biggest risk with anyone.

Gustav Söderström：所以我认为这对任何人来说都是最大的风险。

You just have to be unemotional and just look at the proof and the data.

你只需要保持冷静，只看证据和数据。

And then if you do that, you just move on and then you get to where you want to be, and you solve the same problem but you adapt.

如果你这样做了，你就继续前进，然后你到达你想去的地方，你解决了同样的问题，但你适应了。

Lenny: I really like that philosophy.

莱尼：我真的很喜欢这种哲学。

Essentially, it's the idea of strong opinions loosely held.

本质上，这是松散地持有强烈意见的想法。

Is that-

难道是——

Gustav Söderström: Exactly.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：没错。

Exactly what it is.

到底是什么。

And it sounds so easy, but it's hard.

这听起来很容易，但很难。

Lenny: Right?

莱尼：对吗？

Because to your point, people don't respect someone changing their mind.

因为就你而言，人们不尊重改变主意的人。

They're like, "Oh, I see, they were wrong the whole time and they were so confident about being wrong."

他们会说，“哦，我明白了，他们一直都错了，而且他们对自己的错误如此自信。”

Gustav Söderström: Yeah, exactly.

Gustav Söderström：是的，完全正确。

And it's unclear why it is what we should want, but I think it has something to do with human psychology.

目前还不清楚为什么这是我们应该想要的，但我认为这与人类心理有关。

We actually tend to love profits and people who hold very strong opinions with very little data.

事实上，我们倾向于喜欢利润和那些用很少的数据持有强烈意见的人。

Those are the people we like.

那些都是我们喜欢的人。

People will look at a lot of data and actually that, we don't like.

人们会查看大量数据，但实际上我们不喜欢这样。

Not sure why.

不知道为什么。

Lenny: Is there something that you've recently changed your mind about along these same lines that maybe comes to mind of like, "Oh, yeah?"

莱尼：最近有没有什么事情让你改变了主意，也许你会想到“哦，是啊？”

Gustav Söderström: No, I think these learnings about the science system and homepage does really well, maybe better than others, that we don't want to wash out with a bath water or whatever the expression is.

Gustav Söderström：不，我认为这些关于科学系统和主页的知识做得非常好，也许比其他的更好，我们不想用洗澡水或任何表达方式来冲洗。

I think that's the biggest current learning I'm actually very happy about.

我认为这是我目前最大的学习，实际上我对此感到非常高兴。

Lenny: Yeah, I love learning that we're doing some really well that we didn't really realize necessarily and maybe we should lead into that more.

莱尼：是的，我喜欢得知我们正在做一些非常好的事情，但我们并没有真正意识到，也许我们应该在这方面做得更多。

Lenny: Going in a somewhat different direction.

莱尼：朝着不同的方向前进。

Shishir Mehrotra suggested to ask you something.

Shishir Mehrotra 建议问你一些事情。

He's on your board, I believe.

我相信他是你的董事会成员。

Lenny: And he suggested to ask you about your 10% planning time.

莱尼：他建议询问你 10% 的计划时间。

What is that about?

那是关于什么的？

Gustav Söderström: This is a concept that I think Shishir has used for a long time ever since he worked at YouTube.

Gustav Söderström：我认为 Shishir 自从在 YouTube 工作以来就一直在使用这个概念。

And the idea is that, roughly, you shouldn't be spending more than 10% of your time planning versus executing or building, which means that if you're working quarterly 10 weeks, you should spend one week planning as we work in six-month increment.

大致的想法是，与执行或构建相比，您不应该花费超过 10% 的时间，这意味着如果您每季度工作 10 周，那么您应该花一周的时间进行计划，因为我们以六个月为增量工作。

So we try to spend two weeks planning and roughly successful.

所以我们尝试用两周的时间进行规划并大致成功。

And this is ...

这是...

Actually, when we talk about org models, give a shout-out to Brian Chesky at Airbnb, who is actually one of the first, I think, to have these more contrarian old models.

实际上，当我们谈论组织模型时，请向 Airbnb 的布莱恩·切斯基（Brian Chesky）大声喊叫，我认为他实际上是第一批拥有这些更为逆向的旧模型的人之一。

He's much more applesque than most of Silicon Valley.

他比大多数硅谷人更有苹果感。

He also works in six-month increments.

他还以六个月为增量工作。

He has a lot of experience in that as well.

他在这方面也有很多经验。

So that's what the 10% planning time is.

这就是 10% 的计划时间。

And I think if you find yourself planning much more than that, you're either planning too much or your execution period is just too short for that amount of planning.

我认为，如果你发现自己的计划远不止于此，那么你要么计划太多，要么你的执行期对于那么多的计划来说太短了。

It's a rule of thumb, but I find that it works.

这是一条经验法则，但我发现它确实有效。

Lenny: I asked a few PMs what I should ask you, PMs that work at Spotify actually, that I haven't told you.

Lenny：我问了几位 PM，我应该问你们什么，实际上是在 Spotify 工作的 PM，但我没有告诉你们。

And someone pointed out that you always bring a lot of energy and clarity to a room.

有人指出，你总是会给房间带来很多能量和清晰度。

That's something they see you as really strong at.

他们认为你在这方面非常擅长。

What have you learned about just the importance of that or just how to do that well as a leader?

关于这一点的重要性或者作为领导者如何做好这一点，您学到了什么？

Gustav Söderström: Well, that's great to hear.

Gustav Söderström：嗯，很高兴听到这个消息。

I didn't know that so I'm trying to figure out what to answer.

我不知道，所以我想弄清楚该回答什么。

I think that the energy, I don't know.

我认为能量，我不知道。

I guess I'm just excited about what I do.

我想我只是对我所做的事情感到兴奋。

I've always been excited about technology.

我一直对技术感到兴奋。

I love seeing new things.

我喜欢看到新事物。

My core drive is still this notion of you see something which I think you'll empathize with that doesn't exist yet.

我的核心驱动力仍然是这样的想法：你看到了一些我认为你会同情但尚不存在的东西。

And you're like, "Wow, I wonder if that could exist.

你会说，“哇，我想知道这是否存在。

That would be so cool." And then in order to get people to do it, you try to share that excitement.

那真是太酷了。”然后为了让人们这样做，你尝试分享这种兴奋。

So I don't think I can bring a lot of energy for something I'm not excited about.

所以我不认为我能为那些我不兴奋的事情带来很多精力。

So I have to work on things I actually believe in and that I'm excited about.

所以我必须致力于我真正相信并且令我兴奋的事情。

And so maybe then the energy comes more naturally.

所以也许能量会来得更自然。

Unfortunately, for me, so far, Spotify has been in this phase where a lot of innovation is allowed and I'm even asked to try to do new cool things.

不幸的是，对我来说，到目前为止，Spotify 已经处于允许大量创新的阶段，我什至被要求尝试做新的很酷的事情。

Gustav Söderström: Maybe I would have less energy for a pure optimization phase.

Gustav Söderström：也许我用于纯粹优化阶段的精力会更少。

On the clarity, I've always liked trying to explain things.

在清晰度方面，我一直喜欢尝试解释事情。

It's a well-known fact that the best way to understand something is to try to explain to someone else.

众所周知，理解某件事的最好方法就是尝试向别人解释。

So I go around explaining things to people who didn't ask for it and not to sound smart, but to see if I actually understood it.

所以我到处向那些没有要求的人解释事情，并不是为了显得很聪明，而是为了看看我是否真的理解了。

And so maybe it's that practice.

所以也许这就是这种做法。

And on that note, I actually do ask my leaders that work for me and I ask them to ask their leaders to always explain themselves.

在这一点上，我实际上确实要求为我工作的领导者，我要求他们要求他们的领导者总是解释自己。

And I think when ...

我想当...

We talked a little bit about autonomy and so forth, we don't promise everyone that they have to agree, but I think the promise we should make to all employees is that even if they don't agree, they should be entitled to understand why you're making the decision.

我们谈了一点自主权等等，我们不保证每个人都必须同意，但我认为我们应该向所有员工做出的承诺是，即使他们不同意，他们也应该有权理解你为什么做出这个决定。

Gustav Söderström: What I don't think is acceptable is to say, "No, we're going to do it this way because I'm more senior.

Gustav Söderström：我认为不能接受的是说：“不，我们要这样做，因为我的资历更高。

I've seen this a bunch of times.

我已经见过很多次了。

You are not smart enough." All of those things.

你不够聪明。”所有这些事情。

I think you have to explain yourself so you owe an explanation.

我认为你必须解释一下自己，所以你欠一个解释。

And I find that valuable back to the only way to understand something is to explain it because it usually turns out that if you can't explain it yourself, you probably don't really even understand it yourself.

我发现，理解某件事的唯一方法就是解释它，因为通常情况下，如果你自己不能解释它，你自己可能根本就没有真正理解它。

Sometimes I think it's possible that you can have product instincts that are good but you can't express them.

有时我认为你可能拥有良好的产品直觉，但你无法表达它们。

But most of them, when people say there's something there but they can't explain it, they actually don't understand it themselves.

但大多数人，当人们说那里有东西但他们无法解释时，他们实际上自己也不明白。

And many times, there actually isn't anything there.

很多时候，那里实际上什么也没有。

And also if you can explain it as a product person, that knowledge is now shared.

而且，如果你能以产品人员的身份解释它，那么这些知识现在就被共享了。

So it just becomes much more effective for the organization.

因此，它对组织来说变得更加有效。

So sometimes I try to provoke people a little bit and say ...

所以有时我会试着稍微激怒别人并说......

When people ask how much is art versus science, I say, "It's 0% art, 0% magic, and 100% science." And that's because I want to force people to try to explain it.

当人们问艺术与科学的区别有多大时，我说：“0% 艺术，0% 魔法，100% 科学。”那是因为我想强迫人们尝试解释它。

I think we use the word art and magic.

我认为我们使用艺术和魔法这个词。

We have historically used the word art and magic for anything that we couldn't yet explain.

我们历史上曾用艺术和魔法这个词来形容任何我们尚无法解释的事物。

Gustav Söderström: Genetics was magic and art until it was science.

Gustav Söderström：遗传学在成为科学之前一直是魔法和艺术。

And quantum physics was magic until it was science.

量子物理学在成为科学之前一直是神奇的。

And most recently, actually, intelligence and creativity was art and magic until it was statistics in an LLM.

事实上，最近，智力和创造力一直是艺术和魔法，直到法学硕士成为统计学。

So I think I try to push people to say, "Are you sure you can explain this?" because that forces people to think through.

所以我想我试图促使人们说：“你确定你能解释一下吗？”因为这迫使人们思考。

So maybe I like it and I try to force it on people.

所以也许我喜欢它，并且我试图将它强加给人们。

So maybe that's why people think I sometimes bring clarity.

所以也许这就是为什么人们认为我有时会带来清晰度。

Lenny: I love that.

莱尼：我喜欢这个。

Question along those lines, is there a system or an approach to explaining that you recommend?

沿着这些思路的问题，是否有您推荐的解释系统或方法？

Is it just write it out in a document?

是不是直接写在文档里就可以了？

Is it explaining in a certain style or is it just however is natural to the person?

是用某种特定的风格来解释还是只是对人来说很自然？

Gustav Söderström: I used to write everything and then write and rewrite and make it more and more condensed.

Gustav Söderström：我曾经把所有的东西都写下来，然后写、重写，让它变得越来越浓缩。

So that worked for me.

所以这对我有用。

I don't write as much anymore.

我不再写那么多了。

Now, I tend to walk and talk in my head myself.

现在，我倾向于自己走路和说话。

What I actually do is I ...

我实际上做的是我...

And I found this different for different people and a lot of people want to bounce something with someone else, that's how they think.

我发现这对于不同的人来说是不同的，很多人都想和别人一起讨论一些东西，这就是他们的想法。

You repeat the same thing again and again and you get some feedback on it.

你一次又一次地重复同样的事情，你会得到一些反馈。

And so I used to write a lot.

所以我过去写了很多。

I sometimes do when it's an idea I want to understand better.

当我想更好地理解一个想法时，我有时会这么做。

And at some point in my life, I would love to write something real like a book or something.

在我生命中的某个时刻，我很想写一些真实的东西，比如一本书或其他东西。

But what I do increasingly now is I do my one-on-ones with peers or people who report to me or something, and I just put on AirPods and do a distributed walk and talk.

但我现在越来越多地做的是与同事或向我汇报的人进行一对一的交流，我只是戴上 AirPods，进行分布式散步和交谈。

Gustav Söderström: Both people are walking but in different locations and you spend an hour discussing something.

Gustav Söderström：两个人都在散步，但在不同的地点，你们花了一个小时讨论某件事。

That has actually turned out to be very, very fruitful.

事实证明，这非常非常富有成效。

So then you get the power of you're not alone so you get more brain power than your own.

这样你就获得了你并不孤单的力量，因此你获得了比你自己更多的脑力。

And I don't think there is strong evolutionary proof for this, but there's certainly indications that you're thinking better when you're walking, whether it's because you're oxygenating your brain or because it's evolutionary for some other reason, I'm not sure.

我认为没有强有力的进化证据证明这一点，但确实有迹象表明，当你走路时，你的思维会更好，无论是因为你给大脑供氧，还是因为其他原因，它是进化的，我不确定。

But I found that walking, talking, and thinking actually even if you're not in person, just over AirPods, it's super effective.

但我发现，即使你不在现场，只要通过 AirPods 走路、说话和思考，效果都非常好。

It was the pandemic that forced us.

是疫情逼迫我们。

I thought we would get less creative and strategizing will suffer during the pandemic and I found the opposite.

我认为在大流行期间我们的创造力会减少，战略制定也会受到影响，但我发现事实恰恰相反。

We had more of this than ever and I started thinking about why, and I think it's all of these walk and talks that we did.

我们比以往任何时候都经历过更多这样的事情，我开始思考为什么，我认为这就是我们所做的所有这些散步和谈话。

Lenny: You threw out there that you want to write a book someday.

莱尼：你在那里提出你想有一天写一本书。

What do you think your book would be about?

你认为你的书会讲什么内容？

Gustav Söderström: I have no idea.

Gustav Söderström：我不知道。

I have no idea.

我不知道。

Statistically, it's probably going to be about something that I did a lot, so it has to be about something with technology or product or something.

从统计数据来看，它可能与我做了很多事情有关，所以它必须与技术或产品或其他东西有关。

But I would love to write something fictional.

但我很想写一些虚构的东西。

That'd be a lot of fun.

那会很有趣。

Lenny: Oh, boy.

莱尼：噢，孩子。

I'll pre-order as soon as that's up.

到了之后我会尽快预订。

Another concept I wanted to touch on that another PM suggested, which is he called it the P in the pants analogy.

我想谈谈另一位 PM 提出的另一个概念，他称之为“裤子里的 P”类比。

Does that ring a bell?

这是否敲响了警钟？

And is that interesting to talk about?

谈论这个有趣吗？

Gustav Söderström: I don't know exactly which occasion this person is referring to, but I know I've used that analogy a few times.

Gustav Söderström：我不知道这个人具体指的是哪个场合，但我知道我已经用过这个类比几次了。

Gustav Söderström: I don't know if it's like a Swedish analogy because I thought it was more widely known.

Gustav Söderström：我不知道这是否像瑞典的类比，因为我认为它更广为人知。

But the idea is that you do something ...

但想法是你做某事......

So the saying is that's like peeing in your pants in cold weather.

所以俗话说，这就像在寒冷的天气里尿在裤子里一样。

It feels really warm and nice to begin with.

一开始就感觉非常温暖和美好。

And then after a while, you start to regret it.

然后过了一段时间，你开始后悔。

It's about being short term, basically.

基本上，这是短期的。

So now I just say that's like peeing in the pants inside because people know what I mean.

所以现在我只是说这就像尿在裤子里一样，因为人们知道我的意思。

It's a short-term thing.

这是一个短期的事情。

Lenny: That's a hilarious way of communicating that idea.

莱尼：这是传达这个想法的一种有趣的方式。

Must be a Swedish thing.

一定是瑞典的东西。

Gustav Söderström: Yes, I think Swedish people do it for some reason, apparently others don't.

Gustav Söderström：是的，我认为瑞典人这样做是出于某种原因，显然其他人则不然。

Lenny: Maybe because it's cold a lot of times of the year.

莱尼：也许是因为一年中很多时候都很冷。

Gustav Söderström: Yes.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：是的。

That's probably it.

大概就是这样。

This is a saying in cold climate.

这是寒冷气候下的说法。

In the warm, it doesn't help.

在温暖的情况下，这没有帮助。

No one understands what you mean.

没有人明白你的意思。

Lenny: Speaking of Sweden, do you watch Succession?

莱尼：说到瑞典，你看《继承之战》吗？

Lenny: Okay.

莱尼：好的。

So Sweden's become a big part of the show, specifically the company trying to ...

因此，瑞典成为了展会的重要组成部分，特别是该公司试图......

I guess I don't want to spoil, but there's a character that's really important.

我想我不想剧透，但有一个角色非常重要。

Yes, exactly.

是的，完全正确。

That is Swedish.

那是瑞典语。

And so I'm curious just what do you think of the way they portray the Swedish culture and Swedish business dealings?

所以我很好奇您如何看待他们描绘瑞典文化和瑞典商业交易的方式？

Gustav Söderström: It's super fun to see this as a Sweden.

Gustav Söderström：作为瑞典人看到这里真是太有趣了。

And I guess, first and foremost, like anyone or any person or any country that gets represented by super tall, well-built, great looking Alexander Skarsgård should probably be pretty happy.

我想，首先也是最重要的是，像任何人或任何国家一样，以超高、体格健壮、帅气的亚历山大·斯卡斯加德为代表，可能会非常高兴。

So that's good.

所以这样很好。

Then I think there's this episode where they are in Norway, without giving away too much.

然后我想他们在挪威的这一集，没有透露太多。

Gustav Söderström: There are elements that are authentic.

Gustav Söderström：有些元素是真实的。

There's a lot of, I think, paid brand positioning from a Swedish brand named Fjällräven, which I think means arctic fox, which is actually a very popular outdoor brand in Sweden.

我认为，有很多付费品牌定位来自一个名为 Fjällräven 的瑞典品牌，我认为它的意思是北极狐，这实际上是瑞典非常受欢迎的户外品牌。

So that's authentic.

所以这是正宗的。

The sauna things and so forth are authentic.

桑拿的东西等等都是正宗的。

So it's real, but it's exaggerated.

所以它是真实的，但它是夸张的。

Actually, the thing that isn't very authentic is his negotiation style.

事实上，不太真实的是他的谈判风格。

Swedish people tend to be serious, cautious, and this guy's more of a player.

瑞典人往往比较严肃、谨慎，而这个家伙更像是一个玩家。

So he's not the typical Swedish businessman from a negotiation tactic point of view, I think.

所以我认为，从谈判策略的角度来看，他不是典型的瑞典商人。

Lenny: Yeah, it doesn't make me think of the way you described it where in Sweden, people sit in a circle and no one's in the center.

莱尼：是的，这并没有让我想起你所描述的在瑞典，人们围成一圈，中间没有人。

Gustav Söderström: No, exactly.

Gustav Söderström：不，完全正确。

He's very much in the center.

他非常处于中心位置。

Lenny: And then when people go saunas, there are just like a chant, sauna, sauna .

莱尼：当人们去桑拿时，就像吟诵一样，桑拿，桑拿。

Lenny: I love it.

莱尼：我喜欢。

This season is insane.

这个季节太疯狂了。

I'm so curious where it all goes.

我很好奇这一切都去哪儿了。

Maybe just the last question before very exciting lightning round.

也许只是非常激动人心的闪电回合之前的最后一个问题。

Spotify is, at this point, the biggest podcasting platform for me specifically and I think globally, and I love using it.

目前，对我来说，Spotify 是最大的播客平台，我认为是全球最大的播客平台，我喜欢使用它。

It works great.

效果很好。

I'm curious just what's next for Spotify and specifically Spotify podcasting.

我很好奇 Spotify，特别是 Spotify 播客的下一步会发生什么。

Gustav Söderström: There are two sides to it.

Gustav Söderström：有两个方面。

It's for Spotify creators and for Spotify listeners.

它适用于 Spotify 创作者和 Spotify 听众。

For Spotify creators, there are two things.

对于 Spotify 创作者来说，有两件事。

One is, and this is what we talked about at Stream On, we talked about it also for music discovery, but it's the same problem and even harder for podcast.

一是，这就是我们在 Stream On 上讨论的内容，我们也讨论了音乐发现，但对于播客来说这是同样的问题，甚至更难。

So we're still focused very heavily on helping podcast creators find more audience.

因此，我们仍然非常注重帮助播客创作者找到更多受众。

This is ...

这是...

Like I said, it's even a bigger problem to break out of your habits and your bubbles in podcasting.

就像我说的，打破播客中的习惯和泡沫是一个更大的问题。

Such a big investment to find a new podcast.

寻找一个新的播客需要这么大的投资。

And so that is something, I think, we could and should do really well.

所以我认为，我们可以而且应该做得很好。

So we keep investing a lot there.

所以我们继续在那里投入大量资金。

And as I said, you'll see more as we roll up more features now.

正如我所说，随着我们现在推出更多功能，您会看到更多。

Gustav Söderström: The other big need for creators is monetization and you can monetize today in many ways with DEI and Spotify SEI and so forth.

Gustav Söderström：创作者的另一大需求是货币化，如今您可以通过 DEI 和 Spotify SEI 等多种方式实现货币化。

But we're working hard to expand that and make it better because the industry is starting to mature and I think this is one of the biggest needs and the biggest things we could do for creators to help them monetize better, actually both free and paid.

但我们正在努力扩大这一范围并使其变得更好，因为这个行业正在开始成熟，我认为这是最大的需求之一，也是我们可以为创作者做的最大的事情，以帮助他们更好地货币化，实际上是免费的和付费的。

We also have paid podcast.

我们还有付费播客。

So that's on the creator side.

所以这是创作者方面的。

Gustav Söderström: On the consumer side, I don't want to share too much.

Gustav Söderström：在消费者方面，我不想分享太多。

We've shown that we're investing a lot in discovery.

我们已经证明我们在发现方面投入了大量资金。

I want to keep some secrets for when they roll out, but we are investing a lot in the user expense itself.

我想在它们推出时保守一些秘密，但我们在用户费用本身上投入了大量资金。

I think it's far from optimal yet what it could be.

我认为这远非最佳，但它可能是什么。

One thing that I can share that we're investing a lot in is just the ubiquity and playback across different devices and in cars and all these things that we've done well for music.

我可以分享的一件事是，我们投入了大量资金，那就是在不同设备和汽车中的普遍性和播放性，以及我们在音乐方面做得很好的所有这些事情。

But I think the listening experience can get a lot more seamless.

但我认为聆听体验可以变得更加无缝。

I think search can get better.

我认为搜索可以变得更好。

The data about podcasts and ...

有关播客的数据和...

Well, I don't want to say too much, but looking at AI and generative technology, there is a lot that can be done.

好吧，我不想说太多，但是看看人工智能和生成技术，有很多可以做的事情。

Lenny: All right.

莱尼：好吧。

Well, I'll take what I can get.

好吧，我会拿走我能得到的。

With that, we've reached our very exciting lightning round.

至此，我们进入了非常激动人心的闪电回合。

I've got six questions for you, Gustav.

我有六个问题要问你，古斯塔夫。

Are you ready?

你准备好了吗？

Lenny: Okay, we'll find out.

莱尼：好的，我们会知道的。

What are two or three books that you've recommended most to other people?

您向其他人推荐最多的两三本书是什么？

Gustav Söderström: Okay.

古斯塔夫·索德斯特伦：好的。

This is why I try to squeeze in seven into two and three.

这就是为什么我尝试将七个压缩为两个和三个。

So if we start on product, I think it's well known, but one that I would recommend product people to read is 7 Powers by Hamilton Helmer, and Netflix has used a lot.

因此，如果我们从产品开始，我认为它是众所周知的，但我会推荐产品人员阅读汉密尔顿·赫尔默（Hamilton Helmer）的《7 Powers》，Netflix 已经使用了很多。

We use a lot.

我们用了很多。

It's just if you're starting out, it's great to have a strategy framework.

只是如果你刚开始，有一个策略框架是很棒的。

No strategy framework is right, but having one is better than none.

没有哪个战略框架是正确的，但有总比没有好。

Gustav Söderström: Another in the space of mental models and frameworks, I think, is The Complete Investor by Charlie Munger.

Gustav Söderström：我认为，心理模型和框架领域的另一本书是查理·芒格的《完全投资者》。

So, yes, it's about investment, but really it's a bunch of mental models that he uses.

所以，是的，这与投资有关，但实际上这是他使用的一堆心理模型。

And I think the key takeaway is you have a problem, you should always apply three different models to it because what models do is they simplify and reduce dimensionality.

我认为关键的结论是你遇到了一个问题，你应该始终对其应用三种不同的模型，因为模型的作用是简化和降低维度。

The world has probably infinite dimensions and they reduces to maybe three or four.

世界可能有无限的维度，它们可能会减少到三到四个。

And the risk with that is you happen to get rid of a really important dimension, maybe pandemic diseases or something.

这样做的风险是你碰巧摆脱了一个非常重要的维度，也许是流行病或其他什么。

But if you use three models that have different dimensions and was reduced in different ways, statistically, and it comes to the same conclusion, even the second model you apply vastly increases your chances that you're right.

但是，如果您使用具有不同维度并以不同统计方式减少的三个模型，并且得出相同的结论，那么即使您应用的第二个模型也会大大增加您正确的机会。

So that was a good book to read.

所以这是一本值得一读的好书。

Gustav Söderström: Then I think if we go outside of product, I'm very interested in just science and mathematics.

Gustav Söderström：那么我认为，如果我们超越产品，我对科学和数学非常感兴趣。

So a few quick ones.

所以一些快速的。

The Mystery of the Aleph, an amazing book.

《阿莱夫之谜》，一本令人惊奇的书。

Something Deeply Hidden by Sean Carroll on the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

肖恩·卡罗尔对量子力学的解释中隐藏的一些东西。

Helgoland by Carlo Rovelli on the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics.

卡罗·罗维利 (Carlo Rovelli) 的 Helgoland 关于量子力学的关系解释。

The Beginning of Infinity and The Fabric of Reality by David Deutch.

大卫·达奇的《无限的开始和现实的结构》。

The Case Against Reality by Donald Hoffman on the evolution versus truth and that evolution doesn't optimize for seeing the truth, just for fitness.

唐纳德·霍夫曼（Donald Hoffman）关于进化与真理的反现实案例，进化论并不是为了看到真相而优化，而只是为了适应。

Gödel's Proof, I think, is an amazing book on his incompleteness theorem, that in any axiomatic systems, there will be true statements that can never be proven, which is a weird thing to think about.

我认为，哥德尔的证明是一本关于他的不完备性定理的令人惊叹的书，在任何公理系统中，都会有永远无法被证明的真实陈述，这是一件奇怪的事情。

And then maybe one of my favorites is The Demon in the Machine by Paul Davies that, I think, is lesser known on how information is really just entropy and this concept of information engines, that you can power something by just information and exhaust is also information.

然后，也许我最喜欢的作品之一是保罗·戴维斯（Paul Davies）的《机器中的恶魔》（The Demon in the Machine），我认为，人们对信息如何实际上只是熵以及信息引擎的概念知之甚少，即你可以仅通过信息来为某些东西提供动力，而排气也是信息。

That was not a quick list.

这不是一个简单的清单。

Lenny: No, I was just going to say you've set the record for the most number of books, but it also shows how you've become so insightful and wise just reading books like these.

莱尼：不，我只是想说你创造了读书数量最多的记录，但这也表明你只是阅读这些书就变得如此有洞察力和智慧。

And so I think if people are looking to get to a place that you're at now, I think there's the lesson.

所以我认为如果人们想要达到你现在所处的位置，我认为这就是教训。

Gustav Söderström: I'll keep the artist much shorter, I promise.

Gustav Söderström：我保证，我会让艺术家的作品变得更短。

Lenny: It's all good.

莱尼：一切都很好。

We got time.

我们有时间。

Okay, next question.

好的，下一个问题。

What's a favorite recent movie or TV show?

最近最喜欢的电影或电视节目是什么？

Gustav Söderström: So we talked about Succession and it is a recent favorite.

Gustav Söderström：所以我们谈论了继承，它是最近的热门话题。

So I'll just frivolously take something that isn't recent but is an absolute favorite, which is Halt and Catch Fire, which I think is on FX.

所以我会轻率地选择一些不是最近出现但绝对是我最喜欢的东西，那就是《Halt and Catch Fire》，我认为这是在 FX 上播出的。

Amazing show.

精彩的表演。

If you ever worked in technology, kind of starts out in the Silicon Prairie in the '80s and follows up to present day.

如果您曾经从事过技术工作，您可能会从 80 年代的硅谷开始，一直延续到今天。

Amazing show.

精彩的表演。

Lenny: Halt and Catch Fire.

莱尼：停下来，着火。

Yeah, I watched some of it.

是的，我看过一些。

I actually fell off of it, but it's a good reminder to go check it out.

我实际上从上面摔下来了，但这是一个很好的提醒，让我去看看。

Lenny: I'm going to go back.

莱尼：我要回去了。

What's a favorite recent interview question you like to ask?

您最近最喜欢问的面试问题是什么？

Gustav Söderström: I don't ask it, but my favorite question is Lex Fridman's small ending question that is usually something like, so what's the meaning of it all?

Gustav Söderström：我不会问这个问题，但我最喜欢的问题是 Lex Fridman 的小结尾问题，通常是这样的，那么这一切的意义是什么？

I like that.

我喜欢这样。

It's a tough question to get.

这是一个很难回答的问题。

Lenny: I'm so tempted to ask you, but-

莱尼：我很想问你，但是——

Lenny: Okay.

莱尼：好的。

Let's move on.

让我们继续吧。

That'll be another ...

那将是另一个...

That'll be our second take at this.

这将是我们对此的第二次尝试。

Lenny: What are some favorite products you've recently discovered that you love?

莱尼：您最近发现哪些最喜欢的产品？

Gustav Söderström: The obvious one is ChatGPT GPT-4 and just playing around with that, trying to create bots for yourself that do different things for you and so forth.

Gustav Söderström：最明显的一个是 ChatGPT GPT-4，只是尝试一下，尝试为自己创建机器人来为你做不同的事情等等。

But I don't think that's probably true for everyone.

但我认为这可能并不适合所有人。

The other really favorite is something you've written about and talked about, which is Duolingo, which I think is both very impressive from a product point of view, the execution and what they've done.

另一个真正喜欢的东西是你写过和谈论过的东西，那就是 Duolingo，我认为从产品的角度、执行和他们所做的事情来看，它都非常令人印象深刻。

It is also insanely used in my family.

它在我的家人中也被疯狂使用。

We have a family account and everyone is using it and competing every day.

我们有一个家庭帐户，每个人都在使用它并每天进行比赛。

So I'm both impressed by the product and I also use the product quite a lot.

所以我对这个产品印象深刻，而且我也经常使用这个产品。

Lenny: What languages are folks learning within your family?

莱尼：你们家里的人在学习什么语言？

Gustav Söderström: In my family, it's Spanish right now.

Gustav Söderström：在我家里，现在使用西班牙语。

Gustav Söderström: I only have a few thousand XP.

Gustav Söderström：我只有几千 XP。

I'm not that good yet.

我还没那么好。

Lenny: No, I don't know if that's good.

莱尼：不，我不知道这样好不好。

That sounds pretty good.

听起来不错。

Next question, what's something relatively minor you've changed in your product development process that's had a tremendous impact on your team's ability to execute?

下一个问题是，您在产品开发过程中进行了哪些相对较小的更改，但对您团队的执行能力产生了巨大影响？

Gustav Söderström: I'm not sure I've done anything minor that had a tremendous impact.

Gustav Söderström：我不确定我是否做过任何产生巨大影响的小事。

Usually, it takes something bigger to get a big impact.

通常，需要更大的东西才能产生巨大的影响。

I think maybe one thing that I've tried to do back to clarity and so forth is this thing I mentioned about I'm trying to push a lot for what I call Socratic debate, where the idea is obviously that the best idea wins, not the most senior idea and so forth.

我想也许我试图做的一件事是澄清等等，我提到过我正在努力推动所谓的苏格拉底式辩论，其中的想法显然是最好的想法获胜，而不是最高级的想法等等。

And trying to push for this notion of having people explain themselves, not saying I think there's something there or have a feeling or something like that.

并试图推动这种让人们解释自己的想法，而不是说我认为那里有什么东西或有一种感觉或类似的东西。

And apparently, as you said, that has had some impact because people apparently say that about me.

显然，正如你所说，这产生了一些影响，因为人们显然是这样评价我的。

So that's probably the biggest thing.

所以这可能是最重要的事情。

Lenny: Final question, what is one fun ritual of the Spotify product team, and is it saunas?

Lenny：最后一个问题，Spotify 产品团队的一项有趣的仪式是什么？是桑拿吗？

Gustav Söderström: So Spotify is so big now that it's quite local actually, different parts of Spotify, different product rituals.

Gustav Söderström：Spotify 现在已经这么大了，实际上它非常本地化，Spotify 的不同部分，不同的产品习惯。

I accidentally created one ritual many years ago, maybe 12 years ago, when we talked about which phase a product is in.

很多年前，也许是 12 年前，当我们谈论产品处于哪个阶段时，我无意中创造了一个仪式。

And it was ...

那是...

We needed some definition.

我们需要一些定义。

So I think off the cuff, I said, "Well, it's four phases." It's think it, build it, ship it, tweak it." And then the think it phase, it should be cheap, not a lot of money spent.

所以我即兴思考，说：“嗯，有四个阶段。”它是思考、构建、运输、调整。”然后是思考阶段，它应该很便宜，而不是花很多钱。

In the build it phase, you're going to start spending a lot of money.

在构建阶段，您将开始花费大量资金。

So then you must have reduced the risk in the think it phase that you're right.

那么你一定已经在“思考”阶段降低了你是对的风险。

And then you have the ship it phase and then you go over and tweak it.

然后你就进入了发布阶段，然后你仔细检查并调整它。

And it was something that wasn't that thought through, but it's funny because I still hear it sometimes even from other companies like, "Oh, we're in the think it phase," or "We're in the tweak it phase." So it stuck.

这是一些没有经过深思熟虑的事情，但很有趣，因为有时我仍然会听到这样的话，甚至是从其他公司那里听到的，比如“哦，我们正处于思考阶段”，或者“我们正处于调整阶段”。所以它卡住了。

I don't know if it's very good, but it's stuck.

我不知道它是否很好，但它被卡住了。

Lenny: It is catchy.

莱尼：这很吸引人。

I think anything getting stuck in people's head is a success.

我认为任何被人们牢牢记住的事情都是成功的。

Gustav, thank you so much for being here.

古斯塔夫，非常感谢你来到这里。

We are two for two for Swedish people.

对于瑞典人来说，我们是二对二。

Gustaf, with an F, Alströmer was on the podcast.

古斯塔夫（Gustaf），F，阿尔斯特罗默（Alströmer）出现在播客上。

Gustav Söderström: Who is also an amazing person.

Gustav Söderström：他也是一个了不起的人。

Lenny: Also an amazing person.

莱尼：也是一个了不起的人。

I feel very jealous of people that get to work with you and for you.

我非常嫉妒那些与你一起工作并为你工作的人。

Thank you again for being here.

再次感谢您来到这里。

Two final questions, where can folks find you online if they want to learn more, maybe reach out, ask some questions.

最后两个问题，如果人们想了解更多信息，或者想联系您，问一些问题，可以在哪里找到您。

Lenny: Awesome.

莱尼：太棒了。

And then final question is just how can listeners be useful to you?

最后一个问题是听众如何对你有用？

Gustav Söderström: Just reach out.

Gustav Söderström：伸出手来吧。

I do read feedback and I try to remove the angry comments and understand what they're actually thinking and why they're upset or what's not working.

我确实会阅读反馈，并尝试消除愤怒的评论，并了解他们的实际想法以及他们为什么感到不安或什么不起作用。

Lenny: And then the reaching out, would you recommend an angry tweet at you or more of a email to that email address you shared?

莱尼：然后是联系，你会向你推荐一条愤怒的推文，还是向你分享的电子邮件地址发送更多电子邮件？

Gustav Söderström: Well, the @GustavS is the Twitter handle, so just tweet at me.

Gustav Söderström：嗯，@GustavS 是 Twitter 账号，所以只需向我发推文即可。

Lenny: Amazing.

莱尼：太棒了。

Gustav, thank you so much for being here.

古斯塔夫，非常感谢你来到这里。

Gustav Söderström: Thank you for having me, Lenny.

Gustav Söderström：谢谢你邀请我，Lenny。

It's been a pleasure.

很高兴。

Lenny: Thank you so much for listening.

莱尼：非常感谢您的聆听。

If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

如果您发现这很有价值，您可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或您最喜欢的播客应用程序上订阅该节目。

Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast.

另外，请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，因为这确实有助于其他听众找到播客。

You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennyspodcast.com.

您可以在 lennyspodcast.com 上找到所有过去的剧集或了解有关该节目的更多信息。

See you in the next episode.

下一集见。