本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
那，这是反特朗普的吗？
Well, is it anti Trump?
是的。
Yes.
那我觉得我们大概没问题。
Then I think we're probably fine.
谁掌握了真相？
Who got the truth?
是你吗？
Is it you?
是你吗？
Is it you?
是你吗？
Is it you?
现在谁掌握了真相？
Who got the truth now?
欢迎回到《Acquired》第十三集。
Welcome back to episode 13 of Acquired.
这档节目讲的是那些真正成功的科技收购案例。
The show where we talk about technology acquisitions that actually went well.
我是本·吉尔伯特。
I'm Ben Gilbert.
我是大卫·罗森塔尔。
I'm David Rosenthal.
我们是你们的主持人。
And we are your hosts.
今天我们有位非常特别的嘉宾，来自GeekWire的托德·毕晓普。
We have a very special guest today visiting us from GeekWire, Todd Bishop.
嘿，能来这里真是太好了。
Hey, it's great to be here.
非常高兴你能来。
So great to have you.
我是你们的粉丝。
I'm a I'm a fan.
我是你们的听众。
I'm a listener.
我觉得你们的播客可能是我唯一每集都听过的。
I think yours might be the only podcast that I've listened to every episode of.
哇。
Woah.
这说明
Which speaks
你们还比较新。
to the fact you're still relatively new.
不过，是的，我周末散步的时候会听，真的很喜欢你们在节目里做的事情。
But, yeah, I I listen on I listen on my walks on the weekend and really love what you guys do on the show.
谢谢你，Todd。
Thank you, Todd.
对。
Yeah.
我们很高兴你能来。
We're glad to have you.
是的。
Yeah.
这是我们的荣幸。
It's a privilege.
而且这一期节目会特别有意思。
And for this episode, it's gonna be particularly interesting.
我们要聊的是出版行业。
We're talking about the publishing industry.
所以我们想请托德来，因为我们认为听众们会特别感兴趣，能从亲身经历这次收购结果的人那里得到一些内幕消息。
So, we we wanted to have Todd on because we thought it would be particularly fascinating to listeners to get a little inside info from from someone who's kind of experiencing the results of the acquisition firsthand.
在我们进入今天的话题之前，先说几件琐事。
So before we get into what the the episodes on today, a couple couple of administrative things.
第一件事，请在iTunes上给我们留个评分和评论。
First one, please leave us a rating and a review on iTunes.
这对节目的未来发展帮助巨大，因为我们能投资更好的技术，请到越来越多的嘉宾，也能用节目做更多的事情。
It's a it is tremendously helpful for the future of the show as we invest in better tech and we get, you know, more and more guests on and we're able to do more things with the show.
我很感激大家这么做，也感谢大家在社交媒体上分享任何你觉得合适的内容。
I appreciate doing that and doing any sort of sharing on on social media that you you feel is appropriate.
另外，我们建了一个Slack社区，而且反响很不错。
Secondarily, we started a Slack community and we've seen some really great uptake in that.
所以
So
对。
Yeah.
和大家聊天真的很有意思，希望更多人加入。
It's been really fun to chat with all you guys and please would love more people to join.
但已经加入的朋友们，请继续提问和讨论。
But for people who are already in, keep the questions and discussion coming.
这真是太棒了。
It's been great.
是的。
Yeah.
我们收到了一些邮件，问怎么加入。
And we've got some some email asking, well, how do I join?
在Acquired网站上就有。
It's it's on the Acquired website.
如果你用电脑访问，右边有个小工具。
If you're on desktop, it's a little widget on the right side.
输入你的邮箱，然后它会发邮件告诉你具体步骤。
You just enter your email and then it emails you how to do it.
如果用手机访问，就在文章下面。
And if are on mobile, it is down below the posts.
好了，听众朋友们。
Alright, listeners.
现在是介绍我们节目的老朋友Vanta的好时机。
Now is a great time to tell you about a longtime friend of the show, Vanta.
AI已经彻底打乱了整个安全格局。
AI has scrambled the whole security picture.
以前，你只需要在年度审计或静态PDF中证明一次安全性，大家点点头，就完事了。
It used to be that you proved that you were secure once a year on audit or a static PDF, then everyone would nod, and you're done.
但在AI优先的世界里，这已经行不通了。
But in an AI first world, that doesn't hold up anymore.
对。
Yep.
现在你的风险面每周都在变化。
Your risk surface changes every week now.
一个供应商启用了AI功能，或者有人在不通知IT的情况下引入新模型，你的安全态势就和上周不一样了，更不用说和上次审计时相比了。
A vendor turns on an AI feature or someone writes in a new model without telling IT, and your posture is different than it was last week, let alone at your last audit.
Vanta自己的研究发现，大约70%的公司存在这种所谓的“影子AI”，完全没有经过任何安全审查。
Vanta's own research found that around 70% of companies have this, quote, unquote, shadow AI running with no security review at all.
对。
Right.
这就是Vanta发挥作用的地方。
And that's where Vanta comes in.
他们是领先的代理信任平台，也就是说，他们构建了弥补这一差距的东西。
They're the leading agentic trust platform, meaning they've built the thing that closes the gap.
而他们弥补差距的方式就是Vanta Agent。
And the way that they close that gap is Vanta Agent.
你可以把它想象成一个GRC工程师，也就是治理、风险和合规方面的专家，只不过它是软件，而且不用睡觉。
Think of it as a GRC engineer, that's governance, risk, and compliance, except that it's software and it doesn't sleep.
它能发现问题，起草修复方案，并把你在供应商评估上花费的时间减半。
It finds the issues, drafts the fixes, and cuts the time that you'd spend on vendor assessments in half.
减半，
In half,
这正是如今超过16000家公司使用Vanta的原因。
which is exactly why more than 16,000 companies today run on Vanta.
像Ramp、Cursor和Snowflake这样的公司，都能保持审计就绪状态，并捕捉到审计之间出现的风险，涵盖所有供应商、所有AI工具以及整个环境。
Companies like Ramp, Cursor, and Snowflake all stay audit ready and catch the risks that crop up between audits across every vendor, every AI tool, the whole environment.
这就是真正的价值所在。
And that's the real value.
现在，信任必须是持续性的，所以Vanta自动化了你的安全、合规以及赢得和证明信任所需的工作。
Trust has to be continuous now, which is why Vanta automates your security, your compliance, and the work to earn and prove trust.
我们非常喜欢Vanta，多年来，实际上有数百位被收购的听众在他们的公司成为了Vanta的客户。
We're huge fans of Vanta over here, and literally hundreds of acquired listeners have become Vanta customers at their companies over the years.
所以你可以访问vanta.com/acquired，获得一千美元的折扣。
So you can get a thousand dollars off Vanta at vanta.com/acquired.
网址是vanta.com/acquired，可以省一千美元，只要告诉他们Ben和David推荐的就行。
That's vanta.com/acquired for a thousand dollars off, and just tell them that Ben and David sent you.
那么，话不多说，我们这周的主题是Facebook收购Push Pop Press。
So without further ado, our episode this week is on Facebook's acquisition of Push Pop Press.
试试看。
Try that.
试试看。
Try it.
哎呀。
Blah.
快速说五遍。
Say that five times fast.
大卫，你想开始吗？
David, do you want to dive in
讲讲历史和事实？
with the history and facts?
像往常一样。
As always.
这个很有意思。
So very interesting one here.
这家公司，正如本提到的，叫Push Pop Press，很多人没听说过。
The company, as Ben mentioned, is Push Pop Press, which not many people have heard of.
但这家公司是2010年2月由两个人创立的，我记得是马塔斯和基蒙·辛特里斯。
But it was founded in February 2010 by two guys, Matas and Kimon Tsinteris, I believe.
他们都是苹果公司的校友。
And they were both alums of Apple.
他们在苹果公司分别担任设计师和工程师，大约干了四五年。
And they had been designer one a designer and one an engineer at Apple for about four or five years.
在iPhone发布前的几年里，他们参与了iPhone的研发工作。
And they had worked on the iPhone in the years leading up to the launch.
对。
Yeah.
而且作为一个彻头彻尾的苹果迷，这两个人简直是传奇人物。
And as a total Apple nerd, these guys are legendary.
我是说，你看看他们的作品集，从iPhone前六个软件版本正面的充电电池图标，到地图应用，都是他们设计的。
I mean you look at their portfolios, they've designed everything from the, you know, the charging battery icon on the front of the iPhone for the first six software release to maps to on the map.
本，你这是在抢我的风头啊。
Ben, you're you're stealing my thunder here.
抱歉。
Sorry.
我笔记里确实记着呢。
I literally have in my notes.
对。
Yeah.
这些人可不是普通的苹果工程师和设计师。
These guys, they weren't just any Apple engineers and designers.
他们俩一起设计了相机应用、照片应用、地图应用、设置应用、电池显示、iPad的照片应用，还有Mac上的时间机器和照片亭的初版。
Between the two of them, they designed the first the first versions of the camera app, the photos app, the maps app, the settings app, the battery display, the photos app for the iPad and time machine and photo booth for the Mac.
看来我以后不该再凭记忆说事了。
Well, I should stop doing anything from memory ever.
是的。
Yes.
相当厉害的人物。
Quite, quite impressive guys.
有趣的是，他们在做Push Pop Press的时候，大概只有两年时间，Mike同时还在做别的事情。
And interestingly, while they were working on Push Pop Press, which was only for about two years, Mike was also working on the side.
我不知道哪个是副业，哪个是主业，但他是最早参与Nest项目的人之一。
I don't know which was the side gig and which was the permanent gig, but he was one of the first people working on Nest.
那时候没人知道Nest是什么，只知道那是前苹果员工搞的神秘初创公司，Mike也是那个团队的一员。
And nobody knew what Nest was at this point, but, they were the secretive startup from former Apple folks and Mike was also part of that team.
没错。
He was.
而且Mike长期以来参与了很多非常棒的软件项目。
And Mike's had his hands in really great software for a long time.
对于西雅图的听众来说，他其实是土生土长的西雅图人，还参与开发了一些非常出色的Mac软件，比如Delicious Monster出品的Delicious Library，那个软件真是像素级的完美。
He's a for the Seattleite listeners out there, he's actually a native Seattleite and worked on some really incredible Mac software that is is pixel perfect called Delicious Library from Delicious Monster
对。
That's right.
和Will Shipley一起。
With Will Shipley.
而且，你知道，作为一个苹果迷，同时也是优秀软件的仰慕者，这真的为创造出色的用户体验树立了标杆。
And that, you know, as a I, you know, yet again Apple nerd and and like admirer of great software is is really kinda setting the bar for creating great UX.
而且这是有史以来最棒的创业公司名字之一。
And one of the greatest startup names ever.
对吧？
Right?
Delicious Monster。
Delicious monster.
是的。
Yes.
确实。
Indeed.
所以我们有这两位来自苹果的超级明星工程师和设计师。
So we have these two superstar engineers and designers from Apple.
他们离开苹果，创办了Push Pop Press。
They leave, they start Push Pop Press.
有人可能会问，Push Pop Press 是什么？
What is Push Pop Press one might ask?
在2011年春天的TED大会上，他们展示了他们一直在研发的东西。
So at TED, at the TED conference in spring of twenty eleven, they unveil at the conference what they've been working on.
那是一次对书籍的重新构想。
And it was an attempt to reimagine the book.
书在移动设备上，无论是平板还是手机，智能手机上，应该是什么样子？
What does the book look like on, on a mobile computer, both tablets and phones, smartphones.
他们推出的第一本书是和阿尔·戈尔合作的，有趣的是，戈尔是苹果的董事会成员，而且当时我记得他还和风险投资公司 Kleiner Perkins 有关联，这家公司也是 Nest 的投资者。
And the first book that they launched was in conjunction with Al Gore, who interestingly was an Apple board member and also at the time I believe still affiliated with the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins which was an investor in Nest.
他们和戈尔合作，推出了他的书《我们的选择》，这本书是关于环境的。
And they worked with him to launch his book called Our Choice, which was about the environment.
那是一个极其精美的应用。
And it was an incredibly beautiful app.
它作为应用在苹果应用商店上架了。
It was released as an app within the Apple App Store.
它只能在iOS系统上运行。
It was only on iOS.
Push Pop Press背后的技术创造了一种高度沉浸式的互动体验，再次真正重新定义了书的概念，将互动内容、音频和视频无缝整合到这个体验中。
And the technology behind it that Push Pop Press created enabled highly highly immersive interactions with, again, really a reimagining of what a book was with interactive content, with audio, with video, all seamlessly integrated into this experience.
对。
Yeah.
关于这一点，值得注意的是，要想象出这样一个沉浸式、美观、动画曲线完美的应用，并不是一件容易的事情。
And one of the things to note about that was, you know, it's it's still not it's not an easy thing to imagine a really immersive beautiful kind of perfect animation curve application like this.
光是这一点就很难。
That alone is hard.
特别是在早期的iOS设备上，工程实现尤其困难。
The engineering especially on on those real early iOS devices is particularly difficult.
而世界上能构想并实现这种惊人体验的，就是这两个人，然后……
And these were kind of the the two guys in the world that could that could build that, you know, envision that that incredible experience and then
是的。
Yeah.
我们说的是早期iPad和iPhone 4、4S那个时期。
We're talking early iPads and like iPhone four four s timeframe.
对。
Yeah.
而且有趣的是，现在我们没法证实或否认，但媒体有报道说，这件事可能给他们带来了一点麻烦。
And actually interestingly, now we we can't verify this confirm or deny but it has been reported in the press that this actually might have gotten into them into a little bit of trouble.
因为据说，根据一些文章，我们不知道真假，但显然史蒂夫·乔布斯注意到他们离开后，也注意到了他们在做什么。
Because apparently, again, according to, some articles out there, we don't know if this is true or not, but apparently Steve Jobs, noticed when these guys left and noticed what they were working on.
他认为他们用来打造Push Pop Press的很多技术，和他们之前在苹果做iBooks时开发的一些专利技术惊人地相似。
And he believed that, a lot of the technology that they used to build Push Pop Press was actually alarmingly similar to some of the patented technology that they had developed while they were at Apple working on iBooks.
所以据说他又有点不高兴了。
So he again supposedly got a little upset about this.
好在加州没有竞业禁止条款，对吧？
Good thing there's no non compete provisions in California, right?
是的，没错。
Yes, exactly.
没错。
Exactly.
其实，这涉及到知识产权的问题。
Well, was actually an IP issue.
据说，这是个专利问题。
This was a patent issue, supposedly.
这是在2011年他们在TED发布之后发生的。
So this was after they launched at TED in 2011.
有趣的是，那年六月的WWDC上，并不是苹果所有人都对此不满，因为《Our Choice》和Push Pop Press实际上赢得了苹果设计奖，被苹果评为当年iPad上设计最优秀的应用之一。
And then interestingly at WWDC that year in June, not everybody at Apple was too upset because, Our Choice and Push Pop Press actually won an Apple Design Award, for the iPad as being one of the best designed apps according to Apple on the iPad that year.
但尽管如此，不久之后，在2011年8月初，Facebook宣布收购了Push Pop Press，收购金额未公开。
But nonetheless, very shortly thereafter in the beginning of August of twenty eleven, Facebook announces that they have acquired Push Pop Press for an undisclosed amount.
而且，据这些文章说，乔布斯对此事非常不满，对书籍和应用方面可能存在的知识产权侵权感到恼火，这可能也影响了他们无法继续独立运营的结果。
And again, supposedly according to these articles, the fact that Jobs was kind of on the warpath about this and upset about some of the potential IP violations regarding books and apps might have contributed to the outcome here and not continuing to go along as a standalone company.
我们无从知晓。
No way for us to know.
这个假设挺有意思的。
Interesting hypothesis.
我之前从来没往那个方向想过。
I never never took it there before.
关于这次收购，有个小细节。
A note on this acquisition.
我觉得可以放心地说，那笔钱数目不大。
I think it's safe to assume that's a pretty small sum.
团队也不大，还处于非常早期的阶段。
Not, you know, not a big team, very early stage.
但它代表的意义，我记得当时我就这么想过。
But what it did represent I remember thinking this at the time.
我当时买了那本书。
I had I had bought the book.
玩起来真的非常棒。
It was incredible to play with.
对背后的技术非常敬仰。
Had great reverence for sort of the technology behind it.
我当时就想，天哪，Facebook一直在收购，我们不知道这是不是人才收购，但之前已经收购了好几个团队，都是非常出色的iOS设计师和开发者。
And I was thinking, man, Facebook just keeps buying up and sort of we don't know if this was an acquihire, but had done several acquisitions before of teams that were just incredible iOS designers and developers.
我当时觉得他们真是财大气粗。
And I was like they really have a war chest there.
回想那个时期，我的意思是，Facebook在移动时代仍然处于很大的变动之中。
And thinking back to that time period, I mean this was still a great state of flux for Facebook in the mobile era.
他们当时在做混合网页的东西。
They were doing the hybrid web thing.
他们还没能把自己的优势转化过来，你知道的——
They hadn't managed to translate their, you know
Facebook的应用在iPhone和Android上并不是原生的。
The Facebook apps were not native on iPhone and Android.
他们当时在做那种封装式的开发，你懂的。
They were doing the wrapper, you know, development.
那真是一团糟。
It was a mess.
对。
Right.
而且他们在移动端的未来，加上广告收入，都充满了不确定性。
And their mobile future was uncertain with their ad revenues.
就是说，他们还没把桌面端的摇钱树搬到移动端。
Mean, they hadn't translated their cash cow from desktop yet.
而且，如我们所知，他们在信息流广告上取得了巨大的成功。
And, know, as we know, they were they had become incredibly successful with the the news feed ad.
那是历史上最成功的广告形式之一。
It's one of the best ad units in history.
但是
But
但你说得对。
But you're right.
那时候有好几次，我记得有些，我不确定当时是不是公开的，但确实有很多大问题，关于他们能不能把成功复制到移动应用上，还有……
There were times back then, I remember some I believe, I don't know if they were public or not at this point, but there were big questions about whether they could translate their success into mobile apps and into
这正好是在移动互联网时期，差不多是Recode大会上那次臭名昭著的采访的时候。
This was mobile right around the time there was an infamous Recode interview at the RECODE conference.
这可能是在Recode之前。
This might have been before RECODE.
很可能是在那之前。
Probably was back
在All Things Digital大会上，是那件连帽衫吗？
at the All Things Detail At the All Things Detail Was this the hoodie?
就是那件连帽衫，马克·扎克伯格在台上被沃尔特·莫斯伯格和卡拉·斯威舍追问。
The hoodie where Mark Zuckerberg was being grilled on stage by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher.
他穿着连帽衫，满头大汗，被追问关于移动业务和Facebook在移动领域的失误。
And he had a hoodie on and he was sweating profusely and he was being grilled about mobile and Facebook's missing of mobile.
最后他把连帽衫脱了，那场面真是……
And he ended up taking the hoodie off and it was
然后里面还有那种光照派的十字路口标志。
And then it had that like that illuminati Crossroads
或者类似的东西。
or something
在里面。
inside it.
就像是。
Was like
非常非常尴尬的时刻。
very, very It was embarrassing moment.
但也有人猜测，那一刻是转折点，让他意识到Facebook必须全力投入移动端，之后他们也确实这么做了。
But others have speculated that that was that moment was the turning point when he realized that Facebook needed to go all in on mobile and they really did after that.
对。
Yeah.
而这次收购就是其中的一部分。
And this acquisition was part of it.
有意思的是，我们在这里把历史和事实部分收个尾。
Now interestingly, and then we'll we'll wrap up the history and facts here.
就像本提到的，我们不知道收购的价格。
As as Ben mentioned, we don't know the price of the acquisition.
我们只能假设价格相当低。
We have to assume it was quite small.
Push Pop Press 从来没有融过资。
Push Pop Press had never raised any money.
当时就只有他们两个人，再加上另外几个人在搞这个项目。
It was just the two of them and a couple other people who were working on it.
但被收购后，创始人其实在网站和博客上写了，说这纯粹是关于他们和技术的事。
But when they were acquired, they actually the founders actually wrote on the website, on their blog, that they were this was just about them and the technology.
他们不打算继续做图书行业了。
They were not gonna continue in the book industry.
他们写道，虽然 Facebook 不打算开始出版电子书，但 Push Pop Press 背后的创意和技术会整合进 Facebook，让人们有更丰富的方式来分享他们的故事。
They they write, although Facebook isn't planning to start publishing digital books, the ideas and technology behind Push Pop Press will be integrated with Facebook giving people even richer ways to share their stories.
每天有数百万人发布内容到Facebook，我们认为这将是
With millions of people publishing to Facebook every day, we think it's going to be a
Push Pop Press的绝佳归宿。
great home for Push Pop Press.
咳嗽。
Cough.
发布内容，咳嗽。
Publishing cough.
咳嗽。
Cough.
是发布内容，不是书。
Publishing, not books.
对。
Yeah.
有意思。
Interesting.
所以，是的。
So, yeah.
我们开始吧。
Let's get into it.
我的意思是，就简单总结一下。
Mean, just to just to wrap it up quickly.
然后团队，他们两个人，继续在Facebook上做两件事，直到现在还在做。
So then the team goes the two of them go on and they work on two things that they're still working on at Facebook.
第一是Facebook Paper，很多人可能不记得了，但这是Facebook在2014年初推出的一个独立应用，基本上就是Flipboard的竞争对手。
First is Facebook Paper, which many people don't remember, but this is a standalone app that Facebook launched in early twenty fourteen that's basically a Flipboard competitor.
对。
Yeah.
而且你看这个，我觉得这可能是收购的条件之一，但Mike Matas负责了Facebook Creative Labs，这个产品就是Creative Labs推出的第一个东西。
And if you look at this, this was the first thing I think it might have been conditional upon the acquisition but Mike Matas got to run Facebook Creative Labs and this was kind of the product to launch out Creative Labs.
而且Push Pop Press那本书里的动画和设计感，在Paper里都能看到。
And the animations and the sensibilities from from Push Pop Press' book are just like right there in paper.
我的意思是，整个沉浸式设计理念，事物之间过渡得非常平滑。
I mean, the whole immersive design philosophy, very smooth curves between things.
你能看出是同一个团队做的。
You can tell it's the same team.
而且尽管Paper这个应用，它现在还在。
And although Paper, it still exists.
你仍然可以在App Store里下载到它。
You can still download it in the App Store.
和Push Pop Press一样，它只支持iOS系统。
It's only on iOS much like Push Pop Press.
它并没有取得巨大的成功，但它作为引子，真正重要的是，这个Push Pop Press团队后来成为了Facebook即时文章的产品负责人。
Hasn't been a huge success but it informs the Trojan horse to the real meat here is that this Push Pop Press becomes and and these guys are are the product leaders of Facebook Instant Articles.
对。
Yeah.
而且我觉得Mike最近离开了，但Kimon——我不太确定怎么发音——还在那里。
And I think Mike was and recently left but but Kimon or not exactly sure how to pronounce that is still there.
迈克，你现在在做什么？
Mike, what are you doing now?
如果方便的话，给我们打个电话。
If call us.
我觉得是的，我在Instagram上关注了他。
I I believe so I follow him on Instagram.
他是个很棒的风景摄影师，而且他经常到处旅行。
He's like a tremendous nature photographer and he's he's doing a lot of traveling.
我觉得他是在休息一段时间。
I think he's taking some time.
我相信这是他应得的。
I'm sure well deserved.
不过，Instant Articles确实是个革命性的产品，我相信很多听众都知道，这是Facebook去年推出的一个改变游戏规则的产品。
But Instant Articles is really I'm sure many of our listeners know about it but this is really game changing product that Facebook launched last year.
有趣的是，托德，我相信你会喜欢这个，他们正在开发这个产品的消息在2014年秋天被《纽约时报》的大卫·卡尔抢先报道了。
And it was interestingly, Todd, I'm sure you'll appreciate this, the fact that they were working on it was scooped by David Carr at The New York Times fall of twenty fourteen.
然后最终在2015年春天推出。
And then it ends up coming out in spring of twenty fifteen.
我记得他那篇文章的开头是这么说的：Facebook就像公园里的一只大狗，朝你飞奔过来，你不知道它是想跟你玩，
And I believe the opening line of his article where he talks about this is that Facebook is like a big dog in the park that is galloping at you, and you don't know if it wants to play with you
还是想吃了你。
or eat you.
天哪。
Oh my god.
这个比喻太贴切了。
That is so perfect.
太贴切了。
So perfect.
如果你是出版商的话。
Have If you are a publisher.
没错。
Exactly.
没错。
Exactly.
天哪，我就在公园里啊，兄弟。
Boy, I'm I'm I'm in the park, man.
对。
Yeah.
你们就在公园里。
You guys are in the park.
是的。
We are.
是的。
We are.
所以为了准备这个，我花了不少时间跟我们的分析团队一起，搞清楚我们从Facebook得到什么，又给Facebook什么。
So in preparation for this, I spent quite a bit of time with our analytics just getting a sense for what we get from Facebook, what we give to Facebook.
我们大约10%的流量来自Facebook。
We get roughly 10% of our traffic from Facebook.
而且，它是最大的单一来源吗？它就是最大的。
And Is it the largest single It's the largest.
是的。
Yep.
除了自然搜索之外。
It's other than organic search.
对。
Yep.
所以如果你看自然搜索，它差不多占了一半。
So if you look at organic search, it's, you know, close to half.
但就实际的外部推荐来源来说。
But in terms of this in terms of actual, you know, inbound referrers.
所以，这流量相当可观。
So so it's quite a bit of traffic.
现在，按照传统出版的思维，出版商会想，我得让用户来我的网站。
Now, in the old school publishing mentality, publishers would think, I've gotta get users on my site.
对。
Yeah.
这就是我转化他们的地方，把他们变成潜在的电商客户，或者让他们进入我的网站。没错。
That is where I'm, you know, converting them into, you know, potential ecommerce customers or I'm getting them on my Exactly.
邮件。我觉得Instant Articles就是这种思维转变的最好例子之一，适合那些更前卫的出版商。
Email And I think Instant Articles is one of the best examples of that mentality shifting for publishers that are a little more progressive.
我们也应该解释一下这是什么，对于那些不太了解的人。这是内容分发方式的一个重大变化，这些内容归出版商所有，由他们撰写。
And we should say a word too about what it is for people who haven't really This dug into the is a major change in the way content and articles that is owned and written by publishers are is being distributed.
在Instant Articles出现之前，如果有人分享了一篇Facebook文章的链接，你在手机上点击它，会被带到移动浏览器，然后在页面上阅读文章，就像Todd说的，在出版商的页面上。
So before Instant Articles, if somebody shared a link to an article on Facebook and you clicked on it on mobile, you would be taken to the mobile browser and read the article on the on the page, as Todd was saying, at the publisher's page.
但是有了Instant Articles，出版商实际上是把他们的内容交给了Facebook。
But with Instant Articles, publishers are actually giving their content over to Facebook.
内容托管在Facebook的服务器上，然后以一种非常像Push Pop Press那样漂亮、沉浸式的阅读器显示，加载即时完成，而不是点击进入移动网页，等待所有内容加载。
It's being hosted on Facebook servers and then displayed in a very Push Pop Press like beautiful, immersive reader that loads instantly rather than clicking through to the mobile web and waiting for everything to load.
更重要的是，对于这个讨论来说，Facebook可以在文章内部销售和投放自己的广告。
And more even more importantly for this discussion, Facebook can sell and serve its own advertising within the article.
现在出版商也可以了。
Now publishers can too.
但如果出版商在文章里卖广告，他们能保留100%的收入。
But and if publishers sell the ads in the article, they keep a 100% of the revenue.
不过Facebook也可以参与销售，然后他们保留30%的收入。
But Facebook can also sell in and then they keep 30% of the revenue.
对。
Yeah.
为了让大家更直观地了解速度提升有多大，他们说普通网页文章大约需要8秒加载，很多人等不了那么久就直接离开了。
And to to put some numbers behind the how much faster it is, they say an an average web page article takes about eight seconds to load and people just bounce off that tremendous amount.
尤其是在手机上。
Click Especially on mobile.
对。
Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
他们说，即时文章的速度要快十倍。
And they say it's 10 times faster in an instant article.
对。
Yeah.
我数不清有多少次觉得，这根本不值得。
I can't count the number of times when I've gone, this is not worth it.
我宁愿回去找别的东西来读。
I'm going back and finding something else to to read.
所以，我觉得他们的整个说法和主张，基于日常的用户体验来看，是非常有道理的。
So, I think that whole construct and that assertion of theirs is very valid based on just casual everyday user experience.
但这对出版商来说是个心态上的转变，因为你知道，Facebook上已经有那么多读者了，而老派的想法是，嘿，我们得把他们引到我们自己的网站上来。
But this is a mentality shift for publishers because, you know, you've got so many readers on Facebook already and and the old school mentality is, hey, we we get we need to get them on our site.
但一旦开始谈变现，情况就变了，大家开始想，好吧。
But when you start talking about monetization, that's when it starts to go, okay.
嗯，回到你那个狗公园的比喻，也许我会让Facebook，你知道，我也不确定。
Well, you know, to go back to your dog park analogy, maybe I'll let, you know, Facebook, you know, I don't know.
我不想
I don't wanna
舔我的脸。
Lick my face.
对。
Yeah.
没错。
Exactly.
这比我想说的好多了。
That that's much better than what I was gonna say.
谢谢。
Thank you.
所以，是的。
So so, yeah.
我的意思是，这就是关键。
I mean, that is the thing.
我们其实试过一点Instant Articles。
We've actually experimented with Instant Articles a little bit.
而且我得说，这只是这类做法里比较广泛的一套中的一部分。
And I should say this is part of a sort of broader set of these types of approaches.
你知道，谷歌有加速移动页面。
You know, Google has accelerated mobile pages
对。
Mhmm.
非常类似。
Very similar.
其实我们在AMP上取得的成功比Instant Articles多得多。
We've actually had a a lot more success with AMP than we have with Instant Articles.
当然还有Apple News，然后是Flipboard。
Apple News, of course, and then Flipboard.
你知道，这些都是出版商在说，嘿，好吧，文章不一定非得放在我们网站上，但我们能得到什么回报呢？对。
You know, all these things are examples of publishers saying, hey, okay, the articles don't need to be on our site, but what do we get in return Mhmm.
让他们托管这些文章？
For allowing you to host them?
对我们来说，关键还是变现。
And really for us, it's the monetization.
对于Facebook即时文章和苹果新闻，我们还没看到足够大的用户群体，值得投入大量精力，而且收入也还没跟上。
With Facebook Instant Articles, Apple News, we have not yet seen the kind of user base that would justify putting a lot of effort into it and because the revenue just isn't there yet.
谷歌其实是个例外，因为他们和DFP，也就是DoubleClick for Publishers，整合得非常紧密。
Google is actually a bit of an exception because they're so integrated with DFP, DoubleClick for Publishers.
对。
Yep.
对。
Yep.
而且那是我们的原生系统。
And it's our native system.
谷歌懂这个。
Google gets it.
你懂吧？
You know?
所以从这个角度看，我觉得谷歌在变现和吸引出版商进入这个即时文章生态方面可能有点优势。
So in that way, I think Google may have a bit of an advantage in terms of the monetization and then in attracting publishers in this whole Instant Article world.
这就是我们的看法。
So that's that's our view.
对。
Yeah.
尽管在流量方面，Facebook可能占有明显优势。
Even though Facebook probably has a significant advantage in terms of traffic.
没错。
Exactly.
是的。
Yes.
但是，但是谷歌……
But But Google
谷歌的变现工具要好得多。
has much better monetization tools for you.
是的。
Yes.
对我们作为出版商来说。
For us as a publisher.
但不可否认，Facebook的用户基础确实庞大。
But but there's no denying the reality of Facebook's user base.
我很好奇，你知道，
I'm curious, you know, how
你和约翰怎么看这个问题？
do you and John think about this?
比如，我们在开始之前聊过，你知道，那些老牌的网络出版商。
Like, you know, we were talking before we started about, you know, old web publishers.
托德曾在《费城问询报》工作过。
Todd worked at the Philadelphia Inquire.
我以前在《华尔街日报》工作过。
I worked at The Wall Street Journal back in the day.
你知道，我的意思是，《华尔街日报》的成本结构，我们每年花十亿美元来出版报纸、创建网站等等所有这些。
And, you know, I mean, the cost structure at The Journal, we spent a billion dollars every year on everything putting out the paper and, you know, creating the website and all this.
这一切都是为了和读者建立那种关系。
And it was all about, you know, creating that relationship with the reader.
对。
Yep.
而现在，我们生活在一个不同的世界里。
And now, we live in a different world.
你怎么
How do you
是的。
Yeah.
确实变了。
It's definitely changed.
展开剩余字幕（还有 480 条）
我们以我们的发布流程为例来说吧。
We talk about our publishing process just as an example.
我们会在WordPress上发布文章，然后对我们每个记者来说，下一步就是去Facebook。
We'll publish a story on WordPress and then every reporter for us, the next step is to go to Facebook.
而且，除非你在Facebook上发布了链接，否则你其实还没算真正完成发布。
And you're really not done publishing until you've published a link on Facebook.
所以，很明显，Instant Articles把这个又推进了一步，因为它会自动用缓存版本，也就是Push Pop Press的版本，来填充内容。
And so, obviously, Instant Articles takes that a step further because it's automatically populating that with cached version, the Push Pop Press version essentially.
所以，你要把读者想得更广泛一些，不只是那些访问你网站的人。
So you think of your readers in a much broader way than just the people who are on your site.
你还要考虑其他方面。
You think about other things too.
比如，我们一直在大量尝试重定向，还有这个理念：一旦读者离开你的网站，你仍然可以给他们推送你自己的广告，比如为我们的活动，或者代表你的广告商在Facebook上投放。
Like, we've been experimenting a lot with retargeting and the whole notion of once a reader leaves your site, you can still serve them ads from yourself for for our events, for example, or for your advertisers on behalf of your advertisers on Facebook.
所以，我们现在觉得这更全面了。
So, we think about it as it's much more holistic now.
这样一来，视野就开阔了。
And in that way, has broadened the horizons.
对吧？
Right?
他们虽然拿走了受众，但也为你打开了大门。嗯，去获得——
They've taken away the audience, but they've also opened the door for you Well, to get
以前是这样的。
it used to be.
我的意思是，每个出版商，无论大小，都有自己的广告销售团队，对吧？
I mean, every publisher large and small had their own ad sales force, right?
那曾是《华尔街日报》和其他地方成本的一大部分。
And that was where a huge part of the costs at The Journal and elsewhere were.
但与Facebook相比，销售这些受众的能力实在太有限了。
But the ability to sell that audience was so limited relative to a Facebook.
所以现在你生活在一个世界里，作为出版商，如果你可以轻松点击一下，可能就不值得在自有广告上投入太多。
And so now you live in a world where it probably doesn't really make sense to you for as a publisher to invest a lot in your own ads if you can just Well, click a
我觉得办公室里几个人会非常认真地听这个。所以我们有很强的……
think a couple a few people back at the office are gonna be listening very intently to So, we have a we have a strong
但并不是说没有……我是说，我们曾经有几百个广告……
But not to have a not to have know, I mean, we had hundreds of ad
销售人员，在……
sales people at
在……你们肯定没有几百个广告销售人员吧，大概三个？
at the you know, I'm sure you guys don't have hundreds of have ad three.
我们有……
We have
三个。
three.
而且显然，优势在于直销方面，你能提供更多价值。
And the advantage there, obviously, is that in terms of direct sales, you can provide more value.
你能提供定制化的套餐。
You can provide custom packages.
你可以把活动捆绑进去。
You can bundle in events.
这样你的利润率就比单纯通过某种网络购买要高。
And so your margins are higher than just going through some kind of network buy.
所以对我们来说，至少以我们的规模，直接销售仍然有很大的价值。
So for us, at least, our size, there's still a big value in having direct sales.
更不用说，你实际上知道你的读者会得到什么样的体验。
Not not to mention you actually know what experience is being delivered to your reader.
我的意思是，你不需要祈祷某个网络会把你想展示的东西插到你的内容旁边。
I mean, you don't have to hope and pray that some network is inserting the a thing that you want next to your content.
哦，完全正确。
Oh, that's absolutely right.
对。
Yeah.
所以这就是控制权的问题，确实存在。
So that that is the the control issue is something there.
这一切都是为了确保你给读者和赞助商提供正确的价值。
And that's all about just making sure you're delivering the right value to the reader and to the to the sponsor.
对。
Yeah.
好了，听众朋友们。
Alright, listeners.
现在是时候感谢我们节目的老朋友ServiceNow了。
Now is a great time to thank our longtime friend of the show, ServiceNow.
如果你在经营一家大型企业，AI代理可能遍布每个团队，而部署它们已经不再是难题。
If you are running a large enterprise, AI agents are likely spread across every team, and deploying them is, no longer the hard part.
对。
Yeah.
真正的难题是了解它们拥有哪些权限、员工在使用它们做什么，或者AI在做哪些决策。
The hard part is knowing what permissions they have, what employees are using them for, or what decisions AI is making.
对于大规模企业来说，AI安全可不是一个小问题。
AI security for an enterprise at scale is not a small concern.
比如说，风险是真实存在的。
Like, the risks are real.
没错。
Exactly.
而AI的挑战在于治理、安全、衡量，以及确保它真正带来价值。
And the challenge with AI is governing it, securing it, measuring it, and making sure that it actually delivers value.
这就是ServiceNow打造AI控制塔的原因。
That is why ServiceNow built the AI control tower.
对。
Yep.
AI控制塔为企业提供了一个统一平台，可以查看、管理、治理和优化整个业务中的AI。
AI control tower gives enterprises a single place to see, manage, govern, and optimize AI across the entire business.
而且它支持任何AI，不仅仅是他们自己的。
And it works with any AI, not just theirs.
你网络上的每个设备、每个系统的每个权限、每个AI代理，都能在一个地方可见且安全。
Every device on your network, every permission across every system, every AI agent visible and secure in one place.
ServiceNow能做到这一点，是因为他们花了二十多年时间打造企业的运营骨干，包括工作流程、治理、审批、安全控制以及机构知识，这些支撑着IT、人力资源、客户服务、财务和安全等各个领域实际工作的开展。
And ServiceNow can do this because they've spent more than twenty years building the operational backbone of the enterprise, the workflows, governance, approval, security controls, and institutional knowledge that power how work actually gets done across IT, HR, customer service, finance, and security.
ServiceNow每年已经运行超过1000亿个工作流程，为财富500强中超过85%的企业处理数万亿笔交易。
ServiceNow already runs more than a 100,000,000,000 workflows annually and trillions of transactions for more than 85% of the Fortune 500.
所以当企业需要在一个地方以企业规模来治理AI时，他们是在一个已经处于其业务运营核心的平台上进行构建。
So when companies need a place to govern AI at enterprise scale, they're building on a platform at the center of how their business already operates.
而且未来的趋势不会是只有一个AI，而是会有成千上万个AI代理在公司各个职能部门中协同工作。
And in a future that isn't going to be one AI, it's going to be thousands of AI agents working across every function of the company.
但问题是，谁来管理所有这些AI呢？
But the question is, who's managing them all?
所以，如果你想将AI的雄心转化为实际的业务成果，并确保其安全、可靠地大规模运行，就去看看servicenow.com/acquired，告诉他们是本和戴维推荐你来的。
So if you're trying to turn AI ambition into real business outcomes and make it work safely, securely at scale, go check out servicenow.com/acquired and tell them that Ben and David sent you.
对于谷歌的加速移动页面和Facebook的即时文章，你们是自己销售广告，还是把这些交给他们，然后拿30%的分成？
For accelerated mobile pages for Google and for Facebook Facebook Instant Articles, do you guys do your own ad sales or do you trust the do you hand that off to them and take the 30% cut?
我们其实只对即时文章做过一点测试，而且这完全是另一个问题。
We've only done a little testing with Instant Articles and actually it's a whole other issue.
我们遇到了Facebook和Automatic（WordPress的开发者）创建的插件的问题。
We've run into a problem with the plugin created by Facebook and Automatic, the creator of WordPress.
就像我说的，这可能是个无底洞。
And this is like I said, this could be a rat hole.
所以你可以稍后把这段剪掉。
So you can edit this out later then.
但他们那个插件还需要一些改进，所以我们还没能完全测试它。
But they they need they have some work to do on that plugin and so we haven't been able to fully test that.
那个插件理论上能让Facebook自动抓取你的内容，然后变成即时文章，而不用你做太多工作，是这样吗？
And that's the plug in that it theoretically makes it easier for publishers that that Facebook can go in and automatically suck out your content and then put it into an instant article without you doing a whole lot of work?
没错。
That's right.
正是如此。
Exactly.
对于谷歌的加速移动页面，因为DFP的扩展，我们所有的广告都能放上去。
For Google Accelerated Mobile Pages, just because of the extension from DFP, all of our ads can go there.
所以如果我们直接卖了一个出现在网站上的广告，它可以进入即时文章，或者进入AMP，也就是加速移动页面。
So we can if we direct sold an ad that appears on the site, it can go into the into Instant Articles or it can go into AMP, into Accelerated Mobile Pages.
哇。
Wow.
这对谷歌来说是个巨大的优势。
Huge advantage to Google on that.
是的。
Yes.
因为
As
作为消费者和读者，我更喜欢Facebook的即时文章，因为那种体验是原生的，内容已经全部下载好了，我直接就能看。
a consumer and a reader I'm much more a fan of Facebook Instant Articles because you get this experience where I'm in a native experience, it's already downloaded all the content for the article and I just go right into it.
而在移动页面上，你知道，每次你在网站上时，你都会清楚地意识到自己在网站上，感觉不够原生。
And on mobile pages, you know, it's always whenever you're on a website you're keenly aware that you're on a website and it's not quite native.
所以对于那些还没遇到过加速移动页面的人，或者不知道的人，就是你在谷歌上搜索东西，有个新闻故事的搜索结果，它让你留在搜索结果页，但上面覆盖着一篇文章。
And so whenever for those of you who haven't or don't know if you've hit an accelerated mobile page yet, it's when you search for something on Google and there's a result that's for a news story that sort of keeps you on the search results page but there's an article overlaid on top of it.
而且我总有点失望，虽然它是个更轻量的网站，加载也更快，但它本质上还是个网页，如果能更原生一点就好了。
And I'm always a little disappointed like yeah it's a lighter website and it's accelerated but it's still kind of a web page and it would be nicer if it was if it was you know more native.
Push Pop Press 这样的，所以看到听到这些进展挺有意思的。
Push Pop Press like So it's interesting to see to hear leg up.
我们确实想继续聊下去，但咱们先进入下一个话题吧。
Let's I definitely wanna keep this conversation going but let's let's do it.
我们进入收购类别吧。
Let's move into acquisition category.
所以，所以
So So
甚至在你读他们的新闻稿之前，我就说过这主要是人才收购，其次是技术收购。
even before you read their their press release, I I said that it's primarily a people acquisition, secondarily a technology acquisition.
听起来我们在这方面意见一致。
And it sure sounds like we're in agreement there.
是的。
Yeah.
嗯，我主要看重的是技术，其次才是人。
Well, I had primarily technology, secondarily people.
不过你知道的，这都是说法上的区别。
But you know, it's all semantics.
对。
Yeah.
我很难不同意这一点。
I'd have a hard time disagreeing with that.
我的问题是，他们在2011年到2016年之间在做什么？
My question is what were they doing between 2011 and 2016?
你知道，如果这是一次人才收购或技术收购的话。
You know, if it was a talent acquisition or a technology acquisition.
他们花了不少时间。
It took them a while.
我想他们是在2015年推出了即时文章。
I guess it was 2015 that they came out with Instant Articles.
我觉得是Paper。
I think Paper.
我觉得因为
I think for
有一段时间他们其实在摸索到底要做什么，这也是为什么Creative Labs在Paper推出之前是Facebook内部一个独立的小团队。不过我觉得Paper的团队后来其实挺大的，投入也相当可观。我不记得原话怎么说的了，但我记得扎克伯格发布它的时候说，这是Facebook的一个新方向。
a while they were kind of playing around with is the thing that we're going to build and that was sort of why Creative Labs was its own little entity in Facebook before Paper came But I I think the team for Paper actually got pretty large and it was a sizable effort where I I don't know the exact quote but I remember Zuckerberg announcing it and saying like this is like a new direction for Facebook.
就像这是你体验Facebook的新方式。
Like this is the new way you experience Facebook.
显然，而且他
And obviously And he
说得对。
was right.
只是最后它变成了Facebook应用本身的一部分。
It just ended up becoming within the Facebook app itself.
对。
Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
我觉得这挺有意思的。
Which I think was interesting.
另外，就像你之前说的，早期的核心Facebook应用确实是一团糟。
The other thing is that but like you were saying earlier, the core Facebook app was such a mess in those early days.
我觉得很不可思议的是，现在这么多功能都整合回了那个应用里，而且那个软件变得这么庞大。
I think it's it's amazing how much functionality has been brought back into that app and how how big that piece of software has become.
对。
Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
你想聊聊如果当初不是这样会怎样吗？
You wanna go to what would have happened otherwise?
对。
Yeah.
嗯，我觉得这值得好好聊一聊。
Well, might this was I think this merits an interesting detour.
假设他们当时保持独立，继续尝试重塑这本书。
Let's say they'd stayed independent and continue trying to reinvent the book.
明白。
Mhmm.
好主意？
Good idea?
还是坏主意？
Bad idea?
那会怎么发展？
How does that play out?
他们不可能不被收购。
There's no way they don't get picked up.
如果不是Facebook，也会是别人。
And if it's not Facebook, it's someone else.
但我先不讨论这个。
But I'll suspend that.
我觉得他们做得太好了，而且成本很低，吸引了这么多玩家，所以我不认为这种情况会发生，但咱们还是假设一下，如果他们真的重新发明了书，会发生什么。
I think it's that they're so good and it's so inexpensive when they've built it so interesting to so many players that like I don't think this scenario exists but let's go down to what would have happened if they had had kind of reinvented the book.
你知道，嗯，突然之间
You know Well, all
他们就要和亚马逊竞争了。
of sudden they're competing with Amazon.
而且他们还会被史蒂夫·乔布斯起诉。
And they're getting sued by Steve Jobs.
也许吧。
Maybe.
对。
Yeah.
我是说，这挺有意思的，如果真要把它做成一个生意，那就需要内容生产者，比如作家、作者，去接受一种全新的媒介方式。
I mean, it's interesting like it would have required for that to really work as a business, it would have required content producers to embrace a like writers, authors to embrace a whole new way of a whole new medium, basically.
而有趣的是，这和后来Instant Articles的做法不同，那些内容作者和出版商根本不需要做任何改变。
And what's interesting about that versus what it became with Instant Articles is, you know, the the authors of of content, publishers don't do anything different.
只是Facebook施展它的魔法，让内容看起来很美。
It just Facebook sort of, you know, does its magic and makes it look beautiful.
他们确实能做到。
And they can.
Facebook也希望你这么做。
Facebook wants you to.
有很多独特的功能，比如数据可视化、视差滚动、图片效果等等。
There's all these kind of unique things that you can do with data visualization and parallaxing, know, images and things like that.
但你不一定非得用。
But you don't have to.
对。
No.
对。
Yeah.
而且我觉得可能很少有人会这么做。
And think I probably very few.
出版商偶尔会做那种很炫的，但可能不会做太多。
That that splashy when when when publishers do, but they probably don't do a lot of it.
可能很难证明投资回报率。
Probably hard to justify the ROI on
对。
that.
是的。
Yeah.
而如果要真正重塑书籍，就必须让内容生产者彻底改变行为方式。
Whereas you would have to create a a massive behavior change in terms of producers to really reinvent the book.
这很可能很难实现。
Likely it would have been hard.
我们能看到这种趋势的一个例子就是iBooks Author。
One one way we could see that proxy for that playing out is with iBooks Author.
苹果推出了那个制作教科书的软件，本意就是要做同样的事情。
Apple came out with that software to create text books and it's supposed to be exactly the same thing.
比如，你知道的，能动的、能滑动的、互动式的学习方式。
Like you know, things that move, things that slide, interactive ways of learning.
当他们在台上发布的时候，我当时就想，这真的需要一些苹果并不擅长的东西。
And when they announced it on stage, you know, I was thinking like this is really gonna require some serious things that Apple is not necessarily good at.
比如他们需要很多销售人员、很多客户关系经理，去说服五大教科书出版商，像培生之类的，告诉他们这就是他们的未来。
Like they're gonna need a lot of sales people, lot of relationship managers like really to go and and convince the five major textbook publishers, Pearson and then and the likes of them that like this is their future.
对。
Yep.
而且我觉得他们并没有在这方面下足功夫。
And I I I just don't think they doubled down
确实。
on that.
对。
Yeah.
确实没成功。
It didn't didn't work.
对。
Yeah.
看起来另一个自然的收购方应该是亚马逊。
It seems like the other natural acquirer here would have been Amazon.
我这么说对吗？
Am off base on that?
我是说，就凭图书这块业务来看。
I mean, just given the the books angle.
对。
Yeah.
确实看起来是这样。
Sure seems like it.
或者巴诺书店，如果他们当时还在的话，因为那是2011年，你知道的。
Or Barnes and Noble maybe if they were back in because it's 2011, you know.
他们当时还算是在局里的，是的。
They could they were still sort of in the game Yeah.
在数字方面。
In terms of digital.
想想还挺酷的。
That is cool to think about.
比如，如果Kindle很漂亮会怎么样？
Like, what if what if Kindle were beautiful?
没有冒犯Kindle团队的意思。
No offense to anyone working on Kindle.
但是，它
But It's
已经好多了。
gotten it's gotten a lot better.
确实好多了。
It has gotten a lot better.
我很喜欢Kindle。
I love Kindle.
它可能是我用得最多的应用和设备之一。
It's probably my one of my most used apps and and devices.
应用和设备我都用。
I use both the app and the device.
但是
But
而且Oasis那款真的挺棒的。
And the the Oasis is pretty darn sweet.
你有吗？
Do you have one?
我用过一款。
I've used one.
是的。
Yeah.
我试过一台。
I've tested one off.
我很想买一台，但就是觉得花三百美元不太值。
I would love to get one, but I just can't justify, like, $300 for
对。
it.
是的。
Yeah.
当然，电子书和我们这里讨论的完全是两回事。
And, of course, e is a whole different game than what we're talking about here.
不过，是的，整个数字图书领域还有很多改进空间。
But but, yeah, there's there's still lots of room for improvement in the whole digital ebook landscape.
对，还有很多空间。
Yes, lots of room.
我也想提一点。
I do want to raise the point too.
我觉得他们很幸运，能非常非常挑剔地选择是否被收购，以及被谁收购。
I think they had the luxury of being super, super selective of if they were going to get acquired who it was going to be by.
他们给我的印象是，如果他们对那家公司没有极大的尊重，或者觉得那家公司的努力没有体现他们的设计原则和美好体验的理念，他们就不会去。
They strike me as the kind of people that if they didn't have tremendous respect for the company and didn't feel that their principles of design and beautiful experience were sort of like embodied in the efforts of whatever that company was trying to do, I don't don't think they would have gone.
对。
Yeah.
所以我觉得，
So I think that that
这缩小了范围，我是说，他们没融过资。
narrows I mean, they hadn't raised any money.
所以没有那些邪恶的风险投资家在董事会里逼他们卖。
So there were no, you know, evil VCs on the board, you know, forcing them to sell.
但你说得对，我可能也这么觉得。
But yeah, I I I think you're probably right.
而且更不用说，你知道，是迈克，我想，他当时是在Nest那边兼职还是全职来着。
And and not to mention that, you know, was it Mike, I think, was, you know, working on the side or full time at Nest.
所以，是的。
So Yeah.
这绝对不是，绝对不是被迫出售的。
This was not a, this was not a forced sale by any means.
对。
No.
好了，听众朋友们。
Alright, listeners.
现在是时候来聊聊我们在Acquired的新合作伙伴Legora了，这个代理操作系统正在重新定义全球顶尖法律团队的工作方式。
Now is a great time to talk about a new partner of ours here on Acquired, Legora, the agentic operating system that is redefining how the world's best legal teams work.
是的。
Yep.
很明显，AI将会彻底改变法律行业。
It's sort of obvious that AI is gonna completely change the legal industry.
我猜你们大多数听众都曾经把合同丢进某种AI聊天机器人里。
I bet most of you listening have dropped a contract into some sort of AI chatbot out there.
Legora从这个洞察出发，提出了一个问题：如果真从零开始为法律行业打造一个拥有这种能力的产品会怎样？
Legora took that insight and asked the question, what if you really built something with that power from the ground up for the legal industry?
所以创始人们做了伟大的创始人该做的事，那就是极度关注客户需求。
So the founders did exactly what great founders do, operate with obsessive customer focus.
他们在一家大型律师事务所里待了好几个月。
They embedded inside a massive law firm for months.
他们和律师们坐在一起，观察实际工作是怎么完成的。
They sat with the lawyers just watching how the work really gets done.
正是这样，他们
And that's how you
才做出了客户喜爱的功能，比如表格审查，你放进去一个包含几百份合同的文件夹，它会把所有关键条款提取到一个律师能实际操作的表格里。
get features that customers love, like tabular review, where you drop in a folder of hundreds of contracts and it pulls every key term into a grid a lawyer can actually work with.
Legora在这里的赌注很有意思。
Legora's bet here is interesting.
因为它让每位律师能处理更复杂的事务，个人就能提高工作质量，做更有价值的工作。
Since it lets each lawyer handle more complexity, any given person can increase the quality of their work and do higher value work.
这意味着，即使每项任务耗时更短，整体成果也能更大。
And this means that the pie can grow even as each individual task takes less time.
他们最近推出了Legora Agent，提供更强的智能和性能。
And they recently launched Legora Agent, offering greater intelligence and performance.
这个代理让律师设定目标，然后它就能负责规划、执行和交付最终成果。
The agent lets lawyers set an objective, then it can handle the planning and the execution and delivery of the final product.
法律团队能保持完全控制和透明度，因为在需要判断的地方，他们仍然参与其中。
Legal teams get to maintain full control and transparency since they're still involved where judgment is required.
而且Legora能在你现有的工作环境中使用。
And Legora works where you already work.
你可以在Microsoft Word里使用它，无论是审阅还是起草文件。
You can use it within Microsoft Word while redlining or drafting.
Legora早期的数据本身就说明了一切。
The early Legora numbers essentially speak for themselves.
当他们与最大的竞争对手进行正面较量时，他们赢了70%的时间。
When they have a head to head pilot with their top competitor, they win 70% of the time.
Legora现在有超过10万名律师在平台上，来自50个国家的1200个法律团队。
Legora now has over a 100,000 lawyers on the platform from 1,200 legal teams in 50 countries.
而且疯狂的是，他们在大约18个月内从100万ARR增长到1亿ARR。
And crazily, they went from 1,000,000 to a 100,000,000 in ARR in about eighteen months.
这些数字真是疯狂。
Truly insane numbers.
这才是真正的考验。
And that is the real test.
很多产品演示效果很好，但问题是，忙碌的助理在关键时刻是否会真的使用它，或者合伙人在与重要客户交谈前是否会信任它。
Plenty of things demo well, but the question is whether a busy associate actually reaches for it during crunch time or whether a partner trusts it before going into a conversation with a major client.
如果你的法律团队想了解一下，无论你是律师事务所还是公司内部法务，都可以在legora.com/acquired了解更多，并告诉他们Ben和David推荐你来的。
If your legal team wants to check it out, whether you're a law firm or you're in house at a company, you can learn more at legora.com/acquired and just tell them that Ben and David sent you.
好的。
Alright.
我们回到科技主题上来吧，因为我觉得我们可以和Todd一起深入聊聊一些很酷的东西。
Let's let's jump back into to tech themes because I I think we can really unpack some some cool stuff with Todd here.
那么，Todd，你先来吧？
What well, Todd, why don't you why don't you go first?
好的。
Yeah.
这确实反映了出版商视野的不断拓宽，以及随之而来的风险和机遇。
This really does speak to the the the broadening horizons for publishers and and the risks and opportunities that come along with that.
我的意思是，我觉得，你知道，我从每天只有一个截稿日期的时代就开始了，那时候一个故事需要在晚上十一点前送到印刷厂，你知道的。
I mean, is I think a lot of you know, I've been been around since the days when I had one daily deadline for, you know, one story that needed to get to the printing press by eleven at night, you know.
这么说可不是为了暴露我的年龄。
So and not to not to date myself here.
但我……
But I
我也记得那些日子，2009年在《华尔街日报》的时候。
I remember those days too from 2009 at The Wall Street Journal.
所以那其实也没多久以前。
So it was not that long ago.
所以我觉得出版商们已经经历了好几次转型。
So I think you've gone through a few transitions there for publishers.
首先，显然是从纸质到网络，然后到移动端。
First, obviously to the web and then to mobile.
现在，某种程度上，正在经历第四次转型，就是超越自己的平台。
And now, in some ways, seeing a fourth transition to beyond your own property.
需要做些什么？
What needs to happen?
你能做什么？
What can you do?
你能触达哪些人？
Who can you reach?
以及如何从中获利？
And how can you monetize it?
这对我来说真的是个大主题。
And that really is the big theme for me here.
对。
Yeah.
所以，Todd，我有个疯狂的想法，想开个创业公司，现在正好是时候让你来挑挑刺。
So, Todd, I've had a crazy idea for for a startup for a while and I like, this is perfect time to poke holes in it.
现在你能不能开一个没有网站的出版公司，完全只靠社交媒体存在？
Could you start a publisher at this point that doesn't have a website that purely exists on on social?
只靠AMP。
It's it's it's only on AMP.
只靠Instagram。
It's only on Instagram.
我觉得BuzzFeed就是这样的。
Argue this is what BuzzFeed is.
他们，对。
They yeah.
他们有一个主网站。
They have a destination site.
我很好奇他们的主网站和社交媒体之间的比例是多少。
I'm curious how how much their destination versus social.
但是
But
我觉得你可以这么做，而且你应该这么做。
I think you could and I think you should.
那会非常棒。
And that would be fantastic.
我觉得你应该做所有事情，就是不做网站。
I think you should do, yeah, everything but a website.
也就是说，在Facebook上发布内容。
So in other words, publish on Facebook.
The Verge一直在讨论这个，我知道他们的新科技博客几乎只专注于Facebook。
And The The Verge has been talking about this and I know I think their new gadget blog is focused almost exclusively on Facebook.
然后呢？
And
我觉得是 The Verge。
I think it's The Verge.
这些我都分不清。
I I get all those.
The Verge、Gadget 和 Gizmodo，看完他们的文章后，在我脑子里就混成一团了。
The Verge and Gadget and Gizmodo, they just blend together in my mind after I read their stories.
它们都挺好的。
They're all good.
我是 The Verge 的忠实粉丝。
I'm a big Verge fan.
对。
Yeah.
确实是 The Verge。
Did it is The Verge.
对吧？
Right?
我是在Facebook上做的那个Gadget博客。
It's the I did the Gadget blog just on Facebook.
我肯定他们
I'm sure they
我不知道这个。
I don't know it.
那你说说看。
Correct me on that one.
对。
Yeah.
大卫，我不太清楚，但我很喜欢GeekWire。
I don't David, I'm a big GeekWire fan.
所以我
So I
我觉得The Verge和GeekWire不是竞争对手。
don't think The Verge and GeekWire are competitors.
是的。
Yes.
我也是GeekWire的忠实粉丝。
I'm a big GeekWire fan as well.
但这挺有意思的。
But but it's interesting.
我之前提到的一个主题就是出版行业的这种重塑。
I One of my themes was hinting at earlier is this sort of reinvention of the publishing industry.
我很好奇你们GeekWire，我的意思是，你们当然首先是一个新闻网站。
I'm curious how you guys at GeekWire, I mean, you're such a you are a news site, of course, probably first and foremost.
但你们做的远不止这些
But there's so much more to
你们做的事情。
what you do.
你们是一个社区。
You're a community.
而且
And
那你们怎么看待生活和商业模式呢？在这个新时代，确实如此。
and how do you think about life and your business model in in this new Absolutely.
所以我可以分享一些大概的情况。
So I can share a few broad details.
我们大约60%的收入和网站没有直接关系。
So about roughly 60% of our revenue has nothing to do with the website.
这不是因为收入来自Facebook或其他平台。
And it's not because it's coming from Facebook or anything else.
对。
Yeah.
说和网站没关系可能不太准确。
It doesn't have it's it's probably not accurate to say it has nothing to do with the website.
但我们有活动收入。
But we get event revenue.
我的意思是，这是我们业务的主要驱动力。
I mean, that is a major driver of our business.
你之前提到你们的广告销售重点是整体打包方案，
You were saying your ad sales efforts are focused on a holistic package,
对吧？
right?
你们不仅卖网站上的广告位，还提供活动赞助，所以你们提供的不仅仅是网站。
You're getting ad units on the site but you're also getting sponsorships at events and you know it's you're offering something beyond just a website.
我们的看法是，新闻吸引人们来网站，然后我们围绕新闻建立社区。
The way we look at it is that our news brings people to the site and then we create a community around that news.
然后问题就是，好吧，你有了这个很棒的社区。
And then the question is, okay, you've got this great community.
你怎么为这个社区以及想触达这个社区的人提供价值呢？
How can you provide value to that community and to the people who wanna reach it?
如果你从这种抽象的角度去想，就会冒出很多真正有意思的可能性。
And if you think about it in that abstract way, then all these really interesting possibilities come up.
如果你只是想着‘有人来我网站，我要给他们投放广告’，那就太简单了，而且，你知道，那是十年前的想法了。
If you just think about it as I've got people coming to my website and I wanna serve them ads, then it's too simplistic and it's, you know, a decade ago mentality.
所以这都是出版商思考方式更广泛演变的一部分。
So this is all part of that broader evolution and how publishers think.
说到即时文章，一些大型出版商已经培养出一种习惯，就像整个城市每天早上都去他们的网站，就像以前每天早上在餐桌上看报纸一样。
In thinking about Instant Articles, some of the bigger publishers that have this sort of a trained behavior of a whole city going to their website every morning much like they used to read the paper at their dining room table every morning.
他们担心做类似的事情，因为这会打破那种习惯性访问网站的行为。
And they worry about doing something like this because it untrains that habitual behavior of going to the site.
你们会不会担心失去这种习惯，比如‘他们不再习惯访问GeekWire了’？
Do you guys worry at all about sort of losing that, Oh, they're not used to going to GeekWire anymore?
当然，总有一批核心读者会一直这样做。
Certainly, there's a core set of your readers who will always do that.
但现在很多时候，门户网站，对，是的。
But, so much anymore, the front door the front yeah.
你网站的门面已经不是你的首页了。
The front door of your website is not your homepage.
而是人们点进来的那篇文章。
It's an article that somebody comes into.
所以我们在设计网站的时候，会考虑到这一点。
And when we think about the design of the site, we think about that.
这才是人们真正会来的地方。
This is really the place that people are coming to.
而这主要是由社交媒体驱动的。
So, and that's driven by social.
也就是说，人们从推特、脸书上拿到链接，然后从后门进入你的网站。
It's the fact that people are getting the link off of Twitter, off of Facebook and they're coming into your site through the backdoor essentially.
这个现象我自己也深有体会。
It's a phenomenon that I know I subscribe to.
我相信我们很多人，包括我们的听众，都不再直接去新闻网站了。
I'm sure probably we all do and many of our listeners of, you know, I don't go to the news anymore.
新闻是主动来找我的。
The news comes to me.
对。
Right.
是的。
Yeah.
所以，如果你不参与整个生态系统，那你就是在冒很大的风险。
So, if you're not playing in all those that whole entire ecosystem, then, you know, you've gotta you're taking a big risk.
也有人能做得成功。
And there are some people who can do it successfully.
比如，西雅图有个很棒的生物科技网站，是一个叫卢克·蒂默曼的人创办的。
And, you know, there's some there's a a great biotech site in Seattle run by a guy named Luke Timmerman.
他每年收费99美元，靠这个建立了一个成功的个人事业。
And he's he does $99 a year subscriptions and has built a successful one man business out of it.
所以，不同的做法都有。
So there's there's different approaches.
但大多数情况下，如果你想在这个领域做一个全面的出版商，你就得参与所有这些事情。
But for the most part, you've if you're gonna be a a holistic publisher in this world, you've got to play in all this stuff.
有意思。
It's interesting.
所以我想提一个我眼中的科技趋势，就是企业脱离核心竞争力的那种拆分，你可以决定在某些方面依赖别的公司，因为你认为那不是你独特、有差异化的地方。
So I was going to bring up one of the tech trends that identifies to me as sort of the corporate unbundling away from core competency where you can decide to take a dependency on a different business for something that you're deciding is not the thing that is unique differentiating to you.
所以我要提的是，本·汤普森有一个很棒的理论。
And so one thing that I'll bring up here is Ben Thompson has a great theory
关于——我还在想这期节目要过多久才会提到他。
about was wondering how long we would go in this episode before we reference
这期节目提到斯特拉切里（Stratechery）的时间是三十二分钟。
Time to Strathecari in this episode is thirty two minutes.
其实，我不知道具体时间，但他有个很棒的理论，就是：我可以做一个人独立出版商，因为我有这种非常可持续的商业模式，人们直接付费给我，而且我知道自己不是一个流量很大的网站，所以我必须非常精简，因为我只有这种特定的商业模式来支撑。
Actually, don't know what market will be but he has a great theory about, okay, I can be a one man independent publisher because I have this, you know, very sustainable business model where people pay me directly and I know that I'm not a destination site so there I need to run extremely lean because I only have, you know, this very specific business model that allows me to do that.
而在另一端，你有《纽约时报》，他们能服务所有人、做所有事，因为他们吸引了所有人的目光。
And then on the other side of the continuum you have the New York Times and they can afford to do all things for all people because they have just all eyes on them.
它们是人们首先查看的东西。
They're the first thing that people check.
我的意思是，很少有网站能在互联网入口被Facebook化之后存活下来。
I mean there are very few of those who have survived Facebookization of the front door of the internet.
看看中间层的出版商如何应对这种情况，挺有意思的。
And it's interesting to see like how publishers in the middle play with that.
而且我觉得，Todd，你提了一个很好的观点，就是你必须接受这一点，你知道，这就是我们出版业周围的世界。
And I think, Todd, you raised a great point that you sort of have to embrace that, you know, it's the world around our publication.
我刚查看了我们的分析数据，也许能说明一些问题。
I just looked pulled up our analytics to maybe shed some light on this.
我们大约45%的入站流量来自自然搜索。
So about 45% of our inbound traffic is from organic search.
大约22%来自社交媒体。
About 22% is from social.
各种形式的社交媒体。
All forms of social.
抱歉。
I'm sorry.
22%是直接访问。
22% is from direct.
然后大约18%来自社交媒体。
And then about 18% is from social.
所以你能大概了解情况。
So you get a sense for it.
我们仍然有相当不错的直接访问受众。
We still have a pretty good direct audience there.
说实话，我挺惊讶的，自然搜索仍然是最大的来源。
That's actually crazy to me that organic search is still by far the largest.
确实如此。
It is.
我也不太清楚。
And I don't know.
这可能反映了我们受众或网站的一些特点。
That may speak to quirks of our audience or our site.
我不确定每个人都是这样。
I don't know that that's the case for everybody.
那这不包括直接访问吗？
And that does not include direct?
对，不包括直接访问。
That does not include direct.
哇。
Wow.
是的。
Yeah.
那就是自然搜索。
That's organic search.
这正好证明了地址栏的重要性。
That's that's the testament to the omnibar right there.
我觉得确实是这样。
I mean, I think It is.
虽然
As much as
对，我们也是。
we're Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
我们说得有道理。
We have a good point.
就像人们在搜索的时候
Where like people are searching
哇，广告都上来了。
ads on the wow.
我们现在就去买点谷歌股票吧。
Let's go buy some Google shares right now.
没人知道有什么区别。
Nobody knows the difference.
我们这节目可不提供投资建议。
We do not dispense investment advice on this show.
我们可能得在法律上多说说这句话。
We should probably be legally bound to say that more often.
你知道，大多数人分不清输入关键词和输入网址的区别。
We you know it's a most people don't know the difference between you know typing in words and typing in a URL.
对。
Yeah.
没错。
Right.
所以他们上网，输入关键词，如果GeekWire是第一个出现他们要找的信息的，他们就会点进去。
And so they're going to the internet, they're typing in the words and if GeekWire is the first thing that comes up with the information about they're looking for, they hit
对。
it.
对。
Right.
而且你知道吗，我觉得有意思的一个细微差别是，现在更多的人是主动选择他们想了解的新闻，而不是被动地接受Facebook推送里出现的内容。
And you know, it's interesting only that well, interesting nuance there to me is that more people are being active about the news that they choose to learn about rather than reactive to whatever comes up in their Facebook feed.
对。
Right.
我觉得我之前太小看大家了。
I don't think I was giving people enough credit.
是的。
Yeah.
而且就像我说的，我们可能不代表更广泛的趋势。
And like I said, we may not be representative of the broader trends out there.
我们的受众有一些特点，
There are some quirks in
在听众群体里。
our audience.
这太有意思了。
It's fascinating.
对。
Yeah.
但这么说公平吗？你们至少已经把产品从新闻重新定位成了社区？
But you would it be fair to say that you guys at least have reimagined your product from being journalism to being a community?
不是新闻这个词不对，而是从新闻网站
Not journalism is the wrong word, but from being a news site
变成了，我觉得它本质上还是新闻网站。
to I'd being a say it's still at its core a news site.
关键就在这里。
And that's the thing.
你看业务的驱动力，做高质量的新闻，努力抢独家，那才是你们最终的竞争优势。
When you look at the drivers of the business, the you know, doing quality news, trying to break news, that that really is your ultimate competitive advantage.
这就回到了你说的，Ben。
And that gets what you're talking about, Ben.
就是专注于你的核心竞争力。
It's like focus on your core competencies.
开发社交网络并不是我的核心竞争力。
Developing a social network is not, you know, my core competency.
我受过记者训练，公司里大多数人也是。
I was trained as a journalist and most of the folks at the the company were.
所以这正好印证了你说的。
And so that really gets to what you're saying there.
对。
Yeah.
而且我觉得我得说，你们做得真的非常出色。
And I think I should just say like you guys do a really amazing job
对，确实。
of Yeah.
我也得说一句。
Should say too.
对。
Yeah.
我们都是你们的忠实粉丝。
We are both big fans.
哦，GeekWire，我相信我们西雅图的听众肯定都是粉丝。
Oh, GeekWire is, I'm sure for all of our listeners in Seattle are already fans.
但如果你不在西雅图，可能也听说过GeekWire。
But for people who are not in Seattle, you probably also have heard of GeekWire.
这确实是一个很棒的技术新闻网站。
But it is a fantastic technology news site.
而且我觉得，特别是在西雅图做VC，在Madrona这里，GeekWire简直是整个西北科技社区的支柱。
And I think especially speaking at Madrona as a VC here in the Seattle community, just a linchpin of the whole technology community in the Northwest.
谢谢。
Thanks.
嗯，我得说，我们的流量只有30%来自华盛顿州。
Well, and I should say, only 30% of our traffic is Washington State.
华盛顿州是我们最大的单一市场，但并不是我们流量的主要来源。
Washington State is our largest individual market, but it's not the majority of our traffic.
这说明了几个问题。
Speaks to a couple things.
首先，世界上其他地方对我们这里发生的事情有浓厚的兴趣。
First, there's intense interest in what's going on here from other parts of the world.
但我们创办这个网站的前提是，西雅图和太平洋西北地区应该拥有一个属于自己的、面向全国乃至国际的科技新闻网站。
But we founded the site on the premise that Seattle and the Pacific Northwest deserve a national and international technology news site of their own.
所以，流量数据也印证了这一点。
And so, the traffic kind of bears that out.
这就是我的标准演讲词。
That's that's my stump speech.
这是我的电梯推销词。
That's my elevator pitch.
我会在未来的节目中再聊。
I'll be on a future episode.
我会出现在《Acquired》第一百五十期，讲的是GeekWire的收购案。
I'll be on episode one fifty of Acquired, the the acquisition of GeekWire.
GeekWire的收购案。
The acquisition of GeekWire.
华盛顿州是最大的单一地区，但不是大多数，你和收购案都是这样。
Washington as as largest single geography but not a majority, you and acquired both.
没错。
There you go.
很好。
Nice.
太棒了。
Awesome.
完美。
Perfect.
我们基本上可以，我们可以合并。
We're basically the we could do we could do a merger.
不。
No.
对。
Yeah.
我们之后再说。
We'll talk after.
我们之后再说。
We'll we'll talk after.
对。
Yeah.
这个不算正式内容。
That's not on the record.
对。
Yeah.
另外，我们也聊过很多很棒的技术话题。
And the other we've covered, you know, great tech themes here.
我还想提一下本·汤普森的聚合理论，这个我们之前在节目里也聊过。
The other one I wanted to bring up quickly is Ben Thompson, his aggregation theory, which we've talked about also on the show before.
简单来说，这个理论讲的是，在过去，尤其是在出版和新闻行业，分销环节最能体现这一点。
But basically, is the theory that in the past, and it's represented nowhere better than publishing and journalism, where in the past, distribution.
作为分销商，你需要聚合记者，还需要聚合报纸的配送路线，基本上所有东西都是从顾客的角度往回看的。
As as a distributor, you needed to aggregate, you know, you need to aggregate journalists and you needed to aggregate delivery routes of newspapers and all the everything basically looking backwards from the customer.
你其实不太关心顾客。
You didn't really care about the customer.
顾客得主动来找你。
The customer needed to come to you.
而在互联网时代，你需要先聚合顾客，然后所有的生产者都会来找你。
In the Internet world, you need to aggregate the customers and then all of the producers will come to you.
这就是Facebook和它的即时文章所发生的事情。
And and this is what's happened with Facebook here with with Instant Articles.
你知道，他们是在迎合顾客。
You know, they cater to the customers.
他们关心用户体验。
They care about the user experience.
他们关心让内容变得美观，这也是他们收购Push Pop Press的原因，这样客户就会主动来找他们。
They care about making it beautiful which is why they acquired Push Pop Press so that the customers come to them.
客户就是他们的用户，也就是读者。
The customers are their customer, the readers.
然后生产者就会来找他们，我觉得这真的非常非常有意思。
And then the producers come to them, which is I just think super super interesting.
不。
No.
那太好了。
That's great.
我从来没这么想过。
That's I hadn't had never thought about it that way.
确实是这样。
That's that's and it's true.
完全没错。
It's completely true.
这就是为什么Facebook有这么大的影响力。
And that's why Facebook has so much power.
我是说，你看普通人拿起手机，他们首先打开Facebook应用的可能性非常高。
I mean, if you watch just the casual person pick up their phone, the chances that they're going to open the Facebook app first are so high.
太不可思议了。
Incredible.
他们决定你会被什么内容娱乐。
They decide what you're going to be entertained by.
这真是一把巨大的利剑。
And that is a tremendous sword to yield.
对。
Yeah.
而且这也反映了最近Facebook热门话题出现的问题。
And informed by which is the whole issue that's come up recently with the issue with the Facebook trending stories.
对。
Yeah.
这挺有意思的，我们要不要稍微聊一下这个？
That's an interesting Should we touch on that a little bit?
好。
Yeah.
你说吧。
Go ahead.
好。
Yeah.
所以，对于没在关注的听众来说，基本上就是，你知道，大家对这件事的真实性看法不一。
So, for listeners who haven't been tracking, was basically, you know, there there are mixed feelings about how true it is.
但基本上，不是在信息流本身，而是在桌面端右上角那个小小的趋势新闻小部件，或者在手机上点开空白搜索框时，你会看到Facebook手工挑选的热门新闻，它觉得你会感兴趣。
But basically, not in the news feed itself, but in the little trending news widget on desktop in the top right or on mobile when you tap into an empty search field, you see hand curated top news that Facebook thinks you would be interested in.
而那篇新闻报道基本上声称，他们采访了一个曾经在那个团队工作的人，那个人说这有反保守倾向。
And the news story that that basically alleges that they had talked to someone who used to work on that team and they said it was anti conservative.
这件事引发的风波简直难以置信。
And the blow up from that has been unbelievable.
而有趣的结论是，如果这么小的事情都能引发这么大的风波，那件小事，你们中一半人可能都没见过，大多数人可能都没点过。
And the the interesting takeaway is, boy, if the blow up from that little thing has been that big, that little thing that, you know, half of you probably haven't even seen and most of you probably have never clicked on.
人们给Facebook极大的信任，认为它有一个中立的算法。
People give Facebook a tremendous amount of credit for having this like agnostic algorithm.
所以你能想象如果他们在新闻推送算法里做任何偏向一方的调整会怎样吗？
So can you imagine if they were doing anything in news feed algorithm to tilt one way or another?
我的意思是，他们被视为真理的仲裁者，有一个纯粹干净的算法来决定你看什么。
I mean, they're viewed as like this arbiter of the truth and there's this pure clean algorithm that decides what you look at.
而我认为他们灌输给人们的这种信任
And I think that that trust that they've instilled in people
不过，过去一个月里出现了一个强大的制衡机制。
is There's Powerful check has emerged though in the past month.
对。
Yeah.
我们看看接下来会发生什么。
We'll see what happens.
我觉得这对他们来说非常非常危险。
I think very very dangerous for them.
但这恰恰说明了他们的影响力。
But it speaks to their power.
这也说明了整个用户聚合的转变。
And it speaks to that that whole flipping of you aggregate the users.
只要用户每天来Facebook，作为生产者、发布者，他们就必须在那里。
You aggregate as long as users are coming every day to Facebook as a producer, as a publisher, have to be there.
对。
Yeah.
完全正确。
Absolutely.
这正好回到我们上一集说的，他们的核心资产是用户参与度，就是参与度、在网站上的时间，以及你愿意把多少生活交给Facebook，这就是他们掌握的力量。
This gets right back to what we said last episode that their crown jewels are engagement and it's it's engagement and time on-site and just how much of your life you're giving to Facebook and that's the power that they they wield.
然后呢
And
有意思的是，这和上一集提到的Snapchat形成了对比。你知道，他们说过，我们不会用那些花哨的算法。
Interesting to contrast that with Snapchat too from last episode which is, you know, they've said, like, we're not gonna we're not, you know, funky algorithms.
我们不会追踪你。
We're not tracking you.
我们什么都不做。
We're not anything.
我们就像，你看你想看的故事，关注你想关注的人。
We're like, you watch the stories you wanna watch and you follow the people you, you wanna follow.
而且在Snapchat上很难发现新内容。
And it's hard to discover things on Snapchat.
好了，听众朋友们。
Alright, listeners.
现在是时候聊聊我们最喜欢的公司之一，Statsig了。
Now is a great time to talk about one of our favorite companies, Statsig.
是的。
Yes.
最好的产品团队之所以依赖 Statsig，是有原因的，无论他们是在迭代核心产品功能，还是大规模推出 AI 驱动的体验。
There is a reason why the best product teams rely on Statsig, whether they are iterating on their core product features or shipping AI powered experiences at scale.
对。
Yep.
在当今 AI 世界的高速发展下，快速发布已经只是基本要求了。
In the crazy speed of today's AI world, shipping fast is just table stakes now.
持续构建和部署你的应用基本上是小菜一碟。
It's basically trivial to build and deploy your app constantly.
真正的优势在于，你能多快了解到哪些改动真正为客户创造了价值，以及你能多快利用这些信号来指导下一步发布什么。
The real advantage is how quickly you learn what changes actually created value for customers and how fast you can use that signal to guide what you ship next.
这就是 Statsig 发挥作用的地方。
This is where Statsig comes in.
它将实验、功能开关和产品分析整合到一个统一的系统中，让团队能够安全发布、严格测试，并直接将他们的改动与用户的实际行为联系起来。
It brings experimentation, feature flags, and product analytics into one unified system so teams can ship safely, test rigorously, and directly link what they changed to how users actually behaved.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。