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。
Anthropic与五角大楼的冲突升级到新水平。
Anthropics war with the Pentagon hits another level.
苹果正在准备三款AI设备，但iPhone可能是其关键功能，而奈飞将不得不在没有华纳兄弟探索公司的情况下前行。
Apple's preparing three AI devices, but the iPhone might be the killer feature, and Netflix will have to go forward without Warner Brothers Discovery.
我们将在接下来的内容中，与间谍眼镜专家MJ·西格勒一起深入探讨这一切的意义。
We'll dig into what it all means with spy glasses, MJ Siegler, right after this.
财政负责、金融天才、货币魔术师。
Fiscally responsible, financial geniuses, monetary magicians.
这些是人们在谈到那些将车险转投Progressive并节省数百美元的司机时会说的话。
These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds.
因为Progressive为一次性付清保费、拥有房产等提供折扣。
Because Progressive offers discounts for paying in full, owning a home, and more.
此外，当您需要帮助时，可以信赖其出色的客户服务，让您的每一分钱都花得更值。
Plus, you can count on their great customer service to help when you need it, so your dollar goes a long way.
访问progressive.com，看看您是否能节省车险费用。
Visit progressive.com to see if you could save on car insurance.
Progressive意外伤害保险公司及其关联公司，潜在节省金额因情况而异，并非在所有州或情况下均可使用。
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates, potential savings will vary, not available in all states or situations.
这里是迈克尔·刘易斯。
Michael Lewis here.
我的畅销书《大空头》讲述了2008年美国房地产市场泡沫形成与破裂的故事。
My bestselling book, The Big Short, tells the story of the build up and birth of The US housing market back in 2008.
十年前，《大空头》被拍成了获得奥斯卡奖的电影，现在我首次将其制作成有声书，并由我亲自朗读。
A decade ago, The Big Short was made into an Academy Award winning movie, and now I'm bringing it to you for the first time as an audiobook narrated by yours truly.
《大空头》的故事——押注市场崩盘的意义，以及谁真正为失控的金融体系买单——在今天比以往任何时候都更相关。
The Big Short story, what it means to bet against the market, and who really pays for an unchecked financial system is as relevant today as it's ever been.
立即在 pushkin.fm/audiobooks 或任何有声书平台获取《大空头》。
Get The Big Short now at pushkin.fm/audiobooks or wherever audiobooks are sold.
欢迎收听《大科技》播客。
Welcome to Big Technology Podcast.
今天是每月第一个星期一，来自Spyglass的MJ Siegler将为我们拆解本月的新闻。
It's the first Monday of the month, which means MJ Siegler from Spyglass is here to break down the month's news with us.
而且，天哪，我真高兴今天我们有这一期节目，因为似乎整个周末发生了整整一年的新闻。
And, boy, am I glad that we have an episode for you today because it feels like a year's worth of news has happened over the weekend.
自从我们上周五离开后，五角大楼将Anthropic列为供应链风险，明确表示Anthropic无法与政府或其承包商合作开展政府项目，这对该公司将是重大打击。
Since we last left you on Friday, the Pentagon declared Anthropic a supply chain risk, making it clear that Anthropic was not able to work with the government or its contractors on government work, which is gonna be a major hit to the business.
如果这一决定成立，我们还看到OpenAI介入并签署了与Anthropic即将与五角大楼达成的非常相似的协议。
If it holds up, we also have OpenAI coming in and signing a very similar deal for the one Anthropic was just about to sign with the Pentagon.
因此，我们将深入探讨这一最新动态，以及这对Anthropic和整个AI行业可能产生的影响。
So we're gonna dig into the latest in that story and what the implications might be for Anthropic and the rest of the AI industry.
我们还会聊聊苹果即将推出的AI设备。
We'll also talk about Apple's forthcoming AI devices.
这是一系列设备，当然还有Netflix，它失去了与华纳兄弟探索公司的协议，而派拉蒙迅速介入，为这块缩水的资产支付了巨额资金。
It's a set of them, and Netflix, of course, losing the deal with Warner Brothers Discovery as paramount, swoops in and pays a lot of money for that shrinking property.
好了，MG。
Alright, MG.
很高兴见到你。
Great to see you.
谢谢你的到来。
Thank you for being here.
很高兴见到你，亚历克斯。
Great to see you, Alex.
你知道的，我很高兴能来这里。
As you know, I'm happy to be here.
一周前，我在迪拜。
As a week ago, I was in Dubai.
所以，你知道，我的家人运气不错，及时离开了那里，但显然，我的心与那里所有的人都在一起，那是一个非常糟糕的状况。
So, this is, you know, my family was lucky in the timing of of getting out of there, but, you know, obviously, thoughts with all the people over there, and it's a it's a terrible situation.
当然。
Definitely.
不。
No.
我很高兴你和你的家人安全撤离了。
I'm I'm very glad that you and your family made it out.
而且，确实，被袭击的不仅仅是军事设施，还包括民用酒店、机场，甚至一个由Anthropic运营的数据中心也遭到了打击。
And, yeah, it seems like it's not just military infrastructure, but civilian hotels, airports, even a data center, an anthropic data center was hit.
所以我们来谈谈那个亚马逊数据中心，它可能或可能没有为Anthropic提供服务。
So we'll talk about oh right, an Amazon data center that may or may not have been serving anthropic.
让我们继续深入这个关于Anthropic和五角大楼的故事，因为我们现在有了更多关于这场争端起因及其可能后果的新消息。
Let's pick up, because let's pick up on this story of Anthropic and the Pentagon, because we now have some more news about what exactly led to the dispute and what the fallout might be.
我们有进展了，对吧？
We have movement, right?
Anthropic失去了这笔交易，不仅如此，他们可能再也无法与政府合作了，而OpenAI现在已经接下了这笔交易。
Anthropics lost the deal, not only that they can't work with the government anymore, maybe, and OpenAI has now picked up that deal.
让我为大家详细梳理一下究竟发生了什么，因为《大西洋》杂志有一篇报道，讲述了Anthropic与五角大楼之间关于‘致命机器人’的争端。
So let me just take you all through what exactly happened because there's this Atlantic story inside Anthropic's killer robot dispute with the Pentagon.
他们说，周五早上，Anthropic收到消息，称战争部长皮特·赫格塞斯及其团队将做出一项重大让步。
They say on Friday morning Anthropic received word that Pete Hegseth, Secretary of War, his team was gonna make a major concession.
他们承诺不会将Anthropic的AI用于大规模国内监控或完全自主的杀人机器，但随后又用‘酌情’之类的模糊措辞对这些承诺进行了限定，暗示这些条款将根据政府对具体情况的解读而改变，而正是在这里，事情开始失控了。
It would pledged not to use Anthropics AI for mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous killing machines, but then qualified those pledges with loophole y phrases like as appropriate suggesting that the terms would be subject to change based on the administration's interpretation of the given situation, and here's where it goes off the rails.
但到了周五下午，Anthropic 得知五角大楼仍希望使用该公司的 AI 来分析从美国人那里收集的大量数据。
But on Friday afternoon, Anthropic learned that the Pentagon still wanted to use the company's AI to analyze bulk data collected from Americans.
这可能包括你向最爱的聊天机器人提出的问题、你的谷歌搜索历史、你的 GPS 轨迹以及你的信用卡交易记录，所有这些都会与其他关于你生活的信息进行交叉比对。
This could include information such as questions you ask your favorite chatbot, your Google search history, your GPS tracked movement, and your credit card transactions, all of which would be cross referenced with other details about your life.
Anthropic 的管理层告诉 Hexath 团队，这已经越界了，因此这笔交易破裂了。
Anthropic told, Anthropic's leadership told Hexath team, that told Hexath team that was a bridge too far and the deal fell apart.
让我回顾一下我周五的观点，当时我说可能根本没什么实质内容，这很可能只是策略和营销手段。
Just to pick up my perspective from Friday where I said maybe there's not really a there there and this is, you know, likely, you know, positioning and marketing.
我觉得实际情况比我原先想的要更真实。
I think there's more of a there there than I thought.
Anthropic 设定这条界限，似乎是个不错的选择。
It does seem like this is a good line for Anthropic to draw.
然而，随着我继续深入了解这件事，我越来越觉得，这笔交易本不必破裂，完全可以通过更妥当的措辞，纳入各方已同意的例外条款，从而顺利达成协议。
However, you know, as I kept reading more about this, it just seemed to me like this is a deal that did not need to fall apart, that there were ways to word the deal that you could basically include the carve outs that everybody had agreed to, and it would have been fine.
但五角大楼却坚持将周五下午 5 点设为最后期限，并且毫不退让。
But the Pentagon just set this deadline for Friday at 5PM and it stuck with it.
基本上，达里奥没有以他们期望的方式回电，于是他们彻底翻脸，用OpenAI取代了他们，并将他们列为供应链风险。
Basically, Dario didn't return their calls in the way that they wanted, and then they went nuclear, substituted them out with OpenAI and declared them a supply chain risk.
这就是我对当前局势的看法。
That's that's sort of my perspective on on where we stand today.
这些细节是否改变了你的看法，MG？你对这个故事的现状和走向有什么总体判断？
Do these details change or have have any change for you, MG, in the way that you see the story, and what's your general read on where it is and where it's going?
我实际上没有写过这个话题，部分原因是我觉得我们还在实时消化这件事，而且考虑到我们刚才谈到的中东局势，这情况非常敏感。
So I haven't actually written about this in part because I'm still feel like, yeah, it's obviously, we're all digesting it a bit in real time, and it's a delicate situation given what we just talked about sort of with the the situation in The Middle East going down.
这确实看起来很奇怪，你提到了周五的截止日期，最让我感到不可思议的是，海格塞斯部长竟在大规模战争准备期间还在进行这些谈判。
It does seem I mean, obviously, the timing of that, you note the Friday deadline, it's the most wild thing to me about all of this is that, you know, secretary Hegseth is going through with these negotiations in the middle of major preparations for war, obviously.
当然，当时我们未必知道这一点，但显然局势正在升级。
I mean, we didn't necessarily know that at the time, though, you know, clearly there was the buildup happening.
就在准备发动这些打击的中间，他们还在和一家人工智能技术供应商来回协商，试图达成协议。
And and, you know, in the middle of getting ready for these these strikes, they are going back and forth with, you know, an AI technology provider to try to get them, you know, to agree to terms.
所以，我内心那个愤世嫉俗的部分不禁怀疑，他们是不是根本就没打算真的达成协议。
And so, you know, part of me, the cynical part of me wonders if, you know, they weren't using that.
他们当然不会向Anthropic透露这种事，但显然他们早就预感到这种情况要发生，所以知道我们必须尽快达成协议，因为我们很可能将在即将来临的战争准备和战略执行中使用这项技术。
Not that they would disclose anything like that to to Anthropic necessarily, but, like, that they knew that this was sort of coming, and so they knew, like, we need to both we need to get something done now because we're probably gonna be using some of this technology in the forthcoming, you know, war preparations and execution of the of the war strategy.
或者，这是否是我们最好时机来提出我们想要的条件，也许Anthropic会因此更容易让步一些。
And or, you know, is this going to be the best position for us to sort of lay down the terms that we want and and maybe Anthropic will have to sort of, yeah, just yield a bit easier.
但也许他并没有充分研究过Dario，没听过你的访谈和其他许多访谈，不了解他面对这种最后通牒时会如何回应。
But maybe he hadn't done enough research on on on Dario, listened to your interviews and and many other interviews to know, like, what what the his response was likely to be, so sort of these types of ultimatums.
所以，是的，感觉他们本可以更早好好沟通解决这个问题。
And so, yeah, it it does feel like a bit that they probably could have hashed this out.
但我还是在想，战争和攻击局势这种宏观层面的时间压力，是否必然加剧了这件事的紧迫性。
But I do wonder again if the timing of the macro stuff of of the actual war and and attack situation just added the time pressure necessarily to something.
这很有趣，因为他们实际上确实在这些打击行动中使用了Anthropic。
Well, is interesting because they actually did end up using anthropic in these strikes.
对。
Right.
上周五我说过，Anthropic的参与其实很有限，因为我看到报道说Palantir与Anthropic有合作，而这正是引发整个讨论的起点——因为Palantir系统被用于抓捕马杜罗，而Anthropic对这些系统的使用方式提出了一些疑问。
And last week on Friday I said, it actually anthropic's use was limited because I was reading the reports saying that Palantir has Anthropic involved and that was what started this entire discussion because Palantir systems were used in the capture of Maduro and Anthropic had some questions about how they were used.
我认为，我不敢说我看错了，但我之前对Anthropic与美国政府的融合程度了解得不够全面，这让我感到震惊。
I think, I got I I won't say I got that wrong, but I had an incomplete picture of of how deeply integrated Anthropic already is in the US government, and this stunned me.
这是来自《华尔街日报》的报道：美国在中东的打击行动在特朗普禁令发布后数小时内仍使用了Anthropic。
This is from this is from the Wall Street Journal, US strikes in The Middle East use anthropic hours after Trump ban.
顺便说一下，这项禁令——我们稍后会讨论——实际上六个月后才生效，但伊朗打击行动已经开始使用Anthropic了。
So, by the way, the ban, and we'll talk about this, it's gonna be six months from now, right, that they can't use it, but, already at with with the Iran strikes, they are using Anthropic.
这是《华尔街日报》的这篇报道。
Here's the Wall Street Journal story.
就在宣布联邦政府将停止使用科技公司Anthropic开发的人工智能工具后数小时内，特朗普总统便在伊朗发动了大规模空袭，而正是借助了这些同样的工具。
Within hours of declaring that the federal government will end use of its artificial intelligence tools made by tech company Anthropic, president Trump launched a major air attack in Iran with the help of those very same tools.
全球各地的指挥中心，包括位于中东的美国中央司令部，都在使用Anthropic的云AI工具。
Commands around the world, including US Central Command in The Middle East, use Anthropics Cloud AI Cloud AI tool.
该指挥中心利用该工具进行情报评估、目标识别和作战模拟，尽管该公司与五角大楼的紧张关系不断升级，这凸显了人工智能工具在军事行动中的深度嵌入。
The command uses the tool for intelligence assessments, target identification, and simulating battle scenarios even as tension between the company and the Pentagon ratcheted up highlighting how embedded the AI tools are in military operations.
这不仅仅是军事分析师在向Claude提问，看起来你们是在用Claude进行战争推演，这比我预期的要深入得多。
This was, this isn't just military analysts like asking Claude questions it seems like you have the war games going on with Claude, which was much more than I expected.
我的意思是，我很想听听你的看法：一方面，我们现在了解到Anthropic与政府的整合程度如此之深，你对此有何反应？另一方面，为什么军方要冒风险去替换它，而不是就一些他们本可以与Anthropic达成一致的语言问题进行协商呢？
And, I mean, I'd love to get your reaction, a, to to what your reaction is now that we're learning how deeply it is integrated, and b, why would the military risk having to substitute it out over, you know, language that they could have agreed to Anthropic with and they just didn't?
我再次回到这个观点：这在双方看来，时机都糟糕到了极点。
Again, I I sort of come back to the notion of was this sort of a it's just like the worst possible timing in in ways for both sides.
对吧？
Right?
如果当时局势更稳定一些，也许双方本可以坐下来，更从容地把事情谈清楚。
Like, whereas if it were a more stable situation, you know, maybe the two sides could have sat down and hash things out a little bit more.
但考虑到事态的升级，显然政府对Anthropic的反应非常迅速，或者说，被Anthropic激怒了。
But given the buildup to this, like, it seemed like the administration got very fast it was very fast to get exacerbated by or sorry, exasperated by Anthropic.
现在，你或许能明白为什么了。
And now, again, you might see why.
你看，
It's like, look.
我们没时间搞这些了，伙计们。
We don't have time for this, guys.
我们现在正在为一些军事行动做准备。
We are we are preparing for some military action right now.
如果你们不参与，很遗憾，我们已经部署了相关系统。
If you guys are not on board, unfortunately, like, you know, we already have the systems in place.
我们目前正在使用这些系统。
We're we're using those right now.
当然，我们非常希望你们能参与进来。
And, you know, we'd love for you guys to be on board.
但如果不参与，就像你提到的，我们也许可以六个月后再讨论这个问题。
But if you're not, like, that's something we can discuss, I guess, down the road, to your point, like, six months later.
而且，正如你所说，这不仅仅是他们在使用类似被禁的聊天机器人工具。
And also to your points, like, it's not just that they're, yeah, using, like, clawed chatbot stuff.
这似乎直接关系到他们与Palantir以及亚马逊的合同，亚马逊有自己的政府云服务，允许这些系统在其防火墙后和安全中心运行。
This is directly related, it seems like, to their, you know, their contracts with Palantir and also Amazon, which has their own sort of government cloud stuff, right, that allows these things to operate behind, you know, their own firewalls and in secure centers and whatnot.
因此，这并不是他们能一夜之间替换掉的东西。
And so it's again, this is not something they could swap out overnight.
即使他们给OpenAI或其他任何人开了绿灯，也不可能随便就把这个系统加进去。
It's not something that even if they give clearance to OpenAI or anyone else that they could just, yeah, put put in there.
因为这些系统都必须经过测试。
Because again, these things have to be tested.
你怎么能确定，如果你突然换掉了主模型，还用它来运行真实的战争推演呢？
Like, how would you know to trust that, you know, if you're all of a sudden swapping out your main model and you're running, like, literal war games on there?
你怎么知道该信任什么，不该信任什么？
Like, how do you know, like, you know, what what to trust and whatnot?
所以，这整个时间点感觉真的很奇怪。
And so, again, it just feels like this this timing of it.
也许吧，伙计们，我们必须确保在推进这个行动之前，所有细节都万无一失。
Maybe it's like, guys, we need to make sure all of our eyes are dotted and t's are crossed before we go ahead with this operation.
如你所知，这次我们会使用一些新技术。
As you know, we're we're going to be using some new technology this go around.
有人和Anthropic聊过吗？他们对这件事最新的想法是什么？
So has anyone talked to Anthropic about, like, know, the latest with with what they're thinking about it?
正如你所指出的，马杜罗局势，显然帕兰蒂尔也参与其中。
And then as as you noted, the the Maduro situation, and obviously that Palantir seems like was involved in that as well.
因此，这件事一下子浮出了水面。
And so that came to the forefront there.
现在这一切都变得错综复杂、异常混乱。
And so it is this is this is all sorts of in in snarled and and weird entanglement going on right now.
我们一直在谈论循环交易之类的事情，但我觉得，我们现在面临的局面已经升级了，这些系统正在将这一切深度整合。
We're we're I feel like I feel like all the talk that we've been doing about circular deals and all this, like, we're we're now at new stakes now in terms of, of where this is all getting integrated within these systems.
是的。
Right.
那些关于人工智能未来可能用于军事领域的科幻论文，比如几年后才会发生的事，等等，等等。
These, like, science fiction papers of AI potentially being used in the military somewhere down the line, like, in future years, like, oh, wait a second.
它已经被使用了。
It's already being used.
但有趣的是，他们有一个六个月的期限来与联邦政府脱钩，或者说，实际上是联邦政府有六个月的时间来让它们与Anthropic脱钩。
But it is interesting because they do have this six month deadline to disentangle themselves from the federal government or really the federal government has the six month deadline to disentangle them from Anthropic.
你是想说，因为时间点的关系，实际上并不是因为我们非得让你在本周五前完成，而是我们要换另一个模型？
Are you are you suggesting because of the timing that basically it was like, we it's not that we need this Friday you to meet this Friday deadline because we're gonna swap out another model.
而是因为我们得处理其他一些事情，所以才给你定了这个周五的截止日期，而且
It's like, we're we're gonna give you this Friday deadline because we got some other shit that we need to handle and and
我的意思是，这感觉不就是这样吗？
I mean, doesn't it feel like that?
当然，我完全不知道。
Obviously, I have no idea.
我没有五角大楼的内部消息来源，无法知道他们是否根据战争准备的时间表发出了这个最后通牒。
I have no insight sources at the Pentagon to know that they were giving this ultimatum given their timeline for, for war preparations.
但感觉上，他们一定在某种程度上觉得，我们现在真有时间做这个吗？
But it does feel like, you know, they're they must have been at some level thinking, like, don't we have time for this right now.
是的。
Yeah.
如果你真想好好讨论一下什么，那当然好。
You know, if if you if we wanna hash out something, like, great.
这里有x、y和z三位团队成员，可以帮你理清这些事。
Here's here's x, y, and z partner on the team that can sort of talk you through it.
但如果不行，那就抱歉了。
But if not, like, sorry.
我们会再找时间重新讨论这个问题。
We're, we'll revisit this at some point.
我不明白的是，你马上就要开展一场重大行动了。
The thing I don't understand because you're about to fight a major operation.
对吧？
Right?
这是一场战争，你不可能把Anthropic换掉。
Like, this is a war and you're not gonna be able to swap out Anthropic.
所以如果Anthropic在战争开始前就介入了，对吧？
So if Anthropic, like, comes at, like, before the war starts, right?
你不可能在周五下午突然换成DeepSeek或者OpenAI。
Like, you're not gonna, like, switch to DeepSeek or OpenAI on Friday afternoon.
所以，你知道，DeepSeek，你能想象吗？
So, you know Yeah, DeepSeek, could you imagine that?
我能想象。
I could.
那会持续很久。
That would go for really long.
我能想象。
I could.
我的意思是，到这个地步，什么都有可能发生，对吧？
I mean, at this point anything's possible, right?
我不会这么做，但我也不会感到惊讶，我的意思是，看看他们刚刚对一家美国公司做了什么。
I wouldn't do it, but I wouldn't be stunned, I mean, a look look what they just did to an American company.
但我觉得这很有趣，因为如果你打了这场仗，然后说，好吧，Anthropic 在战争期间给我们制造了麻烦，那可能就是你开始考虑寻找替代方案的时候了，无论如何，你总会弄清楚的。顺便说一句，这场攻击在初期非常成功，我的意思是，我不确定这是否完全是 Anthropic 的功劳，把所有责任都推给 Anthropic 可能有点过度了，但如果你用的就是这个 AI 工具，而你在军事上初期打得相当顺利，至少是这样。
But I guess it's interesting because, like, if you fight that war and you say, alright, Anthropic gave us problems during the war, that's maybe when you start the process of thinking about you're gonna find out one way or the other, so by the way, the attack was quite successful in the early going, I mean I'm not sure if this is like all Anthropic's doing, that would be I think a bridge too far to put it all on Anthropic, but if that's the AI tool you're using, you're having a pretty successful campaign early on, militarily, at least.
我的意思是，我不知道。
Like, I don't know.
这就是你想要开始替换他们的时候吗？
Is that is that when you wanna start subbing them?
关于这一点，有两点要说。
So two things to that.
首先，马杜罗的情况显然在这件事中起到了作用。
One, again, I do think the Maduro the the Maduro thing situation, obviously played a role in this.
这有点奇怪地暗示了接下来会发生什么。
It's sort of weirdly, like, hinted at what was to come.
对吧？
Right?
因为突然间，我们得知它可能被使用了。
Because all of a sudden, we we learned that maybe it was being used.
报道中说法不一，但有些报道称，Anthropic了解到Palantir可能将其用于这次突袭，并对此不太满意。
The reporting had there's conflicting reports, but some of the reports had, you know, the notion that Anthropic learned about how Palantir was using it potentially for that raid, and they didn't like that maybe too much.
于是他们将此事向上级汇报了一点，而政府和Palantir可能都不喜欢他们这样做。
And sort of that's where they raised raised the, you know, raised it up the chain a little bit, and maybe the the administration didn't like the fact, and Palantir didn't like the fact that they were doing that.
所以快进到现在，我们知道，政府显然知道他们即将进入这一新局势。
And so fast forward to now, again, we know, you know, the government obviously knows that they're they're heading into this new situation.
也许他们想在进入之前先把这事解决掉，或者回到我之前的第一点，他们可能把这当作对Anthropic施压的筹码，说：听着，我们知道你们对我们在多大程度上使用这项技术一直有争议。
Either maybe they wanted to try to get it squared away before they did that, or again, to my earlier to my first point, like, it's possible that they used it as like a point of leverage over Anthropic, right, to say like, look, we understand, you know, that there's been this back and forth about how we're potentially using using the technology here.
但我们要明确的是，未来我们还是会继续使用你们的模型。
But, like, look, we're, you know, we're gonna be using these things going forward to your models.
我们很希望继续这样做。
We'd love to keep doing that.
而且，顺便说一句，他们当然不会直接表露立场，但咱们不妨一周后再看看，你觉得这事儿会怎么发展？从他们的角度来看，你真的想站在对立面吗？
And, like, dot dot dot, by the way, like, you know, again, they wouldn't they wouldn't tip their hands, but let's just look in a a week from now and see, what you think, like, how this is, how this is playing out and if you really, you know, want to to be on sort of the wrong side of this from their advantage vantage point.
听好了。
Look.
我越想这件事，就越觉得，就像我周五说的，这本质上是一场文化冲突。稍后我会谈到这个开端理念。你看看负责此事的战争事务副部长埃米尔·迈克尔，他显然不喜欢达里奥，也不喜欢Anthropic团队。考虑到他们的背景，我一点都不会惊讶他们之间会有文化冲突。
The more I think about this, the more it just seems to me, like like I shared on Friday, that this is sort of an ultimate culture clash and we'll get into the opening ideal in a moment you look at Emile Michael, the Undersecretary of War who's been working on this, clearly doesn't like Dario, clearly doesn't like the Anthropic team and I wouldn't be surprised knowing about him and knowing about them that there would be a culture clash there.
事实上，我读到过，最初Anthropic曾反对他们认为可能用于国内监控的用途，而在自主武器方面，他们似乎已经达成了一致。
And in fact, so I read that basically at the beginning that Anthropic stood up against what they thought was going to be domestic surveillance and they had seemingly both agreed on the autonomous warfare part.
这就是埃米尔·迈克尔说的话，他只是，你知道的，我多年来一直报道这件事，而他却直接发了条推文，就直接发了出去！
This is what Emile Michael said, he just, you know, it's like one of those like I reported it for years and he just tweeted it out, he just tweeted it out!
有点像幕后发生的事情。
Sort of like what happened behind closed doors.
他说，Anthropic公司希望加入一条措辞，禁止所有国防部员工进行领英搜索。
He says, Anthropic wanted language that would prevent all Department of War employees from doing a LinkedIn search.
他们希望阻止国防部使用任何公开数据库，这些数据库本可用于招募军人、聘用新员工。
They wanted to stop the Department of War from using any public database that would enable us to, for example, recruit military service members, hire new employees.
当我打电话讨论切断国防部使用公开信息的权限时——这会损害我们的军事战备能力——达里奥却不敢回应。
When I called to discuss cutting off the Department of War from using publicly available information that would hurt our military readiness, Dario, didn't have the courage to answer.
对吧？
Right?
这现在成了著名的事件：埃米尔在截止日期前给他打了电话，而达里奥当时正在开会。
This is the now sort of infamous Emile called him before the deadline, and Dario was in a meeting.
等他开完会出来时，这件事已经彻底爆发了。
And then by the time he got out of the meeting, this whole thing was blown up.
现在这才是真正疯狂的地方。
Now this is really where it gets wild.
他说，我们书面同意遵守1947年《国家安全法》、1978年《外国互联网情报监视法》以及其他所有适用法律。
He says, we agreed in writing to act according to the National Security Act of 1947 and the Foreign Internet Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and all other applicable laws.
他们希望用‘根据’代替‘符合’，并删除所有适用法律，而这对美国民众的保护更少。
They wanted the word pursuant versus consistent with and wanted to delete all applicable laws, which was less protective of Americans.
这简直编都编不出来。
Can't make this up.
我们还同意对所有武器和武器系统进行严格监督，规定国防部将依据美国法律及国防部指令，仅在所有合法用途和使用场景中使用人工智能系统，而我们希望保留根据情况适当接管或关闭人工智能系统的权利，因为他不喜欢——这是Emile在谈论Dario。
We also agreed to humid oversight of all weapons, weapon systems by saying the Department of War will use the AI systems for all lawful uses use case in accordance with all applicable laws of the, US law and the Department of War directives, and we wanted to to retain the ability to override or disable the AI system as appropriate because he didn't like this is Emile talking about Dario.
他不喜欢‘适当’这个词。
He didn't like the word he didn't like as appropriate.
那你更喜欢什么？
What do you prefer?
不恰当。
Inappropriate.
我同意了，我甚至同意把这一点删掉。
I agreed I even agreed to take that out.
他心里清楚。
He knows it.
他的投资者、客户和员工都应该知道他的谎言。
His investors, customers, and employees should know about his lies.
拿我们国家和士兵的安全与保障来做他的营销工具。
Risking the safety and security of our country, and our troops are a marketing vehicle for him.
我的意思是，再说了，我就直说了吧。
I mean, again, like, this is I'm just gonna say it.
如果有两个成年人在场，我认为你们应该能协商出这样的措辞。
If you have two adults in the room, I think you should be able to work out this language.
另一种解释是，国防部确实希望保留对这些系统的干预能力，确实希望进行国内监控。
The other explanation is that the Department of Defense really did want to be able to override these systems, really did want to be able to conduct domestic surveillance.
但再说一遍，我们讨论的是一种对当今军队至关重要的工具，它被用于我们所描述的那些场景，却因为这些措辞就闹得不可开交，在我看来，这简直荒谬至极。
But, again, we're talking about a tool that's so important to the military today that's being used in the use cases we described to blow it up over these terms, to me, seems like complete like a ridiculous thing.
我觉得这里有几个因素在起作用。
I think there's a few things going on here.
所以首先，听你复述那些原话，我觉得你肯定参与过这些事。
So first and foremost, like, hearing you talk through those exact quotes, it's like, I'm sure you've been involved with them.
我曾经在多个交易中，作为一方与律师合作过，当律师介入时，他们总是想使用非常明确的措辞，确保每一点都彻底明确，不留任何余地——说白了，律师们自己为了这些细微的术语简直会打起来。
I've been involved in on, you know, in a deal side on a number of times, like, with lawyer when lawyers get involved and wanna use very explicit language to to make sure that everything is drilled down and there's no wiggle room, like, lawyers themselves, for lack of a better phrase, go to war over these little terms.
对吧？
Right?
但其实不是这样的。
And it's like, no.
我们不能这么说。
We can't say it this way.
我们必须Exactly这样表达。
We have to say it exactly this way.
而对方的律师也会说：不行。
And the other side's lawyers will say, no.
我们不能让他们这么表述。
We can't let them say it this way.
所以，确实存在某种程度上的这种情况。
So, like, there's definitely some level of that.
我知道，他们在埃米尔和达里奥这个层面上确实也在讨论这个问题。
I I I know that, you know, they're they're talking about this on, like, the the Emile and Dario level, certainly.
但这些法律术语看起来就像是双方律师在来回拉扯，试图保护自己和公司免受不利情况的影响，对吧？
But, like, the legalese stuff just seems like it's it's lawyers, like, you know, going back and forth on both sides to try to cover their own asses, right, and the company's asses in the in the case of their downside scenario.
话虽如此，我认为你之前提到过，显然这两方在哲学层面上彼此反感。
That said, I think you hit on it earlier where it's like, obviously, these two sides just don't like each other from a philosophical level.
对吧？
Right?
长期以来，特朗普政府一直指责Anthropic是一家更‘觉醒’的AI公司，拥有大量他们不喜欢的有效利他主义理念，而且大卫·萨克斯也在这类问题上立场鲜明，因此他们觉得双方在哲学上根本无法对齐。
There's long been the the charge against Anthropic from the Trump administration that maybe Anthropic is the more quote unquote woke AI company, that they have all this, you know, effective altruism stuff going on that they don't like and that, you know, David Sacks has come out strongly on these on these issues and that they just feel like that they're misaligned philosophically.
我认为这确实是个尴尬的局面，因为他们——我不确定这一点，但如果他们根本不知道Anthropic对他们正在使用的某些系统有多关键，我一点也不惊讶。
And I do think it's an awkward situation because they didn't I'm not I don't know this for sure, but I wouldn't be shocked if they didn't necessarily know just how vital Anthropic was to some of the systems they're using.
再说一遍，关于Palantir，显然他们用Palantir做了很多不同的事情，而政府长期以来也一直用它提供各种服务。
Again, with with regard to Palantir, obviously, they they use Palantir for a lot of different things and and government famously has for a while for different services.
而且，无论你对Anthropic团队的哲学立场持什么看法，大家普遍都喜爱他们的模型，因为他们的技术确实出色。
And the fact that, you know, Anthropic because everyone, I think, across the board loves their models for different reasons, regardless of sort of your philosophical bent about the team that's building them, you know, they have great technology.
所以，Palantir、亚马逊，还有其他许多公司都在使用Anthropic的服务，也许政府根本没意识到Anthropic本身有多深入地整合在这些系统中，就像我们之前说的，不可能一夜之间就替换成其他前沿模型。
And so the fact that Palantir and then Amazon, obviously, and a bunch of others have used Anthropic services, like maybe the government just wasn't savvy enough to know just how integrated Anthropic itself was and that they can't just, again, like we were talking about, swap it out overnight for everyone makes, you know, frontier models.
我们可以用OpenAI，可以用Google，可以用任何一家。
We can use OpenAI, we can use Google, we can use anyone.
我们随便找个人替代就行了。
Let's just get someone else in there.
但事情没那么简单。
It's like, it's not going to be that simple.
所以我认为，所有这些因素叠加起来，正好赶上了上周末那些攻击事件的发生，感觉就像情绪已经达到了临界点。
And so I think, you know, all of these things sort of coming to a head leading up to the situation that we're talking about with the attacks last weekend, it just feels like there is a boiling point.
而且，也许Emile和其他一些人曾经考虑过一些可以施加影响的切入点。
And again, there's maybe some points of leverage that Emile and some others like thought about.
而且，我们甚至还没提到特朗普的那条推文。
And obviously, we didn't even talk about the Trump tweet.
他发推文，基本上是想彻底终结我们所熟知的Anthropic，说我们不再和他们合作了。
He tweeted like, you know, to basically try to to, you know, end Anthropic as we know it, you know, saying that like, we're we're done dealing with them.
祝你们未来一切顺利。
You know, best of luck with whatever you do.
我们不再和你们合作了，我们的所有合作伙伴也不再和你们合作。
We're not working with you anymore, and none of our partners are working with you.
显然，政府与谷歌、亚马逊以及其他所有公司都有合作关系。
And obviously, the government has partnerships with Google, with with every with Amazon, with everyone else.
这感觉像是对Anthropic本身可能构成生存威胁。
And it's like, you know, it felt like it was an existential potentially threat to to Anthropic itself.
因此，这件事背后有太多层面在交织。
And so there's so many layers going on into this.
而且，每天的报道都在不断揭示出更多需要梳理的层面。
And obviously, the reporting every single day comes up with more and more layers to it to unravel.
更奇怪的是，这一切正在 unravel 的同时，实际的攻击却在进行。
And it's just weird to think that, again, all this is unraveling while there's actually attacks going on.
疯狂。
Crazy.
是的，简直荒谬。
Like, yeah, insane.
还有杰克·沙纳汉将军，他并不支持科技行业中的‘觉醒’派别。
There's general Jack Shanahan, who's no friend to the sort of woke wing of the the tech industry.
他是‘马文计划’背后的将军，这个计划曾引发谷歌员工的反抗，是谷歌与美国国防部之间的合作项目。
He's the general behind the Maven program that, you know, Google Google employees rebelled against, was a partnership between Google and the Department of Defense.
你可能会以为他支持国防部的立场，但他并没有。
He said you might expect him to be sympathetic to the Department of War's position, he's not.
他说，我同情 Anthropic 的立场。
He says I'm sympathetic to Anthropics' position.
任何当前形式的大型语言模型都不应被考虑用于完全致命的自主武器系统。
No LLM anywhere in its current form should be considered for use in fully lethal autonomous in a fully lethal autonomous weapon system.
尽管宣传甚嚣尘上，前沿模型在国家安全场景中尚未做好实战准备。
Despite the hype, frontier models are not ready for prime time in national security settings.
现阶段过度依赖它们无异于自取灭亡。
Overreliance on them at this stage is a recipe for catastrophe.
大规模监控美国公民？
Mass surveillance of US citizens?
算了吧。
No thanks.
这似乎是一个合理的第二条红线。
Seems like a reasonable second redline.
就这些。
That's it.
这两个是致命的障碍。
Those are the two showstoppers.
把Anthropic当成靶子能吸引爆炸性新闻，但最终所有人都会输。
Painting a bullseye on Anthropic garners spicy headlines, but everyone loses in the end.
这本不该变成一场公开的争执，本应私下低调处理，我一直在纳闷，双方为何会对使用条款产生如此大的误解。
This should never have been such a public spat, should have been handled quietly behind the scenes scratching my head over why there was such a misunderstanding on both sides about terms and conditions of use.
在模型匆忙上线的过程中，某些地方出了严重的问题。
Something went very wrong during, the rush to roll out the models.
让理性与理智占上风吧。
Let reason and sanity prevail.
我的意思是，这个观点看起来相当合理。
I mean, that seems like a pretty reasonable take.
确实如此。
It does.
但再说一次，我认为这可能是马杜罗局势的连锁反应——政府早有预感，知道即将陷入这种局面，因此不希望此事被曝光。
But, again, I think that maybe it was a trickle down effect of the Maduro situation coming into this knowing that the government knowing that they're going into this situation and not wanting to you know, for this to come up.
比如说，这些攻击一开始，Anthropic 就得知他们的模型被 Palantir 之类公司使用了，于是立刻发起一场针对政府的大规模公关行动。
Like, say that the these attacks started and Anthropic got wind that their models were being used via Palantir or whatnot, and, you know, they just start to raise, like, this giant PR campaign against against the government for doing that.
你可能会说，这反而会反噬他们，确实有可能，但谁又能确切知道在这种情况下事情会如何发展呢？
Now you might say that that would backfire against them and it could have, but it's sort of a who knows how it would have exactly played out in that case?
但我只是在设想，政府在这里到底在想什么，为什么要提前介入这件事。
But I'm just trying to game through, like, what the government was thinking here in terms of, like, why engage this ahead of time.
再说一遍，要么是他们视此为在之前制约Anthropic的筹码，他们知道可以借此获得更多的东西，或许认为能从达里奥那里争取到更多利益；或者，他们只是想为自己铺路，以防将来真的要推进并使用这些模型时出现状况。
Again, either it's that they viewed it as a point of leverage over Anthropic leading up to this that they knew that they could they could get maybe they thought that they could get more of what they wanted out of out of Dario leading up to this or, again, that they wanted to sort of cover themselves for if and when they went forward with this and and using these models.
但你又提到了其他方面，也就是说，这里涉及多重层面。
But, again, you point to the other stuff, which is, you know, there's there's the multilayers here.
这不仅仅是战争推演之类的场景。
It's not just war game scenarios and things like that.
还包括大规模监控，而这显然是Anthropic所关心的。
It is the mass surveillance stuff, which obviously Anthropic cares about.
你很难找到有人会站在对立面。
And you would be hard pressed to find people who would be on the other side of that.
对吧？
Right?
就像你提到的将军的评论，大多数人其实都持这种观点——当然不是所有人，但我想很多人会站在这一边。
Like, to your point on on the general's comments, like, everyone sort of is on this not everyone, of course, but, like, a lot of people I think would be on the side.
但到目前为止，政府对此的反对立场是：我们只是不希望Anthropic对任何事情拥有事实上的决定权。
But the government's pushback against that, at least to date, has been like, we just don't want Anthropic to have de facto say over anything.
他们并不是在说，我们想要大规模监控美国民众，他们会说，法律已经禁止了这种行为。
It's not like that they're saying like, we want to mass surveil the American populate, and they would say like, the laws are already in place against that.
当然，所有这些事情都存在灰色地带。
Like, obviously, there's gray areas with all of this stuff.
但他们的立场就是：我们不认为一家公司应该对我们在各种情况下的行动拥有事实上的发言权。
But like, they just their stance is we do not think that a company should have a de facto say over what, you know, what we would do in situations.
而且，我们并不打算对美国进行大规模监控，但这些确实是滑坡效应，这正是Anthropic会提出的观点，我猜是这样。
And again, we're not gonna the plan is not to mass surveil The US, but again, these are they're slippery slopes, which is what Anthropic would argue, I would assume.
因此，你们可以在这类问题上反复争论，不断来回拉扯。
And so you could just go back and forth and continually will go back and forth over those issues.
对，我仍然认为他们本该达成协议，但他们没有。
Right, and I would still hold that they should have come to a deal, but they didn't.
所以现在的问题是，接下来会发生什么？
And so now the question is what happens next?
正如我之前提到的，五角大楼已将Anthropic列为供应链风险，据我理解，这意味着在六个月期限过后，任何联邦政府机构都不能与Anthropic合作。
So as I mentioned earlier, the Pentagon has labeled Anthropic a supply chain risk, which as I understand it means no federal government agency can work with Anthropic after this six month deadline.
不仅如此，与政府合作开展特定合同工作的私营公司也不能使用Anthropic的服务来完成这些工作。
Not only that, private companies working with the government on certain contracting work cannot use Anthropic for that work.
所以，举个例子，如果你是波音公司，你可能不希望工程师在政府项目中使用一种模型，而在商业项目中使用另一种模型。
So, by the way, like if let's say you're a Boeing, you may not want to have a certain model that your engineers use for, you know, government work and a different model that they use and maybe for commercial work.
你希望实现标准化。
You wanna have standardization.
因此，这对Anthropic来说可能是一个巨大的打击，不仅仅是它与五角大楼那笔2亿美元的合同，如果五角大楼真的实施这一认定，这可能带来数十亿甚至上百亿美元的损失。
So this is a potentially very big hit for Anthropic, not just the $200,000,000 contract that it had with the Pentagon, but this is a potential billion dollar, multibillion dollar hit if the Pentagon does go through with this designation.
你同意吗？
Would you agree?
哦，我完全同意。
Oh, I totally agree.
正如你所说，这不仅仅是合同本身的问题。
It's it's not just, as you said, the contract itself.
这还涉及到连锁反应和失去这一认定后更广泛的后果。
It is the the trickle down effects and the broader ramifications of if they lose that distinction.
而且，正如你所说，它可能仅仅只是……是的。
And it might and, again, like, it might just yeah.
这会对新签署的合同产生寒蝉效应。
It puts a chilling effect on new contracts that are signed.
对吧？
Right?
因为这会让其他公司考虑：万一我们将来也想接政府合同呢？
Because it's like, what if some other company is thinking about, like, oh, we might do a government contract one day.
正如你提到的，我们是宁愿只用一个模型来完成所有工作，还是真的需要在接政府合同时把Anthropic换成OpenAI？
And to your point of, like, would we rather just use one model, like, you know, to sort of do all of our work or would we really wanna have to swap out Anthropic for OpenAI if if we do go forward with this government contract?
说到这点，我认为你听到的两种观点确实存在，后续报道也显示，他们仍在讨论如何重新让这件事可行，至少为了其他目的。
And to that point, like, I do think that the two sides you you hear, you know, there's been subsequent reporting that, like, there's still some talk that they wanna, you know, figure out how to make this work again for nothing else.
也许在还有这六个月窗口期的情况下，他们仍会继续使用Anthropic的模型，而这六个月肯定会非常紧张，会发生很多事。
Maybe if if we still have this six month window, like, where they're gonna be using the Anthropic models, like, you you the six months are probably going to be pretty intense in terms of what's going down
令牌的数量。
A of tokens.
从战争的角度来看。
From, you know, the war perspective.
是的。
Yeah.
正在使用大量令牌。
A lot of tokens being used.
所以他们很可能想设法解决这些问题。
And so they probably do wanna find a way to hash things out.
因此，显然希望理智的人能占上风。
So, like, the hope obviously is that cooler heads prevail.
也许当这波攻击的初期浪潮过去后，希望他们能再次坐下来，像我们之前讨论的那样，敲定法律条款和具体的后续方案，因为没错，如果他们真的被逐出美国政府，这对Anthropic来说是坏事。
Maybe once this initial wave of of the of this, you know, these attacks are are sort of behind us, hopefully, that they can, you know, sit down again and maybe hash out the legalese as we were talking about and, like, the exact wording of, like, how to go forward with this because, yes, it's it's bad for Anthropic if if they get ripped out of the US government as they're talking about.
对。
Right.
我们还应该指出，供应链威胁通常并不针对国内公司。
And we should say that the supply chain threat is not something that's typically used for domestic companies.
对吧？
Right?
它通常是，比如，
It's typically, like,
当存在时，对。
when there's Right.
这是中国的。
It's Chinese.
就像所有针对华为和中国公司的那些威胁一样，现在这种情况发生真是令人惊讶，这正是当前所有这一切的背景。
It's like all the threats that were used against Huawei and all the Chinese companies, and it's wild that this is and that's like so it's the the sort of backdrop behind all of this right now.
我之前提到过，但很多人都注意到了这一点。
I noted this earlier, but, you know, a number of people have seen this.
比如，Claude 现在已经是 App Store 的第一名了，这真让人惊讶。
Like, Claude is now the number one app in the App Store, which is wild.
而且这是第一次
And it's For the first
有史以来。
time ever.
明显与其中一些有关。
Very clearly related to some of this.
是的。
Yeah.
对吧？
Like right?
比如，显然它一直表现不错。
Like, it's not just that obviously, it's been doing well.
Anthropic 凭借新推出的 Opus 模型以及 CoWork 和 Cloud Code 等产品表现良好。
Anthropic's been doing well with the new with the new Opus models that have rolled out and and CoWork and Cloud Code and whatnot.
但无论如何，这其中一些确实是一种道德姿态。
But, like, some of this is certainly, you know, virtue signaling if nothing else.
对吧？
Right?
比如，人们都说，哦，是的，我们想站在那些反对政府大规模监控的AI公司一边，至少在新闻头条上是这样。
Like, people are saying like, oh, yeah, we want to be on the side of the AI company that is pushing back against the government that's trying to mass surveil or or in the headlines at least.
对吧？
Right?
就像，这正是它被呈现的方式。
Like, that's the way that it's being portrayed.
那谁
And who
让你想起了谁？
does that remind you of?
十年前的蒂姆·库克。
Tim Cook ten years ago.
十年前零一个月，他发了一封备忘录，表示反对联邦调查局，而苹果公司此后十年基本上都利用了这一点。
One month ten years and one month ago was the the time that he sent that memo out about, standing up to the FBI, and Apple's basically capitalized on that for the last decade.
是的。
Yeah.
所以，你知道，Anthropic 是否在采用类似的策略？
And so, you know, is Anthropic running a similar playbook to that?
我的意思是，也许目前并不明确，至少没有开展公关活动。
I mean, maybe not explicitly, at least right now, like not doing PR campaigns.
那样做现在会显得相当不合适，你知道的，品味不佳。
That would be pretty, you know, not in great taste to do that at the moment.
但即便如此，Claude 的崛起和人们认为 Anthropic 正在塑造为那个‘有道德的’AI公司，这之间显然并非毫无关联。
But still, like, again, it doesn't seem like it's completely unrelated that Claude is shooting up and people and they're sort of thinking of that this might be Anthropic is positioned as the AI company that's going to be the moral one.
而且，你知道，这本身又是一个充满争议的话题。
And, you know, that's a whole, obviously, hornet's nest of a of a topic as well.
没错。
That's right.
我来发表一下我的观点：这种供应链风险的威胁根本从未真正发生过，也永远不会产生实际影响。
I will give my hot take here, which is that this supply chain risk threat is never, never manifests, just never takes that takes effect.
这又是一个六个月的期限。
Again, it's a six month deadline.
我们已经多次看到美国政府设定六个月的期限。
We've seen six month deadlines a lot from the US government.
这通常与TikTok有关。
Often it's been around TikTok.
嘿，我们六个月后就封禁TikTok。
Yo, we'll ban TikTok in six months.
是的，我们会再延长六个月。
Yeah, we'll extend it for another six months.
如果Anthropic对政府至关重要，那么他们就会继续使用它，延长或撤销这项规定，或者它在法庭上站不住脚。
Anthropic is this pivotal for the government, then they will just continue to use it and extend this or rescind it or it won't hold up in court.
所以这是我的第一个大胆观点。
So that's hot take one.
但另一方面，我已经听到一些政府承包商的大公司传出风声，他们可能会提前将Anthropic从工作流程中移除，或者至少正在认真考虑这么做，因为他们不想赌这项规定会被延长。
The other side of it though is I've already heard some rumblings from government, like big companies that are government contractors, that they will preemptively take Anthropic out of their workflow, or at least are highly considering it, because they don't want to bank on the fact that this will get extended.
所以，即使这不会完全实施，我也预计这会对Anthropic在这些私营公司中的处境造成影响。
So even if this isn't gonna go through completely, I do anticipate that that it will hurt Anthropic when it comes to these private companies.
我同意你的观点，但我也想说，我们之前讨论过的那个观点——即双方的人员彼此不和——也不应完全忽视，对吧？
I agree with you, but I would also just say, like, I wouldn't fully discount the notion that we talked about already, but that these two sides just don't like each other from the personnel involved, right?
所有迹象似乎都表明了这一点。
Like every indication seems that way.
那么，他们能否跨越特朗普政府与达里奥之间的积怨呢？
And so like, are they going to be able to get past sort of the grudge between the Trump administration and Dario, basically?
还是说需要一个中间人来某种程度上缓和这种矛盾？
Or is there some intermediary that has to come in to sort of assuage that in some ways?
因为，是的，就像TikTok事件和其他一切一样，你知道的，那些 taco 之类的事情。
Because, yeah, like the TikTok thing and everything else, like, you know, the sort of the taco stuff.
对吧？
Right?
就像特朗普总是对他威胁过的事情退缩并反悔一样。
Like, Trump always chickens out of, like, the things that he threatens and goes back upon.
这是另一个这样的情况吗？
Is this another one of those?
而且again，感觉是的，它很可能就是这样，除非他们认为这样做是为了表达一些更哲学性、高层次的观点，比如所谓的‘觉醒企业’，或者那些与美国公众和选民利益不一致的企业。
And again, it feels like, yes, it probably will be, except if they view it like that they wanna make a sort of, you know, makes make some sort of points about of more philosophical points and high level point about, you know, quote unquote, woke companies or companies that are that are misaligned or or that they view as misaligned with sort of the American public and the electorate and all that.
而且，由于这个原因，他们可能会更加固执己见。
And, you know, they may dig in their heels a little bit more because of that.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为塔可确实实施了关税政策，但也许在伊朗这件事之后，会变得更难了
I I do think Taco really did apply, with the tariffs, but maybe after this Iran thing, it's gonna be tougher for
那个，是的。
that Yeah.
这个标签会贴得更牢。
It's label to stick.
是的，是的。
Yeah, yeah.
展开剩余字幕（还有 322 条）
也许介入的中间人是萨姆·阿尔特曼？
Maybe the intermediary that comes in is Sam Altman?
或者也可能不是。
Or maybe not.
我的意思是，他直接就插进来了。
I mean, he he swooped right in.
这是来自《纽约时报》的报道。
This is from the Times.
你知道，当这些与Anthropic的讨论陷入僵局时，埃米尔·迈克尔手中还握着一张王牌。
You know, as these discussions were breaking down with Anthropic, Emile Michael had an ace up his sleeve.
他私下里一直在与竞争对手OpenAI敲定一个替代Anthropic的方案。
On the side, he had been hammering out an alternative to Anthropic with its rival OpenAI.
五角大楼和OpenAI之间已经达成了一个框架。
A framework between the Pentagon and OpenAI had already been reached.
OpenAI的阿尔特曼先生接到迈克尔先生的电话，讨论他们公司的一项交易。
Mister Altman of OpenAI got a call got on a call with mister Michael to discuss a deal for his company.
当天之内，他们就起草了框架。
Within the day, they had drafted the framework.
OpenAI 同意了五角大楼的要求，即其人工智能可用于所有合法用途，但也协商保留了在系统中设置技术防护措施的权利，以符合其安全原则。
OpenAI agreed to the Pentagon's requirement that its AI could be used for all lawful purposes, but it also negotiated the right to put technical guardrails on its system systems to adhere to its safety principles.
周五晚上10点，当Anthropic的律师开始起草针对五角大楼的诉讼时，Altman先生正与Michael先生通电话，敲定OpenAI与国防部协议的细节。
At 10PM on Friday, as Anthropics lawyers began working on a lawsuit against the Pentagon, mister Altman was on the phone with mister Michael finalizing the details of OpenAI's deal with the Department of Defense.
随后，Altman先生在社交媒体上发布了这项协议的消息。
Mister Altman then posted the news of the agreement on social media.
周六，Altman邀请人们在X平台上就这笔交易向他提问，因为OpenAI因突然介入而面临舆论反弹。
On Saturday, Altman invited people to ask him questions on X about the deal as OpenAI faced a backlash for swooping in.
他说，我们并不想对具体的军事行动发表意见，但我们非常希望运用我们的专业知识来设计一个安全的系统。
He goes, we don't wanna the ability to opine on a specific legal military action, but we do really want the ability to use our expertise to design a safe system.
基本上是一样的。
Basically, the same.
这与Anthropic未能与五角大楼达成的协议非常相似。
Very similar deal, to the one that Anthropic could not agree on with the Pentagon.
你对OpenAI在这整个事件中的角色有什么看法？
Your thoughts on OpenAI's role in this whole situation?
很经典，我想？
Classic, I guess?
我的意思是，这100%是可以预见的。
I mean, this could a 100%, this could have been predicted.
对吧？
Right?
你看，你看到了机会。
Like, you, you see you see the opening.
萨姆·阿尔特曼看到了这个机会。
Sam Altman sees the opening.
萨姆·阿尔特曼会抓住这个机会，立刻打电话给埃米尔·迈克尔，把他叫到线上，想办法迅速介入，不仅可能拿下所有这些合同，而且显然他还在试图将自己塑造为和平调停者的角色。
Sam Altman's gonna take that opening, and he is going to to immediately ring up Emil Michael and get get him on the get him on the line and figure out a way to sort of swoop in there and not only potentially take over all these contracts, but also, obviously, he's positioning he's trying to position this as, like, they are the peace broker here.
对吧？
Right?
也就是说，他们才是那个通过达成自己的协议来弥合Anthropic与美国政府之间分歧的人，为未来达成新协议铺平道路。
Like, that they are the ones who are who are going to sort of iron out these differences between Anthropic and the US government by cutting their own deal that paves the path to sort of do a new deal going forward.
但我认为，如果最终是他们而不是Anthropic拿到了所有这些合同，他们也不会介意。
But I think that they wouldn't mind if, say, they got all those contracts instead of Anthropic got all those contracts going forward as well.
所以，你知道，这部分可能被忽略了。
And so, you know, that part was maybe left out.
但他们才是和平调解者，他们会介入进来，让一切变得顺利——再说一遍，这一切都太可预见了，连随之而来的反弹也早有预兆。
But but they're the peace broker, and and they're gonna come in here and and make everything I mean, again, this was so predictable, and it was also predictable, the backlash to it.
对吧？
Right?
因为，谁会相信，两个在台上连手都不愿意牵的死对头，居然会如此大力地帮助对方呢？
Because, like, no one believes that, like, two blood rivals that won't hold hands on stage at a at an event are going to you know, one is going to help out the other in a major way.
不过，公平地说，萨姆·阿尔特曼可能从宏观层面认为，是的，我们应当采取一个更贴近Anthropic所倡导立场的立场，至少在最高层面上是这样。
Now, to be fair to Sam Altman, like, he might think at a high level, like, yeah, I think we should probably take a stand on this that's more in line with what Anthropic is trying to project, at least at the highest level.
但归根结底，我们还是会以对业务有利的方式来做这件事。
But still, we're going to do that in a way that's good for the business at the end of the day.
所以，你知道，这两件事很可能都是真的。
And so, you know, both things can probably be true.
但再说一次，这件事的表象确实不太好，不过呢，这也早就在预料之中。
But again, the the optics around this are just not great and, you know, again, to be expected there.
就在这一切发生的时候，我收到一条短信，说萨姆提到过，我们不希望Anthropic无法与政府合作。
I got a text as this was all unfolding where Sam had said something like, we don't want Anthropic to, you know, not be able to work with the government.
有人给我发了这条短信，说：‘看来OpenAI对Anthropic的态度真的变了。’
And someone sent me this text like, oh, looks like OpenAI is really changing their tune on Anthropic.
我当时就想：我不这么认为。
And I was like, I don't think so.
等等看吧。
Wait and see.
结果他们果然出现了。
And there they were.
这对OpenAI来说可能是一笔非常有利可图的交易，尤其是如果这件事真的能成的话。
Could be could be a potential very lucrative deal for OpenAI, and especially if this thing goes through.
顺便说一下，OpenAI 正处于一个大力强调企业市场的年份，他们可能趁机拿下远不止这一份合同的更多业务。
And OpenAI, by the way, the middle of a year where they're really emphasizing enterprise, they could potentially swoop in and get much more than just that one contract.
我想再补充最后一点，因为我今天在回顾时，像往常一样，想看看这些 AI 公司的股权结构数据。
I would just one last thing I would add to this because I was going over it today, trying to look through some of the numbers for ownership stakes as I like to do as like a hobby of these these AI companies.
根据我们已知的 Anthropic 股权结构，显然有谷歌和亚马逊，现在微软也入局了，还有英伟达。
Given the ownership stakes in Anthropic from that we know, obviously from Google and Amazon, but now Microsoft bought in, right, famously, and NVIDIA too.
所以，别小看这些因素，尤其是像亚马逊和谷歌这样本身就有大量政府合同的公司。
And so, you know, don't necessarily underplay those elements to it well, especially someone like Amazon, right, who has lots of government contracts as well and Google too.
如果他们能介入其中，充当一个中间人，比如说：
If they can sort of step in and be a bit of an intermediary here and say, you know, like, look.
好吧。
Cool.
我们得先暂停一下。
We gotta pause on this.
我们可以一起合作。
Like, we can all work together.
我们都能和谐相处。
We can all get along.
你们可以找到一种方式，让双方都能学会如何使用这些模型。
We you can figure out how to use these models in ways that both sides sort of figure out.
因为再次强调，如果这一切都被彻底拆解，这些大公司自己的业务也会受到冲击。
Because again, like, it does ding also their businesses, those big players, if if all of this gets ripped out.
是的。
Yeah.
顺便说一下，亚马逊刚刚和OpenAI达成了500亿美元的投资交易。
By the way, mean, Amazon just did this $50,000,000,000 funding deal with OpenAI.
所以，你知道，首先是十五。
So, you know, it's fifteen first.
那件事有关联，但接下来是三十五。
That was related, but 35 next.
对。
Yeah.
所以也许他们只是说，好吧。
So maybe they they might just say, alright.
创造性破坏。
Creative destruction.
他们在对冲。
They're hedging.
他们总是在对冲。
They're always hedging.
所以不管怎样，他们都没问题，我想。
So so they're fine either way, I guess.
但确实如此。
But yeah.
太疯狂了。
Wild.
好吧。
Alright.
那么，亚马逊和OpenAI是否可能合作开发一款设备，以对抗苹果和谷歌的联盟？
So could Amazon and OpenAI work on a potential device together to go against the Apple and Google alliance?
苹果的AI设备布局进展如何？
And where is Apple's AI device bet going?
这就是我们回来后将继续探讨的内容，就在广告之后。
That's what we're all gonna where we will pick up when we come back right after this.
如果您的车队中有一位司机明天发生了事故，您能证明当时究竟发生了什么吗？
If a driver in your fleet got in an accident tomorrow, can you prove what actually happened?
如果没有视频记录，就很难说清楚了。
Without footage, it's much harder.
于是您的保险费率飙升，还得自己承担费用。
So your insurance rates spike and you're stuck paying for it.
因此，许多车队选择萨姆拉的AI驱动行车记录仪，它提供清晰的视频证据、实时警报以及帮助预防事故发生的培训工具。
That's why so many fleets choose Samsara's AI powered dashcams, clear video evidence, real time alerts, and coaching tools that help prevent accidents before they happen.
萨姆拉AI可将事故率降低近75%。
Samsara AI helps reduce crash rates by nearly 75%.
例如，丹佛市和县的虚假索赔减少了50%，整体安全事件减少了94%。
For instance, the city and county of Denver saw a 50% reduction in false claims against them and a 94% reduction in safety events overall.
这是每位运营经理都需要的可见性。
This is the kind of visibility that every operation manager needs.
别等到下一次事故发生才采取行动。
Don't wait for the next accident to take action.
前往 samsara.com/bigtech 申请免费演示，了解 Samsara 如何为您的运营带来可见性和安全性。
Head to samsara.com/bigtech to request a free demo and see how Samsara brings visibility and safety to your operations.
网址是 samsara.com/bigtech。
That's samsara.com/bigtech.
Samsara。
Samsara.
更智能地运营。
Operate smarter.
你想吃得更好，但你完全没有时间，也没有精力去实现。
You wanna eat better, but you have zero time and zero energy to make it happen.
Factor 并不要求你提前备餐或遵循食谱。
Factor doesn't ask you to meal prep or follow recipes.
它只是彻底解决了这个问题。
It just removes the entire problem.
只需两分钟，你就能吃到真正的食物，然后就完成了。
Two minutes, you get real food, and you are done.
还记得那次你想健康烹饪，却没时间的情况吗？
So remember that time where you wanted to cook healthy but just ran out of time?
你并不是在健康饮食上失败了。
You're not failing at healthy eating.
你只是在每晚多出三个小时这件事上失败了。
You're failing at having three extra hours of every night.
Factor 由厨师精心制作，由营养师设计，并直接配送到你家门口。
Factor is already made by chefs, designed by dietitians, and delivered to your door.
里面包含优质蛋白质、色彩丰富的蔬菜和健康脂肪。
Inside, there are lean proteins, colorful vegetables, and healthy fats.
这正是如果你有时间的话，会在家里做的那种食物。
It's the stuff that you'd make at home if you had the time.
还有一个专为力量训练和恢复设计的全新肌肉蛋白系列。
There's also this new muscle pro collection for strength and recovery.
你永远得到的都是新鲜食物，从不冷冻。
You always get fresh and never frozen food.
只需两分钟即可享用，无需准备、无需清洁，也无需耗费心力。
It's ready in two minutes, and there's no prep, no cleanup, and no mental load.
前往 factormeals.com/ Big tech 50 off，使用代码 Big Tech 50 off，即可享受首份 Factor 餐盒 50% 折扣，外加一年免费早餐。
Head to factormeals.com/ Big tech 50 off and use code Big Tech 50 off to get 50% off your first Factor box plus free breakfast for one year.
此优惠仅适用于使用该代码并购买符合条件的自动续订订阅的新 Factor 客户。
The offer is only valid for new Factor customers with the code and qualifying auto renewing subscription purchase.
让健康饮食变得简单，就选 Factor。
Make healthier eating easy with Factor.
我们回到《大科技播客》，今天邀请到的是 SpyGlass 的 MG Siegler。
And we're back here on big technology podcast with MG Siegler of SpyGlass.
你可以在 spyglass.org 上找到它。
You can find it at spyglass.org.
强烈建议注册并订阅它的通讯，这是我最喜欢的科技读物之一。
Highly recommend signing up for it, getting the newsletter, one of my favorite tech reads.
好的。
Alright.
MG，我们来聊聊换个话题，从刚才那场大风波说起。
MG, let's talk a little bit about switching gears from this big blow up.
是的。
Yes.
五角大楼。
A Pentagon.
很到位。
Nice touch.
我们来谈谈 Siri。
Let's talk about Siri.
是的。
Yes.
或者更准确地说，我们来谈谈苹果可能正在开发的那些内置Siri或Gemini或Gemini增强版Siri的设备。
Or or or more, let's talk about the devices that Apple might be, developing that will have Siri or Gemini or Gemini powered Siri baked in.
最近，我们得知苹果可能会一次性发布三款设备。
So, recently, we've gotten news that Apple is going to release maybe three devices all at once.
智能眼镜、吊坠设备，以及具备更强AI功能的AirPods。
Smart glasses, a pendant, and AirPods with expanded AI capabilities.
我一直认为，我们俩其实都讨论过，今年对苹果来说将会是相当不错的一年。
I've thought that I think we've both discussed actually that this is gonna be a pretty good year for Apple.
当这个消息传出时，我立刻想到要去SpyGlass看看MG的看法。
And, when this news hit, I was like, I gotta go to SpyGlass to get MG's perspective.
你一开始说了一句非常令人惊讶的话，认为我们可能正看到苹果不仅没有在AI竞赛中落后，反而开始强势介入并发力。
And you started with a very surprising line at the beginning that maybe we're seeing the beginning of Apple, if not pulling ahead of the AI race, really starting to assert itself and make a strong play here.
谈谈你观察到的情况吧。
Talk a little bit about what you're seeing.
是的。
Yeah.
所以，我认为有几件事支持这个观点。
So this there's a few things that I think lead into fuel that idea.
这可以追溯到两年前苹果在WWDC上首次认真谈论人工智能的时候。
And, you know, this this dates back to, obviously, when when Apple at WWDC two years ago now was gearing up to to talk about AI in a real way for the first time.
显然，他们当时确实这么做了，但却失败了，因为他们无法兑现承诺。
And obviously, they ended up doing that and falling flat on their face because they couldn't execute upon it.
但现在，某种程度上，他们会不会重演同样的策略？只不过现在有了与谷歌在Gemini上的合作，能够真正构建这些模型，并以正确的方式实现和执行？
But now in a way, it's almost like, are they gonna run basically the same game plan, but now that they have the Google partnership for Gemini building these models, like, they can actually do it and execute on it execute on it in the right way?
我并不排除他们完全兑现所有承诺，并如你所说，将这些扩展到我们当前所进入的世界的可能性。
I wouldn't put it past them to sort of basically do that, do everything that they promised, and then to your point on these devices, extend it a bit to sort of the world that we're entering now.
我认为他们可能处于一个不错的位置。
I do think that they are potentially in a good position.
我们之前讨论过，如果我们相信模型正在变得商品化，而继续投入数十亿甚至数百亿美元训练大型语言模型的回报正在递减，那么下一步该是什么？
We've talked about it before that if we believe that models are getting commoditized and if there's going to be diminishing returns and sort of spending billions and billions hundreds of billions of dollars on training these large language models, like, what's the next sort of step after that?
如果你是苹果公司，并且相信这种情况属实——即他们并不需要自行训练庞大的前沿模型，而是可以像现在与谷歌合作那样进行合作，那么对他们而言，价值可能来自于他们如何实现这些技术。
And if you and if you're Apple and you believe that that is the case, that they don't need to train necessarily their own massive frontier models that they instead can partner as they're doing with Google on them, then the value might, you know, from their eyes, come from the way that they implement them.
显然，苹果的大部分价值一直来自于销售设备，也就是最好的设备，许多人认为这是面向公众的。
And obviously, a lot of their value has always been derived from selling devices, the best devices, you know, many would say to the to the public.
因此，如果他们能够创造出利用这一优势的设备，顺便说一句，所有这些技术中最关键的设备仍然是iPhone。
And so if they can create these devices that leverage that and by the way, like, do think the one key device to all of these things remains the iPhone.
我认为，你所看到的这三款被提及的设备——你提到的AirPods、眼镜和吊坠——根据报告，尤其是马克·古尔曼的报道，它们在某种程度上都将依赖于iPhone。
And I think that what you're seeing with these three devices that are being talked about that you put out there, you know, AirPods and and and glasses and a pendant, all of them, you know, per the report, per Mark Gurman's reporting, like, would likely be reliant to some degree upon the iPhone.
这正是苹果的独特优势所在。
And that's where Apple has this unique advantage.
你或许会说，谷歌和三星也具备类似的能力，因为它们也有智能手机。
You know, maybe you could say that Google and Samsung have similar capabilities because of their device their smartphones.
但苹果的优势非常独特，尤其是在Meta等试图打造这类新奇设备的公司，以及任何试图这么做的初创公司，甚至包括OpenAI在内，苹果都遥遥领先。
But Apple has has a very unique advantage in, you know, certainly ahead of the metas of the world and others that are trying to create these types of newfangled devices, let alone any startup that's trying to do so and OpenAI in that bucket.
苹果拥有一个独特的位置：iPhone遍布数十亿人的口袋，而如今，他们还将推出这些依赖iPhone作为至少在可预见未来核心处理器的设备。
Apple has this unique position where they have the iPhone in billions of pockets, and now they're going to have these devices that rely upon that as sort of at least for the foreseeable future as basically the central processing unit of those devices potentially.
因此，你可以闭上眼睛，不难想象一个苹果再次成为这个新人工智能时代设备领导者的世界。
And so you can close your eyes and not it's not too hard to imagine a world in which Apple is sort of the device leader again in this new AI world.
如果他们是设备领域的领导者，谁又能说他们不会成为整体的领导者呢？毕竟，每个人都是通过他们来与人工智能互动的。
If they're the device leader, who's to say they're not the overall leader, if they're the way that everyone's interfacing with AI.
好的。
Okay.
至少在性能方面。
At least on the power.
是的。
Yeah.
所以我想聊聊这个，因为最近我得到了第一个真正经常使用的可穿戴设备，是一款佳明手表，这不是苹果的产品。
So I want to talk through this because you know, I've recently I've gotten, like, the first wearable that I actually use frequently, which is this Garmin watch, which is not an Apple product.
没错。
Yep.
但它实际上和iPhone配合得非常好。
But actually works quite well with the iPhone.
有一个Garmin应用。
There's this Garmin app.
它主要都能连接。
It mostly connects.
只遇到过一次情况，我不得不重置整个设备，因为蓝牙连接断了。
Only had one situation where I've had to, like, reset the whole thing because the Bluetooth connection was off.
而这些AI设备基本上不会独立存在，不会形成自己的生态系统。
And and this is basically, like, these AI devices probably wouldn't exist in their own, like, their own ecosystem.
例如，当你想设置Meta眼镜时，你是用智能手机来设置的。
For instance, when you want to set up the MetaGlasses, you set it up with the smartphone.
但它仍然同步得很好，而且出现了一些技术，比如通过Wi-Fi同步数据，让这一切变得更加顺畅。
But it's still it syncs pretty well, and there's technologies that have, come out that lets you, like, sync data through Wi Fi that have made it much more seamless.
所以，如果iPhone要为苹果的AI设备带来优势，那它的互操作性——这一直是苹果的招牌——如何能比当前可穿戴设备的连接方式更好呢？
So if the iPhone is going to give an advantage to Apple's AI devices, how does its interoperability, which has always been Apple's calling card, how does that help, in a way that would be that much better than, you know, the ways that these current wearables are connected?
这是个好问题。
So it's a good question.
要确切知道这一点很难，毕竟我们还没看到苹果将推出什么产品，但我只想指出，诺斯和马克·扎克伯格一再抱怨，说他们无法获得与苹果产品完全理想的互操作性。
It's hard to know for sure without obviously seeing what Apple's gonna release out there, but I would just point to, you know, comments made by No Less and Mark Zuckerberg over and over again about complaining nonstop about how they don't get the full level of interoperability that they would like with with Apple's products.
对吧？
Right?
其中一些显然是在做姿态，因为这两方彼此并不喜欢对方。
And some of that is obviously just a little bit of posturing because those two sides don't like one another.
而且显然，Meta 并没有智能手机业务。
And obviously, Meta famously doesn't have a smartphone play.
所以，他们告诉监管机构：你们必须确保 iPhone 对第三方产品足够开放，比如我们正在开发的产品以及其他公司正在开发的产品。
And so, you know, they're telling regulators that, look, you need to make sure that the iPhone is as open as can be to to third party products like perhaps the ones we're making and others are making.
显然，欧洲非常支持这一观点。
And obviously, Europe is very open to that notion.
他们已经在多个地方颁布了相关法律，强制要求设备必须具备更高的互操作性，允许一些苹果可能不愿提供的底层系统集成。
They've they've basically installed some laws in various places to to make it so that they have to be more interoperable and allow thing low level system integrations that Apple may not want to.
但再说回你的问题，到底会有什么不同呢？
And again, your question though, like, what's going to be all that different?
从日常使用的层面来看，可能并没有太大不同，但我认为在底层还有很多容易被忽视的改进，比如电池续航时间稍长一些，因为苹果能够更紧密地优化其设备与iPhone之间的连接方式。
From the, you know, at the day to day level, it might not be all that different, but I do think that there's lots of low lying under under the hood stuff, you know, potentially as as as boring as, like, slightly longer battery life because Apple is able to, you know, more tightly hone the way that the connection is made between their device and the iPhone.
我认为还有各种各样的功能，比如后台同步、联系人同步等，这些在你日常使用时可能感觉不到有多大影响，但苹果确实拥有这些优势。
And I think there's all different sorts of things, background syncing, contact syncing, all this type of stuff that can come into play that you might not think on a day to day level as you're using it is like that big of a deal, but there are advantages that Apple has.
问题将在于，尤其是在欧洲，但我想最终在美国也会变得同样重要：这些优势在多大程度上构成了过大的竞争优势，从而损害了市场竞争。
And the question will become probably both certainly in Europe, but I think it will ultimately become true also in The US of, like, how much of that is too much of a competitive advantage and that they're hurting competition as a result of that.
未来，我们将会听到马克·扎克伯格，可能还有萨姆·阿尔特曼等人对此发表大量看法。
And that's we're gonna hear a lot from Mark Zuckerberg and probably some others, maybe Sam Altman as well about that going forward.
所以看起来，这些新产品似乎都会在同一时间发布。
So we're gonna have it seems like these are all coming at the same time.
智能眼镜、触控笔，还有增强版的AirPods。
Smart glasses, a pen, and, and these enhanced AirPods.
在这三者中，你认为哪一个最有可能取得最大成功？
What what do you give the chance of being the most successful of those three?
我
I
我想，它们各自的目的会略有不同。
would imagine I mean, I do think that they'll all be slight for slightly different purposes.
我认为价格会是关键因素，就像往常一样。
I would imagine price will be a key factor in that as it always is.
但如果非要我猜的话，我觉得AirPods可能会最成功，因为现在你我都在戴着它们。
But, like, if I had to guess, I would think that the AirPods would probably be the most successful just because you and I are wearing them right now.
人人都在外出时戴着它们。
Everyone's wearing them out and about.
它们已经是人们熟知的产品了，只要它们不因为加了摄像头之类的东西而显得完全滑稽可笑，我认为它们将继续是非常受欢迎的产品。
Like, they're a known thing As long as they don't look entirely ridiculous and different with some sort of camera sensor on them, I think that they will continue to be obviously a very popular product.
关键又回到了价格问题——如果加了摄像头，它们会贵多少？
It's a matter of, again, how much do they cost if they add a camera sensor to it?
它们会不会一下子涨到500美元？
Is it a $500 product all of a sudden?
它们能不能把价格保持在300美元左右？
Do they can they keep it, like, at $300 or something around there?
我认为这会非常重要。
I think that will matter a lot.
眼镜方面，显然Meta已经初步证明了市场存在。
Glasses, obviously, Meta has already sort of proven somewhat of a market.
但与苹果的其他产品相比，这不过是九牛一毛。
But relative to Apple's other products, like, it's a drop in the bucket.
规模并不大。
It's not very big.
你知道，Meta的Ray-Ban产品相比AirPods或Apple Watch等其他产品，并不算大热门。
You know, the Meta Ray Ban products are not huge compared to, say, AirPods or Apple Watch or anything else.
那么，苹果能将这个推向另一个层次吗？
And so can Apple take that to to another level?
我认为，我觉得它们会在这一领域取得成功。
I think that, you know, I think that they'll have success with it.
但你知道，我们现在已经开始看到，由于Meta声称要在眼镜中使用人脸识别，提前引发了反对声浪。
But, you know, we're now seeing already there's starting to be backlash preemptively against Meta because they're talking about using facial recognition within the glasses.
对吧？
Right?
事后添加。
Adding that after the fact.
所以我们突然又被抛回几年前谷歌眼镜的困境中。
And so we're all of a sudden right thrown right back into the glass hole situation from Google Glass a few years ago.
值得肯定的是，到目前为止，Meta一直避开了这种情况，但现在我们又被拉回了那种局面。
Meta has, to their credit, sort of avoided that to date, and now we're getting thrown back into that.
如果Meta某种程度上在破坏整个市场，让人产生‘我可不想戴任何带摄像头的眼镜’的想法，那苹果该如何应对呢？
And how does Apple deal with something like that if Meta is, you know, for lack of a better word, sort of poisoning the well or the market by thinking like, I don't want any glasses with any sort of camera on your face.
显然，苹果的产品在某种程度上也会具备这种功能。
And obviously Apple's product will have that to some degree.
至于那个吊坠本身，显然，那些曾参与该项目的前苹果工程师和设计师们最终没能成功，后来以跳楼价卖给了惠普。
And then the pendant itself, obviously, you think too humane and ex Apple engineers and designers who were working on that Didn't end up being successful, of course, and sold to HP and a fire sale, seems like.
但苹果拥有一个独特优势，那就是它本身拥有iPhone。
But Apple has that unique advantage of having the iPhone itself.
而且听起来，这可能更像是古尔曼所说的，作为iPhone未来的眼睛和耳朵。
And it sounds like this would maybe be more of a I think Gurman even said it was like an internal phrasing of it as the eyes and ears maybe of the of the iPhone going forward.
所以你戴着它四处走动，它会持续不断地观察周围的事物。
And so you wear it around, and it's constantly just looking at things.
不过，这又涉及隐私问题。
Again, this is a privacy thing, though.
但正如我们所讨论的，苹果在隐私方面所处的独特地位，可能比其他任何科技公司都更值得信赖。
But Apple's as we're, you know, talking about, Apple is in the the unique position to be more trusted than probably any other tech company certainly from a privacy angle.
所以，是的，这一切都构成了这个方案的组成部分。
And so, yeah, there's all those all those elements to it.
对。
Right.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为AirPods才是我的猜测。
I think the AirPods, that's my bet.
我认为我们将会在耳塞设备领域看到这些AI设备之间的竞争。
I think we're gonna see a battle of these AI devices in the in the earbuds space.
但你说得对。
But it does seem you're right.
就像，我们似乎注定要时刻被所有人拍摄，尽管我们实际上已经如此了。
Like, we're just kind of we are sort of doomed to just be videotaped by everybody at all, although we kind of already are.
所以，就我们现在戴着AirPods的样子来看，我一直很好奇，从纯粹的产品角度来看，他们到底会怎么实现这一点。
So I I still like like, looking at us, you know, right now wearing these AirPods, like, I've I've always been curious, like, how they're actually going to do that, though, from a pure pure product perspective.
我有胡子。
It's like, so I have a beard.
如果像有杆状设计，还内置摄像头，那它是只拍我的胡子，还是得设计得更突出一些？
If, like, there's stems, you know, feature the camera, like, does it just record my beard, like, looking forward, or do they have to stick out more than as a result?
那看起来会很滑稽。
And that will look ridiculous.
你知道，当AirPods刚推出时，大家都开玩笑说它们从耳朵里伸出来的样子有多滑稽。
You know, everyone joked when the AirPods first came out how ridiculous, you know, they thought they look because they're sticking out of your ears.
但最终，它们的设计非常简洁，你通常根本看不出来，人们很快就适应了这种样子。
But, like, ultimately, they're pretty streamlined, you can't really, you know, tell all that often, you know, when you're looking at people, and we got used to it very quickly.
但如果它们上面伸出摄像头，再加上之前有传言说不是普通的摄像头，而是红外摄像头，用来捕捉动作之类的东西，以帮助实现对不同设备的手势控制。
But if you got cameras sticking out of them, and then there was like talk where it wasn't like it wasn't necessarily camera cameras, but was more IR cameras and was used like, you know, to potentially capture motion and things like that to to help with gesture control of of different devices and things.
这对我来说就合理多了。
And that made a little bit more sense to me.
但我非常好奇，他们最终会怎么做。
But I am very curious, like, how they end up doing.
但还有传言说，他们会在手表上装一个摄像头，让你能像 Dick Tracy 那样，看着自己的手腕就能拍别人。
But there was also talk that they were gonna put a camera in the watch and that you would have, like, yeah, like, almost like a, you know, Dick Tracy style, like, camera that you would, like, shoot people with, like, looking at looking at your wrist.
所有这些都会创造出一种局面，迫使我们建立新的文化规范。
And and so all these things are going to create situations where you just need new cultural norms to come in.
苹果在这方面比其他任何公司都做得好，但也要承认，Meta 在 Ray-Ban 产品上表现也不错。
And, Apple has done much better than any other company, but to Meta's credit, they have done well with the Ray Ban so far.
没错。
That's right.
我认为这场竞争最终会落在哪个助手更优秀上，而Siri必须改进。说实话，现在说这个感觉就像在敲一具死马，但我们甚至都没怎么讨论过，因为这种情况太常见了——Siri又被推迟了，或者Siri里的某些功能又被推迟了。你之前写过一篇特别有趣的文章，说苹果在AI实现和战略上似乎遇到了重大问题，他们真该好好查一查。但这种情况就是不断发生。
And I think the battle will definitely fall on whose assistant is better and Siri has to get better I mean it's we we don't it feels like beating a dead horse at this point but we didn't even talk about it because it's so regular, that Siri got postponed again or features within Siri got postponed again you had a really funny funny piece about that you said it's almost like Apple's having some major issues with their AI implementation and strategy they should probably look into that But it just keeps happening.
对吧？
Right?
这种延迟一再发生，你开始逐渐失去信心，即使他们和谷歌有合作，你也不再相信他们能解决这个问题。
That that this keeps getting delayed and, you know, you start to lose faith over time even with the Google partnership that they're gonna be able to figure this out.
是的。
Yeah.
我一直以来都有点怀疑。
I was always, like, a little bit skeptical.
我的意思是，过去十五年我一直使用Siri，对它一直非常怀疑。
I mean, I've obviously been super skeptical of Siri over the past fifteen having used it over the past fifteen years.
但当他们宣布与谷歌合作时，我对最初的发布始终持保留态度，因为这就像我们刚才讨论政府问题时说的那样，他们到底要怎么做到呢？
But, like, when they announced the Google partnership, I was always a little bit skeptical of the initial rollout because it's like, how are they going to it's sort of what we're talking about with the government.
对吧？
Like, right?
你不能随便把这些东西换进去。
Like, you can't just swap these things in.
表面上看好像很简单，但实际上有很多底层的东西需要连接起来。
It may seem like it's it's that simple, but, like, there's a lot of, like, underlying things that need to be connected.
看看亚马逊就是个例子。
Look at Amazon for an example of that.
对吧？
Right?
你看他们花了多长时间才重新改造Alexa，让它能兼容Anthropic这样的模型以及后台使用的各种模型来升级Alexa。
Like, look how long it took them to to rework Alexa to be able to to work with things like Anthropix models and and all the models that they're using behind the scenes to sort of upgrade Alexa.
他们花了一年多时间，然后承诺了某些功能，却没能按时交付。
It took over a year, and then they promised something, and they couldn't deliver on the timing of it.
现在我们又看到了同样的情况。
And now we're seeing the same thing.
我们已经看到苹果身上发生了同样的事情。
We've seen the same thing play out with Apple.
要让所有这些小细节都到位，真的需要很长时间，因为苹果现在最不能承受的就是推出任何东西——哪怕只是测试版，或者任何面向用户的的服务，再搞砸一次。
It just takes a long time to get, like, all of the little pieces in place because the last thing Apple can afford to do right now is put something out there even in beta, I think, even in some sort of, you know, like, thing where it's any any forward facing, user facing service and just have it flop again.
那将会是致命一击，我认为他们那时不得不放弃Siri这个名字。
That would be just a death knell, I think, to they would have to change the Siri name at that point.
你可能会看到类似微软式的葬礼场景，哦，没错。
You would have, like, Siri we we might have the Microsoft style, like, funeral Oh, yes.
他们会举着棺材走在库比蒂诺的街道上，棺材里放着Siri，因为他们如果再失败一次，就必须彻底重塑品牌。
Where they would be, like, you know, walking down Cupertino with with a coffin and series in it because they would need a new a new branding if they fail one more time with this.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为现在早就该这么做了。
I think it's long past past time to do that.
亚马逊和OpenAI会是这里的竞争对手吗？
Could Amazon and OpenAI be the competition here?
我的意思是，我们之前休息前就讨论过，亚马逊打算投资500亿美元给OpenAI。
I mean, we talked about it before the break, but Amazon's gonna invest 50,000,000,000 in OpenAI.
当然，OpenAI 目前正在推进一个设备项目。
Now, of course, OpenAI has a device program underway.
苹果有，我的意思是，亚马逊有 Echo。
Apple has I mean, Amazon has the Echo.
我觉得，Alexa 其实已经相当不错了。
I think, Alex plus is actually already pretty good.
你能想象这会是那笔交易的一部分吗？
Could you see as part of that deal?
因为 OpenAI 将帮助亚马逊开发一些专用的 AI 技术，这也可能是其中的一部分。
Because OpenAI will be helping Amazon develop some of some specialized AI technology that this could also be part of a counter.
这可能会变成一场团队对决，OpenAI 和亚马逊对阵谷歌和苹果。
Could be a, like, team team battle, OpenAI and Amazon against Google and Apple.
是的。
Yeah.
我读到这些报道时，脑海里想到的就是这个。
That's sort of where my mind went when I was reading about these reporting.
再说了，五十亿美元。
Again, like $50,000,000,000.
是的，听起来像是分两笔投入，分别是15亿和35亿，但无论如何，亚马逊在自身正在裁员和削减开支的时候，仍投入了五百亿美元。
Yes, it's over like two tranches, it sounds like, you know, 15 and then 35, but still $50,000,000,000 Amazon is investing in a time when they're making cuts or famously doing layoffs.
对吧？
Right?
他们因为资本支出问题，一直被频频批评。
Like they're getting dinged left and right for their for their CapEx spend.
五十亿美元可不是小数目。
Like, dollars 50,000,000,000 is no joke.
他们这么花钱，显然是为了和OpenAI合作。
And they're spending that for a reason, obviously, with with OpenAI.
所以，我再次想到，这会不会是他们想把所有模型都内部化的一个巨大布局？现在很多人都在谈论编排，像Perplexity这样的公司正试图将业务转型为LLM之上的层，让用户无需操心该选哪个模型之类的问题。
And so you have to my mind again went to wondering, is this some sort of massive play to get sort of all of the models in house to There's a lot of talk right now about orchestration and the idea that like Perplexity and others are now trying to like move their businesses into being these layers on top of the LLMs to be able to do whatever you as a user shouldn't have to worry about which model picker and things like that.
你只需要告诉它你的需求，让服务自动为你挑选最合适的模型即可。
You should just let it say what you want and let a service pick the best one for you.
显然，这对亚马逊来说更难，因为正如你所指出的，他们自己开发了Alexa产品。
And obviously, that's harder with an Amazon because as you noted, they make their own product in in Alexa.
但考虑到他们与Anthropic的合作，以及现在又有了与OpenAI的合作，是否存在这样一种可能：他们在后台同时使用所有这些模型，从而能够对抗苹果和谷歌？因为在这两种情况下，用户都会得到谷歌的结果，因为他们都在使用Gemini。
But given that they have the Anthropic partnership and now given that they have the OpenAI partnership, is there a world in which they're using all of those models behind the scenes and sort of they can use that to counter both Apple and Google potentially where they say like, look, if you're using those products, you're only going to get in both cases, Google as a result, because they're both using Gemini.
但他们使用的是自己的内部模型。
But, you know, they're using their in house house models.
而如果你使用亚马逊、使用Alexa，未来你可能会同时获得Claude、ChatGPT和Alexa这三大模型的能力，甚至可能还有他们后续加入的其他模型。
Whereas if you use Amazon, if you use Alexa, maybe going forward, you know, you will have the power of Claude, you will have the power of ChatGPT, and you'll have the power of Alexa, all three, you know, on top of maybe some others that they add in there as well.
这其实也类似于他们在云计算领域所采用的策略。
And it's sort of a playbook that they've run right with the cloud in a way too.
对吧？
Right?
所以，他们认为你可以自行选择想用哪个模型，或者让我们从产品角度帮你选择最合适的那个。
So it's like they view it as like you can pick which which you want to use and or let us pick which you which you think we should use from a product perspective.
当然，目前还没有任何明确迹象表明这一定会发生，但我对此并不感到意外。
And so no no, you know, indications that that necessarily is gonna be what happens, but I wouldn't be shocked about that.
好的。
Okay.
在我们结束之前，我 definitely 想简要聊聊这个奈飞、华纳兄弟、派拉蒙的交易。
Before we leave, I definitely wanna talk briefly about this Netflix Warner Brothers Paramount deal.
你写过关于这个的内容。
You've written about it.
我们还没在节目中深入讨论过，但简要来说，奈飞原本同意收购华纳兄弟探索公司，后者拥有CNN和HBO，计划通过整合这些传统媒体资产，打造一个可能是未来流媒体巨头的公司。
We haven't talked about it on the show in-depth really yet, but the the cliff notes here was that Netflix had agreed to buy Warner Brothers Discovery, which has CNN and HBO, and was gonna build this sort of powerhouse streaming company that maybe the streaming company of the future by adding these old school assets.
奈飞显然在流媒体领域遥遥领先，没人能接近它的规模，这笔交易可能会进一步巩固它作为主导平台的地位。
Netflix is obviously in the lead, no one really comes close to it in streaming, so this might just have solidified it as the dominant, service.
它与华纳兄弟探索公司达成了协议。
It reaches a deal with Warner Brothers Discovery.
派拉蒙突然介入，说：不行。
Paramount comes in and says, nope.
我们想接手这笔交易。
We want to, make the deal instead.
我们没有得到公平的竞标机会，对方不断提出新的报价，直到最终两家公司决定由派拉蒙而非奈飞成为收购方。
We weren't given a fair chance to bid, and, just keeps throwing out these bids until it decides that it's going to end up, or the both companies decide that Paramount will be the buyer and not Netflix.
华纳兄弟探索公司将不得不向奈飞支付约30亿美元的分手费，而最终的交易金额将达到约1.1万亿美元，派拉蒙将以此价格收购华纳兄弟探索公司——而你知道，一年前这家公司的市值（包括Spyglass）仅为200亿美元。
Warner Brothers Discovery is gonna have to pay Netflix about a $3,000,000,000 breakup fee, and the final deal is going to be a $110,110,000,000,000 or so, that Paramount will pay for Warner Brothers Discovery whose market cap, as you know, in Spyglass was $20,000,000,000 a year ago.
所以，请谈谈你对这件事的看法以及它的影响。
So just give us the the your perspective on what happened here and what the implications are.
是的。
Yeah.
从表面上看，这无疑是华纳兄弟探索公司CEO大卫·扎斯拉夫的一次精妙操作，因为他成功地将一家如你所说、一年前市值还远低于当前报价的公司，变成了这笔巨额交易。
So it does seem like on one level, at the highest level, this is just a master a masterful job by David Zaslav, who's the CEO of of Warner Brothers Discovery because he was able to take a company, as you noted, that a year ago was a fraction of of what this offer is in terms of market cap and still is right now, and turn it into this offer.
他们基本上是通过先由派拉蒙提出一个远低于当前报价的初始要约来实现这一点的。
And they basically did that, you know, by at first, it was Paramount that came out with an offer, much lower offer than what these current offers are.
我记得最初是每股19美元，而现在最新的报价已经涨到了每股31美元。
So I believe $19 a share, and we're up to $31 a share now with the newest one.
我认为其中的变数在于奈飞的介入，因为奈飞显然是一家巨头，也是最大的媒体公司——如果你愿意这么称呼的话，它的市值大约是迪士尼的两倍。
And I think the wildcard there, you know, was Netflix coming in because Netflix was viewed as as a obviously a big player and the biggest sort of, if you wanna call it a media company, the biggest one, its market cap is roughly double that of Disney.
他们显然有资本在这样的交易中为所欲为，但过去从未做过类似的事情。
And so they obviously have the capital to be able to do whatever they want in a deal like this, but they had not historically done anything like this.
所以我认为，派拉蒙方面觉得他们进来时，从对方眼皮底下把这笔交易抢走了。
And so I think that, you know, Paramount basically felt like they came in and stole this from under their nose.
这里还有一个问题：这是否是大卫·扎斯洛精心策划的杰作，他或许早就知道Netflix对这笔交易的渴望不如派拉蒙强烈。
And there is a question of, was this the, you know, Masterstroke by David Zaslow sort of orchestrating this whole thing, knowing perhaps that Netflix that Paramount basically needed this more than Netflix did.
因此，他们故意抬高价格，迫使Netflix退出，从而让Netflix拿到30亿美元的纯现金补偿，这已经相当不错了，我都会接受。
And so they were going to drive up the price to make it so that Netflix would walk away with their $3,000,000,000 all cash consolation prize, which is a pretty nice I would take it out.
这个补偿金额差不多是他们一个季度的利润。
Offer to, yeah, it's about what they make in profit a quarter.
于是他们一次性就拿到了这笔钱。
And so they just got that in one fell swoop.
但即便如此，这笔交易还是来回反复了多次。
But still, yeah, this deal has has gone back and forth and back and forth.
现在Netflix一看到派拉蒙的报价就迅速退出了，看来Netflix确实很有纪律，值得称赞。
And now the fact that Netflix walked away relatively quickly once the Paramount offer came in, You know, kudos to Netflix for it seems like had good discipline.
他们不会陷入某种竞标战，超出自己的界限。
They weren't gonna get into some sort of bidding war and go outside of of their bounds.
但另一方面，我整体上为好莱坞感到遗憾，因为我觉得他们其实不喜欢这两笔交易，但我认为他们将因派拉蒙的交易而陷入比与奈飞合作更大的困境。
But also, like, I I'm just overall port sort of sad for Hollywood because I do feel like that they they didn't like either of these deals, but I think that they're gonna be in for a bigger world of pain with the Paramount deal than they would have been with Netflix.
我们可以谈谈，是的，奈飞在流媒体领域的主导地位之类的。
And we talk you know, you could talk about, yeah, the streaming dominance of Netflix and whatnot.
但在我看来，现实是这更多关乎未来的发展方向，而未来将是奈飞与YouTube以及其他一些关键玩家之间的较量。
But the reality, in my view at least, is that this is much more about, like, the future going forward, and the future is going to be Netflix versus YouTube and a few other, you know, key players.
我认为Prime Video也会参与其中，Disney+当然也是。
I think Prime Video will be in there, Disney plus obviously.
但关键是，这不仅仅是TikTok，而TikTok由于这次派拉蒙的结构变化，也有了新的所有者。
But, like, it's not just and TikTok and which has interesting new ownership given this this Paramount structure as well.
因此，这些所有参与者之间的较量，才是未来真正的战场。
And so all of these players in there is really the battle going forward.
我们谈论的是一个正在衰退的行业——电影放映业，这是我热爱的行业，但它并不是一个高速增长的产业。
And we're talking about, like, this decaying sort of industry that in in moviegoing, which is an industry I love, but it's not like a giant growth industry.
所以我们谈论的是这些玩家在争夺这些资产，感觉Netflix本可以成为一家被大型财团掌控了上百年的电影公司不错的避风港。
And so we're talking about, like, these players battling over these assets, and it feels like, you know, Netflix would have been a good safe haven for a for a studio that's, like, been owned by conglomerates for a hundred years.
这并不是什么新鲜事。
This isn't like a new thing.
每个人都感到害怕，因为我们现在身处科技时代，AI正在涌入这一切。
Everyone's all afraid because we're in the world of tech now and and AI is coming in all of this.
但我觉得，Netflix本可以成为这个情况下的一个相当不错的避风港。
But, like, Netflix would have been a pretty good safe haven, I feel like, for this.
而相反，我们只会得到两家工作室的直接合并，这将导致大量裁员，并带来一种漫长而残酷的衰退。
And instead, we're just gonna get a straight down the middle sort of combination of two studios, and that's just gonna be a lot of layoffs, and it's gonna be just this brutal sort of, you know, decline over a longer period of time.
没错。
Right.
我注意到，过去五天Netflix的股价上涨了26%。
And I'll note that Netflix is up 26 in the past five days.
显然，市场已经充分消化了这一消息，并认为：是的，你们没达成这笔交易可能是更好的选择。
So clearly the market has really digested this and said: Yeah, probably better that you didn't do the deal.
我本来觉得，把这些内容整合在一起可能不错，或许会很好。
I thought maybe it would be good, like maybe it would be nice to roll all this content up.
作为消费者，你当然不会高兴，因为选择变少了，但从商业角度来看，我理解奈飞为什么感兴趣。
Obviously as a consumer you're not happy about that because you have have less choices, but from a business perspective, I understand why Netflix was interested.
但显然，市场喜欢这个决定，大家都会继续向前走。
But obviously, different way, market likes it, and everyone will just move forward.
是的。
Yeah.
我们走着瞧吧。
We'll see.
但最终，这件事会带来大量后续影响，我认为这会从反垄断的角度发生，毕竟涉及到特朗普和埃里森之间的关系，还会有很多关于这类事情的听证会。
Until until, like, there's gonna be a lot of fallout from this, and I think it's gonna happen both both from, you know, the antitrust perspective because, you know, of the the relationship with with Trump and the Ellisons, and and there's gonna be a lot of different hearings on this type of stuff.
我认为这会持续多年，因为等到审批通过后，他们回过头来看，会问：当初批准是不是出于不太正当的理由？
And I think it'll play out over years and years because then they'll look back on it after it's approved and say, was it approved for, you know, less than above board reasons?
所以我觉得，未来很多年我们都会不断听到关于这件事的讨论。
And so I think we're going to just hear about this for years and years and years.
而现实是，这确实有点令人难过。
And the reality is it's like it is a bit sad.
感觉很明显，派拉蒙的策略是试图壮大自己，以与迪士尼+和奈飞等巨头竞争，但他们真的有可能成功吗？
It just feels like, you know, obviously Paramount's play is gonna be to try to bulk up to compete with the the Disney Pluses and the Netflixes of the world, but are they really realistically going to be able to do that?
也许如果他们能以某种方式利用TikTok，毕竟现在TikTok在很大程度上由甲骨文拥有，也许吧。
Maybe if they can leverage TikTok or something in some way, you know, now now owned in in no small part by Oracle, maybe.
但感觉这更像一个缓慢衰落的故事，最终他们还是会像以往一样，把内容本身出售给奈飞。
But, like, it it feels more like that this is a still a slow decay story, and and, you know, they'll just sell their their products ultimately, the the content itself to Netflix just as they've been doing.
好了，各位。
Alright, folks.
网站是spyglass.org。
The website is spyglass.org.
MG，和你交谈总是很棒。
MG, always great to speak with you.
我很高兴我们今天能有机会交流，尤其是经历了这样一个令人震惊的周末，新闻层出不穷，我们都还在努力消化，我很高兴我们能一起在这里探讨这些。
I'm so glad we got a chance to speak today, especially just, I mean, an incredible weekend of news that I think we're all still trying to wrap our heads around, and I'm I'm so glad we got a chance to digest it here together.
确实如此。
Indeed.
一如既往，亚历克斯，很高兴和你交谈。
Good as always, Alex.
好的。
Alright.
非常感谢。
Thank you so much.
感谢大家收听和观看。
Thanks everybody for listening and watching.
如果你还没有的话，能否在Spotify或Apple Podcasts上给我们打五颗星？这将极大地帮助播客触达新听众，从而帮助我们邀请更多嘉宾，这总是非常好的。
If you haven't, if you could rate us five stars on Spotify or Apple Podcasts, it will go a long way to helping the podcast reach new audiences, which would help us, you know, recruit guests, and that would always be great.
希望你们能这么做。
So hope you do that.
希望你们周一愉快，接下来的一周也顺利，我们周三会带着另一场新访谈回来。
Hope you have a great Monday and the rest of your week, and we'll be back here on Wednesday with another new interview.
我不太确定会是谁，但我们希望能更多地探讨一下Anthropic五角大楼事件。
I'm not quite sure who it will be, but we'll hopefully touch more on the Anthropic Pentagon saga.
再次感谢你的到来，我们下次再见于《大科技播客》。
So thank you again for being here, and we'll see you next time on big technology podcast.
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。