保罗·格雷厄姆谈雄心、艺术与人才评估

那时候我已经很自在了，背着滑翔伞从悬崖上跳下去完全不害怕。

So there's this intermediate point where I was comfortable, totally comfortable jumping off a cliff with a hang glider on my back.

开塞斯纳172的时候就有点儿紧张了，尤其是教练把引擎关掉，说：‘好了，你来着陆吧。’

Moderately comfortable flying a Cessna 172 where the instructor had just turned off the engine and said, okay, land it.

因为它的滑翔比其实跟滑翔伞差不多。

Because the glide ratio is actually similar to a hang glider.

但一想到要坐民航客机，我还是怕得要命。

And still afraid of getting on an airliner.

这说明人对恐惧的反应有多不讲道理。

That shows you how irrational these things are.

可当我终于坐上民航客机时，天哪，简直像进了宇宙飞船，跟之前飞的小飞机完全不是一回事。

But when I finally did get on an airliner, my God, it was like a spaceship compared to the planes I'd been flying.

那感觉太棒了。

It was fabulous.

完全打消了我的顾虑。

And it totally worked.

我对飞行的恐惧完全消失了。

My fear of flying was completely cured.

从这个过程中，你对创业和人才选拔有什么新的认识吗？

And what did you learn about startups and talent selection from that process?

说实话，要不是你这么一问，我压根没意识到自己学过这些。

Boy, if I learned anything, I hadn't considered it until this moment.

你可能已经掌握得很透彻了，只是还没说出来而已。

But you might have learned it quite well, just not articulated it.

我不确定。

I don't know.

你提的问题可真不容易回答。

You asked me these hard questions.

我都没时间好好想想这些。

I don't have time to think about them.

这跟我想不起来曾经有意识地用过那些经验，有关系吗？

Did that have anything to do with I don't think I've ever consciously used anything I learned there.

你觉得那些经历过类似过程的创始人，除了克服飞行恐惧之外，还有别的方面吗？

Do you see founders who go through a comparable process something other than flying?

我明白你的意思，接下来你是这么想的，对吧？

Oh, I get where you're at and here's how you what you

接下来你需要做的是。

need to do next.

很多技术出身的创始人特别讨厌去搞销售、去跟人打交道。

A lot of technical type founders hate the idea of doing sales and going and talking to people.

所以你可以告诉他们，直接去做这件事就行。

And so you can tell them, look, just go do this.

你知道的，过几个月他们也就习惯了。

And you know after a few months, they'll be used to it.

他们可能永远都不会喜欢这件事。

They may never like it.

我是说，要是让我自己现在去做，我肯定很讨厌，但至少他们能做到。

I mean, I would hate doing that myself now, but they can at least do it.

美第奇家族算得上是优秀的风险投资人吗？

Were the Medici good venture capitalists?

还是说你更认可佛罗伦萨的行会？

Or do you give greater credit to the Florentine guilds?

我也不清楚。

I have no idea.

我也不清楚。

I have no idea.

我得再多了解一些关于……

I need to learn more about the

行会会举办比赛。

The guilds would run competitions.

美第奇家族则是直接挑他们喜欢的人。

The Medici would just pick the people they liked.

两者各有各的长处，但显然代表的是两种不同的模式。

They both have good records in different ways, but obviously they're competing models.

你是经济学家。

You're an economist.

你读过不少这方面的书。

You've read books about this stuff.

我不知道。

I don't know.

我不知道。

I don't know.

我对美第奇家族能懂多少？

What do I know about the Medici?

我觉得美第奇家族被高估了，行会才更重要，不过这观点有争议。

I think the Medici were overrated and the guilds were more important, but that's a debatable view.

你也可以认为，他们可能都被高估了。

You could argue They either could well

被高估了。

be overrated.

他们才是那个被大肆宣传的群体，所以我根本说不清楚。

They were the ones who had all the publicity, so I have no idea.

你在RISD和佛罗伦萨的经历，对你的软件设计和人才选拔观念产生了什么影响？

Your time spent at RISD and in Florence, how did it alter or affect your thoughts on software design and talent selection?

要是你问我这些经历怎么改变了我对绘画的看法，

Man, if you asked how it affected my ideas about painting,

那我倒是可以回答一下。

I could Well, would you give an answer?

佛罗伦萨那地方，讲的全是人才筛选。

Florence was all about talent selection.

你想想，在那么小的一个地方，怎么会有那么多人都成了大师还名扬天下？

Because how many people in quite a small area became both great and famous?

是的。

Yeah.

有一件事我记得特别清楚，当时我坐在佛罗伦萨，突然意识到自己来错了地方。

One thing, I remember there was one moment I was sitting in Florence and I realized I had gone to the wrong place.

我当时在研究佛罗伦萨的历史。

I was studying Florentine history.

周围的建筑全都环绕着你。

All the buildings are right around you.

我突然意识到，1450年的佛罗伦萨简直就是纽约。

I found myself thinking, damn, Florence was New York City in 1450.

那时候人口有六万。

That was 60,000 people.

是的。

Yeah.

所以那会儿艺术才这么发达。

That's why it was good at art.

并不是佛罗伦萨人有什么特别的艺术天赋或独特的审美观。

It wasn't some weird Florentine thing about art or some special Florentine sense of aesthetics.

他们只是当时最前沿的城市。

They were just the most progressive city.

真可惜，左翼激进派把这个词给占了。

It's really too bad that the far left has hijacked that word.

这个词本来用得特别好。

It's such a good word.

也许我们还能把它夺回来。

Maybe we can get it back.

但我记得当时就觉得，我来错地方了。

But it was but I remember thinking, I've gone to the wrong place.

我跑到的是几百年前冰球曾经在的地方。

I went to the place where the puck used to be hundreds of years ago.

但你从研究冰球过去的位置

But you can learn a

能学到很多东西。

lot from studying where the puck used to be.

哦，倒也不一定。

Oh, not really.

你确定吗？

Are you sure?

那所大学的艺术学院其实挺差的。

Academia was a pretty crappy art school.

但身在佛罗伦萨本身

But being in Florence itself

哦，我确实能从欣赏这些作品中学到很多，但我不必非得去

Oh, I can learn a lot from looking at the works, yes, but I don't have to go

住在那里。

live there.

那你从中学到的哪些东西对Y Combinator有帮助？

But what is it you learned that was relevant for Y Combinator?

因为你做的，跟当年佛罗伦萨人做的事很像——选一个很小的区域，把它打造成顶尖人才的中心，一个吸引人的磁石，还出了很多成功者。

Because you are doing something comparable to what the Florentines did, Picking a pretty small area, making it the absolute center for talent selection, a magnet that drew people in and having a lot of winners.

你只是复制了自己亲身经历的东西。

You copied what you were living.

这个道理我早就从哈佛明白了。

I had already learned that from Harvard.

也许你确实得再学一遍。

Maybe you had to learn it twice.

不，我对这种现象早就非常清楚了。

No, I was already very well aware of this phenomenon.

所以，如果YC真的用了类似的做法，那我们当时确实是刻意在思考的。

So to the extent YC uses anything like that, we were definitely thinking.

YC的成立地点就在哈佛的辐射范围之内。

YC was started like within the convex hull of Harvard.

哈佛在剑桥市扩散的那些区域，YC最初的办公室就在其中。

Like the places Harvard spread out through Cambridge, like, YC's original office was within it.

所以我们一直有意识地想把YC打造成创业界的哈佛。

And so we've consciously tried to make YC the Harvard of startups.

这一点毫无疑问。

No question about that.

我们当时就有现成的模型。

We had the model right there.

你知道的，哈佛的问题可不少。

Harvard is very screwed up as you know.

你看看他们的招生标准。

You look at their admissions.

有多少是靠院长偏爱、校友后代和种族平权政策？

How much is like Dean's Favorites and Legacies and Affirmative Action?

这跟Y Combinator完全不一样。

It's not Y Combinator, right?

他们想搞的是利益联盟，而你只关心选出真正的赢家。

They are trying to build a coalition and you're just caring about picking winners.

关键是，

The thing

但话说回来，几乎所有大学的招生都存在这种腐败现象，除了可能的加州理工。

is though, all universities have a sort of admissions process that's corrupt in that way except possibly Caltech.

加州理工可能真的把本科招生做得挺正经的。

Caltech might actually do undergrad admissions properly.

既然其他学校都这么乱，哈佛还是有它的吸引力，比如

And so since they're all messed up, Harvard does still have this draw compared to

其他学校。

the others.

AI是不是让编程变得更像绘画了？

Does AI make programming even more like painting?

天啊，这

God, what

什么问题啊。

a question.

你怎么总能想出这种问题？

How do you make these questions?

AI是不是让编程变得更像绘画了？

Does AI make programming more like painting?

我没理由相信这一点。

I have no reason to believe that.

也许吧。

It might be true.

有可能。

It might be true.

在这个后GPT时代，你确实需要把更多碎片拼凑起来。

You're piecing things together more, arguably, in this new world, post GPT world.

我刚才说的是

What I was saying

我说编程像绘画，意思是两者都是在创造东西。

when I said programming was like painting is they're both building something.

对吧？

Right?

用AI编程，并不比亲手写代码时更像在‘构建’什么。

And you're not building something any more with AI than when you were writing code by hand.

我觉得不会。

So I would guess not.

我觉得不会。

I would guess not.

MidJourney和所谓的真正艺术之间差距有多大？

How far is mid journey from quote unquote real art?

不知道。

Don't know.

这是不是一种衰败的现代主义？

Is it more decrepit modernism?

这是一场惊人的革命吗？

Is it a fantastic revolution?

或者抛开创业的角度，单从艺术本身来看。

Or as art, put aside the start up angle.

你怎么看？

How do you view it?

我看到这些AI生成的图片，根本分不清哪些是MidJourney做的，哪些不是。

I don't see all these AI generated images and I don't know which ones are from mid journey and which ones aren't.

所以我没法肯定地说MidJourney怎么样，但我确实见过一些AI作品，美得让人震撼，完全就是艺术。

So I can't say for sure about mid journey, but I have definitely seen some AI generated stuff that looks amazing, that looks truly art.

作为艺术。

As art.

不只是看起来很厉害。

Not just that it looks impressive.

它作为平面设计确实很棒。

So it's amazing as graphic design.

但你觉得它和伦勃朗的作品一样，算得上艺术吗？

But do you think it's art in the same way that Rembrandt is art?

至于什么算艺术、什么不算，我觉得这其实是个程度问题。

This whole thing about, like, what's art and what isn't, I think it's all a matter of degree.

比如，那种廉价的雀巢咖啡杯，也可能是艺术。

Like, crap Carnation coffee mug is art.

就是艺术性不太高。

It's just not very good art.

对吧？

Right?

并没有一个明确的界限，超过就算艺术，不到就不算。

So there's not like some threshold where above this threshold, it's art.

人做的所有东西都算艺术，只是水平有高有低。

Everything people make is art, just to varying degrees of goodness.

但我可以告诉你，我见过一些AI生成的作品。

But I can tell you some of the things I've seen that were AI generated.

如果是人画的，我肯定会觉得厉害。

I'd be impressed if a person made them.

那大概就超过你的标准了。

So that probably is over your threshold.

如果你擅长发现人才，有没有哪位画家被严重低估了？为什么？

If you're good at talent selection, who is an underrated painter and why?

哇。

Wow.

天啊，这真是我经常思考的一个话题。

Boy, there is a topic I think about a lot.

人们被低估的原因其实有很多。

So there's a bunch of different reasons people can be underrated.

几乎所有优秀的艺术家都被低估了。

Almost all good artists are underrated.

我同意。

I agree.

听起来有点奇怪，但你看看拍卖市场上钱都花在哪儿了，几乎全是赶时髦的当代垃圾。

It sounds weird, but if you look at where the money's spent at auction, it's almost all fashionable contemporary crap.

因为你要想一想，顶级艺术品的价格是怎么定的，其实就是靠拍卖价。

Because if you think about how prices in very high end art are set, they're they're auction prices.

到底要多少人参与，才能推高一个拍卖价格呢？

How many people does it take to generate an auction price?

两个人。

Two.

就两个人。

Just two.

对吧？

Right?

于是就有一些愚昧的俄罗斯人，想在墙上挂一幅毕加索，好让别人觉得他们有品位；还有对冲基金经理的太太们，被人叮嘱要买些气派的艺术品挂在公寓里。

And so you have boneheaded Russians who want to have a Picasso on their wall so people will think they're legit, or hedge fund managers' wives who've been told to buy impressive art to hang in their loft.

所以当客人来的时候，她们就会说：哎，你看。

So when people come over, they'll say, oh, look.

她们有幅达米恩·赫斯特的作品。

They've got a Damien Hirst.

顶级艺术品的价格，几乎完全是由一群特别不靠谱的人定出来的——这其实挺好的。

The way art prices at the very high end are set is almost entirely by deeply bogus people, which is great actually.

我以前当艺术家的时候，还为此挺烦的。

When I was an artist, used to be annoyed by this.

现在我经常在拍卖会上买艺术品，这让我特别高兴，因为这意味着有大把的钱在流动。

Now that I buy a lot of art at auction, I'm delighted because it means there's all this money.

安迪·沃霍尔的丝网印刷品能卖到九千万美元，对吧？

Andy Warhol screen prints selling for $90,000,000, right?

没错。

Yes.

古典大师的作品，我不说便宜，但确实被严重低估了。

And old masters can be, I wouldn't say cheap, but I would say radically underpriced.

几十万美元就能拿下。

A couple 100,000.

有些真正好的甚至还能更便宜。

Or even less for some good ones.

确实如此。

Yeah.

这一点我清楚，因为我确实买这些作品。

And so I know because I buy them.

以前我对此还挺烦的，但现在我觉得这简直是世界上最让人开心的事了，因为有这么多闲钱在四处流窜，所谓的当代艺术就像一块海绵，把所有钱都吸得干干净净。

But I used to be annoyed by this and now I think it's the most delightful thing in the world because there's all this loose money sloshing around and so called contemporary art is like this sponge that just absorbs all of it.

一点都没剩下。

There's none left.

我买的一些作品，竞拍时就我一个人出价。

Some of the things I buy, I'm the only bidder.

最后就以底价成交了。

I get it for the reserve price.

全世界可能压根没人想要，甚至根本不知道这件作品在拍卖。

No one else in the world wants it or even knows that it's being sold.

所以我对此特别高兴。

So I am delighted about this.

所以你问哪些艺术家被低估了，答案是——

So the answer to your question, which artists are undervalued?

几乎所有优秀的艺术家都被低估了。

Essentially all good artists.

那些极其、极其、极其有名的艺术家，

The intersection between the very, very, very famous artists.

比如连沙特人也都听说过的艺术家，

Like artists famous enough for Saudis to have heard of them.

像达·芬奇这样的人，大概不算被低估，但那些家喻户晓的艺术家，

Like Leonardo, I would say, is probably not undervalued except for the artists who are, like, household names.

连小学生都知道他们的名字，

Every elementary school student knows their names.

其实全都被低估了。

They're all undervalued.

如果你觉得艺术史上出了问题，想用最少的维度来解释这个问题，你觉得问题出在哪里？

If you think that something has gone wrong in the history of art and you try to explain that in as few dimensions as possible, what's your account of what went wrong?

哦，

Oh.

这个我可以用几句话说清楚。

Oh, I can explain this very briefly.

品牌和技艺逐渐脱节了。

Brand and craft became divorced.

过去，最好的艺术家往往也是最顶尖的工匠。

It used to be that the best artists were the best craftspeople.

一旦艺术作品开始在报纸、杂志这些东西上大量复制，你就可能打造出一个不靠质量的名气。

And once art started to be reproduced in newspapers and magazines and things like that, you could create a brand that wasn't based on quality.

所以你觉得是大众媒体导致了品牌和技艺的分离？

So you think it's mass media causing the divorce between brand and craft.

这确实起了推波助澜的作用。

It certainly helps.

然后艺术家们也跟着调整了方向。

And then talents responding accordingly.

从根本上说，问题出在哪里？

Fundamentally, went wrong?

你搞出一套独特的套路，技术上这叫个人风格。

You invent some shtick and then technically it's called a signature style.

所以你画画时用的就是这种套路。

So you paint with this special shtick.

要是有人能先把势头造起来——经销商最擅长干这个——有人就会买下你这种风格的画，挂在特里贝卡阁楼的墙上，别人来了就说：天啊，这可是某某的作品。

If someone can get some sort of ball rolling, some speculative ball rolling which dealers specialize in, then someone buys the painting with your shtick and hangs it on the wall in their loft in Tribeca and people come in and say, oh my goodness, that's a so and so.

对吧？

Right?

他们之所以认得，是因为之前见过这种套路。

Which they recognize because they've seen the shtick.

但假设上世纪二十年代现代主义正盛行呢？

But say if we have modernism raging in the nineteen twenties.

那时候，大众媒体主要就是收音机。

In the twenties, mass media's radio for the most part.

不对。

No.

报纸那时候可火了。

Newspapers were huge.

现代主义那时候已经挺成熟了，

Modernism was well Oh,

用来展示绘画再合适不过了。

for showing paintings.

报纸上根本看不到彩色图片。

There's no color in the papers.

那时候有

Was have

二十世纪二十年代足够让塞尚那样的绘画变得流行了。

to The twenties be were good enough to make painting like Cezanne fashionable.

所以，二十世纪二十年代才刚刚开始兴起。

So it was just about getting going in the 1920s.

为什么我们现在建不出像样的英国乡村住宅了？

Why can't we build good British country homes anymore?

还是说，你觉得我们其实还是能建的？

Or do you think we can?

没人拦着你啊。

There's nothing stopping you.

但就是办不到。

But it doesn't happen.

就是那些

Except the

规划部门的人。

planning people.

你在英国想盖房子，根本行不通。

You can't do you know anything about building houses in England?

根本没法盖。

You just cannot build

难度大得离谱。

It's impossibly difficult.

这是世界上最糟糕的国家之一。

It's one of the worst countries.

这就是这里看起来这么美的原因。

It's the reason it looks so nice here.

对。

Yes.

要是这儿也用美国的分区法规，整个乡村早就被房子填满了。

If they had America's zoning rules here, the entire countryside would be plastered with houses.

连一块田地都剩不下，因为农地和建筑用地之间的价值差距，简直有上百倍之多。

You wouldn't have any fields left at all because the difference in value between agricultural and building land, it's like, God, a 100 x or something like that.

而且这儿地方本来就小。

And this place is small.

是啊，但剑桥、英国其他很多地方都有新建筑，不过那些都不是乡村住宅。

Yeah, but there are new buildings, say, in Cambridge, many other parts of Britain and the new buildings are not country homes.

但平均来说，每个人的财富都增加了。

Yet everyone on average is wealthier.

那为什么会发生这种变化呢？

And why the change?

比哪里更富裕？

Wealthier than where?

哦，比过去好多了，要是跟以前比的话。

Oh, than in the Well, old if you're than in the old days.

甚至在铁路出现之前，尽管生活水平低得可怜，还是建了很多乡村宅邸。

So even before the railway, you have large numbers of country most country homes being built when living standards were pathetically low.

乡村宅邸总得配有一定面积的周边土地。

A country house has got to have a certain amount of land around it.

不可能把它们挨着街道密密麻麻地盖一排。

You can't just have them plastered down a street.

那样看起来会很怪。

It would look wrong.

这种建筑得有不一样的风格才行。

You want a different style of architecture for something like that.

确实有个地方，人们会建大型住宅。

There is a place where they build big houses.

你知道是怎么回事吗？

You know what it is?

就像当年Macintosh问世的时候，你可以随便选任何字体。

It's like when the Macintosh appeared and you could have whatever font you wanted.

对吧？

Right?

大多数人审美都不怎么样。

Most people have bad taste.

过去呢，你只能盖那种古典风格的房子，因为那是唯一能盖的方式。

In the old days, you had to have a classical looking house because that was the only way to build houses.

其实维多利亚时期才是问题开始的时候。

And in the Victorian period actually was when things went wrong.

你可以盖一座意大利别墅，或者不对，也可以是希腊神庙，或者看起来像都铎时期的样式。

You could have an Italian villa or wait, no, it could be a Greek temple or something that looked like it was from the Tudor period.

随便挑，混搭都行，希腊神庙加都铎风格的元素。

Take your pick, mix them together, Greek temple with Tudor bits.

从那以后，情况就一发不可收拾了。

And it was all over from that point on really.

具体怎么说呢，如果这有什么影响的话……

In which way, if It's any not

美国的房子也建得不怎么样。

like they build good houses in America either.

没错。

No.

社区更糟。

And neighborhoods are worse.

是啊。

Yeah.

个别房子倒是挺不错的。

There are nice individual homes.

但1950年以后，有哪个社区真正漂亮过吗？

But is there any truly beautiful neighborhood built after 1950?

会在哪里呢？

Where would it be?

任何国家都算。

In any country.

在帕洛阿尔托，有个社区是叫艾克勒的开发商建的，他请了几个上世纪中期最顶尖的建筑师。

In Palaulda, there's a neighborhood of there are neighborhoods of houses built by this guy called Eichler, this developer who hired some of the best mid century architects.

这些社区确实不错，就是把树给毁了。

And arguably those neighborhoods are good, although they messed up the trees.

那些房子是什么时候建的？

When were those built?

五六十年代。

'50s and '60s.

可那都已经是七十年前的事了。

Okay, but that's seventy years ago now.

这七十年你什么都没做吗？

You haven't done anything in seventy years?

我肯定。

I'm sure.

你的那个是哪一款？

What's your

那种型号？

model of that?

肯定有人在某个地方盖出不错的房子。

Someone is building some good houses somewhere.

关键是，你根本没必要非得这么做，所以这事儿纯属偶然，对吧？

The point is you don't really need to and so it only happens by accident, right?

开发商想的都是怎么赶紧把这块地变成房子。

Developers mostly are thinking, we need to just turn this land into houses as soon as possible.

买家也没什么品味。

The buyers don't have any taste.

咱们不用操心这个。

We don't need to sweat that.

所以我们只会盖一些看起来气派、主卧很大的随机房子。

So we'll just build random houses that look big and have large master bedrooms.

人们会买这些房子。

People will buy them.

我们把本钱收回来，接着做下一个项目。

We'll get our capital back and go on and do the next one.

房子不用非得质量好。

They don't need to be good.

房子本来就不需要质量好。

Houses don't need to be good.

以前的房子也不用非得漂亮。

They didn't need to be beautiful in the old days either.

那时候技术限制大，你根本没得选。

It was just technology was so constrained you didn't have any choice.

你倒是能回到过去看看。

You get to go back in time.

你的健康有保障，而且你需要的任何语言都能掌握。

Your health is guaranteed and you know whichever languages you might need.

你还会在安全的地方待上六个月。

And you spend six months somewhere safe.

你的安全绝对有保障。

Your safety is guaranteed.

你会选哪里？

Where do you choose?

我经常在想这个问题。

I often think about this question.

你看起来就是那种经常琢磨这问题的人。

You seem like someone who often thinks about this question.

是的。

Yeah.

说来遗憾，我每次想这个问题，都想着避开那个显而易见的答案，可最后还是逃不掉。

Sadly, the way I think about it is I keep trying to escape from the obvious answer and I don't manage to.

因为显而易见的答案就是雅典，毕竟每个人都会选那里。

Because the obvious answer is that Athens, which is that's where everyone would pick.

那不是我会选的地方，但你的第二选择是哪儿？

It's not what I would pick, but what's your choice number two then?

我可以告诉你我的选择，不过……

I'll tell you mine, I think, but

我对欧洲黑暗时代究竟发生了什么着迷得不得了。

There are things where I am obsessed with the mystery of what the hell was going on in Dark Age Europe.

我特意用‘黑暗时代’这个词，因为现在有人想禁止它。

I'm deliberately using the term Dark Age because they're trying to outlaw it.

我觉得这个词用得没错。

It's correct, I think.

如果‘黑暗时代’这个词还没被创造出来，那它简直是描述那个时期的完美发明。

If the term Dark Ages hadn't been invented already, that would be a fabulous invention to describe that period.

是的。

Yeah.

当然。

Sure.

当时新事物不断涌现。

New things were getting invented.

有些人依然在做些好事，就像往常一样，但整体情况也糟到了极点。

Some people were doing good things just like always happens, but it was as bad as things have been.

留下的记录实在太少了。

And there's so few records.

没人知道当时具体发生了什么。

Nobody knows how things happened.

我特别想知道，当蛮族涌入罗马帝国时，那些大罗马地主还在，却不得不把大片庄园的大部分交给这些实际上掌控局面的新来者——他们身在核心，却根本不懂该怎么操作。

Like, I would be really interested to know when barbarians infilled the Roman Empire, but there were still big Roman landholders and they had to give a large percentage of their estates to these new barbarians who were in a sense running things and yet they were in the cockpit, but they didn't know what the buttons did.

公元600年。

600.

那时候到底发生了什么？

What was going on?

六月的时候，普罗旺斯那边到底发生了什么？

What was going on in Provence in June?

我特别想了解那段历史。

I would be very interested to see that.

有点像那种带着点病态的好奇心。

But almost like morbid curiosity.

虽然去雅典能学到更多，但我就是特别想知道当时发生了什么。

I wouldn't learn as much as I would from going to Athens, but I just really want to know what was going on.

顺便说一句，我特别喜欢这种病态的好奇心。

I'm a big fan of morbid curiosity, by the way.

在很多情况下，这反而是最棒的好奇心。

It's the best kind of curiosity in many cases.

我能看出来。

I can tell.

我会选西班牙人到来之前的阿兹特克帝国。

I would pick the Aztec empire before the Spanish arrive.

我对古雅典的样子有点模糊的印象。

So I feel I have vague glimpses of what ancient Athens was like.

那里还有希腊的遗迹留存着。

There are still Greek ruins.

但欧洲人看到那些城市时惊叹不已，却把所有的书都烧了。

But the Europeans marveled at the cities they saw and they burnt all the books.

我觉得去一个更陌生的地方，或许能学到更多。

And I think I would learn more by somewhere more strange.

也许吧。

Maybe.

我之所以对中世纪欧洲感兴趣，是因为那是我们这个世界起源的地方。

The reason I'm interested in medieval Europe is it's because where our world came from.

对吧？

Right?

我们用的钟表、文字系统，甚至衣服，最终都是从那时候演变过来的。

The clocks we use, the writing system, all the clothes eventually evolved from that.

所以我早就意识到，中世纪并不是一个低谷。

So the reason I'm interested I long ago realized that the medieval period wasn't a dip.

并不是说曾经有个高度发达的文明，然后突然下滑了一段时间，之后又重新回升。

It wasn't like there was this high level of civilization and then it dropped down for a while and then it rose back up again.

更准确地说，是一个原本发达的文明衰落了，而另一个起源于北方的文明逐渐兴起。

It was more like there was one civilization that was high and went down and another civilization based in the North that rose up.

从这个角度看，它其实是现代世界一切的开端。

And so, in a sense, it was the beginning of everything.

对吧？

Right?

所以我特别想知道，六月份那会儿到底发生了什么。

That's why I want to know what the hell was going on in June.

罗马非得灭亡不可吗？你能想象另一种可能吗？比如罗马自己发生了工业革命，这样我们就能省下七百年，甚至更久的时间。

Did Rome have to fall, or can you imagine a path where Rome has an industrial revolution and we save ourselves 700 or however many centuries of time?

你觉得非得经历分裂，才能催生竞争吗？也许正是这样，英国才得以崛起。

Like, do you need the fragmentation to get the competition Maybe, for Britain to become

也许吧，我不确定。

maybe, I don't know.

两千年很长，哪怕一千七百年也很长，对吧？

Two thousand years is a long time or even seventeen hundred years, right?

中国一直到两百年前都还算连续，也就是一千五百年左右。

Because China never was recent until two hundred, so fifteen hundred years.

但这一千五百年里，变化完全可以很大。

But fifteen hundred years, things could have changed a lot.

但真的有吗

But did

在中国？

they in China?

中国帝国从没真正崩溃过，它换过很多形式、很多朝代，但最终停滞了。

Chinese empire never collapses, it takes many forms, many dynasties, but it ends up stalling.

所以也许罗马帝国的崩溃，反而是欧洲最幸运的事之一。

So maybe the collapse of the Roman empire was one of the best things that could have happened, Oh, for Europe at

那时候的人肯定没想到会这样。

people, I'm sure people didn't think so the time.

我肯定也是。

I'm sure

当时的人觉得，情况没必要糟到这个地步。

people were thinking at the time it didn't have to be this bad.

我不清楚。

I don't know.

这种事，咱们谁都不懂。

Neither of us knows about this kind of thing.

展望未来，你对英国的前景有多乐观？

Looking forward, how optimistic are you about the future of The UK?

自2008年以来，实际工资没涨过，生产力也多年没提升。

No real wage growth since 2008, no real productivity growth for as many years.

问题出在哪？出路又在哪里？

What's up and what's the path out of that?

我比较乐观，因为他们还没使出真正的本事。

I am optimistic because they still have a gear that they haven't shifted into.

等我开始说‘我们’而不是‘他们’的时候，我想我才真算融入了。

I suppose I'll really have gotten native when I say we instead of they.

你是在匹兹堡长大的，对吧？

Because you grew up in Pittsburgh, right?

是的。

Yeah.

就在匹兹堡附近。

Near Pittsburgh.

对。

Yeah.

但我生来是英国人。

But I'm British by birth.

这算数吗？

Does that count?

你是真英国人，还是父母在这儿当外交官？

Are you really British or like your parents were diplomats here?

不是，是的。

No, yes.

所以你真是英国人？

So you're really British?

是的。

Yes.

好的。

Okay.

是的。

Yes.

你去问英国税务海关总署就知道了。

Just ask HMRC.

在他们眼里，我从来没离开过。

As far as they're concerned, I never left.

HMRC就是英国的国税局。

HMRC is the British IRS.

明白了。

Okay.

我之所以对英国持乐观态度，今天早上刚想到，是因为这里的人一点都不懒散。

The reason I'm optimistic about Britain, I was just thinking about this morning, is because people here are not slack.

他们不懒，也不笨。

They're not lazy and they're not stupid.

这才是最重要的。

And that's the most important thing.

最终，那些不懒惰、不愚昧的人一定会胜出。

So eventually, non lazy, non stupid people will prevail.

我在这里投资了几家初创公司。

And I funded a couple startups here.

当你把这些人的想法转向快速成长、追求宏大目标时，就像在教他们一门外语。

You can see like when you introduce these people to the idea of trying to make something grow really fast and have these really big ambitions, it's like teaching them a foreign language.

但他们确实学会了。

But they do learn it.

他们真的学会了。

They do learn it.

英国人并不比美国人天生差劲。

It's not like English people are somehow genetically inferior to Americans.

所以我觉得他们还有很大的潜力没发挥出来。

So I think they have all that potential still to go.

每当我看到这些数据，我都感到震惊。

I'm astonished when I see statistics.

比如，英国的人均GDP只有美国的三分之二左右。

Like, I think GDP per capita in The UK is only two thirds of what it is in America.

跟密西西比州差不多。

It's about the same as Mississippi.

这太离谱了。

It's preposterous.

我知道。

I know.

所以你想想这背后有多大的潜力。

So imagine the potential there.

想想这潜力有多大。

Imagine the potential.

但你对密西西比州未必有这种感觉。

But you don't feel that way about Mississippi necessarily.

不会。

No.

我觉得密西西比州可能已经接近它的最大潜力了。

I think Mississippi is probably already up close to its full potential.

我不确定。

I don't know.

我从来没去过那里。

Never actually been there.

我不该这么说。

I shouldn't say things like that.

但为什么这里这么多东西都资金不足呢？

But why and how did so many things here end up undercapitalized?

供水系统、国民医疗服务体系，看起来都是同样的模式。

So the water utilities, the NHS, it seems to be a consistent pattern.

这可能会让我们更悲观，因为资金流动的数据没反映出，资本维护的状况比我们想象的还要糟。

That could make us more pessimistic because the flow numbers don't reflect the fact that capital maintenance is even worse than we had thought.

我不知道。

I don't know.

你是经济学家。

You're an economist.

我不清楚资本维护这个术语是什么意思。

I don't know what the term capital maintenance

但你指的是英国人。

But you're means to British person.

我是

I'm

被告知的。

told.

资金不足。

Undercapitalized.

我不明白这些词是什么意思。

I don't know what these things mean.

他们一直都是，我的意思是，

They've been I mean,

被推迟的 NHS 是由政府运营的。

postponed NHS is run by the government.

政府运营的项目往往表现不佳。

So things run by governments are often bad.

尽管 NHS 经常被人批评，但它实际上还挺不错的。

Although the NHS seems to be pretty good even though people attack it.

这比美国的体系文明多了。

It's a lot more civilized than the American system.

但如果你需要急救，救护车要等多久呢？

But how long it takes an ambulance to arrive if you Well,

这问题最近才变糟的。

that's only recently got bad.

就最近几年的事。

That's just couple years.

意思是。

Means.

你一直在透支未来。

You keep on borrowing against the future.

也不把资源回流进去。

You don't plough resources back in.

所以最后就什么都没了。

So eventually you don't have anymore.

事情一旦糟到一定程度，他们就会去解决。

When things get bad enough, they fix things.

这个地方可不像美国那样，由一群莽撞的人来管。

This place is not run by the kind of yahoos that America is.

虽然国家小，但掌权的人可不是那种愚昧的政治任命官员。

It may be a small country, but people running things, you know, they're not just like boneheaded political appointees.

出了问题，他们能察觉到，然后马上改正。

Like when things are wrong, they notice they're wrong and they fix them.

这是一个历史悠久的国家。

This is a very old country.

这也是它不会垮掉的另一个原因。

That's another reason it's not gonna tank.

他们以前就经历过更糟的情况。

They've been through some bad stuff before.

有起有落，早就习惯了。

There have been ups and downs.

你对旧金山这座城市持乐观态度吗？

Are you an optimist about the city of San Francisco?

不是指那个区域。

Not the area.

是整个城市。

City.

说说为什么。

Tell us why.

我没法告诉你，因为背后已经有不少人在悄悄解决问题了。

Can't tell you because there are all sorts of things happening behind the scenes to fix the problem.

你是说政治层面，还是科技初创公司？

In politics, you mean, or in in tech startups?

不是。

No.

不是。

No.

不是。

No.

政治。

Politics.

政治。

Politics.

旧金山的问题完全源于少数几个糟糕的政客。

The problems with San Francisco are entirely due to a small number of terrible politicians.

这一切都因为埃德·李去世了。

It's all because Ed Lee died.

市长埃德·李是个很理性的人。

The mayor Ed Lee was a reasonable person.

在埃德·李去世之前，旧金山简直像天堂一样。

And up till the point where Ed Lee died, San Francisco seemed like a utopia.

但就像盖茨离开微软后，一切都迅速回到了原状。

But it was like when Gates left Microsoft and things rapidly reverted to the mean.

但在旧金山的情况，简直跌到谷底了。

Although in San Francisco's case, way below the mean.

所以要毁掉旧金山，根本不需要多少力气。

And so it didn't take that much to ruin San Francisco.

只要你换掉大约五个市议员，旧金山立马就能变成一个好得多的城市。

It's really if you could if you just replaced about five supervisors, San Francisco would be instantly a fabulously better city.

但不是应该换掉选民吗？

But isn't it the voters you need to replace?

那些人不是一直被选上、再选上吗？

Are those people got elected, reelected?

旧金山之所以彻底烂掉，根本原因在于市议员权力太大。

The reason San Francisco fundamentally is so broken is that the supervisors have so much power.

而市议员选举，几百票就能赢。

And supervisor elections, you can win by a couple 100 votes.

你只需要一群极端左翼的铁杆支持者，不管你怎么干，他们都死心塌地支持你，而且一定会出来投票。

So all you need to do is have this hard core of crazy left wing supporters who will absolutely support you no matter what and turn out to vote.

别人都觉得，地方选举无所谓。

And everybody else is, oh, local election doesn't matter.

我才懒得管呢。

I'm not gonna bother.

这是一种特别古怪的情况，以前根本没人注意到。

It's a uniquely weird situation that wasn't really visible.

它一直都在，但直到埃德·李去世后才暴露出来。

It was always there, but it wasn't visible until Ed Lee died.

现在我们终于看到了这种局面带来的后果——一团糟。

And so now we've reverted to what that situation produces, which is a disaster.

现在是2023年了。

Now we're in 2023.

再过两三年，你觉得人工智能会受到怎样的监管？

Say two or three years from now, what do you think the regulation of AI will look like?

天知道呢。

Oh, God knows.

你老问我一些我完全没头绪的问题。

You keep asking me questions I have no idea about.

你其实心里有数。

You have plenty of idea.

我觉得你懂的不比别人少。

You know as much as anyone, I suspect.

不是这样的。

No, that's not true.

这根本不对。

That is not true.

我真的完全不知道AI监管会是什么样子，甚至它该是什么样子——后者其实更容易回答。

I really have no idea what AI regulation will look like or even should look like, which is an easier question.

还有一个更简单的问题。

Here's an easier question yet.

这基本上是湾区的科技圈。

So this is broadly a tech community in the Bay Area.

比如说，如果你让我今天下午就得想出一套AI监管方案，那简直太难了。

Like if you said I had to make up the regulations for AI this afternoon, it would be really hard.

我同意。

I agree.

所以，这就是为什么我根本没法当场回答这个问题。

And so that's how far away I am from being able to answer that question on the spot.

就算给我一整天，我也理不出头绪。

I couldn't even figure it out in a day.

什么时候该采用模块化监管，什么时候该对AI设限，这些问题本身就没法轻易解决。

Like when it should be modular or when there should be a regulation on AI is a thing that itself is intractable.

不过我可以告诉你一个宏观的事实。

I'll tell you one meta fact, though.

有个叫罗布·迈尔斯的人在推特上说，想做出安全的AI，就像试图打造一个绝对安全的操作系统。

There was a guy on Twitter, I think his name was Rob Miles, who said that trying to make safe AI will be like trying to make a secure operating system.

这话一点不假。

And that is absolutely true.

所以这让人害怕，因为要打造一个安全的操作系统，不是靠坐在桌前，拿张纸琢磨设计原则。

And therefore, frightening because the way you make a secure operating system is not by sitting down and thinking at a table with a piece of paper about the principles for making a secure operating system.

更可能是你先试着定出这些原则，结果有人黑了你的系统，你才恍然大悟：哦，抱歉，漏了这茬。

More like you try and make such principles and then someone hacks your operating system and then you think, oh, okay, sorry.

然后你打个补丁，他们又黑掉新的版本。

And you patch it and then they hack that.

打造安全的操作系统，就像设计一个没人能钻空子的税法。

Making a secure operating system is like making a fraud proof tax code.

说白了，就是一连串针对成功漏洞的补丁堆出来的。

It's basically a series of patches that were based on hacks, successful hacks.

对吧？

Right?

是梅隆吗？

Is it Mellon?

有人说，美国的税法其实就是对梅隆那些操作的一一回应。

They say The US tax code is basically a series of responses to things Mellon did.

有一部分确实是这样。

Some parts of it, yes.

对。

Yeah.

所以安全的操作系统就是这样的。

So secure operating systems are like that.

所以我担心人工智能，因为不管制定什么监管规定，都会出问题。

And so I'm worried about AI because whatever the regulations are, they'll be wrong.

我跟你讲，肯定如此。

I'll tell you that.

有些方面管得太死，另一些地方却又漏洞百出。

They'll be over regulated in some ways and have huge holes in others.

以前，湾区科技圈至少在很多问题上看法比较一致。

There's a Bay Area tech community, at least in the not too distant past, they agreed about many things.

但最近，关于人工智能，大家的观点明显分歧很大。

But very recently, it seems on AI, there's quite a divergence of views.

有些人特别担心，觉得人工智能会毁灭全人类。

People who are very worried, oh, it's gonna kill us all in the world.

另一些人则说，确实有问题，但这东西最终会带来巨大好处。

People who say, Oh, there's problems but this is gonna be great.

从最少的几个角度来说，为什么背景相似、过去观点也相近的人，现在看法却截然不同？

In as few dimensions as possible, what accounts for that difference in perspective from people with broadly similar backgrounds and who used to agree on many things?

是性格使然吗？

Is it temperament?

是基因决定的吗？

Is it genes?

是曾经受过什么打击吗？

Is it like a snake bit?

更可能的原因是，

It's probably which

他们各自关注的问题层面不一样。

aspect of the problem they choose to focus on.

对吧？

Right?

你可以选择关注其中任何一个方面。

You could focus on either one.

如果你关注它可能带来的好处，就会发现很多令人兴奋的可能性，也会找到许多真正积极的方面。

And so if you focus on how it could be good, there's all sorts of exciting things to discover and you discover lots of genuine ways it could be good.

如果你关注它可能带来的坏处，那确实也存在。

And if you focus on how it could be bad, it's true there too.

所以，两种可能性都存在。

So it could be either.

我能够同时在脑子里保留这两种想法。

I manage to keep both thoughts in my head simultaneously.

我一边觉得会有很多美好的事情发生，一边也觉得会有很多糟糕的事情出现，而且两者都会好到难以想象，也会坏到难以想象。

I simultaneously think there will be all kinds of good things and all kinds of bad things and that both will be they will be unimaginably good and unimaginably bad.

这么说，这会导致思维反复摇摆，对吧？

So it sounds like that produces oscillation, doesn't it?

是的。

Yes.

这让人担心。

That's worrying.

光是这一点就挺让人忧心的，对吧？

That in itself is worrying, Right?

为什么Lisp没有更成功呢？

Why hasn't Lisp been more successful?

还是你觉得它其实已经成功了？

Or do you think it has?

Clojure是Lisp的一个方言，而Clojure非常成功。

Closure is a dialect of Lisp, and closure is very successful.

所以在这方面，它确实是成功的。

So it's been successful in that respect.

还有另一种方式，它也取得了成功。

And there's another way it's been successful.