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。
本节目由Public提供支持，Public是一个为认真对待投资的人打造的平台。
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously.
在Public上，您可以构建包含股票、债券和期权的多资产投资组合，现在还可以生成资产，通过人工智能将任何想法转化为可投资的指数。
On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, and options, and now generated assets, which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI.
前往 public.com/podcast，在转移您的投资组合时可获得无上限的1%奖励。
Go to public.com/podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio.
网址是 public.com/podcast。
That's public.com/podcast.
本服务由Public Investing提供资金支持，经纪服务由Open to the Public Investing Inc提供，该公司为FINRA和SIPC会员；投资顾问服务由SEC注册的投资顾问Public Advisors LLC提供。
Paid for by Public Investing, brokerage services by Open to the Public Investing Inc member FINRA and SIPC, Advisory service by Public Advisors LLC, SEC registered adviser.
生成资产是一个交互式分析工具。
Generated assets is an interactive analysis tool.
输出内容仅用于信息参考，不构成任何投资建议或推荐。
Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice.
完整披露信息请访问 public.com/disclosures。
Complete disclosure is available at public.com/disclosures.
本节目由Vanta赞助。
Support for this show comes from Vanta.
Vanta利用人工智能和自动化技术，帮助您快速实现合规，简化审计流程，并打通交易障碍，向客户证明您对安全的重视。
Vanta uses AI and automation to get you compliant fast, simplify your audit process, and unblock deals so you can prove to customers that you take security seriously.
您可以把Vanta看作是一位24小时在线、由AI驱动的安全专家，能够随您一同成长。
You can think of Vanta as your always on AI powered security expert who scales with you.
因此，Cursor、Linear和Replit等顶尖初创公司都使用Vanta来实现并保持安全。
That's why top startups like Cursor, Linear, and Replit use Vanta to get and stay secure.
请前往vanta.com/vox开始使用。
Get started at vanta.com/vox.
请前往vanta.com/vox开始使用。
That's vanta.com/vox.
vanta.com/vox。
Vanta.com/vox.
本节目由Odoo赞助。
Support for this show comes from Odoo.
经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？
Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?
介绍Odoo。
Introducing Odoo.
这是你唯一需要的商业软件。
It's the only business software you'll ever need.
它是一个一体化、完全集成的平台，能让您的工作更轻松。
It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier.
客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务等等。
CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.
最棒的是什么？
And the best part?
Odoo以远低于其他平台的价格取代了多个昂贵的系统。
Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.
因此，成千上万家企业已经转用了Odoo。
That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.
那你为什么不来试试呢？
So why not you?
前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。
Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.
就是 odoo.com。
That's odoo.com.
你好，欢迎来到《Decoder》。
Hello, welcome to Decoder.
我是《The Verge》的主编埃利·帕特尔，《Decoder》是我主持的节目，探讨重大议题与其他难题。
I'm Eli Patel, editor in chief of The Verge, and Decoder is my show about big ideas and other problems.
今天，我们要聊聊 Anthropic 公司混乱而快速变化的状况，这家公司开发了 Claude，如今却陷入了一场与五角大楼的激烈法律纠纷。
Today, we're gonna talk about the messy, fast moving situation at Anthropic, the maker of Claude that now finds itself in a very ugly legal battle with the Pentagon.
整个过程错综复杂，但就在几天前，五角大楼将 Anthropic 列为供应链风险，而 Anthropic 已提起诉讼，质疑这一认定，称政府侵犯了其第一和第五修正案权利，并‘试图摧毁全球增长最快私营企业之一所创造的经济价值的经济成果’。
The back and forth is complicated, but as of a few days ago, the Pentagon had deemed Anthropic a supply chain risk, and Anthropic had filed a lawsuit challenging that designation, saying that the government was violating its first and fifth amendment rights and, quote, seeking to destroy the economic value created by one of the world's fastest growing private companies.
我可以明确告诉你，未来几个月，我们将在《Decoder》和《The Verge》上多次深入探讨这个案件的来龙去脉。
I can tell you right now, we're gonna be talking about the twists and turns of that case here on Decoder and on The Verge many, many times in the months to come.
但今天，我想退后一步，深入探讨这个局势中一个非常重要却被忽视的部分，因为事情已经失控。
But today, I wanna take a step back and really dig in on one very important part of this situation that hasn't gotten nearly enough attention as things have spiraled out of control.
美国政府如何进行监控，允许这种监控的法律依据是什么，以及为什么Anthropic如此不信任政府，认为政府在利用人工智能进行更多监控时不会遵守法律。
How the United States government does surveillance, the legal authority that allows that surveillance to occur, and why Anthropic was so distrustful of the government saying it would follow the law when it comes to using AI to do even more surveillance.
监控。
Surveillance.
今天我的嘉宾是Mike Masnick，他是Techdirt网站的创始人兼首席执行官，这是一家出色且长期运营的科技政策网站。
My guest today is Mike Masnick, the founder and CEO of Techdirt, the excellent and long running tech policy website.
Mike几十年来一直撰写关于政府越权、数字时代的隐私以及其他相关议题。
Mike has been writing about government overreach, privacy in the digital age, and other related topics for decades now.
他对互联网与监控国家如何相互交织发展有着深刻的理解。
And he's an expert on how the internet and surveillance state have grown up in interconnected ways.
你要知道，法律上规定了政府在监控我们时可以做什么。
You see, there's what the law says the government can do when it comes to surveilling us.
而政府实际想做的是什么。
There's what the government actually wants to do.
更重要的是，政府声称法律允许它做什么，而这往往与任何普通人单纯阅读法律后所理解的完全相反。
And most importantly, there's what the government says the law says it can do, which is often exactly the opposite of what any normal person simply reading the law would think.
在本集中，你会听到迈克详细解释，我们在涉及监控问题时，绝不能也不应该相信美国政府的说辞。
You'll hear Mike explain in great detail in this episode that we cannot and should not take the United States government at its word when it comes to surveillance.
政府律师长期以来惯于曲解诸如‘目标’等简单词汇的含义，以复杂的方式扩大监控范围，这种历史由来已久。
There's just too much history of government lawyers twisting the interpretations of simple words like target to expand surveillance in complicated ways.
这些做法通常只在法律界引发担忧，只有在像斯诺登曝光这样的重大丑闻发生时，才会浮出水面进入主流视野。
Ways that usually only cause concern in legal circles and only bubble up to the mainstream when there are huge controversies like the Snowden revelations.
但在特朗普时代，政策制定毫无隐蔽性或复杂性可言。
But there's nothing subtle or sophisticated about policy making in the Trump era.
因此，对于Anthropic，我们现在正实时地、公开地在互联网上、博客中、X平台的帖子以及新闻发布会的片段中，展开一场关于科技与监控的激烈辩论。
And so with Anthropic, we are now having a very loud, very public debate about technology and surveillance in real time on the internet, in blog posts, and posts on x, and press conference sound bites.
这其中既有积极的一面，也有消极的一面，但要理清这一切，你必须了解其历史背景。
There are positives and negatives to that, but to make sense of it all, you really have to know the history.
这正是迈克和我在这期节目中试图阐明的内容。
That's what Mike and I set out to explain in this one.
无论你对人工智能和政府持何种观点，这一集都会清楚地表明，双方都让监控体系随着时间推移不断膨胀。
Whatever your views on AI and the government, this episode will make it clear that both parties have let the surveillance state get bigger and bigger over time.
而当我们谈到人工智能时，我们正站在有史以来最大规模扩张的门槛上。
And we're on the cusp of the biggest expansion yet when it comes to AI.
在开始之前，快速提醒一下：你可以通过订阅《The Verge》来无广告收听本集或《Decoder》的任何一集。
Before we start, a quick reminder that you can listen to this episode or any episode of Decoder completely ad free by subscribing to The Verge.
只需访问 theverge.com/subscribe。
Just go to theverge.com slash subscribe.
好的。
Okay.
Techdirt 的创始人兼首席执行官迈克·马斯尼克谈 Anthropic、五角大楼和人工智能监控。
Techdirt founder and CEO Mike Masnick on Anthropic, the Pentagon, and AI surveillance.
我们开始吧。
Here we go.
迈克·马斯尼克，你是 Techdirt 的创始人兼首席执行官。
Mike Masnick, you are the founder and CEO of Techdirt.
欢迎来到《Decoder》。
Welcome to Decoder.
是的。
Yeah.
很高兴能来这里。
I'm glad to be here.
很高兴邀请你来参加。
I'm excited to have you on.
我刚刚还在说，真没想到你以前从来没上过这个节目。
I was just saying I'm shocked that you've never been on the show before.
你和我长期以来一直在彼此的帖子和文章中互动。
You and I have been writing and posting around each other for a long time.
《The Verge》很多政策类报道都得益于你在Techdirt上的工作。
A lot of The Verge policy coverage owes a debt to what you've done at Techdirt.
而Anthropic目前的情况非常复杂，却恰好触及了你多年来一直关注的诸多主题。
And then what's going on with Anthropic is so complicated, but hits so many themes that you have covered for so long.
很高兴你终于来了。
I'm glad you're finally here.
这是一个复杂混乱的话题，但我很兴奋能深入探讨它。
It is a a complicated mess of a topic, but I'm I'm excited to be digging in on it.
所以我想和你讨论的，不是Anthropic是否会与政府签订合同，或者OpenAI是否会拿到那份合同这些细节。
So what I want to focus on with you is not the details of whether Anthropic is gonna sign a contract with the government or whether OpenAI is gonna get that contract instead.
我有信心，在我们录制这段对话到听众听到的这段时间里，推文会更多，情况也会比现在发生许多变化。
I'm confident between the time we record this and the time people listen to it, there will be there will have been more tweets and more things will be different than they were before.
我想聚焦的，只是Anthropic所设定的两条红线中的一条。
What I wanna focus on is just one of the two red lines that Anthropic has really laid out.
其中一条是自主武器。
One of them is autonomous weapons.
关于这方面的法律还比较初级，无论是这些武器是否真的存在，还是已经在俄乌战争中被部署，都还不明确。
The law there is a little bit more nascent whether or not the weapons even exist or have already been deployed by Russia and Ukraine war.
我只是想暂时搁置这一点，因为我觉得它会按照自己的节奏独立地获得更多关注。
I just want to set that aside because I I think that is gonna come into more focus all on its own on its own schedule.
另一个我想要花大量时间讨论的红线是大规模监控。
The other red line that I do want to spend a lot of time on is mass surveillance.
是的。
Yeah.
关于大规模监控，这里有很多相关法律。
And there's quite a lot of law here about mass surveillance.
有很多历史，而且是充满争议的历史。
There's a lot of history, lot of controversial history.
爱德华·斯诺登之所以广为人知，正是源于围绕大规模监控的争议。
The entire character of Edward Snowden exists because of controversies around mass surveillance.
这一切最终归结于——我想是你发过这个观点——美国国家安全局属于国防部，不知为何我们现在不得不称其为战争部。
And it all comes down to, I think you are the one who posted this, the National Security Agency, is part of the Department of Defense, which we have to call the Department of War now for some reason.
我们没必要这么做。
We don't have to do anything.
我们确实没必要，你说得对。
We don't have, that's true.
在美国，我们不必做任何事。
Here in America, don't have to do anything.
但国家安全局基本上重新定义了许多词汇的含义，将日常英语中的词义转变为：哦，我们可以直接进行监控。
But the National Security Agency has basically redefined what a lot of words mean out of like colloquial English to mean, oh, we can just do surveillance.
然后每隔一段时间，当人们发现他们只是在进行监控时，就会爆发丑闻。
And then every so often there's a scandal when people discover that they're just doing surveillance.
所以先设定一下背景，我并不想让你从头开始回顾，但这种模式已经反复出现很长时间了。
So just set the stage there, and I don't wanna rewind you all the way, but it's been quite a lot of time where this pattern has repeated itself.
是的。
Yeah.
而且，确实，这取决于你想深入到什么程度。
And and, yeah, it it sort of depends on how deep you wanna go.
但简而言之，显然在9/11事件之后的世界里。
But the the sort of short version is obviously in the post 09/11 world.
我们美国通过了《爱国者法案》，该法案赋予政府一定的监控权力，据称是为了保护我们免受未来恐怖主义威胁。
We The US passed the Patriot Act, which had, you know, some ability for the government to engage in surveillance, which was supposed to be for, you know, protecting us against future terrorist threats.
随着时间的推移，这些规定被以各种有趣的方式解释，而且也存在一些限制。
And over time, that got interpreted in interesting ways, and there were some limits on that.
我们还有外国情报监视法院，这是一家专门负责审查情报机构及其活动的法院，但传统上它一直是一个单方面运作的法院。
We also had the FISA court, which is a special court that is supposed to, you know, review the intelligence community and their activities, but has been traditionally a one-sided court.
只有单方面能够向该法院陈述其立场，而且所有程序都是秘密进行的。
Only one side gets to plead their case to that court, and it's all done in secret.
因此，有很多事情外界并不知晓。
And so there's a lot of stuff that that was not known.
而这一切中还有另一项内容，可以追溯到罗纳德·里根时期，即第12333号行政命令，该命令本意是为情报收集设定规则。
And then there was one other piece in all of this, which goes all the way back to Ronald Reagan, which is executive order 12 triple three, which is supposedly about setting out the rules of the road for intelligence collection.
因此，你有这几套法律——好吧，几部法律和一项行政命令，对公众而言，那些可以阅读的部分似乎表明了我们的政府，特别是国安局，在监控方面的权限，如果用你我都能理解的普通英语词典来解读，我们会认为国安局监控美国公民的能力非常有限。
And so you have these three sets of laws well, you know, a few sets of laws and an executive order that to the public, the parts that you can read seem to say certain things about what our government and the NSA in particular can do in terms of surveillance, which when read with a plain English dictionary, the nature of which you and I probably have and understand, we would come away with a belief that the NSA's ability to surveil Americans was was very limited.
事实上，根据这些规定，他们甚至应该在意识到自己在监控美国公民时，立即停止行动，提出异议，并删除数据等等。
In fact, you know, to the point that they're supposed to you know, if they realize that they are surveilling a US person, that they are supposed to immediately stop and cry foul and, you know, erase the data and all of this other stuff.
一段时间以来，一直有传言称这些规定实际上并未被执行，也出现过一些蛛丝马迹。
And there were rumors for a while that that was not really happening, and there were hints.
特别是，参议员罗恩·怀登非常公开地在参议院发言，说这里有些不对劲，但我又不能具体告诉你是什么。
And in particular, senator Ron Wyden was very vocal about, you know, going on the floor of the senate and saying, you know, something is not right here, and I can't quite tell you what.
在听证会上，他会问情报官员：你们是否在收集美国民众的大规模数据？
Or in hearings, he would ask intelligence officials, are you or are you not collecting mass data on Americans?
他们要么避重就轻，有时甚至直接撒谎。
And they would either deflect or in some cases outright lie.
我认为是在2012年的一次听证会上，时任国家情报总监的詹姆斯·克拉珀被直接问到这个问题，他基本上回答说：没有。
And I believe it was one hearing in, like, 2012 with James Clapper, who was the director of national intelligence at the time, he was asked directly on this point, and he basically said, no.
我们不会收集美国民众的数据。
We don't collect data on Americans.
这正是促使爱德华·斯诺登泄露数据的重要原因之一，他将这些报告泄露给了格伦·格林沃尔德、巴特·盖尔曼以及劳拉·波伊特拉斯。
And that was a big part of what inspired Ed Snowden to leak the data, the the the reports that he leaked to Glenn Greenwald and Bart Gellman and Laura Laura Poitras as well.
因此，从这一切中，我们开始发现，美国国家安全局有自己的词典，与你我使用的词典略有不同，他们能以不同于日常英语含义的方式解读某些词语，比如‘目标’这个词，听起来像是个关键词。
So from all of that, what we began to discover was that the NSA has its own dictionary that is somewhat different than the dictionary that you and I use, such that they can interpret words in ways that are different than the plain English meaning of them, including words like target, which feels like kind of a keyword.
所以，总的来说，这就是大致的情况。
But so, you know, a sort of broad understanding of what this is.
理论上，他们只应该针对非美国公民，我认为这是他们的说法。
In theory, they're only supposed to target people who are not US persons, I think is the phrase.
但随着时间的推移，这种做法被解释为：任何提及该外国人的内容，只要是与外国人有关的，即使涉及的是美国公民的通信，也都可以被收集。
But the way it had been interpreted over time was that anything that mentions that person, any anything that is about a foreign person is now fair game even if that is the communications of a US person.
所以，如果你我和我发短信时提到了一个外国人，那么这些通信内容现在就成为美国国家安全局可以收集、保存和存储的对象。
So if you and I were to text each other and mention a foreign person, that is now fair game for the NSA to collect and to keep and to store.
这还有第二部分。
There's a second part of this.
我之前提到过里根总统签署的第12333号行政命令，该命令随着技术发展和互联网扩张，允许国家安全局监听外国通信，甚至包括那些途经美国境外的通信。
I mentioned first the the executive order 12 triple three from Ronald Reagan, which effectively allowed the NSA as as the technology changed over time and the Internet grew, it allowed the NSA to tap into foreign communications, but that included any communications that maybe left The US on route somewhere.
比如，如果你我在加州发短信，而信息通过一条经过美国境外的光纤电缆传输，国家安全局就可以在信息离开美国后接入该线路，收集这些数据，即使它们最终只是发给美国境内的你。
So if, you know, if I am texting you and a message went from me in California through a fiber optic cable that happened to leave The US, the NSA could put a tap in the part once it's outside The US, collect that information even if it was just going to you within The US.
然后，他们甚至可以保留这些涉及美国公民的信息，并日后进行特定搜索，这有时被称为‘后门搜索’。
And then what they could do is keep that information even if it was on US persons, and they could do specific searches on that later, sometimes referred to as backdoor searches.
因此，他们收集了本不该收集的信息，但却可以合法地保留这些数据。
So they collected this information that we believe they weren't supposed to collect in the first place, but they could keep it.
他们承诺过，甚至赌咒发誓说会保持隐私。
And they promised, they sort of pinky swore that they would keep it private.
但一旦他们进行搜索，发现你或我提到了某个外国人，那么这些信息就立刻成了他们可以任意处置的对象。
But if they did a search and found, like, that you or I mentioned a foreign person, then suddenly it was fair game for them to do whatever they want with.
总的来说，这已经演变成一个他们可以收集任何与境外有关联的信息的世界。
In total, that has turned into a world in which they can basically collect any information that happens to touch outside The US.
即使通信完全发生在两个美国公民之间，只要他们提及或甚至暗示了非美国公民，这些信息就立刻成了可以被收集的对象。
And even if it is entirely between two US persons, if they mention or even hint at someone who is not a US person, suddenly it is fair game to be collected.
由此，我们看到了一种针对美国公民的大规模监控，而美国国家安全局却声称并公开表示他们不会监视美国公民。
And from that, we've gotten what appears to be a a form of mass surveillance of US persons by an NSA that claims and publicly states that they do not spy on US persons.
我们是怎么走到这一步的？
How did we get to this point?
对吧？
Right?
这是一步步缓慢积累的结果。
This is a lot of incremental baby steps.
你提到了2012年的詹姆斯·克拉珀。
You mentioned James Clapper in 2012.
那是奥巴马政府时期。
That's the Obama administration.
你提到了罗纳德·里根。
You mentioned Ronald Reagan.
那是八十年代。
That's the eighties.
我们这里可是交替经历着民主党与共和党的执政。
Like, we're we're we're going through Democrats and Republicans here.
对吧？
Right?
反恐战争发生在小布什政府时期，也就是9/11之后，《爱国者法案》也是在小布什政府时期通过的。
The the the war on terror happens in the in the George w Bush administration, 09/11, and the Patriot Act happens in the George w Bush administration.
这些都是一步步积累起来的糟糕事，是的。
This is a lot of incremental bad things Yes.
在两党总统和两党国会的领导下。
Under presidents of both parties, under congresses of both parties.
这是怎么发生的？
How did this happen?
我的意思是，最简单的解释就是，没有人——尤其是任何总统——都不想在发生重大恐怖袭击时担任总统，因为这会让他们的形象受损。
I mean, the the simplest form of it is just that nobody and certainly no president wants to be president during the time when there's a big terrorist attack because that makes them look bad.
对吧？
Right?
我的意思是，他们当然也想保护美国人。
I mean, obviously they also wanna protect Americans.
对吧？
Right?
这大概是他们职责的一部分。
That's part of part of their job, I guess.
所以，你知道，如果你有一个情报机构，它基本上是在黑暗中运作——因为情报机构本来就是这样运作的，它们不断来找你，说：嘿。
And so, you know, if you have an intelligence community that is basically operating in darkness because that's what intelligence communities do, and they keep coming to you and saying, you know, hey.
你知道，如果我们能获得这些信息，对预防恐怖袭击会非常有帮助。
You know, if we could just get access to this information, it'd be really helpful in preventing a terrorist attack.
确实可能存在一些情况，情报机构能够很好地利用这些信息。
And there may be cases where that's true, that the intelligence community is able to use this information in a way that works well.
但理论上，我们是一个法治社会，应当遵守宪法。
But we also are, in theory, a society of laws and a constitution that we're supposed to obey.
但这也使得历届政府——无论是共和党还是民主党——都能聘请非常精明的律师，他们仔细研究：如果我们这样定位、这样表述、这样解释，就能达到目的，又不构成违法，也不算真正违反第四修正案。
But that allowed for the fact that, you know, administration after administration, again, Republican and Democrat, had lawyers who were very clever and who would look through, well, you know, if we sort of position this this way or we state this this way or we interpret this that way, we can get what we want and not technically break the law or not technically violate the Fourth Amendment.
一直以来的假设是：我们可以稍微扭曲法律或对法律的解释，反正没人会看到，或者关心的人也永远不会发现，因此我们就能蒙混过关。
The assumption was always like, well, we can sort of bend the law or bend our interpretation of the law, and nobody's really ever going to see this or nobody who cares, you know, is really ever going to see this, and therefore, we'll get away with it.
我们需要短暂休息一下。
We need to take a quick break.
马上回来。
We'll be right back.
本节目由领英提供支持。
Support for this show comes from LinkedIn.
对于中小企业来说，每一次招聘都很重要，但招聘所需的时间和资源却十分有限。
For small businesses, every hire matters, but the time and resources required to hire right are limited.
幸运的是，LinkedIn 招聘专业版正是为这种现实情况设计的。
Luckily, LinkedIn Hiring Pro is built for that reality.
它作为您的招聘伙伴，旨在帮助您自信地招聘，仅推荐合适的候选人，而不会让招聘变成另一份全职工作。
It's your hiring partner designed to help you hire with confidence by surfacing only the right candidates without turning hiring into another full time job.
发布职位并不总是最难的部分。
Hosting a job isn't always the hard part.
最难的是找到、联系并筛选出合适的候选人。
It's finding, connecting with, and screening the right candidates.
招聘专业版简化了整个流程，从撰写职位描述到筛选候选人，再到通过人工智能进行初步面试。
Hiring Pro streamlines the entire process from drafting your job to shortlisting candidates and conducting AI powered interviews for initial screenings.
对话式界面让您可以用通俗的语言描述您的需求。
Conversational interface lets you describe what you need in plain language.
无需使用招聘行话。
No recruiter jargon needed.
近60%的招聘在一周内就能找到合适的候选人进行面试。
Nearly 60% of hires find a candidate to interview within a week.
使用Hiring Pro，您将减少搜索时间，更多地与合适的人才建立联系。
With Hiring Pro, you spend less time searching and more time connecting with the right talent.
一次就招对人。
Hire right the first time.
发布您的第一份职位，即可在linkedin.com/partner享受100美元优惠。
Post your first job and get $100 off towards your job post at linkedin.com/partner.
那就是linkedin.com/partner。
That's linkedin.com/partner.
条款和条件适用。
Terms and conditions apply.
本节目由Odoo赞助。经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？
Support for this show comes from Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?
推出Odoo。
Introducing Odoo.
这是你唯一需要的商业软件。
It's the only business software you'll ever need.
它是一个一体化的全集成平台，让您的工作更轻松。
It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier.
客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务等等。
CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.
最棒的是什么？
And the best part?
Odoo 以极低的成本取代了多个昂贵的平台。
Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.
因此，成千上万的企业已经切换到了 Odoo。
That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.
那您为什么不来试试呢？
So why not you?
立即前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。
Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.
这就是odoo.com。
That's odoo.com.
这是由Stonyfield Organic提供的广告内容。
This is advertiser content brought to you by Stonyfield Organic.
我们的奶牛们去牧场，它们特别喜欢。
Our cows, them going out to pasture, they love it.
它们非常期待出去。
They're so excited to go out.
每天，它们都会在门口等着。
Every day, they wait right at the door.
事实上，我们挤完奶后，就打开通道，让它们直接去牧场。
In fact, We milk them and we just open up the laneway and let them just go right out to pasture.
我是罗达·米勒·古德里奇，佛蒙特州卡博特的一名奶农。
I'm Rhonda Miller Goodrich and I'm a dairy farmer in Cabot, Vermont.
我们的农场叫莫莉溪农场。
Our farm is Molly Brook Farm.
我们是一家有机乳品农场，为Stonyfield提供原料。
We're an organic dairy farm and we are a supplier to Stonyfield.
Molly Brook农场自1835年起就属于我丈夫的家族。
Molly Brook Farm has been in my husband's family since 1835.
我们于2015年开始转型为有机农业。
We started our organic transition in 2015.
我们当时有53英亩的玉米地，不得不使用除草剂和杀虫剂，土壤实际上已经完全失去了生机。
We had 53 acres of corn ground and of course we had to use herbicides and pesticides and the soil was dead, really for all intents purposes.
我们停止种植玉米，也不再使用除草剂和杀虫剂，改种了多年生牧草。
We stopped growing corn and stopped using herbicides and pesticides and we seeded that down to perennial grasses.
之后，我们再次看到了土壤中的生物多样性。
After that, we began to see biodiversity in that soil again.
要获得有机认证，我们的奶牛每年必须在牧场放养至少120天。
To be organic certified, our cows need to be in pasture at least one hundred and twenty days.
我认为有机耕作方式确实对我们的牲畜有益。
I think the organic practices really benefit our animals.
你知道，好的饲料、干净的水、明亮的环境，这些对我们很重要，对Stonyfield也同样重要。
You know, having good feed, good water, a nice light area, that's what's important to us and that's what's important to Stonyfield.
访问 stonyfield.com 查找你附近的Stonyfield有机酸奶。
Visit stonyfield.com to find Stonyfield Organic Yogurt near you.
本节目由Wix赞助。
Support for this show comes from Wix.
你可以用Wix制作一个外观精美的网站，而且完全按照你的想法来。
You can make a great looking website with Wix, and you can do it your way.
无论你希望AI协助还是更喜欢亲自动手，都可以通过Wix的AI网站构建器在几分钟内获得一个定制好的、即用型网站，或者从2000多个模板中选择。
Whether you want AI to jump in or prefer to do things yourself, get a custom ready to use website in minutes with Wix's AI website builder, or choose from more than 2,000 templates.
获得专为你的业务量身定制的内置解决方案，并享受便捷无忧的域名注册和包含在内的网页托管服务。
Get built in solutions tailored to your business and enjoy easy, fuss free domain registration, web hosting included.
Wix为全球超过2.8亿家企业提供支持。
Wix powers more than 280,000,000 businesses around the world.
因为使用Wix，你可以拥有自己的独特性，自由创造，无畏扩展。
Because with Wix, you can own your individuality, create freely, and scale fearlessly.
准备好创建你的网站了吗？
Ready to create your website?
前往 wix.com。
Go to wix.com.
就是 wix.com。
That's wix.com.
我们回来了，今天邀请到 Techdirt 的创始人 Mike Masnick，讨论美国政府在历史上如何操纵语言以规避宪法权利。
We're back with Techdirt founder Mike Masnick talking about mass surveillance in the history of the United States government manipulating language to get around our constitutional rights.
有两件事特别引起我的注意。
There's two things that that really jump out at me.
首先，你和我都读过很多法院判决、上诉法院判决和最高法院判决，而我们的最高法院正就如何逐字解释法律条文存在分歧。
One, you know, you and I both read a lot of court decisions and appellate court decisions and supreme court decisions, and there's a fight in our supreme court about how to how to literally interpret the words in our statutes and our laws.
我不会深入展开，但总的来说，在美国，主张直接按法律条文的字面意思来执行，是当前主流的法律解释方式。
And I won't get too far into it, but I I would say generally the idea that you should just read the words on the page and do what they say is the dominant strain of statutory interpretation in The United States.
对吧？
Right?
比如，无论左右派，他们都这么说，他们可能会就这些话的确切含义争论一些非常深奥的细节，但你本就应该直接阅读这些文字并照做。
Like, left or right that they both say it, they might they argue about some very esoteric fine points of what that actually means, but you should just be able to read these words and do what they say.
这一点不容置疑。
That's not up for grabs.
对吧？
Right?
我们至少已经达成了初步共识，你可以称之为文本主义。
Like, we we've landed on at least that first pass of what you might call textualism.
为什么两届政府的律师们会偏离我国主流的法律裁决方式，而双方大法官都至少认同这是第一步？
How do lawyers of both administrations get this far away from the dominant mode of legal decision making in our country that that both the justices of both parties both agree is at least the first step.
我希望我能知道确切的答案。
I wish I knew the exact answer.
但我想，这其实是动机性推理，对吧？
But, you know, what I think it is is it's motivated reasoning, right?
我的意思是，作为律师，你的职责就是为你的当事人辩护，而我们法律体系的成功——如果你能称之为成功的话——往往建立在对抗制的基础上，即各方就这些问题展开辩论，而裁决者的角色则是从中厘清，判断哪一方才是真正正确的。
I mean, as a lawyer, you you are there to sort of defend your client and the, you know, the success, if you can call it success of our legal system tends to be based on having an adversarial situation where you have different sides arguing over these things where you kind of, you know, the the role of the adjudicator is to narrow in and figure out which side is actually correct.
情报机构及其架构的一个问题是，你没有这种对抗性的情境。
One of the problems with the intelligence community and the setup of it is that you don't have that adversarial situation.
因此，一方更容易为自己的论点辩护，因为没有人真正地反驳它。
And so that makes it easier for one side to justify the argument that they're making because nobody is really pushing back on it.
再加上对另一次恐怖袭击的普遍恐惧，任何与国家安全相关的事情都如此。
And so you combine that with the the, you know, overarching fear of another terrorist attack, anything related to national security.
所以，即使在你有像FISA法院这样的情况时——FISA法院多年来因其实际上成为橡皮图章而闻名。
So even when you have situations where you have, like, the FIRE court I mean, the FIRE court was somewhat famous for effectively being a rubber stamp for many years.
我记不清确切的数字了，但大约有99%以上提交给FISA法院的申请，用于授权对某些情况进行监控，都被批准了。
I forget the exact numbers, but it was something like nine over 99% of of applications that went to the FISA court for you know, to allow for surveillance of certain situations were granted.
而且，你很容易就说，哦，99%显然太高了。
And, you know, it's easy to just say, well, if 99%, that's obviously too much.
显然，向法院提出主张的人，他们在有选择地提请诉讼。
Obviously, those bringing claims to the to to the court, you know, they're they're picking and choosing.
他们绝大多数并没有提出完全荒谬的主张。
They're not, for the most part, bringing totally crazy claims.
但如果没有这种对抗性机制，再加上一群强烈有动机的人——他们认为我们必须这么做，或是被政府告知必须这么做——他们总会找到办法去实现。
But without that adversarial aspect and with a very strongly motivated group of people who don't you know, who think we need to do this or are being told by the administration we need to do this, they'll find ways to do it.
而随着时间推移，你最终就会陷入这种局面。
And, you know, and that's that's where you end up over time.
在这个过程中，有没有人曾醒悟过来，对自己说：天啊，我们竟然把‘目标’这个词重新定义成了我们想让它代表的任何东西？
Has there been anyone involved in this process who's ever woken up and said to themselves, boy, we've managed to redefine the word target to mean anything we want.
我的意思是，显然有像爱德华·斯诺登这样的人，泄露了一大堆文件。
I I mean, there obviously, you had, like, Ed Snowden who who leaked a bunch of documents.
还有约翰·纳皮尔·泰，他在2014年左右为《华盛顿邮报》撰写了一篇文章，揭示了对12333号行政令的解读，并指出这才是真正值得关注的问题。
You had John Napier Tie who wrote a piece for the Washington Post in 2014, I believe, which sort of revealed the interpretation of executive order 12 three and said that's the real issue to pay attention to.
还有其他人也曾经就这些问题发声。
You have other people who have sort of spoken up about the these things.
但绝大多数参与其中、在政府内部从事情报工作的人，都深信情报机构的这种观点——即首要目标是保护国家免受任何威胁，而实现这一目标的最佳方式就是掌握尽可能多的信息。
But for the most part, the people who are involved and working, you know, within the administration on intelligence community stuff are sort of bought in to that the view of the intelligence community, which is the overriding goal is to protect the country from something bad, and the best way to do that is to have as much information as possible.
而且，说真的，人们很容易对这种观点产生共鸣：是的，掌握更多信息或许能让他们更早发现威胁，或找到关键线索。
And, like, it's easy to be sympathetic to the the argument that, yes, having more information may allow them to, you know, catch something earlier or find something important.
但你知道，首先，这可能并不正确。
But, you know, one, that might not be true.
获取过多的信息可能和信息太少一样糟糕，因为过多的信息往往会掩盖真正有用的信息，以及你真正需要用来做出判断的信息。
Getting too much information is probably just as bad as too little information because it can often hide the information that is actually useful and the the the information that you actually need to determine something.
但另一方面，我们本来就有宪法，理论上我们之所以不允许多数监控而没有合理依据，是有其原因的。
But also, like, we have a constitution in the first place, and we have reasons why, in theory, we're not supposed to allow for mass surveillance without probable cause.
作为一个信奉法治的国家，我们应当践行这一原则。
And as a country that believes in the rule of law, we should be able to live up to that.
而当所有这些事情都在暗中发生时，你往往会忽视这一点。
And, you know, when when all this stuff happens in in darkness, you will tend to lose sight of that.
我想这让我想到了Anthropic公司。
I think this brings me to Anthropic.
Anthropic主要是一家企业公司。
Anthropic is primarily an enterprise company.
他们在政府事务方面很在行。
They're they're good at the government.
对吧？
Right?
他们打造了这些能力。
They they they built those muscles.
他们的团队由非常熟悉这些内容的人组成。
They're they're staffed by people who are really well versed in some of this stuff.
他们显然注意到皮特·赫格塞斯说‘我们希望所有合法用途’，然后深入两层解读，认为：你字面上的信念是，这些词的含义并非其表面所言，因此‘所有合法用途’这个说法范围太大，我们需要设置一些限制，特别是针对大规模监控。
They obviously looked at Pete Hegseth saying we want all lawful uses and they went two levels of interpretation down and said, well, your literal belief is that these words do not mean what they say they mean on their face And so all lawful uses is too big and we wanna put some guardrails, particularly on mass surveillance.
再次说明，我会把自主武器搁置一旁。
Again, I'm I'm gonna bracket out autonomous weapons.
当然还有其他红线，但特别在大规模监控方面，达里奥修正案提出：我们可能做得过头了。
Obviously, other red lines, but particularly on mass surveillance, Dario Amendment is out there saying, we can we can do too much.
这太危险了。
This is too dangerous.
这是对第四修正案的侵犯。
This is a fourth minute violation.
这里存在一种矛盾：你说你会遵守这些法律，而这些法律原本的意思是这样，但经过这么长时间后，它们的实际含义却完全变了，我们就是不想参与其中。
And there's the tension there is you're saying you're going to comply with these laws that say one thing and they actually now after all this time they mean something completely different and we just don't want be part of that.
这就是这场斗争的核心。
That's the fight.
我想把这和萨姆·阿尔特曼做个对比，他突然跳出来表示我们会遵守所有合法用途，然后发一篇长文，列出我们要遵守的所有法律。
I just want to compare that to Sam Altman who, you know, swoops in to say we'll do all lawful uses and then post this long message being like, here are the all the laws we're going to comply with.
但看起来他并不知道美国国家安全局是如何重新解释这些条款的，结果被误导了。
And it seems like he didn't know how the NSA had reinterpreted these things and kinda got taken for a ride.
从那以后，他一直在退缩，就像我说的，就在我们录音的同时，我确信还有更多推文，每个人的观点都在变化，而萨姆正在慢慢收回他的说法。
And he's been since walking it back, like I'm saying, even as we are recording, I'm confident there are more tweets and everyone's positions have changed and Sam has been walking it back slowly.
是的。
Yep.
但看起来OpenAI和萨姆·阿尔特曼只是按字面意思解读了这些法规，并相信了它们的表面含义。
But it does seem like OpenAI, Sam Altman got roped into reading the statutes on their face and believing what they said.
这也是你对这件事的解读吗？
Is that your interpretation of events as well?
我认为有两种可能性，其中一种就是如此。
I think there's two possibilities and that's one of them.
一种可能是，他和公众一样，被玩弄了多年。
One is that he got played the same way that the public got played for for many years.
另一种理论是，他或OpenAI的一些律师——我认为他们非常能干且知识渊博——其实知道内情，却以为自己能像NSA那样玩同样的游戏几十年。
The alternative theory, and I have no idea which one of these is true, is that he or some of the the lawyers at OpenAI, who I think are very competent and very knowledgeable, knew this but thought that they could play the same game that the NSA played for, you know, a few decades.
只要他们嘴上说这些话，却从不揭露实际的解读方式，他们就能蒙混过关。
And that as long as they say these things and then they say the words, but they don't reveal the actual interpretations, that they could get away with it too.
所以萨姆发表了一项声明，看起来好像OpenAI和Anthropic有着完全相同的红线，而政府对此也表示满意。
So Sam comes out with a statement that makes it look like, you know, we had the exact same red lines as Anthropic did, and the government was great with that.
事实上，我认为萨姆还说他们多了一条红线，Anthropic有两条，而OpenAI有三条，政府对此完全接受。
In fact, I think Sam put it that they had a third red line, that that Anthropic had two red lines and OpenAI had three, and the government was perfectly fine with it.
这让很多人感到困惑。
And that, like, left a lot of people sort of scratching their heads.
但我认为，这要么是萨姆和他身边的人根本不理解这些规定在实际中如何运作，要么是他们明白，却以为公众不会察觉，因此能蒙混过去。
But I think I think it's it's it has to be either that Sam and whoever was surrounding him didn't understand how these how these work in practice or they did and they just assumed that that the public wouldn't know and therefore they could get away with it.
另一个让我想到的是，AI是新的，人们很容易把新技术当作前所未有的问题来对待。
The other thing that comes to mind, again, AI is new and it it's so tempting to come at new technologies as though these are problems of first impression.
是的。
Yeah.
以前从来没有人需要思考过这个问题。
No one's ever had to think about this before.
但事实上，人们早就一直在思考这些问题了。
But the reality is everyone's been thinking about this stuff for a long time.
也许这里真正新颖的不是AI，而是特朗普的第二任期政府，他们没有像以往那样进行一堆可能无人阅读的法律辩护来向一个无人关注的秘密法庭解释自己的行为，而是直接不那么隐晦了。
Maybe the thing that's new here is not AI, but that the second Trump administration, instead of doing a bunch of lawyering that maybe no one will ever read to justify their actions to a secret court that no one's paying attention to, they're just not that subtle.
他们并不那么精明。
They're not that sophisticated.
他们直接说要一直监视所有人。
And they're just saying they're going to spy on everybody all the time.
是的。
Yeah.
他们只是以一种或许所有政府都该如此的方式公开宣布自己的意图，然后看事情会如何发展。
They they they just announce their intentions in a way that maybe all administration should just announce their intentions and see where the the chips fall.
但我在想，好吧。
But I'm looking at okay.
爱德华·斯诺登曾经在这里的纽约市。
There was Ed Snowden here in New York City.
AT&T运营着一栋众所周知是国家安全局的建筑。
There's AT and T runs a building that everyone knows is an NSA building.
那是一栋巨大的建筑，我们却要假装它不是国家安全局的监控中心，但它就明明白白地在那里。
Like, it's just a giant building and we're supposed to pretend it's not an NSA surveillance center, but like it's right there.
它非常庞大。
It's huge.
但这些似乎都没带来什么结果。
None of that seems to have come to anything.
对吧？
Right?
这些爆料和泄露事件层出不穷，但我们并没有退缩。
Like, all of these revelations, these leaks, we haven't backed it off.
事实上，随着我们的生活越来越数字化，这种情况反而加剧了。
In in fact, it's only increased as so much of our lives has gotten more and more digital.
也许特朗普政府总是如此直白粗暴，这反而会成为引发清算的导火索。
And maybe the Trump administration being such a blunt instrument at all times, that might actually be the thing that causes the reckoning.
你觉得这种情况会真的发生吗？
Do you see that playing out anyway?
是的。
Yeah.
我的意思是，这里面有几个不同的方面。
I mean, I think there's a few different things there.
说我们完全没有在这些问题上退步，并不完全正确。
And it it's not entirely true that we haven't backed off this stuff at all.
我的意思是，这些爆料确实促使了一些改变，比如在外国情报监视法院中，现在出现了某种类似民事法庭之友的角色，他们会代表另一方就某些问题发声。
I mean, the revelations did lead to some changes within how these things happen, and there there there are now, I forget what they're called, but they're like these civil amicus people within the FISA court that will act as a you know, presenting the other side on certain issues.
我们已经看到某些权力在某些方面受到限制，这些权力每隔一段时间就需要重新授权，而活动人士一直积极地反对，并试图为这些权力设置更多限制。
And we've seen some of the authorities limited in certain ways, and they, you know, come up for reauthorization every so often and and people activists have been very aggressive in pushing back and trying to put some more guardrails on.
但就更大的问题而言，我认为有两方面。
But to the larger question, I think there's two different things.
我觉得你说得对一半，这个政府确实不够隐晦，它公开说出了一些本不该说的事情，是的。
I think I think you're half right in that the this administration is not subtle and is and just says out loud the things it it shouldn't and that Yeah.
与伊朗处于战争状态。
At war with Iran.
是的。
Yeah.
他们就是直接说：我们正在做。
They're just like, we're doing it.
这件事正在发生。
It's happening.
对。
Right.
你知道，这就像是我们连舞都不想跳了。
You know, it's like, we're not even gonna try the dance.
是的。
Yeah.
以所有前任政府都不会采取的方式。
In ways that all previous administrations wouldn't do.
但他们并没有直接就监控，尤其是对美国人的监控发表过明确言论。
But they haven't really said that directly about surveillance, especially surveillance of Americans.
你知道，有一些暗示，但他们在这方面并没有强烈表态。
You know, there's been hints of it, but they haven't come out as strongly on that.
所以我不完全确定问题就出在这里。
So I'm not entirely sure that it's that.
另一方面，我认为这可能更多与Anthropic的定位以及人们对人工智能作为可能具有存在性威胁技术的普遍看法有关，而Anthropic一直把自己定位为有思辨精神的善良一方。
The other half of it is I think maybe has to do more with Anthropic's positioning and the general view of AI as this possibly existential technology where Anthropic has always presented itself as we're the sort of thoughtful good guys.
无论你是否相信这一点，其实都无关紧要，但他们确实拥有这样的公众形象。
And whether or not you believe that is kind of besides the point, but they have this reputation out there.
如果我们试图以一种安全的方式进行，尊重人类，并关注所有这些方面。
If we're trying to do this in a way that is safe, that that respects humanity and is paying attention to all of these things.
因此，当你遇到这种冲突时，我认为这就是矛盾产生的根源。
And so when you have that clash, I think that's where the the the struggle comes in.
你有一个特朗普政府，他们只想为所欲为，而且毫不掩饰这一点。
You have a Trump administration that just wants to be able to do whatever it wants to be able to do, and they're not subtle about that.
而Anthropic则不同，它的自我定位和公众形象始终是：我们深思熟虑，尊重人类、权利以及所有这些价值观。
And you have an Anthropic that that, you know, its self description and its public persona is always like, we're thoughtful and we respect humanity and rights and all of these kinds of things.
我认为冲突很可能就源于此，因为Anthropic，正如已明确指出的，长期以来一直与国防部合作，并与政府签订了多项其他合同。
I think that's probably where the clash came in because Anthropic, you know, as has been made clear, has worked with the defense department for a while and has many other contracts with the government that it has used.
这之前并不是问题。
It hasn't been a problem.
只有在这些特定领域，当政府试图扩大合同范围时，Anthropic的高层才开始说：等等。
It was only in these specific areas where, know, as the government was seeking to expand expand the contract that it had that, you know, the senior leadership of Anthropic began to say, well, wait.
我们必须确保不跨越那些可能损害我们作为深思熟虑、安全型AI提供者声誉的红线。
We have to make sure that we're not crossing these red lines that would potentially harm our reputation as the sort of thoughtful, safe AI provider.
我们得再休息一下。
We have to take another quick break.
马上回来。
We'll be back in just a minute.
你的企业身份涵盖客户能看到和看不到的一切，比如法律文件、网站安全和州级执照。
Your business identity is everything from what customers see to what they don't, like legal paperwork, website security, and state licenses.
现在，你可以通过西北注册代理为你的企业获得更多支持。
Well, now you can get more for your business with Northwest Registered Agent.
西北注册代理近三十年来一直帮助创业者创立和扩展企业。
Northwest Registered Agent has been helping entrepreneurs launch and grow businesses for nearly thirty years.
他们是美国最大的注册代理和LLC服务提供商，拥有超过1500名企业顾问。
They're the largest registered agent and LLC service in The US with over 1,500 corporate guides.
别再拖延了。
Don't wait.
只需十次点击和十分钟，即可保护你的隐私、打造你的品牌，并完成你的完整企业身份设置。
Protect your privacy, build your brand, and get your complete business identity in just 10 clicks and ten minutes.
访问 northwestregisteredagent.com/paidvox，开始打造令人惊叹的事业。
Visit northwestregisteredagent.com/paidvox and start building something amazing.
前往 northwestregisteredagent.com/paidvox，获得更多服务，尽在 Northwest Registered Agent。
Get more with Northwest Registered Agent at northwestregisteredagent.com/paidvox.
本节目由 Core Weave 赞助支持。
Support for the show comes from Core Weave.
无论你看向哪里，人工智能都在拓展我们曾经认为不可能实现的边界，而这一切的核心正是 CoreWeave。
Everywhere you look, AI is expanding what we thought was possible, And at the center of it all is CoreWeave.
医疗研究与诊断、教育、电影中的复杂视觉特效、科学与技术突破。
Medical research and diagnosis, education, complex visual effects for movies, science and technology breakthroughs.
CoreWeave 为全球人工智能先驱提供专为 AI 打造的技术，构建前所未有的成果。
CoreWeave powers AI pioneers around the world with purpose built tech, building what's never been built before.
CoreWeave 是人工智能不可或缺的云平台。
CoreWeave is the essential cloud for AI.
随时待命，为 AI 而生。
Ready for anything, ready for AI.
展开剩余字幕（还有 284 条）
要了解有关CoreWeave如何为全球顶尖AI提供支持的更多信息，请访问coreweave.com/readyforanything。
To learn more about how CoreWeave powers the world's best AI, go to coreweave.com/readyforanything.
本节目由Retool赞助。
Support for the show comes from retool.
太多公司依赖胶带式电子表格、Slack工作流以及各种拼凑起来的工具来运行关键业务。
Too many companies run critical operations on duct tape spreadsheets, Slack workflows, and whatever else they could cobble together.
这并不是因为他们想这样，而是因为开发内部工具意味着要等待他人积压的开发任务长达数周。
Not because they want to, but because building internal tools means weeks of waiting on someone else's backlog.
这就是Retool的用武之地。
That's where retool comes in.
只需描述你需要什么，就能构建自定义的内部工具。
Build custom internal tools just by describing what you need.
输入类似“帮我基于Salesforce数据创建一个收入仪表板”的指令，Retool就会直接在你公司的数据和云端环境中构建出来，并内置企业级安全功能。
Prompt something like build me a revenue dashboard on our Salesforce data, and retool actually builds it on your company's data in your cloud with enterprise security built in.
前往retool.com/vox。
Go to retool.com/vox.
我们都必须重新思考如何构建软件。
We all need to retool how we build software.
如果你在经营企业，你就知道大多数CRM的情况。
If you're running a business, you know the deal with most CRMs.
它们塞满了你根本用不上的功能，界面笨拙，你最终会花太多时间只是寻找基本信息。
They're packed with endless features you'll never use, interfaces that feel clunky, and you end up spending way too much time just trying to find basic information.
幸运的是，你有Pipedrive。
Luckily for you, there's Pipedrive.
Pipedrive是一款专为中小型企业设计的简单销售CRM工具。
Pipedrive is a simple sales CRM tool for small and medium businesses.
Pipedrive将你的整个销售流程整合在一个仪表板上，让你掌控全局，更快地促成交易。
Pipedrive brings your entire sales processes in one dashboard, so you stay in control and close more deals faster.
现在，通过这个链接，你可以获得三十天的免费试用。
Right now, when you use the link, you'll get a thirty day free trial.
无需信用卡或任何付款。
No credit card or payment needed.
只需前往 pipedrive.com/vox 即可开始使用。
Just head to pipedrive.com/vox to get started.
那就是 pipedrive.com/vox，你几分钟内就能上线运行。
That's pipedrive.com/vox, and you can be up and running in minutes.
我们继续与 Techdirt 的 Mike Masnick 对话。
We're back with Techdirt's Mike Masnick.
在广告前，Mike 解释了 Anthropic 作为安全、有意识的 AI 公司的声誉，如何因特朗普政府的粗暴要求以及科技行业几乎默不作声、不再追问其技术将如何使用和最终目的而受到威胁。
Before the break, Mike was explaining how Anthropic's reputation as the safe conscious AI company is being put at risk by the Trump administration's blunt demand and the tech industry essentially shut up and stop asking questions about how its technology will be used and to what end.
现在我想深入探讨这个故事中的一个重要细节，即我们的数据来源和存储位置。
Now I wanna get into an important detail of the story, which relates to where our data comes from and where it lives.
因为第四修正案禁止对属于我们所有并由我们控制的数据进行非法搜查和扣押。
Because the Fourth Amendment prohibits unlawful search and seizure when it comes to data that we own and control.
但在云计算和云服务时代，我们绝大多数数据并非保存在我们的设备或家中，而是存储在大型公司运营的服务器上。
But in the era of cloud computing and cloud services, the vast majority of our data isn't kept on our devices or in our homes, but instead on corporate servers run by huge companies.
而在许多情况下，政府无需搜查令即可获取这些数据。
And the government can, in a lot of cases, go and obtain it without a warrant.
我想简要问问你关于监控的问题，特别是Anthropic涉及的第四修正案担忧。
I wanna briefly ask you about surveillance in general, and in particular, Anthropic's Fourth Amendment concern.
对吧？
Right?
第四修正案规定政府不得无理搜查你。
The Fourth Amendment says the government can unreasonably search you.
理解第四修正案最好的方式是听Jay Z的《99 Problems》。
The best way to understand the Fourth Amendment is by listening to 99 Problems by Jay Z.
所以如果你需要休息一下，去听一下《99 Problems》吧。
So if you need to take a break, you go listen to 99 Problems.
这太棒了。
That's great.
所有内容都在里面了。
It it's all in there.
我上法学院时听过这首歌，当时就完全明白了。
I I listened to it when I was in law school and made perfect sense.
但政府通常需要获得搜查令才能搜查你。
But the government generally needs a warrant to, like, search you.
随着你的生活越来越多地转移到线上，这种要求的例外情况也越来越多。
And as more and more of your life goes online, there's lots and lots of exceptions to this.
但核心理念是，他们在网络上也应当需要搜查令。
But the idea is they should still need a warrant online.
Anthropic 的论点是，人工智能永远不会疲倦。
Anthropic's argument is, well, the AI will never get tired.
它可以全天候搜索一切内容。
It can search everything all the time.
这意味着我们将进行大规模监控。
That means we're just gonna do a mass surveillance.
但即使在人工智能出现之前，政府可以搜查你所有物品的想法就已经存在了。
But even before AI showed up, right, the idea that the government could search everything that belonged to you was out there.
政府无需搜查令即可搜查你所有物品的想法，也早已存在。
The idea that the government didn't need a warrant to search all your stuff was out there.
有一种观点认为，只要你的任何数据短暂地传输到国外，政府就能进行拦截。
The idea that if any of your data ever went outside the country for a brief second, the government intercepted there was out there.
当我上大学时，正值《爱国者法案》出台，当时的争论是：他们不会搜索你的实际数据，但可以获取元数据；而仅凭元数据——即关于你数据的数据——就足以随时精确定位你，甚至这种做法也被认为太过分了。
When I was in college around the time of the Patriot Act, the debate was they're not going to search your actual data but they can get the metadata and the metadata alone, the data about your data will be enough to precisely locate you at all times and that even that is too far.
我们一直在进行一场博弈：政府可以收集哪些信息？哪些是允许的？为了保障我们的安全，他们需要保留什么？而哪些又太过界了？这些界限已经发生了变化。
And we've been doing this dance of what can the government collect, what is permissible, what do they need to keep us all safe and what's too far, those lines have moved.
所以，请简要描述一下当前大规模监控的一般性担忧，以及我们在人工智能出现之前所处的状况，那时人工智能尚未使一切变得更加复杂。
So just briefly describe the sort of generalized concern about surveillance at the scale and where we are now before the AI situation sort of exponentially made everything more complicated.
是的。
Yeah.
在这里，我必须引入另一个概念，这个概念本该早些提到，但它非常重要，那就是‘第三方原则’。
And here I have to introduce another concept that that probably should have mentioned earlier, but it is important, which is called the third party doctrine.
第四修正案的核心理念是，政府在没有搜查令的情况下不得搜查你或你的物品，而且没有合理理由证明你犯了罪，他们也无法获得搜查令。
And so the idea with the Fourth Amendment is that the government can't search you or your things without a warrant, and it can't get a warrant without probable cause that you've committed some sort of crime.
但几十年前出现了一个被称为‘第三方原则’的概念，它指出：即使这些信息属于你，只要不属于你‘所有’，第四修正案的保护就不一定适用，甚至完全不适用。
But there's this concept which came about decades ago called the third party doctrine, which says that doesn't necessarily apply or doesn't apply at all to things that aren't yours even if it is your data.
因此，最早也最明显的表现形式是电话公司记录的你拨打过哪些电话。
And so the the earliest and most obvious version of this was phone records that the phone company had of who who you called.
电话公司并没有录音你的通话内容，但它们会记录，比如我给你打电话，电话公司就会有一条记录显示迈克打了电话。
The phone companies weren't recording your calls, but they were recording you know, if I called you, there would be a record at the phone company that says Mike calls.
多个法院已经裁定，政府可以要求获取这些信息，而且不需要搜查令，因为这并不构成对你数据的搜查。
What had been determined by multiple courts was that the the government can go and request, and they don't need a warrant for that because it's not a search of your data.
这是第三方的数据，而第三方可以自行决定将这些数据交出。
It's this third party, and they can agree as a third party to just hand over that that data.
但这些裁决都来自六七十年代，当时第三方数据还很少，政府在没有搜查令的情况下就能获取这些信息。
But that was like, you know, cases from the sixties and seventies where that was determined that the government can get access to that without a warrant when there wasn't that much third party data out there.
计算机和互联网的兴起改变了这一状况。
The rise of computers and the Internet changed that.
现在，一切都可以被视为第三方数据。
Now everything is third party data.
我们所做的一切都会被某个公司收集并留下记录。
Everything that we do is collected by some company somewhere and has a record of it.
所以，关于你的每一点数据——你在哪里、你和谁交谈、你与谁互动、你说什么、你正在做什么——
And so basically every bit of data about you, where you are, who you speak to, who you interact with, what you say, what what you're doing.
如今，所有这些数据几乎都由第三方持有。
All of that is pretty much held by third parties these days.
因此，第三方原则在某种程度上吞噬了整个第四修正案，任何关于你的信息，只要被他人持有，政府请求获取时的标准就低得多。
And so the the third party doctrine has sort of swallowed the entire Fourth Amendment to some extent where any anything that is about you had there that somebody else has, there's a much lower standard for what the government can do to request it.
现在公司可以
Now companies can
为了具体说明，这意味着当我的数据存储在iCloud中时，是的。
And just to be specific, this means when my data is in iCloud Yes.
政府可以直接联系苹果公司，从iCloud中获取我的数据，而无需告知我。
The government can go to Apple and get my data out of iCloud without ever telling me.
嗯，他们可以提出请求。
Well, it it's it's they can request it.
因此，他们可以轻松在没有搜查令的情况下提出请求。
So they can easily request it without a warrant.
然后公司也有自己的权利，可以决定如何处理这一请求。
Then the company has its own rights and can determine what they want to do with that request.
它们可以直接交出数据。
They can just give it up.
它们通常会这么做：如果请求比较严重，它们可以直接拒绝，或者通知你——而这正是大多数公司会采取的做法。
They can, as most of them will do, is you know, if if it's a serious request, they can reject requests out of hand or they can alert you and they can say and this is what most of them will do.
它们会通知你，说政府正在请求获取你的一些数据。
They'll alert you and say, you know, the government is requesting some of your data.
你可以去法院尝试阻止他们。
You know, you can go to court and try and block them.
如果不行，我们将在七天内交出你的数据，或其他类似的时间期限。
If not, we will hand over your data in seven days or whatever it might be.
同样，这取决于是否涉及刑事调查，有时可能会有保密令，禁止公司告知你。
Again, it depends if it's a criminal investigation, then there may be some sort of gag order where the company is not allowed to tell you.
各种情况都有，但大多数情况下，其保护程度都低于第四修正案对您家中数据或任何信息所要求的保护水平。
There's all sorts of situations, but most of them involve less than the level of protection that the Fourth Amendment would require if it was data in your or any information or anything in your own home.
我问这个问题是因为，显然在座的每个人都明白。
I'm asking this because, you know, it's obvious to everybody listening to this.
你存在他人云服务器上的数据量是巨大的。
The amount of data you have on someone else's cloud server is massive.
对吧？
Right?
现在，你几乎在互联网上做的每一件事都会以某种方式被备份或记录在别人的服务器上，而政府找到了一种绕过第四修正案的方法，声称那些数据并不真正属于你。
Every every single thing that you do generally in the Internet now is backed up in some way or recorded in some way on someone else's servers and the government has found this way to get around the Fourth Amendment and say, that's not actually yours.
它属于亚马逊或者其他公司。
It belongs to Amazon or whatever.
我们可以去和亚马逊交涉，亚马逊必须在这一过程中居中调停，说我们已经设计了另一种程序来一定程度地保护用户。
We can go talk to Amazon and Amazon has to stand in the middle of that process and say, we've invented another process to somewhat protect the people.
当我报道第一批涉及云服务的第三方原则案件时，政府一直胜诉，那正是我变成小丑的时候。
And I look at that and you know, the when I was covering the first third party doctrine cases that covered the cloud services and the government kept winning, that's basically when I turned into the Joker.
我当时就想，
And I was like,
我们所有这些关于文本主义和字面意思的假装，其实毫无意义。
all of this stuff that we're pretending about textualism and the plain like, of this means anything.
是的。
Yeah.
我们只是利用这部古老法律，通过后门获取每个人的数据。
Cause we've we've just horsepower to backdoor using this ancient law into everyone's data.
然后我看到这个，再看看Anthropic，我觉得这是同样的模式。
And then I look at this and I I look at Anthropic and I say, is the same pattern.
对吧？
Right?
这是一家私营公司说：好吧，我们理解你们的立场，我们知道你们重新解释了法律，让它变成这个意思，所以我们会在你们、我们的工具和通过我们服务流动的美国人的数据之间设置一些流程。
This is a private company saying, okay, like we understand your position, we understand that you've reinterpreted the law to mean this thing and we're gonna put some process in between you, our tool and the data of Americans flowing through our service.
我只是想知道，你是否看到了Anthropic、Amazon、Azure以及其他持有我们如此多数据的云服务之间的这种相似性。
And I'm just wondering if you see that parallel there between Anthropic and Amazon and Azure and whatever other cloud services that exist that hold so much of our data.
对。
Yeah.
不过我认为这里有几点重要的澄清，能让情况有所不同。
Though I think there are a few clarifications that are important here that that make this a little bit different.
事实上，据报道，我认为《纽约时报》最先报道过，Anthropic 最关键的条款是专门针对从商业服务收集的数据，明确禁止将 Claude 用于这些数据，而这正是我们讨论的第三方数据问题的核心。
And in fact, you know, it was reported I think the New York Times had this reporting first that, you know, the main clause that was most important to Anthropic was specifically about data collected from commercial services and not being able to use Claude on that data which is you know exactly this issue in terms of third party data.
但我想要澄清一下，我们刚才谈到的亚马逊或其他第三方托管您数据的情况，与现在不同，因为它们在生态系统中的位置，直接托管了您的数据。
But I do wanna clarify the the main difference where what we were just talking about before this with with you know, Amazon or other third parties hosting your data, that was cases where they were you know, because of where they sit in the ecosystem, they were hosting your data directly.
对于 Claude，没有人担心 NSA 会去查看您的 Claude 使用记录。
With Claude, it's not that any anyone is worried about the NSA looking through, like, your Claude usage.
对吧？
Right?
真正的问题在于，它们会去获取来自亚马逊，或者更可能的是那些在您手机上投放广告、掌握您位置和兴趣等信息的隐蔽数据经纪商的第三方数据，然后把这些数据喂给 Claude 系统处理。
It's it's about them going out and getting third party data from an Amazon or more likely, you know, the the sort of sneaky hidden data brokers that serve ads on your phones and know all your location and and your interests and things like that, and then feeding that into a system that Claude would then work on.
这才是 Anthropic 真正不想参与的部分。
That's what Anthropic really didn't wanna be a part of.
所以，无论政府通过何种方式从第三方获取这些数据，Claude 都表示：我们不希望我们的工具被用于这些数据。
So wherever or however the government would collect that data from a third party, Claude said, we don't we don't want our tool to be used on that data.
这部分让人想起苹果公司曾坚决抵制联邦调查局，拒绝在iPhone上安装后门，并且敢于对抗特朗普。
There's a piece of that that just feels like Apple famously stands up to the FBI, put a backdoor in the iPhone and Apple says no and they stand up to Trump.
我们的体系中有一部分就是，大型私营企业可以代表客户对政府说不，而这次感觉如出一辙。
And there's just a part of however our system works in which big private companies get to say no to the government on behalf of their customers and this felt the same.
就像苹果公司拒绝在iPhone上安装后门，或者大型云服务商要求你必须经过一定流程才能获取个人数据一样。
In the same way that you know, Apple again won't put it back to work on the iPhone or the big cloud providers say there's a little bit of a process you have to jump through before you get the individual data.
在这里，Anthropic似乎在说：我们不会对你们从其他方获取的数据进行批量分析，因为这会导致对美国民众的全天候大规模监控，我们不想参与这种事。
Here it seems like Anthropic is saying, we're not just gonna do bulk analysis of data that you have acquired from other parties because that leads to twenty four seven mass surveillance of Americans and we don't want to do that.
这对本届政府来说，似乎已经越过底线了。
And that seems like a bridge too far for this administration.
这种情况还能挽回吗？
Is there any coming back from that?
我的意思是，我们拭目以待。
I mean, we'll see.
过去这种情况发生过很多次，大多数大型科技公司都曾说过，有些事已经越过底线了。
In the past when that's happened and it's happened plenty of times with with most of the the large tech companies, at some point, they've said something is a bridge too far.
通常情况下，这种情况会诉诸法庭，公司或政府一方会提起诉讼，展开一场法律较量。
And where that normally goes is to court and that, you know, the companies will go to court or the administration will go to court and there'll be some sort of court battle.
我的意思是，给iPhone开后门就是一个完美的例子。
I mean, you know, backdooring the iPhone is is a perfect example of that.
这件事确实上了法庭，双方也激烈交锋，但最终并没有得出明确结论，因为FBI最终还是手动破解了iPhone，之后也不希望法院的裁决影响未来。
Sort of went to court and they sort of fought it out, though they never quite got to a conclusion because the FBI eventually did just, you know, manually break into the iPhone and then didn't want the court ruling to to ruin the future.
但在这个案例中，升级的方式和以往情况不同——他们没有直接诉诸法庭，而是采用了供应链风险认定，这简直荒谬至极。
But in this case, you know, where the escalation is and where this is this is different than those past situations is that rather than just going to court, they did this supply chain risk designation, which is just insane.
你知道，这个工具原本是用来阻止潜在的外国恶意行为者提供可能被植入隐蔽监控工具的技术，从而禁止这些技术的使用。
You know, this idea that this tool which was designed to stop, you know, far potential foreign malicious actors from supplying technology that could then, you know, put in hidden surveillance tools into the larger technology stack, that those could be banned.
而如今，把这个工具用在一个美国公司身上，仅仅因为其制定了伦理政策，这明显是对该工具的严重滥用。
To apply that to a US based company basically for having an ethics policy feels, you know, like a real real misuse of that tool.
即使这个工具本身，在某些方面也值得质疑，但当你谈论的是中国网络公司之类的情况时，你还能理解其背后的动机。
And even that tool, I think, was questionable in in some ways, but you could understand the the impetus behind it for when you're talking about, like, a Chinese networking firm or something along those lines.
但在这里，这完全说不通。
Here, it makes no sense.
因此，对此事的反应远远超出了通常在这种情况下会出现的程度。
And so the the reaction to this goes so far beyond what would normally be seen in this case.
你可以看到，传统上，可能会出现某种诉讼，任何一方都可以发起。
You could see you know, traditionally, there would be some sort of court case and either side could start it.
而这场争斗仅仅围绕着合同该如何适用这样的问题。
And it would just be a battle about, you know, what what you know, how the contract could be applied.
但这里发生的情况并非如此。
But that's not what is happening here.
这一届政府实际上是在说：如果你不把我们想要的一切都交出来，如果你不按照我们的要求来设置你的工具，那么我们就将试图彻底摧毁你的整个业务。
That that this administration is effectively saying, if you don't give us absolutely everything that we want, if you don't set up your tools to work the way we want them to work, then we will effectively try to destroy your entire business.
这是一种升级。
And that that is an escalation.
关于这一点，我想最后谈一点。
There's one piece of this that I wanna end on.
这是对这一切的终极版本解读。
It's kind of the galaxy brain version of all this.
FIRE是一个倡导言论自由的组织，就在今天我开始录制之前，他们发布了一篇博客文章，主张强迫Anthropic构建其不愿开发的工具构成对言论自由的侵犯。
FIRE, which is a free speech advocacy group, they put out a blog post just today, just before I started recording, making the argument that forcing Anthropic to build tools it doesn't want to build is a free speech violation.
这被称为强制性言论。
That it's something called compelled speech.
这里有着丰富的历史背景。
And there's a there's a lot of history here.
这涉及到一些非常深入、非常技术性的、近乎存在危机级别的细节。
This is some some deep verge and tech dirt like in the weeds existential crisis history here.
但其核心观点是：解码即言论。
But it basically comes on the idea that decode is speech.
编写计算机代码是一种言论形式，政府无权强迫你这么做，由此衍生出大量相关论点。
Writing code for a computer is a form of speech and the government can't force you to do it and a whole bunch of stuff flows from that.
你是否认同这个观点，即强迫Anthropic构建其不愿开发的工具属于强制性言论？
Do you buy this argument that that forcing Anthropic to build tools that doesn't want to build this compelled speech?
是的。
Yeah.
我实际上觉得这个被迫言论的观点相当有说服力。
I actually think it's it is fairly compelling Compelling compelled speech.
但不完全是。
But no.
我认为这个论点确实很有意思。
I I do think it is an interesting argument.
这个观点在我原本考虑的问题清单中，其实排得比较靠后。
It's one that, you know, had been a little bit further down the list of of the issues that I was thinking about.
我显然更关注第四修正案相关的问题。
I was obviously mostly more focused on the Fourth Amendment issues and and that.
但我认为FIRE的论点并没有错。
But this I I think the FIRE argument is not wrong.
在其他情境中，我们也见过类似的情况，比如在加密系统中强制植入后门的问题上。
And we've have seen this in other contexts in terms of you know, it did come up in the backdoor issue as well in terms of, you know, trying to build backdoors into encrypted systems.
公司确实援引了第一修正案，声称强迫我们编写这类代码属于被迫言论。
Companies definitely raised First Amendment claims and saying you can't that is compelled speech to force us to write that kind of code.
所以我认为这是一个有效的论点。
And so I think it is a a valid argument.
它可能再次是法院最初不太愿意处理的论点，如果他们能以其他方式解决这些问题的话。
It might be, again, one that courts are probably less willing to tackle initially if they can deal with these issues some other way.
但我很高兴FIRE发布了这篇帖子，我认为这是一个有趣且有说服力的论点。
But I'm glad that FIRE made that post, and I think I think it is an an interesting and and compelling argument.
第二任特朗普政府的本质就是如此粗暴。
It's just the nature of the second Trump administration is that it's such a blunt instrument.
就像我们几乎肯定会同时攻击所有问题一样。
It's like we it it is it is almost certain we will attack all of the issues all
一次性全部处理。
at once.
是的。
Yes.
对。
Yeah.
是的。
Yeah.
对，没错。
And and yeah.
我的意思是，每一项权利法案修正案都必须以某种形式，针对每一个可能的问题进行挑战。
I mean, every every bill of rights amendment has to be has to be challenged in some form or another with every every possible issue.
我相信我们可以
I'm sure we can
转转轮盘。
Spin the wheel.
我相信我们可以
I'm sure we
在这里某个地方找到第三修正案的违规情况作为
can fit a third amendment violation somewhere in here as
当然。
well.
是的。
Yeah.
克劳德必须住在你家。
Claude has to live in your house.
没错。
Exactly.
这会很棒。
It's gonna be great.
我们正在做第一、三、四和七期。
We're we're doing one, three, four, and seven.
我们来收尾吧，把这些都搞定。
Let's let's wrap we'll wrap them up.
迈克，这真是太棒了。
Mike, this has been great.
我简直不敢相信你以前没上过节目。
I cannot believe you haven't been on a show before.
这真是太棒了。
This has been great.
你一定要尽快再回来。
You gotta come back soon.
当然。
Absolutely.
只要你需要我，随时都可以。
Whenever whenever you want me.
在结束之前，我想快速介绍一位特别嘉宾。
Before we wrap up, really quickly, I wanna bring on a very special guest.
她是海伦·哈夫卢克，我们《The Verge》的出版人。
It's Helen Havluk, our publisher here at The Verge.
嗨，海伦。
Hey, Helen.
谢谢邀请我参加。
Thanks for having me on.
海伦，我想问问你，因为你负责我们的业务，现在关于AI的讨论很多。
Helen, I wanted to ask, because you run our business, there's a lot of talk about AI.
我们刚刚做了一整期关于这个话题的节目。
We just did a whole episode about it.
我们在这种报道上如何进行投资？
How are we investing in that coverage?
我们在The Verge这里如何扩大这方面的报道？
How are we growing that coverage here at The Verge?
你和我显然花了大量时间讨论The Verge对AI的报道，以及The Verge应该如何报道这个故事。
You and I obviously spend a lot of time talking about The Verge's AI coverage, how The Verge needs to cover this story.
这不仅是The Verge作为一个独立报道领域的最大故事。
It's both the biggest story as a standalone beat for The Verge.
我们聘请了一些出色的人才，比如海登·菲尔德，他们专门负责这一领域的报道。
We've hired some amazing people like Hayden Field who are covering it as a standalone beat.
但这也是The Verge每一个部门所面临的最大故事，对吧？
But it's also the biggest story in kind of every desk of The Verge, right?
我们的政策团队完全聚焦于这个话题，我们那里有很多出色的人才，比如我们新聘请的 Tina Nguyen 和进行出色报道的 Sarah Zhang。
Our policy desk is pointed dead ahead at the story, and we have a lot of fantastic people there, and Tina Nguyen, who we've hired, and Sarah Zhang, who's doing amazing reporting.
最后，在我们的产品报道方面。
And then lastly, in our product coverage.
你知道，当我跟你交流，以及我去市场向合作伙伴和广告商介绍 The Verge 时，我认为我们报道的独特之处在于它根植于产品报道。
You know, I think as you and I talk to each other and then as I go into market to talk to partners and advertisers about The Verge, I think what makes our coverage really unique is that it is rooted in the product coverage.
因此，我们的资深评测员对这些公司实际产品有何评价，这些产品如何使用，消费者使用产品的体验如何。
So what our senior reviewers have to say about the actual products these companies make, how they are to use, what the experience of using product is as a consumer.
因为我认为，如果不深入产品层面，就无法讲清楚 AI 的商业故事和政策故事。
Because I don't think you can tell the business story of AI and the policy story of AI without being deep in the product story of AI.
我认为，这正是这个时刻 The Verge 最适合报道这个故事的原因，也是我认为 The Verge 在当下最独特、最适合报道这一故事的地方。
And I think that is what makes it a perfect Verge story for this moment and what I think also makes The Verge the uniquely best place to cover this story in this moment.
确实，目前 AI 的报道还不够多，关键问题是：这有用吗？
It is true that not enough AI coverage, features the question, does this work?
而 The Verge 一直在不懈地提出这个问题。
And The Verge relentlessly asked that question.
这有用吗？人们愿意为此付费吗
Does this work and will people pay for
吗？
it?
我们经常把海伦描述为《The Verge》这里的防火墙。
We often describe Helen as our firewall here at The Verge.
她负责我们业务的商业部分。
She runs the commercial side of our business.
我负责新闻部，海伦负责广告或订阅业务，两者之间有一道墙。
I run the newsroom, Helen runs the advertising business or subscriptions business and there's a wall between that.
我们的商业运营不会影响新闻部的内容，正是海伦和我保护着这种独立性。
Our our business doesn't affect what we make here in the newsroom and it's Helen and I that protect that dynamic.
海伦就是那道防火墙。
Helen is the firewall.
海伦，请帮助大家理解这种分离，以及《The Verge》的听众和读者可以如何支持我们。
Helen, help people understand that separation and what individual listeners and readers of The Verge can do to support us.
我认为，《The Verge》之所以独特且备受尊重，原因之一是我们严格的伦理准则——我们的报道绝对不对外出售。
One of the things that makes The Verge, I think, really unique and respected is how strong our ethics policy is, where our coverage is definitely not for sale.
但我们依然拥有庞大的广告业务。
But we do still have a huge advertising business.
这是支撑《The Verge》的重要部分。
That's a big part of what supports The Verge.
因此，我工作的重要一部分是与我们的合作伙伴、广告商和销售团队合作，帮助他们理解《The Verge》，了解为什么应该选择我们投放广告，以及我们可以开发哪些机会。
And so a big part of my job is to work with our partners, our advertisers, our sales team, to help them understand The Verge, why they should advertise with us, what opportunities we can develop.
比如，我们推出了新的广告产品，如QuickPost广告。
You know, we've made new ad products like QuickPost ads.
这些广告都明确标注了广告标识。
They're clearly disclosed.
我们希望制作出人们喜欢的优质广告，因为这样也能让广告效果更好。
We want to make good advertising that people like because that also makes ads perform better.
因此，在运营这项业务时，我主要负责这一侧的工作。
And so in running that business, I'm kind of on that side of the house.
过去一年，我们还开展了规模庞大的订阅业务，我相信在座的很多人都知道，目前个人支持我们报道的最重要方式就是订阅《The Verge》。
We also, for the last year, I think as many people here know, have a really big subscriptions business, and that's, you know, the single most important thing any individual person can do to support our coverage in this moment is subscribe to The Verge.
成为《The Verge》订阅用户，你当然可以无限制地阅读我们的内容。
Benefits you get with The Verge subscription, you obviously get unlimited access to read The Verge.
我们现在还推出了《Decoder》播客的无广告版本，你可以通过订阅免费获取该播客源。
We now have an ad free version of this podcast feed, Decoder, where you can subscribe and get the feed for free.
如果你对人工智能、政策以及本集讨论的某些主题感兴趣，你的订阅还能让你获得一系列你一定会喜欢的通讯内容。
And then if you are interested in the story of AI and policy and some of the themes of this episode, your subscription also gets you a bunch of newsletters you should really enjoy.
蒂娜·阮有一份关于MAGA科技政策及其发展动态的精彩通讯，名为《监管者》。
Tina Nguyen has a fantastic newsletter about MAGA tech policy and how all of this is unfolding called Regulator.
如果你对产品层面感兴趣，我强烈推荐维多利亚·宋的通讯《优化器》，它探讨了人工智能与健康生活之间令人惊讶的交集。
If you're interested in the product side of it, I'd really recommend Victoria Song's newsletter optimizer about the crazy, like, AI intersection with wellness and how we all live.
戴维·皮尔斯的《周末重装》一直是我最爱的栏目之一，它总能告诉我有哪些新奇有趣的小玩意儿值得尝试。
David Pierce's Weekend Reinstaller is always one of my favorite, like, what little things should I play with that are new and interesting?
市面上还有大量值得探索的产品。
And there's a lot of product playing out there.
目前，The Verge 的年度订阅价格为 40 美元，而作为出版人兼防火墙，我会毫不掩饰地推荐。
Right now, a Verge subscription annually, and because I'm the publisher and firewall, I will shill shamelessly.
目前，The Verge 的订阅首年价格低至 40 美元。
A Verge subscription right now starts at $40 for the first year.
这性价比极高，同时也能支持我们正在进行的所有工作，并帮助我们招聘更多记者来报道这一故事。
It is incredibly good value, and it also supports all of this work we need to do and helps us invest in hiring more reporters to cover this story.
我告诉你，这周我了解到，世界上一些最大公司的顶级高管，每周都会像你一样阅读《Weekend Reinstaller》。
I will tell you, I found out this week some of the biggest executives at some of the biggest companies in the world read Installer the same way you do every single weekend.
这真是非常棒的内容。
It's pretty pretty good stuff.
你和我一直在讨论的一个话题是广告市场的转变。
One thing you and I have been talking about is the shift in the advertising market.
Decoder 的听众对此都很熟悉。
Decoder listeners know this well.
影响者营销是真实存在的，广告与内容融合的理念无处不在。
Influencer marketing is real, the idea that the ad should be integrated with the content is everywhere.
你有一些想法，关于我们如何在保持我们的道德准则的同时，维持这种分离。
You've got some ideas for how we can do that and preserve our ethics policy and keep that separation alive.
几周后，你将在节目中分享这些想法。
We're going hear some of those ideas from you on the show in a couple of weeks.
给听众们提前剧透一下。
Give the listeners a preview.
是的。
Yes.
我非常兴奋地为这个播客试点一个全新的广告产品。
I'm super excited to be piloting a new ad product for this podcast specifically.
它叫做 Decoder Sessions。
It's called Decoder Sessions.
我们常说的一个玩笑，但也是事实，就是‘披露’就是我们的品牌。
A joke we have that is also deeply true is that the Disclosure is our brand.
因此，我认为The Verge处理这个问题的方式是，打造真正优秀的产品，既能为我们的广告合作伙伴提供良好服务，也能为你们——我们的听众和观众——带来更好的体验，同时进行披露，并按照我们的道德准则进行明确区分。
And so I think the way The Verge handles this is to make really good products that do a good job for our advertising partners, but that also ideally make a much better product for you, our listeners and viewers, while also disclosing it, and separating it to the standards of our ethics policy.
所以，我们在这档节目中要尝试的一件事是：你们不能付钱让我们让你们的高管和埃利对话。
So one thing we are going to try on this show, where the thing you cannot do, is pay us to have your executive talk to Eli.
但这是一档访谈节目。
But this is a show of interviews.
这是一档关于商业、组织结构和技术的有趣对话节目。
This is a show of interesting conversations about business and organizational structure and technology.
我们将采用这种访谈形式，采访来自不同公司的有趣人士，聊聊他们的业务和组织结构，并为你们打造一种全新的广告插播形式，希望你们会非常喜欢——它比传统的播客广告更有趣、更吸引人、更自然，我会亲自主持。
We So are going to take that format, which is to interview interesting people from companies about their businesses and their organization, and we are going to make a new kind of ad break for you that hopefully you really enjoy and that is better than kind of a standard podcast ad that's more fun, more engaging, more native, I will host it.
所以，我会与一些合作伙伴的高管进行对话。
So I'm going to be talking to different executives from some of our partners.
这将与内莉所做的内容完全分开。
It will be separate from what Nely is doing.
内莉不会提前得知任何相关内容。
Nely will not get a heads up on any of it.
但我对这个项目非常期待。
But I'm really excited about it.
我们想要为你和我们的合作伙伴打造一个更好的产品，同时依然保持《The Verge》的高标准。
What we wanna make is a better product for you and a better product for our partners that still kind of holds the high standards of The Verge.
所以我们在几周后就会推出第一个版本。
So we have our first one coming up in a few weeks.
我觉得这会非常有趣。
I think it should be really fun.
我将采访来自欧莱雅集团的一位高管。
I'm talking to an executive from L'Oreal Group.
这将会是一次非常有趣的对话。
It is going to be a really fun time.
我对这个产品感到兴奋，因为我希望抢占广告主资金流向的前沿——这一点每个《Decoder》的听众都知道，我认为广告资金正朝着创作者经济方向流动，并与新闻业产生交汇。
I'm excited for this product because I want to go compete for where I think the advertiser dollars are going, which again every Decoder listener knows, I think is headed towards the creator economy in ways that collide with journalism.
这就是我们解决这个问题的方法，这个节目即将推出，你会听到海伦进行这次采访。
So this is our approach to solving it, that one's gonna come out, you're gonna hear Helen do that interview.
我们非常重视你的反馈，以及如何让这类内容变得更好。
We're very interested in your feedback and how we can make that stuff better.
我觉得广告应该做得很好。
I think the ad should be good.
我觉得它们应该像节目一样有趣。
I think they should be fun to listen to just like the show is.
我只是觉得应该让别人来制作它们。
I just think someone else should make them.
所以海伦，我非常期待你的第一次Decoder访谈。
So Helen, I'm excited for your first Decoder session.
非常感谢你抽空在这里最后和我聊聊。
Thank you so much for joining me quickly at the end here.
谢谢你，尼尔。
Thank you, Neil.
我想感谢迈克·马斯尼克抽出时间参加Decoder节目，也感谢你的收听。
I'd like to thank Mike Masnick for taking time to join Decoder, and thank you for listening.
希望你们喜欢。
I hope you enjoyed it.
如果你对我们这一集或其他任何内容有什么想法，欢迎给我们留言。
If you'd to let us know what you thought about this episode or really anything else at all, drop us a line.
你可以发送邮件至 decoder@theverge.com。
You can email us at decoder@theverge.com.
我们真的会阅读每一封邮件。
We really do read all the emails.
你也可以在 Threads 或 Blue Sky 上直接联系我，我们也在 YouTube 上。
You can also hit me up directly on threads or blue sky, and we're on YouTube.
你可以在 decoder pod 观看完整节目。
You can watch full episodes at decoder pod.
我们还有 TikTok 和 Instagram 账号。
We also have a TikTok and an Instagram.
它们的账号也是 decoder pod。
They're at decoder pod as well.
它们都很有趣。
They're a lot of fun.
如果你喜欢《Decoder》，请分享给你的朋友，并在你收听播客的平台订阅我们。
If you like decoder, please share it with your friends and subscribe wherever you get podcasts.
《Decoder》由The Verge制作，属于Vox Media播客网络的一部分。
Decoder is production of Verge and part of the Vox Media Podcast Network.
本节目由凯特·考克斯和尼克·萨特制作。
The show is produced by Kate Cox, Nick Satt.
剪辑由乌尔萨·赖特负责。
It's edited by Ursa Wright.
我们的编辑总监是凯文·麦克肖恩。
Our editorial director is Kevin McShane.
《Decoder》的片头音乐由Breakmaster Cylinder创作。
The Decoder music is by Breakmaster Cylinder.
我们下次再见。
We'll see you next time.
本节目由以下赞助商支持：经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？
Support for this show comes from Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?
介绍Odoo。
Introducing Odoo.
这是你唯一需要的商业软件。
It's the only business software you'll ever need.
它是一个一体化的全集成平台，让您的工作更轻松。
It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier.
客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务等。
CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.
最棒的是什么？
And the best part?
Odoo以远低于传统方案的成本，取代了多个昂贵的平台。
Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.
因此，成千上万的企业已经选择了切换。
That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.
那您为什么不来试试呢？
So why not you?
前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。
Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.
那就是 odoo.com。
That's odoo.com.
本节目由 Ateo 赞助，Ateo 是为现代企业打造的 AI 客户关系管理工具。
Support for this show comes from Ateo, the AI CRM for modern businesses.
有些团队成交速度是别人的两倍，总是领先一步，时刻准备充分。
There are teams closing deals twice as fast as everyone else, always one step ahead, always prepared.
但他们是怎么做到的呢？
But how are they doing that?
结果发现，他们正在使用 Attio。
Come to find out, they're using Attio.
Attio 将你的邮件、通话、产品数据等连接起来，让你对每位客户都拥有完整的背景信息。
Attio connects your email, calls, product data, and more so you always have complete context on every customer.
然后你可以让 Attio 帮你规划下一步行动、起草 outreach 内容、识别有风险的交易，并了解任何事项的最新进展。
You can then ask Attio to plan your next move, draft outreach, spot deals at risk, and find out where anything stands.
让你的CRM发挥更多作用。
Ask more from your CRM.
问问Attio。
Ask Ateo.
你可以访问 ateo.com/vox，享受首年15%的折扣。
You can go to ateo.com/vox and you'll get 15% off your first year.
那就是 attio.com/vox。
That's attio.com/vox.
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。