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。
推荐确实挺管用的。
Recommendations can be great.
说不定是有人给你安利了这个播客，你才点进来的。
Maybe someone recommended this podcast, and here you are.
但家里的事儿可不太一样。
But home projects are a little different.
要是这播客不合你胃口，最多就是浪费几分钟。
If the podcast isn't your thing, you might lose a few minutes from your day.
可要是你找表哥的邻居来装电视，搞不好电视装歪了，墙还给弄坏了。
But if you hire your cousin's neighbor to mount your TV, you might end up with a lopsided screen and wall damage.
光靠熟人介绍，可不靠谱。
I know a guy isn't a good strategy for your home.
所以Thumbtack才这么好用。
That's why Thumbtack works so well.
它能帮你直接找到本地评分最高的专业人士，照片、评价、资质全在一处，特别方便。
It matches you with top rated local pros with photos, reviews, and credentials all in one convenient place.
下次做家装项目，试试Thumbtack吧。
For your next home project, try Thumbtack.
今天就雇个靠谱的师傅吧。
Hire the right pro today.
越来越多的美国人一边照顾孩子，一边还得照顾父母。
More and more Americans are finding themselves taking care of their kids and their parents at the same time.
说实话，我常开玩笑说，我玩了个黑暗游戏。
Well, you know, I I joke that there's a dark game, which I was playing.
今天我又会让哪个家人失望呢？
Which family member will I disappoint today?
怎么照顾别人，又不把自己累垮？
How to care for others without burning out in the process?
本周《解释给我听》就聊这个。
That's this week on explain it to me.
每周日更新，你在哪儿听播客，就在哪儿找新 episodes。
Find new episodes, Sundays, wherever you get your podcasts.
本节目由MongoDB赞助播出
Support for the show comes from MongoDB.
如果你是个开发者，天天忙着解决各种瓶颈问题，根本没空去开发真正有价值的新项目，那你
If you're a developer stuck fixing bottlenecks instead of building the next big thing, then you
就需要
need
用MongoDB。
MongoDB.
MongoDB是一款灵活的一体化开发平台，能帮你扫清障碍、专注开发。
MongoDB is the flexible, unified platform that gets out of your way.
它支持ACID事务，符合企业级使用标准，还能帮你快速部署人工智能应用。
It's ACID compliant, enterprise ready, and built to ship AI apps fast.
那么多世界五百强企业都信赖它，这可不是没有道理的。
It's trusted by so many of the Fortune 500 for a reason.
你随便问哪个开发人员都知道。
Ask any developer.
这简直是个超棒的数据库。
It's a great freaking database.
马上去 mongodb.com/build 开始构建吧。
Start building at mongodb.com/build.
大家好，欢迎收听《Decoder》，这是尼莱关于重大理念和其他问题的节目。
Hello, and welcome to Decoder, Nilay's show about big ideas and other problems.
我是高级制作人尼克·斯塔特，今天和节目主持人、偶尔的嘉宾尼莱·帕特尔一起。
This is Nick Statt, senior producer, and I'm joined by host, very occasional guest, Nilay Patel.
尼莱，欢迎回到你自己的节目。
Nilay, welcome back to your own show.
嗨。
Hello.
我真讨厌当嘉宾。
I hate being the guest.
你以前也这么说过，但我总觉得，其实你内心也觉得，最理想的节目状态就是你啥也不用干，就来聊聊各种话题。
Now you have said that in the past, but I feel like there's also a version of you that says that that is the ideal version of this show where you just get to not do anything and show up and talk about stuff.
所以我总觉得你对这档节目的理想形态其实有两种想法：到底什么才是 Decoder 最理想的样子？
So I feel like there are you're of two minds with how the show of, like, what is the what is the ideal version of Decoder?
当个常驻嘉宾其实是一种很难达到的成就——别人请你来，就因为你一出现，节目就有趣了。
Being a permanent guest is a level of success that is hard to attain, where other people just want you to show up because they think you'll be interesting.
我真想达到这种级别的成功。
And I would love to attain that level of success.
但同时，当嘉宾就意味着你得每时每刻都得有趣。
At the same time, being the guest means you also have to be interesting all the time.
当主持人就不一样了，你才是掌控全局的那个人。
Being the host, you're just in control.
你 basically 就是在问：你能连续一小时不断抛出有趣的内容吗？
You're basically saying, can you be interesting over and over again for an hour?
然后你就等着看会发生什么。
And then you see what happens.
这今天就是我的工作。
That is my job today.
几个月前，我们做了年度的听众来信特辑，原本打算每年假期前后搞一次，回应大家的提问、反馈、批评和建议。
A few months ago, we did our annual, mailbag episode, which we were thinking of as, like, an annual thing that would happen around the holidays where we respond to listener questions, feedback, criticism, suggestions.
但最近我觉得，咱们不妨多搞几次，毕竟收到的反馈特别多，而且每封邮件我们真的都看。
But recently, I think we thought we should just do this more often because we get a ton of great feedback, and we do read all of the emails.
所以咱们又来了。
So we are here again.
那咱们直接开始吧。
So I thought we would just jump into it.
尼莱，你准备好了吗？
Nilay, you ready?
好啊。
Yeah.
来吧。
Let's do it.
今年我们最受欢迎的一集，同时也是争议最大的一集。
So by far our most popular episode of this year was also our most contentious.
最火的那期节目是你和Superhuman首席执行官沙希尔·马霍特拉的访谈，重点谈了Grammarly专家评审争议的事。
It was, your interview, Nilay, with Superhuman CEO, Shashir Mahotra, that focused heavily on Grammarly's expert review controversy.
那期节目我们收到了海量的反馈。
We got mountains and mountains of feedback about that episode.
大部分都是特别正面的评价。
Most of it was overwhelmingly positive.
我们收到了很多有趣邮件、评论和反馈，想挑一些在这儿跟大家分享。
There were a lot of interesting emails and and comments and feedback we wanted to to to highlight here.
有些简直让人拍案叫绝。
Some of them were like, damn.
有一条高赞评论说：‘尼莱的问题让我紧张得不行。’
Nilay's questions are making me nervous was one of our top comments.
还有人说：‘咱们得多让科技公司的CEO们这么坐立不安几次。’
Another said we need to make tech CEOs this uncomfortable more often.
一位《The Verge》的订阅者写信说：‘这期节目听得我浑身不自在，但也正因如此，我不到一周前就决定订阅了。'
A Verge subscriber wrote in to say this episode was extremely uncomfortable to listen to and absolutely the reason I became a subscriber less than a week ago.
所以，为了开场，Nilay，我第一个问题是你对《Superhuman》那期节目的反响感觉怎么样？
So I think to kick this all off, Nilay, my first question for you is, how did you feel about the reception to the Superhuman episode?
有没有哪类反应让你觉得意外？
Were you at all surprised by any of the reactions?
是的。
Yeah.
有些反应确实让我有点意外。
I was a little surprised by some of reaction.
我可以详细说说。
I can get into that.
就像Nick提到的，Shashir早在争议爆发前就定好要来节目了。
You know, as Nick alluded to, Shashir was booked to come on the show well before any of the controversy.
我特别期待和他聊。
And I was really excited to talk to him.
他之前可是YouTube的产品和技术双料负责人。
He had been both the chief product officer and the chief technology officer at YouTube.
他还在Spotify的董事会里。
He's on the board at Spotify.
他原本想通过Grammarly来推AI，但要把AI真正普及开，其实特别难。
He was thinking about distributing AI through Grammarly, and and distributing AI is actually a really hard challenge.
你得跟谷歌斗。
You're up against Google.
苹果迟早也会把谷歌的AI模型集成进iOS，你还要跟他们抢。
You're up against Apple, which is gonna integrate AI into iOS with Google's models over time.
所以啊，关于创作者经济、AI未来该往哪儿走、该怎么落地，这话题多得说不完。
So, you know, there's just a lot to talk about there in the creator economy and where AI is supposed to go and how it's supposed to work.
后来出了那档子事，我特别佩服Shashir愿意上我们节目。
And then this thing happened, and I gave Shashir a lot of credit for coming on the show.
他心里清楚自己会面对什么。
He knew what he was gonna get.
我们可不会提前把问题塞给嘉宾。
It's not that we give people the questions.
我觉得我要问什么，根本不用猜。
I think it was just obvious what I was going to ask about.
我觉得他能扛得住，毕竟他在大公司里都担过要职。
And my feeling was that he could take the heat because he had these big roles at big companies.
我不喜欢把年轻创始人拎出来，替整个行业挨批。
And I didn't I don't like taking like young founders and and putting him on trial for the whole industry.
但考虑到Shashir的背景、专业深度、人脉广度，还有他坐那儿能稳稳答所有问题的本事，我觉得这期节目完全可以这么搞。
But given Shashir's background, his depth of expertise, his enormous network, and his ability to just sit in there and answer the questions, I felt like we could do that with that episode.
因为Shashir是谁，我才能拿他当代表，去聊AI背后那些更大的问题。
Because of who Shashir was, it felt like I could ask him about the specific issues in the case as a proxy for the bigger issues with AI.
我觉得很多人都在回应这一点。
And I I think you a lot of people were responding to that.
让我没想到的是，有些反应根本就是：‘你根本不懂AI，这本来就是注定的。’
And so the the thing that surprised me was the reactions that kind of felt like you don't understand AI, this is just how it's gonna be.
你根本不懂当个创造者是什么感觉。
You don't understand what it's what being a builder is like.
从某个角度看，我确实能理解，但我的想法是：第一，这正是《Decoder》的宗旨。
And I kind of get it on from one perspective, but I I think my response is, a, this is what Decoder is about.
这些产品到底会带来什么后果？它们实际是怎么运行的？本该怎样运行？我们又该对它们抱有什么态度？
What are the consequences of of building these products and how do these products actually work and how should they actually work and how should we all feel about them?
更重要的是，如果我们不问这些问题，不一再追问，那些造产品的人就永远不会认真思考答案该是什么。
And my sort of more important response, if we don't ask these questions, if we don't ask them sort of relentlessly, then we will never make the people building the products actually think about what the answer should be.
这正是我的初衷。
And that was really my goal.
我知道Shashir是个深思熟虑的人。
I know Shashir is thoughtful.
我知道他愿意上节目，就是因为他能扛得住压力。
I know he came on because he can take the heat.
所以我抓住机会，把问题问得直白、直接，毫不拐弯抹角。
And I took the opportunity to ask the questions as plainly and as bluntly as I could.
也许正因如此，让一些人感到不舒服了。
And maybe that made people feel uncomfortable.
我觉得在场的每个人其实都早有预料，你知道的。
I feel like everybody in the room got exactly what they knew was coming, you know.
我觉得这期节目对观众来说很有价值，因为现在关于AI的每一场讨论，都充满了这种张力。
And I I think it was a service to the audience because that tension right now is reflected in every conversation about AI.
这些公司是不是从我们这儿拿得太多了？
Are these companies taking too much from us?
它们是不是在肆意践踏我们用来保护创意、肖像权，还有那些作者、创作者和其他人本该因使用其作品而获得报酬的法律？
Are they running roughshod over the laws we have to protect things like creativity and likeness and, you know, large bodies of work that authors and creatives and other people should be compensated for when you use them again?
可我们却一路狂奔，对这些问题的答案却迟迟不解决。
And we're just racing forward without resolving the answers to any of those questions.
所以我觉得，这期节目我们确实达成了想达成的目标。
So I think we we accomplished what we wanted to that episode.
我对观众的反应一点都不意外。
I'm I'm not surprised with the reaction it got.
真正让我惊讶的是，这正是我们在《Decoder》上一直在做的事。
I think the thing that did surprise me is I that's what we do here on Decoder.
所以你跑到店里来，说我不喜欢你们卖的东西——嗯，这不就是我们一直在做的事吗？
So coming to the store and being like, I don't like the product you're selling is well, that's that's what we're that's
这正是我们做的。
what we make.
我希望我们能一直这么做。
I hope
我们得继续做下去。
we continue to make it.
有位叫Brendan G的评论者，专门提到了那期Superhuman的节目。
One commenter, Brendan g, actually wrote in about Superhuman episode.
他本身是做媒体培训的，所以平时特别反感那些经过媒体包装的高管。
He does media training professionally, and so he obviously hates listening to media trained executives.
但他觉得，要么Shashir的媒体培训水平太高了，要么就是他够聪明，根本没听那一套，干脆就来场真心实意的对话，而不是动不动就躲在律师后面。
But he said either Shashir's media training was really good or he was just smart enough to ignore it and decided to have a real conversation other than occasionally hiding behind lawyers.
Brendan还说，从他的角度看，你们好像花了特别多时间，专门在较劲一件私人的事。
Brendan also said that, from his perspective, it felt like you spent a lot of time grinding what felt like a personal axe.
你听起来挺生气的，不过他也不确定你是不是在演戏。
You sounded angry, although he doesn't know if that was a kind of performance that you were doing.
从媒体培训师的角度来看，我反而会特别喜欢这种表现，因为这次你显得特别理性、冷静。
And he said from a media trainer's perspective, I would have loved that because it just in this case, seem reasonable or calm.
所以，尼莱，我想问你，你是怎么决定这次采访的风格的？你是觉得自己得代表那些被Superhuman盗用形象的人，扮演某个角色？还是说，你根本就没想那么多，就是想着：‘我这次就死磕他一点——他到底欠我多少，搞定这个，别的再说’？
So the question for you, Nilay, is how did you decide to approach that interview, and did you think of it as you having to kind of play a part on behalf of the people whose likenesses Superhuman had appropriated, or were you just, you know, was your strategy just, oh, I'm gonna just nail him on this one part around, like, how much he owes me, and then we're gonna go from there?
很少有故事是真正围绕我的。
It's very rare that the story is actually about me.
在《Decoder》或者整个《The Verge》里，这种情况几乎从不发生。
It's not not a thing that occurs very often on Decoder or on The Verge as a whole.
这次算是少数几个我直接卷入故事里的时刻。
And so this was one of the rare times where I was just in the story.
说白了，他们的产品里就有一个我的AI克隆体。
Just straightforwardly, there was an AI clone of me in their product.
所以我觉得，从一开始，我就能让这个故事更有温度。
And that felt like I could make this story more human just from the beginning.
我不用解释这事儿对普通人有什么影响，因为它对我自己的影响太明显了。
I didn't have to explain how it would affect regular people, it was just very obvious how it was affecting me.
我觉得，让这个故事自然地围绕我展开，虽然我并不喜欢这样，我相信也没哪个记者喜欢这么做。
My feeling was that by just letting the story naturally be about me, which I don't like doing and which I think no journalist likes doing.
但正因为让故事自然地聚焦在我身上，才能把这件事的利害关系说得清清楚楚。
But by letting it naturally be about me, I could make the stakes of it plain.
对吧？
Right?
而且我相信，很多有类似感受的人都能在这件事里看到自己。
And I and I think a lot of people who felt themselves reflected in that story.
很多艺术家都想过冲到CEO面前问一句：你到底打算给我多少钱？
A lot of artists wanna go up to a CEO and say, how much are gonna pay me?
但咱们大多数人根本没这个机会，而这次，我正好赶上了。
And very few of us will ever get that opportunity and this was just one of those opportunities.
所以我抓住了。
So I took it.
我觉得愤怒这部分特别有意思。
I think the anger piece is really interesting.
而且我觉得这正是因为我是以第一人称在讲自己的事。
And I do think that is because it was me in first person talking about myself.
那场采访的时候，我其实没觉得生气。
I didn't feel angry during that interview.
我脾气确实有点急。
I I certainly have a temperate.
但很少表现出来。
It rarely comes out.
但我真没感到愤怒。
But I I didn't feel anger.
我感受到的是一种强烈的投入感。
What I felt was intensity.
我觉得这两者有点不一样，而且最近我们的很多访谈都充满了这种强烈的投入感。
And I think those things are a little different and I think a lot of our interviews lately have had a lot of intensity to them.
也许你会把这种感觉误认为是愤怒，我确实该更好地表达这些情绪之间的微妙差别。
And I think maybe you can mistake that for anger and I should do a better job of communicating the nuances of those emotions.
但这里真的一点愤怒都没有。
But there there's no anger here.
我知道科技圈每天都会把我的东西拿走，改头换面，发到成千上万个平台。
Like I I'm aware that the tech industry is gonna take all of my work and remix it on a thousand platforms every single day.
这种事我已经经历了十五年了。
It's been happening to me for fifteen years.
随它吧。
Whatever.
这种事本来就是家常便饭。
Like that that's just a thing that happens.
我觉得重点在于——我们能不能停下来，认真想一想这件事？
I think the intensity is, hey, are we gonna stop and think about this for one second?
我们能不能花一秒钟，想想这里头的价值交换？
Are we gonna think about the value exchange here for one second?
我有机会做这件事。
I get the opportunity to do that.
我真的很幸运，能有这个机会。
I'm very lucky that I get the opportunity to that.
我觉得很多人一辈子都没这机会。
I think a lot of people don't have that opportunity ever.
我本来是想在这些问题里体现出那种紧迫感。
And I I was hoping to reflect that intensity in the questions.
有个评论者说得挺有意思，他说，提到你问Shashir该付你多少钱时，他直接说：我敢打赌，他们只会给你零块钱。
One commenter, I think, wrote something interesting about this, which is he said that in reference to you asking Shashir how much they should pay you, he said, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say they'll they'll pay you $0.
结果还真被他说中了。
And in fact, they just did that.
他们白拿宣传，你也没去告他们。
They got free publicity, and you didn't sue.
在他眼里，这轮他赢了——当然啦，你还没上法庭，我们记者也不管谁算被告。
To him, he won this round, which, of course, you know, you don't you're not part of the lawsuit yet, or we don't determine who's part of the lawsuit as journalists.
但我觉得这跟我们在《Decoder》经常被问到的一个问题有关，尼莱：我们是不是在给那些根本不配拥有平台的人提供平台？
But, I think that relates to a question, Nilay, that we get a lot of the time here on Decoder, which is, are we platforming people that does don't deserve a platform?
我们是不是在免费帮他们宣传产品，或者炒作AI概念之类的？
Are we giving them free publicity to hawk their product or push AI hype or whatever it is?
关于‘是否该给某些人平台’这个问题，我内心其实很纠结。
I have a lot of complicated feelings with the platforming debate.
我们办《The Verge》已经十五年了。
We've run The Verge for fifteen years.
这期间，我们经历过无数轮关于‘该给谁平台’、‘该不该给’、‘是不是在白送免费曝光’的争论。
We've lived through a lot of different versions of who do you platform, should you platform them, are you just giving people free publicity.
最后我得出一个结论——我知道很多人不认同，但这没关系——对我们来说，选择不给某些人平台，其实根本没用。
And I arrived at the conclusion, and I know a lot of people disagree about this and and that's fine, that The Verge, the thing that we make choosing not to platform people effectively does not matter.
你只要看看周围就知道了：你躲着不搭理，问题也不会自己消失。
You can just look around and be like, well, if you ignore things, they don't go away.
所以，不如我们直接提问、坦率面对，逼着大家去正视他们自己脑子里那些想法背后的逻辑后果。
So it is better for us to ask the questions and be direct and make people face the logical conclusions to the thoughts they have started to have.
但我觉得，我们请来的这些人还不至于坏到需要讨论要不要给他们平台的地步。
But I don't think the people we have on the show are bad actors to the level where we should be having a platforming debate.
他们大部分都是在认真做事的人，想聊聊自己怎么打造产品，经营那些充满复杂挑战的大机构。与其一棍子打死所有CEO，说‘我讨厌所有老板，绝不请他们上节目’，不如老老实实、坦诚地聊聊这些事到底意味着什么。
Think they are by and large people who are trying to build things, people who wanna talk about the way they build things, you know, people who are running complex organizations with lots and lots of multifaceted challenges, and it just seems better to have honest sincere conversations about what all those things mean than to say, I hate every CEO in the world and we're never having them on the show.
这纯粹是我个人的看法，毕竟这只是我们的小节目。但时间久了，我越来越坚信：回避问题，并不能让问题消失。
And that's just, you know, it's my position, it's our little show, but I'm just I've become convinced over time that ignoring things does not make them go away.
那些大平台都把特朗普给封了，结果呢？他现在又当上了总统。
The major platformers all de platform Donald Trump, and now he is our president again.
他正在制造一种几乎难以想象的混乱。
And he is creating a particular kind of chaos that is almost unimaginable.
封了他，根本没用。
De platforming him simply did not work.
关于这点，我也不知道还能说什么。
I don't know what else to say about that.
还有好多极端右翼、极端民族主义的人物，被平台封了又回来，反反复复。
There are all kinds of ultra hard right, ultra nationalist figures who have been kicked off of platforms, come back on platforms.
我觉得我们短期内不太可能会请一堆种族主义者上节目。
I don't think we're gonna have a bunch of ethno nationalists on our show anytime soon.
我可不是说我们应该往那个方向走。
I'm not suggesting that's where we need to go.
我只是觉得，那种说‘别给CEO们平台、别给他们免费曝光’的说法，其实反映了一种虚无主义，而我正努力远离这种态度。
I just think that this answer about platforming CEOs and giving them free publicity, it reflects a kind of nihilism that I'm trying actively to get away from.
我想做的是说：他们上节目，是因为他们知道我会问什么样的问题。
And what I would like to do is to say, they come on the show because they know, all these people know what kind of questions I'm gonna ask.
现在节目已经有口碑了，我本人也有口碑。
At this point, the show has a reputation, I have a reputation.
他们上来，是想证明自己扛得住质问；而我的任务就是把节目做好。我觉得这种博弈，其实恰恰能让人变得更谨慎、更体谅。
They come on because they wanna show that they can take the heat and then, you know, my job is to do a good job and I I think that balance that dance actually ideally helps make everybody more considerate.
当然了，你完全可以不同意我的这些看法。
Again, I think you can disagree with all this.
早就有很多人不认同我这些观点了。
A lot of people have disagreed with all this.
我 personally觉得，回避问题并不能让问题消失。
I've just I personally have arrived at the conclusion that ignoring things doesn't make them go away.
咱们先暂停一下，做个简短的广告。
You need to pause here for a quick break.
马上回来。
We'll be right back.
我是米奇·福斯特，两届恩德沃杯冠军，MVP，美国女子国家队前锋。
I'm Mitch Furst, two time Endeavor Cell champion, championship MVP, and forward for the US Women's National Team.
在成为职业运动员之前，我从哈佛大学毕业，主修心理学，这本事比你想象的还管用。
Before I went pro, I graduated from Harvard with a degree in psychology, which comes in handy more than you think.
每个追求卓越的运动员都知道，你得有那么一种心态。
Any athlete pursuing greatness knows there's a certain mentality you have to have.
但没人知道，这种心态背后要付出什么代价。
What people don't know is what that costs.
在我的播客《精英运动员的自白》里，我会和世界上顶尖的运动员坐下来聊聊，揭开通往卓越之路背后的心理、心态和那些不为人知的挣扎。
In my podcast, Confessions of an Elite Athlete, I sit down with the best athletes in the world and explore the psychology, mindset, and unseen battles on the path to greatness.
所以坐下来看看《精英运动员的自白》吧，在YouTube或者你常用的播客平台都能找到。
So take a seat and learn from the Confessions of an Elite Athlete on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.
今天节目的赞助商是CNN。
Support for today's show comes from CNN.
你想长生不老吗？
Do you wanna live forever?
知名记者卡拉·斯威舍正在深入审视长寿产业，拨开网红炒作的迷雾，回归有科学依据的真相。
Influential journalist Kara Swisher is taking a hard look at the longevity industry to separate the influencer hype from evidence backed science.
在她的全新CNN原创系列中，卡拉采访了硅谷的重量级人物，亲身体验最新的抗衰老科技，看看哪些真有效，哪些纯属智商税。
In her new CNN original series, Kara's talking to Silicon Valley power players and trying out the latest in anti aging technology to see what works and what's a waste.
卡拉·斯威舍，就是想长生不老。
Kara Swisher wants to live forever.
新集数每周日上线，需CNN订阅才能观看。
New episodes streaming Sundays with a CNN subscription.
马上去 cnn.com/subscribe 开始观看吧。
Go to cnn.com slash subscribe to start watching.
大家好。
Hi, everyone.
我是卡拉·斯威舍。
Kara Swisher here.
我们刚拿下了韦比奖，被评为新闻、商业与社会类最佳访谈节目，我的播客《与卡拉·斯威舍对谈》请过不少特别棒的嘉宾。
We just won the Webby Award for the best interview show in news business and society, and I've had some great guests on my podcast on with Kara Swisher.
这儿挑几个你绝对不能错过的。
Here are some you don't wanna miss.
特里斯坦·哈里斯，人文科技中心的联合创始人。
Tristan Harris, the cofounder of the Center for Humane Technology.
我跟他聊了聊，他对AI发展和应用最担心的事。
I talked to him about his biggest worry when it comes to development and deployment of AI.
猜猜看。
Hint hint.
跟那些CEO们能从中赚多少钱脱不了干系。
It has something to do with the CEOs and how they stand to profit.
我采访了纪录片导演路易斯·泰鲁。
I interviewed documentarian Louis Theroux.
他最新的纪录片《走进男性至上主义圈》探讨了这个群体对年轻男性和男孩产生的惊人又令人不安的影响。
His latest documentary, Into the Manosphere, focuses on the incredible and horrifying influence this group of individuals has, especially on young men and boys.
最近，我跟凯蒂·库里克、艾米·拉罗卡，还有我弟弟杰夫·斯威舍聊了聊，揭穿了价值数十亿美元的健康养生行业里那些跟风和谣言，还谈了谈真正值得你花时间做的医学检查。
And recently, I caught up with Katie Couric, Amy Larocca, and my brother, Jeff Swisher, to debunk some of the fads and misinformation behind the billion dollar wellness industry, and we talked about the important medical tests that are actually worth your while.
这些对话现在都能听到了。
All of these conversations are available now.
你可以在YouTube，或者你常用的播客平台找到它们。
You can find them on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.
夏天我们还准备了更多精彩内容，记得订阅《与卡拉·斯威舍对话》，别错过任何一期。
And we've got plenty more lined up for the summer, so be sure to subscribe to on with Kara Swisher to catch them all.
中美竞争，归根结底是在争夺未来的设计权吗？
Is The US China rivalry ultimately a race to build the future?
美国和中国，才是真正正在塑造未来那两个国家。
The United States and China are the two countries that are really inventing the future.
未来是由华尔街融资、硅谷和深圳共同创造的。
The future is being, financed by Wall Street, invented in Silicon Valley as well as Shenzhen.
我是杰克·沙利文。
I'm Jake Sullivan.
我是约翰·费纳。
And I'm John Feiner.
我们是《长远博弈》的主持人。
And we're the hosts of The Long Game,
这是一档每周更新的国家安全播客。
a weekly national security podcast.
本周，作家王丹加入我们，聊聊美国的律师文化、中国的工程型国家，以及为什么疯狂可能是超级大国的必备条件。
This week, author Dan Wang joins us to discuss America's lawyerly society, China's engineering state, and why derangement might be a prerequisite for superpower status.
这一期已经上线了。
The episode's out now.
搜索
Search for
并在你听播客的任何平台关注《The Long Game》。
and follow the long game wherever you get your podcasts.
欢迎回来。
Welcome back.
这里是《Decoder》的高级制作人尼克·斯塔特，今天由尼莱尔来回答大家的所有问题。
This is Decoder senior producer Nick Statt, making Nilay answer all of your questions.
我们最近一期和Puck首席执行官莎拉·珀森内特的访谈，收到了大量反馈，尼莱尔。
So another episode that we got a ton of feedback about, Nilay, was, of course, our most recent one of our most recent episodes with Puck CEO, Sarah Personnett.
尤其是听众们几乎一致注意到了莎拉的避重就轻。
In particular, listeners almost universally picked up on Sarah's evasiveness.
很多听众对这种风格到底算不算好播客，意见不一。
A lot of listeners were divided on whether this makes for a good podcast or not.
有一位听众，亚历杭德罗·托瓦，给我们发了一封只有一行字的邮件，说这场访谈太震撼了。
One listener, Alejandro Tower, sent us a one line email saying the interview was majestic.
另一位听众只说了一句：太棒了。
Another listener said, excellent.
但我们还收到了几乎同样多的完全相反的反馈。
But we also got an almost equal amount of polar opposite feedback.
有位评论者说，当尼莱邀请的CEO显得过于媒体包装、或者准备得太刻意时，我真的很难听下去。
One commenter wrote, when Nilay has a CEO who comes on who comes off as over overly media trained or maybe overly prepared, I have a hard time getting through it.
另一位评论者说，老实讲，我根本听不下去，全是避重就轻、绕圈子、不正面回答。
Another commenter said, honestly, I couldn't listen through this one because of all the sidestepping, zooming out, non answers.
有人写到，这场访谈简直像在打擂台，但原因只是对方一直在躲闪问题。
Somebody wrote this interview almost feels combative, but only because of the squirming to avoid answering questions.
这真的绝了。
It's truly out of this world.
像这种嘉宾准备得太满、或者就是不想回答问题的访谈，我们经常收到反馈。
We get a lot of feedback about episodes like this where people are too overly prepared or they just kind of don't wanna answer something.
有些人就是受不了，因为太让人坐立不安了。
And some people can't handle it because it makes them too uncomfortable.
听着就像在看一场尴尬到爆的喜剧。
It kind of sounds like a like they're watching, like, a cringe comedy.
关于Superhuman，我们经常听到这种反馈。
We heard this about Superhuman quite a bit.
有些人说，他们根本听不下去，太让人难受了。
Some people said they couldn't listen to the whole thing because it made them too uncomfortable.
这里更广的话题是，我们有时候会碰到一些特别难搞的采访对象，要么太套路，要么太无聊，或者根本没法好好聊。
The broader topic here, of course, is that we sometimes deal with challenging subjects that are either so trained or so boring or difficult to talk to.
他们躲躲闪闪，死死抱着自己的话术不放，搞得整个对话特别别扭，明眼人一听就感觉不对劲。
They're evasive or they're uninterested in straying from their talking points, and that creates a lot of unnecessary friction that is, like, plainly obvious to anyone who's listening to the to the interview.
你平时怎么看待这种状况？不管你是觉得它像对抗，还是只是难搞，你怎么看？
How are you thinking about those kinds of situations, whether they're you know, whether you would describe them as adversarial or challenging, whatever?
你有没有调整过自己的采访方式，或者改改风格，好让这类采访能挖出更多干货？
And have you been kind of tweaking your approach or your style in terms of how you get through these interviews or try to extract more insight out of them?
做访谈节目最奇怪的一点是：节目好不好，全看对方行不行。
The weirdest thing about doing an interview show is that the episodes are only good if the other person is good.
我再怎么问，也不可能比Sarah Personett自己更懂她的业务。
I can't make Sarah Personett understand her business more than she does.
我试过了，真的。
I tried, man.
我觉得她根本就没懂。
I don't think she understands it at all.
一点都没懂。
Not even a little bit.
我问她的那些问题，真没觉得有多尖锐。
And the questions I was asking her, I don't think were particularly adversarial.
录完之后，我觉得是我们编辑总监凯文·麦肖恩说的，他说莎拉根本没意识到她和你是同一边的，她当时都飘到外太空去了。
We got off that recording, and I think it was Kevin McShane, our editorial director, who said, I don't think Sarah realized she's on the same side as you because she was in outer space.
我不会在‘你到底懂不懂自己业务的基本情况’这个问题上让步。
I'm not gonna back off on do you understand the basics of your business.
我觉得这完全合理，而且我真的觉得她不懂。
That that seems like totally fair game to me, and I don't think she does.
还有像沙希尔这样的例子，我知道他有准备，有经验，有背景，他完全能应对。
I also feel like, you know, with Shashir is a good example, I knew that he was prepared, I knew he had the the experience and the history, he could do it.
如果你是负责YouTube产品的人，别人问你的问题可比这难多了。
If you are the if you're the guy who runs product at YouTube, people have asked you a lot harder questions.
你面对的质疑比我现在这一小时里能抛给你的激烈多了吧？
You faced a lot hotter fire than I can I can provide to you in a one hour conversation?
所以这里头有个程度问题。
So that that there's a spectrum here.
我就直说了啊。
And I, you know, I I I'm just gonna flat out say it.
我觉得莎拉这次彻底搞砸了。
I thought Sarah blew it.
我觉得这可能是我们节目里最差的一次表现了。
I I I thought that was one of the worst performances on the show we've ever had.
从那期节目进行到一半的时候，我就在想：你到底懂不懂啊？
And I think you could tell about halfway through that episode that I was just like, do you know anything?
也许她其实懂。
Maybe she does.
她可能根本没搞清楚自己上的是什么节目，就想念她的TED演讲，结果跑题了，就这样。
She would maybe she just didn't know what show she was on and she wanted to give her TED talk and she got derailed and that's that.
但另一方面，如果你真懂行，真有深度，也准备好了，那压力就该越来越大才对。
On the other hand, I feel like if I do think you know what you're saying, if I do think you have the depth of understanding and you're ready for it, then the pressure should only escalate.
所以也许到最后感觉都一样，但我就坐在房间里，觉得它们的氛围截然不同。
And so this is maybe it all feels the same in the end, but to me just sitting in the room, it they feel like very different vibes.
我就想干这么件事。
And that that's what I just wanna do.
就像我说的，要做一个访谈节目，对方得愿意来，得有参与的意愿。
You know, like I said, to make an interview show, the other person has to a, they have to wanna show up.
我们总说《解码器》这场游戏，你是可以赢的。
You know, we always say the Decoder is a game you can win.
他们得真心想来，坦诚开放地参与进来。
They have to want to be here and participate honestly and openly.
他们得相信，聊完之后不会觉得自己被扒得体无完肤。
They have to think that they're gonna come out the other end and they won't feel completely attacked.
不然的话，没人愿意来当嘉宾。
Because otherwise, we won't get guests.
他们随时都能挂掉电话。
Like, they have to they can just hang up.
点一下按钮，人就走了。
They can just click the button and go.
所以这个节目得营造出一种尊重参与者的氛围。
So the the show has to be an environment that reflects and respects the participation.
既然这是一场能赢的游戏，那自然也有可能输。
At the same time, if it's a game you can win, it's also a game you can lose.
我觉得我们正亲眼看到这种动态在发生。
And I think we're just seeing that dynamic.
大家早就看腻了那种浮夸的网红访谈了。
I think everyone is very used to very puffy influencer interviews.
最近这种访谈太多了，也许每个人都该再多准备一点。
There's a lot of that going around lately, and maybe everyone should just be one more turn more prepared.
观众其实特别渴望那种你能称之为问责式报道的内容，尤其是在播客里，特别是现在科技和人工智能行业这么火的时候。
There's a real, like, hunger from the audience for what you might call accountability journalism, especially in podcast form and particularly with the current tech and AI industries.
你以前老开玩笑说，观众希望每期节目结尾你都能把CEO给抓了。
The joke that you've said before is that the audience wants you to end every episode by arresting a CEO.
现在真有评论员把这当成了我们的编辑策略来讨论。
And we've even had some commenters now referencing that as an editorial strategy.
有些人甚至说，希望你们能更狠一点。
They some people are saying, you know, they want you to be tougher even.
但这跟一个现实冲突了：公司并不想总做这种采访，甚至不太愿意做，而且谁也不喜欢被扔进一个完全不知道要问什么的突发状况里。
But this is running headlong into the idea that companies don't necessarily want to do these kinds of interviews all the time or even often and that people don't like being put into unpredictable situations where they don't know the questions.
你问啥，他们完全猜不到。
They don't know what you're gonna ask.
其实观众自己也未必真那么爱看这种内容。
And then audiences themselves are not really even all that interested sometimes in that kind of product.
比如那种‘CEO日记’式的节目，虽然挺吸引人，但算不上真正有冲击力的深度报道。
Like, the end result of that, like, diary of a CEO is not hard hitting journalism even though it's very engaging, acquired.
TBPN肯定算不上新闻报道，乌尔萨和霍洛维茨那边那种监督方式就更谈不上是新闻了。
TBPN is certainly not journalism, and whatever monitoring the situation from Ursa and Horowitz is not journalism at all.
但我觉得最近英伟达的CEO黄仁勋和帕特尔那期节目，就挺能说明问题的——他根本不是传统记者，可问的问题确实够尖锐。
But I think we saw a version of this kind of play out recently with NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang and Patel, right, where he's not a traditional journalist, but he asked some challenging questions.
结果搞得大家脑子都乱了，因为没人见过有人敢这么直接质问黄仁勋这样的科技大佬，毕竟他掌管着全球最有价值的公司，大家总觉得他无所不能。
And it kind of broke people's brains because they weren't used to seeing somebody kind of check somebody like Jensen, a rich tech guy, but also head of valuable the company in the world, people think he's unfallible.
那期节目罕见地让观众分成了两派，对采访的目的到底是什么争论不休。
This was a rare moment where people were divided on what's the purpose of this interview.
所以，尼莱，我想问问你，你怎么看这种矛盾——新闻该做什么、观众想要什么，以及当真问出尖锐问题时，观众实际的反应又是什么？
So, Nilay, the question for you is how are you thinking about that tension between the functions of journalism, what the audience wants, and then what the audience actually responds to when it comes to tough questions?
还有啊，你说为啥这些人愿意上咱们节目？咱们可没付他们钱。
And, also, you know, why do you think people are coming on this show when they're you know, we're not paying them.
我们也不会提前告诉他们要问什么。
We're not telling them what we're gonna ask beforehand.
就算他们知道大概会遇到什么，可真到录的时候，还是跟蒙着眼睛上战场似的。
Even though they know what to expect, they are going kind of they are they are going kind of blind.
我最喜欢的就是有人来的时候，根本没准备好被问公司结构或者决策流程这种问题。
My favorite is when people show up and they're not ready to be asked what the structure of their company is or how they make decisions.
我觉得这些现在都应该是基本题了。
I feel like those are gimmes at this point.
偶尔就会出现这种情况：哦，你居然不知道？
And every now and again, it's just like, oh, you you didn't know.
当这些问题让人猝不及防的时候，你基本就能预判整场采访会怎么发展了。
You can always tell how things are gonna go when those questions seem like a surprise.
我觉得新闻报道至关重要。
I think journalism is critically important.
当然了，我们这儿做的就是新闻。
Obviously, we make journalism here.
现在做这个节目的所有人，都是记者。
All of us who are making the show right now are are journalists.
我们骨子里都是搞新闻的。
We're steeped in it.
也许我们只是太自以为是了，平台最后可能会毁了我们，但我认为这很重要。
Maybe we're just high in our own supply and the platforms are gonna kill us all in the end, but I think it's important.
而且我们的观众，现在你都能看出来，当我们多做些短视频、发到社交媒体上时……
And our audience, when we even you can see it now that we, like, make more clips and put them on social platforms.
那些从来没接触过我们的观众，因为算法把视频推到各处，他们就会说：哇，我太喜欢这个了。
The audiences who have never encountered us before because the algorithms are just taking the videos to wherever they go, they're like, oh, I love this.
终于有人问出这些问题了，这真的很难得。
Like, finally, someone's asking the questions and that is remarkable.
这种感觉特别清新。
I it's refreshing.
我说不上来为什么，但市面上真没多少这样的内容。
I I don't know what it is, but there's not a lot of that that people see.
这就是我们做的东西。
So that's the product we make.
看来已经找到一批观众了。
It seems to have found some audience.
我希望我们能继续吸引更多的观众，大家一起坚持做下去，因为我真的喜欢做新闻报道。
I hope we continue to find more audience and we can all keep doing this because I like making journalism.
我知道人们为什么愿意来参加我们的节目。
I know why people come on the show.
我终于想明白了。
I it it has finally clicked for me.
我跟很多人聊过这个事。
I've had a lot of conversations about it.
你知道的，我们的制片人尼克和凯特都会说，我们现在基本不主动去邀约嘉宾了。
You know, Nick and Kate, our producers will tell you, we don't do a ton of outbound booking anymore.
我们这儿有一大堆想来的。
We have an incoming list.
名单长得很。
It's a mile long.
大家都想上我们的节目。
People want to be on the show.
我听到最多的原因是，这些高管都知道，自己团队根本不会听全员大会。
And the number one reason that I hear is that all of these executives know that their own teams aren't gonna listen to the all hands.
他们的团队根本不会看邮件，所以作为领导者，他们需要外界的认可来证明自己。
Like their own teams aren't gonna read the emails, and it is good for them as leaders to go get the external validation.
不是他们自己公司发的通稿，不是自家品牌的内容，也不是那些假模假样的TED演讲。
Not their own comms stuff, not their own branded content, not their own fake TED Talks.
有些人还真拍假TED演讲，简直离谱。
Some of them do fake TED Talks, which is wild.
现在我们连假播客都见多了。
We're we've moved on to fake podcasts.
有人来找我，想让我录个假播客，再剪成一堆假播客片段用。
We've gotten pitches for me to do a fake podcast that will then be clipped into like fake podcast clips.
我其实已经有真播客了，但这就是我们现在的环境，大家心里都明白。
And like, don't need to I have a real podcast, but this is the market that we live in and everyone can see through it.
所以如果你能上这个节目，把公司说清楚，讲明白你作为领导者怎么做决策，说说公司结构，不怕被质疑，敢接住尖锐的问题，把活儿干漂亮了——
So if you can come on this show and explain your company well, explain how you make decisions as a leader, explain how your company is structured, take a little heat, be asked some challenging questions, do a good job.
这对外面的观众——也就是我们庞大且不断增长的受众群体——确实有好处，对他们自己公司内部的人来说也同样有帮助。
It is actually good for those folks out in the world with our audience, our actual audience which is big and and growing, but it is also good for them inside of their companies.
就像我说的，这场游戏你可能赢，也可能输。
So like I said, you can win that game and you can lose that game.
真正让这事儿有价值的地方，在于他们没法完全掌控局面。
It's the fact that they're not in control that makes the thing valuable.
这种外部的认可，太关键了。
And that external validation is so important.
我看TVPN，恭喜你们把一个只有7万YouTube订阅者的播客卖了两亿美元，真牛。
I look at TVPN and congratulations for selling a podcast with 70,000 YouTube subscribers, $200,000,000, like that's great.
内容特别吸引人，我看了好多期。
It is very engaging, I've watched a lot of it.
他们本来就在这个行业里，一直毫不掩饰地为行业站台，现在又进了行业里的公司。
They were inside the industry, they're unapologetic boosters of the industry and now they're inside a company in the industry.
他们根本没法再提供什么外部认可了。
They have no ability to provide external validation.
展开剩余字幕（还有 283 条）
他们呢，其实已经失去了那种能制造冲突的东西，而冲突才是所有好故事的核心。
They can they you know, it's it they've lost the thing that might provide conflict and conflicts is what drives all great stories.
安德森·霍洛维茨搞过上千万个媒体品牌，全都失败了。
Andreessen Horowitz has started and failed 10,000,000 media brands.
他们搞过一个叫《未来》的技术博客，通篇都在吹嘘一切有多棒，结果没人看，直接黄了。
They had a tech blog called Future that was just about how great everything was and it failed because no one wants to read it.
因为故事靠的是冲突和情感，不是空洞的赞美。
Because conflict and emotion is what drives stories.
你要是身在其中，根本没法搞到这些东西。
And you can't get that if you're inside.
如果你在一家公司里，连批评自己同事都不被允许，那你永远写不出关于这家公司的精彩故事。
If you are working in a place where you are not allowed to criticize the people who work at your own company, you are never gonna write a good story about that company.
你最多能写写漂亮的公关稿。
You can write great press releases.
你也能拍些挺吸引人的视频，比如‘看看我们的工厂是怎么运作的’。
You can write engaging, like, here's how the factory works videos.
但接着我们就会跳出来指出：嘿，你们苹果不是说能回收所有iPhone吗？结果就一台回收机，还一台都没在回收。
But then we're gonna come along and we're gonna say, hey, you're a robot Apple that you said can recycle all the iPhones, there's only one of them and it's not recycling any iPhones.
这种模式你一看就能发现，一再重复。
Like, you can see this pattern happen over and over again.
所以我知道我们在The Verge和OnDecoder这个生态里扮演的角色——就是当个局外人。
So I I know what role we play in the ecosystem at The Verge and OnDecoder and it is to be outside.
你们得按我们的规矩来，把活儿干漂亮了。
You have to show up here on our terms and do a good job.
我们有庞大的受众，只要你干得够好，观众一定会为你喝彩。
And we have a big audience, and if you do a good job, I think the audience will be excited for you.
要是干得差，观众也会直接告诉你哪儿不行。
If do a bad job, I think the audience is gonna let you know it.
这种反馈，可不容易拿到。
And that is that's hard to get.
而且说实话，我们对其他所有事也都很较真。
And, you know, we're also precious about all of the rest of it.
我们不会接品牌合作、植入广告这些会损害我们作为记者核心承诺的事。
We won't do brand deals and integrated sponsorships and all the stuff that compromises that core promise that we make as journalists.
我经常聊这个话题。
I I talk about that stuff a lot.
现在没必要再啰嗦了，但这就是大家愿意来的原因。
I don't need to overdo it now, but that's to me is that's why everybody shows up.
现在想找到我们这种东西，真不容易。
It's hard to find the thing that we make anymore.
我和制作团队从不提前把 Decoder 节目要问的问题透露给嘉宾。
The producers and I will not give anyone the questions that they're gonna face on Decoder in advance.
也不会让他们自己定采访主题。
We will not let them tell us what topics they wanna cover.
更不会接受他们事后修改答案或者要求审核内容。
We will not accept edits afterwards or approvals on on answers afterwards.
你得亲自来，好好表现，有时候也可能表现砸了——大家都能看得出来。
You have to show up and you have to do a good job and sometimes you can do a bad job and everybody can see it.
我觉得很多人对网红媒体特别困惑，那些要求背后都跟品牌合作、植入广告、未来赚钱挂钩，还得过审，但我们就是不玩这套。
I also think a lot of people are very confused by influencer media where those asks are tied to brand deals and integrations and money to made made down the line and there are approvals and we just don't do it.
有时候别人想施压，我们的回应就是把压力原封不动扔回去。
And sometimes people think they can pressure us and our response to pressure is to turn it right back around.
我们得歇一小会儿。
We have to take another short break.
马上回来。
We'll be back in just a minute.
婚礼季来了，你的钱包已经开始冒汗了。
Wedding season is here, and your wallet is already sweating.
维加斯的单身派对、异地婚礼、礼单礼物、每个场合的穿搭……当个好闺蜜，从来没这么烧钱过。
Between the bachelorette in Vegas, the destination ceremony, the registry gifts, and the outfits for every single event, being a good friend has never felt more expensive.
我是Vivian Too，Urich的死党。
I'm Vivian Too, Urich BFF.
在这期《财富与闲聊》里，咱们来聊聊怎么在婚礼季里不破产地活下来。
And on this episode of Net Worth and Chill, we're breaking down exactly how to survive wedding season without going broke.
我们会聊到那些你忘了预算的隐藏开销，到底该花多少钱买礼物，怎么订机票和酒店能省几百块，还有我那些最离谱但完全合法的省钱妙招，让每一分钱都花得值。
We're talking hidden costs you forgot to budget for, how much you actually need to spend on a gift, flight and hotel hacks that could save you hundreds, and my most unhinged but totally legal money tips for stretching every dollar.
因为庆祝爱情，不该拿你的财务未来做代价。
Because celebrating love shouldn't mean sacrificing your financial future.
无论你在哪儿听播客，都可以在 youtube.com/yourrichbff 观看视频。
Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on youtube.com/yourrichbff.
欢迎回来。
Welcome back.
我是《Decoder》的高级制作人尼克·斯塔特，今天来回答你们关于《Decoder》和《The Verge》如何报道人工智能的问题。
I'm Decoder senior producer Nick Statt, making Nilay answer your questions about how Decoder and The Verge cover AI.
上次我们做听众问答 episode 时，收到了大量关于人工智能的反馈，比如《The Verge》是怎么报道AI的，我们在《Decoder》采访科技CEO时怎么处理这个话题，还有像海登·菲尔德这样的记者做AI科普时我们是怎么把控的。
The last time we did a mailbag episode, we got a lot of feedback about AI, how The Verge covers it, how we cover it here on Decoder when we talk to CEOs, how we approach AI coverage in our explainer episodes with reporters like Hayden Field.
上次收到这些反馈，很多人说：你们对AI太温柔了。
The last time we got that feedback, a lot of it was like, oh, you're not hard enough on AI.
得再狠一点才行。
You need to go harder.
但最近三四个月，我们发现了个挺有意思的现象：大家对AI的反馈开始变得两极分化了，不少人说我们太苛刻了，或者总盯着不对的方向。
But we've noticed something interesting in the last, you know, three, four, five months, which is that we're starting to see a lot of mixed feedback around AI, especially people saying we're too critical or we're fixating on the wrong perspectives.
你知道的，这可不是泡沫，现在真有人在用AI了。
You know, it's not a bubble or, you know, people are actually using it now.
公司都在疯狂刷token。
Companies are token maxing.
Claude代码都出来了。
There's Claude code.
还有OpenClaw这种东西。
There's OpenClaw.
各种新玩意儿接二连三冒出来，AI真的在变。
There's all this stuff happening, and AI is changing.
Nilay，我知道你一直觉得我们对AI的报道得不断调整。
Nilay, I know you're thinking about AI coverage is evolving all the time.
你现在是怎么想的？尤其是对《Decoder》来说？
How are you thinking about it right now, especially for decoder?
我们是不是太纠结于这些问题了？比如这个行业是不是泡沫，这项技术有没有大众市场或产品契合度？
Are we fixating too much on questions like whether the industry is a bubble or whether there's mainstream appeal or product market fit for this technology?
这种想法现在是怎么变化的？
How is that thinking evolving?
我对怎么报道AI这件事真的挺矛盾的，这跟我们一直聊的那些调查数据息息相关——普通用户越来越多地接触到AI，也越来越讨厌它，而且一点都不掩饰。
I have really mixed feelings in how to cover AI, and it is really related to all of the polling we're constantly talking about, where regular people are encountering it more and more and they're hating it more and more, and they're not being shy about it.
我特别在意一点：Decoder 虽然是个商业节目，但它背后是那个庞大的消费科技网站。
And I really take to heart that Decoder is the business show that sits on top of a big consumer tech website.
The Verge 本质上就是给普通消费者看的媒体。
So The Verge is a publication is very much for consumers.
我们在这儿报道的，就是科技怎么影响普通人，企业级技术我们很少碰。
That's what we cover here, we don't do a lot of enterprise tech coverage on The Verge, we focus relentlessly on technology and how it makes regular people feel.
Decoder 是个商业节目。
Decoder is a business show.
对吧？
Right?
我一直在问那些CEO，他们的组织架构是什么样的。
I'm I'm asking CEOs what their org charts look like.
这跟普通消费者关心的事儿差得太远了。
That is very far from anything any consumer cares about.
但我认为，理解公司和人的思维方式，才能真正看懂他们做的产品。
And I think understanding how the companies and the people think really helps you understand the products.
所以当我们做产品评测的时候，就会形成一个特别有意思的反馈循环：我了解了这些产品的背后公司，这种理解会反映在我们的评测里，然后我再回到Decoder上反复说——我们还有一个庞大的评测团队，天天用你们的产品，说实话，我觉得你们这产品真不行。
That So when we do the product coverage, we get a really interesting feedback loop where I understand the businesses that built the products and I think that's reflected in the products and then I can come back around and you hear me do it on Decoder all the time and say, also we run a giant reviews program, we use your products and I think your products are bad.
这种互动模式，别的地方真很难找到。
And that is it's hard to find that dynamic anywhere else.
我觉得这正是The Verge独特的地方，也是Decoder和The Verge之间关系特别的地方。
So I think that's honestly what makes The Verge unique and what makes the relationship between Decoder and The Verge unique.
拿AI来说，很长一段时间里，我们一直在用他们的产品，但发现根本做不到公司吹的那些功能。
Specifically as applied to AI, I think for a long time, we were using their products and they just couldn't do the things the company said they could do.
你尽管免费用，聊天聊到天荒地老都没问题。
You can use free chat, chat, day and all night.
只要你还有点自省能力，就会意识到：这根本不是活的。
And if you have an ounce of like self reflection, you will say to yourself, this is not alive.
每次回复完，它就催我再问下一个问题，我实在想不通，从这玩意儿怎么就能跳到它能运营一家公司、有自我意识、成为通用人工智能呢？
Like it's just prompting me to ask it another question at the end of every response and I don't see how you get from here to this thing can run an entire business to this thing will attain sentience to this thing will be AGI.
你只要看看这产品就知道，根本用不了。
Like you can just look at the product and see it doesn't work.
大卫·皮尔斯刚评测了星巴克和Chatuchu的整合，结果惨不忍睹。
David Pierce recently just reviewed the Starbucks integration and Chatuchu, and the thing is a miserable failure.
明白了。
Okay.
我们其实可以直接看产品，看看它们到底是什么，再问问这些公司许下的诺言，有没有兑现？
We can just look at the products and see what they are and see the promises these companies are making and ask very directly, are those promises being kept?
我觉得在消费者这边，答案明摆着：没有。
And I think on the consumer side, the answer is manifestly no.
它们根本做不到承诺消费者的那些事，这正是消费者开始反感AI的根本原因。
They they cannot do the things they promised consumers they can do, I think that is very much why consumers are are turning on AI.
他们没得到价值，却承受了所有要求。
They're not getting the value, but they're getting all the demands.
变化在于，我觉得这正是反馈两极分化的关键——尤其是《解码者》这个节目，我们的听众主要是企业人群。
The thing that has changed, and I think this is the reason the feedback is getting mixed, is on Decoder particularly, we have a business audience.
这是一档商业节目，受众都是企业人士，而AI在企业场景里确实有真实的市场契合点。
It's a business show, it has a business audience and there is a real product market fit for AI in the enterprise.
你看看Anthropic的收入就知道了。
You can see what Anthropix revenues look like.
你再看OpenAI，早就把所有消费端业务都扔了，连Sora都放一边，全力押注编码器和企业级AI应用。
You can see OpenAI basically sloughing off every consumer thing it was doing, including Sora and trying to focus heavily on codecs and enterprise use of AI.
这背后其实大有道理。
And there's a lot to be said for that.
我觉得很多企业流程确实该自动化。
I I think a lot of business processes should be automated.
让智能代理替人跑腿办事，让真人去做更有价值的工作，这事儿特别棒。
I think having agents run around and do things inside your business so that people can real people can do actual tasks of higher value is that's great.
我觉得营销的前沿，某种程度上就是自动化。
I I I think the cutting edge of marketing is automation in some way.
对很多人来说这事儿肯定挺怪的，但它确实在发生，你没法否认。AI 已经在这儿找到了用武之地，有些会失败，有些会成功，这事儿特别值得跟进。
I think it's gonna be really weird for a lot of people, but it's happening and you can't deny that it's happening, you can't deny that AI has found uses here and some of them will fall flat and some of them will succeed and that will be really interesting to cover.
所以我觉得大家意见不一，是因为你要是只看市场的一个角落，会觉得 AI 真的能带来很大价值。
So that's where I think the mixed opinions come from, is that if you're looking at one part of the market, you say, oh, AI has a lot of value to offer here.
但你要是再往前迈一步，最近我们刚听到黄仁勋说，AGI 其实已经来了。
But then you kind of take the jump and I think we've recently heard Jensen Huang say AGI is already here.
贾森·卡尔卡尼斯也说过，AGI 已经来了。
Jason Kalkanis has said AGI's already here.
他们说的 AGI，能写代码、能自动化业务流程，照这么说，一个人就能开一家公司了——AGI 真的来了。
And what they are describing is, it can write software, it can automate some business process, which means maybe you can run a company all by yourself, AGI's here.
我觉得这纯属胡扯。
I I don't that's pure nonsense to me.
我更关心的是，到底有没有哪个 AI 产品，是让人真爱上它、彻底改变想法的。
And I think the the thing that I'm looking at a lot is where is the product, the AI product that people love that actually changes their minds.
在我看来，这样的产品根本就不存在。
And to me that product doesn't exist.
我觉得未来几年，我们得好好掰扯清楚这个分歧。
So I think we're gonna hammer on that divide pretty hard in the in the years to come here.
这跟我们收到的一位读者克里斯的评论有关。
That relates to a comment we got from a a reader, Chris.
他说，最近在《Decoder》和《Vergecast》上讨论AI投票这事，根本就是搞错了重点——首先，他再也不敢相信图片或视频了。
He says he thinks the AI polling is bad shtick lately on Decoder and Vergecast is underrating how much, one, he cannot trust images or video anymore.
其次，现在这情况真的太糟了。
Two, it's this is really bad right now.
第三，大家其实都明白，AI在不久的将来可能带来末日般的后果，而末日这种念头在美国人心里本来就根深蒂固。
Three, it's easy to understand that it's genuinely apocalyptic in the near future, and apocalypse looms large in American imagination.
第四，这些糟糕的结果，都是因为人们动不动就拿AI说事造成的。
And four, those bad outcomes are the fault of gestures broadly toward AI.
所以他想表达的是：不仅现在没有真正好用的消费级AI产品，而且现有的那些产品，已经在实实在在地、明明白白地破坏社会契约了。
So he's saying not only is there no good consumer AI product, but that the consumer AI products that do exist are a threat to the social contract in real and immediately obvious ways.
你刚才提到关于Z世代的AI民意调查，这事儿很明显。
Obviously, you know, you mentioned the the AI polling around Gen Z.
现在这些事正朝着非常阴暗的方向发展。
It's manifesting in some very dark ways.
已经有针对政客的袭击，有人冲进萨姆·阿尔特曼的家，数据中心也面临巨大压力；人们反对AI高管说他们会创造更多工作机会而不是摧毁工作，而有些AI高管干脆直接说：我们要把所有工作都干掉。
There have been attacks on politicians, attacks on Sam Altman's home, a lot of pressure mounting against data centers, pushing back on AI executives claiming that they're gonna create more jobs, not destroy them, and then some AI executives, of course, just plainly saying we're gonna destroy all jobs.
这些事对你在《Decoder》上跟人聊AI有什么影响？尤其是跟科技领袖、正在搞这项技术的人聊的时候？
How is this affecting how you think about talking to people about AI on on Decoder, particularly tech leaders and people who are working on this technology?
第一，我想确保我继续问他们：以现在的技术，真能实现他们说的那些事吗？
One, I think I want to make sure I keep asking them if the technology as it's constituted today can actually do all of the things they say it's gonna do.
这事儿我真没底。
I don't think that answer is clear at all.
你可以听听扬·莱昆，他以前是Meta的AI负责人，就因为说大语言模型不可能达到通用人工智能，被赶出了Meta。
I you can listen to Jan Lecun, who used to be the head of AI at Meta, who got pushed out of Meta for saying he didn't think LLMs could get to AGI.
但他现在还在外面坚持这个观点。
He's still out there saying it.
我最近听他讲的一个观点是，如果一个智能系统连自己行为的后果都搞不清楚、也预测不了，那它就不配被称为能自主行动的系统。
The latest argument that I've heard him make is it you can't have an agentic system that's taking action for itself when it can't know or predict the consequences of its actions.
这其实就是大语言模型的本质问题。
That's And just sort of the nature of the LLM.
对吧？
Right?
它总是先干了再说，看会发生啥，但真正的智能应该是能反复行动、结果可预期的。
It's gonna do stuff and see what happens, but like true intelligence is gonna take repeated actions in a way that is predictable.
就像我们普通人，做一件事之前心里大概都知道下一步会怎样。
Just like you and I would take actions and and know what's gonna happen next.
大语言模型呢，每次都靠第一印象瞎猜，根本没个准谱。
The LMs are sort of reacting on on first impression all the time.
这确实是个值得深聊的话题，也许我们可以设计一些机制来绕开大语言模型这个固有的缺陷。
That's a big conversation you can go have and maybe you can build some affordances to to get around that sort of inherent fact of an LLM.
但我认为，这个领域里其实有个更大的争议，只是大家都不愿承认——因为眼下这些工具的商业潜力实在太大了。
But I think there's a bigger debate in this field than anyone wants to to acknowledge because the market opportunity for the tools we have now is huge.
所以你得说，它就会接着做下一步
So you have to say it's gonna do the next
再下一步，再下一步。
thing or the next thing or next thing.
我想继续深挖这一点。
I I want to keep pushing on that.
我觉得这根本不是什么微妙的事，让大伙儿把对这项技术能做什么、不能做什么的真实想法说出来，特别重要。
I I don't think that is subtle at all and I think making people say out loud what they actually think the technology can do and what its limits are, is important.
第二点，我们必须继续讨论的是民意调查。
The second thing I want to make sure we keep doing is talking about the polling.
讨论这个行业对所有人提出了多高的要求。
Talking about the fact that this industry is demanding so much from everyone.
它要消耗这么多电力、这么多土地、历史上所有的内存，到底为了什么？
All of the power, all of the land, every stick of RAM in history for what?
我们不可能真以为，只是把营销自动化了而已。
And it really cannot be we've automated marketing.
这根本不可能。
It it just can't.
必须得有比这更好的东西。
It has to be something better than that.
我一直在说这一点，我知道有人会跟我争上一万遍。
And I I I I I keep saying it and I know people argue with me a million ways about this.
但ChatGPT到底算什么？
But Chatchpia is what?
每周九亿用户？
900,000,000 weekly users?
你只要稍微瞄一眼谷歌的产品，Gemini就无处不在。
Gemini is everywhere if you just like blink at a Google product.
Claude现在之所以出名，是因为它已经成了一个政治话题。
Claude is famous now for a lot of people because it is now also a political story.
人人都在Facebook信息流里见过Slop。
Everybody has seen Slop on their Facebook feeds.
大家对这项技术其实都很清楚。
People are aware of this technology.
他们早就拿定主意了。
They have made up their minds.
靠营销是解决不了这个问题的。
You cannot market your way out of this problem.
你没法靠广告去扭转人们对你所展示内容的真实感受。
You cannot advertise people out of their honest reactions to what you're putting in front of them.
如果你的产品没法真正超越它，我觉得你根本改变不了人们的想法。
And unless you have a product that can overcome it, I I don't think you're gonna change the hearts and minds.
目前还没有哪款普通人天天用的产品，能让他们对它的喜爱压过这种抵触。
And there is not a product that regular people are using every day that they feel like love for that overcomes this.
说实话，我能举出一大堆例子。
You know, I I can give a lot of examples here.
比如优步。
Uber.
你可以列出过去几年人们对优步的所有政策批评。
You can list all of the policy criticisms people have had with Uber for years and years.
优步在劳工问题上一直有争议。
There are labor concerns with Uber.
安全问题也是大家担心的点。
There are safety concerns with Uber.
有一阵子，好几个城市都禁了优步。
At one point, Uber was getting banned in various cities.
但大家就是喜欢用这个产品。
People really liked the product.
他们能挺过来，是因为产品真的好用。
They were able to overcome it because the product was compelling.
司机也喜欢优步，他们自己都说了一遍又一遍——有些司机根本不想当全职员工。
And drivers like the product as Uber will tell you over and over and over again, some drivers don't wanna be full time employees.
他们太看重这种灵活性了，以至于优步遇到监管问题时，他们也照样不走。
They they like the flexibility to the point when Uber had regulatory problems.
他们还在应用里打广告，号召用户去游说当地的政客。
They were putting ads in the app asking people to lobby their local politicians.
这个产品太有吸引力了，让人愿意为它去搞政治行动；而现在的AI产品，连让人反着去搞政治行动的劲儿都提不起来。
This is a product that was compelling enough to make people take political action in a way that AI is a product that is anti compelling enough to make people take anti political action.
这种产品其实一抓一大把。
And I I there's a long list of products like this.
只要产品够吸引人，政策上的反对、社会上的质疑，全都能扛过去。
You can overcome the policy objections, the societal objections if your product is compelling.
但我真不觉得现在有哪个面向消费者的AI产品，能让人有那种发自内心的认可，达到这个行业目前所要求的那种程度。
And I just do not think there is a consumer AI product that people feel good about at the level that rises to the the kinds of demands this industry is making.
你不能光说‘这玩意儿对生意好’就完事了。
And that you can't be like, this is great for business.
我觉得光靠这个，根本行不通。
I don't think that's gonna do it.
明白了。
Okay.
我们还有几个问题要问，尼莱。
We've got a few questions left, Nilay.
接下来这些问题我们快节奏地问一下，聊聊节目的当前结构和未来打算。
We'll do these in more of, like, a lightning round style about the current structure of the show and what to expect in the future.
有个叫乔·罗德里克的听众说，他特别喜欢尼莱情绪高涨的那些 episode。
One question here from Joe Roderick is that he really enjoys the occasional episode where Nilay is really fired up.
他说，希望你们能考虑做个定期的辩论类播客，让两个人的观点针锋相对。
He says, would love for you to consider a periodic debate style podcast where two people's views are pitted against each other.
我知道你以前开玩笑说想搞个 YouTube 辩论节目，对吧。
I know you've joked about starting a a YouTube debate show Yeah.
偶尔提过这么一嘴。
At some points.
你觉得这种形式行得通吗？
Do you think this format works?
你对 Decoder 节目的形式和结构，现在是怎么想的？
How are you thinking about formats and and and the structure of Decoder itself?
我们以前在《Decoder》上做过一次辩论。
We did one debate on Decoder.
节目刚开始的时候，是关于比特币的辩论。
At the very beginning, it was a Bitcoin debate.
一边是特别支持比特币的高管，另一边是强烈反对比特币的教授。
It was a very pro Bitcoin executive, obviously, and then a very anti Bitcoin professor.
他们俩根本不在同一个房间，我是通过分别问他们同样的问题来主持的。
And I was it they weren't in the same room.
然后我把两段剪到一起，效果还挺有意思的。
I was sort of moderating them by asking the same questions to each, and then we edited it all together, and it was fairly interesting.
也许我们该多搞几次这样的。
Maybe we should do that more.
至于纯粹的辩论节目，我有点同意乔恩·斯图尔特的看法。
I think the pure debate shows, I I think I sort of side with Jon Stewart on this.
我觉得这种形式对社会没什么好处。
I I think they're bad for society.
我就在想，乔恩·斯图尔特跟塔克·卡尔森、艾伦·康布斯对话时说：‘你们这样是在伤害美国，别再这样了。’
I just I'm thinking about Jon Stewart talking to Tucker Carlson and Alan Combs and being like, you're hurting America, like, stop it.
那些节目靠的都是表演。
Those shows rely on performance.
根本不是靠内容。
They do not rely on substance.
所以你随便看一集《Jubilee》，最后全看谁在台上更吸引人，而不是谁说得比对方更聪明。
And so, you know, you can watch any random Jubilee episode and it all comes down to how compelling is the person in the chair, not are they saying smarter things than the other person.
我很开心大家觉得我够有意思，能撑得起一档节目的另一端。
And I like that people think that I'm interesting enough to, like, hold one side of a date.
我的工作不是去替某个立场站台。
My job is not to, like, advocate positions in that way.
我们确实有些明确的价值观，但在2026年的美国，光是坚持这些，就让人觉得我在鼓吹什么了——毕竟这时代太疯狂了。
I think we have some clear values, which in America in 2026 feels like I'm advocating for stuff because we live in a crazy time.
但我只是想问问题，了解别人在做什么，怎么做的。
But I'm just trying to ask questions and and learn what people are doing and how they're doing it.
有时候我想说的是：你有没有想过，让你的平台少点种族歧视？
Sometimes what I'm saying is, hey, have you thought about making your platform less racist?
这听起来就像我在拼命鼓吹，特别激动似的。
And that feels like I'm advocating, like, really hard and being really fired up.
谁会去想别总把别人的东西全抄走呢？
Who thought about not stealing everything from everyone all the time?
这对我来说根本就是底线，理所当然的事。
I that is like table stakes for me.
也许我们该多搞点我当主持人的辩论，但要是我本人也站队，感觉就有点怪了。
Maybe we should do more debates where I'm the moderator, but I think it gets weird if I'm the one taking a position.
我看了好多这类辩论节目在YouTube上播，感觉观众看的都是表演，不是内容。
And I I really have watched a lot of those debate shows show up on YouTube and it feels like what people are getting out of it is performance, not substance.
这正好引出我最后想问的一个问题，是我自己特意写的，就是想听听你怎么看。
That segues perfectly into a question here at the end that I just personally wrote myself because I'm curious what your answer is.
你正在写一本《Decoder》的书。
You have a Decoder book in the works.
你最近刚公布了这本书。
You recently announced it.
书名叫做《如何得到你想要的》。
It's called How to Get What You Want.
为什么给这本新书取这个名字呢？
Why is that the title of the forthcoming Decoder book?
这个书名其实带点幽默。
That title is a little bit of a joke.
我觉得这名字挺有趣的。
I think it's a fun title.
这话说起来，我天天对我八岁的女儿这么说。
It is just what I say to my eight year old daughter all the time.
她跟我想要什么东西，我就回她：‘那你打算怎么搞到手？’
She asked me for something, and say, well, how you gonna give me what?
就是问她：你有啥计划？
Like, what's your plan?
所以这就是书名。
So that's the title.
这本书我从一开始做《Decoder》的时候就在想了。
The book I've been thinking about since we started Decoder.
我以前说过，你知道吗，当初做这个播客的时候，我就打算每周采访一位CEO。
I I I've said this before, but, you know, when you when you start a podcast in the premises, I'm gonna interview a CEO every week.
这事儿根本没完没了。
That is just a forever project.
这项目没有截止日期。
There's no end date to that project.
你也说不清它是成功还是失败，只要有人听，它就会一直继续下去。
You can't mark any sort of success or failure, it just goes on forever as long as people are listening.
这种做事方式挺特别的。
And that's a weird way to do things.
所以我得给自己找点标志性的目标，这就是我们设计《Decoder》问题的初衷。
So I wanted to have some kind of marker, some goal and that's why we structured the decoder questions as they are.
所以我才总问每个人是怎么做决定的，问他们公司是怎么架构的，因为我感觉，只要收集足够多的答案，就能找到其中的共性。
That's why I ask everybody how to make decisions, that's why I ask everybody how their companies are structured because my feeling was that if I could get enough of those answers, I could find enough commonalities.
等我侄子侄女明年大学毕业时，我就能跟他们讲清楚企业到底是怎么运作的。
And then when my niece and nephew graduate from college, which they're gonna do next year, I could tell them how businesses work.
因为他们毕业的这个时机太特殊了，这群孩子马上就要踏入第一份工作，可我根本不知道现在的就业市场是什么样，尤其是有了AI之后。
Because they're gonna graduate from college in a really weird time and all of these kids are gonna go off into their first jobs and I don't know what that job market looks like, especially now with AI.
而且现在这些公司连培训新人的时间都舍不得给，人来了待不到二十五分钟就走，根本没人带。
And none of these companies hold on to anyone for longer than twenty five minutes, like no one's gonna get trained.
我当时就想，不如干脆写本操作指南吧。
And I was like, I should just make an instruction manual.
所以这本书里有一章，其实就是一集Decoder的精华版。
And so the, you know, the one of the chapters of the book is is just a decoder trip.
你只要告诉我你公司是怎么组织的，我就能猜出它80%的问题在哪。
If you tell me how your company is structured, I can tell you 80% of its problems.
这点我太清楚了。
I know that.
我觉得我在节目里已经证明过了。
I've I've proven that, I think on the show.
我觉得Decoder的听众都懂，最后那20%真的特别关键。
I think Decoder listeners know that, yeah, that last 20% is really important.
剩下的这一小时，说的就是这个。
That's the nest that's the rest of the hour.
但如果你只问一句：公司的组织架构是怎样的？
But if you just say, what is the org chart?
你就能大致看明白一家公司最看重什么、哪里有矛盾。
Like you can get a pretty basic understanding of where the priorities and the tensions of a company are.
我采访过很多CEO，问过很多类似的问题，我们节目里都有固定套路了。
I've talked to a lot of CEOs, I've asked a lot of very similar questions, we have tropes inside of our show.
我能把这些整理出来，交给别人，让他们对自己的职业生活更有掌控感吗？
Can I package that up and hand it to people and have them feel a sense of agency about what they're doing in their professional lives?
所以这本书叫《如何得到你想要的》，就是想让人觉得：我能做主。
And so it's called How to Get What You Want because I want people to feel empowered.
等这本书出版的时候，我觉得很多机构都已经被推翻了。
I think a lot of institutions are gonna be torn down by the time this book comes out.
很多有理想、有想法的年轻人，根本没经历过真正管过事儿。
And a lot of young people with idealism and ideas are not gonna have had the experiences of running anything.
那我能不能直接给大伙儿一个‘秘籍’？
So can I just hand people a cheat code?
对吧？
Right?
就是这么回事儿。
Like here's here's how it goes.
所有公司其实都差不多。
It's all the companies are the same.
无非就是职能型或者事业部制嘛。
Like they're all they're all functional or divisional.
你要是听多了程序员说话，这些答案就都明白了。
If you listen to the coder, you know these answers.
如果你的老板对问题也没答案，那你该怎么做决定？
If you have a boss and they don't know the answer to the question, how do you make decisions?
你干脆辞职算了。
You should quit your job.
我说得再直白不过了。
It's just like as flat out as I can tell you.
其实这个问题是有答案的。
Like, there are answers to that question.
咱们已经听过不少了。
We've heard a lot of them.
这本书想说的，就是这个意思。
So that's the idea of the book.
但怎么得到你想要的，其实就是我跟我八岁女儿说的那句话：你打算怎么拿到你想要的？
But how to get what you want is very much just me saying to my eight year old daughter, how you gonna get what you want?
你的计划是什么？
What's your plan?
那今天最后一个问题是，尼莱，今年 Decoder 节目你最想邀请哪些重磅嘉宾？
So for the final question today, Nilay, who are your moonshot guests this year for Decoder?
是苹果的约翰·特尼斯吗？
Is it Apple's John Turnis?
还是萨姆·阿尔特曼和达里奥·阿马代？
Is it Sam Altman and Dario Amade still?
是 Palantir 的 CEO 亚历克斯·卡尔普？
Palantir CEO Alex Karp?
你最想请谁来上节目？
Who do you most want on the show?
我们正在联系萨姆。
We're working on Sam.
达里奥那边也在跟进。
We're working on Dario.
希望他们能答应过来。
I hope they come through.
就像我说的，这是一场你赢得到的游戏。
Like I said, it's a game you can win.
但同样，你也可能输掉。
It's also a game you can lose.
我觉得大家都很清楚这一点，现在都朝着上市一路平稳前进。
I think everyone's very aware of that, and they're cruising towards IPOs.
所以他们其实特别怕冒险。
So I think they're they're pretty risk averse.
而且他们特别喜欢上播客。
They also love being on podcasts.
如果你认识这些大佬，麻烦跟他们说，咱们这节目是最有意思的。
So if you know these guys, tell them this is the the most fun one to be on.
我好多年都开玩笑说，我连蒂姆·库克都没敢请，我觉得我搞不定他的媒体培训那一套。
I've joked for years that I've never even asked for Tim Cook because he I don't think I can win media training.
我真的搞不定。
I really don't.
我见过约翰·特尼斯。
I've met John Turnis.
他挺随和的。
He is pretty relaxed.
他喜欢做产品。
He likes making products.
他也喜欢聊产品。
He likes talking about products.
也许等他今年晚些时候真当上CEO了，咱们再提这个请求吧。
Maybe maybe once he actually becomes the CEO later in the year, we can we can make that ask.
那可太棒了。
That'd be great.
亚历克斯·卡尔普要是来，绝对能成节目最搞笑的一期。
Alex Karp, I think, would be just the funniest episode of the show.
咱们真该去问问。
We should ask for that.
但我更想找那些真正用AI工具来运营生意的嘉宾。
But I'm also looking very much for guests who are using AI tools in particular in ways to actually run their businesses.
我们已经听够了那些模型公司的说法。
I think we've heard a lot from the model companies.
可还没怎么听过新一代企业家——他们用这些工具的方式特别有意思，不是简单地取代人力。
We have not heard a lot from a new generation of of business leaders who are actually using these tools in interesting ways that aren't just replacing jobs.
我知道他们肯定存在。
I know they're out there.
我特别想聊聊他们，聊聊在企业场景里真正用好这些工具意味着什么，我觉得他们已经找到了产品市场的契合点。
I'm just very curious to talk about them and and talk about what it really means to use these tools in the enterprise setting where I think they've found product market fit.
我觉得这真是个完美的收尾。
So I think that's a great place to end it.
尼莱，谢谢你再次做客《Decoder》。
Nilay, thank you for coming back on Decoder.
不客气。
You're very welcome.
我真该摔电话走人，让大伙儿看看这有多气人。
I should hang up in rage just so people could see what it's like.
每期节目都有这种风险。
That's the it's the danger of every episode.
对。
Yeah.
你随时想走都可以走。
You're allowed to walk out whenever you want.
感谢Nilay抽时间来做这档节目，也谢谢大家收听。
I'd like to thank Nilay for taking the time to make his own show, and thank you for tuning in.
希望你们喜欢这期内容。
I hope you enjoyed it.
如果你对这期节目有什么想法，或者想让我们聊点别的，欢迎给我们留言。
If you'd like to let us know what you thought about this show or what else you'd like us to cover, drop us a line.
你可以发邮件到 Decoder@TheVerge.com。
You can email us at Decoder at The Verge.
团队真的会看每一封邮件，你也可以直接在Threads或Blue Sky上找Nilay。
The team really does read every email, or you can hit up Nilay directly on threads or blue sky.
我们也在YouTube上。
We're also on YouTube.
你可以在Decoder Pod观看完整节目。
You can watch full episodes at at Decoder Pod.
我们还有TikTok和Instagram账号。
We also have a TikTok and an Instagram.
账号都是Decoder Pod两个，内容特别有意思。
They're at Decoder Pod two, and they're a lot of fun.
如果你喜欢Decoder，别忘了分享给朋友，并在你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 your podcasts.
Decoder是The Verge出品，属于Vox Media播客网络的一部分。
Decoder is a production of The Verge and is part of the Vox Media Podcast Network.
本节目由Kate Cox和我Nick Statt制作，剪辑由Ursa Wright负责。
The show is produced by Kate Cox and myself, Nick Statt, and it's edited by Ursa Wright.
我们的主编是凯文·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.
下次见。
See you next time.
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。