约翰·阿诺德 - 中国、能源市场与修复美国体系 - [像最好的投资者一样投资，第461集]

然后行业就得手忙脚乱了。

And then the industry has to scramble.

接着你再把数据中心加进来，这简直就是用电需求激增，而且对价格不太在意，反而比我们国家以往任何能源消费者都更看重速度。

And then you throw data centers in here, which is just a load growth and being less concerned about price and more concerned about speed than any consumer of energy that we've seen in this country maybe ever.

把所有这些因素都搅在一起，试图打造一个能正常运转的系统。

Put it all in the mixing bowl and try to get a system that works.

如果你能想象一个美国能源的未来，我真想让你描绘一下，十年后我们可能实现的最理想场景，以及那个系统与今天相比有哪些不同之处。

If you could imagine a US energy future, I'd love to paint the poles and have you imagine the best possible scenario you can imagine for us ten years from now and what the components of that system would be that are different than how it is today.

也许再想象一下，十年后最糟糕的系统版本是什么样子。

And maybe like the worst possible version of the system that you can imagine in ten years.

只是为了了解你如此深入研究这个系统后，我很欣赏你看待这些相互竞争目标的方式，还有这个奇特的数据中心变量。

Just to get a sense of having studied the system so carefully, I love your way of thinking about the competing goals and this weird data center variable as well.

但我们先从这一点开始。

But let's start with that.

你认为十年后最糟糕的场景会是什么？那种情况会让你对美国能源系统的现状感到担忧？

What would be the worst scenario that you can imagine that would get you concerned about the state of The US energy system in ten years time?

最糟糕的情况是，能源系统成为制约美国创新以及本国人民个人发展的瓶颈。

The worst scenario is that the energy system becomes the bottleneck for both of US innovation, as well as individual flourishing in this country.

在美國的創新方面，尤其是技術和人工智能數據中心，關鍵在於我們能否建設。

On US innovation, especially on technology and AI data centers, it's largely around, can we build?

我們能否滿足產業所需求的供應？

Can we create the supply that industry is demanding?

而在個人發展方面，問題在於我們能否在實現這一目標的同時，保持美國人不僅渴望而且要求的可負擔性和可靠性。

And on individual flourishment, it's can we do so and maintain the affordability and reliability components that Americans have come to not only desire but demand.

能源、食品和住房之間存在政治博弈，因為我們需要所有這些東西。

And there's this politics around energy and food and housing because we need all of those.

這些對人們來說都不是可選的。

Those aren't optional for people.

但這些領域存在政治角力，如果你開始失去其中任何一項的可負擔性，就會帶來巨大的政治後果。

But there's politics around it that if you start to lose affordability of any of those, then there's real tremendous political ramifications of it.

因此，你可以看到，如果能源系統出現問題，將對這個國家的政治產生巨大影響。

And so you can start to see if an energy system goes bad, we'll have a huge impact on politics of this country.

如果你考虑一下这种糟糕的情景，从供需两方面来看，我想知道，对于美国几十年来首次出现的这种巨大需求增长，你有多大的把握认为它会持续下去？

If you think about that bad case scenario, both supply and demand wise, I'm curious starting with demand, how certain you feel that this big increase in demand for really the first time in decades in The US, how lasting it feels to you?

我们是否几乎无论如何都会迎来大量新增的数据中心，需求无论如何都会激增，这种感觉有多确定？

Does it feel pretty certain that we're just gonna get a ton more data centers almost no matter what or demand for them anyway?

从供应端来看，我们可能无法满足这种需求的原因是什么？

And then on the supply side, what the reasons would be that we just failed to meet that demand?

我们为什么会失败、无法成功？

Why we would stumble and not succeed?

到2030年之前的前景看起来非常清晰。

Visibility through 10/2030 Feels pretty clear.

很清楚。

Clear.

是的。

Yeah.

投资正在持续进行。

The investments are being made.

进行这些投资的主体，是地球上曾经存在过的规模最大、利润最高的公司。

The actors that are making these investments are the largest, most profitable companies that have ever existed on this planet.

其中许多公司正以非常健康的增速成长，因此它们的自由现金流正在增加。

Many of them are growing at very healthy clips, And so their free cash flow is increasing.

它们具备执行这些计划的财务能力，并且正在如今进行投资。

They have the financial capability to execute on these plans, and they're making the investments today.

我认为2030年之后会怎样，谁也说不准。

I think the twenty thirties on is who knows?

你在构建任何此类模型时所依赖的假设，其不确定性范围极大，当你向外推演如此多年时，只会得出一个垃圾进垃圾出的模型。

The assumptions that you have to go into any model on this have such wide airbars and you extrapolate out that many years and you just create a garbage in garbage out model.

那我们满足这一需求的能力又如何呢？

And what about our ability to meet that demand?

什么会让我们陷入困境？

What would screw us up

在供应端，最可能让我们出问题的是什么？

on the supply side the most?

我认为这是政策问题。

I think it's policy.

这些年来，在这个国家进行建设变得越来越困难。

It's gotten harder and harder to build in this country over the years.

社会需求与当地社区偏好之间始终存在张力。

And there's always this tension between what the needs of society are and what the preferences of a local community are.

因此，每个人都意识到我们需要交通、住房与能源。

So everybody realizes we need transportation and housing and energy.

但人们也不希望这些东西建在自己家附近。

People also want it not in their neighborhood.

这整个NIMBY运动就是：我们需要经济适用房、职工住房，需要交通设施，需要能源设施。

This is a whole NIMBY movement is we need affordable housing, workforce housing, we need transportation, we need energy assets.

但别把它们建在我旁边。

But don't put them by me.

如果你敢这么做，我就去法院跟你打官司。

And if you try to, I'm gonna go fight you in the courts.

对开发商来说，时间就是金钱。

For developers, time is money.

项目反对者越来越擅长利用现有的监管法规来一再拖延项目，从而常常导致项目失败。

The opponents of projects have gotten very clever about how to use the existing regulatory laws to delay and delay projects, and in doing so can often kill them.

通过我们的基金会，我一直专注于如何进行许可改革，确保对社会有益的项目不会给任何社区带来不必要的痛苦，同时保证不良项目无法获批。

I've been very focused, you know, through our foundation at how do you do permitting reform to make sure that the projects that are good for society aren't unnecessarily painful to any community will get built while maintaining the parameters that the bad projects don't get built.

这种邻避主义和建设困难，会导致美国无法满足能源供应，使能源成为美国发展的瓶颈，尤其回到我们对话开头提到的中国——他们建设的速度和规模。

This NIMBYism and this difficulty in building is what would lead to the problem of not being able to supply or energy becoming the choke point for development of The United States, and particularly bringing it back to the first part of the conversation of China and just the speed and scale that they can build.

他们没有这个问题。

They don't have this problem.

我对此很有信心。

I'm confident of that.

这是两国之间最大的差异之一。

It is one of the biggest differences between the two countries.

我真的很担心，如果能源成为美国的瓶颈，将对我国的战略地位产生严重影响。

I really worry about if energy becomes a choke point in The US, it has real ramifications for strategic ranking of this country.

如果你是个政客，你会不会把中国的故事当作催化剂，来宣传和推广这个观点，即我们正被一个与我们要么是对立要么是竞争对手的国家超越？

If you were a politician, would you use the China story as fuel to the fire to try to communicate and market this concept that we're sort of getting lapped by someone that's of our, if not adversary, our competitor?

完全会。

A 100%.

这不仅是个好故事，而且是事实。

Not only is it a good narrative, but it's true.

如果能源成为制约因素，我们将相对于中国失去竞争力。

If energy becomes the constraint, we will become less competitive vis a vis China.

你提到能源领域的资产方面非常令人兴奋。

You mentioned the asset side being so exciting on the energy side.

如果我是个能源资产投资者，真的想投资那些有助于解决这个问题的项目——即增长与需求并存，同时面临NIMBY主义的崛起——那么整个链条的瓶颈在哪里？

If I was a energy asset investor, and I really wanted to fund stuff that would help us solve this problem where you got the joint growth and demand and this rise of NIMBYism, where does this whole thing break down?

是输电环节吗？

Is it in transmission?

问题出在输电上吗？

Is that the problem?

因为假设我们能在人烟稀少、无人关心的偏远地区大量生产能源，并高效地输送出去，这个问题就能解决。

Because presumably, if we could just produce lots of energy in remote places that nobody lived or cared and transport it efficiently, the problem would be solved.

这样想对吗？

Is that the right way to think about it?

你的想法不一样。

You think about it differently.

我想探讨一下，在未来五到十年内，你能想象出的最理想解决方案是什么，它能让我们实现能源富足而不拖慢发展。

I wanna get towards the best version of things you could imagine in five, ten years time that would solve this problem and make us energy abundant and not slow.

输电确实是其中的一个组成部分。

Transmission is certainly a component of it.

但它并不是唯一的部分。

It's not the only component.

你还可以谈供应链、土地利用，但输电是其中非常关键的一环。

You can talk about supply chains, can talk about land use, but transmission is a huge component of it.

我五年前创办了一家公司，致力于建设跨区域输电线路，因为这个行业在许可和建设方面变得极其困难，私人资本几乎已经放弃尝试新项目了。

I actually started a company about five years ago trying to build interregional transmission lines because it was an industry that had become so difficult to permit and build that private capital had largely given up trying to do new projects.

而且这是一个对所有人都有利的三赢方案。

And it's one of the solutions that can be a win win win for everybody.

我们之前没在讨论这个系统的总体目标。

We weren't talking about the goals of the system.

对吧？

Right?

它可以降低成本。

It can reduce costs.

它可以提高可靠性。

It can increase reliability.

它可以减少排放。

It can reduce emissions.

它可以增强国家的安全性。

It can make a country more secure.

它可以创造更多就业机会。

It can create more jobs.

但即便如此，建造这些线路变得异常困难。

But yet, it had gotten so hard to build these lines.

建造这些线路仍然非常困难，以至于大多数在二月份启动项目的开发者都放弃了。

It is still very hard to build these lines that most of the developers who had gotten started with projects in the February gave up.

他们一开始以为这些项目只需五年，但如今已超过十年，许多人甚至还没破土动工。

They started things thinking these were gonna be five year projects, and they were ten plus years in, and many of them hadn't broken ground yet.

这再次体现了美国面临的挑战。

Again, this is part of the challenge of America.

整个过程耗时太长，部分原因是没有任何一个实体能直接下令：‘去做吧。’

It just takes so long, and part of this is there's not one entity that can just say, okay, do it.

途中存在多个否决点，你必须说服众多不同的相关方支持这个项目。

There are multiple veto points along the way, and you have to convince a lot of different actors of this project.

我与许多来自两党的联邦政界人士交谈过。

I talked to a lot of federal politicians on both sides of the aisle.

我几乎从所有人那里听到的共同点是，必须找到一种方法，让美国的审批和建设过程更快、更高效。

One of the things I hear from almost all of them is this need to figure out how to permit and build faster and more efficiently in The United States.

因此，在顶层上有着广泛的共识。

So there's very broad agreement at the top level.

但在如何实现这一点的细节上，仍可能存在分歧。

But you can get disagreements about the details about how to go about that.

我仍然相当乐观地认为，今年我们能够完成联邦许可改革。

I remain reasonably optimistic that we can get federal permitting reform done this year.

这将是除预算之外唯一可能通过的两党法案。

It'll be by the only bipartisan legislation that happens besides maybe a budget.

但我感受到一种意愿，这在华盛顿目前的其他议题中是前所未有的，那就是人们意识到这可能会拖累国家的发展。

But there is this will that I sense that is unlike any other issue in DC right now, is that there is this realization that this can set the country back.

而且，你知道，人们会出于不同的原因看待这个问题。

And, you know, people would look at it for different reasons.

再次，人们以不同的方式优先考虑这些目标。

Again, people have prioritized those goals in different ways.

那么，如何制定一项能够帮助实现所有这些目标的法案呢？

So how can you do a bill that helps all those goals?

这正是我们所追求的目标。

And that's what we're shooting for.

你对核能怎么看？包括新型裂变技术，以及聚变可能带来的革命性突破？

What do think about nuclear, both new forms of fission, but also the panacea potential of fusion?

前景光明，但非常非常困难。

Promising, but very, very difficult.

这项创新尚未得到验证。

The innovation hasn't been proven.

我们可以建造AP1000。

We can build the AP 1,000.

AP1000是传统核电站的最新型号。

The AP 1,000 is the latest of the traditional nuclear power plant.

我们知道它是非常非常昂贵的项目。

We know it's a very, very costly electron.

它是美国最后一座建成的核电站，我认为是在2024年完工的。

It was the last nuclear plant to be built in The United States, finished I think in 2024.

Vogtle三号和四号机组是AP1000型反应堆，具有非常先进的核电厂安全设计。

Vogtle units three and four, AP one Thousands, and have a very advanced safety design for a nuclear power plant.

Vogtle电厂的建设成本极其高昂。

The Vogtle plants were enormously expensive.

自那以后，建造这类电厂变得更加困难，因为它们需要在该国普遍偏远的农村地区投入大量劳动力。

And if anything, they've gotten harder to build since then, because they require a very significant amount of labor in generally rural parts of this country.

在建设高峰期，Vogtle项目现场有9000名工人，其中许多是技术娴熟的工匠。

At its peak, Vogtle had 9,000 laborers on-site, many of which were highly skilled craftsmen.

而如今在美国再这样建造，非常困难。

And trying to do that today in The United States is very difficult.

但我们已经证明了我们能够建造这种电厂。

But we've proven we can build that.

我们知道它的成本非常高。

We know it's of a high cost.

因此，目前正投入大量努力发展先进核能，这包括裂变领域的小型模块化反应堆（SMR），或通过聚变技术。

And so there's a lot of effort to do advanced nuclear, and that's either the SMR, small modular reactor, that's fission, or through fusion.

我认为问题在于，我们并不了解LOES的经济性。

I think the question is, we don't know what the economics of either a LOES are.

或者我们不知道是否能够建成商用的聚变装置。

Or one, we don't know whether we can build a commercial fusion unit.

行业内充满了乐观情绪。

There's a lot of optimism in the industry.

我们能否实现这一目标仍有待观察。

It remains to be seen whether we can get there or not.

更大的问题是，其全部成本是多少？

The greater question is, what are the all in economics of that?

这是一个巨大的未知数。

And that's a big unknown.

因为归根结底，你是在一个大宗商品市场中竞争。

Because at the end of the day, you're competing in a commodity market.

我们已经看到，人们愿意为更清洁的电力多付一点钱，但并不愿意为更清洁的电力多付很多钱。

And we've seen that we're willing to pay a little bit more for a cleaner electron, but we're not willing to pay a lot more for a cleaner electron.

所以它必须在成本上具有竞争力。

So it has to be cost competitive.

理想情况下，最便宜的电能是那些能最小化排放的电能。

Optimally, is the cheapest electron, is one that minimizes emissions.

所以我认为这就是核能的前景。

So I think that's the promise of nuclear.

但这些技术不会很快问世。

But these aren't coming anytime soon.

即使现在有一些试点电厂正在规划中。

Even there are some pilot plants that are being drawn up today.

它们可能已经，也可能还没有开始建设其中一些项目。

They may or may not have started construction on some of this.

我认为这些公告大多是为了公关。

I think most of these announcements are for the PR.

到本十年末，我认为我们将在这方面迈出一些小步。

By the end of this decade, I think we'll have taken some small steps there.

但我们可能需要十年到十五年的时间，才能在美国实现先进核能的大规模应用，这还是最好的情况。

But we're probably looking ten, fifteen years to really have advanced nuclear be at any scale in The United States, and that's best case.

你对那些初创公司怎么看

What do you think about the basket

这些公司已经成立并筹集了资金，有些甚至筹集了大量资金。对于今天或过去五年里投入这些公司和项目的资金，你认为它们有希望获得良好回报吗？

of startups that have been launched and raised, in some cases, a lot of money, about the prospects of good returns for those dollars that are going into these companies and projects either today or the historical dollars that have gone in over the last five years?

这让我感到惊讶。

It surprised me.

在某些方面，我以为这些技术从风险投资的角度来看几乎是不可投资的，因为要实现自由现金流需要很长的时间。

In some ways, I thought that some of these technologies were almost uninvestable from the VC side, because it's such a long duration to get to free cash flow business.

我惊讶于投入了这么多资金。

I'm surprised at how much money.

我觉得这太棒了。

I think it's fantastic.

这必须是一个公私合作的项目，政府需要为这些项目投入真正的资本，因为我认为没有公共支持，它们作为独立投资是没有意义的。

This has to be a public private partnership where the government is putting in real capital into these, because I don't think they make sense as a standalone investment without public support.

商业化部署的时间框架，以及为此需要筹集的资金数额。

The timeframe to commercial deployment, the amount of money that has to be raised for it.

在早期阶段你其实很难知道是否取得了进展。

The fact that you don't really know early on whether you're making progress or not.

需要克服一系列技术基准。

There's a bunch of benchmarks to be overcome.

但在真正建成一个装置之前，你并不真正了解其经济性如何，单位的效率又会怎样。

But until you actually build one, you don't really know what your economics are gonna be, what your efficiency of the unit's gonna be.

我担心这个行业会出现分化。

I worry that there's gonna be a falling out in the industry.

可能SMR公司太多了，如果行业能集中到三到四种技术上，集中资源会更好。

There's probably too many SMR companies, and it would be better if the industry can coalesce around three or four different technologies and focus the resources there.

这是一个

It's a

作为投资者，当资金枯竭而自由现金流仍遥不可及、甚至完全看不到希望时，这种情形令人担忧。

scary circumstance to imagine as an investor when funding dries up and free cash flow is still over the horizon, not even within the visible horizon.

我想知道，你是否认为其他领域没那么明显，比如太阳能和电池，似乎是解决能源市场一些问题的非常有趣的方式。

I'm curious if there are other areas that you think that's less true, like solar and battery seems like a really interesting way of solving some of the problems in the energy markets.

这两者的成本曲线看起来都非常出色且有趣。

The cost curves for both look really cool and interesting.

我想了解你对这两者有什么发现，以及你总体上如何看待这种能源生产和储存方式。

I'm curious what you've learned about those two and just generally what you think about that style of energy generation and storage.

太阳能有两个趋势。

Solar has two trends.

一个是技术与制造成本持续下降。

One is technology and manufacturing costs keep going down.

技术正在改进。

Technology is improving.

制造成本正在下降。

Manufacturing costs are going down.

因此，太阳能电池板的最终产品

So the end product of a solar panel

主要在中国。

Mostly in China.

成本持续下降，主要在中国。

Keeps getting cheaper, mostly in China.

因此，制造太阳能电池板的成本持续下降。

And so the cost to develop a solar panel keeps falling.

但太阳能电池板本身并不能给你想要的东西。

Now, a solar panel doesn't get you what you want.

你想要的是在用电地点的电子。

You want electrons at the location that load is at.

因此，从太阳能电池板到在正确地点产生电子，中间有很多步骤。

And so there's a lot of steps to go from a solar panel to electrons in the right location.

其中一些步骤会推高成本。

Some of those are inflationary.

电池板本身则是降低成本的。

The panel itself is deflationary.

但这需要土地、劳动力、输电接入、资本获取以及资本成本，而资本成本曾长期下降，但过去五年对我来说一直在上升。

But it requires land, it requires labor, it requires access to transmission, it requires access to capital and the cost of capital, which was falling for a long time and has now been increasing for me over the past five years.

人们喜欢谈论太阳能电池板的成本，通常当你看到这些图表时，讨论的只是电池板本身的价格，走势基本是从左上到右下。

People love to talk about the cost of solar panel, and usually whenever you see these graphs, it's what's the cost of the panel, and it's just kind of from top left to bottom right.

与此同时，太阳能购电协议（PPA）的成本已远高于最低点。

Meanwhile, the cost of a PPA, power purchase agreement for solar is well off the lows.

最低点出现在2020年左右。

Lowest happened around 2020.

太阳能输送电力的成本，可能比2020年最低点时高出50%以上。

The cost again of delivered electrons from solar is probably 50% plus more expensive than they were at the cheapest point in 2020.

这是因为电池板本身在系统总成本中的占比越来越小。

And it's because the panel itself, again, becomes a smaller and smaller percentage of the total cost of the system.

任何持续的技术进步或制造改进，都只影响到总成本中越来越小的一部分。

Any advantage continued technological improvements or manufacturing improvements, are just getting at a smaller and smaller percentage of the total cost.

与此同时，系统中具有通胀压力的组成部分在总成本中的占比却越来越大。

And meanwhile, the inflationary aspects of the system become a bigger and bigger percentage of total cost.

话虽如此，有很多想法是关于如何将用电负荷更靠近太阳能发电的地方。

Now that being said, there's a lot of ideas about how to bring load closer to where the solar is being generated.

你能否使用某种自动化、工厂自动化或机器人技术来更好地建造电厂。

And can you use some type of automation, factory automation, or robotics to build the plant better.

以更便宜的方式建设太阳能电站，减少对劳动力的需求。

The solar field better and cheaper way that requires less labor.

因此，目前正在进行一些技术进步。

And so there are advancements being done.

很高兴看到许多数据中心的开发商或最终用户正在与太阳能开发商签署新的购电协议。

It's good to see that a lot of the data centers that the developers or the end users are signing new PPAs with solar developers.

因此，我们看到大量太阳能被接入系统。

And so we've seen a tremendous amount of solar come onto the system.

我认为，在需求稳定的环境下，每增加一兆瓦的太阳能，其价值都会略微降低。

I think it's also true that generally in a stable demand environment, each megawatt of solar that comes on is worth a little bit less.

最有价值的太阳能是第一兆瓦，之后你会达到一个临界点，即某个地区的太阳能供应在白天阳光充足时段已经超过了需求。

The most valuable solar that came on was the first megawatt, and then you get to a point where the supply of solar has exhausted the demand during the sunny parts of the day in a certain region.

因此，随着你接入更多太阳能，要么你必须同时接入电池，要么必须建设输电线路将其转移到其他地方。

And so as you bring on more solar, either you have to also bring on batteries or you have to bring on transmission to move it to a different place.

而这会产生成本。

And so that has a cost.

电池成本也在下降。

Battery costs have been declining as well.

我想，太阳能所经历的某些动态可能很快也会在电池上出现。

I wonder if some of the same dynamics that happen with solar will start happening with batteries soon.

随着技术不断进步，制造过程日益优化，当那些能显著降低电池系统成本的创新逐渐耗尽时，成本就越来越取决于原材料价格。

As the technology is getting better, the manufacturing gets optimized, you start running out of the advancements that have significant cost ramifications for the battery system, it becomes more and more on what the input costs are.

比如，就在过去几个月里，锂的价格上涨了50%以上。

And so we've seen lithium prices, for instance, just in the past few months, be up more than 50%.

在其他条件不变的情况下，这将导致电池成本上升。

And that's going to translate into higher battery costs, all things being equal.

有趣的是，这一切最终又回到了劳动力这个相同的问题上。

It's fascinating that it all goes back to the same problem of labor.

我们能建造这些东西吗？

Can we build these things?

我们能快速建造它们吗？

Can we build them quickly?

许可证。

Permits.

作为国家，我们可能应该把更多注意力放在那里。

A lot of our attention as a country maybe should just be there.

我们可以把成本持续下降的趋势视为理所当然，这固然很好，但仅靠这一点还不足以实现我们想要的最终系统。

We could take for granted these falling cost curves, which are great, but it's great but not sufficient to have the end system that we want.

如果让我强迫你投资于当前数据中心扩张相关的领域，我很想知道你会如何应对这个问题。

If I was forcing you to invest in something related to the proliferation of data centers today, I'm curious how you would attack that problem.

人们对这些事物充满热情。

There's so much excitement around these things.

许多公司都建立在数据中心兴起和建设的基础之上。

Lots of companies that are predicated on the rise of data centers and the build out of data centers.

要让你对投资与这一趋势相关的东西感到兴奋，需要什么条件？

Would it take for you to get excited about investing in something that was tied to that trend?

是的。

Yeah.

有一些公司正试图通过机器人技术减少数据中心建设的劳动力需求。

There's a number of companies that are trying to make the build out of the data center a less labor intensive through robotics.

这是一个有趣的领域。

That's an interesting source.

但这个领域可能也会非常拥挤。

It could be a very crowded space though.

因此，机器人公司是否是良好的投资仍有待观察。

So it remains to be seen how good an investment that robotics companies will be.

从能源角度来看，我认为先进的地热能是当今系统中最有趣的组成部分之一。

From an energy standpoint, I think advanced geothermal is one of the most interesting components of the system today.

它是一种对环境友好的基荷能源。

It is a baseload energy source that is friendly to the environment.

成本正在下降。

It is coming down the cost curve.

这个行业还处于非常早期的阶段。

It's still very early in this industry.

因此，几年后的成本情况仍然不明确。

So still is unclear what costs are gonna look like in a few years.

但这个国家已经存在一支熟练的劳动力队伍，他们主要来自石油和天然气行业。

But there is the skilled labor force that exists in this country already, that comes largely from the oil and gas sector.

这项技术现在已经得到了验证。

The technology has now been proven out.

要实现规模化还有大量工作要做。

There's a lot of work to do to scale this.

在页岩气或页岩油革命初期，它只是从小规模开始，因为这些公司必须先验证地质条件、验证技术、验证管理团队，并且必须进入项目融资市场，才能获得极低的资本成本，从而使这些项目真正可行。

It's early on in the shale gas or shale oil revolutions that it just starts out small because these companies have had to prove out the geology, have to prove out the techniques, have to prove out the management team, and you have to get to the project finance market in order to get a very low cost of capital to make these things really work.

因此，从行业起步，到完成所有这些步骤并最终让银行愿意贷款——因为他们确信项目会成功、确信贷款能被偿还——这个过程需要时间。

So it takes time to get from startup of the industry and even getting all these steps proven to getting to where banks are willing to loan you money because they know it's going to work, and they know that it will get repaid.

但我可以看到，即使在五年内，地热行业也可能成为美国最令人兴奋的行业。

But I can see even five years that the geothermal industry could be the most exciting in The United States.

你的财务团队并不是因为重大错误而亏钱。

Your finance team isn't losing money on big mistakes.

钱是通过无数个没人留意的小决定慢慢流失的。

It's leaking through a thousand tiny decisions nobody's watching.

Ramp 在支出发生前就设置了管控措施。

Ramp puts guardrails on spending before it happens.

实时限额、自动规则、零救火。

Real time limits, automatic rules, zero firefighting.

前往 ramp.com/invest 试用。

Try it at ramp.com/invest.

随着你的业务增长，Vanta 也会随之扩展，自动化合规流程，并为你提供安全与风险的单一信息来源。

As your business grows, Vanta scales with you, automating compliance and giving you a single source of truth for security and risk.

了解更多，请访问 vanta.com/invest。

Learn more at vanta.com/invest.

每家投资公司都是独特的，通用的人工智能无法理解你的流程。

Every investment firm is unique, and generic AI doesn't understand your process.

Rogo 可以。

Rogo does.

它是一个专为华尔街打造的人工智能平台，连接你的数据，理解你的流程，并生成实际成果。

It's an AI platform built specifically for Wall Street, connected to your data, understanding your process, and producing real outputs.

了解更多请访问 rogo.ai/invest。

Check them out at rogo.ai/invest.

从 OpenAI 到 Cursor 再到 Perplexity，最优秀的人工智能和软件公司都使用 WorkOS 在一夜之间实现企业级准备，而非耗时数月。

The best AI and software companies, from OpenAI to Cursor to Perplexity, use WorkOS to become enterprise ready overnight, not in months.

访问 workos.com，跳过枯燥的基础设施工作，专注于你的产品。

Visit workos.com to skip the unglamorous infrastructure work and focus on your product.

Ridgeline 正在重新定义资产管理技术，它不仅是软件供应商，更是真正的合作伙伴。

Ridgeline is redefining asset management technology as a true partner, not just a software vendor.

他们已帮助多家公司实现五倍规模增长，推动更快的发展、更智能的运营和更强的竞争优势。

They've helped firms 5x in scale, enabling faster growth, smarter operations, and a competitive edge.

访问 ridgelineapps.com 了解他们能为您的公司带来哪些突破。

Visit ridgelineapps.com to see what they can unlock for your firm.

我们之前已经深入讨论了能源基础设施。

We've talked a lot about energy infrastructure specifically.

除了能源之外，美国基础设施的其他哪些领域最吸引您？

Are there other parts of US infrastructure, non energy that interest you most?

全国范围内关于住房的讨论非常引人入胜。

The housing discussions that are happening across the nation are really fascinating.

许多反对建设住房的‘别建在我家后院’（NIMBY）现象，其起源地是加州，主要因为加州的房价最高、上涨最快，且对新建住房的限制最为严格，情况恶化到人们开始强烈抵制这一切。

And a lot of the NIMBYism, or yes in my backyard, as a combatant to NIMBYism originated in California, largely because California had some of the highest housing costs and the fastest growing housing costs and some of the most stringent restrictions on trying to build new housing, and had gotten so bad that there started to be this pushback against all of that.

我们看到，类似于许可制度改革，让住房建设更容易已成为一个高度两党共识的问题。

And we've seen is similar to permitting reform, this has become a very bipartisan issue of make it easier to build housing.

这种趋势不仅出现在加州，也在蒙大拿州、奥斯汀以及东北部地区可见。

And we see it from not only California, but you see it in Montana, you see it in places like Austin, and in the Northeast.

因此，这一议题已经超越了政治立场。

And so it has kind of superseded politics.

我认为政客们现在意识到， affordability 这一问题是选民最关心的焦点。

I think politicians are now realizing that this affordability issue is front and center for voters.

这促使人们重新关注电费、食品价格和住房成本。

And that's driving this renewed focus on cost of electricity, renewed focus on cost of groceries, and on housing.

人们正在向市长、州长和联邦政府提问：住房问题怎么办？

People are asking, their mayors, governors, federal government, what about housing?

你们在做什么来降低住房成本，帮助人们更容易买到第一套房子？

What are you doing to reduce the cost of housing and make it easier for people to buy that first house?

如果作为政客你对此没有回应，那么在当今的选举中你根本赢不了。

And if you don't have a response as a politician, you're just not going to win a race these days.

特朗普总统曾发表评论说，我希望有房者的房价上涨。

President Trump came out and made this comment about, I want housing prices for those who have a house to go up.

但他也谈到让买房变得更加实惠。

But he also talks about making it more affordable to buy a house.

除非有大规模的政府补贴，否则我们不可能同时做到这两点。

And so we can't do both unless there's just a massive government subsidy.

我认为，这种负担能力推动的风险之一在于，几十年来，这些法规和对本国建筑的种种限制已经累积成问题。

And I think that's one of the risks of this affordability push is that it's been decades in the making from all these regulations, all these restrictions on building things in this country.

除了大规模补贴之外，没有简单的解决方案来克服这一问题。

There aren't easy solutions to overcome this besides just big subsidies.

真正的解决方案需要时间。

That the real solutions take time.

但问题是，这个时间窗口比政治周期要长。

And the problem is that that window is longer than the political cycle.

因此，如果你是一位面临每两年或四年一次连任选举的政治家，你就必须现在就给出答案：在我的任期内，我具体做了什么能让大家看到成效？

And so if you're a politician and you're facing reelection every two or four years, you have to have an answer today about what am I doing that you can actually see in during my term.

其中最容易做的，就是如果你能掌控预算——联邦政治家确实可以——那就开始补贴各种项目，这虽然从长远来看会让问题更糟，但选民在短期内却很买账。

One of the easiest thing to do there is if you have access to the budget, which federal politicians do, you just start subsidizing things, which makes the problem worse in the long term, but the electorate likes it in the

短期。

short term.

我很想把你的系统性思维应用到你与基金会深度参与研究的其他领域。

I'd love to apply your system thinking to some other areas that you've studied carefully and been really involved with with the foundation.

但在那之前，能否请你总体介绍一下基金会的目标？

But before we do that, to have you describe your goal for the foundation overall.

我听过你提到一个非常有趣的观点，那就是基金会应该随着时间推移变得不那么有影响力，指的是单个基金会。

One of things I've heard you say that's so interesting is that foundation should get less powerful over time, individual foundations that is.

作为一家大型基金会的负责人，这个想法确实很特别。

And as someone that's running a big one, that's an interesting thought.

我很想知道你为什么这么认为。

I'm curious why you think that.

所以，是的，也许在谈到你关注的一些具体领域之前，先解释一下：如果你的目标是让基金会逐渐变弱，那为什么还要设立基金会呢？

So, yeah, maybe before getting to some of the things that you focus on, just frame why have a foundation if you just wanted to get weaker over time.

任何机构随着时间推移都会变得效率降低。

Any institution gets less effective over time.

我认为这对企业来说也是如此。

I think it's true of companies.

我认为这对国家或政府也是如此。

I think it's true of countries or governments.

我认为基金会也是如此。

I think it's true of foundations.

作为任何组织，你最富有成效、最具创新性的时期通常是在你还相对年轻的时候。

You have your best, most innovative times when you're still relatively young as any organization.

因此，我非常清楚永久性基金会的一些弊端。

So I'm very cognizant of some of the downsides of having perpetual foundations.

基金会的一个作用是承担私营部门和政府没有动力去承担的风险。

One of the roles of a foundation is to take risks that the private sector and governments aren't incentivized to take.

可能会有政治风险。

There might be political risks.

可能会有经济风险。

There might be economic risks.

由于基金会的问责性较低，它们可以提供资本和资源，去尝试其他人不愿尝试的事情。

Because there's less accountability on foundations, they can provide that capital and resources to try things that others aren't willing to do.

但这些是有风险的。

But those are risky.

这些尝试常常会失败。

Oftentimes, those will fail.

我认为，随着时间推移，组织会变得更加官僚化、更加规避风险。

And I think organizations become more bureaucratic, more risk averse over time.

因此，它们无法履行基金会的一项主要职能。

And so they're not able to do one of the main functions of a foundation.

慈善与公益之间存在区别。

There's this difference between charity and philanthropy.

慈善机构通常旨在满足短期需求，而公益则更侧重于创造长期解决方案。

Charities often designed to meet the short term needs and philanthropy is more on trying to create long term solutions.

当我们同时做这两件事时，我们主要聚焦于长期解决方案，但也会向当地的食品银行捐款，资助本地医院。

When we do both of those, we're mostly on the long term solution side, but we also give money to our local food bank, give money to help the local hospital.

这是一项更困难的工作。

It's harder work.

这需要更大的团队。

It requires having bigger staff.

这需要更长的时间跨度，并愿意接受不确定性以及我们所做许多事情可能失败的可能性。

It requires having a longer timeframe and being willing to live with ambiguity and likelihood of failure on many of the things that we're doing.

我提到过，最容易筹集的资金是用于大学新建大楼的捐款。

I talked about the easiest money to raise is a university that's going to build a new building.

因为捐赠者信任该机构，他们知道如果捐出一美元，就能指着那块砖说这是我的钱捐的，有时甚至你的名字还会刻在那块砖上。

Because a donor has trust in that institution, and they know that if I give a dollar that I can point at the brick that my dollar went to, and sometimes you even have your name on that brick.

因此你能清楚地看到自己的钱去了哪里。

And so you see directly where your money's going.

我们做的很多工作都是基于试图改善美国的大型系统，无论是医疗体系、刑事司法体系、基础设施、公共财政体系，还是教育体系。

A lot of the work that we do, which is based on trying to improve these big systems in America, whether that is the healthcare system, or the criminal justice system, or infrastructure, or public finance system, education.

这是长期的工作，进展缓慢，但我们真正充当了研究人员与政策制定者之间的桥梁。

It is long term work and progress is slow, but we really act as this conduit between researchers and policy makers.

我们尝试开展实验、评估和研究，以了解这些体系中哪些有效、哪些无效，帮助人们思考新想法，如何测试它们，以及如何将这些成果转化为对政策制定者有用的信息，从而改善这些体系的成效。

And trying to do this experimentation and do evaluations and research about what works and what doesn't in these systems, and help people think about new ideas, and how would you test them, and how can we translate into something that's useful for policymakers to improve the outcomes of these systems.

那刑事司法体系呢？

What about criminal justice?

谈谈你们在这一领域的工作。

Describe your work in that part of

世界上。

the world.

你们取得了哪些进展？

What progress have you made?

你认为这个系统还需要做出哪些改进？

What progress do you think needs to be made to that system?

我们最初参与了这项工作。

We first got involved in this.

我们刚开始只是被动资助无辜者计划。

We just started passively funding the Innocence Project.

无辜者计划致力于审查那些被定罪的人的案件，对部分证据进行新的DNA检测，以确定这些当初作为定罪依据的证据是否真的指向了犯罪者。

And the Innocence Project tries to go look at cases of people that have been convicted of a crime and do new DNA testing on some of the evidence and see whether that evidence that was used as part of the conviction actually points to them as the perpetrator of the crime or not.

无辜者计划已经成功推翻了大量定罪。

And the Innocence Project has been able to overturn many many many convictions.

那里有很多非常令人心酸的个人故事。

And there's a lot of very sad individual stories there.

但我认为，从无辜者计划中最重要的是，他们真正关注的是导致这种错误定罪的整个过程。

But I think most important from the Innocence Project is they're really looking at what was this process that led to this wrong conviction.

我们该如何改进这个系统，以减少错误的起诉和定罪？

And how do we improve the system to lead to fewer incorrect prosecutions and convictions.

因此，他们通过个案来推动整个系统的改进。

And so they were using the individual to try to improve the system.

通过这一切入点，我们开始更深入地研究刑事司法系统，并听到了许多关于该系统低效或失败的轶事。

With that entry, we started looking more and more into criminal justice system, and we heard a lot of anecdotes about some of the inefficiencies or failures of the system.

于是我们退后一步，思考：我们能在哪些方面为这个系统提供帮助？

And so we took a step back and say, okay, where can we try to help in this system?

美国刑事司法的许多原则源于六七十年代和八十年代的犯罪率激增，最终在九十年代初克林顿总统任内通过了一项两党支持的犯罪法案，该法案的核心是严厉打击犯罪，加大对犯罪行为的惩罚力度。

And there was a lot of the criminal justice principles came from the great crime spike that happened in the sixties, seventies, eighties in this country, culminated with a bipartisan crime bill under Bill Clinton in the early nineties, that was really about getting tough on crime, and it was about increasing the penalty for if you're caught doing things.

与此同时，研究人员多年来一直认为，比起被抓住后所受的惩罚，更重要的是被抓获的概率。

And meanwhile, the researchers have known for years that what's more important than the penalty if and when you're caught is probability you're

你一定会被抓到的。

You'll get caught.

是的。

Yeah.

很多犯罪者并没有能力进行理性思考。

That a lot of people who are committing crime don't have the ability to process.

如果我被抓了，我会被判五年还是十年刑期？这会影响我的行为。

If I get caught, will I have a five year sentence or a ten year sentence, and that's gonna change my behavior.

更多人关心的是：我会不会被抓到？

A lot of it more is, am I gonna get caught or not?

然后还有很多问题，比如：如何进行审前拘留？

And then there is lots of questions about things like, how do you do pretrial detention?

从你被逮捕到法院最终定罪之间的这段时间，你该受到怎样的对待？

This time between when you're arrested for a crime and this time when you're convicted in courts of a crime, and what should happen to you in that timeframe.

我们被邀请去新泽西州，帮助他们思考这个问题。

We got asked to come into New Jersey to help them think about that.

肯塔基州，这个共和党主导的州，在其原有制度被裁定为违宪后，是最早尝试重新设计系统的州之一。

And Kentucky, the Republican state was one of the first to really try to redesign the system when their existing system was deemed unconstitutional.

因此，在决策过程中，什么是重要的？许多州认为，关键问题是：你是否对他人构成威胁？

And so thinking about what's important in that decision process, and what many states have decided is, what's important is, are you a threat to others?

你有多大可能返回出庭受审？

And what's the likelihood that you're gonna come back for your trial?

这些因素应该决定：在你被定罪前，是否需要被羁押？

And that should decide, do you need to be detained before you're convicted of the crime?

还是可以释放回社区？

Or can you be released back into the community?

与此同时，我们仍沿用着以经济能力为基础的保释制度——你是否有钱缴纳保释金以获得释放？

Meanwhile, we have this cash bail system that's largely based upon, do you have money to post to get out or not?

多年来，我们与多个州（包括共和党和民主党执政的州）合作，探讨如何使这一流程与社会目标保持一致。

We worked with a number of states, both Republican and Democratic states over the years trying to think about how do you align the process with what the goals of society are.

这场刑事司法改革运动经历了起起落落。

This criminal justice reform movement has had its ups and downs.

当我们大约十五年前刚开始时，我们是少数几家关注这一问题的慈善机构之一，尤其是在成人领域。

We were one of the very few philanthropies that was looking at it when we got started close to fifteen years ago, particularly on the adult side.

然后，这逐渐成为一个非常受欢迎的运动。

And then it became a very popular movement.

许多加入这一运动的人，最初都是从社会正义和种族平等的角度出发的。

A lot of the people that were coming into it were coming in from a social justice and racial equity perspective.

我认为我们与众不同的一点是，我们始终试图思考这个体系的所有目标。

I think one of the things that distinguishes us is we always try to think about what are all the goals of the system.

刑事司法系统有其自身的目标。

There's the goals of the criminal justice system.

首要的是，你绝不能牺牲公共安全。

First and foremost, you can never lose public safety on it.

因此，任何改革都不能以牺牲公共安全为代价。

So any reform you do can't have a trade off of public safety.

但社会正义和种族平等无疑是该体系中的重要目标。

But social justice and racial equity are certainly goals in that system.

我们研究了许多改善这一系统的思路，试图找出其中存在的权衡，并尽可能量化这些权衡，以判断是否存在真正的取舍。

We look at a lot of ideas about how to improve it, and we try to figure out what are the trade offs that exist, try to quantify them to the extent that we can, try to figure out are there trade offs.

如果你做某件事，可能会改善社会正义或种族平等，但可能会带来成本上的权衡，或影响公共安全。

If you do one thing, it could improve social justice or racial equity, but there could be a trade off on cost or trade off of public safety.

你认为，改善现状的最佳途径，是不是就是通过技术手段提升人们被抓获的主观概率？

Do you think that the best place to improve things is just that subjective probability that you'll get caught using technology especially?

这是否应该是我们投入最多时间和精力的方向？

Is that where we should invest the outsized amount of our time and attention?

因为看起来，只要发生一起案例——某个家伙被抓获的概率极低，于是他逍遥法外，接着又犯下一起严重的暴力罪行——所有人就会恐慌，要求立即叫停这一切。

Because it seems all it takes is one case of some guy's probability as low c, let him go, and he commits another really bad violent crime or something and everyone freaks out and says shut this down.

这就像核能一样。

It's like nuclear.

三哩岛事故发生后，核能就彻底被弃用了。

Three Mile Island happens and then you get no nuclear forever.

这意味着，我们是否应该把注意力集中在让人们对被抓获感到更恐惧上，将其作为这个系统中最重要的杠杆？

Does that mean that we should focus our attention on making people more scared that they'll get caught as the number one lever in this system?

我觉得是的。

I think so.

而在一个城市层面公共资金不足以显著增加警力的社会中，这就是你要做的。

And that's the way you do that in a society where number one, there's not the public funds at the city level to really significantly increase the number of police.

其次，社区对在他们 neighborhood 增加更多警察持谨慎态度。

Second is that communities are hesitant to have a lot more police in their neighborhood.

奇怪的是，社区并不希望失去现有的警察。

It's weird that communities don't want to lose the police they have.

对。

Right.

但你问他们时，他们也不希望有更多警察进驻，这背后是现状偏见。

But you also ask them they don't want a lot more police coming in, and the status quo bias associated with it.

所以，问题来了：如果你没有更多资金，社区也不希望有更多警员巡逻，那解决方案是什么？

And so, the kind of the question is, if you don't have a lot more money, and communities don't want a lot more officers just walking around, then what's the solution?

我认为，有很多有趣的技术正在被开发出来。

And I think there's a lot of interesting technologies that are being developed.

安全与监控之间，或者安全与隐私之间，总是存在这种权衡。

And there's always this trade off about security versus surveillance, or security versus privacy.

我认为，每个社区都必须自己决定在这个光谱上希望处于哪个位置。

And I think this is one where each community has to figure out where they want to be on that spectrum.

不同的社区会选择不同的平衡点。

And different communities are gonna choose different equilibriums there.

你走在曼哈顿中城，那里可能是美国最受监控的地方。

You walk down Midtown Manhattan, might be the most surveyed place in The United States.

同时，它也是最富裕的地区之一。

And it's also one of the wealthiest.

我曾去过比弗利山庄的实时犯罪中心。

I've been in the real time crime center in Beverly Hills.

那里到处都是摄像头，还有无人机，一切都被拍摄下来。

And the cameras everywhere, and they have drones, everything's being filmed.

富裕社区已经决定：我们希望如此，我们愿意用部分隐私来换取安全。

The wealthy communities have decided we want this and we're willing to trade some of our privacy for security.

与此同时，许多争论仍在继续。

Meanwhile, a lot of the debate happens.

人们普遍认为低收入人群不希望如此，他们更愿意以牺牲安全为代价来换取隐私。

The assumption is that low income people don't want that and that they want more privacy at the expense of security.

我认为这背后确实存在值得质疑的地方。

I think there's real questions about that.

当你看到犯罪率下降时人们积极的反应，以及我们作为个人为了获得喜欢的网络服务而愿意放弃的隐私时，就会明白这一点。

You see the positive response that people have whenever crime goes down, and the privacy that we're willing as individuals to give up on the Internet in order to get something we like.

互联网带来的回报。

The rewards of the Internet.

我们愿意放弃大量的隐私。

We're willing to give a lot of our privacy.

因此，我认为现在有必要重新审视这种权衡关系，思考有哪些工具可用，以及如何使用这些工具，既能维护公众信任，又能最大限度地减少人们滥用这些工具的可能性。

And so I think there is this broader rethink now about this trade off and what tools are available, and how to use the tools that don't lose the trust of the public, and that minimize the chances that people are gonna misuse any of these tools.

那么，教育作为预防犯罪的上游措施呢？

What about education as something upstream of crime?

在你的工作中，你是否观察或发现过这两者之间有用或有趣的关联？

Have you observed or discovered in your work useful or interesting relationship between those two things?

你如何看待教育体系呢？

And how do you think about the system of education as well?

我们最初参与的问题是K-12教育，因为那里的结果与几乎所有你所能想到的重要结果都相关，无论是药物依赖、经济状况还是犯罪结果。

The first issue we got involved in was k 12 ed because the outcomes there are associated with almost any outcome you could think about that matters, whether it's drug dependency or economic outcomes or criminal outcomes.

所以这种关联是很强烈的。

So the relationship is strong.

更好的K-12教育意味着更好的结果。

Better k through 12 equals better outcomes.

是的。

Yes.

存在很强的相关性。

There's strong correlation.

然后你会尝试去思考，好吧，这里是否存在因果关系？

And then you try to like, okay, is there causation here?

如果我能改善教育成果，这会带来改变吗？

If I can improve the education outcomes, does that change?

我认为答案通常是肯定的。

I think the answer is generally yes.

我认为困难在于，我们该如何改善教育成果？

I think the hard part is, how do we improve educational outcomes?

这个问题，美国已经为之挣扎了几十年。

And that's a question The United States has been struggling with for decades.

作为社会，我们在这方面取得了一点进展，但还没有真正破解这个难题。

And we've been able to do it a little bit as society, but we haven't cracked that nut.

或许令人惊讶的是，全球也是如此。

What's maybe surprising is this is true globally as well.

多年来，我们与一些特许学校以及‘为美国而教’组织合作过。

We've worked with a number of charter schools, worked with Teach For America over the years.

世界上几乎所有拥有重要K-12教育体系的国家，都曾来到美国，试图了解我们的做法，因为他们正面临与我们相同的教育挑战。

Almost every country around the world that has a significant k 12 system has come to America to try to figure out what we're doing because they're facing the same challenges on education that we are.

在这一领域，是什么让你最充满希望？

What makes you most hopeful in that area?

去年我邀请了乔·利蒙做客节目，他谈到了Alpha学校。

I I had Joe Limon on the show talking about Alpha School last year.

虽然这还很年轻，但早期的结果看起来非常有希望。

That seems young but extremely promising in some of the early results.

我总是提醒自己不要对技术解决所有问题过于乐观，但AI似乎确实有可能解决教育中的许多问题。

I always try to catch myself to be not too overly optimistic about technology solving all of our problems, but it sure does seem like AI could solve a lot of the problems in education maybe.

我想知道你的看法。

I'm curious what you think.

我认为这很有前景。

I think there's a lot of promise.

我认为Alpha学校很有希望。

I think there's promise in office school.

我之所以不敢过于兴奋，是因为教育科技行业已经向我们许诺了二十年了。

What my hesitancy to get too excited about is we've been hearing this promise from the ed tech industry for twenty years now.

在过去二十年里，我们在教室里采用了越来越多的技术，但教学效果却下降了。

We've adopted more and more technology in the classroom over that twenty years, and outcomes have gone down.

你去跟任何一家教育科技平台的提供商交谈，他们都会向你展示大量数据，证明他们的学生取得了显著成果。

You talk to any of these providers of an ed tech platform, they have all this data they're gonna show you about the remarkable results that they get from their students.

但当你退一步看时，却从未在现实世界的实际数据中看到过这些成果。

And then you step back, and you just never see it in the actual data applied in the real world.

这就像太阳能的情况吗？AI系统相当于太阳能电池板？

Is that like the solar thing where the AI system is the equivalent of the solar panel?

它变得越来越好、越来越便宜，但真正重要的并不是这个。

It's getting better and better and cheaper and cheaper, but that's not actually the thing that matters.

更重要的是系统中的其他部分。

It's more like the rest of the stuff in the system.

我认为关键问题是：如何与孩子们互动？

I think there's a question of how do you engage with kids?

孩子们常常注意力不集中。

Oftentimes, have short attention spans.

今天的情况可能比以往任何时候都更真实。

It's probably more true today than it's ever been.

我们每个人大概都能回想起曾经遇到过的一位非凡老师，他能完全吸引我们，让我们在整整六十分钟的课堂上保持专注。

We can all probably think back about some remarkable teacher that we had that just captivated us and kept our attention for the full sixty minutes of a class.

我们也能想起那些糟糕透顶的老师，根本让人无法集中注意力。

And we can also think about teachers that were just terrible and you wouldn't pay attention at all.

我认为，其中一个挑战在于，长时间盯着屏幕通常并不是一种能让人投入的格式。

And I think part of the challenge has been that sitting there staring at a screen oftentimes just has not been an engaging format for people.

问题是，AI加上AR或VR的某种组合，能否创造出一种前所未有的、更具吸引力的内容及其呈现方式。

And the question is, can some combination of AI plus AR or VR try to create some type of more engaging, both content as well as the delivery of the content that we haven't seen before.

我认为这里大有希望。

I think there's promise there.

我想保持乐观，但再次说，我对这个领域几十年来缺乏实际成果感到非常沮丧——尽管长期以来一直充满希望，却始终一无所获。

I wanna be optimistic, but again, I'm so frustrated with the lack of results that we've seen from this field for decades with a lot of promise being there for a long time and just seeing nothing.

我有点贪心，问了你这么多不同的系统，但我还想听听另外两个。

I feel greedy asking you about all these different systems, but there's two more that I really wanna hear about.

分别是医疗保健和新闻业，其中新闻业是我个人非常感兴趣的领域。

Those being healthcare and journalism, which is one that I'm personally interested in, of course.

我们先从医疗保健开始吧。

Maybe starting with health care.

每个人都了解那些 headline 数据。

Everyone knows the headline stats.

医疗保健占GDP的百分比随着时间推移稳步上升。

The percent of GDP that health care represents has ticked up steadily over time.

在许多情况下，医疗效果并没有变得更好。

Outcomes, in many cases, haven't gotten better.

有一些相反的趋势，比如GLP-1药物似乎是一种现代医学奇迹，能够在一定程度上解决医疗系统中的这些问题和成本。

There's some countervailing things like GLP one seem to be a modern medical miracle of sorts that can address some of these problems and costs in the health care system.

当你评估整个系统时，你的注意力会被吸引到哪里？

When you assess that overall system, where does your attention get drawn?

你发现哪些方面是最有趣和最重要的？

What are the things you've discovered are most interesting and important?

我们经历了医疗体系长达数十年的金融化。

We've had this multi decade financialization of the healthcare system.

这确实推高了成本，因为人们找到了各种方法进入市场，创办企业或合并企业，利用该领域现有的监管漏洞来最大化企业利润。

That's really driven up costs as people have figured out ways to get in, start businesses or consolidate businesses, and take advantage of some of the regulations that exist in the field to maximize firm profits.

医疗保健违背了经济学教科书中关于竞争市场的每一项原则，想想病人拥有什么信息？

And the healthcare violates every principle of a competitive market from econ textbooks, you know, thinking about even what information does the patient have?

支付方拥有什么信息，与拥有信息不对称优势的提供方相比，后者还能决定你需要哪些治疗，他们的激励机制又是什么？

What information does the payer have versus what are the incentives of the provider who has this asymmetric information advantage and also gets to decide what treatments you need?

于是，你把所有这些市场失灵都叠加到了这个体系上。

So you've load up all these market failures onto the system.

这就需要一套庞大的监管体系来试图克服这些问题。

And that requires this huge system of regulations to try to overcome that.

所以，是的，如果没有市场失灵，你就可以说，好吧，这里不需要政府政策或监管，我们退后即可。

And so, yeah, if there were no market failures, then you could just say, okay, no need for government policy here, government regulation, we step back.

但有了这么多市场失灵，你就需要厚厚的书籍、成千上万页的法规，来应对每一个具体问题。

But with all the market failures, you need books and books and books and tens of thousands of pages of regs about how to deal with every certain thing.

而在大多数医疗体系中，第三方支付方是政府或私营保险公司。

And you have a third party payer, the government or a private insurance company for the vast majority of the system.

因此，这些规则催生了私营行业自然去寻找和发现规则中的漏洞。

So it creates all these rules that then private industry will naturally try to seek and find out where's the gap in the rules.

这种情况在每个行业都会发生。

And this happens in every industry.

目前，一个重要的领域是皮肤替代品。

Right now, one of the big things is skin substitutes.

如果你被烧伤，需要新的皮肤覆盖，有关于这些产品如何获得报销的规定。

So if you get a burn, you need some type of new skin on, there's regs about how those get reimbursed.

在任何新产品发布的前六个月，都没有该产品以往的定价记录。

And the first six months whenever a product is released, there's not history of Dahallos that product's been priced before.

因此，联邦政府在产品上市的前六个月，给予制造商更大的定价自由度。

So the federal government gives a lot more latitude on how a manufacturer of that product can price it for the first six months.

随着市场开始做出反应，六个月后，政府会对价格施加更多监管。

And then as the market starts to react, after six months, the government puts more regulation on price.

因此，制造商的做法是推出一种新产品，让它在市场上存在六个月，然后撤下市场，再推出一个略有不同的新产品，价格就这样不断上涨，同时还存在一些所谓的回扣，这正是政府或私营行业权利与监管之间不断上演的猫鼠游戏的一个例子，每个人都试图找到绕过这些规则的方法。

So what manufacturers have done is introduce a new product, let it be out there for six months, take that off the market, introduce a new one that's slightly different, and the prices keep going up, and there's some quote unquote kickbacks that and so there's just an example of this cat and mouse game that constantly happens on government or private industry rights or regulation, and then everybody tries to figure out how to beat that.

因此，我们的大量工作就是试图识别这些问题，并努力修正规则，使系统的激励机制更符合我们国家所关注的结果。

And so a lot of our work is trying to identify these and trying to correct and make the rules and incentives of the system be more aligned with the outcomes we care about as a country.

总的来说，不仅在医疗保健领域，而且在您所研究的所有这些系统中，是否可以得出结论：规则越少越好？

As a general matter, not just in health care, but in all of these systems that you've studied, is a conclusion that fewer rules are better?

您是否普遍支持去监管化？

Do you find yourself pro deregulation as a general matter?

不一定。

Not necessarily.

这正是我不太认同任何一个政党的原因之一，因为我认为不同的问题需要不同的解决方案。

It's one of the reasons why I don't feel at home necessarily with either political party because I think different problems need different solutions.

我们将会永远拥有一个由第三方支付方主导的医疗体系，并且需要非常严格的监管。

And we are going to have a healthcare system that has third party payers forever, and the need for very tight regulation.

例如，看看K-12教育体系，它是一个完全不同的系统，参与者也大不相同，市场失灵的情况较少，因此可以采取较少的监管，而且监管的重点也可以不同。

If you look at k 12, for instance, it's a very different system, very different actors in the system and fewer market failures, and you can have maybe less regulation, and you can regulate different things.

你可以监管系统的输出，而不是输入。

You can regulate outputs rather than inputs in the system.

因此，我一直支持政府退出K12教育的服务提供角色，因为政府作为监管者和服务提供者双重身份时，并不能很好地履行职责，而传统学区正是如此。

And so I've been very favorable to having the government try to get out of being the service provider in k 12, that the government doesn't do a great job of being both the regulator and the service provider, that the traditional district is.

政府需要在两者之间做出选择。

And that the government needs to choose one of Lowe's.

所以问题不是监管好还是坏？

And so it's not is regulation good or bad?

不同的系统需要不同类型的监管。

It's different systems need different types of regulation.

监管者与私营主体之间总会存在这种猫鼠游戏，我们必须确保监管者不仅在事前制定好系统的规则，还能在规则失效时积极修正。

And there's always gonna be this cat and mouse game between regulators and the private actors, and we need to make sure that the regulators both do a good job of devising the rules of the system upfront and then are actively fixing it as they fail.

最后，你对新闻业有什么

Finally, what have you

关于新闻业的领悟？

learned about journalism?

这一点与你研究和探索过的其他大规模全国性系统形成了鲜明对比。

That's one that stands out in contrast to some of these other massive countrywide systems that you've studied and explored and done things in and around.

关于新闻业，你学到了什么？它需要什么？

What about journalism have you learned and what does it need?

我们被新闻业吸引，是因为它被称为第四权力，能够对政府和私人行为者进行监督，信息传播和许多媒体所做的调查性报道都具有公共利益。

We got drawn to journalism because view it, it's called the fourth estate that it's check on both government and on private actors, that there is a public good of both the dissemination of information, as well as the investigative journalism that many outlets do.

试图发现正在发生的欺诈、滥用和浪费行为。

Trying to find the frauds and abuses and wastes that are happening.

长期以来，你拥有每日城市报纸这种打包产品，但现在它已经崩溃了。

For a long time, you had this package product of the daily city paper and that has fallen apart.

因此，我们感到对地方和州政治的报道，以及大量调查性工作的投入不足。

And so that role of both coverage of local and state politics, as well as a lot of that investigative work, we feel is being under invested in.

而这些工作的商业收入潜力有限。

And the commercial revenue potential of that is limited.

我们的观点是，需要慈善机构来资助其中一部分工作。

Our view is that there is a need for philanthropy to fund some of this.

就像慈善机构资助歌剧院、博物馆和公园一样，拥有一个充满活力的新闻机构来监督这些事务，对于一个充满活力的社区来说是必要的吗？

The same way that philanthropy funds the opera house and museums and parks that having a vibrant journalistic outlet to oversee a lot of these things, is that necessary for a vibrant community?

你看到了系统中的这么多方面，可能比我和任何其他人交谈过的人看到的都要多。

You get to see so many parts of the system, probably more than almost anyone I've ever talked to.

是什么让你对这个世界最感到兴奋？

What has you the most excited about the world?

创新。

Innovation.

很容易变得悲观。

It's very easy to get pessimistic.

很容易谈论问题，谈论债务和赤字，以及我们所有的政治 dysfunction。

It's very easy to talk about the problems, to talk about the debt and deficit and all our political dysfunction.

但当你退后一步，看看这个国家自建国以来所经历的一切，以及它所面对的种种挑战，就会发现它在历史上一直如此坚韧，能够克服这些困难。

And then you step back and look at what this country's gone through since its formation and the number of challenges it's faced and that it's been so robust in being able to overcome those challenges historically.

以及多年来许多人所带来和创造的创新，以及这些创新如何提升了我们的生活质量。

And the innovation that many have provided and created over the years and how that's improved quality of life for us.

我认为这就是我们需要信任和坚信的，未来我们也会继续如此。

And I think that's what we have to trust and have faith in, we'll continue to do so in the future.

当我进行这些访谈时，我总会问每个人同一个传统的结尾问题。

When I do these interviews, I always ask everyone the same traditional closing question.

别人对你做过的最善良的事是什么？

What is the kindest thing that anyone's ever done for you?

当我深陷交易之中，它让我养成了一些不健康的习惯，开始改变我时，我哥哥曾把我拉到一边，只是说：你变了，而且不是变得更好。

When I was really deep into trading and about how it created some unhealthy habits and started to change me, at one point, my brother pulled me aside and just said, you've changed and not for the better.

他这么做需要很大的勇气。

Took courage on his part to do.

我认为这让我退后一步，试着思考：我是否同意他的说法？

And I think it caused me to step back and try to think about, did I agree with it or not?

当然，第一反应是说：不，你错了。

And of course the first instinct is to say, no, you're wrong.

但那个想法会萦绕不去，让你开始尝试以旁观者的视角来看待自己。

And then that thought lingers and start trying to see yourself as a third person would.

我开始想，也许他是对的。

And I started to think maybe he's right.

我生活中需要改变的是什么？

And what do I need to change in my life?

我努力让事业之外的其他生活领域也保持高效。

And I try to make these other parts of my life besides the business high performing as well.

我喜欢这个结尾的观点：对在乎的人说些困难的话，其实是一种善意。

I love the closing idea that saying something hard to someone you care about can be a great kindness.

一个很酷且独特的回答，约翰。

A cool and unique answer, John.

非常感谢你抽出时间。

Thank you so much for your time.

很高兴能来这里。

Great to be here.

谢谢。

Thanks.

如果你喜欢这一集，请访问 colossus.com。

If you enjoyed this episode, visit colossus.com.

你可以找到本播客的所有集数，附有精心编辑的文本稿。

You'll find every episode of this podcast complete with hand edited transcripts.

你还可以订阅 Colossus，我们每季度推出的印刷版、数字版和私密音频出版物，深入介绍我们最钦佩的创始人、投资者和公司。

You can also subscribe to Colossus, our quarterly print, digital, and private audio publication featuring in-depth profiles of the founders, investors, and companies that we admire most.

了解更多，请访问 colossus.com/subscribe。

Learn more at colossus.com/ subscribe.

你知道微小的优势如何随着时间积累吗？

You know how small advantages compound over time?

这在投资中是成立的，在经营公司时也同样适用。

That's true in investing, and just as true in how you run your company.

你的支出体系就是你的资本配置策略。

Your spending system is your capital allocation strategy.

Ramp 默认让这一切变得更智能。

Ramp makes it smarter by default.

更好的数据，更明智的决策，长期来看更优的经济效益。

Better data, better decisions, better economics over time.

了解更多，请访问 ramp.com/invest。

See how at ramp.com/invest.

随着您的业务增长，Vanta 将与您同步扩展，自动化合规流程，为您提供安全与风险的单一信息源。

As your business grows, Vanta scales with you, automating compliance and giving you a single source of truth for security and risk.

了解更多，请访问 vanta.com/invest。

Learn more at vanta.com/invest.

Ridgeline 正在重新定义资产管理技术，成为真正的合作伙伴，而不仅仅是软件供应商。

Ridgeline is redefining asset management technology as a true partner, not just a software vendor.

他们已帮助多家公司实现五倍规模增长，推动更快的发展、更智能的运营和更强的竞争优势。

They've helped firms 5x in scale, enabling faster growth, smarter operations, and a competitive edge.

访问 ridgelineapps.com，了解他们能为您的公司带来哪些突破。

Visit ridgelineapps.com to see what they can unlock for your firm.

从 OpenAI 到 Cursor 再到 Perplexity，最优秀的 AI 和软件公司都使用 WorkOS，在一夜之间而非数月内实现企业级准备。

The best AI and software companies, from OpenAI to Cursor to Perplexity, use WorkOS to become enterprise ready overnight, not in months.

访问 workos.com，跳过枯燥的基础设施工作，专注于你的产品。

Visit workos.com to skip the unglamorous infrastructure work and focus on your product.

每家投资公司都是独特的，通用人工智能无法理解你的流程。

Every investment firm is unique and generic AI doesn't understand your process.

Rogo 可以。

Rogo does.

它是一个专为华尔街打造的 AI 平台，连接你的数据，理解你的流程，并生成实际成果。

It's an AI platform built specifically for Wall Street, connected to your data, understanding your process, and producing real outputs.

了解更多，请访问 rogo.ai/invest。

Check them out at rogo.ai/invest.