AI 领导者希望放缓发展速度，因为……

AI领域的领导者们正在寻找刹车踏板。

AI leaders are looking for the brake pedal.

Motley Fool隐藏宝石投资现在开始。

Motley Fool hidden gems investing starts now.

欢迎来到Motley Fool隐藏宝石投资。

Welcome to Motley Fool hidden gems investing.

我是你们的主持人，Crowe。

I'm your host, Crowe.

今天，我邀请了长期的全职贡献者Rachel Warren和Travis Hoium，我们稍微换个方式聊聊。

And today, I'm joined by longtime full contributors, Rachel Warren and Travis Hoium, doing a little bit of a mix up.

最近有很多关于需要放慢AI发展的讨论。

There has been a fair share of we need to slow AI development chatter out there.

但就在上个周末，这个话题似乎达到了白热化的程度。

But this past weekend, that conversation appeared to hit a fever pitch.

有几位员工因为安全问题离开了Anthropic和OpenAI，现在Sam Altman和Dario Amote都在呼吁放慢前沿模型的开发，以免它们失控，我记得Sam Altman用的词就是“失控”。

We had several employees leaving Anthropic and OpenAI over safety concerns, and now both Sam Altman and Dario Amote are calling for the slowing down of development of frontier models, lest they go out of control, I think was the words that, you know, Sam Altman used.

就连对冲基金桥水公司的首席信息官，在过去一周里，也上播客谈论人类灭绝的可能性，说概率超过百分之十。你想想看，这要么让人觉得有点荒唐，要么让人震惊，就看你怎么看了。

Even the CIO of the hedge fund Bridgewater Associates was on podcasts, well, over the past week, like, talking about human extinction, and the probability was higher than ten percent, which is, you know, kind of silly if you think about it, or startling depending on how you wanna look at it.

这倒不是什么新鲜事，但确实发生在一个非常特殊的时刻，因为OpenAI和Anthropic都快要进行IPO了。

This isn't anything new, but it does appear to come at a very specific time where both OpenAI and Anthropic are on the precipice of IPOs.

而且这些企业的开支越来越让人难以接受，尤其是在前沿模型层面，大部分资金都投在那里。

And spending on these businesses is getting tougher to swallow, especially at the frontier level where the bulk of their spending is going.

至少在我看来，比较悲观的观点是，所有这些放缓的讨论，其实是因为他们想放慢支出速度，而不是真的想阻碍业务增长。

The cynical view, at least to me, is that all of this slowdown chatter comes at a time when they wanna slow down spending more than anything else without disrupting business growth.

所以我想问你们两位一个问题。

So I wanna pose the question to both of you.

从“AI会害死我们，我们需要放慢脚步”到“我们只是在努力平衡支出和业务增长的挑战”这个范围来看，

On a scale of AI will be the death of us, we need to slow down, and we're trying to middle this spending versus growth challenges of business.

你们觉得自己处在哪个位置？

Where do you land on the spectrum here?

说实话，我觉得真相可能介于两者之间，但我确实倾向于对我们听到的这些消息持更悲观的态度。

Honestly, I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but I do tend to take a bit of a more cynical view to what we've been hearing.

我想说说为什么。

And I I wanna talk about why.

我觉得背后有很多算计在进行。

I think there's a lot of calculations going on behind the scenes.

但这并不意味着对AI安全的担忧，以及这些前沿实验室的约束或缺乏约束的问题，就不是真实合理的。

And I don't think that means that there aren't real justifiable concerns about AI safety and the constraints or lack thereof of some of these front frontier labs.

但我也觉得你得看看这背后的账。

But I also think you have to look at the math behind all of this.

我的意思是，你提到OpenAI和Anthropic。

I mean, we're you talk about OpenAI and Anthropic.

对吧？

Right?

你基本上已经过了轻松拿风投的阶段。

You're kinda moving out of the easy money venture phase.

这些公司预期要大举进入公开市场，在那里它们将面临与私人市场截然不同的审查力度。

These are companies that are anticipating to have huge entrances into the public markets where they're going to face a very different level of scrutiny than they have in the private space.

基础设施支出已经成了一个真正的无底洞。

And infrastructure spending has become a real black hole.

你看，OpenAI的内部预测，最近被The Information报道过。

I mean, you look at OpenAI's internal projections, which were reported not that long ago by the information.

他们预计2026年会亏损140亿美元。

They're, expecting a $14,000,000,000 loss in 2026.

到2028年，累计亏损可能达到440亿美元。

They could have cumulative losses of about 44,000,000,000 by 2028.

你想，一个下一代数据中心就要花掉350亿美元。

You know, think about how a single next gen data center runs about $35,000,000,000 on its own.

华尔街可不一定会对这个心慈手软。

This is not something that Wall Street is necessarily going to be forgiving on.

咱们先说说Anthropic吧。

Talking about Anthropic for a moment.

我们听Dario Amodei说这个已经有一阵子了。

I mean, we have heard for a while now from Dario Modi.

他差不多过去一年都在警告行业要放慢脚步。

He's been spending almost the last year warning the industry to slow down.

同时，我们还看到一份来自The Information的报道，说Anthropic已经锁定了5170亿美元的计算承诺。

Meanwhile, we also saw a report from the information that Anthropic has locked in $517,000,000,000 in compute commitments.

那是14.8吉瓦的容量。

That's 14.8 gigawatts of capacity.

这个规模足以和十几座核反应堆相媲美。

It's enough to rival just for scale a dozen nuclear reactors.

你知道，他们显然是用收入来资助这些的。

You know, they're funding that obviously with revenue.

他们有保密的IPO计划。

They have their confidential IPO pipeline.

其中很多会流向Alphabet、亚马逊、微软、SpaceX这些公司。

A lot of that is going to, you know, Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, SpaceX.

那些持这种观点的外部声音，他们自己也投入了很多。

The outside voices that are making this case as well have a lot of skin in the game.

而且我们最近几天还采访了桥水基金的格雷格·詹森。

And we we had an interview, with Greg Jensen that we saw from Bridgewater in recent days.

他可不是什么中立旁观者。

He's not a neutral bystander.

他是OpenAI和Anthropic的早期投资者之一。

He was one of the earlier investors in both OpenAI and Anthropic.

他最近在彭博的播客上说，未来几年发生灾难性AI事故的概率有30%到60%。

He's the one that was telling Bloomberg on a recent podcast, there's a 30 to 60% chance of a catastrophic AI disaster in the next few years.

你知道，桥水自己的SEC文件显示，他们一直在增持英伟达、博通、亚马逊的股票。

You know, Bridgewater's own SEC filings show that it's been building up positions in, you know, NVIDIA, Broadcom, Amazon.

所以我们看到这种推动监管和合规成本的趋势，但更可能的结果是，把开源社区和那些付不起法律费用的小玩家挤出市场。

So we're seeing this push for regulation and compliance costs, but it's more likely to just price out the open source community and the small players who can't afford the legal overhead.

最大的实验室能承受这些成本。

The biggest labs can absorb it.

所以我觉得这些风险很可能是真实存在的。

So I think the risks are very likely real.

我更倾向于相信，那里确实有一些合理的担忧。

I'm more inclined to believe that there are justifiable concerns there.

但我也觉得，那些最强烈呼吁谨慎的声音，恰恰是持有最大股份的那批人。

But I also think one of the loudest voices calling for caution are the same people holding the largest stakes.

你得想想他们的动机是什么。

You have to question what the motivation is.

我们正处在一个非常有意思的时期，围绕这场辩论。

We're in such an interesting time with this entire debate.

从投资的角度来看，我们谈论的是数万亿美元，以及许多市值数万亿美元的公司参与其中。

And from an investment perspective, I mean, we're talking about trillions of dollars and many multi trillion dollar companies that are involved here.

所以这不是我们可以掉以轻心的事情。

So this isn't something that we should take lightly.

回顾这个周末，很有意思的是，首先，这些实验室的领导者几乎都同意达里奥写的内容。

And as a reflect on the weekend, it was so interesting to see, first of all, the leaders of these labs almost all agree with what Dario wrote.

对我来说，这有点令人震惊，而且感觉有点像是协调好的。

I mean, and that was a little bit stark to me, and I it's felt a little bit coordinated.

我不知道这是好是坏，但我离开时也认为所有这些情况都可能是真的。

I don't know whether that's good or bad, but I also came away thinking that all of these things can be true.

他们可能真的很担心安全问题。

They can be really worried about safety.

批评者可能是对的，他们只是想抬高门槛，获得监管优势，这样他们就能，你知道，为自己的业务建立护城河。

Critics can be correct in that they're just trying to pull the ladder up and get regulatory capture so that they can, you know, build a moat around their business.

每个人也可能在这些事情上都是错的。

Everyone can also be wrong about all of those things.

这些公司有点在喊狼来了，因为他们已经这样做好几年了。

These companies are crying wolf a little bit because they've been doing this for years.

达里奥·阿莫德一直是最大的批评者之一，但他创立的公司现在在AI发展方面处于领先地位，而且他也认为这会导致一些可怕的后果，这里确实存在很多认知失调。

Dario Amade has been one of the biggest critics, and yet he started a company that is now in the lead arguably in the lead in AI development and also thinks that this is going to lead to some terrible it it just there's a lot of cognitive dissonance going on here.

科技史告诉我们，坏事很可能会发生。

And the history of technology says that something bad will probably happen.

我们只是不知道那会是什么。

We just don't know what that is.

当互联网刚发明的时候，我们并没有想到它会带来年轻人之间更多的孤立和心理健康问题，但今天我们确实面临这样的局面，因为，你知道，根本原因和因果关系在这里是未知的。

When when the Internet was invented, we didn't necessarily think that was gonna lead to more isolation and mental health issues among younger people, but this is where we are today because of, you know, so the root cause and the cause and effect is sort of unknown here.

我觉得真正的挑战在于，这些人几乎是在说，嘿，你得保护我，让我不伤害自己，因为如果我继续发展这个，我会做出非常糟糕的事情。

And I think that's the real challenge is that it's almost like these people are saying, hey, you gotta protect me from myself because if I continue to develop this, I'm gonna do something really bad.

对我来说，最引起共鸣的一点是，很多事情其实已经有法律规定了。

And one of the one of the things that's most resonant to me is that there are laws in place for a lot of these things.

如果你开发的产品出去伤害了人或者偷了东西，那就是你的责任。

If you build a product that goes out and hurts people or steals things, it is your fault.

所以我也在想，你知道，在这次Hugging Face事件之后，据我了解，确实有违法行为发生。

And so I almost wonder too if, you know, after this hugging face incident, my understanding is that there were laws broken.

有人犯了重罪，而OpenAI似乎对此有点轻描淡写。

There were felonies committed and is OpenAI we just sort of seem to be kind of glossing over that.

所以，如果下一个大事件是金融机构被入侵，这些AI偷了钱，人们会因此入狱吗？这就是他们担心的吗？

So if we if the next big thing is suddenly financial institutions are broken into and, you know, these AIs steal money, are people gonna go to jail and that's what they're worried about?

这一切非常有趣，也相当复杂，是多种因素相互拉扯的结果，其中可能都有一些真实的成分，但又不完全属实。

It it all It all is a very interesting and sort of complicated push and pull of many things that are probably have threads of truth, but are not completely true.

说到底，我们作为投资者，坏事很可能会发生。

And ultimately, we're investors here, something bad is probably going to happen.

问题就在于，到时候我们该怎么办？

And the question is gonna be then what are we gonna do?

因为尤其是在美国，我们通常不会先发制人。

Because especially in The US, we don't typically act first.

我们总是在事情发生之后才行动，这大概就是——你可以回顾一下金融危机，至少过去二三十年里的任何事件都是这样。

We we act after the thing happens and that's probably I mean, you can go back to the great financial crisis, you know, anything in the last twenty or thirty years, at least.

而且事情很可能就会这样发展下去。

And that's just the way that it's I I think it's probably gonna play out.

我觉得这就是监管机构在关注的重点。

I think that's the what regulators are looking at.

总统也是这么说的。

That's what the president says as well.

所以虽然有很多不确定性，但要认真对待这些风险，同时也要问问是谁在提出这些问题。

So a lot of uncertainty, but take these risks very seriously, but also ask questions about who is bringing them up.

我得说，听了这些，我感觉就像在看Anthropic和OpenAI的招股书，看到风险部分写着，我们的AI代理可能会犯重罪，我们不知道会不会发生。

I gotta say, hearing all of this, I feel like reading the s one for Anthropic and OpenAI of seeing, like, in the risk sections, like, our AI agents might commit felonies, we don't know if it might happen.

我是说，那真是太棒了，我平时不会逐行读整个风险部分，但如果这就是我们会发现的内容，我可能得读一读。

I mean, that'll just be great re like, I don't normally read the entire risk section, like, line for line, but I might have to if this is what we're gonna find.

但你们提到了一个我想深入探讨的点。

But you guys kinda touched on a point I wanna drill down a little bit deeper into here.

你们在谈论监管AI发展之类的想法。

You were talking about like this, you know, little bit more the idea of regulating AI development, stuff like that.

这真的感觉像是我们以前见过的硅谷套路，就是那种先占地盘再扩张的模式，就像谷歌主导搜索，或者Meta开始主导社交媒体那样。

And it really feels like the Silicon Valley playbook that we've seen before, where it's this land and expand role of like you saw with Google, where it dominated search and or Meta, where it started to dominate social media.

然后最终发生的是，监管来了。

And then what ends up happening is regulations come down.

想想欧洲的GDPR或者类似的东西，监管负担被加上了，目的是为了让事情更公平。

Think about GDPR in Europe or something along those lines where the regulatory burdens are put up, and it's the idea of trying to make it more fair.

但最终发生的是，这些巨头是唯一能应对监管合规的，从而让这一切成为可能。

But what ends up happening is these giants are the only ones that can handle the regulatory compliance to make it happen.

所以我想问一下，就你的具体观点来说，你觉得这真的可能只是监管方面的事情吗？

And so I am curious if you to get your specific point, do you think this may actually just be like a regulatory thing?

是不是我们已经把别人远远甩在后面了，现在想放下吊桥，然后利用监管优势来为自己谋利？还是说，这更多是跟钱有关？

It's like we have pushed ourself far enough ahead of other people that we wanna, you know, drop the drawbridge now and then, you know, use our the regulatory advantage to our benefit, or is or, you know, is this more like the money side of it?

我觉得如果后者被提上日程，那对他们来说也是个不错的巧合，正好能成为他们的竞争优势。

I think it's a nice happenstance that it also be be is to their competitive advantage if if the latter is pulled up.

我不一定认为特别是Anthropic，但我觉得所有AI开发者总体上都是这样——这听起来可能有点疯狂，毕竟我们是投资播客，但在很多方面，这更像是一种宗教般的看法，因为他们真的不太清楚这东西是怎么运作的。

I I don't necessarily think I iAnthropic in particular, but I think all the the AI developers in general, it is and this this sounds crazy, again, we're an investing podcast, but there is much more of a religious view to this in a lot of ways because they don't really know how this thing works.

他们没法跟你解释为什么AI会做它正在做的事情。

They can't explain to you why AI is doing the things that it's doing.

所以他们对正在开发的这项技术有一种难以言喻的看法。

And so there is this sort of ineffable view that they have of this technology that they're developing.

这就是为什么我觉得他们对于担忧是非常认真的。

And that's why I think they're very serious about being concerned.

而且，顺便说一句，如果这碰巧对我们的业务有帮助，那也是个不错的副产品。

And, oh, by the way, if it happens to help our business, that's a nice byproduct.

我是说，你看，可以说这个精灵已经从瓶子里跑出来了。

I mean, look, the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak.

而且我觉得看待这个问题有很多种方式。

And I think there's multiple ways to look at this.

我是说，我想我之前说得很清楚，我对此有一种比较愤世嫉俗的看法，因为我觉得这些前沿实验室的领导者们之所以表现出这种团结，归根结底是因为瓶颈确实存在，而且他们进入公开市场时对增长的担忧，以及试图设定预期。

I mean, I think I was pretty clear about, I have a sort of a cynical take in the sense that I think a lot of this, unity that we're seeing among the leaders of these frontier labs goes back to, the reality that the bottlenecks are there, concerns about growth as they enter the public markets and trying to set expectations.

但我也确实认为，我们看到这些领导者们在谈论一种他们帮助创造和开发的技术，而这种技术正在迅速超出他们控制和完全理解的能力。

But I do also think that we see that these leaders are talking about a technology that they have helped to create and develop that is rapidly outpacing their ability to control and even fully understand it.

这就形成了一个很难破解的难题，因为你如何监管一种进化得这么快、学得这么快的东西呢？

And that creates a very difficult paradigm to unlock because how do you regulate something that is evolving and learning so quickly?

嗯，至少在短期内，答案是必须稍微踩一下刹车。

Well, at least in the short term, the answer is you have to pull the brakes a bit.

你必须放缓开发，才能弄清楚如何监管它。

You have to scale back development to understand how to regulate it.

所以，我是说，如果他们正在关注最近的一些事件，显然，Hugging Face那个事件是最突出的之一。

So, I mean, if they are are watching some of these recent incidents, obviously, the hugging face one is is one of the most prominent.

这些企业未来三到五年甚至更长时间，可能会面临什么样的责任问题，这确实是个值得担忧的事情。

There could be a real concern about what liability could look like for these businesses moving, you know, on to the next three, five years and beyond.

所以我认为，无论是为了他们自己的利益，还是更广泛地为了全人类的利益，都应该有监管。

So I think it's both to their benefit and of course more broadly for the benefit of mankind for there to be regulation.

但是，这种技术要想真正设立法律护栏，比过去硅谷出现的那些技术要困难得多。

But that is a much more difficult type of technology to actually set real legal guardrails around than what we've seen come out of Silicon Valley in the past.

我觉得这也是为什么这个问题如此棘手的原因之一。

And I think that is part of why this is so challenging.

泰勒，我快速提一件事。

Tyler, I just wanna bring up one quick thing.

我在想，是不是这些实验室里发生了什么我们还不知道的事情。

I wonder if something happened at one of these labs that we don't net yet know about.

会收到报告的。

Gonna get a report.

我们是在事情发生很久之后才知道那个Hugging Face事件的。

We didn't know about the hugging pace incident incident until long after it happened.

有可能。

Could be.

这些看起来在互相竞争、想领导世界的人，在AI领域，为什么突然都站在同一阵线了？

Is there a reason that all these people who seem to be fighting each other to lead the world, the the AI world, why are they suddenly all on the same page?

就是提一下这个。

Just just bringing that up.

等两个月后的大新闻发布。

Waiting two months from now for the big news drop.

他就像在说，OpenAI那边出了点小差错之类的。

He's like, there was a there was an oopsie at OpenAI or something like that.

这件事我们都会关注，而且作为周一的开始，这可不是最让人开心的方式，对吧。

Something that we're all gonna be following, and not exactly the most chipper way to start your Monday as a, hey.

AI可能会杀了我们，但也许只是为了合规目的。

AI might kill us, but maybe it's just for regulatory compliance purposes.

但我保证，在接下来的环节里，我们会稍微轻松一点。

But I promise we're gonna do a little bit more of a palate cleanser here in the next segment coming up.

休息得不错。

Good break.

你刚发现你的销售团队可能完不成业绩目标。

You just found out that your sales team is at risk of missing quota.

别慌。

Don't panic.

直接问Rippling AI。

Just ask Rippling AI.

因为它基于你的实时人员和业务数据，Rippling AI可以从Rippling和Salesforce提取数据，生成一个会议用的仪表盘，显示各区域的业绩完成率、人员编制计划和月度收入与目标的对比。

Since it's built on your real time people and business data, Rippling AI can pull metrics from Rippling and Salesforce into a meeting ready dashboard showing quota attainment, headcount plan, and monthly revenue to quota by region.

几秒钟内，你就能清楚看到业绩风险背后的原因，并在目标落空之前解决它。

In seconds, you'll see exactly what's behind your quota risk and fix it before it's missed.

问题解决了，行动到位了，危机化解了。

Question answered, action taken, crisis averted.

当你有关键业务问题需要答案时，不要只是提交工单然后等几周拿一份过时的报告。

When you have critical business questions that need answers, don't just file a ticket and wait weeks for an outdated report.

描述你的需求，让 Rippling AI 根据你的实时人员和业务数据立即构建。

Describe what you need and have Rippling AI build it instantly from your live people and business data.

无论是带有详细图表的仪表板，还是带有正确触发器、条件和审批的自动化工作流。

Whether it's a dashboard with detailed charts or automated workflows with the right triggers, conditions, and approvals.

准备好掌控你的业务了吗？

Ready to rule your business?

前往 rippling.ai/fool，获取唯一一款能让你全面了解情况并在整个组织中执行复杂操作的 AI。

Head to rippling.ai/fool to get the only AI built to give you full visibility and take complex actions across your entire organization.

就是 rippling.ai/fool。

That's rippling.ai/fool.

今天就注册，获取独家访问权限。

Sign up for exclusive access today.

Rippling.ai/fool。

Rippling.ai/fool.

每周日，我们都会在《本周科技》中报道本周的科技新闻。

Every Sunday, we cover the week's tech news on This Week in Tech.

嗨。

Hi.

我是TWIT播客网络的Leon Laporte，邀请你和Jacob Ward、Molly White、Harry McCracken一起，聊聊针对Meta的那场大官司的结束，以及这对我们意味着什么。

This is Leon Laporte from the TWIT Podcasting Network inviting you to join me with Jacob Ward, Molly White, and Harry McCracken as we talk about the end of the big lawsuit against Meta and what it means for us.

NVIDIA花大钱想进军AI软件领域，还有关于Hugging Face攻击的真实细节。

NVIDIA spending lots of money trying to get into the AI software game and real details on that hugging face attack.

你听到的会让你震惊。

What you hear will shock you.

你可以在twit.tv以及任何你收听播客的地方找到它。

You'll find it at twit.tv and wherever you get your podcasts.

AI占据了头条新闻，尤其是这次对话。

AI dominates the headlines, especially this conversation.

你今天打开任何新闻网站，全都是关于AI要来毁灭我们的消息。

You go to any news website today, and it's all about AI coming to kill us all.

所以我想稍微转移一下焦点，谈谈一些投资趋势。

So I I wanted to just shift the focus a little bit and just some of the investing trends.

我不能说一定是在AI之外，但除了直接像OpenAI和Anthropic的讨论之外，在投资界你正在关注的趋势中，到年底你会觉得，我认为可能会发生一些大事。

I wouldn't say necessarily say outside of AI, but outside of directly, like, the OpenAI Anthropic discussion of trends in the investing world that you are following right now that through the end of the year, you're like, I think something big could happen.

我认为这里有一个重大的势头，我觉得更多的投资者应该关注这里正在发生的事情。

I think there's a major momentum going on here, and I think more investors should be paying attention to what's going on here.

Travis，我想从你开始。

Travis, I wanna start with you.

你最期待什么？

What are you most excited about?

期待。

Excited.

我想，你知道，你问我们在看什么？

I I guess, you know, you said what what are the things that we're looking at?

消费者是我真正关注的，我不确定这是否是值得兴奋的理由，因为我们从财报中看到的一些数据，甚至只是轶事中的小事情，可能没有我们希望的那么积极。

The consumer is something that I'm really looking at, and I don't know if it's reason necessarily to be excited because some of the data that we've seen coming out from earnings, even just anecdotally little things are maybe not as positive as we would like to see.

而且市场处于或接近历史高位，加上AI方面的所有支出，我不得不怀疑经济有多少是由AI交易支撑的。

And with the market where it is at or near all time highs with all of the spending that's going on in AI, I have to wonder how much of the economy is being held up by that AI trade.

再看消费者这边，尤其是鞋类和服装类股票今年被砸得很惨，餐饮股表现也不好，因为同店销售数据很难看，利润率被压得很紧，因为他们没有定价权。

And as I look at consumer, particularly shoe and apparel stocks have gotten absolutely hammered this year, restaurant stocks have not done well because, know, same store sales comps are rough, margins are getting squeezed because they have no pricing power.

现在油价还在继续上涨，而且看起来短期内不会结束。

Now you have gas prices continue to rise and it doesn't seem like that's gonna be ending anytime soon.

所以我一直在关注消费者，因为我觉得市场现在主要关注两件事：AI交易和消费者。消费者已经被边缘化了，因为AI交易太抢眼了。

So I'm keeping an eye on the consumer because I think the market is thinking about two things right now, the AI trade and the consumer, the consumer has fallen by the wayside because the AI trade just kind of overwhelms that.

但如果AI交易真的放缓，然后我们发现消费者其实很疲软，那对投资者来说可能不是什么好事。

But if that AI trade does slow down and then we find out we have a weak consumer underneath, that's probably not great for investors.

不过话说回来，我也发现了很多真正有意思的机会，因为那些被砸得很惨的股票现在市盈率只有10到15倍。

But that said, I'm finding a lot of really interesting opportunities because some of those stocks that have been beaten up are trading for 10 to 15 times earnings.

如果你能找到那些能以这个价格长期增长的公司，这其实是个开始建仓的好时机。

If you can find companies that are gonna be able to grow long term at those prices, this is actually a interesting time to start building positions.

当然，和这个相关的还有房地产市场。

Certainly connected to that is the idea of like the housing market too.

我特别关注的是，房屋净值贷款这类东西几乎已经过时了，因为利率高得让人望而却步，而且大家都在看房市，却被挡在门外。你可以想象，这可能会对消费者产生一些连锁反应，尤其是他们的一些非必需消费。

It would be the one I'm gonna be watching is because the idea of like home equity loans and things like that are almost like a thing of the past because they're so the interest rates are prohibitively expensive and everyone's kind of looking at the housing market and being bumped out, you can imagine why that might start to have some trickle down effects into, into the consumer as well and some of the more discretionary purchases they're making.

我现在在看一张图表，非必需消费品板块是目前市场上表现最差的板块。

I'm looking at a chart right now and consumer discretionary is the worst performing sector right now on the market.

今年至今下跌了5.3%，而像能源和科技板块则上涨了28%到30%。

It's down 5.3% year to date, while things like energy and tech are up 28, 30%.

所以今年到目前为止确实不是最吸引人的，但话说回来，有很多便宜的股票可能很有吸引力。

So certainly not the most interesting so far this year, but again, a lot of cheap stocks that could be compelling.

瑞秋，你在关注什么？

Rachel, what are you looking at?

嗯，我对AI在医疗领域的应用感到非常兴奋，这算是对我们之前讨论的一个更积极的补充。

Well, I am very excited as I see what's happening with AI as it pertains to healthcare, to put a little bit of a more positive follow-up to our our earlier discussion.

你知道，这个领域可能不像其他行业那样看到那么多炫酷的AI应用案例。

You know, this is a space where you're not maybe seeing as much of the flashy use cases of AI that we do in other industries.

AI在医疗领域的作用是真正帮助优化和精炼长期以来的药物研发、发现和临床试验流程。

What AI is doing in healthcare is it is really helping to refine and optimize the long held processes of drug development, discovery, optimizing clinical trials.

它并不是要取代医生和科学家。

You know, it's not replacing doctors and scientists.

它正在帮助公司开发、商业化、生产，并且优化从药物发现到批准再到患者手中的整个时间线，而且效率要高得多。

It's helping companies develop, you know, commercialize, manufacture, and optimize really the entire, timeline from drug discovery to approval to getting it into the hands of patients, at a much more favorable rate.

你想啊，平均一种药物，从研发到上市，可能要花十多年时间，平均要花几十亿美元。

I mean, you have to think about how the average drug, it can take over a decade, couple billion dollars on average to bring a drug to market.

而且百分之九十的药物在后期试验阶段就失败了。

Ninety percent fail in in later stage trials anyway.

所以，人工智能实际上是被用作自动化和数据引擎，来解决那些长期以来让药物开发变得如此缓慢的瓶颈问题。

And so AI is really being used as an automation and data engine to attack a lot of the bottlenecks that have historically made drug development so slow.

你可以看到，从大型制药公司在幕后利用AI模型，到生物技术公司更公开地展示他们在AI中找到价值的用例，到处都是这样。

And you can see that everywhere from, you know, the big pharmaceutical companies that are leveraging AI models behind the scenes to biotech companies that are much more kind of upfront about the use cases for which they're finding, you know, value in AI.

比如说，Moderna就是一个很好的例子。

I mean, you know, Moderna is a great example.

对吧？

Right?

显然，他们正在和默克合作开发癌症疫苗。

Obviously, they're working on their their cancer vaccine with Merck.

这最近吸引了很多投资者的关注。

This has been something that's gotten a lot of attention from investors recently.

他们有自己的系统，叫Maestro，用来协调这些个性化疫苗。

Well, they have their own, you know, system called Maestro that helps orchestrate these personalized vaccines.

它读取患者的肿瘤序列。

It reads a patient's tumor sequence.

它预测最佳的免疫反应。

It predicts the best immune response.

Crystal Biotech是另一家非常有趣的公司。

Crystal Biotech is another really interesting company.

他们为罕见皮肤病制造可还原的基因疗法，并且他们使用AI机器学习在生产线上进行实时质量控制。

They make reducible, gene therapies for rare skin disease, and they are using AI machine learning to run real time quality control in their production line.

所以看到这项技术在非常实际的应用中出现，作为一个广泛关注AI但同时也是医疗投资者的我来说，这真的很令人兴奋，我认为这为投资者创造了很多机会。

So seeing the way this technology shows up in really practical use cases as someone who is following AI broadly, but is also a healthcare investor, that's really exciting, and I think it creates a lot of opportunity for investors.

Rachel，我在医疗领域看到的一件事，以及你猜到的，或者你也可以从股票表现中看到，合同研究组织，MEDP PACE Holdings，ICVIA Holdings，像这样的公司。

Rachel, one thing I've seen in the healthcare space, and chatter, I guess you will, or and you can see it in performance of stocks too, contract resource organizations, MEDP PACE Holdings, ICVIA Holdings, companies like this.

他们是医疗行业的工蜂，真正为初创生物技术公司等开展大量临床试验的群体。

They're the worker bees of the healthcare industry, the ones that actually conduct a lot of clinical trials for startup biotechs and things like that.

有一种观点认为，AI会淘汰他们，因为它取代了药物发现这一块业务。

There has been a thesis that AI is going to kill them because it takes away that drug discovery side of the business.

但我也听到相反的说法，如果因为AI让药物发现蓬勃发展，我们从中获得了大量候选药物，那岂不是让所有这些临床试验工作更加高效，或者说不是更高效，而是因为候选药物更多了，临床试验的工作量也会相应增加。

But I've also heard the counter that says, well, if drug discovery is booming because we've been able to get so many out of drug discovery through AI, doesn't that just make all this clinical trial work that much more productive or not more productive, but there's just gonna be that much more of it because we have that many more candidates.

那你在这个问题上怎么看？

So where do you land on that spectrum?

我们是在见证AI导致CRO的消亡，还是他们会因为必须开展所有这些临床试验而迎来大爆发？

Are we seeing like the death of the CRO because of AI or are they gonna be absolutely booming because they have to conduct all these clinical trials?

你知道，这真的取决于具体的CRO。

You know, it really depends on the individual CRO.

围绕这一点有很多担忧，尤其是大约一年前，以及2024年和2025年的大部分时间。

There was a lot of fear around this, especially I would say a year ago and, you know, well into 2024 and 2025.

再说一次，这真的取决于组织本身。

And again, it really depends on the organization.

从历史上看，CRO 是靠按人头收费来赚钱的，比如数据录入、现场监查、合同修改这些。

I mean, like historically speaking, CROs would make money by billing for the number of people typing data, monitoring sites, redlining contracts.

而现在这个时代，很多易用的 AI 工具正在幕后为医疗机构优化这些流程。

And in a day and age where very user friendly AI tools are optimizing a lot of these processes behind the scenes for healthcare organizations.

显然，那些重复性的行政工作就没那么必要了。

Obviously, those types of kind of rote administrative tasks, that's not as necessary.

而且我们也看到一些生物科技初创公司实际上推迟了签署部分 CRO 合同。

But and we've seen some biotech startups that have actually kind of delayed signing some of their CRO contracts.

但因为 AI 加速了早期药物发现的过程，而这是药物研发中最耗时的阶段之一，我们看到很多机会涌向那些更懂技术的 CRO 机构。

But because AI is accelerating the early stage drug discovery process, which is one of the most time intensive phases of developing a drug, we are seeing a lot of opportunities for these more tech fluent, CRO organizations.

所以我认为，对于那些积极进取的企业来说，这将继续是机会。

And so I think that that will continue to be an opportunity for the businesses that step up.

当然，也有一些老派的夫妻店式机构可能经不起考验。

There are certainly some of these kind of old school mom and pop organizations that may not, stand up to the test of it.

但像 MEDPACE 这样的公司，你知道，它们是非常知名的全球性 CRO。

But companies like MEDP PACE, for example, you know, they are a very prominent global CRO.

他们在行业里有很多经过验证的合作关系。

They have a lot of proven relationships with players in the space.

所以我觉得，像这样的公司会没事的，但确实值得关注。

So I I think that, you know, companies like that are gonna be just fine, but something to watch for sure.

休息之后，我们会进入听众来信环节。

Coming after the break, we're gonna hit the mailbag.

这里是微软Windows每周播报。

Microsoft on Windows weekly.

大家好。

Hi.

我是Leo Laporte，邀请您本周和我、Paul Therott以及Richard Campbell一起聊聊Sonos的回归。

This is Leo Laporte inviting you to join me, Paul Therott, and Richard Campbell this week as we talk about the return of Sonos.

但您还会再买一个Sonos音箱吗？

But will you buy another Sonos speaker?

Paul说他会。

Paul says he's gonna.

Windows 11 版本 26H2 进入发布预览阶段，IFA 也在柏林进行中。

Windows 11 version 26 h two goes to release preview, and EEFA's underway in Berlin.

我们会聊聊一些新笔记本，包括 RTX Spark。

We'll talk about some new laptops, including the RTX Spark.

Windows 每周播报。

Windows weekly.

你可以在 twit.tv/ww 以及任何你获取播客的地方找到它。

You'll find it at twit.tv/ww and wherever you get your podcasts.

每周二，我们会在 Mac 每周播报中报道最新的苹果新闻。

Every Tuesday, we cover the latest Apple news on Mac break weekly.

你好。

Hi.

我是 TWIT 播客网络的 Leo Laporte，这周邀请你和我一起，还有 Jason Snell、Christina Warren 和 Andy Inotco。

This is Leo Laporte from the TWIT podcast network inviting you to join me this week with Jason Snell, Christina Warren, and Andy Inotco.

我们会和即将离任的 Tim Cook 道别。

We'll wave goodbye to the departing Tim Cook.

向约翰·特尼斯打个招呼，聊聊他的领导可能给苹果带来什么变化，还有Vision Pro部门更多裁员的消息，不过Vision Pro也有个好用处。

Say hello to John Turnis and talk about what his regime may bring to Apple, plus more layoffs in the Vision Pro division, but there is a good use for the Vision Pro.

杰森发现了这个用处。

Jason's found it.

这些内容以及更多，本周尽在MacBook Weekly。

That and more this week on MacBook weekly.

你可以在twit.tv/mbw以及任何你收听播客的地方找到我们。

You'll find it at twit.tv/mbw and wherever you get your podcasts.

嘿，大家好。

Hey, everyone.

提醒一下，如果你想向我们提问，请发邮件到podcasts@fool.com。

Reminder, if you wanna get a question into us, email us at podcasts@fool.com.

注意，是podcast，后面带个s。

That's podcast with an s.

我也把邮箱地址放在了节目简介里，你也可以在那里找到。

I also put the email in the show description so you can get it there as well.

今天的提问来自亚特兰大的詹姆斯。

Today's comes in from James from Atlanta.

他是节目的忠实粉丝，从疫情开始就一直听，很喜欢我们做的内容。

He's a huge fan of the show, been listening since COVID, and loves what we do.

他的问题是，想听听大家怎么看股息，无论是从回报计算的角度，还是从公司传达信息的角度。

So the question is, would love to hear everyone's thought on how you view dividends, both in the return calculation and the company's messaging.

虽然我能理解股息在能源股中的作用，他提到埃克森美孚和雪佛龙，这类公司长期派息并不断增加股息。

While I see the role they play in energy stocks, he mentions ExxonMobil's Chevron, kind of that been doing it for a long time, growing dividends here.

但我很难理解一只成长股派息的价值。

I struggle to see the value of a growth stock paying one.

他举了迪士尼、谷歌，更具体地说是Alphabet的例子。

And he uses Disney, Google, or Alphabet more specifically.

他觉得这些资本用在资本支出和业务增长上，比派息更好。

And as I would think that the capital could be better spent on CapEx and business growth rather than dividends.

那么，你在这个问题上大致持什么立场呢？

So what where do you kinda land on the spectrum here?

你觉得像Alphabet和迪士尼这样的成长型公司，是不是不应该发股息，而是应该把钱花在业务增长上？

Is it you know, should these growth companies like Alphabet and Disney based not spend dividends and probably be spending on a business growth?

还是说，股息本身也有它的价值？

Or, you know, is there value into into the dividend?

你得看一家公司在跟投资者沟通时，想吸引什么样的投资者。

One of the things you have to look at is a company is trying to communicate with investors what sort of investor they want to attract.

你提到两个有趣的例子，Alphabet就是那种，嘿，我们现金太多了。

So when you bring up two interesting examples, you know, alphabet would be a case of, hey, we got so much cash.

总得想办法把钱还给股东。

We gotta return this somehow.

那就发股息吧。

Dividend, I guess.

迪士尼就不一样了，他们想把股息投资者纳入自己的投资者群体。

Disney is a different story where they want to have dividend investors as part of their investor pool.

所以你看，他们历史上就想在股息投资者这块儿有所作为。

So when you look at, you know, what are the sort of the pools of investors, that that's an area that they want to play historically.

所以我觉得你需要考虑的是，这其中的一部分就是和投资者的沟通。

So that's, I think, something that you need to think about is that part of this is communication with investors.

话虽这么说，我也很想为定期分红说几句好话。

With that said, I also wanna I would love to lobby for a regular dividends.

我觉得我们在分红上容易陷入的一个误区是，分红总是要增加。

I think one of the things that we get stuck on with dividends is they always have to go up.

总是要保持稳定。

They always have to be consistent.

但生意不是这样运作的。

That's not the way the business works.

如果你拥有一家私人企业，某一年业绩很好。

If you own a private business, you have a great year.

你今年就多给自己发点钱，如果明年业绩不好，就少发点。

You just pay yourself more this year and maybe don't pay yourself as much next year if it's not such a good year.

在公开市场上我们也应该这样做。

We should do that in public markets.

不过话说回来，我觉得分红很多时候其实意味着公司已经没有那么多投资机会了。

But that said, one of the things that I think about with dividends is it's actually a lot of times a sign that a company doesn't have as many investment opportunities as they once did.

你看年轻的公司通常不分红，高增长的公司也一般不分红，分红的更多是成熟公司。

You don't see young companies paying dividends, you don't typically see high growth companies paying dividends, it's much more mature companies.

所以如果你在看分红股票，要明白这些公司处于投资周期的哪个阶段，确保基础业务是稳健的。因为如果基础不牢，分红也不可靠，未来可能面临削减分红的风险，那样又会回到我一开始说的，投资者群体可能会因为分红被砍而发生变化，股价开始下跌，形成恶性循环。

So if you're looking at dividend stocks, just understand where those companies are on their investment phase, make sure the underlying business is solid, because if it isn't, then that dividend isn't solid, you risk the future dividend cut, which then again goes back to the first thing I said, which is the investor pool, you know, maybe shifts because they cut that dividend, now your stock starts to drop and it's sort of a downward spiral.

所以一定要确保基础业务是好的。

So make sure that underlying business is good.

如果基础好，公司也分红，那没问题。

And if it is, if they pay a dividend, fine.

如果公司不分红，我其实也不太担心。

If they don't, it's not really something that I worry about.

但说到底，不管你看不看分红，最重要的是确保公司根基稳固，因为那才是最关键的。

But, you know, at the end of the day, whether you're looking at dividends or not, make sure the business is is on solid footing because that's ultimately the most important thing.

我觉得说得对。

I think that's right.

我的意思是，把钱重新注入业务并不一定能带来更多增长。

And I mean, just injecting cash back into the business doesn't necessarily create more growth.

我喜欢看到那些现金充裕的企业在过程中回报投资者。

I like when I see a business that is flushed with cash rewarding investors in the process.

这是一种自律的信号。

I mean, it's a disciplined signal.

对吧？

Right?

它告诉你，当资产负债表允许时，公司不会囤积现金。

I mean, it's it's telling you that a company is isn't gonna hoard cash when the balance sheet can afford it.

他们在回报股东。

They're rewarding shareholders.

显然，作为投资者，这是按计划到手的现金。

Obviously, as an investor, it's cash in your pocket on a schedule.

而且这对再投资非常有利，可以随着时间推移增加你的整体回报。

And that's something that can be really favorable for, you know, reinvestment just to grow your overall returns with time.

而且显然，分红能让一只股票吸引更广泛的买家群体。

And obviously dividends open up a stock to a much bigger, you know, buyer base.

很多基金，很多保守的养老金资金，都规定只能持有支付分红的股票。

A lot of the the funds, a lot of the conservative pension money are mandated to only hold dividend payers.

所以更多的需求能在股价下方提供更多支撑。

So more demand can meet more support under the price.

不过，显然，分红在税收上可能不如回购那么划算，比如说。

Now, obviously, dividends can be less tax efficient than buybacks, for example.

要知道，这不是保证的。

Know, it's not a guarantee.

就连迪士尼在疫情期间也短暂暂停过分红。

Even Disney paused its dividend back, during the pandemic briefly.

所以这种情况是可能发生的。

So that can happen.

但一般来说，当你看到那些有巨大利润和现金基础的公司，它们的分红支付比率通常是比较有利的。

But, as a general rule, I mean, when you see companies that have, you know, an immense baseline of profits and cash, they have a favorable dividend payout ratio.

他们有能力长期向投资者支付这笔分红。

They're able to support that long term payout to investors.

如果你有一个多元化的投资组合，并且想寻找额外的资本增值方式，那这可能会很棒。

That can be great if you have a diversified portfolio and you're looking for extra ways to to generate capital.

所以作为一个既喜欢成长股又喜欢分红股的人，我倾向于在我的持仓篮子里同时包含这两种类型的企业。

So as someone who likes growth stocks and also likes dividend stocks, I tend to include, both types of of businesses in my basket of holdings.

Travis，我想这可能是我第一次听到你主张美国公司应该像欧洲公司那样，采用不固定的分红方式。

Travis, I think that might be one of the first times I've ever heard you advocate for American companies to act more like European companies with irregular dividends.

我，我，有一家叫Melco Crown的公司。

I I there's there's a Melco Crown.

我，我不确定它是否还叫这个名字。

I I don't know if that's still the name.

他们改过几次名字，但他们确实是这样做的，他们支付净收入的50%或三分之一作为股息。

They've changed their name a couple times, but they actually do this where they think they pay out 50% or a third of their net income as a dividend.

所以股息会波动很大，但这非常合理。

So the dividend kinda goes all over the place, but it it makes a ton of sense.

对吧？

Right?

就是别把自己困在这种处境里，比如你发现持有的公司股息率有7%，但派息却超过了净利润和自由现金流，那就不合理了。

It just makes sense to not get stuck in this position where you go, oh my gosh, this company that I own has has a 7% dividend yield, but they're paying more than their net income and their free cash flow and dividend.

那太离谱了。

That that's nuts.

我采访过一位油气行业的CFO，我跟他提过那种不定期分红的想法。

I interviewed a CFO in the oil and gas industry once, and I I proposed that idea of, like, an irregular dividend.

我说，你可以每季度派一分钱，然后剩下的，就按你觉得能分配的额度来派。

I was like, you could pay, a penny a quarter and then just pay, like, excess, like, like, what you think is distributable.

他回答说，要是他真这么干，在资本市场上会被骂死的。

And he's like, I would get murdered in the capital markets if I ever tried to do that.

确实。

That's true.

Winter's Arts就是这么做的，所以市场上还是有这样的例子的。

Winter's Arts does this, so there there are examples out there.

但你得先跟市场建立一定的信誉，让他们明白，这就是我们的做法。

But you have to kind of establish a track record with the market and be like, this is what we do.

如果你以前没这么做过，第一次做的时候很可能会被市场找麻烦。

And if you haven't done it before, you're probably gonna get in trouble with the market when you do it.

好了，今天的时间就到这里。

Well, that's all the time we have for today.

和往常一样，节目中的嘉宾可能对他们提到的股票有兴趣，而The Motley Fool也可能为我们的嘉宾提供正式推荐。

As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for our guests.

所以不要仅仅因为你听到的内容就买卖股票。

So don't buy or sell stocks based solely on you hear.

所有个人理财内容都遵循Motley Fool的编辑标准，并且未经广告商批准。

All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers.

广告是赞助内容，仅供参考。

Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only.

要查看我们的完整广告披露，请查看我们的节目说明。

To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes.

感谢制作人丹·博伊德以及Motley Fool团队的其他成员。

Thanks for producer Dan Boyd and rest of the Motley Fool team.

特拉维斯、瑞秋和我，感谢大家的收听，我们很快再聊。

For Travis, Rachel, myself, thanks for listening, and we'll chat again soon.