科技巨头如今正在为白宫提供建议——会出什么问题？

本节目由以下赞助支持：经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？

Support for this show comes from Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?

推出 Odoo。

Introducing Odoo.

这是你一生中唯一需要的商业软件。

It's the only business software you'll ever need.

它是一个一体化、完全集成的平台，让您的工作更轻松。

It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier.

客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务等。

CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.

最棒的是什么？

And the best part?

Odoo 以极低的成本取代了多个昂贵的平台。

Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

这就是为什么成千上万家企业已经转向 Odoo。

That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.

那你为什么不来试试呢？

So why not you?

前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。

Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.

就是 odoo.com。

That's odoo.com.

本节目由以下内容赞助：经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？

Support for this show comes from Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?

介绍 Odoo。

Introducing Odoo.

这是你一生中唯一需要的商业软件。

It's the only business software you'll ever need.

它是一个一体化、完全集成的平台，能让您的工作更轻松，包括客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务等。

It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.

最棒的是？

And the best part?

Odoo 以极低的成本取代了多个昂贵的平台。

ODOO replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

因此，成千上万家企业已经选择了切换到 Odoo。

That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.

那你为什么不呢？

So why not you?

前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。

Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.

那就是 odoo.com。

That's odoo.com.

本节目由 SoFi 赞助。

Support for the show comes from SoFi.

坦白说吧。

Let's face it.

大学费用高昂，而你如何支付这笔费用至关重要。

College is expensive, and how you pay for it really matters.

这就是SoFi发挥作用的地方。

That's where SoFi comes in.

SoFi帮助你以低至4.24%的年利率进行再融资，通过降低月供为你节省大量开支。

SoFi helps you refinance at rates as low as 4.24% APR, potentially saving big by lowering your monthly payment.

你甚至可以自定义浮动利率以实现你的财务目标，且无需支付任何罚金或费用。

You can even customize variable rates to meet your financial goals, all with no penalties or fees required.

两分钟内即可查询你的利率，且不会影响你的信用评分。

Check your rate in two minutes with no impact to your credit score.

已有超过58万会员通过SoFi完成了超过500亿美元的再融资。

Over 580,000 members have already refinanced more than $50,000,000,000 with SoFi.

访问sofi.com/voxpod，查看你能节省多少。

Visit sofi.com/voxpod to see how much you could save.

那就是sofi.com/voxpod。

That's sofi.com/voxpod.

SoFi学生贷款由SoFi银行发放，该银行为FDIC成员。

SoFi student loans are originated by SoFi Bank and a member FDIC.

适用其他条款和条件。

Additional terms and conditions apply.

NMLS 696891。

NMLS 696891.

今天的数字是四。

Today's number, four.

这是泰格·伍兹在上周于佛罗里达州朱庇特岛翻车后卷入的车祸次数。

That's how many car accidents Tiger Woods has now been involved in after he rolled his car over in Jupiter Island, Florida last week.

今天的另一个数字是二十。

Today's other number is 20.

泰格，如果你只是叫一辆优步，这只需要你花二十美元。

That's how many dollars it would cost you, Tiger, if you simply ordered an Uber.

七万二千。

72,000.

我觉得我要开始了。

I feel like I'm gonna start.

货币市场疯了。

Money market's mad.

如果钱是邪恶的，那么那栋楼就是地狱。

If money is evil, then that building is hell.

节目继续进行。

The show goes on.

从未观看过节目的人出售的价格。

The price of never watched the show sell.

欢迎来到Prof G市场。

Welcome to Prof G Markets.

我是埃德·埃尔森。

I'm Ed Elson.

今天是3月31日。

It is March 31.

让我们回顾一下昨天的市场关键数据。

Let's check-in on yesterday's market vitals.

纳斯达克指数因科技股抛售加剧而下跌。

The Nasdaq fell as a tech sell off deepened.

该指数在本季度最后一天已明确进入修正区间，较10月高点下跌了13%。

The index is firmly in correction territory heading into its final day of the quarter, down 13% from its October peak.

与此同时，标普500指数也下滑，而道琼斯指数持平。

Meanwhile, the S and P also declined and the Dow was flat.

在杰罗姆·鲍威尔表示美联储将忽略石油冲击并维持利率稳定后，美国国债收益率下降。

Treasury yields dropped after Jerome Powell indicated the Federal Reserve will look past the oil shock and keep rates steady.

他的评论正值布伦特原油价格上涨至每桶116美元以上。

His comments came as Brent crude prices rose to more than a $116 per barrel.

好的。

Okay.

还有其他什么动态吗？

What else is happening?

一些科技领域最具影响力的人物现在正式为白宫提供咨询。

Some of the most powerful people in tech are now formally advising the White House.

特朗普总统任命了13位行业领袖担任总统科学与技术顾问委员会（简称PCAST）成员。

President Trump has named 13 industry leaders to the president's council of advisers on science and technology, also known as PCAST.

任命人选包括马克·安德森、黄仁勋、马克·扎克伯格和拉里·埃里森。

Appointees include Mark Andreessen, Jensen Huang, Mark Zuckerberg, and Larry Ellison.

他们的职责是就科技政策向白宫提供建议，目标是确保所有美国人都能在创新的黄金时代蓬勃发展。

Their mandate is to advise the White House on science and tech policy, and their goal is to ensure that, quote, all Americans thrive in the golden age of innovation.

该委员会的联席主席是戴维·萨克斯，他担任人工智能与加密货币事务主管的任期已经结束。

Co chairing that council is David Sachs, whose time as AI and crypto czar has come to an end.

此外还有白宫科技政策办公室主任迈克尔·克拉齐奥斯。今天我们邀请到丽兹·霍夫曼，她是《商业与金融中心》编辑兼《复合利息》节目主持人，来讨论这个委员会及其对人工智能政策的意义。

And also Michael Kratzios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Joining us to discuss this council and what it means for AI policy, we're speaking with Liz Hoffman, Center for Business and Finance Editor and host of Compound Interest.

丽兹，欢迎再次做客。

Liz, welcome back.

我想直接切入正题。

So I wanna get right into this.

这类顾问委员会已经存在很长时间了。

This has these councils have existed for a long time.

罗斯福在1933年设立了第一个这样的委员会。

FDR had his first one in 1933.

历史上，这些委员会成员通常都是学者，但这次却是真正的行业领袖。

Historically, it seems like they've usually been academics, but this time, it's really industry leaders.

他们是真正构建这项技术的人，比如扎克伯格、黄仁勋、马克·安德森等等。

It's the people who are actually building this technology, people like Zuckerberg, Jensen Huang, Marc Andreessen, etcetera.

你如何看待这个委员会？它在任何方面让你感到意外吗？

What do you make of this council, and is it surprising in any way to you?

首先，我觉得没能让这个缩写变成‘podcast’是个错失的机会。

First, I think there was a missed opportunity in not getting the acronym to be podcast.

我觉得这并不难实现，总统令直接命名的‘whatever委员会’，几乎就差一点了。

I don't think you'd have to try that hard, the presidential order directoring council of whatever, because that is Almost.

这里的团队都在。

Is the crew here.

是的。

Yeah.

不。

No.

我觉得你说得对，而且这是非常有意为之的。

I think you're right, and and that's extremely intentional.

大卫·萨克斯曾谈到过这一点，他说，这些是实干家。

There was, know, David Sachs was talking about this and said, I think, quote, these are doers.

你可以对这里的政治立场有自己的看法。

And you can, you know, feel however you feel about the the politics here.

但众所周知，私营部门对拜登政府的主要抱怨，并不在于他们推行的政策，而在于执行这些政策的人员，以及私营部门人士所能获得的接触机会。

But, you know, one complaint that was really widely felt in the private sector about the Biden administration was less the sort of policies they were pursuing than the personnel pursuing them and and the sort of access that private sector people had.

不管怎么说，即使在特朗普的第一任期，他就算说了些私营部门不喜欢的话，人们也会打电话给史蒂夫·姆努钦，或者加里·科恩，进行沟通和反馈。

Like, say what you want, even the Trump's first term, he would say something that, you know, the private sector didn't like and they but they would call up Steve Mnuchin, they would call up Gary Cohn, and there would be this back and forth.

而在拜登政府时期，这种状况完全消失了——做决策的人从未真正运营过损益表，从未管理过资产负债表，也从未真正以评估企业风险为生。

And that totally went away during the Biden administration in the sense that people were making decisions who would never run a p and l, who would never run a balance sheet, never really underwritten risk for a business, you know, for a living.

显然，这种情况现在已经回来了。

That has obviously come come back.

所以我认为，这是对这一切最宽容、最少政治化的看法，我觉得这样挺好。

So that I think is the most the most charitable and and sort of least politicized view of all of this, and like seems fine to me.

人工智能非常重要。

AI is really important.

它在经济上极其重要。

It's really important economically.

它对国家安全也至关重要。

It's really important for national security.

我想，大家都会记得那次参议院听证会，当时一群大型科技公司的高管被参议员质询，而这些参议员显然完全不明白这些公司是怎么赚钱的。

And I think, you know, we'll all remember that senate hearing, you know, where a bunch of the big tech executives were being questioned by senators who clearly just had no idea how they made money.

我的意思是，监管者和立法者与他们所监管的行业之间存在的这种知识鸿沟，过去就一直是个有害的问题。

I mean, that that knowledge gap between people doing the regulating and writing the laws and the industries they're regulating has been pernicious before.

所以，这是一种看待问题的方式。

And so, you know, that's one way to look at it.

另一种看法是，这不过是又一条新兴的权力通道，行业提出了很多诉求，而现在他们有了更直接的渠道去接触能够满足他们需求的人。

The other is this is just another sort of corridor of power that is, cropping up, and that there are a lot of asks from the industry, and they now have a a more direct line to people who can give them what they want.

不过，如果从对立面来看，这里的利益冲突难道不是指那些本应监管这项技术的人，同时也是最深度投资于这项技术的人吗？

Wouldn't the conflict of interest here, though, to to play devil's advocate, wouldn't it be that the people who are supposedly going to regulate this technology are also the people who are most heavily invested in this technology?

他们才是最希望从这项技术中获利的人。

They're the ones who are incentivized to profit from this technology.

如果你有一个由技术领袖可以与之交流的委员会，而且这些人还具备一些技术背景，那或许还能说得通，但现在这简直就是黄仁勋本人。

I mean, it would be one thing if you had a council of people whom with whom technology leaders could speak with and maybe who had some background in technology, but it's literally Jensen Huang.

这简直就是马克·安德森本人。

It's literally Marc Andreessen.

这简直就是那些最深度投入、最想从这件事中获利的人。

It's literally the people who are most invested who want to profit off of this thing.

这难道不是一种利益冲突吗？

Is that not a conflict?

这绝对是利益冲突。

It's absolutely a conflict.

但话说回来，这个政府里到处都是这样的情况。

But, I mean, that this administration is full of them.

我觉得

I think

对。

Right.

你知道，这比一些人的孩子通过加密货币交易赚大钱，或者特朗普把家族企业的一半卖给中东，要稍微没那么严重。

You know, and it's a slightly less pernicious one than, like, people's kids making a lot of money on crypto deals and Trump selling half of his family business to The Middle East.

我的意思是，你根本不用到处找，就能看到真正有问题的事情。

I mean, you don't have to look far and wide for, you know, things that are genuinely problematic.

我对这个问题没那么担心，因为我想，还有什么别的选择呢？

I'm not that bothered by this one because I guess what's the alternative?

对吧？

Right?

那样的话，又是让完全不懂这项技术的人来监管它。

That, again, you have this being regulated by people who have no idea what it is.

我还要说，人工智能界对于如何最好地监管这项技术，其实有着令人惊讶且略显安慰的多样观点。

I would also say that there is a surprising and actually slightly comforting range of ideas and and and viewpoints within the AI community about actually how best to regulate this.

如果每个人都全速前进，我会更担心，但事实上，像Anthropic这样的公司已经提出了关于这项技术应该如何使用和监管的不同观点。

I would be more concerned if everyone was just full steam ahead, but there are real, like, you know, Anthropic has put out a different version of how this technology ought to be used and regulated.

有些州也有自己的看法。

There are states that sort of have their own point of view.

我不知道，但我认为，让一群八十多岁的参议员来监管这件事，这个替代方案也好不到哪里去。

I I don't know, but I I don't think that the the argument or the the alternative is a whole lot better where you have got a bunch of, like, octogenarian senators trying to to oversee this.

我还要说，你看。

I would also say and look.

大卫·萨克斯一直是个焦点人物。

David Sachs has been a real lightning rod.

他是总统顾问，经常分享这些内容。

He's the the presidential adviser sort of sharing a lot of this stuff.

我认为很难说，他现在在白宫任职比在硅谷真正投资这项技术时更富有。

I think it's hard to argue that he is richer now being in the White House than he would be if he was in Silicon Valley, like, actually investing in this stuff.

所以我也说不准。

So I don't know.

是的。

Yes.

你确实得为此担心。

It is you gotta be worried about it.

但随着监管经济重要领域的人员与行业内部人员之间的知识差距不断扩大，我不确定还有什么更好的办法，只能把相关人士请到桌前来讨论。

But as the knowledge gap between the people regulating huge sections of the economy and the people in them gets wider, I'm not really sure there's a better option than to bring people to the table.

顺便说一下，目前没有参与进来的一群人就是那些大型AI模型本身。

By the way, the one people one group of people not in this are the big the big AI models themselves.

所以你会想，这会不会最终成为某种起源故事——比如，马斯克转向右翼，很大程度上是因为他被拜登的电动汽车委员会忽视了。

So you wonder whether there isn't this isn't gonna end up being some kind of, you know, origin story where, like, Elon Musk's turn to the right, a lot of it kinda goes back to his snub from the the Biden EV council.

我不确定。

I don't know.

我本来很惊讶，看到萨姆·阿尔特曼那些人竟然没被包括在内。

I I I was surprised to see that, that group, Sam Altman, those folks not included here.

对。

Right.

埃隆·马斯克没在其中。

Elon Musk wasn't in it.

我猜他和总统闹翻了。

I guess he had his fallout with the president.

这一点就没那么令人意外了。

That one's little less surprising.

但，是的，你可能会

But, yeah, you would

期待看到萨姆或者 yeah。

expect to see Sam or yeah.

或者达里奥，或者其他运行这些模型的人。

Or Dario or, or other folks who are running these models.

对。

Right.

但我想稍微反驳一下，以戴维·萨克斯为例，他的政策和对人工智能监管的态度似乎是：我们根本不要去监管人工智能。

But I I guess I I just wanna push back for a moment because, I mean, with David Sachs as the example, it seems as though his policy, his approach to AI regulation has been let's not really regulate AI.

让我们把它变成一个自由竞争的局面。

Let's make it kind of a free for all.

同时，他通过自己的投资公司Prof Ventures，仍然投资了大量从事人工智能领域开发的公司。

And at the same time, he was still invested through his investment firm, Prof Ventures, in a lot of companies that were building in the AI space.

这确实似乎是这里存在的风险。

And it does seem that that is kind of the risk here.

我同意你的看法。

I agree with you.

让一群根本不懂这项技术的参议员在这个委员会中提供建议，而他们从未真正开发过任何产品，这似乎是个糟糕的主意；但让那些最希望制定政策的人——其动机并非保护美国人，而是最大化自身利益——来主导政策，也同样不太妥当。

Having a bunch of oxygenarian senators who don't really know what they're talking about on this council advising on things that they've literally never built products in seems like a bad idea, but it also seems like a little bit of a bad idea to have the individuals who are most incentivized to build policy, not that necessarily protects Americans, but that allows them to profit as much as possible.

这让我想到，我们难道不能找到某种折中方案吗？

And it just makes me think, can we not find some sort of happy medium?

我们难道不能找一些人，他们既不是在硅谷同时担任风投，又兼任政府特别雇员的人吗？

Can we not find some people who aren't balancing their their other job as a as a VC in Silicon Valley and being a special employee for the government?

找一些真正能胜任监管工作、同时又对商业语言有一定理解的人。

People who could actually do the job of regulating, but who also have some fluency in the in the language of business.

我不知道。

I don't know.

像你这样的人。

Someone like you.

我们难道不能找一些人吗

Like, could could we not get people

那些真正了解这行，但又不会为了尽可能少监管、最大化利润而被完全驱动的人。

in there who who know what know what this is about, but who also aren't going to be totally incentivized to simply get as little regulation as possible to profit as much as possible.

我以及我的同事丽塔·布雷加蒂都没有被邀请，而她实际上对这些东西非常了解。

I was not invited nor was my colleague, Rita Bregatti, who actually knows a lot a lot about this stuff.

当然。

Sure.

显然，是的。

Obviously, yes.

现在有成千上万个AI安全组织，把它们包括进来才是正常的做法。

There's like a million AI safety groups and, like, having them included would be the normal thing to do.

像这样，这并不是这个政府通常的运作方式。

Like, that's not generally how this administration operates.

所以他们对先例和我们一贯的做法缺乏尊重。

So they don't have a lot of respect for precedents and how we've kind of consistently done things.

对。

Right.

是的。

Yes.

我同意。

I I agree.

但你知道，我一直认为监管机构和被监管者之间存在着某种差距。

But, you know, I do think that that the you know, there's always been this gap between regulators and the people they're regulating.

比如，联邦能源监管委员会（FERC）监管公用事业公司。

But, like, for example, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, regulates utilities.

让了解行业的人坐在监管位置上，其代价就是随着时间推移允许这种旋转门现象的存在。

Like, there's a the the sort of price of having people who understand the industry in the regulatory seat is kind of allowing that revolving door over time.

嗯嗯。

Mhmm.

对吧？

Right?

让这些人进来又出去，到私营部门去赚钱。

Letting people come in and come out and get paid in the private sector.

这正是吸引他们来的关键。

That's how you get them there in the first place.

这个职位，他们不需要那样。

This one, they don't need that.

对吧？

Right?

这些人太富有了，几乎没有动力让他们来担任真正的监管角色。

These guys are so wealthy, and there's not a lot of incentive to bring them in to a true regulatory role.

所以我真的担心，对于这种强大且发展迅速的技术，这种知识鸿沟将会变得极其巨大。

And so I really do worry that this is that the that knowledge gap is just gonna be incredibly wide here for a technology that is very powerful and and developing really quickly.

我想，让我稍微安心一点的是，这是一个顾问委员会。

I guess the the thing that would make me maybe a little bit more comfortable is that these this is an advisory council.

他们实际上并不起草法律，但会发挥某种顾问作用，或许能在一定程度上影响政策走向。

They're not actually writing the laws, but they're gonna have some sort of advisory role, maybe they'll shape things in some capacity.

那么问题来了，这些委员会究竟有多重要呢？

I guess the question then becomes, how significant are these councils really?

它们真的能以有意义的方式影响政策吗？

Do they really influence policy in a way that is meaningful?

你很难找到一个例子，你知道，在拜登政府期间，而且当然，当你记得特朗普当选时，根本没有哪家首席执行官愿意在顾问角色上靠近那个政府。

You'd be hard pressed to find one, you know, during the Biden administration and probably certainly Trump won when you remember, by the way, like, no CEOs really wanted to to be kind of anywhere near that that administration from an advisory perspective.

你知道，这些委员会通常只在国家紧急状况下出现，回溯到2008年，当时私营部门确实深度参与了解决那个问题的方式。

You know, they tend to crop up kind of around national emergencies and go back to o eight, and there was obviously some a lot of private sector input into how that that problem would be solved.

或者坦白说，甚至包括新冠疫情时期。

Or honestly, even the pandemic.

对吧？

Right?

Warp Speed项目曾有一个由众多制药公司CEO组成的顾问委员会。

Warp Speed had a had a advisory council with a bunch of pharma CEOs.

这是一次巨大的成功，我经常说，奇怪的是，Warp Speed竟是特朗普第一任期内最显著的成就之一，而他却完全弃之不顾。

It was a huge win, and and I often say, like, it's weird warp speed was one of the the biggest wins from Trump's first administration that he completely walked away from.

对吧？

Right?

它完全奏效了。

It totally worked.

事实上，它非常受欢迎，但他从未为此争取任何功劳，因为围绕它的政治环境已经发生了变化。

It was, in fact, very popular, but he never took any credit for it because of the politics had had shifted around it.

所以我们拭目以待吧。

So so we'll see.

我认为在监管者与他们所监管的行业保持对立的同时，又试图利用其专业知识或至少保持开放的沟通渠道，这之间需要找到一种平衡，我认为这通常是有帮助的。

I think there's a there's a balance to be struck between sort of being regulators being in opposition to the industry they regulate while trying to sort of tap their expertise or at least have some open lines of communication, I think often is is helpful.

而这个委员会在这方面似乎严重失衡。

This one seems fairly lopsided in in that respect.

但你知道，我不太愿意说AI是不同的。

But there's just you know, I hate saying AI is different.

这次真的不一样。

This time is different.

这种技术对我来说确实感觉截然不同。

This technology does fundamentally feel different to me.

所以我认为让私营部门参与进来可能是有帮助的。

And so I I think that having private sector involved, is probably helpful.

而且要明白，他们并不都想要完全相同的东西。

And understanding that not all of them want necessarily exactly the same thing.

他们之间竞争非常激烈，虽然我不太愿意把所有赌注押在竞争上，但这或许能对这种单向推进形成一些制约。

They are competing with each other very aggressively, which, is not where I like to put my eggs, but could be a little bit of a of a check on on this sort of one way push.

好的。

Alright.

莉兹·霍夫曼，Semafor商业与金融编辑，同时也是《Compound Interest》节目的主持人。

Liz Hoffman, Semafor business and finance editor and also host of Compound Interest.

莉兹，谢谢。

Liz, thank you.

非常感谢你抽出时间。

Always appreciate your time.

总是很愉快，埃德。

Always fun, Ed.

广告后，SpaceX即将发射升空。

After the break, SpaceX is filing for liftoff.

如果你喜欢这个节目，请从下周开始关注我们的新频道Prof G Markets YouTube频道。

And if you're enjoying the show, please follow our new Prof G Markets YouTube channel starting next week.

所有我们的YouTube内容都会在那里发布。

That is where you will find all of our content on YouTube.

本节目由Incogni赞助。

Support for the show comes from Incogni.

如果你知道身份窃贼正在四处打探，翻找你的垃圾桶以获取你的私人信息，你大概就不会再把垃圾桶整晚留在外面了。

If you knew that identity thieves were snooping around and digging through your garbage to get your private information, then you probably wouldn't keep leaving your bins out at night.

在线隐私也是如此。

Same goes for your online privacy.

如果你知道有恶意行为者在四处搜寻，试图窃取你的私人信息，你肯定想保护自己，对吧？

If you knew bad actors were rooting around trying to steal your private information, you'd wanna protect yourself, right?

这就是Incogni的用武之地。

That's where incogni comes in.

Incogni会从搜索引擎和数据经纪商那里删除你的数据。

Incogni removes your data from people search sites and data brokers.

它会在后台自动运行，完成所有繁琐的工作，包括提交删除个人数据的请求，并应对数据经纪商的异议。

It works automatically in the background doing all the messy work of requesting your personal data removal and dealing with the data brokers objections.

你的私人信息，比如全名、电子邮件、家庭住址、性别、电话号码、教育背景、亲属的社会安全号码，甚至你的工作经历和购物习惯，都会通过Incogni得到保护。

Your private information like your full name, email, home address, gender, phone number, education, relative social security number, even your employment history and shopping habits will be protected with incogni.

Incogni甚至能针对那些你可能根本不知道存在的隐藏数据库。

Incogni can even target hidden databases that you may not even know exist.

你的数据正在被不断收集、共享和出售，而Incogni能帮助你阻止陌生人在线找到你的个人信息。

Your data is constantly being collected, shared and sold without your knowledge and can help you stop strangers from finding your personal information online.

今天就开始掌控你的个人数据。

Take control of your personal data today.

访问 incogni.com 并使用代码 Prof G 享受 58% 折扣。

Visit incogni.com and use code Prof G for 58% off.

本节目由以下赞助商支持：经营企业已经够难了，为什么还要用十几个互不相通的应用程序让事情变得更复杂呢？

Support for this show comes from Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?

介绍 Odoo。

Introducing Odoo.

这是你一生中唯一需要的商业软件。

It's the only business software you'll ever need.

它是一个一体化、完全集成的平台，能让你的工作更轻松。

It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier.

客户关系管理、会计、库存、电子商务，等等。

CRM, accounting, inventory, ecommerce, and more.

最棒的是？

And the best part?

Odoo 以极低的成本取代了多个昂贵的平台。

ODOO replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

因此，成千上万家企业已经选择了切换到 Odoo。

That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.

那你为什么不来试试呢？

So why not you?

立即前往 odoo.com 免费试用 Odoo。

Try Odoo for free at odoo.com.

就是 odoo.com。

That's odoo.com.

本节目由 SoFi 赞助。

Support for the show comes from SoFi.

坦白说吧。

Let's face it.

大学费用高昂，而你如何支付这笔费用至关重要。

College is expensive, and how you pay for it really matters.

这就是SoFi发挥作用的地方。

That's where SoFi comes in.

SoFi帮助你以低至4.24%的年利率进行再融资，通过降低月供可能为你节省大量费用。

SoFi helps you refinance at rates as low as 4.24% APR, potentially saving big by lowering your monthly payment.

你甚至可以自定义浮动利率以实现你的财务目标，且无需支付任何罚金或费用。

You can even customize variable rates to meet your financial goals, all with no penalties or fees required.

两分钟内即可查询你的利率，且不会影响你的信用评分。

Check your rate in two minutes with no impact to your credit score.

已有超过58万名会员通过SoFi完成了超过500亿美元的再融资。

Over 580,000 members have already refinanced more than $50,000,000,000 with SoFi.

访问sofi.com/voxpod，查看你能节省多少。

Visit sofi.com/voxpod to see how much you could save.

那就是sofi.com/voxpod。

That's sofi.com/voxpod.

SoFi学生贷款由SoFi银行发放，该银行为FDIC成员。

SoFi student loans are originated by SoFi Bank and a member FDIC.

其他条款和条件适用。

Additional terms and conditions apply.

NMLS编号：696891。

NMLS six nine six eight nine one.

我们继续回到Prof G Markets。

We're back with Prof G Markets.

SpaceX正在为迄今为止规模最大的发射做准备。

SpaceX is preparing for its biggest launch yet.

据相关信息，该公司即将提交IPO招股说明书。

According to the information, the company aims to file its IPO prospectus imminently.

据报道，其目标估值为1.75万亿美元，并希望在此次发行中筹集750亿美元。

It's reportedly targeting a valuation of $1,750,000,000,000 and hopes to raise $75,000,000,000 in the offering.

这将成为历史上规模最大的IPO。

That would make it the largest IPO in history.

今年早些时候，马斯克将xAI并入SpaceX，而SpaceX此前已收购了社交媒体平台X，这就引出了一个问题：特斯拉是否会成为下一个并入SpaceX集团的马斯克资产？

Earlier this year, Musk merged x AI into SpaceX, which had already absorbed the social media platform X, which begs the question, will Tesla be the next Musk property to join the SpaceX conglomerate?

这里有很多问题。

Lots of questions here.

今天我们邀请到DVx Ventures的首席执行官、前特斯拉总裁、通用汽车董事会成员、新书《算法》的作者乔恩·麦克尼尔来为我们解读。

Here to help us break it down, we are joined by Jon McNeill, CEO of DVx Ventures, former Tesla president, GM board member, and author of the new book, The Algorithm.

乔恩，很高兴见到你。

Jon, good to see you.

我直接进入正题。

I'm gonna get right into this here.

你刚刚出版了一本名为《算法》的书。

You just published a book called The Algorithm.

这本书主要讲述了埃隆是如何打造特斯拉和SpaceX的。

It's basically about how Elon built both Tesla and SpaceX.

现在，SpaceX可能即将上市。

And now SpaceX could be going public.

这可能会成为历史上规模最大的IPO。

It could be the largest IPO in history.

作为曾经与埃隆共事过、并写过这家公司的作者，你如何看待这家公司即将上市？

As someone who has worked with Elon and as someone who's written about this company, what do you make of this company now going public?

这种理念和算法的基础是简单性，而这也是埃隆的组织原则——简单性。

Well, the basis of the approach and the algorithm is simplicity, and that's Elon's organizing principle is simplicity.

我认为特斯拉可能会与SpaceX合并，成为其一部分，原因可能有三个。

So I think there might be three reasons why Tesla may become a part of SpaceX and these entities might combine.

我没有内部消息，但这三个理由都相当重要。

I don't have any inside knowledge, but but these three, reasons are pretty significant.

首先是，运营一家上市公司比运营两家更容易。

So the first is it's easier to run one public company than two.

这正是第一个简单性论点。

And so that is that simplicity argument number one.

但我认为，在这背后，它还解决了几个问题。

But I think beneath that, it solves a couple of problems.

特斯拉本质上正在转型为一家自动驾驶公司，涉及人形机器人和汽车机器人。

Tesla is essentially becoming, an autonomy company, in terms of humanoid robots and car robots.

因此，这两者都依赖人工智能作为其操作系统。

And so both of those things rely on AI as their operating system.

因此，正如你所知，特斯拉今年早些时候投资了20亿美元进入X公司。

And so Tesla, as you know, invested $2,000,000,000 into X earlier this year.

但将特斯拉、SpaceX和X合并为一个实体，能让人工智能资源更贴近特斯拉的应用场景。

But combining the entities of Tesla, SpaceX, and X into one entity would put the AI resources closer to the application at Tesla.

所以我认为这是第二个原因。

So I think that's a second reason.

第三个原因是，人们一直热议埃隆对他所持特斯拉股份比例的不满。

And a third reason is, is, you know, there's been a lot of talk about Elon's frustration with his, his portion of the cap table at Tesla.

他希望拥有更多股份，而合并特斯拉似乎能解决这个问题，尤其是考虑到他在SpaceX拥有大量股权。

He wants more, And this would seemingly help to solve that problem, of combining Tesla in, given his significant SpaceX ownership.

他可以通过这一举措一举解决特斯拉控股股东身份的问题。

He would sort of solve the problem of who the majority shareholder is at Tesla in when one move.

所以我认为这三方面因素表明，此事发生的可能性超过50%。

So I think those three things probably point to this being a higher than 50% chance of happening.

你把Lyft上市了。

You took Lyft public.

你曾是这家公司的首席运营官。

You you were the the company's COO.

所以你亲身经历了IPO。

So you were there for an IPO.

我的意思是，作为旁观者，如果你试图将SpaceX与Tesla合并，如果SpaceX已经是独立的上市公司，难道不会更难吗？

I mean, just as an observer here, if you're trying to combine SpaceX with Tesla, is it not gonna be a lot harder if SpaceX is its own public company?

它还有所有的新监管要求。

It has all of its new regulations.

那时你已经引入了大量散户投资者。

You got all these retail investors in the mix at that point.

为什么他们不现在就把这两家公司合并呢？

Why wouldn't they they just combine the two things now?

为什么先让它上市？这难道不会让未来的事情变得更复杂吗？

Why take it public first, and will that not make things more complicated down the road?

你说得对，埃德。

You're right, Ed.

在SpaceX上市后这样做会变得更加复杂。

It makes it more complicated to do it post the SpaceX IPO.

并非不可能，但会更复杂。

Not impossible, but more complicated.

你会引入额外的监管层，而现在你只需要监管一家公司，而不是将来两家。

You invite in, I think, an extra layer of regulators, whereas you have one company to to look at now, versus two then.

所以我认为现在做这件事更容易，但我不确定他们是否想放慢速度，因为埃隆设定了一个底线——他希望在生日之前完成这件事。

So I think, I think it is easier now to do, but I'm not sure they wanna slow this down because Elon's got, this line in the sand where he wants this done by his birthday.

关于这里的估值，1.75万亿美元。

Just on the, the valuation here, $1,750,000,000,000.

这将使其成为全球第七大价值的公司。

That would make it the seventh most valuable company in the world.

这将使其比Meta更有价值。

That would make it more valuable than Meta.

这还会使它比特斯拉更有价值，这相当引人注目。

It would also make it more valuable than Tesla, which is quite striking.

我很想听听你对这个估值目标的看法，他们瞄准的是1.75万亿美元。

I'd love to get your reactions to this, valuation target that they're shooting for, $1,750,000,000,000.

你觉得这合理吗？

Does that make sense to you?

如果你先拆解一下，把各个部分加起来，你会看到SpaceX业务在发射领域占据了90%的市场份额，在卫星互联网领域则接近99%。

If you break it down first and say, let's add up the pieces, you've got, the SpaceX business, which has got 90% market share in launch and call it 99% market share in satellite Internet.

因此，这个业务中拥有两个近乎垄断的地位。

So two kind of monopoly positions in that business.

然后还有xAI，它正与OpenAI等估值达万亿美元级别的公司竞争，而Anthropic的估值可能接近7500亿美元。

And then you've got x AI, which is competing in the world of the kind of trillion dollar valuations of, OpenAI, and then, maybe 3 quarters of 1,000,000,000,000 for Anthropic.

所以，把这两部分结合起来，我认为很大程度上要依赖散户投资者，让他们忽略任何能支撑这一估值的基本财务指标，这或许正是他们为散户保留了三分之一IPO份额的原因。

So putting those two pieces together, you've gotta depend, I think, a lot on retail investors to look past any fundamental financial metrics on what would justify that valuation, which I think is why they're reserving a third of the IPO for retail.

我认为，他们不仅需要散户的需求来支撑估值，而且正如你之前提到的，这将是历史上规模最大的融资，高达750亿美元。

I think they they need that retail demand not only for the valuation, but to your early point, this is gonna be the largest capital raise, in history with $75,000,000,000.

所以他们需要机构投资者和散户投资者都参与进来，才能填满这个订单簿。

So they're gonna need everybody from institutions to retail investors coming to the table to fill in that, that book.

这是一个非常大的订单簿。

That's a big, big order book.

在我看来，他显然是个精通诸多领域的高手，但这里有一个批评声音：他擅长让我们忽视基本面，而这正是SpaceX目前正在发生的情况。

It seems to me that I mean, is clearly a mass master of a lot of things, but this is kind of a criticism here, incoming, is that he's kind of a master of getting us to not look at the fundamentals, which is exactly what is happening with SpaceX here.

我的意思是，你看看基本面，他们大约有150亿美元的收入。

I mean, you look at the fundamentals, the fact that they've I mean, I think they did around $15,000,000,000 in revenue.

但他们却获得了1.75万亿美元的估值。

They won a 1,750,000,000,000 valuation.

到了这个地步，你只能说：是的。

At which point you say, yes.

因为这完全是另一门生意。

Because this is an entirely different business.

这是太空领域。

This is space.

这将改变世界。

This is gonna change the world.

当我们开始讨论将SpaceX与特斯拉合并的想法时，在我看来，这听起来像是某种基本面洗白，目的是让我们忘记特斯拉目前的销量并不理想，转而关注未来，对这些前景感到兴奋，从而愿意为这些股票支付超高的估值倍数。

And then when we start to talk about the idea of merging SpaceX with Tesla, to me, it starts to sound like we're doing a lot of fundamentals laundering of some kind to basically make us forget about the fact that Tesla sales are not that great right now and make us start to look into the future and get all excited about all these things such that we are down to pay extraordinary multiples, for these for these shares.

你难道不觉得这可能正是正在发生的事情吗？这难道不会让你感到些许不安吗？

Would you not say that that is perhaps what is happening here, and does that not make you, I don't know, a little bit uncomfortable maybe?

我会说，我从未见过像埃隆这样擅长炒作的人。

I would say I've never met somebody as good at their promote as Elon.

他太出色了。

He is incredible.

说到这一点，特斯拉是一个销量和利润率都在下滑的汽车业务。

And to your point, like Tesla is a declining car business with declining margins.

过去两年里，利润率下降了一半，但它的市值却是其他所有汽车公司市值总和的两倍。

Margins have fallen by half in the last two years, and yet it's worth, twice as much as all other car companies combined.

因此，他有一种能力，能让人们违背金融逻辑，接受这些估值。

And and so he has got an ability to get people to defy financial logic, around these val these valuations.

我认为，有很多人因为做空特斯拉或没有参与特斯拉而亏了很多钱。

And I think, you know, there are plenty of people that have lost a lot of money saying I'm either short or I'm not participating in in Tesla.

我学会了不要与他对抗，但他确实独一无二，能够让人忽视财务指标和基本面。

And I've learned not to bet against the guy, but he is unique in his ability to, to get people to look fat past financial metrics and financial fundamentals.

你认为这对汽车行业意味着什么？

What do you think this means for the automobile industry?

显然，这正是你的专长所在。

Obviously, that's really your expertise here.

如果特斯拉与SpaceX合并，我的意思是，如果我们真的将这两者结合起来，这对其他车企，比如通用汽车，会有什么后续影响吗？

If Tesla were to merge with SpaceX, I mean, if we're really combining those two things, does that have any downstream implications for the other players for, say, GM?

我看不出有什么影响，因为我们都在朝着同一个生存问题冲刺，那就是自动驾驶和工厂自动化，以与中国竞争。

I can't see any, in the sense that we're all kind of racing towards the same existential issue, which is autonomous cars and, and factory automation to compete with the Chinese.

这两件事应该是每家汽车制造商都该关注的核心问题。

That those are the two issues that ought to be on every, car manufacturer's mind.

我认为这并不会改变这一格局。

And, I don't think it changes that, that dynamic at all.

而这些显然也是埃隆为特斯拉指明的两个方向。

And those are clearly the two things that Elon's got Tesla pointed out as well.

好的。

Alright.

乔恩·麦克尼尔，DVx Ventures的首席执行官，新书《算法》的作者。

Jon McNeill, CEO of DVx Ventures, author of the new book, The Algorithm.

我拿到了一本。

I got a copy.

我没带在身上，但放在我家公寓里了。

I don't have it with me, but I have it at my apartment.

谢谢你寄给我这本书，乔恩。

I appreciate you sending it to me, Jon.

非常感谢你抽出时间。

Really appreciate your time.

很高兴和你聊天，埃德。

Great to talk to you, Ed.

在结束之前，简要更新一下伊朗战争的情况。

Before we end, a quick update on the Iran War.

截至本周，我们已经正式进入战争状态超过一个月。

As of this week, we have officially been at war for more than a month.

这是冲突的第五周。

This is week five of the conflict.

作为提醒，我们现在已远远超过特朗普当初声称这场战争会持续的时间。

And just as a reminder, we are now officially over the amount of time Trump said this war would last.

在第二天，特朗普告诉我们，这场战争将耗时‘四周或更短’。

On day two, Trump told us this would take, quote, four weeks or less.

他后来单独对《纽约时报》表示，战争将持续四到五周。

He then separately told the New York Times that it would take four to five weeks.

皮特·海格塞斯也跟进表示，‘这可不是伊拉克战争。’

Pete Hegseth also followed up and said, quote, this is not Iraq.

这不会没完没了。

This is not endless.