以下是内容的中文翻译： 安妮·杜克（Annie Duke），一位前职业扑克牌手和决策顾问，探讨了她的著作《对赌：在不确定性下做出更好的决策》（"Thinking in Bets"）背后的灵感，并探讨了人们在做出合理判断时面临的挑战，以及如何改进一个人的决策过程。 杜克解释说，她对决策的兴趣源于她认知科学的学术背景，她在那里研究了我们的大脑如何处理信息。在暂时涉足职业扑克之后，她意识到扑克成为了研究不确定性下决策的天然实验室。她观察到，即使在快速反馈的环境中，人们也常常难以从错误中吸取教训。这一认识激发了她帮助他人做出更好决策的愿望，即将她的扑克经验与她的学术知识相结合。 她指出，决策中的一个重要问题是不确定性，它源于隐藏的信息和运气的干预。虽然完美的信息很少能获得，但即使有完整的信息，运气也会影响结果。她还指出，人类并不是很好的聚合器，常常根据单次试验的情况做出决策，而不是等待更多的数据。 杜克详细阐述了决策错误的进化根源。她强调了第一类错误（假阳性）的普遍性，导致人们感知到并不存在的因果关系。人类天生具有部落性，这在处理来自群体外部的信息时会产生问题。最后，个人倾向于确认预先存在的信念，而不是证伪它们。这些因素的结合导致了做出理性决策的挑战。 她强调了动机推理，在这种推理中，人们积极寻求确认其信念的信息，并否定与其信念相矛盾的信息。特别是，当我们所属的群体决定哪些信息来源被认为是可信的时候，就会出现回音室效应。杜克建议应用一个名为普遍主义的原则，将信息传递者与信息本身分离，以客观地评估信息。 杜克提出以“对赌”的方式思考，作为改进决策的一种方法。她认为，每一个决策都是一个赌注，它基于对未来可能结果的信念。通过认识到这一点，个人会被迫面对不确定性，并更加开放地思考。将决策明确地框架为一个赌注，可以鼓励概率思维，并促使人们思考自己可能出错的原因。 当赌注没有奏效时，杜克建议不要沉溺于“后见之明偏误”（resulting），也就是用结果来逆向衡量决策的质量。她主张尽可能忽略结果，而专注于决策过程本身。她还建议组建一个“真理寻求小组”，以帮助识别偏见、在结果出来之前评估决策，并从不同的角度分析决策。 她讨论了技能和运气的因素，并鼓励人们像菲尔·艾维（Phil Ivey）一样，即使在获胜后也要分析自己的错误，而不是将成功归因于技能，将失败归因于坏运气。通过专注于决策过程的质量，个人可以学习和进步，无论结果如何。同样重要的是，不仅要理解做出决策是一种决策，而且在一段时间内不做出决策也同样是一种决策，这需要同样的思考过程。 她强调了群体决策的重要性，因为我们很难看到自己决策中的偏见，而其他人则更容易发现这种偏见。建立一个团队更好，因为这些偏见是会传染的。 最后，她建议使用尤利西斯协议（Ulysses contracts），为未来的偏见做好计划，并提前采取行动，以便未来的你在决策中发挥的影响力更小。

Annie Duke, a former professional poker player and decision-making consultant, discusses the inspiration behind her book, "Thinking in Bets," and explores the challenges people face in making sound judgments, as well as how to improve one's decision-making process. Duke explains that her interest in decision-making stemmed from her academic background in cognitive science, where she studied how our brains process information. After a temporary departure into professional poker, she realized it served as a natural laboratory for studying decision-making under uncertainty. She observed that even in a setting with rapid feedback, people often struggled to learn from their mistakes. This realization fueled her desire to help others make better decisions by merging her poker experience with her academic knowledge. She points out that a significant problem in decision-making is uncertainty, which arises from hidden information and the intervention of luck. While perfect information is rarely available, even with complete information, luck can influence outcomes. She also noted that humans are not very good aggregators and often make decisions based on one-trial scenarios instead of waiting for more data. Duke elaborates on the evolutionary roots of decision-making errors. She highlights the prevalence of type 1 errors (false positives), leading people to perceive causal relationships where none exist. Humans are inherently tribal, which creates problems in processing information from outside their group. Lastly, individuals tend to confirm pre-existing beliefs rather than disconfirming them. This combination of factors contributes to the challenge of making rational decisions. She emphasizes motivated reasoning, where people actively seek information that confirms their beliefs and discredit information that contradicts them. In particular, the problem of echo chambers arises when the group we belong to dictates which information sources are considered trustworthy. Duke recommends applying a principle called universalism, separating the messenger from the message, to evaluate information objectively. Duke proposes thinking in terms of bets as a way to improve decision-making. She argues that every decision is a bet informed by beliefs about possible future outcomes. By recognizing this, individuals are forced to confront uncertainty and be more open-minded. Explicitly framing a decision as a bet encourages probabilistic thinking and prompts consideration of why one might be wrong. When a bet doesn't work out, Duke advises against resulting, which is retrofitting decision quality to the outcome. She advocates ignoring the outcome as much as possible and focusing on the decision process itself. She also recommends forming a "true seeking group" to help identify biases, assess decisions before the outcome, and analyze decisions from different perspectives. She discusses the skill and luck factors and encourages people to be like Phil Ivey, analyzing their mistakes even after winning, rather than attributing successes to skill and failures to bad luck. By focusing on the quality of the decision-making process, individuals can learn and improve, regardless of the outcome. It is also equally important to understand not just making a decision is a decision, but not making a decision in a period of time is equally making a decision, which calls on the thought process to be the same. She highlights the importance of making decisions in a group because it's hard to see our own bias in our decision-making, others are better at spotting that bias a mile away. Creating a group is better because, these bias is infectious. Finally, she suggests using Ulysses contracts, planning for future biases, and taking action in advance so future you has less influence in your decision-making.