首页 >> 来自播客: User Upload Audio 更新反馈

Joe Rogan Experience #1309 - Naval Ravikant

发布时间 2019-06-05 02:25:12 来源

中英文字稿

two, one, boom, alright, we're live. Thank you very much for doing this man, I really appreciate it. I've been absorbing your information and listening to you talk for quite a while now, so it's great to actually meet you. Thanks for having me. My pleasure, my pleasure. You are one of the rare guys that is, you're a big investor, you're deep in the tech world, but yet you seem to have a very balanced perspective in terms of how to live life, as opposed to not just be entirely focused on success and financial success and tech investing, but rather how to live your life in a happy way. It's not balanced. Yeah, I think the reason why people like hearing me is because if you go to a circus and you see a bear, that's kind of interesting, but not that much. If you see a unicycle, that's interesting, but you see a bear on a unicycle, that's really interesting, right? So when you combine things, you're not supposed to combine, people get interested. It's like Bruce Lee, striking thoughts, philosophy, plus martial arts. And I think it's because at some level, all humans are broad. We're all multivariate, but we get summarized in pithy ways in our lives, and at some deep level, we know that's not true, right? Every human basically is capable of every experience and every thought. You're UFC comedian, commentator, podcaster, but you're also more than that. You're also father, lover, thinker, et cetera. So I like the model of life that the ancients had, the Greeks, the Romans, right, where you would start out and when you're young, you're just like going to school, then you're going to war, then you're running a business, then you're supposed to serve in the Senate or the government, then you become a philosopher, this sort of this arc to life where you try your hand at everything. And as one of my friends says, specialization is for insects, right? So everyone should just be able to do everything. And so I don't believe in this model anymore of trying to focus your life down on one thing. You've got one life, just do everything you're going to do.

好的，我们开始了。非常感谢你能来，兄弟，我真的很感激。一直以来我都在吸收你的信息，倾听你的演讲，所以能见到你本人真是太好了。感谢你的邀请。我的荣幸，我的荣幸。你是少数几位不仅仅是大投资者，也深耕于科技界的人，却还能在生活方面保持很好的平衡。不只专注于成功或经济利益和科技投资，而是以幸福的方式生活。这种生活方式是不平衡的。我想人们喜欢听我的原因是，如果你去马戏团，看一只熊，可能觉得稍微有趣，但并不是特别吸引人。如果你看到一个独轮车，那也有趣，而如果你看见一只熊在骑独轮车，那就真的很吸引人了，对吧？所以当你把不该结合的东西组合在一起时，人们就会感兴趣。这就像李小龙，把哲学和武术结合起来。我认为在某种程度上，所有人类都很广泛。我们都是多维的，但在生活中却常常被简单地概括。而在内心深处，我们知道这并不是真的，对吧？每个人基本上都有体验和思考各种事情的能力。你是UFC评论员、脱口秀主持人，也是一位父亲、爱人、思想家等。我喜欢古希腊和罗马人的生活模式，他们认为人在年轻时先去学习，然后参军，接着经商，之后应该在参议院或政府任职，然后成为哲学家，这种尝试各种事情的生命历程。正如我一位朋友所说，专一化是昆虫的事情，每个人都应该能够做所有事情。所以我不再相信那种把生活聚焦于某一件事情的模式。你只有一次生命，尽你所能去体验所有事情吧。

I couldn't agree more. And I think that sometimes people find certain success in whatever the endeavor is, and then they think that that is their niche, and they stick with it, and they never change, and they are almost out of fear. It's hard because there's a analogy around mountain climbing. Like if you find a mountain and you start climbing and you spend your whole life climbing it and you get, say, two-thirds of the way, and then you see the peak is like way up there, but you're two-thirds of the way up. You're still really high up, but now to go the rest of the way, you're going to have to go back down to the bottom and look for another path. Nobody wants to do that. People don't want to start over. And it's the nature of later in life that you just done at the time. So it's very painful to go back down and look for a new path, but that may be the best thing to do. And that's why when you look at the greatest artists and creators, they have this ability to start over that nobody else does. Like Elon will be called an idiot and start over doing something brand new that he supposedly is not qualified for. Or when Madonna or Paul Simon are you to come out with a new album, their existing fans usually hate it because they've adopted a completely new style that they've learned somewhere else. And a lot of times they'll just miss completely. So you have to be willing to be a fool and kind of have that beginner's mind and go back to the beginning to start over. And if you're not doing that, you're just getting older. Yeah, I mean, I don't even know if it's willing to be a fool. It's just to me that the most exciting thing is to try to get better at something and to learn things. I mean, it's really exciting when you just have incremental progress in something that you're completely new to.

我完全同意。我认为有时候人们在某个领域取得了一定的成功之后，他们就会认为那就是他们的定位，于是坚持不变，几乎是出于恐惧。这种感觉就像登山，如果你发现一座山并开始攀登，用了一生时间爬到大约三分之二的高度，却看到山顶还在遥远的上方。虽然已经爬得很高了，但要想继续往上爬，你可能需要重新回到底部寻找新的路。然而，没有人愿意这样做，人们不想重新开始。而到了人生的后期，你已经没有太多时间了，所以重新下山寻找新的路非常痛苦，但这可能是最好的做法。这就是为什么当你看伟大的艺术家和创造者时，他们拥有一种别人没有的重新开始的能力。比如，马斯克可能会被称作疯子，去做些他看似不擅长的新事物，或者像麦当娜和保罗·西蒙这样的人发布新专辑时，他们的现有粉丝通常会不喜欢，因为他们采用了从别处学来的全新风格，而很多时候，他们甚至会彻底失败。所以，你必须愿意当个傻子，保持初学者的心态，回到起点重新开始。如果不这样，你只是变老而已。我甚至觉得这不光是愿意当傻子的问题，对我来说，最让人兴奋的就是努力去提高自己和学习新东西。即便在全新的领域中有些微小的进步，都会令人感到非常兴奋。

Yeah, I live for the aha moment, that moment when you connect two things together, that you hadn't connected together before and it fits nicely and solidly and it kind of helps form a steel framework of understanding in your mind that you can then hang other ideas off of. That's what I live for. It's like curiosity fulfilled. It's what little children do too. My little son is always asking why, why, why, why, why. And I always try to answer him and half the times I realize actually I don't really understand why I just have a memorized answer for you, but that's not really understanding. Yeah, those are weird conversations. When you're talking to your kids and you say, look, the reality is I don't know a lot of things.

是的，我活着是为了那种“顿悟时刻”，当你把以前没有联系在一起的两个事物连接起来，它们完美契合，形成一种坚固的理解框架，可以悬挂其他想法的时候。这就是我生活的意义。这就像满足了好奇心。这也是小孩子常做的事情。我的小儿子总是问“为什么，为什么，为什么”，而我总是尽量回答他，但有一半时候我意识到其实自己并不真正理解原因，只是背下了一个答案，那并不是真正的理解。是啊，那些对话很奇怪。当你和孩子们谈话时，你会说：“看，现实是我有很多东西都不知道。”

Yeah, I've just memorized a lot of things. And there's certain things that you just can't know. Yeah, you realize that you have answers for a few things that you've thought through, then you sort of have coverups like trapdoors, like don't go here. This is just a coverup. I don't really know the answer to what the meaning of life is or how we got here. Yes. I've got a whole bunch of memorized stuff because a lot of your, a lot of intelligence these days, just the external brain pack of civilization. I know it's out there. I know the answers are out there. I know how to look them up and I've memorized some of them.

是的，我只是记住了很多东西。有些事情是你无法知道的。你会发现自己对某些经过思考的问题有答案，但有些问题你会避开，就像有陷阱门似的，不要去碰。这只是个掩饰。我其实不知道生命的意义或者我们是怎么来到这里的。我记住了许多东西，因为在当今社会，很多智力只是来源于文明社会的知识储备库。我知道这些答案存在，我知道如何查找，并且记住了一些。

I kind of understand how money works in the Federal Reserve of Prince it and what this government thing is, but not really. Right. So not good enough to teach it in university. Exactly. Yeah. I think people do that with almost everything in life these days in terms of like have a one page, a one sheet, like a brief summary of what and the explanation for what this very complex subject might be. TLDR, right? Yes. Don't give me the lecture. Give me the book. Don't give me the blog post. Don't give me the blog post. Give me the tweet. Don't give me the tweet. I just, I already know.

我大概理解联邦储备如何发行货币以及政府的运作，但并不是很清楚。对吧。所以，还达不到能在大学里讲授的程度。确实如此。我觉得现在很多人对生活中的几乎所有事情都是这样处理的，比如用一页纸写下这复杂主题的简要总结和解释。简而言之，就是不要给我一整堂课，而是给我一本书摘要；不要给我一篇博客文章，而是给我一条推文；甚至连推文都不用，因为我已经知道了。

Yeah. I got really fascinated by the way you read because I thought there was something wrong with me by doing that, but you, you don't really just read a book to completion. You read and then you pick something else up and you just kind of go based on your whims, whatever you're interested in. Well, I was raised by my, I was raised by a single mom in New York and she used the local library as a daycare center because it was a very tough neighborhood. And so she would basically say, when you get back from school, go straight to the library and don't come out until I pick you up late at night.

好的。我对你阅读的方式感到非常着迷，因为我之前以为自己那样做是不对的。但其实你并不是要把一本书从头到尾读完，而是根据自己的兴趣随意挑选书籍。我是在纽约由单身母亲抚养长大的，她把当地的图书馆当作托儿所，因为我们住的社区环境很艰难。所以她经常跟我说，放学后直接去图书馆，等晚上她来接我之前都不要出来。

So I used to basically live in the library and I read everything. I read every magazine. I read every pictograph or every book or every map. I just ran out of stuff to read. I just read everything. So I got over this idea of that reading a large number of books or reading a book to completion as a vanity metric because really when people are putting up photos on Twitter Instagram of look at my pile of books that I'm reading, it's a show off thing. It's a signaling thing.

我过去基本上是住在图书馆里，什么都读。我读过每一本杂志，每一个图画，每一本书，甚至每一张地图。我就是把能读的东西全都读完了。所以我不再认为读很多书或者把一本书读完是一种炫耀的资本。因为现在很多人在推特或Instagram上晒自己的读书照片，其实就是在炫耀，是一种信号展示。

Yeah, sure. And the reality is I would rather read the best hundred books over and over again until I absorbed them rather than read all the books. Right. Yeah. Because your brain has finite information, in finite space, you get enough advice at all cancels to zero. There's a lot of nonsense in books out there too. So I don't read any more to complete books. I read to satisfy my genuine intellectual curiosity. And it can be anything.

是的，当然。实际上，我宁愿反复阅读那一百本最好的书，直到我彻底掌握它们，也不愿意去读所有的书。对，因为我们的大脑容量有限，吸收太多的信息会导致信息相互抵消为零。市面上也有很多书是没有价值的废话。所以我现在不再为了读完一本书而读书，我阅读是为了满足自己真正的求知欲。这可以是任何内容。

It could be nonsense. It could be history. It could be fiction. It could be science. It could be sci-fi. These days it's mostly sci-fi philosophy science because that's just what I'm interested in. But I will read for understanding. So a really good book, I will flip through. I won't actually read it consecutively in order and I won't even just even finish it. I'm looking for ideas, things that I don't understand. And when I find something really interesting, I'll reflect on it. I'll research it. And then when I'm bored of it, I'll drop it or I'll flip to another book.

这可能是无稽之谈，也可能是历史、小说或科学。也可能是科幻。最近我大多在看科幻哲学科学书，因为我对这些特别感兴趣。但我读书时主要是为了理解。所以即使是一部好书，我也会随手翻翻，不会按顺序从头到尾读完。我在寻找那些我不理解的想法。当我发现某些特别有趣的内容时，我会思考并研究它。而当我感到厌倦了，我会放下它，或者翻到另一本书去看。

Thanks to electronic books, I've got 50, 70 books open at any time in my Kindle or iBooks and I'm just bouncing around between them. It's also a little bit of a defense mechanism to how in modern society we get too much information too quickly. And so our attention spans are very low. So you get Twitter, you get Instagram, you get Facebook, you just used to being bombarded with information. So you can view that as a negative and be like, I have no attention span or you could view that as a positive.

感谢电子书的存在，我可以在Kindle或iBooks上同时打开50至70本书，并在它们之间来回切换。这在某种程度上也是一种防御机制，帮助我应对现代社会中过量的信息轰炸，这使我们的专注力变得很低。我们习惯了被各种信息如Twitter、Instagram和Facebook淹没。你可以将此视为一个负面的现象，比如说觉得自己没有专注力，或者你也可以将其视为一个积极的方面。

I multitask really well and I can dig really fast. If I find a thread that's interesting, I can follow through five social networks, through the web, through the libraries, through the books and I can really get to the bottom of this thing very quickly. It's like the library of Alexandria that I can research in my disposal. So I no longer track books read or even care about books read. It's about understanding concepts. Yeah, you brought up two awesome points. First of all, the social media aspect of books and basically anything. It's such a weird way to display your life because you're displaying the best aspects of your life and some sort of a glass case. It's an unrealistic version of your life that you cultivate and you curate.

我擅长同时处理多项任务，还能快速深入研究。如果我发现一个有趣的话题，我可以在五个社交网络上、通过网络、图书馆、书籍深入追踪，迅速弄清事情的真相。这就像可以随时查阅的亚历山大图书馆一样。因此，我不再追踪或在意读过多少书，重要的是理解概念。你提到了两个重要的观点。首先，书籍和几乎一切的社交媒体性质。通过社交媒体展示生活是一种奇怪的方式，因为你在展示生活中最好的一面，就像在展示柜里。这是一种你精心打造和挑选的、不太现实的生活版本。

And I'm as guilty of that as anybody. Everybody's guilty of it. I'm guilty of it too. I mean, I pose with my dog every time I run. Yeah. We're always signaling. Yes. It's like rather than really looking at yourself, you're looking at how other people look at you. It's like this one remove mental image. And it's kind of a disease because social media is making celebrities of all of us and celebrity is the most miserable people in the world.

我和其他人一样对此感到内疚。每个人都犯过这样的错。我也不例外。我是说，每次我跑步的时候都会和我的狗合影。是的，我们总是在传达某种信号。就像是与其真正审视自己，不如去关注别人怎么看待你。这就像是一个经过一层过滤的自我形象。这种现象就像是一种病，因为社交媒体让我们每个人都变成了名人，而名人却是这个世界上最不快乐的人。

Because they have this strong self image that gets built up. It gets built up by compliments. Every time somebody pays you or me a compliment and we're like, oh, well, thank you. Then that builds up an image of who we are. And then one idiot comes along, one out of 10, one out of 100, and they can easily tear it down because it doesn't take many insults to cancel out a lot of compliments.

因为他们内心自我形象很强，这个形象是通过赞美建立起来的。每当有人称赞你或我，我们回应：“哦，谢谢你。” 这样就逐渐塑造了我们的自我形象。然而，只需一个愚蠢的人，可能是十个、甚至一百个人中才有一个，就能轻易摧毁它。因为再多的赞美，也抵挡不住几句刻薄的批评。

And now you're carrying around this big weighty self image and it's just very easy to be attacked. And because you're famous or you're well known, people want to attack you. So being a celebrity is no good. It's actually a problem. So my tweets is these are all reminders to myself is you want to be rich and anonymous, not poor and famous. There's benefits to it. Of course, of course. But we wouldn't do it. It has unusual problems that you don't get trained for. And you really will not understand unless you experience it.

现在你背负着一个沉重的自我形象，这让你很容易受到攻击。因为你有名或你是公众人物，人们就想攻击你。所以，做名人并不好，实际上这是一种麻烦。我的推文只是给自己的一些提醒，希望自己富有而默默无闻，而不是贫穷却出名。当然，做名人也有好处，但如果可以选择，我们不会这么做。它带来了一些不寻常的问题，而这些问题是你无法提前学习应对的。除非你亲身经历，否则你真的无法理解。

You know, I was having this conversation with my wife. We were talking about people that just come up to you and they don't care what you're doing. They don't care if I'm with my daughter. If I'm holding her, if I'm feeding her, if we're, you know, we're in the middle of an intense conversation, she's crying. She could be crying. And some bro will come over and just immediately have to take a picture. Doesn't care. His needs supersede the daughter.

你知道吗，我之前和我妻子聊过这个话题。我们说到那些不管你在做什么就过来打扰你的人。他们不在乎我是不是和我女儿在一起，不管我是不是在抱着她，喂她，还是我们正在进行一次重要的谈话，甚至她正在哭。有些家伙就非要过来拍照，一点都不在乎。他自己的需求排在我女儿之前。

And my wife was saying that before she knew me, she used to think that that's just part of the price of being famous, that people, people like you, that's just part of the price of being famous. And now when it interrupts her life. And you know, it interrupts the children and it interrupts friends. And you know, she now she's like, this is annoying. Like this is not, this is not healthy. This is not a smart way to interact with people and that people have this weird challenge. This weird thing that if you're, if you become famous, there's this weird challenge where people just want to come to you, especially today, because if they can get a photo of you, then that boosts their social media profile.

我妻子说，在认识我之前，她曾认为成为名人就必须承受这些，觉得被人喜欢是名人必须付出的代价。然而现在这些事情影响到了她的生活，也打扰到了孩子和朋友，她觉得这实在让人烦恼。这种情况对互动不是很健康，也不算明智，因为名人面临一个奇怪的挑战，尤其是在今天，人们总想接近你，因为如果他们能和你合影，他们的社交媒体形象就能提升。

Like, hey, I'm sitting here with the vol. Look at this. And anonymity is a privilege. On the other hand, it's self-inflicted. I mean, we brought it on ourselves. Yeah. I don't think we knew what it was though. We did, but we carry on. So it tells us we are getting something out of it. So you know, there are times when someone approached me in public and I'm a little resentful. And then other times, I'm just like, actually, I'm really grateful that, you know, I worked for this. I got this. Right. This is the payoff. Just embrace it, smile, grin, bear it, meet some of them.

就像，嘿，我坐在这里，看看这个。而匿名是一种特权。不过，从另一面看，这是自找的。我是说，这都是我们自己造成的。是的。我觉得我们当时并不知道那是什么。其实我们知道，但我们还是继续这样做。所以这说明我们从中得到了某种东西。有时候，有人在公共场合接近我，我有点不满。但在其他时候，我又觉得很感激，因为我为此努力过，我得到了这样的结果。对，这就是回报。就接受它吧，微笑，面对，和他们中的一些人见面。

But you have a different sort of celebrity too, right? But you're a hero amongst investors and amongst, I mean, you've just been a part of. I'm a hero among young male geeks. Those are some of my favorite people. Right. But that's not the kind of celebrity I think most people set out to get, especially most guys, right? You want the cute females. Yeah. You want chicks? Yeah. I look at my brief little YouTube clips. I have a tiny little podcast going now. And it's like 95% male. Oh, for sure. Yeah. This is very highly. 18 to 35. Yeah. What is the numbers? It's in the 90s. Yeah. You do that one very small podcast where you just have small, like three or four minute clips. Yeah. So what it was, I did a tweet storm called How to Get Rich Without Getting Lucky. And it got pretty popular on Twitter. And it's really about wealth creation.

但你也有另一种名气，对吗？不过你在投资者中可是个英雄，我是说，你已经成为其中的一部分。我在年轻的男性极客中是个英雄。他们是我最喜欢的人群之一。对吧。不过这不是大多数人想要的那种名气，尤其是大多数男性，对不对？大家都想吸引漂亮的女性。是的。你想吸引女生吗？对。我看看我的短视频和播客。我的观众几乎有95%是男性。哦，肯定的。大多数都在18到35岁之间。具体比例是多少？大概在90%以上。你做的那个很小的播客，就是只有三到四分钟的小片段。对。我曾经在推特上发了一系列叫做《如何在不靠运气的情况下致富》的推文，反响还不错，主要是关于财富创造的。

I just use the Clickbait title. And it's trying to basically lay out timeless principles of wealth creation that if you absorb them, you become the kind of person who can create wealth, create business, make money. And my theory behind that is like there are three things everybody wants. There's actually more than three. But let's just start with three. Three basics. Everybody wants to be wealthy. Everybody wants to be happy. And everybody wants to be fit. And I know there's a lot of virtue signal that goes on. Like we don't want to money and, you know, I don't care about being happy and happiness is for stupid people.

我用了一个标题党式的标题，主要是为了介绍一些关于创造财富的永恒原则。如果你能理解这些原则，你就能成为那种能创造财富、建立事业、赚取金钱的人。我的理论是，每个人都有三个基本的愿望，虽然其实不止三个，但我们先从三个开始。三个基本愿望是：每个人都想富有，每个人都想快乐，每个人都希望拥有健康的身体。我知道很多人会对此表示反感，比如说他们不在乎金钱，或者觉得快乐是愚蠢的追求。

But let's face it, like you want to be rich and happy and healthy. Yeah. And that's a lot more effective. Now, of course, you also want to internally calm state of mind. You want a loving household. So there are other things that come into it. But those three, I think they can actually be taught, right? And a fitness, I'm not going to teach. There are a lot of people who you've had on here, including yourself, who know a heck of a lot more about fitness and health than I do.

但我们得面对现实，比如说，你想要富有、快乐和健康。是啊，这样会更有效。当然，你也想要内心的平静、和睦的家庭。所以，还有其他因素需要考虑。但我觉得这三者实际上是可以教授的，对吧？至于健身，我可教不了。有很多在座的人，包括你自己，对健身和健康比我了解得多得多。

But I was born poor in miserable. And I'm now pretty well off and I'm very happy. And I worked at those. And so I've learned a few things. There are some principles. And so I try to lay them out. But in a timeless manner, where you can kind of figure it out yourself. Because at the end of the day, I can't really teach anything. I can only inspire you and maybe give you a few hooks so you can remember things when they happen or put a name to them.

我出生时家境贫寒，生活困苦。而现在，我生活得相对不错且非常幸福。这一切都是通过努力实现的，因此我学到了一些东西。有一些原则，因此我试着将它们整理出来。但我希望以一种永恒的方式呈现，这样你可以自己理解。因为归根结底，我并不能真正教给你什么，只能激励你，并提供一些记忆的线索，让你在遇到相应情况时想起或关联到这些原则。

So this podcast actually ended up explaining this tweet storm. So the tweet storm was like 36, 38 tweets, got very famous, got translated dozens of languages. And these were principles that I came up with for myself when I was really young, around 13, 14. And I've been carrying them in my head for 30 years. And I'd been sort of living them. And over time, I just realized like, sadly or fortunately, the thing that I got really good at was looking at businesses and figuring out the point of maximum leverage to actually create wealth and capture some of that.

这个播客实际上最终解释了这一系列推文。这些推文大概有36到38条，非常有名，被翻译成数十种语言。这些是我在很年轻的时候，大约13、14岁时，为自己制定的原则，我把它们在脑子里牢记了30年，并一直在实践。随着时间的推移，我逐渐意识到，无论是不幸还是有幸，我最擅长的是观察企业，找出能够真正创造财富并捕获部分财富的最大杠杆点。

And do it in a very long term kind of way. Not the banker crash the economy, get build out kind of way. But build businesses and help people and provide value kind of way. Especially when applied to modern technology and leverage in this age of infinite leverage that we live in. So the podcast is just explaining each tweet. So these are little three, four, five minutes snippets. I don't like to say the same thing twice. I don't like to explain in detail. I feel like if you have something original and interesting to say you should say it. Otherwise, it's probably been said better.

以一种非常长远的方式来做这件事，而不是像银行家那样搞垮经济，然后接受救助的方式。而是以建设业务，帮助他人，并提供价值的方式。特别是当应用到现代科技和利用我们所处的这个无限杠杆的时代时。这个播客就是在解释每条推文，所以每段内容都很短，仅有三到五分钟。我不喜欢重复说同样的事情，也不喜欢详细解释。我觉得如果你有一些原创和有趣的观点，就应该直接说出来，否则可能已经有人更好地表达过了。

So that podcast tries to be information dense. It tries to be very concise. It tries to be high impact. It tries to be timeless. And it has all the information. I think you need the principles that if you absorb these and you work hard over 10 years, you get what you want. So I've got the one on wealth creation. I'm going to attempt to do one on happiness is a big word, but you know, happiness and inner peace and calm and all that. Because what you want is you don't want to be the guy who succeeds in life while being high strung, high stress and unhappy and leaving the trail of emotional wreckage with you and your loved ones, which is more common than not.

那档播客尽量信息密集，非常简洁，旨在产生强大影响，并且内容经得起时间考验，包含了所有必要的信息。我认为，如果你能够吸收这些原则，并在10年内努力工作，就能实现你的目标。我已经制作了关于财富创造的内容，接下来我打算讨论幸福，这个词很大，但我会谈论幸福、内心的平和与宁静。因为我们不想成为那种在生活中虽然成功但总是紧张、压力大、不快乐，还给自己和亲人留下情感创伤的人，而这样的情况比比皆是。

Because you got to focus and it's very hard to be great at everything. You want to be the guy or the gal who gets there calmly, quietly without struggle. You want to be the person who's the when there's a crisis going on. You want to be the calmest, coolest cucumber in the room who still also figures out the correct answer. If you can be. One of the things that you were saying is that you feel like happiness is something that you can learn and then you can teach yourself to be happy even just by adopting the mindset that you are a happy person and proclaiming that to your friends. And so you've sort of developed a social contract. I'm a happy person and they'll have to live up to that.

因为你必须专注，很难在各方面都做到出色。你希望自己能够不费力地、冷静地达到目标，在危机发生时成为那个镇定自若的人。你想成为房间里最冷静、最从容的人，同时还能找到正确的答案。你可以做到这一点。你提到的其中一个想法是，你觉得幸福是一种可以学习的东西，通过培养自己成为一个快乐的人并向朋友宣告这一点，你可以教自己快乐。这样一来，你就似乎形成了一种社交契约：我是一个快乐的人，朋友们也必须适应这一点。

Yeah, I've got hundreds of techniques. But the more. How did you develop that one? Well, there's just a social consistency, right? Students have a need to be highly consistent with their past pronouncements. So the way I started my first tech company was I was in a working inside a larger organization and I told everybody that I was going to go start a company. I was like, I hate this place and we would do my own thing. I'm going to be successful entrepreneur. Six months past, nine months past, then people start, you're still here? I thought you were going to go start a company. Are you relying?

是的，我掌握了数百种技巧。不过，更重要的是，你怎么发展出这个技巧的呢？这其实和一种社会一致性有关，对吧？人们倾向于和过去的承诺保持高度一致。所以，我开始我第一家科技公司的方法是：我当时在一个大公司工作，我告诉所有人我打算出去创业。我说我讨厌这里，我要做我自己的事情，我要成为一个成功的企业家。六个月、九个月过去了，人们开始问：你怎么还在这里？我还以为你要去创业呢。你是在撒谎吗？

Right. That was the implication. So we kind of know this, right? Social contracts are very powerful. Like if you want to give up drinking, right? And you're not serious about it. You'll say, I'm going to cut back. I'm going to have only one drink a night. I'm going to only drink on weekends. You tell yourself, but if you're serious, you'll announce it on Facebook. You'll tell all your friends. You'll tell your wife. You'll say, I'm done drinking. I'm throwing everything out of the house. You'll never see me drink again. When you say that, you know you're serious. So I think a lot of these are choices that we make and happiness is just one of those choices. And this is unpopular to say because there are people who are actually depressed, you know, chemically or what have you. And there are people who don't believe that it's possible because then it creates a responsibility on them. It says, oh, now if I'm you're saying if I'm not happy, that's my fault. Not saying that, but I'm saying that just like fitness can be a choice, health can be a choice, nutrition can be a choice. Working hard and making money can be a choice. Happiness is also a choice. If you're so smart, how come you aren't happy? How can you haven't figured that out? That's my challenge to all the people who think they're so smart and so capable. If you're so smart and capable, why can't you change this? There are a bunch of people though that actually take pleasure in being miserable. There's something about the pursuit of excellence and of success that supersedes all other pursuits that in their eyes, it is the peak, the pinnacle, the most important thing. It's not a trade off. I would argue that it. When I say happy, happy is one of those words that means a zillion different things. It's like love. What does that mean? I love cheese. Yeah. I mean, before I did a little bit more tightly. Let's go back to desire. This is old, old Buddhist wisdom. I'm not saying anything original, but desire to me is a contract that you make with yourself to be unhappy until you get what you want. I keep that in front of mine. I'm unhappy about something. I look for what is the underlying desire that's not being fulfilled. It's okay to have desires. You're a biological creature. You put on this earth. You have to do something. You have to have desires. You have a mission. But don't have too many. Don't pick them up unconsciously. Don't pick them up randomly. Don't have thousands of them. My coffee is too cold. It doesn't taste quite right. I'm not sitting perfectly. Oh, I wish you were warmer. My dog pooped in the lawn. I didn't like that. Whatever it is. Pick your one overwhelming desire. It's okay to suffer over that one. But on all the others, you want to let them go so you can be calm and peaceful and relaxed. Then you'll perform a better job. Most people when you're unhappy, like a depressed person, it's not that they have a very clear calm mind. They're too busy in their mind. The sense of self is too strong. They're sitting indoors all the time. Their mind's working, working, working. They're thinking too much. Well, if you want to be a high performance athlete, how good of an athlete are you going to be if you're always having epileptic seizures? If you're always twitching and running around and jumping and your limbs are flailing out of control. The same way, if you want to be effective in business, you need a clear, calm, cool, collected mind.

好的，这就是其中的含义。我们有点明白这一点，对吧？社会契约是非常有力的。比如说，如果你想戒酒并且并不太认真地对待，你可能会说：“我要减少饮酒，每晚只喝一杯酒，只在周末喝酒。” 但如果你很认真，你会在 Facebook 上宣布，你会告诉所有的朋友，你会告诉你的配偶：“我不再喝酒了，我把家里所有的酒都扔掉了，你再也不会看到我喝酒了。” 这样说的时候，你知道你是认真的。我认为很多事情都是我们自己的选择，而幸福也是其中之一。这种说法可能不受欢迎，因为有的人确实处于化学失调的抑郁中，或者有人认为这不可能做到，因为这对他们来说意味着一种责任——如果不快乐，那是自己的错。我不是这么说，我的意思是，正如健身是可以选择的，健康是可以选择的，营养是可以选择的，努力工作和赚钱是可以选择的，幸福也是一种选择。如果你很聪明，那么为什么不快乐呢？怎么还没找到答案呢？这是我对那些自认为聪明且有能力的人的挑战。如果你如此聪明和有能力，为什么不能改变这一点？有些人实际上从痛苦中获得乐趣。在他们看来，对卓越和成功的追求凌驾于其他追求之上，这是顶峰，最重要的事情。并不是一种权衡。当我谈到“快乐”时，这个词涵盖许多不同的含义，就像“爱”这个词一样。比如“我爱奶酪”，对吧？之前我关注得更紧一些。让我们回到欲望。这是古老的佛教智慧。我说的不是原创的东西，但在我看来，欲望就是和自己达成的一个约定，除非实现它，否则你就会不快乐。我一直记着这一点。当我对某事不满时，我会寻找未能满足的根本欲望。拥有欲望没什么问题，你是一个生物个体，被放在这世上需要做些事情，需要有欲望，需要有目标。但不要有太多欲望，不要无意识地、不经意地去选择，不要有成千上万个。 “我的咖啡太凉了，味道不对，我坐得不够舒服，我希望天气更暖和，我不喜欢狗在草坪上拉屎”。不管是什么，选择一个你非常想要的欲望，为它而奋斗是可以的。但对于其他的，放手，这样你就能保持平和、宁静、从容。这样你能更好地表现。大多数不快乐的人，比如抑郁的人，并不是因为他们的头脑清晰而冷静，而是因为他们的头脑太忙碌，自己的意识太强。他们整天待在室内，思想不停地运转，思虑太多。如果你想成为一名高水平运动员，但总是在抽搐、扑腾，四肢不听使唤，你能成为多优秀的运动员呢？同样，如果你想在商业中取得成效，你需要一个清晰、冷静、从容的头脑。

Warren Buffett plays bridge all day long and goes for walks in the sun. He doesn't sit around constantly loading his brain with non-stop information and getting worked up about every little thing. We live in an age of infinite leverage. What I mean by that is that your actions can be multiplied a thousand-fold either by broadcasting at a podcast or by investing capital or by having people work for you or by writing code. Because of that, the impacts of good decision making are much higher than they used to be because now you can influence thousands or millions of people through your decisions or your code. A clear mind leads to better judgment, leads to better outcome. A happy, calm, peaceful person will make better decisions and have better outcomes. If you want to operate at peak performance, you have to learn how to tame your mind just like you have to learn how to tame your body.

沃伦·巴菲特整天打桥牌，有时在阳光下散步。他不会总是坐着，不停地给大脑加载信息，也不会为每件小事而紧张。我们生活在一个拥有无限杠杆的时代。我指的是，你的行动可以通过播客传播，资本投资，让人们为你工作，或者编写代码，被成千上万倍地放大。正因为如此，做好决策的影响力比以前要大得多，因为现在你可以通过你的决定或代码影响上千甚至上百万的人。清晰的头脑会导致更好的判断，从而带来更好的结果。一个快乐、平静、安详的人会做出更好的决策，并获得更好的结果。如果你想在最佳状态下工作，就必须学会如何驯服你的心智，就像你必须学会如何锻炼你的身体一样。

I love what you're saying. Warren Buffett might not be the best example because he drinks like I think six Coca-Cola is a day and he eats mostly McDonald's. And he's still alive somehow that shows you that low stress is more important than one of them. Yeah, but he looks like shit. How old is he? He's a fairly old man. But Charlie Munger is I think in his 90s, right? He's made it really far. I wonder what Warren's doing. I mean, he's got to know that's bad for him, but he doesn't care. He doesn't care. I think he's just low stress. Stress is the big kid. Right. So he just enjoys that Coca-Cola and that's probably maybe there is a tradeoff, right? Maybe him enjoying that junk food and that Coke just ah, that pleasing of the mind is maybe better than him just eating wheatgrass shots and kale salads and just being just super worked up about everything. It's like if you need your glass of red wine and de-stress and calm down, that's probably better than you flying off the rails.

我喜欢你说的话。用沃伦·巴菲特作为例子可能不太合适，因为他每天好像要喝六罐可乐，并且主要吃麦当劳。但他居然还活得好好的，这说明低压力比饮食更重要。不过他看起来不怎么样。他现在多少岁了？他已经算是个老人了。不过查理·芒格好像已经90多岁了，对吧？他活得够久的。我想知道沃伦是怎么做到的。我是说，他一定知道这样对身体不好，但他似乎并不在乎。他不在乎。我觉得他就是压力小。压力才是关键。所以他就享受喝可乐带来的快乐，也许这就是一种权衡吧。也许享受这些垃圾食品和可乐带来的心理愉悦，比起每天喝麦草汁和吃羽衣甘蓝沙拉然后对一切都战战兢兢要好。这就像如果你需要一杯红酒来放松和冷静，那可能比情绪失控要好。

Right, right. And I think that that's applicable not just in business, but in probably any pursuit. And I like what you're saying about allow that one thing to be your obsession. But everything else just, you know, learn how to learn how to let things go. Pick your battles. And we like to think that we like to view the world as linear, which is I'm going to put in eight hours of work. I'm going to get back eight hours of output, right? Doesn't work that way. Guy running the corner grocery stores working just as hard or harder than you and me. How much output is he getting? What you do, who you do with, how you do it, way more important than how hard you work, right? Outputs are non-linear based on the quality of the work that you put in. The right way to work is like a lion. You don't, you and I are not like cows. We're not meant to graze all day, right? We're meant to hunt like lions. We're closer to carnivores in our omnivorous development than we are to herbivores. We can't tell vegans that.

好的，对。我认为这不仅适用于商业，也可能适用于所有追求。我喜欢你说的，要让一件事成为你的执念，但其他事情就学会放手。挑选你要投入的战斗。我们总是喜欢认为世界是线性的，比如我投入八小时工作，就会得到八小时的成果，对吧？但事实并非如此。经营街角杂货店的人可能和你我一样努力，甚至更努力。他能得到多少成果呢？你做什么，与谁一起做，怎么做，比你努力工作要重要得多，对吧？成果是与工作的质量成非线性关系的。正确的工作方式应该像狮子。你我不是像牛那样整天吃草的人，我们是要像狮子一样捕猎。在我们的杂食性进化中，我们更接近肉食动物，而不是草食动物。当然，这话可不能对素食者说。

Yeah, sorry. Look, I wish all that stuff worked. I don't want to eat meat. This future generation will look back at us as worse than slavers, you know, because the holocaust we're committing with the animals, but they'll have artificial meats and taste and are healthier, is better than the real thing. So, allegedly. Allegedly. But so as a modern knowledge worker athlete, as an intellectual athlete, you want to function like an athlete, which means you train hard, then you sprint, then you rest, then you reassessed, you get your feedback loop, then you train some more, then you'll sprint again, then you rest, then you reassess. This idea that you're going to have linear output just by cranking every day at the same amount of time, that's machines. That's machines should be working nine to five. Humans are not meant to work nine to five. No, I agree wholeheartedly, but for people that are working for someone, there's not really that option. So that's unfortunately the rub, right? That's kind of where my tweet storm starts, which is, first of all, the first thing if you're going to make money is that you're not going to get rich renting at your time. Even lawyers and doctors who are charging three, four, five hundred dollars an hour, they're not getting rich because their life's done slowly ramping up along with their income, and they're not saving enough. They just don't have that ability to retire.

好的，抱歉。我希望那些东西能行。我其实不想吃肉的。未来的世代会回头看我们，觉得我们比奴隶主还糟糕，因为我们对动物犯下的屠杀罪行。然而，他们会有人工肉，这种肉的味道更好，而且更健康，据说比真正的肉更好。所以，据说是这样。作为一个现代的知识工作者运动员，你想像一个运动员那样运作，这意味着你要努力训练，然后疾跑，接着休息，然后重新评估，获取反馈循环，再训练一些，然后再疾跑，接着休息，然后重新评估。这种每天工作同样长时间就能获得线性产出的想法，那是机器的工作方式。机器应该是从九点工作到五点。人类天生就不该这样工作，我对这点完全赞同。但对于那些为别人工作的人来说，他们没得选择。这就是问题所在，也是我对推特长篇的开头——如果你想赚钱，首先要明白，仅靠出租时间你不会变得富有。即使是按小时收费三、四、五百美元的律师和医生，他们也不会因此变得富有，因为他们的生活和收入一起缓慢增长，但他们并没有存下足够的钱来退休。他们缺乏这种能力。

The first thing you have to do is you have to own a piece of a business. You need to have equity. Either as an owner, an investor, shareholder, or a brand that you're building that accrues to you to gain your financial freedom. Yeah, and I was really fascinated by another thing that you were bringing up about working for yourself that you feel in the future, whether it's 50 or 100 years from now, virtually everyone is going to be working for themselves. And I believe the way you put it is that the information age is going to reverse the industrial age. Yeah, if you go back to hunter-gatherer times, how we evolved, we basically work for ourselves. We communicated and cooperated within tribes, but each hunter, each gatherer, stood on their own and then combined their resources with a family unit. But there was no boss hierarchy hierarchy hierarchy where you're like the third middle manager down. In the farming age, we became a little bit more hierarchical as we had to run farms, but even those were still mostly family farms. It's industrial work with factories that sort of created this model of thousands of people working together on one thing and having bosses and schedules and times to show up.

首先，你必须拥有一个生意的一部分。你需要有权益。无论是作为所有者、投资者、股东，还是作为一个品牌的创建者，以便积累财富，实现财务自由。我对你提到的关于为自己工作未来趋势的观点很感兴趣。你提到，无论是50年后还是100年后，几乎所有人都会为自己工作。我相信，你的意思是信息时代将逆转工业时代。回到狩猎采集时代，人类基本上都是为自己工作。我们在部落中沟通合作，但每个猎人和采集者都是独立的，然后与家人单位共享资源。在那时，没有像现代社会那样层层管理的老板结构。在农业时代，由于要管理农田，我们变得稍微有些等级化，但那时仍主要是家庭农场。而是到了工业时代，工厂的大量出现，才形成了成千上万人一起工作、拥有老板和固定工作时间的模式。

The reality is if you have to go, I don't care how rich you are, I don't care whether you're like a top Wall Street banker, if you have to go, if somebody can tell you when to be at work and what to wear and how to behave, you're not a free person. You're not actually rich. So we're in this model now where we think it's all about employment and jobs and intrinsic in that is that I have to work for somebody else. But the information age is breaking that down. So Ronald Coase is an economist who has this Coase theorem, very famous theorem, but it basically just talks about why is a company the size that it is? Why is a company one person instead of 10 people instead of 100 instead of 1000? And it has to do with the internal transaction costs, which is the external transaction costs.

现实是，如果你必须去工作，无论你多富有，无论你是顶尖的华尔街银行家，无论如何，如果有人可以告诉你什么时候上班、穿什么、怎么表现，你就不是一个自由的人，你实际并不富有。所以我们现在处于一个模式中，认为一切都关乎就业和工作，而这意味着我必须为他人工作。然而，信息时代正在打破这种模式。经济学家罗纳德·科斯有一个著名的理论——科斯定理，它基本上讨论了为什么公司有当前的规模，为什么有的是一个人而不是十个人，一百个人或一千个人。这与内部交易成本相等于外部交易成本有关。

Let's say I want to do something, let's say I'm building a house and I need someone to come in and provide the lumber, I'm a developer, right? Do I want that to be part of my company or do I want that to be an external provider? A lot of it just depends on how hard it is to do that transaction with someone externally versus internally. If it's too hard to keep doing the contract every time externally, I'll bring that in house. If it's easy to do externally and it's a one off kind of thing, I'd rather keep it out of the house. Well information technology is making it easier and easier to do these transactions externally.

假设我想要做点事情，比如说我正在建造一栋房子，我需要有人来提供木材，我是一个开发商，对吧？那么，我是想让木材供应成为我公司的一部分，还是找一个外部供应商？很大程度上，这取决于外部交易与内部处理之间的难易程度。如果每次与外部签合同太麻烦，我就会把这项工作纳入公司内部。如果外部处理很简单而且只是一次性的事情，我宁愿外包出去。信息技术正在使这些外部交易变得越来越容易。

It's becoming much easier to communicate with people, gig economy, I can send you small amounts of money, I can hire you through an app, I can rate you afterwards. So we're seeing an atomization of the firm. We're seeing the optimal size of the firm shrinking. It's most obvious in Silicon Valley. Tons and tons of startups constantly coming up and shaving off little pieces of businesses from large companies and turning them into huge markets. So what looked like the small little vacation rental market on Craigslist is now suddenly blown up into Airbnb. One example. That's a great example. But what I think we're going to see is whether it's 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now, high quality work will be available. We're not talking about driving an Uber. We're talking about super high quality work will be available in a gig fashion where you'll wake up in the morning, your phone will buzz and you'll have five different jobs from people who will work within the past or have been referred to. It's kind of like how Hollywood already works a little bit with how they organize for a project. You decide where to take the project or not.

与人交流变得越来越容易，这得益于零工经济。我可以通过应用程序给你支付小额资金或雇佣你，并在事后对你进行评价。因此，我们看到了公司的细分化，公司的最佳规模正在缩小。这在硅谷最为明显。大量初创公司不断涌现，从大公司中分割出业务小块并将其发展成庞大的市场。比如，原先看似Craigslist上的小型度假租赁市场，现在已经演变成了Airbnb，这是一个很好的例子。我认为未来无论是10年、20年，还是更久之后，高质量的工作机会将会以零工的形式提供。我们并不是在谈论开Uber这样的工作，而是谈论超高质量的工作。早上醒来时，你的手机可能会收到来自过去合作过的人或推荐人的五个不同的工作项目，有点像好莱坞在组织项目时的方式。你可以决定是否接下这些项目。

The contract is right there in the spot. You get paid a certain amount. You get rated every day or every week. You get the money delivered. And then when you're done working, you turn it off and you go to Tahiti or wherever you want to spend the next three months. And I think the smart people have already started figuring out that the internet enables this. And they're starting to work more and more remotely on their own schedule, on their own time, on their own place, with their own friends, in their own way. And that's actually how we are the most productive. So the information revolution by making it easier to communicate, connect and cooperate is allowing us to go back to working for ourselves. And that is my ultimate dream. Even when I run a company and I have employees, I always tell those people, hey, I'm going to help you start your company when you're ready because I think that's the highest calling.

合同就在那儿，你会获得一定的报酬。你每天或每周都会被评级，款项会按时支付。工作完成后，你可以关闭工作模式，然后去塔希提或任何你想度过接下来三个月的地方。我认为聪明的人已经开始意识到互联网可以实现这一点。他们越来越多地开始按照自己的时间表、在自己选择的地点、和自己的朋友一起、以自己的方式远程工作。这其实是我们最高效的工作方式。信息革命通过简化沟通、连接和协作，使我们能够重新为自己工作。这是我的终极梦想。即使当我经营公司并有员工时，我也总是对他们说，当你们准备好时，我会帮助你们创办自己的公司，因为我认为这是最高的追求。

Maybe not everybody will get there, but it would be fine if we were even working at 10 person company or 20 person company is way better than working in a thousand person company, a 10,000 person company. So this idea that we're all factory like cogs in a machine who are specialized and have to do things by rote memorization or instruction is going to go away and we're going to go back to being small groups of creative bands of individuals setting out to do missions. And when those missions are done, we collect our money, we get rated, and then we rest and reassess until we're ready for the next sprint.

也许并不是每个人都能达到这样的状态，但即使我们在一个10人或20人的小公司工作，也比在一个上千人、甚至上万人的大公司要好得多。所以这种认为我们都是流水线上的齿轮，专门做重复性工作的观念将会消失。我们会回到由小群体组成的创意团队，着手完成各自的任务。当这些任务完成后，我们领取报酬，被评价，然后休息并重新评估，直到准备好迎接下一个挑战。

Has there ever been a study done on happiness as it regards to the size of companies? Not that I'm aware, but to me it's obvious. It's just obvious. The smaller the company that happy you're going to be, the more human your relations are, the less you have rules to operate under, the more flexible, the more creative, the more you be trained like a human just because you're able to do multiple things. Yeah.

是否曾有研究探讨过幸福感与公司规模之间的关系？据我所知，没有这样的研究。但对我来说，这一点显而易见。公司越小，你会感到越幸福，因为你的人际关系更加有人情味，规章制度更少，工作更有灵活性和创造性，你能像人一样被对待，因为你能够在多个方面发挥作用。是的。

This brings me to what is a subject that keeps getting brought up nowadays is universal basic income with the oncoming apocalypse of automation. This is how it's being portrayed by Andrew Yang, who's running for president. I sat down and talked with him about it. It's very compelling. And he's a very smart guy and he's an entrepreneur himself. And when he starts talking about automation and how it's going to just eliminate massive amounts of jobs and leave people stranded, what do you, when I know you're a guy who thinks about the future and I'm going to take the unpopular point of view on this.

这让我想到了一个如今经常被提及的话题：随着自动化的到来，基本收入的问题。美国总统候选人安德鲁·杨对此的描述就是这样。我和他坐下来谈论过这个话题，觉得非常有说服力。他是一个非常聪明的人，同时也是一位企业家。他谈到自动化如何将大量工作岗位消灭，导致人们无所适从时，给人很深的印象。而且我知道你是一个思考未来的人，但我对这个问题的看法可能和大多数人不一样。

I think it's a non-solution to a non-problem. And I mean that in the sense that automation has been happening since the dawn of time. Man, when electricity came along, that put a lot of people out of work. Did it? Right. A lot of people carrying buckets of water and lighting lamps and all those kinds of things. And this was the concern with factories as well. Yeah. Apps, everything, literally every single thing that comes along. Even the printing press. Absolutely.

我认为这是在解决一个并不存在的问题。我的意思是，自古以来自动化就一直在发生。当电力出现时，确实让很多人失去了工作，对不对？很多人过去都在打水、点灯这类事情上工作。而工厂的出现也让人感到担忧。没错，手机应用和所有新出现的东西都是如此。即使是印刷机也是一样的。

And what it does is it frees people up for new creative work. So the question is not, is automation going to eliminate jobs? There is no finite number of jobs. We're not like sitting around dividing up the same jobs that were around since the Stone Age. So obviously new jobs have been created and they're usually better jobs, more creative jobs. So the question is how quickly is this transition going to happen and what kinds of jobs will be eliminated and what kinds of jobs will be created. It's impossible looking forward to predict what kinds of jobs will be created. If I told you 10 years ago that podcaster was going to be a job or that, you know, playing video games is going to be a job or commentating on video games is going to be a job, you would have laughed me out of the room. Those are nonsense jobs, but yet here we are. So society will always create new jobs. Civilian creates new jobs, but it's impossible to predict what those jobs are. So the question is how quickly is that transition happening? Well, the reality is even though everybody keeps talking about this automation apocalypse, where did record low unemployment explain that? Where's the transition? Donald Trump. That's all I'm saying is it's, it's, it's, I don't see it in the numbers. I don't see it actually happening. The question is how quickly can you retrain people? So it's an education problem.

这段话的大意是，自动化技术可以让人们有更多的时间从事新的创造性工作。因此，问题不是自动化是否会消除工作岗位，因为工作岗位的数量不是固定不变的。自石器时代以来，我们并不是在瓜分一成不变的工作，显然会有新的工作产生，而且通常是更好、更有创造性的工作。所以问题在于这个转变会发生得多快，以及哪些工作会被淘汰，哪些工作会被创造。展望未来，我们无法预测将会创造出哪些新工作。例如，如果十年前我告诉你播客会成为一种职业，或者玩视频游戏和评论视频游戏会成为一种职业，你可能会觉得不可思议，但如今这确实成为现实。因此，社会总会创造新的工作机会，但无法准确预测这些工作是什么。关键在于这个转变的速度。然而，尽管人们常谈论自动化带来的危机，但为什么失业率创历史新低？转变在哪里？我的意思是，我并没有在数据中看到就业状况受到严重影响。关键问题是，人们能以多快的速度接受再培训。因此，这是一个教育问题。

The problem with UBI, there's a couple of problems with UBI. One is you're creating a straight, you're creating a slippery slide transfer straight into socialism. Right. The moment people can start voting themselves money combined with a democracy, it's just a matter of time before the bottom 51 votes themselves or everything on the top 49. And it just, it, it, by the slippery slope fallacy is not a fallacy. And I know people like saying that, but they haven't thought it through. But the moment you start having a direct transfer mechanism like that in a democracy, you're basically doing it with capitalism, which is the engine of economic growth. You're also forcing the entrepreneurs out or telling them not to come here. The estimate I saw for 15K a year, basic income for everybody would be three quarters of current GDP. And of course, GDP was shrink in responses, all the entrepreneurs fled. So you would essentially bankrupt the country.

这个问题的关键在于基本收入制度（UBI）有几个潜在问题。首先是它可能会导致向社会主义的直接过渡。当人们在民主制度下可以投票给自己发放金钱时，接下来的发展就是底层51%的人会通过投票从上层49%的人那里获取资源。在这种情况下，滑坡论并不是谬误。尽管很多人可能不同意，但他们并没有认真考虑这个问题。当这样的直接转移机制在民主社会中实施时，你实际上是在抛弃资本主义，而资本主义是经济增长的发动机。这种机制还可能使企业家望而却步。根据一个估算，为每个人提供每年1.5万美元的基本收入将占到目前GDP的四分之三。而一旦所有企业家离开，GDP将减少，最终可能导致国家破产。

Another issue with UBI is that people who are down in their luck, they're not looking for handouts. It's not just about money. It's also about status. It's about meaning. And the moment I start giving money to you and put you on the dole, I've lowered your status. I've made you a second class citizen. So I have to give you meaning. And meaning comes through education and capability. I have, you have to teach a man to fish, not to basically throw your rotting leftover carcasses that have been say here, eat the scraps. So it doesn't solve the meaning problem. And lastly, it's nonsense to hand 15K out to everybody. You want to means test people. There's no reason to give it to you and me. So you end up back towards the welfare system where you do have to figure out who needs it and who doesn't. So I think the better route is that we actually establish a set of basic substance services that you have to have. And we provide those in abundance to technology based automation. So get basic housing, get basic food, get basic transportation, get high speed internet access, get a phone in your pocket. Those are the kinds of things you want to give people.

关于全民基本收入（UBI）的另一个问题是，那些处于困境中的人并不在寻找施舍。问题不仅仅是钱，还涉及到地位和意义。当我开始给你钱并把你纳入领取福利的行列时，我降低了你的地位，让你成为二等公民。所以我还需要给予你意义，而意义来源于教育和能力。我们要教人们如何捕鱼，而不是简单地把腐烂的残羹剩饭扔给他们让他们吃。所以，这并不能解决意义的问题。最后，给每个人发放1.5万美金是没有意义的。你需要对人们进行经济状况评估。没有理由给你我这些不需要帮助的人发放补贴。因此，最终你还是会回到福利系统，需要找出谁需要帮助、谁不需要帮助。我认为更好的办法是建立一套基本的生活服务体系，通过科技自动化手段大量提供这些服务。所以，可以提供基本住房、基本食物、基本交通、高速互联网接入和手机。这些才是你想要给予人们的东西。

And finally, in terms of the rate of automation, I think we can educate people very quickly. One of the myths that we have today is that adults can't be re-educated. We view education as this thing where you go to school, you come out when you're out of college and you're done. No more education. Well, that's wrong. You have all these great online boot camps and coding schools coming up. They're ones that will even pay you to go there now. You can educate people and mass and you can educate them into creative professions. People who are talking about AI automating programming have never really written serious code. Coding is thinking. It's automatic, structured thinking. An AI that can program as well or better than humans is an AI that just took over the world. That's end game. That's the end of the human species.

最后，关于自动化的速度，我认为我们可以很快教育人们。现今我们存在一个误解，就是认为成年人无法重新学习。我们把教育看作是一个过程，你去上学，大学毕业后就结束了，不再需要受教育了。其实，这种观点是错误的。目前，有很多优秀的在线训练营和编程学校涌现出来，有些甚至会付钱让你去学习。我们可以大规模地教育人们，并且可以把他们培养成创造性行业的从业者。有些人说人工智能会自动化编程工作，但他们从未真正编写过复杂的代码。编程其实就是一种思维方式，是自动化的、有结构的思考。能够编写出不亚于人类编程水平的人工智能就意味着人工智能主宰世界，那将是人类的终点。

And I can give you arguments why I don't think that's coming either. People who are thinking, and I know I take the opposite side from some very famous people in this debate, but we're nowhere near close to general AI. Not in our lifetimes. You don't have to worry about it. Even in our lifetimes. Really. It's so overblown. It's another, it's a combination of Cassandra complex. It's fun to talk about the end of the world combined with a God complex like people who have lost religion. So they're looking for meaning and some kind of end of history. The reason why I don't think AI is coming anytime soon is because a lot of the advances in so-called AI today are what we call narrow AI. They're really pattern recognition.

我可以告诉你为什么我认为这也不会发生。我知道在这个问题上，我的观点和一些非常著名的人相反，但我们离通用人工智能还很远。至少在我们有生之年是不会看到的。真的，你不用为此担心。关于通用人工智能的讨论被严重夸大了。这种现象可以说是一种“卡珊德拉情结”和“上帝情结”的结合：人们喜欢讨论世界末日，同时一些失去信仰的人在寻找意义和某种历史的终点。我认为人工智能近期不会实现的原因是，如今所谓的人工智能的很多进步其实是我们所说的狭义人工智能，实际上只是模式识别而已。

Machine learning to figure out what is that object on the screen. Or how do you find this signal in all of that noise? There's nothing approaching what we call creative thinking. To actually model general intelligence, you run into all kinds of problems. First, we don't know how the brain works at all. Number two, we've never even modeled a paramecium or an amoeba, let alone a human brain. Number three, there's this assumption that all of the computation is going at the cellular level at the neuron level. Whereas nature is very parsimonious, it uses everything at its disposal. There's a lot of machinery inside the cell that is doing calculations that is intelligent that isn't accounted for. And the best estimates are it would take 50 years or more law before we can simulate what's going on inside a cell near perfectly.

机器学习用于识别屏幕上的物体，或者在大量噪声中找到特定信号。但这远不及我们所说的创造性思维。要真正模拟通用智能，会遇到各种问题。首先，我们对大脑的运作几乎一无所知。其次，我们甚至从未成功模拟一个草履虫或变形虫，更不用说人类大脑了。第三，普遍认为所有的计算都在神经元等细胞层面进行。然而，自然界非常节俭，会充分利用一切资源。细胞内部有很多复杂的结构进行智能计算，但这些并未被考虑在内。最佳估计显示，可能需要50年或更长时间才能接近完美地模拟细胞内部的运作。

And probably 100 years before we can build a brain that can simulate inside the cells. So putting it at saying that I'm just going to model neurons on or off and then use that to build a human brain is overly simplistic. Furthermore, I would posit there's no such thing as general intelligence. Every intelligence is contextual within the context of the environment that it's in. So you have to evolve an environment around it. So I think a lot of people who are peddling general AI, the burden of proof is on them. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to indicate we're approaching general AI. Instead, we're solving deterministic closed set finite problems using large amounts of data, but it's not sexy to talk about that.

可能还需要100年，我们才能够建造出一种可以在细胞内部进行模拟的大脑。所以，仅仅说我要对神经元进行简单的开关状态建模，然后用它来构建一个人类大脑，这种想法过于简单化。此外，我认为并不存在所谓的通用智能。每种智能都是在其所处环境的上下文中表现出来的。所以你需要在周围创造一个相应的环境。因此，我认为很多推销通用人工智能的人，他们需要提供证明。我还没有看到任何迹象表明我们正在接近通用人工智能。相反，我们是在使用大量数据解决确定性的封闭有限问题，但谈论这些并不吸引人。

If you're talking about mirroring the actual abilities of cells, or are you talking about recreating the actual mechanism? What is going on inside cells and biological organisms? Yeah, we just don't know how intelligence works. We don't know what we have no idea. So most of the AI approaches basically say we're going to try and model how the brain works, but then model at the neuron level, which is saying this neurons on that neurons off, they're combining their signal. But I'm saying the neuron is a cell inside the cell. There's all this machinery going on that's operating the neuron that is also part of the intelligence apparatus. You can't just ignore that and abstract that out. You have to model it down to the inside the cell level. It's also part of the biological organism itself. It has all these needs that the biological organism has to have food and rest and there's a balance going on. But when you eliminate all that, when there is none of that, it's just calculations.

如果你在谈论模拟细胞的实际能力，还是在谈论重现其实际机制？细胞和生物体内到底发生了什么？实际上，我们对智力的运作方式一无所知，我们完全没有头绪。所以，大多数人工智能的方法基本上都说，我们会尝试模拟大脑的工作方式，但只是模拟到神经元的水平，也就是说这个神经元开、那个神经元关，它们在组合它们的信号。但我认为，神经元本身也是细胞，细胞内部有各种运作机制，这也是智力组成的一部分。你不能只忽视这一点并将其抽象掉，而是要详细到细胞内部进行建模。这也是生物体本身的一部分，生物体需要食物和休息，并达到一种平衡。但是当你去掉这一切，当这些都不存在时，那就只剩下计算而已。

We get to a point where it's just this thing that we've created, whether you call it a computer, where it doesn't have to be a moving thing even, but a thing that you've created that stores virtually all the information that's available in the world, stores all the patterns of all the thinking of all the great people that have ever lived, all the writers, all the people that have ever published anything, all the people that have ever spoken any words, stores all of their points, all of their counterpoints, all their contradictions, applies logic and reason and some sort of sense of the future and starts improving upon these patterns and then starts acting on its own based on the information that it's been provided with. Well first you would have to actually simulate a structure of the human brain that can hold all that information. You're basically talking about tens of thousands of brains worth of information. We can't even build one brain the next decade or two or three.

我们达到了这样一个点：我们创造了一个东西，你可以称之为电脑，它甚至不需要具备移动能力，但它是一个我们创造出来的东西，几乎存储了世界上的所有信息，存储了所有伟大人物的思维模式，所有作家，所有发表过作品的人，所有说过任何话的人，存储了他们的观点、反驳和矛盾之处，应用逻辑、推理以及对未来的某种理解，进而开始改进这些模式，并基于所提供的信息自行采取行动。然而，首先我们必须模拟一个人脑结构来存储这些信息。你基本上在谈论需要数万个大脑的信息。我们在未来十年或二三十年内甚至无法构建一个人脑。

Well in terms of an actual physical brain, yes, but what about something that recreates the abilities of a brain? Like I said, nature is parsimonious. So we've got this three pound wetware object that can hold all this data. Nature has been very efficient in evolving how we get there. I just don't think computers are anywhere close to that. Like they can hold that amount of data with that complexity, with the holographic structure of the brain where it can recall in many, many different ways. And then I don't think you can evolve a creature to be intelligent outside of the boundaries of feedback in a real medium.

从实际的物理大脑来看，确实如此，但是如果是想创造一种具有大脑能力的东西呢？就像我说的，自然界是节俭的。因此，我们有这个三磅重的生物大脑，可以存储如此多的信息。自然在进化过程中对这种结果非常高效。但我认为计算机目前还远远达不到这个水平。它们可能存储这么多数据以及这种复杂性，还要处理大脑那种可以通过多种方式回忆信息的全息结构。而且，我不认为在没有真实环境反馈的约束下，可以进化出智慧生物。

Like if you raised a human being at a concrete cell with no input from the outside, they wouldn't have any feedback from the real world. They wouldn't evolve properly. So I think just dumping information into a thing isn't enough. It has to have an environment to operate in to get feedback from. It needs to have context. But isn't that biological? I mean, if you have just all the information that people have accumulated and the lessons that people have learned, and you program that into the computer, like if we can take a computer that can beat someone at chess, the real question was, well, can we make some sort of an artificial intelligence that could beat someone at go, which is far more complex at chess? They figured out how to do that too. And that was a giant shock, right?

就像如果你把一个人抚养在一个封闭的水泥房间里，没有外界的信息来源，他们就得不到真实世界的反馈。他们将无法正常发展。因此，我认为仅仅往某个事物中灌输信息是不够的。它还需要有一个可以运作并获取反馈的环境。它需要有背景和上下文。但这不就是生物的特性吗？我的意思是，如果你收集了人们积累的所有信息和经验教训，并把它们编程到计算机里，比如，我们可以让一台计算机打败某人在国际象棋中，真正的问题是，能否打造某种人工智能去战胜某人在围棋中，围棋比国际象棋复杂得多。他们也找到了办法做到这点，这真是个巨大的震惊，对吧？

These are still man-made, very closed, bounded games. They're not on the road to the unbounded game of life. They are completely artificial. But this didn't go. Didn't that give you a little bit of a pause? A little bit. Go is not go or League of Legends or Fortnite. They're not completely deterministic. But they're still very artificial, very bounded games. Being good at go doesn't mean that you can then suddenly figure out how to write great poetry. The creativity for sure is something that's great. Creativity is the last frontier. So I do believe that automation over long enough period of time will replace every non-creative job or every non-creative work. But that's great news.

这些仍然是人造的、非常封闭的有限游戏。它们并不在通往无限生活游戏的道路上，完全是人工的。但这并没有改变你的看法，对吗？这会让你稍微停下来想一下吗？围棋不是无限开放的游戏，也不是《英雄联盟》或《堡垒之夜》这种游戏。它们并不是完全确定的，但仍然非常人工化，非常有限制。在围棋上很厉害并不意味着你能立刻学会创作出伟大的诗歌。创造力确实是非常宝贵的，创造力是最后的边界。因此，我相信在足够长的时间内，自动化将取代所有非创造性的工作或任务。但这其实是个好消息。

That means that all of our basic needs are taken care of and what remains for us is to be creative, which is really what every human wants. Yeah. When what are you doing right now? This is a creative job. Sure. Right. This is back to the idea of meaning and universal basic income. I think the idea of giving someone $15,000 a year doesn't necessarily cause what everyone would worry about as a peel being on the dole. You would have a bunch of listless people out there with no meaning in life. But the idea is that $15,000 a year, and I'm not necessarily sure I agree with this. I'm not even endorsing this.

这意味着我们的基本需求都得到了满足，剩下的事情就是进行创造性的活动，这其实是每个人都想要的。对吧？那么你现在在做什么？这是一项创造性的工作。是的。从这个角度来看，我们又回到了人生意义和普遍基本收入的观念。我认为，给予每个人每年$15,000 并不一定会导致大家担心的那种依赖救济的局面。你不会发现一大群无所事事、生活没有意义的人。这个想法是每年$15,000，不过我并不确定我完全赞同这个观点，我也不在推崇这个方案。

But that $15,000 a year would just provide you with the necessities to get by in life. It would give you food. It would give you shelter. Well, that's not going to stop at $15, because the moment people are like, I mean, $15,000, like, the people would demand more. But these handers will be on the. $16, $17, $18, $19, $19. These companies are too big. Yeah. That could happen. It doesn't stop. It just goes all the way to bankruptcy. The concern is the slide to socialism. It's obvious. Yeah. I mean, heck, if I was not working and I was getting my $15 a year, I would happily look for the guy who'd give me 20 or 25. It's just common sense.

那每年$15,000只够你勉强维持基本生活。它能为你提供食物和住所。但是，这个金额不会停留在$15,000，因为一旦人们觉得不够，肯定会要求更多，比如$16,000、$17,000，甚至$18,000、$19,000。这些大公司很可能会应付这种情况。这种需求增长不会停止，可能会导致破产。令人担心的是，这会滑向社会主义。这显而易见。如果我不工作，每年拿$15,000，我一定会去找能给我$20,000或$25,000的人。这是常识。

What do you say to the people that don't believe that there is such a thing as ethical or compassionate capitalism? There's many people today that are espousing Marxism and they're espousing sort of a socialist society where they believe that capitalism is screw people over and eliminated the middle class. Yeah. They're absolutely problems with capitalism. I think monopolies are a problem. I think that crony capitalism is a problem with the government, kind of gets in bed with them and sort of forces things. I think the bankers have really raped society and the rest of us are suffering from it.

你会对那些不相信存在道德或富有同情心的资本主义的人说什么？如今有许多人在提倡马克思主义，主张一种社会主义社会，他们认为资本主义损害了人们的利益，消灭了中产阶级。确实，资本主义有很多问题。我认为垄断是个问题。我也认为裙带资本主义是个问题，即政府与大企业勾结，相互勾结、操控经济。我认为银行家对社会造成了严重伤害，导致其他人都受到其害。

Yeah. They've essentially taken huge risks where they privatize the gains and the socialize the losses. So when it fails, they basically get built out and bankrupt everybody else. So capitalism has gotten a really bad name. Let's talk about it as free exchange, free markets. Free markets and free exchange are intrinsic to humans. From when the first person started a fire and somebody came along with a deer and said, hey, if I cook my deer and...

好的。他们基本上是在承担巨大风险，把收益私有化，而把损失社会化。当失败时，他们自己得到救助，但却让其他人破产。因此，资本主义的名声变得很差。让我们用“自由交换”“自由市场”来讨论这个问题。自由市场和自由交换是人类与生俱来的。从第一个人生火开始，有人带着一头鹿过来说，“嘿，如果我能把我的鹿烤熟，并且……”

your fire, I'll share some of it with you. So specialization of labor, we trade, that's built into the human species. Basic math comes from accounting, keeping track of debts and credits and so on. We need to be able to engage in free trade. The correct criticism of capitalism is when it does not provide equal opportunity. So we should always strive to provide equal opportunity. People confuse that with equal outcome. When you have equal outcome, that can only be enforced through violence because different people, free people make different choices. And when they make different choices, they have different outcomes.

火，你的激情，我会和你分享。分工是与生俱来的，我们通过交换来合作。基本的数学来源于记账，记录债务和收入等等。我们需要能够进行自由贸易。对资本主义的正确批评是当它不能提供平等机会时的不足。因此，我们应该始终努力提供平等的机会。人们常常混淆平等机会和平等结果。平等结果只能通过强制手段实现，因为不同行为和选择会导致不同的结果。每个人在自由环境下会做出不同的选择，而这些选择会导致不同的结果。

If you don't let them suffer the consequences of bad choices or reap the rewards from good choices, then you are forcibly redistributing through violence. It's interesting that there are no working socialist examples that exist without violence. You basically need someone to show up with a gun and say, okay, you're not allowed to do that. You hand this over to that person. So one of the reasons why I do this podcast is because I believe everybody can be wealthy. Everybody. It's not a zero sum game. It is a positive sum game. You create something brand new. You exchange it with me for something brand new. I've created this higher utility for both of us. The sum of the value created is positive.

如果你不让他们承受做出错误选择的后果，或者不让他们享受做出正确选择的奖励，那你就是在通过暴力强制重新分配。有趣的是，没有哪一个社会体制的例子在没有暴力的情况下是成功的。你基本上需要有人拿着枪出现，然后说，好，你不可以这样做，你要把这个交给那个人。因此，我做这个播客的原因之一就是我相信每个人都可以变得富有。每一个人。这不是一个零和游戏，而是一个正和游戏。你创造一些全新的东西，与我交换我创造的全新东西，我们都获得更高的效用。创造的总价值是正数。

It's not like status where it's like you're higher up. I'm lower down. Your president, so I must be vice president. You're a plus one. You're a minus one and has to cancel a zero. We should be all for playing positive sum ethical games. The problem is because of these looters who have ruined capitalism's name, that then you get socialists coming in and saying burn the whole system down. You burn the whole system down. We end up like Venezuela or the former Soviet Union. You don't want to be a failed socialist state with emaciated teens hunting cats in the streets to eat. That's literally what happens in some of these places. I think it's very important not to destroy the engine of progress that brought us here.

这不是一种地位上的比较，不是说你在上面，我在下面。你是总裁，所以我就是副总裁。你是加一，我是减一，然后互相抵消为零。我们应该都去参与那些正和的道德竞争。问题在于一些投机者破坏了资本主义的名声，结果导致一些社会主义者进来喊着要彻底摧毁整个体系。如果你真这么做，我们的结局可能就像委内瑞拉或前苏联一样。你不希望成为一个失败的社会主义国家，让青少年在街头瘦弱地捕捉猫来果腹。在这些地方，这种情况真的发生过。我认为非常重要的是，我们不能摧毁那个让我们走到今天的进步发动机。

The idea that socialism just hasn't worked yet, that we just need to do it right. If we do it right, we can. If you ever hundred million died and. Yeah, well, let's keep trying. All over the world. And every single time it's been implemented. Have you ever had a conversation with someone who's a socialist? Many times some of my better friends are socialists. Really? We really get into it. Yeah, I mean, does anyone have a compelling perspective at all? I think really socialism comes from the heart. We all want to be socialists. Capitalism comes from the head because there are always cheaters in any system. And there's incentives in any system. When you're young, if you're not a socialist, you have no heart. When you're older, if you're not a capitalist, you have no head. You haven't thought it through.

这个观点认为社会主义只是尚未成功实施，我们只需要正确地去做。如果我们方法得当，就能实现理想。尽管有上亿人因此而死，但我们还是在全球范围内反复尝试。你有没有和社会主义者交流过？我与不少社会主义者谈过，其中一些甚至是我不错的朋友。我们常常深入探讨。那么，他们中有没有人能提出有说服力的观点呢？我觉得社会主义源于情感，因为我们内心都渴望它。相较之下，资本主义源于理性，因为任何制度中总会有欺骗者，并且都有激励措施。年少时，如果你不是社会主义者，那是因为缺乏同情心。年长后，如果你还不是资本主义者，那是因为缺乏理性思考。

So I understand where it comes from. I always like Nassim Taleb's framing on this, where he said, with my family, I'm a communist. With my close friends, I'm a socialist. At my state level politics, I'm a Democrat. At higher levels, I'm a Republican and at the federal level, I'm a libertarian. So basically, the larger the group of people you have massed together, who have different interests, the less trust there is, the more cheating there is, the better the incentives have to be aligned, the better the system has to work, the more you go towards capitalism. The smaller the group you're in, you're in a kibbutz, you're in your commie, you're in your house, you're in your tribe, by all means be a socialist. With my aunts, with my brother, with my cousins, with my uncles, with my mom, with my family, I'm a socialist. That's the right way to live a loving, happy, integrated life.

我明白他的意思。我一直喜欢Nassim Taleb对此的看法，他说，和家人在一起时，我是共产主义者；和亲密的朋友在一起时，我是社会主义者；在州级政治上，我是民主党人；在更高层次上，我是共和党人；在联邦层次上，我是自由意志主义者。简单来说，群体越大，成员的利益差异越大，信任就越少，舞弊就越多，因此激励机制需要更好，系统需要更完美，所以越倾向于资本主义。群体越小，比如在类似于家庭或小团体这样的环境中，就可以实践社会主义。和我的姑姑、兄弟、堂兄弟、叔叔、妈妈及家人在一起时，我是社会主义者。这才是过上一个充满爱、快乐和融洽生活的正确方式。

But when you're dealing with strangers, you want to be a real socialist? Great. Open all your doors and windows tomorrow. Please, everybody, come take what you want. See how that works out. This idea of income inequality that always strikes me as a very, it's a deceptive term, income inequality. Well, let's flip it around. It comes from outcome inequality. Yes. And the outcome inequality is there because you made different choices. Now again, going back, if it was because you didn't have the same opportunities, that's a problem. Yes. So society should always try to give people equal opportunities.

但当你面对陌生人时，想要真正成为一个社会主义者吗？好吧，那就把你家的门窗明天都打开。请大家随意来拿你想要的东西，看看会发生什么。我觉得收入不平等这个说法很有欺骗性，所谓的收入不平等，其实是结果不平等。结果不平等是因为大家做了不同的选择。当然，如果是因为没有相同的机会，才导致的这种不平等，那就是个问题。因此，社会应该努力给人们提供平等的机会。

So for example, instead of basic income, what if we had a retraining program built into our basic social fabric, which said that every four years or every six years, or whatever it is, maybe it's every 10, you can take one year out and we'll pay for you to go retrain completely. And you can go into any profession you like that has some earning power and output, hopefully a creative long-term profession. And you can re-educate yourself. That would be much better for society on all levels than basically just saying, now you're going to be the dole for the rest of your life. Yeah. You just, you'd have to lead that horse to water and then make them drink. It requires people to put in some effort. Yes. You know, we can't all just sit around. It's just not.

例如，与其提供基本收入，不如在我们的基本社会结构中加入再培训项目。假设每四年或六年，或者每十年，你可以花一年时间去重新接受培训，我们会为此支付费用。你可以选择进入任何有一定收入和产出的行业，最好是一个有创造性和长期发展的职业。通过这样的再教育，这对整个社会来说会比让人一辈子依赖救济金要好得多。当然，这就像引导马去喝水，还需要他们愿意去喝。这需要个人付出一些努力。毕竟，我们不能只是坐在那里不动。对吧？

Well, that's my perspective on income inequality. There's always effort inequality and thought inequality. I mean, there's just some people that are obsessed. And if those people become successful, it doesn't mean they stole from you. It just means that they put in the amount of energy and effort that's required to reach where they're at. And there's a lot of richness signaling that goes on now where people say, well, it's because you're privileged. It's like, well, you know, what the greatest privilege is, you're alive. 85% of humanity is dead. Yeah. So how privileged are you? Then you're living in the first world. Then you have four limbs, et cetera. So you can take that argument all the way. It's kind of a nonsense discussion. Well, it's a very weird progressive argument.

好的，这是我对收入不平等的看法。总会有努力不平等和思维不平等。我的意思是，有些人就是全身心投入。如果这些人成功了，这并不意味着他们从你那里偷走了什么。这只是表明他们投入了达到他们所处位置所需的能量和努力。现在有很多所谓的"财富信号"，有人会说，这是因为你有特权。其实，最大的特权是什么？是你还活着。人类中有85%的人已经去世。所以，你有多么的幸运呢？接着，你生活在第一世界，然后你有四肢等。所以你可以一直用这套论调，但这是一种无意义的讨论。这是一种很奇怪的进步主义论点。

And as it pertains to race, it's always a weird one, right? Because white privilege to me. Although you could look at what they're saying on paper like, yes, yeah, I'm sure there's more black people that are harassed by the police. I'm sure there is more black people who are treated suspiciously by shop owners and the like, but the problem isn't the people who aren't treated poorly. The problem is the people who treat the people poorly. The problem is racism. The problem is not people that didn't ask to be born white or whatever they are and they don't get harassed. So this idea of white privilege or male privilege or whatever it is, that's not the problem.

翻译成中文并尽量易读：谈到种族问题，总是有点奇怪，对吧？因为对我来说，所谓的“白人特权”有点复杂。虽然从表面上看，确实有更多黑人受到警察骚扰，也有更多黑人在店主等人眼中被视为可疑，但问题不在于那些没有被不公对待的人。问题出在那些对人不公平对待的人。问题是种族主义。问题不是那些没有选择出生为白人或其他种族的人，以及他们没有被骚扰。因此，所谓的“白人特权”或者“男性特权”并不是问题所在。

You're just looking at someone who's not a victim of this particular problem that you're highlighting, but you're not looking at the perpetrators of the problem. You're making people perpetrators by simply existing and having less melanin in their skin or having their ancestors come from the same crisis. Yeah, it's a sneaky way to be racist. Yeah. And then they say you can't be racist. It's not racist because you're white. That's right. That's hilarious if you can't be racist, why people are that one? That's a variation of the whole still while I hit you argument. Stop struggling while I'm hitting you. Well, it's just so silly.

你只是在看一个不是你所强调的特定问题的受害者的人，但你没有看到问题的制造者。你仅仅因为一个人存在、皮肤中的黑色素较少或他们的祖先来自同一个危机地，就把他们当作问题的制造者。是的，这是一种隐蔽的种族歧视方式。然后有人会说这不是种族歧视，因为你是白人。这真是可笑，如果说白人不能成为种族歧视的受害者，那不正是“别动，当我打你的时候”这类论调的变种吗？继续挣扎只会显得更荒谬。

You've just completely changed what racism means. But what's hilarious is that mostly the people who are yelling racist are not the minorities. When I look on my Twitter, my social media or on my news, it's white on white violence. Virtue signal. Yeah, it's white on white violence. Yeah. What's mostly going on is its elitist whites, blue state whites, college educated whites, beating up on high school educated whites, blue color. It's a white color versus blue color war that's going on. And the rest of us are just kind of watching. Like, oh, that's kind of interesting.

你刚刚完全改变了种族主义的定义。但有趣的是，大多数喊种族主义的人并不是少数族裔。当我查看我的推特、社交媒体或者新闻时，我看到的都是白人与白人之间的冲突。这是一种道德标榜。是的，这确实是白人与白人之间的冲突。主要发生的是精英白人、蓝州白人和受过大学教育的白人在攻击那些只有高中教育、有蓝领工作的人。这是一场白领与蓝领之间的战争，而我们其他人只是在旁观看，觉得还挺有趣。

Well, it's also a side effect of the ability to broadcast, right? Like everyone with a Twitter handle has the ability to broadcast. Everyone with a Facebook page has the ability to pontificate and have these long rambling, these huge statements that people put out when you read them. It's like, how much time did you put in this? Do you put that much time in your kids? Or your job or your life or your future or planning for your, you know, how much do you work out a day? I mean, you just, I've read some people's Facebook posts. I'm like, this is a preposterous amount of effort that you put into saying virtually nothing.

嗯，这也是广播能力的一个副作用，对吧？就像每个人有了一个推特账号就有了广播的能力。每个人有了一个脸书主页就可以大谈特谈，发布那些冗长而絮叨的巨大声明。当你读这些内容时，会觉得，你到底花了多少时间在这上面？你有花这么多时间在你的孩子身上吗？或者你的工作、生活、未来或计划上呢？你每天锻炼多少时间？我的意思是，我读过一些人的脸书帖子，我想，你居然花了这么多努力去说实际上没什么实质内容的东西，真是荒唐。

Let's say humans are being creative. Yeah. Let's see an AI do that. Well, that's true. It is creative. It's creative in a very odd way, right? Because it's creative in that they're trying to elicit a response from people and they're trying to raise their social value or raise their position on the social totem pole. It's signaling and it's easy signaling because it's the kind of thing that everybody has to agree with you on because nobody wants to be seen as a horrible person. Yeah. And it's very hard to make the nuanced arguments against then this is just kind of go along. Right.

假设人类正在展现创造力。是啊。让我们看看人工智能怎么做到这一点。这确实是一种创造力。但这是一种非常奇怪的创造力，对吧？因为在这个过程中，他们试图引发他人的反应，提高自己的社会价值或在社会阶梯中的地位。这是一种信号传递，并且是一种很容易的信号传递，因为这种事情每个人都不得不同意你，因为没有人想被看作一个可怕的人。是的。反对这种情况很难提出细致入微的论点，因此大家就随大流了。

Well, it's also, it's some of it is so cliche that it seems like I know one guy who poses as a woman on Twitter, but he does it. Just one. Obviously. Yeah. What is the name, Tatiana McGrath? McGrath. Yes. Yeah. You used to be God for Elwick. Yes. Oh, is that the same guy? I think so. Yeah. That's hilarious. I did not. They killed his account. They killed the same one. They were pretending to be transracial. That's right. They didn't. Yeah. He basically says all the crazy stuff that people on the left say, but he says the craziest version. Yes. And kind of just shows how it's okay. Like I said, I saw a tweet from recently just said or her that it's not okay to be white.

这段话的大意是：嗯，这些事情中有一些已经老套到不行了，我认识一个人，他在推特上假装成女人，他只是这么做而已。显然，就是一个人。这个人是不是叫塔蒂亚娜·麦格拉思？麦格拉思。对。你以前是叫God for Elwick吗？对。哦，是同一个人吗？我想是的。这太搞笑了。我不知道。他们封了他的账号。他们就是那个假装自己是跨种族的人。对。他基本上就是模仿那些左派人士说的极端言论，但是他说得更加夸张。对，然后通过这种方式来展示这为什么是可以被接受的。就像我最近看到的一条推特中她说不当一个白人是好的。

Yes. Yes. And then some people agree, but it's it's so close to what they say. It's so close that it's like the most artful form of subtle parody because it's. If you replace in half of these things, if you replace the word white with black or Asian, white, the lynch mob descended. Yeah. Yeah. It's it's a strange time in that respect that there is so much. That if you want to see who rules of it over you, see who you're not allowed to criticize. Mmm. Excellent.

是的，是的。有些人同意，但这与他们所说的非常接近，接近到像是一种最巧妙的讽刺艺术形式。因为如果在这些说法中将“白人”替换为“黑人”或“亚洲人”，那么就会引发群体性的愤怒。在这一点上，这真是个奇怪的时期。如果你想知道谁在掌控一切，那你看看谁是不能被批评的就知道了。嗯，太好了。

Yeah. That is a that's so true. Right. Yeah. That's so true. I wonder where this is going. I really do. I wonder because this is it seems like this new found ability to broadcast that we have with whether you have a YouTube page or whether you have a Twitter or whatever you're doing, this new found ability to spread whatever you're trying to say to so many people with very little understanding on the most part from what it's doing. I think it's actually a great thing overall. Yeah. Because now it means that any human can broadcast to any other human on the planet at any time.

是的，那确实是真的。对吧，是这样的。我真想知道这会走向何方。确实很好奇，因为这感觉像是一种新发现的传播能力，无论是通过YouTube页面还是Twitter账户，无论你在做什么，我们现在都可以把想说的话传播给很多人，虽然大多数时候我们并不了解这究竟带来了什么影响。我认为总体来说这是件好事。因为现在这意味着任何人都可以在任何时间传达信息给地球上的任何其他人。

So for example, if a totalitarian dictator were to come to power and someone was beating up, had fascist beating up on old women, that would get broadcast out instantly. There would be an instant outrage, hue and cry rallying. So in that sense, it helps bring attention to the plight of anybody. But right now we're going through the phase where we have this new found power to assemble mobs and people don't know how to deal with that. So it becomes very easy to set up a mob and have it attack somebody, take all the context out. Like even this conversation, I'm sure people will take out snippets, put them on social media and try and get somebody outraged. Of course. And so you have to learn how, first of all, society just has to get over this idea of outrage. Like to me, like, outrage people, people get easily outraged as stupid as people on social media. Those are the people I block instantly. It's just kind of very low level thinking, right? These are the foot soldiers in the mob. Eventually society just has to get over it. They have to understand that these are all snippets being taken out of context. These are doctored video clips. These are just someone who's trying to get outraged over something. Eventually, there will also be anti mob tactics. Like, for example, if I go to someone's Twitter feed and all it is is full of political, ranting, raving, conspiracy theories, do I want to work with this person? Do I want to associate with this person? Do I want to be friends with this person? Their mind is just cluttered with junk.

比如说，如果一个极权独裁者上台，有人打人，法西斯分子殴打老妇人，这种事情会立刻被传播出去。人们会立即感到愤怒，群情激昂，纷纷声援。在这种情况下，这种传播可以帮助人们关注某些人的困境。不过，现在我们正处于一个阶段，就是人们发现了可以聚集群众的新力量，但还不知道如何应对。所以很容易就能煽动一个群体攻击某人，并忽略全部背景。就像这段对话，我相信有人会截取片段，把它放到社交媒体上，引发对某人的愤怒。当然，我们首先要学会让社会摆脱这种愤怒的情绪。在我看来，容易被激怒的人就像社交媒体上那些愚蠢的人，他们是我立刻屏蔽的人。这是一种很低级的思维方式，他们就像暴民中的小卒。最终，社会必须克服这一点，要理解这些都是被断章取义的片段，是被修改过的视频，是某些人在试图引起愤怒。最终，也会有反对暴民的对策。例如，当我看到某人的推特上全是政治怒骂、阴谋论时，我会想，我想和这样的人一起工作吗？我想和这样的人交往吗？我想和这样的人成为朋友吗？他们的思想被垃圾信息占据。

Now, I don't necessarily blame them. I think that the human brain is not designed to absorb all of the world's breaking news, 24 seven emergencies injected straight into your skull with clickbait headline news. If you pay attention to that stuff, even if you're well meaning, even if you're sound of mind and body, it will eventually drive you insane. This is goes back to Clockwork Orange, where he has his eyes opened up and is forced to watch the news. But I think that's what's happening right now because these are addictive, right? Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, these are weaponized. You have social statisticians and scientists and researchers on people in lab coats, literally, best minds of our generation figuring out how to addict you to the news. Yes. And if you fall for it, if you get addicted, your brain will get destroyed. And I think this is the modern struggle, right? The modern struggle.

现在，我不一定责怪他们。我认为人类的大脑并不是为了吸收全世界的突发新闻而设计的，24小时不间断的紧急信息通过诱人的标题新闻直接注入你的大脑。如果你关注这些东西，即使你有良好的意图，即使你身心健全，它最终也会让你变得疯狂。这让我想起《发条橙》里的情节，主人公被迫睁开眼睛观看新闻。我认为这正是现在发生的事情，因为这些都是会上瘾的，比如Twitter、Facebook、Instagram。这些平台被“武器化”了。社交统计学家、科学家和研究人员，穿着白大褂的专家们，用我们这一代人的最佳智慧来研究如何让你对新闻上瘾。如果你上钩了，如果你上瘾了，你的大脑就会被摧毁。我认为这是现代的斗争，没错，这就是现代的斗争。

So the ancient struggle used to be the tribal struggle. You had your tribe of friends and family. You had your religion. You had your country. You had your loyalty. You had your nationality. You had meaning and support, but now you would struggle against other tribes. Modern life where so free, everything's become atomized. We stand alone. You live in your apartment alone. You live in your house alone. Your parents don't live nearby. Your friends don't live nearby. You don't have any tribal meaning. You don't believe in religion anymore. You don't believe in country anymore. It's fine. You got a lot of freedoms. Fantastic. But now when they come to attack you, you're alone and you can't resist. So how do they attack you? It's all well meaning. I don't fault capitalism. I love capitalism. I love it. Look at how it happens.

古代的斗争往往是部落之间的斗争。你有自己的朋友和家人组成的部落，有自己的宗教，有自己的国家，有自己的忠诚和民族认同。这些给你带来了意义和支持，但同时你也会与其他部落发生冲突。现代生活中一切都变得非常自由，所有的关系都呈现出分散的状态。我们独自站立。你一个人住在公寓里，一个人住在房子里。你的父母不住在附近，你的朋友也不住在附近。你没有任何部落的意义感。你不再相信宗教，不再相信国家。这没关系，你获得了很多自由，很棒。但当他们来攻击你时，你是孤独的，无法抵抗。那他们是如何攻击你的呢？这都是出于好意。我不责怪资本主义，我热爱资本主义。我爱它。看看这是如何发生的。

Social media, they've massaged all the mechanisms to addict you like a Skinner's pigeon or a rat who's just going to click, click, click, click, click, can't put the phone down. The food, they've taken sugar and they've weaponized it. They've put it into all these different forms and varieties that you can't resist eating. Drugs, right? They've taken pharmaceuticals and plants and they've synthesized them. They've grown them in such a way that you can't, you get addicted. You can't put them down. Porn, right? If you're a young male and you wander around the internet, it'll like sap away your libido and you're not going out in real life society anymore because you've got this incredibly stimulating stuff coming at you.

社交媒体，他们调整了所有机制，让你像斯金纳的鸽子或者不停按按钮的老鼠一样上瘾，停不下来看手机。食物方面，他们利用糖分，将其变成了一种武器，做成各种各样的形式和品种，让你难以抗拒。药物呢？他们提取了药物和植物，并合成它们，使其具有让人上瘾的效果，让你无法放下。色情方面，如果你是个年轻男性，在网上闲逛时，它会逐渐消耗掉你的性欲，让你不再参与真实世界中的社交活动，因为你被这些极度刺激的内容所吸引。

Video games, another way to addict people. So you have this, you have entire large factories of people that are working to addict you to these things and you stand alone. So the modern struggle as an individual is learning how to resist these things in the first place, drawing your own boundaries and there's no one there to help you. That's terrifying. I mean, it is. It's a new road that needs to be navigated by young people that are, there's no map. There's no guidebook on how to handle this. Our generation is the transition generation. I think our kids will know how to handle it better because they'll grow. I hope, I hope. I hope too because you're seeing some ridiculous behavior from people today that's so common.

电子游戏是让人上瘾的另一种方式。现在，有些大型公司专门在研究如何让你对这些东西上瘾，而你自己孤身一人面对这样的情况。现代人的挑战，就是学会如何抵抗这些诱惑，设定自己的界限，而没有人能帮助你。这真的很可怕。真的。年轻人需要探索一条全新的道路，却没有地图、没有指南来告诉他们该怎么做。我们这一代是处于过渡阶段的一代。我想我们的孩子们会更懂得如何应对这些问题，因为他们会在这样的环境中成长。我希望如此，我真的希望如此。因为如今我们已经能看到一些人表现出相当荒谬的行为，这种情况非常普遍。

I mean, I don't know if you've been paying attention to this, but there was a guy who he made a video, it turns out it wasn't even him that made the video, at least that's not what he said, but it was a video where he sort of doctored Nancy Pelosi talking and made it look like she was drunk. And then a bunch of people retweeted it and like, oh my God, look, she's drunk. And so one of the online publications, some website tracked him down and docked him. And it turned out he's just a day laborer who was an African American Trump fan and thought it would be funny to do that. And it turns out that he didn't even, at least according to him, he actually just put it up on his Facebook page.

我的意思是，我不知道你有没有注意到这个事情，有一个人拍了一个视频，但结果发现甚至不是他拍摄的视频，至少他是这么说的。那个视频里，他有点伪造了南希·佩洛西讲话的内容，看起来她像是喝醉了一样。然后很多人转发了这个视频，觉得好像在说：“哦天哪，看，她喝醉了。” 很快，一个网站找到了这个人，把他的资料公布出来。事实证明，他只是个非裔美国人特朗普支持者，做日工的，他认为这样做很有趣。他自己说，他只是把这个视频放到了自己的脸书页面上。

What's even more disturbing is Facebook gave up his information to this website. For what? Because he made something funny that made people seem drunk. There's a million of those about me. I mean, you could find them. I think Facebook and Twitter and a bunch of these other social media platforms are committing slow motion suicide through these kinds of activities. That was a stunning one though, that they would give up this guy who's a laborer because he made a parody video or he made someone look foolish with editing. Well, you now have basically the media views it as their job to go after individuals they don't like. Yeah, I use media with air quotes in that regard. Yeah.

更让人不安的是，Facebook 把他的信息透露给了这个网站。为什么？就因为他制作了一个让人看起来喝醉了的搞笑视频。类似的内容关于我的都有上百万个。我认为Facebook、Twitter以及其他很多社交媒体平台通过这些行为正在慢性自杀。不过，这次真的让人震惊，他们竟然为了一个工人制作的搞笑或讽刺视频就泄露了他的身份。现在媒体基本上把追击他们不喜欢的人当成了自己的工作。我这里用"媒体"这个词时是打引号的。

I don't think this is something that the New York Times would have done or anything responsible. But the media is getting more and more desperate, right? Because what happened was before the internet, you could have two local newspapers in every town and you could have two local news stations, TV stations in every town. And then CNN came along and started commoditizing the news 24-7 broadcast. And then the internet came along. That was a final nail on the coffin because what the internet did was it said, actually, if there's a fact that's news, you can distribute that immediately. It can go on Twitter, it can go on Facebook, it gets reprinted on Google news a thousand times. You go on Google news, you're like, okay, what's the piece of news? Which source and 3,000 other articles? Too many, right? So news has become commoditized.

我不认为这是《纽约时报》或者任何一个负责任的媒体会做的事情。但现在的媒体越来越绝望了，对吧？因为在互联网出现之前，每个城镇可能有两家本地报纸和两家本地电视新闻台。然后 CNN 出现了，开始提供全天候的新闻广播，使新闻成为商品。接着互联网来了，这就是最后一根稻草，因为互联网允许新闻事实可以被立即分发。新闻可以立刻出现在 Twitter 和 Facebook 上，被 Google 新闻转载无数次。当你上 Google 新闻时，你会看到很多文章来源，可能是一个新闻事件下有 3,000 篇相关文章，是不是太多了？因此，新闻已经被商品化了。

So the entire news media has shifted into peddling opinions and entertainment. Yes. And so now they've become a variation between cheerleaders, shock troops and foresters, you know, talking heads. So these are now tribal, these are now propaganda machines signaling for their tribes. It's a right wing one, there's a left wing one, right? There's the alt right, there's a control left. And the two of them are just fighting it out using their various media organs and memes. So basically when you see one of these news organizations doxing an individual, that's like a tank running over a soldier. That's what's going on. It's just war. And so there's no such thing anymore as a neutral media commentator. The illusion of objectivity that journalism had is lost. There's no longer one guy like a Walter Cronkite that everyone's going to listen to. It's now all just shock troops fighting wars with each other. How does this play out? Have you thought about it? Yeah, a little bit.

整个新闻媒体已经转变成宣传观点和娱乐的工具，是的。因此，他们现在变成了啦啦队、冲击队和评论员这些角色，成为了部落化的宣传机器，为各自的团体服务。有的偏右，有的偏左，还有极右翼和极左，两者都在利用各自的媒体平台和话题展开斗争。所以，当你看到这些新闻机构公开个人信息，就像坦克碾过士兵。这就是实质上的战争。已经没有所谓的中立媒体评论员了。新闻业曾经的客观性幻象已经消失，不再有像沃尔特·克朗凯这样人人都会去听的记者了。现在一切都变成了互相斗争的冲击队。这会如何发展？你有考虑过吗？有一点。

So what the internet does, a lot of this is internet driven. What the internet does is the internet creates one giant aggregator or two for everything. One taxi dispatcher, one e-commerce door, one search engine, one social media site for friends and family, one for business, et cetera. So the internet is this giant aggregator where it creates one big hegemon for everything. And it creates an atomized long tail of millions and millions of individuals. What it gets rid of is the medium size ones in the middle. So for example, you might have had like seven Hollywood studios. What's all going to be Netflix? You had like 10 large e-commerce players, so commerce players from Walmart to Costco to Kmart and whatever. No, it's just going to be Amazon and a ton of small individual brands.

这段话主要说的是互联网在很多方面导致了市场的集中化和个性化。互联网通过整合将很多领域都汇聚成一个或两个大型平台。例如，一家出租车调度公司，一个电商入口，一个搜索引擎，一个家庭和朋友用的社交媒体，还有一个用于商业的社交平台等等。互联网成为了一个巨大的聚合器，为每个领域创造了一个主导者。此外，它还形成了一个由上百万个个人组成的“长尾效应”。而它逐渐淘汰的则是处于中间的中型公司。举个例子，以前可能有七家好莱坞制片厂，现在都转向了类似Netflix这样的平台。以前可能有十家大型电商公司，从沃尔玛到好市多到Kmart等等，但现在只剩下亚马逊以及大量小型个体品牌。

So that's the world that we're headed towards. One hegemon and millions of individuals. So where it ends up long term is media will be a few gigantic outlets. It could be the New York Times, it could be Facebook, a few like that. And there's going to be just a really long tail of millions of independent people. So this idea of who's a journalist and who's not is a Sanjay journalist or not. Everyone's a journalist. That's the world that we're headed towards. I do think the extreme power, the most powerful people in the world today, and this is not well known, but the most powerful people in the world today are the people who are writing the algorithms for Twitter and Facebook and Instagram. Because they're controlling the spread of information. They're literally rewriting people's brains. They're programming the culture. And they're doing it very subtly.

所以这就是我们正在走向的世界：一个霸主和数以百万计的个体。最终的发展可能是媒体行业将由少数几个巨大的机构主导，可能是《纽约时报》，也可能是 Facebook，类似的还有几个。与此同时，将会有一个非常长的尾部，由成千上万的独立个体组成。关于谁是记者谁不是，像“桑杰是记者吗？”这样的问题，每个人都是记者。这就是我们走向的世界。我确实认为，当今世界上极具权力的人，其实是那些为 Twitter、Facebook 和 Instagram 编写算法的人。因为他们控制着信息的传播，实际上是在重塑人们的大脑，编织着文化，并且以非常微妙的方式进行。

Like Google, I believe that one of their execs got up in front of Congress and the congress men asked him, do you manipulate search results? And he said, no, we do not manipulate search results. Really? That's your job. That is literally all Google does. Google has one job, which is to manipulate search results, to pull them out of the noise and rank them properly. And the precise algorithms of how they do that is very hidden, very complex, but influences the hearts and minds of everybody, including all the voters. Now if Google, Facebook, and Twitter have been smart about this, they would not have picked sides. They would have said, we're publishers, whatever goes through our pipes goes through our pipes. If it's illegal, we'll take it down, give us a court order. Otherwise, we don't touch it. It's like the phone company. If I call you up and I say something horrible to you on the phone, the phone company doesn't get in trouble.

就像谷歌一样，我记得其中一个高管在国会面前作证时，被议员问道：“你们会操控搜索结果吗？” 他说：“不会，我们不会操控搜索结果。” 真的吗？这正是谷歌的工作。这实际上就是谷歌的全部工作——操控搜索结果，从信息噪声中提取出有用的信息，并进行正确排序。他们如何做到这一点的具体算法非常隐蔽且复杂，但它影响着每个人的思想，包括所有选民。如果谷歌、Facebook 和 Twitter 足够聪明的话，他们就不会偏袒任何一方。他们应该说：“我们是发布平台，任何通过我们渠道的内容都会这么传递。如果内容是非法的，我们会在收到法院命令后将其删除。除此之外，我们不会干涉。这就像电话公司，如果我打电话给你并说了些令人厌恶的话，电话公司不会因此受到指责。”

But the moment they started taking stuff down that wasn't illegal because somebody's scream, they basically lost their right to be viewed as a carrier. And now all of a sudden, they've taken on liability. So they're sliding down the slippery slope into ruin, where the left wants them to take down the right, the right wants them to take down the left. And now they have no more friends, they have no allies. Traditionally, the libertarian, the Republican and Democrats would have stood up in principle for the common carriers, but now they won't. So my guess is, as soon as Congress, this day is coming, if not already here, it might have even been here today, actually, because this saw something related in the news, the day is coming when the politicians realize that these social media platforms are picking the next president, the next congressman. They're literally picking and they have the power to pick so that they will be controlled by the government. In what way? How do you think they're going to be controlled? Do you think they're going to have to adhere to strict principles of freedom of speech? No, unfortunately it's head of the opposite direction. The opposite direction. I wish it was freedom of speech. Much more likely they're going to be, in the short to medium term, they're going to be holding for hearings. They're going to be pressured massively, do this, don't do that. My concern about that is the hearings that I saw with Zuckerberg, those people were completely incompetent. They didn't seem to understand. They don't. They don't. But they're just applying pressure. They're just trying to scare him so he'll do what they want. And what do they want him to do? They want him to basically suppress the other side. So if you're a right wing, you want to suppress the left wing. If you're left doing it, you want to suppress the right wing.

一旦他们开始因为某些人的喊叫而删除并不违法的内容，他们基本上就失去了作为‘运营商’的资格。于是，他们突然间承担起了责任，滑入一条危险的滑坡。在这条道路上，左派希望他们删除右派的内容，右派希望他们删除左派的内容。现在，他们没有朋友和盟友了。传统上，自由意志主义者、共和党人和民主党人会出于原则来支持大众运营商，但现在他们不会了。我猜想，国会很快会意识到这些社交媒体平台在‘挑选’下任总统和国会议员。换句话说，他们有能力决定，并因此会受到政府控制。会以什么方式被控制呢？你认为他们会被迫遵循严格的言论自由原则吗？不幸的是，事情正朝着相反的方向发展。相反的方向。我希望是为了言论自由，但更有可能的是，在短期到中期内，他们将被召集去参加听证会，承受巨大压力，被告知‘该做这个，不该做那个’。我担心的是我看到扎克伯格参加的那些听证会，那些人完全不称职，他们似乎都不理解。他们并不理解。但他们只是在施加压力，试图吓唬他，让他按他们的意愿行事。他们想要他做什么呢？他们希望他压制另一方。如果你是右翼，你想压制左翼；如果你是左翼，就想压制右翼。

And if you just see where these companies are headquartered in Silicon Valley, all the sensors, and that's really what they are. They're sensors working inside these companies. They're just called, they're called by different names obviously, right? It's double speak. You call it the department defense when it's a department of war. So in this case, the department of safety and trust when really it's a department of censorship, the sensors are inside Silicon Valley.

如果你看看这些公司在硅谷的总部，这些公司里的人就像传感器一样。这就是他们的真实角色，只是被称为了不同的名字。这有点像花言巧语：你称它为国防部，其实是战争部。在这种情况下，你称其为“安全与信任部”，但实际上它是“审查部”。这些“传感器”就在硅谷内部。

So it's going to reflect Silicon Valley's politics. Which is extremely progressive left-frying. And if you're not that, you really have no place. That's right. So instead of being a conservative, an open conservative at Google, good luck. No, you get lynched. It's crazy. I mean, I don't think that there was ever a thing like that that was so influential and so politically, ideologically, one-sided.

所以，这反映了硅谷的政治立场。硅谷非常激进地偏向左翼。如果你不是这样的人，就很难融入。是的，在谷歌，你要是一个公开的保守派，那真是好运了。否则，你会受到排挤。这种情况真是不可思议。我认为，在历史上很难找到这样一个既有影响力又如此政治和意识形态单一的地方。

Yeah, there's a little saying on the internet, I think it's called conquest law, that any organization that's not explicitly left right wing eventually becomes left wing. And I don't know why that's true, but it does seem to me to be true. Well, it's a fascinating battle that's going on right now. I mean, it really is.

在网上有一句话，我想它叫做征服定律，大意是任何没有明确左翼或右翼立场的组织最终都会变成左翼。我不知道为什么会这样，但在我看来确实如此。现在这场讨论真的很有趣，确实如此。

And conservatives, as far as social media is concerned, they're just getting chopped off at the hams, left and right. Yeah. What'll eventually happen is that whenever you suppress speech, the organism metastasizes, then it has to start turning towards other means. If you're unlucky, it goes towards violence. If you're lucky, they find other outlets.

关于社交媒体，保守派仿佛被“削腿断肢”，到处遭遇打压。最终，压制言论只会导致事态恶化，迫使人们寻找其他途径表达。如果运气不好，可能会转向暴力；如果运气好，他们会找到其他出口来表达。

I think what will happen is we will start creating decentralized media that's not owned by any single entity that can't be suppressed or shut down, that will then start spreading these various things. And that will take the place of Twitter or Facebook or what have you. That's right. But it's going to take 10 years, 20 years. It's not overnight.

我认为，我们将开始创建去中心化的媒体，这种媒体不属于任何单一实体，因此无法被压制或关闭。它会开始传播各种信息，并取代像推特或脸书这样的平台。没错。但这需要10年到20年的时间，并不会一蹴而就。

Well, you know, Twitter took 10 years to get to the point where it's at this mess right now, but it was so interesting to have Jack Dorsey and to talk to him about where it's going, where he thinks it's going. And his own principles, which he believes that it's a fundamental right. And he believes that freedom of speech is something that we all should have and that these platforms should essentially be like utilities, like the electric company. Jack is correct. And he has the right vision.

你知道，推特花了十年时间才走到现在这个混乱的地步。不过，和杰克·多西（Jack Dorsey）讨论推特的发展方向真是很有趣。他认为言论自由是我们都应该拥有的一项基本权利，这些平台应该像电力公司那样，成为一种公共服务。杰克的观点是正确的，他的愿景很有远见。

It's just he's in an organization where the other individuals in the organization feel differently. Very differently. So the organization itself can get hijacked. And his timeline for changing things is like it's decades. I mean, I know I shouldn't say decades, but I mean, I was like, when do you think that something, there was one idea of having an uncensored Twitter, like one Twitter that's the Wild West, like you can have regular Twitter or you could try Wild West Twitter.

他所在的组织中，其他人有非常不同的看法。因此，整个组织可能会被“绑架”。他改变事情的时间表是以几十年来计算的。虽然我不该说几十年，但我的意思是，我想知道他认为什么时候会实现一种不受审查的Twitter理念，比如一个像“狂野西部”一样的Twitter，你可以选择使用常规的Twitter，或者尝试这种“狂野西部版”的Twitter。

Well, that already exists as a network called GAB, which is what happens. Yeah, but GAB isn't even Wild West Twitter. And people, docs people, they remove things like that. Yeah. I mean, I think there's certainly lines around violence and illegality that you don't want to cross, but GAB is closer to a free speech platform, but it's still not decentralized. It can still get shut down. It can still get taken out. Yes. It's also suppressed heavily.

这其实已经存在一个叫做GAB的网络平台上了。是的，GAB甚至比“狂野西部”版的Twitter还不如。然而，人们在GAB上揭露他人隐私或信息的时候，他们会采取措施移除这些内容。当然，我认为在暴力和违法行为方面确实有一些界限是不应该跨越的。不过，GAB更接近一个言论自由的平台，但它仍然不是去中心化的。它仍然可能被关闭或取缔。同时，它也受到很大的压制。

Yes. So there and the people on there are right now are extremely right wing. So it's not a pleasant place for someone like me to hang out. Well, it's all the people that have been kicked off of something else. That's right. Try going over there and being moderate. Try going over there. There's no room for you. Yeah, unfortunately, because I don't identify as any party or any creed. You know, it doesn't work for me.

是的，目前在那里的人非常极端右翼。对我这样的人来说，那不是一个令人愉快的地方。那些人都是从其他地方被踢出来的人。没错。试着过去做个中立的人，试试看，你是没有立足之地的。很遗憾，因为我不属于任何党派或信仰，所以那里对我来说不合适。

Does that a problem in Silicon Valley when you don't identify as anything? Do you get pressure? Totally. It used to be okay. It's not okay anymore. When was it okay? Like 10 years ago, I would say it was okay. And then you started seeing a shift? Yeah. And now you have to pick sides. Otherwise, you automatically be the enemy.

在硅谷，当你不认同任何身份时，这是个问题吗？你会感受到压力吗？完全是的。以前没事，但现在不行了。什么时候还算可以？大概10年前吧，那时候还行。然后你开始注意到变化了吗？是的。现在你必须选边站，否则你就自动成为敌人。

Really? Yeah. Struggle sessions and all that. God, struggle sessions. I'm exaggerating for effect. But it definitely has that oppressive feeling to it. Right. And you also have to be politically outspoken. Yeah. It can't be something that you just stay neutral about. Right. It's like when Tim Ferriss, I think at some point, put out a tweet about how you can't just say anything anymore.

真的吗? 是的。批斗会之类的东西。天啊，批斗会。我有点夸大其词了。但这种压迫感确实存在。对了，你还得在政治上表明立场。是的。你不能对这些事情保持中立。是啊。这就像蒂姆·费里斯有一次发了一条推特，说现在不能随便发表任何言论了。

And you know, people are being suppressed. And a whole bunch of people, a lot of them from Silicon Valley, piled in and said, what is it that you can't say? What are you afraid to say? You can say whatever you want, Tim. Go ahead. What are you afraid of? I think they're like beating him. Yeah. What was he trying to say?

你知道，人们正在受到压制。一大群人，其中很多来自硅谷，纷纷涌上来问：有什么是你不能说的？你怕说什么？蒂姆，你可以随便说任何你想说的。继续吧。你在怕什么？我觉得他们好像在逼问他。他到底想说什么呢？

Wow, we have to put him in that box. He was someone who was thinking about saying something and he shouldn't have said. Exactly. Now we know. One great tweet I saw was, you know, the left won the culture wars. Now they're just driving around shooting the survivors. Wow. That's hilarious. Yeah, I wonder. I wonder who has won the culture war. There's certainly a battle that's been won in terms of like control of social media. Control of social media is absolutely left. Well, this is unfortunate for conservatives. But technology is a force that also pushes left. So if you look all throughout human history, like the left essentially grows and grows and grows. Right? Why is that? Why is it inexorably that as some commentators have said Leviathan slouches left? Right. Leviathan is the government. Why does it slouch left? And I think a lot of that has been because of technology.

哇，我们必须把他放在那个框框里。因为他说了不该说的话。这就对了，现在我们知道了。我看到一个很有趣的推文：你知道的，左翼赢得了文化战争，现在他们只是在到处寻找还未消灭的对手。哇，真搞笑。是啊，我很好奇。我好奇到底谁赢得了文化战争。无疑在社交媒体的控制方面有一场战斗被赢得了。社交媒体的控制绝对是倾向于左翼的。这对保守派来说很不幸。但是技术是一种也推动向左发展的力量。如果你看看整个人类历史，其实左翼是在不断壮大的，对吗？为什么会这样？为什么正如一些评论员所说，“利维坦”会向左倾斜？没错，利维坦指的是政府。为什么它会向左倾斜？我认为这与科技有很大关系。

Technology has made it so that it makes more like industrial revolution technology. We all band together. We're wards of the state, right? Contraception is a technology that kind of helps lean left where it takes away from the family unit. Abortion is a technology. It wasn't possible thousands of years ago. So technology actually empowers the individual. The individual means that you have the breakdown of family structure and religion and all that. And I'm not necessarily opposed to that. But it does mean that there's a leftward shift to it. Now we're getting a small set of technologies that actually can take you more rightward. Encryption is an example because encryption makes it easier to have privacy. It makes it easier to have money that is outside of the state. It means 3D printing of guns is an example of a technology that is more of a rightward shift.

科技的发展让我们仿佛回到了工业革命的时代。我们团结在一起，成为国家的庇护者，对吧？避孕是种在某种程度上削弱家庭结构的科技，它让社会更倾向于左翼。堕胎也是一种科技，在几千年前是不可能实现的。所以科技其实赋予了个体更多的力量。个体的强大意味着家庭结构和宗教等的瓦解。我对此并不完全反对。但这确实意味着社会会朝向左翼转变。如今，我们又迎来了少数能让社会更趋向右翼的技术。比如，加密技术，因为加密技术让保持隐私更容易，同时也更容易拥有不受国家控制的钱财。再例如3D打印枪支，这也是一种让社会更趋向右翼的技术。

But generally technology leads the world left. Yeah. It's also usually highly educated people that are involved in technology in the first place. And I think when you look at universities in particular, they tend to lean left in this country as well. Well, universities, what happened to universities is very interesting. Universities first became the arbiters of data and intellectualism and what's right and wrong. So at the time period when it was like, should we be doing that or not, well, let's look at the university. What do they have to say? What are the smartest people the professors that think tanks have to say? And the university's got this credibility from the hard sciences. So they got this from physics and math and computer science and chemistry because these deliver real things. The Manhattan Project, the microprocessor, the space vehicles and so on, the electric car.

一般来说，科技会推动世界向左发展。对，通常会参与科技领域的人本身受过高等教育。而且我认为，当你特别关注大学的时候，会发现它们在这个国家也往往倾向于左翼。大学的变化非常有趣。最初，大学成为数据、知识和是非判断的裁决者。在需要决定是否应该做某件事情的时候，人们会去看看大学的意见。最聪明的教授和智库会怎么说？大学的公信力来源于硬科学，比如物理、数学、计算机科学和化学，因为这些学科带来了现实的成果，例如曼哈顿计划、微处理器、航天器以及电动车等。

So they gain this mantle of authority and legitimacy from the hard sciences. So then come the social sciences kind of sneak in. Then you get economics. And microeconomics is a real discipline, real science, real math behind it. Logic, reason. And then you get macroeconomics, which can be politicized a little bit more voodoo. And then you get social studies and then you get gender studies and then you get blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And so what happened is that because we took scientists to be the high priests of our new world, science itself has gotten corrupted. And the social sciences, and you can tell their fake sciences because they're the words science tacked on at the end, have come in and hijacked the universities and become the new think tanks.

他们通过硬科学获得了权威和合法性的外衣。接着，社会科学悄然出现。然后是经济学。微观经济学是一门真正的学科，有真正的科学和数学支撑，背后有逻辑和推理。而宏观经济学则可能受到政治化的影响，有时显得有些玄乎。接下来是社会研究，之后是性别研究，再然后就是各种各样别的研究。因此，发生的情况是，由于我们把科学家视为新时代的祭司，科学本身受到了腐蚀。社会科学进入并占领了大学，成为新的智囊团，而你可以辨别出这些是伪科学，因为这些学科的名字后都带有“科学”这个词。

And so essentially what you see going on today in the universities is a war between the social sciences and the physical sciences. And the crossover point is biology, right? Where you can see like the whole gender is a social construct movement is attacking biology and evolutionary biology. Just like in the social sphere, they're coming after the comedians, right? But you can see the struggle going on the universities. And I would say the physical sciences are essentially losing that war. What can be done? Or is it just something that has to play out? Do we have to realize the consequences of the foolishness? The good news is the physical sciences have a reality on their side. Right. Yeah, but it's not even, I mean, in many ways, it's not respected. Yeah, but at the end of the day, your aircraft still has to fly. You know, your microprocessor still has to compute.

基本上，你会发现现在的大学里存在着社会科学与自然科学之间的冲突。生物学就是两者间的交叉点，比如性别是社会构建的观点正在攻击生物学和进化生物学。就像在社会领域，他们也开始攻击喜剧演员。不过你可以看到这种冲突正在大学中发生。我认为，自然科学基本上在这场战争中处于下风。我们能做些什么呢？还是说这只是一个必须经过的过程？我们是否必须意识到无知带来的后果？好消息是，自然科学有现实这一优势。对，但在很多方面，这一点并不受尊重。然而，归根结底，你的飞机还是得会飞，你的微处理器还是要能够计算。

So there's only so far they can take it. But I do see, for example, in biology, a lot of biologists are facing this difficult thing where they have to say things that they know are not true to keep their job. Like what? Well, you had Brett Weinstein on here. Right. So that's a clear example. So there's just the crossover line of what is acceptable and what's not is entering into biology. And biology will probably suffer the most. Synthetic biology, for example, a lot of this will end up in China because it won't be. You won't be able to map facts and reality and actions together. You won't be able to get grants. You won't be able to get the adulation of your peers. I don't know enough here.

所以，他们能够做到的程度也有限。但是，我确实看到，比如在生物学领域，许多生物学家正在面临一个困难的局面，他们必须说一些自己明知道不是真的的话来保住工作。比如说什么呢？嗯，你曾邀请过Brett Weinstein来这里。这就是一个很明显的例子。因此，什么是可接受的，什么不是，已经在进入生物学领域。而生物学可能会受到最大的影响。比如说合成生物学，许多研究最终可能会转移到中国，因为事实、现实和行动之间无法进行匹配。你无法获得研究经费，也无法得到同行的赞誉。我对这方面了解不够。

So now I'm in shaky territory. It's just my sense that that crossover battleground right now is an evolutionary biology. Economics lost. Well, certainly in terms of gender and that sort of seems to be one of the major battlegrounds. Yeah. It's also going to happen, for example, blank slate theory. You know, are we nature? Are we nature? Yes. It's kind of socially unacceptable to say that a lot of it is nature and not nurture or vice versa depending on which side you're on. Right. Those kinds of discussions get corrupted. They do get corrupted and it's really unfortunate because that's an unbelievably important thing to understand. Like what makes a person a sociopath? What makes a person a super successful person, a winner? What makes a person a drug addict? What are these factors?

所以现在我进入了一个不太稳定的领域。我的感觉是，当前的交叉争论领域在于进化生物学。经济学在这方面已经显得无足轻重了。特别是关于性别的问题，这似乎是主要的争论焦点之一。类似的事情也会发生，比如“白板理论”。我们是天性使然吗？现在说很多东西是天性而不是后天教养或者反过来，是不太被社会接受的，看你站在哪一边。这样的讨论经常会被扭曲。这真的很不幸，因为这对理解人类行为而言是极其重要的。比如说，是什么让一个人成为社会病态者？是什么让一个人成为极其成功的人或赢家？是什么让一个人成为吸毒者？这些因素是什么？

You can't have a reasonable conversation about climate science anymore. It's not a science. It's all politicized. You can't even bring it up. Everyone's got their minds made up already. Well, what's uncomfortable to me is people have their minds made up and they don't even have the data. On most of these topics, people are talking past each other anyway. They're talking about different things. Like when you get into gun control, for example, right? One side is talking about the right to bear arms in case a tyrannical ruler or king drastic over the country. The other side is talking about school shootings and protecting people in their homes, right? From crime. So they're just talking about two different things.

你现在已经无法进行一场合理的气候科学讨论了。这已经不是纯粹的科学，而是被政治化了。你甚至无法提起这个话题，因为每个人都已经有了自己的固定想法。让我感到不安的是，人们在没有数据的情况下就坚信不疑。在大多数这样的议题上，人们其实是互相说不到点子上的，彼此谈论的是不同的事情。比如说枪支管控，一个方面在谈论持有武器的权利，以防国家被暴君统治，而另一个方面在谈论校园枪击事件和保护家庭免受犯罪侵害。所以他们实际上在谈论完全不同的事情。

Right. They're not politically acceptable to even talk about the same thing. Or when it gets to immigration, the right is talking about the left is like bundling together illegal immigration and legal immigration into one thing. Yes. Right. On the right, sometimes you've got racist hiding in there. So it doesn't help their cause. Right. They're talking about two different things. If they were talking about the same thing, which is how many immigrants should we let into the country and what are the criteria for that, that would be a very different conversation than no immigrants or everybody comes in. And then also on the left, you have this benefit that everybody who's currently coming in illegally is going to vote for the left because of where they're coming from and their socioeconomic circumstances.

好的。在政治上，即使谈论同一件事也是不可接受的。或者当涉及到移民问题时，右派认为左派是在将非法移民和合法移民混为一谈。对，没错。在右翼，有时会有一些种族主义者隐藏其中，这并不利于他们的事业。他们实际上谈论的是两件不同的事情。如果他们讨论的是同一件事，比如我们应该允许多少移民进入国家，以及相应的标准是什么，那将是一场不同的对话，而不是讨论不允许任何移民或者允许所有人进入。同时，左翼也有这样的好处，即目前非法入境的人由于他们的出身和社会经济状况，很可能会支持左派。

To me, the test of any good system is you build a system, hand it over to your enemies to run for the next decade. So for example, if you want a censorship on Twitter or Facebook, you should build that system and then hand it over to the other side to run. So if you're a left winger who's promoting censorship, that's somebody else running. Same with immigration. If you want immigration system, build a system, then hand it over to the other side to running. That's how you know it's a good system. There's no room for nuance when you're dealing with these political battlegrounds, when you're dealing with right versus left and one side has a clearly established stance that you're supposed to take.

在我看来，一个好的系统的考验在于：你建立一个系统，然后在接下来的十年里交给你的对手来运行。例如，如果你想要在Twitter或Facebook上进行审查，你应该建立这个系统，然后交给对方来管理。如果你是一个支持审查的左翼人士，那就让别人来运行。同样，对于移民政策也是如此。如果你想要一个移民系统，先建立这个系统，然后交给对方来运行。这样你就能知道这个系统是否真正好用。当面对这些政治角力场时，尤其是涉及左右对立的情况下，几乎没有给微妙处理留有空间，因为双方都已经有了明确的立场。

Like gun control is a great example of that, right? There's no room for what about mental health? What about the fact that so many of these people are on psych medication? Why is that not being discussed? We're running one of the greatest mental health experiments in history when we're doping everybody up in SSRIs. And maybe if you give 30 million people SSRIs, maybe like 29.9 million are a lot happier. And then you have a fraction that commits suicide or detonate. Yes.

枪支管控就是一个很好的例子，对吧？在这个问题上，没有人讨论心理健康问题。为什么那么多使用精神类药物的人没有被关注？我们其实正在进行历史上最大的心理健康实验，把这么多人用上选择性5-HT再摄取抑制剂（SSRIs）。或许如果给3000万人使用SSRIs，可能有2990万人会变得更开心，但还是有一小部分人会自杀或者做出极端行为。

You're basically trading the mean for the variants. You have blow up risk. Yeah, there's no room for nuance, which is why I stay out of politics largely. Do they drag you in though sometimes? They always try. I mean, even this conversation is going to force you to get dragged in. Sure. But I'm sure there's going to be some people there. Yeah. Here's the thing about politics. Because we have a first past the post system. What that means is like whoever wins 51% of the vote in this country gets a lot of the power, right? It's not like proportional representation where the Greens have 10% and you know, libertarians of 3% or whatever. It's just like you're all Democrat in power now or all Republican. Because of that to win, you have to pick one of these two sides, right? You have to choose. You can't just basically say I'm going to be, you know, nuanced about it. You can't vote for a third party that's throwing over your vote, right? I have a friend who's trying to fix that. He's starting this thing called a good party where like you kickstart your vote. So you combine all your votes, you hold them in reserve. And then when you have enough to win, then you vote that person in power, right? You don't throw away your vote. Outside of those hacks, we're never going to get a third party elected.

你基本上是在用均值换取变数，这会带来爆仓风险。因为政治中没有细微差别的空间，所以我大多避免参与政治。但他们会时不时地拉你进去吗？他们总是尝试。即使这次对话也会迫使你被卷入其中。当然。但我确信一定会有一些人对此感兴趣。政治的问题在于，我们有一个“领先者当选”制度。这意味着在这个国家，只要谁赢得了51%的选票，谁就能掌握大部分权力。它不像比例代表制，比如绿党获得10%的选票，自由意志党获得3%的选票或类似情况。在这种制度下，现在都是民主党掌权或都是共和党掌权。因此，要想获胜，你必须在这两个阵营中选一个，你必须做出选择。你不能说我要保持某种微妙的立场，也不能投给第三方，这样无异于浪费你的选票。我有个朋友在尝试解决这个问题，他启动了一个名为“好党”的项目，你可以把你的选票众筹起来，储存在一起，然后当票数足够多时才投票以便推选某人上台。这样你就不会浪费你的选票。除非有这样的创新，否则我们永远无法选出一个第三方。

So because of that, all of your beliefs have to neatly fit into the Democrat bundle or the Republican bundle. And so when you get into that tribe, if you signal outside of that out of that bundle, you get attacked. Yeah. So it's literally, it's making you into an unclear thinker. It's making you into a muddle thinker. If all of your beliefs line up into one political party, you're not a clear thinker. If all your beliefs are the same as your neighbors and your friends, you're not a clear thinker. You're literally just your beliefs are socialized. They're taken from other people. So if you want to be a clear thinker, you cannot pay attention to politics. It will destroy your ability to think. Oh, but what dread. Most of modern life, all our diseases are diseases of abundance, not diseases of scarcity, right?

因此，你所有的信念都必须整齐地归入民主党或共和党的框架。一旦进入某个阵营，如果你表现出与这个框架不一致的观点，就会受到攻击。这实际上让你无法清晰地思考，使你的思维混乱。如果你的所有信念都符合某个政党的立场，你就不是一个清晰的思考者。如果你的所有信念都和你的邻居和朋友一样，你也不是一个清晰的思考者。你实际上只是随波逐流，这些信念是从别人那里借来的。所以，如果你想成为一个清晰的思考者，就不能过于关注政治，否则它会摧毁你的思考能力。噢，不过又有什么可怕的。现代生活中的大多数问题，都是由富足而非匮乏引起的疾病，对吧？

All times I may have starved. I'm, you know, all times if I got sugar, that was a wonderful thing. I should have eaten all the sugar to get my hands on. If I got in a piece of news or gossip that was interesting data that would have helped my life and moved me forward. If I'd gotten some brief amount of entertainment, whether through video games or magazines or whatever, that would have been good. Now it's all a disease of abundance. We are overexposed to everything. So the way to survive in modern society is to be an ascetic. It is to retreat from society. There's too much society everywhere you go. Society in your phone, society in your pocket, society in your ears. We're being socialized right now by listening to this podcast. We're socializing you. We're programming you. Everyone's trying to program everybody. The only solution is to turn it off. The only solution is to turn it off and concentrate on your breathing.

我曾经历过可能缺乏食物的时光。你知道的，那时如果我有糖，那真是一件美好的事情。我应该吃光所有能得到的糖。如果我听到一些有趣的消息或八卦，那将是对我生活有帮助的信息，让我有所进步。如果我能获得一点点娱乐，无论是通过视频游戏还是杂志，这都很好。现在一切都成了过剩的问题。我们无所不在地接触到各种信息。所以在现代社会中生存的方式就是要成为一个隐士，要从社会中退隐。无论你走到哪里，到处都是社会：手机里的社会，口袋里的社会，耳朵里的社会。现在通过收听这个播客，我们正在被社会化。我们正在影响你，我们在对你进行编程。每个人都在试图给别人洗脑。唯一的解决办法就是关闭这一切，专注于你的呼吸。

Meditation, yeah. Yes. It works. It's been a lifesaver for me. Oh, I do it. And I do it whenever I get spare time. I was at the doctor's office this morning. And I knew it was going to be 20 minutes. So I just sat there with my eyes closed for 20 minutes and I meditated. You know, when I was growing up, there was a statement. I think it was Pascal. He said, you know, all of man's problems arise because he cannot sit by himself in a room for 30 minutes alone. And it's very true. I always needed to be stimulated. And when the iPhone came along, boredom was dead. I would never be bored again. Even if I'm standing in line, I'm on my iPhone.

冥想，真的有效。对我来说，它就像救命稻草。我会利用空闲时间进行冥想。今天早上我在医生办公室，知道要等20分钟，于是就闭上眼睛冥想了20分钟。小时候，我听过一句话，好像是帕斯卡尔说的：所有人类的问题都源于不能独自坐在一个房间里待上30分钟。这真的很有道理。我总是需要被刺激。当 iPhone 出现时，无聊就不存在了。不管是排队时，还是其他时候，我都会用iPhone，这样我就再也不会感到无聊。

And I thought it was great. And when I was a kid, I used to try and overclock my brain. Like, how many thoughts can I think at once? The answer is only one. But I would try to like think multiple thoughts at once. And I was proud of that. I was proud that my brain was always running. This engine was always moving. And it's a disease. It's actually the road to misery. And now that I'm older, I realize like you actually want to again, rest your mind. You want to learn how to settle into your mind. And now I look forward to solitary confinement. You'll leave me alone for a day. It'll be like the happiest day I've had in a while. And that is a superpower that I think everybody can attain. The superpower of learning to be alone and enjoying it. Yeah. Well, I think it's critical. And I do think that these times where you just think about things, just be alone and think about things are so rare these days. And I think during those rare times is when you really get to understand what you actually believe or don't believe.

我觉得这很棒。小时候，我总是试着过度使用我的大脑，比如同时想到多少个念头。答案是只能想到一个。但我总是试着同时思考多个想法，我为此感到自豪，因为我的大脑总是在运转。可是这其实是一种病，实际上通向的是痛苦。现在我年纪大了，我意识到其实我们应该让大脑休息，学会如何平静心神。现在我期待独处。如果让我一个人呆一天，那可能会是我好久以来最开心的一天。我认为这种能力人人都可以拥有——学会享受独处的能力。我认为这是非常重要的。在现今这个时代，独自思考的机会非常稀少。我认为正是在这些难得的时刻里，你才能真正理解自己到底信仰或者不信仰什么。

Yeah, it's funny. When I first started meditating, it was really hard, right? Because everybody, I think a lot of people who listen to this broadcast, they've heard of meditation that has a good rep. So everybody tries it. They struggle. They kind of give it up. It's one of those things that everybody says they do, but nobody actually does. Right? It's like not eating sugar. Right? Everyone talks about how, yeah, I don't eat sugar. But like, yeah. Then the dessert tray rolls around and everyone's going for the cookies. Yep. Right. So it's become one of those things. And in fact, it's now even become a signaling thing where it's like, oh, how much did you meditate? I meditated this much. You know, there are people now wearing headbands saying with tweetbirds that chirp it. And then when they're in deep meditation, I don't know. They make it work. But they'll be like, I got a lot of chirps today. How many chirps did you get? Oh, my God. Oh, your meditation technique is wrong. Mine is right. But really all it is is the art of doing nothing. Okay. And it's important because I think when we grow up, right, it's all this stuff happening to you in your life and some of it you're processing, some of it you're absorbing and some of it you should probably think a little bit more about and work through, but you don't. You don't have time. So it gets buried in you. It's preferences and judgments and unresolved situations and issues. And it's like your email inbox. It's just piling up email after email after email. That's not answered going back 10, 20, 30, 40 years.

是啊，这挺有趣的。当我刚开始冥想的时候，真的很难，对吧？因为我想很多听这个节目的人都听过冥想，说它口碑很好。所以大家都去尝试，但因为很难，坚持不下来，很多人就放弃了。这就像那些大家都说自己做了，但其实没做到的事情，对吧？比如说不吃糖。每个人都在说自己不吃糖，但当甜点车推过来时，却又都去拿饼干。是吧？所以冥想变成了这样的事情。事实上，现在这甚至成为一种炫耀的事情，比如你冥想了多久，我冥想了这么久。现在甚至有人戴着能发推文的头带，当他们进入深度冥想时，会有小鸟发出鸣叫声。他们让它运作起来，然后他们会说，我今天得到了很多鸣叫声。你得到了多少？哦天哪，你的冥想技术是错的，我的是正确的。但实际上这只是无为的艺术而已。这是重要的，因为我认为当我们成长过程中，生活中有这么多事情发生，一些事情我们在处理，一些事情我们在吸收，还有一些事情我们可能应该多想想并解决，但我们没有时间去做。所以这些事情在心里埋藏起来，变成偏好和判断，未解决的情况和问题。这就像你的电子邮件收件箱，未读邮件一封接一封地累积，时间长达十年、二十年、三十年、四十年。

And then when you sit down to meditate, those emails start coming back at you. Hey, what about this issue? What about that issue? Have you solved this? Did you think about that? You have regrets there. You have issues there. And that gets scary. People don't want to do that. So like it's not working. I can't clear my mind. I better get up and not do this. But really what's happening is it's it's it's self therapy. It's just that instead of paying a therapist to sit there and listen to you, you're listening to yourself. And you just have to sit there as those emails go through one by one, you work through each of them until you get to the magical inbox zero. And there comes a day when you sit down, you realize the only things you're thinking about are things that happened yesterday because you've processed everything else. Not necessarily even resolved it, but at least listen to yourself. And that's when meditation starts. And I think it's a very powerful thing that everybody should experience. And that's when you arrive upon the art of doing nothing.

当你坐下来冥想时，那些邮件内容又开始浮现心头。嘿，这个问题怎么解决？那个问题呢？你解决了吗？你有考虑过吗？你在那里有遗憾，也有问题。这让人感到害怕，很多人因此不想进行冥想，觉得无法清除头脑中的杂念，甚至会想起身放弃。但实际上，这是一种自我疗愈的过程。只是这次不是付钱给治疗师来倾听你，而是你在倾听自己。你只需要坐在那里，让那些“邮件”一一浮现，你逐一处理它们，直到达到心灵的“收件箱归零”。有一天，当你坐下冥想时，你会发现自己只在思考昨天发生的事情，因为其他事情已经被处理好了。未必解决了所有问题，但至少你倾听了自己。这时，真正的冥想才开始。我认为这是每个人都该体验的一种强大的感受，那时你便会领悟到“无为而治”的艺术。

Well, I think it's even a problem that most people are getting their meditation from an app. I will not use an app. It's sneaky. I mean, Sam Harris is a very good meditation app. I should say that. But you should be able to just do it. And many people can't. It is it is literally the art of doing nothing. Yeah. So all you need to do for meditation is just sit down, close your eyes, comfortable position, whatever happens happens. If you think you think if you don't think you don't think don't put an effort into it, don't put effort against it, all you need. Do you concentrate on your breath or do you have a specific technique? Nothing.

好吧，我觉得大多数人通过应用程序来进行冥想本身就是个问题。我不会使用应用程序。这有点隐蔽。我的意思是，Sam Harris 的冥想应用非常不错，我必须承认这一点。但你应该能够直接去做。而许多人却做不到。冥想实际上是一种无为而为的艺术。是的，你所需要做的就是坐下，闭上眼睛，保持一个舒适的姿势，顺其自然。如果你想到了就去想，如果没想到也没关系，不用刻意去努力，也不用抗拒，只要这样就行。你需要专注于呼吸或者有其他特定技巧吗？完全不需要。

Nothing. No, you just sit. I think about my breath. That's all I do. You can do that. I try to only concentrate on breathing. I used to do that. But at some level, all the concentration, every meditation technique is leading you to the same thing, which is just witnessing. And concentration is a technique to still your mind enough that you can then drop the object of concentration. So you could also just try going straight to the end game. The problem with what I'm talking about, which is not focusing on your breath, is you will have to listen to your mind for a long time. It's not going to work unless you do at least an hour a day and preferably at least 60 days before you kind of work through a lot of issues. So it will be hell for a while. But when you come out the other side, it's great. You get rid of the chatter. Or when the chatter comes, it's in the background. It's dimmer. It's smaller. You've heard it before. You see the patterns. It's more recent. It's something you need to resolve anyway. And you will get moments of actual silence.

没什么。不，你只需静坐。我专注于呼吸，这就是我所做的一切。你可以这样做。我努力只专注于呼吸。以前我也是这样做的。但是，在某种程度上，所有的专注和冥想技巧最终都是为了让你观察自己。而专注是一种让你的心足够平静的方法，这样你就可以放下专注的对象。所以，你也可以尝试直接进入最终的结果。我所说的不去专注于呼吸的问题是，你可能需要长时间倾听自己的内心。如果一天不至少练习一个小时，而且最好能坚持至少60天，很多问题就无法得到处理。所以，开始时可能会很困难。但当你度过这个阶段后，情况会很棒。你会摆脱那些琐碎的杂念。即使它们出现，也只是背景声，它们变得更暗、更小，你已经听过，以前未解决的问题，现在更能看清，你需要解决。你还会有片刻的真正宁静。

What is your ultimate state when you meditate? Is there a state where you've achieved rarely, if ever, where you're in bliss or you're in harmony or you're in enlightenment? It's kind of indescribable. Because when you're really meditating, you're not there. When there's no thoughts, there's no experience or there's nothing. There's just nothing. So it's hard to describe. But I would say that you can definitely, every psychedelic state that people encounter using so-called plant medicines can be arrived just through pure meditation. And I've definitely hit some of those states. You've hit some transcendent psychedelic states where you're hallucinating the whole deal. I've had trippy visuals. I've had the kind of the lights and colors. I've had the so-called downloads. I've had the realizations. I've had the bliss. I've had the light. I've had the colors. But not every time. No, it's rarely. And in fact, I would say that's also like an experience that you can start craving, which will then actually take you out of meditation.

当你冥想时，你的终极状态是什么？是否有一种状态你很少能达到，却充满了极乐、和谐或启蒙？这种状态难以用言语形容。因为当你真正冥想时，你是超越自我的。当没有想法时，就没有经验、没有任何东西，只是一片空无。所以这很难描述。但我会说，所有人们通过所谓的植物药物体验到的迷幻状态，仅通过纯粹的冥想就可以达到。而我确实达到了其中一些状态。有时你会进入超越的迷幻状态，仿佛在幻觉中。我体验过奇异的视觉效果，看见光芒和色彩。我也有收到所谓的“信息下载”，获得了一些领悟，感受过极乐、光芒和色彩。但这不是每次都会发生，很少发生。事实上，我会说这些体验会让你开始渴望，从而实际上让你偏离冥想的正轨。

Were you really, and I'm not enlightened or anything close to it, so not even the ballpark, but my own experience, and this is just personal experience, is the place where I end up the most that is really the one that I want to be at, is peace. It's just peace. Peace. Happy. To me, peace is happiness at rest and happiness is kind of peace and motion. You can convert peace to happiness anytime you want, but peace is what you want most of the time. That's interesting. You can convert peace to happiness anytime you want. Yeah. If you're a peaceful person, anything you do will be a happy activity. And by the way, being on social media and engaging politics will not bring you peace. There's nothing less peaceful. Right. And today's day and age? The way we think you get peace is by resolving all your external problems, but there's unlimited external problems. So the only way to actually get peace is on the inside by giving up this idea of problems. Who thinks you can get peace by resolving external problems other than politicians? Everybody. That's what everybody's struggling to do, right?

你真的这样想吗？我并没有开悟，离开悟还差得远。但根据我个人的经验，那种我最想达到的状态就是平和。就是平和。平和。快乐。对我来说，平和是安静的幸福，而幸福则是动态的平和。你可以随时将平和转换为幸福，但大部分时间你都会更想要平和。这很有趣，你可以随时将平和转换为幸福。是的，如果你是个内心平和的人，那么你做的每件事情都会充满快乐。顺便说一下，上社交媒体或参与政治讨论不会给你带来平和，这二者是最不平和的。对，当今社会呢？我们一直以为，只要解决掉所有外部的问题，就能获得平和，但外部的问题是无穷无尽的。所以真正能给你带来平和的方法，只能是从内心放下对问题的执念。除了政客，还有谁认为可以通过解决外部问题来获得平和呢？其实大家都是这样努力尝试的，对吗？

Why are you trying to make money to solve all your money problems? Why are you trying to win up politics? Because then you'll be at peace because your people will have won. It's a daunting task to get your shit together. It's easier to change yourself and to change the world. That's true. And the best way to change the world is to change yourself. Exactly. It's all these people who are shouting on social media. The best way is just to actually live the life that you want other people to live. Like I went to New Zealand and there's this guy that I met with and everyone's on social media shouting about environmentalism and concern and sustain. I go to this guy's house and he was doing a very quietly, very gently, he was doing a two week long zero waste experiment where he was throwing out nothing. So every package that he opened he would keep and he would like clean it up so he would keep his Amazon boxes. He would keep the little container. Even a tea bag, if he opened a tea bag, he has to figure out how to compost the tea inside, how to make the tea itself useful, how to make the tea bag like a little storage item. So there was no trash. He was literally living with zero trash waste. And he was doing it and it was really inspirational. Meeting people like him made me far more environmentally conscious than any amount of people yelling at me on social media ever will.

为什么你总是想着通过挣钱来解决所有的经济问题？为什么你想要在政治上获胜？因为这样你就能安心，因为你们的人赢了。要把生活整理好是一项艰巨的任务。改变自己比改变世界更容易。确实如此，而改变世界的最佳方式就是改变自己。没错。总有些人在社交媒体上大声嚷嚷。最好的方式就是过你希望别人过的生活。我去新西兰时，遇到一个人，大家都在社交媒体上大喊着环保和可持续发展。我去了这个人的家，他在很安静地进行一个为期两周的零垃圾实验，没有扔掉任何东西。每个打开的包装都被他保存下来，比如他保留亚马逊的箱子，甚至茶包也是如此。他会研究如何堆肥茶叶，如何利用茶包，把它变成一个小储物品。所以他几乎没有垃圾。他真的实现了零垃圾生活。遇到这样的人让我比社交媒体上的各种声音更有环保意识。

How long did he do that for? I think it was two weeks. It was hard. What the fuck are you going to do with tea bags? He had quite the collection. The tea bag was filling them with little things. He sounds like a crazy, this hoarder, like a hoarder person stacks of tea bags in his house. A very impressive guy. Yeah, that's a strange way to go about things. I appreciate it.

他做了多久？我想是两个星期。这很不容易。你打算用茶包做什么？他真是收集了不少。茶包里装满了小东西。听起来就像个疯子，一个囤积狂，家里堆满了茶包。真是个了不起的人。是啊，这是一种奇怪的做法，但我欣赏他。

I mean, look, it is entirely possible to somehow or another engineer all of our cups and all of our things and all of our, to be biodegradable. The struggle with the modern environmental movement is that they identify the correct problem, which is finite earth, spaceship earth, this is all we got, don't ruin it. But they don't have the solution. So what they say is no growth, no growth, no growth. The problem is you got three billion Indian and Chinese who aren't going to stay in poverty. They're going to grow whether you like it or not. So you can yell at them, you can scream at them, you can yell at us and scream at us, but that's not going to happen. So the only way out, unfortunately, is again through technology, which is you have to build green technology. And I give Musk a lot of credit for being one of the few people who's out there trying to do that. So you build things that are biodegradable and good for you and healthier and everybody wants to be healthier. Chinese want to be healthier. Indians want to be healthier. They want to be cleaner. If you say, I can clean up your rivers, I can clean up your forests, I can have your children not get sick with cholera and diphtheria and typhoid, I can cure your diseases, I can help make your immune system stronger, I can give you clean drinking water, that is what causes people to become environmentalists. Not shouting and screaming at them that they shouldn't grow and they should stop pumping things into the sky. They have no concept of that. They're trying to get out of poverty. So I think the modern environmental movement identifies the correct problem but then doesn't come up with the right set of solutions that are appealing to people. People are not going to give up economic growth. They're going to have to get rich first.

我的意思是，你看，其实我们完全有可能让所有的杯子和物品都可生物降解。现代环保运动的问题在于，他们识别出了正确的问题：地球资源有限，这是我们唯一的家园，不能破坏它。但他们没有找到解决方案。所以他们主张的是“不要增长，不要增长，不要增长”。问题是，你不能指望30亿印度人和中国人永远保持贫困状态。不管你喜不喜欢，他们都要发展。因此，你可以对他们大喊大叫，对我们也大喊大叫，但这行不通。不幸的是，唯一的出路还是依赖技术，也就是发展绿色技术。我很赞赏马斯克，因为他是为数不多的尝试这样做的人之一。所以，我们需要制造可生物降解的、有益健康的产品，因为所有人都希望更健康。中国人想更健康，印度人想更健康，他们都希望生活更清洁。如果你告诉他们，我可以净化你的河流，改善你的森林环境，阻止你的孩子患上霍乱、白喉和伤寒病，我可以治愈你的疾病，增强你的免疫系统，提供清洁饮用水，这才是真正让人们成为环保主义者的原因，而不是对他们大喊大叫，说他们不应该发展，不应该向天空排放污染。他们对此没有概念，他们只是想摆脱贫困。所以我认为现代环保运动识别出了正确的问题，但没有提出一套吸引人的解决方案。人们不会放弃经济增长，他们必须先富裕起来。

That's a very good point. But how do you do both? You lower the price of clean technologies massively. So you basically make clean technologies cost competitive with uncleaning technologies. Innovation ideally, you can subsidize in the short to medium term until the innovation curve is crossed. I mean, like Tesla doesn't have any patents, right? Or they freely give away their patents. That's an example of how you can do it. So if you want to get rid of plastic straws, yeah, you can do it here and there. You can get sent to go to Ban plastic straws. But China is not going to blame Ban plastic straws. Not until you build a paper straw that is same cost, good durability, and then you educate Chinese like, hey, this is petroleum. This plastic that you're doing, this petroleum is bad for you. Here's the chemical composition. Here's the things that are going in your bloodstream and they want healthy, happy kids also. So they're going to have their kids use paper straws. Maybe straws aren't the best example, but this is true with fossil fuels, for example. That's probably the best one. Or replacing a lot of plastics with glass and paper and so on. Yeah, there's a new technology that was just, Ron de Patrick had on our Twitter today, about they're able to convert plastic waste into fuel and that there's companies that are actively trying to do that now.

这是个很好的观点。但是，你该如何同时做到这两点呢？你需要大幅降低清洁技术的价格，使其在成本上能够与不环保的技术竞争。理想情况下，通过创新，在短期到中期内可以给予补贴，直到创新曲线被跨越。比如说，特斯拉没有任何专利，或者他们免费开放他们的专利，这就是一个例子。所以，如果你想淘汰塑料吸管，你可以在这里或那里做到。这可能会迫使一些地方禁止塑料吸管。但中国并不会因为全球变暖去禁止塑料吸管。除非你能生产出价格相同且耐用的纸质吸管，然后教育中国人，告知他们塑料吸管中含有石油成分，这对身体有害，以及它对健康的影响。当中国人意识到这些问题，他们自然也希望自己的孩子使用纸质吸管。或许吸管不是最好的例子，但在化石燃料问题上，这个道理尤其适用。或者，还可以用玻璃和纸取代许多塑料。最近，（在我们的推特上）有一个技术刚刚被提到，关于如何将塑料垃圾转变为燃料，现在有公司正在积极尝试这么做。

So then in that way, plastic waste will become valuable. Right. It'll become a commodity. It'll become something that people are resource. Now there's certain problems this doesn't solve. This doesn't solve carbon. This doesn't solve deforestation. So there you kind of have to step in with other means.

这样一来，塑料垃圾将变得有价值。对的，它会变成一种商品，成为人们的一种资源。不过，这并不能解决所有问题。这并不能解决碳排放问题，也不能解决森林砍伐问题。因此，我们还需要采取其他措施来应对这些问题。

So for example, look at the Amazon. Everyone's complaining about the Amazon being deforested. Well, you're not the poor Brazilian farmer. So you're sitting here and you're comfortable chair, like social media hammering away at the evil Brazilians who are deforesting the Amazon. But the Amazon has incredible resources. If we really care about it, we should turn it into an incredible tourist park and put your money where your mouth is. Start doing eco-tourism in the Amazon. Start paying for it. And then maybe take the future rights for all the pharmaceuticals that are going to come out of all the incredible plants there and start selling those off so that people, so that maybe give the pharmaceutical companies an incentive to preserve the biodiversity of the Amazon. Say, hey, if you buy this patch of the Amazon, you can serve it and you can serve it.

举个例子，看看亚马逊雨林。大家都在抱怨亚马逊雨林被砍伐。然而，你并不是那个贫穷的巴西农民。你坐在舒适的椅子上，在社交媒体上抨击那些砍伐亚马逊的“邪恶”巴西人。但实际上，亚马逊拥有丰富的资源。如果我们真的关心这片雨林，就应该把它发展成一个大型旅游公园，把支持变成实际行动。可以开始在亚马逊进行生态旅游，并为此出资。同时，也许可以将那里的植物可能开发出来的未来药品权益出售，给制药公司一个保护亚马逊生物多样性的动机。比如说，“如果你购买这片亚马逊雨林，你会得到相应的权益以保护它。”

Whatever plant medicines that come out of there that you can then license, you get the patent for 20 years or 30 years or whatever. So I think there are solutions where we as the first worlders who have money can put our money where our mouth is and go and rescue these kinds of properties. That's a very interesting solution, but I could see immediate pushback from people that don't think the pharmaceutical companies should have the rights to this natural plant.

从那里开发出来的任何植物药物，你可以获得许可，并获得20年、30年或其他年限的专利。因此，我认为有一些解决方案可以让我们这些发达国家有钱的人用实际行动支持这个想法，并去拯救这些资源。这是一个非常有趣的解决方案，但我可以预料到会立即遭到一些人的反对，他们认为制药公司不应该拥有这种天然植物的权利。

Or the government does it and then the government gets the patents and the government will auction off the patents later or they'll license them or whatever it is. Often the problem is there is no really good solution. There's a bunch of solutions that also have drawbacks. That's life. Yes. That's a trade-off. That's being human. It's very messy. It's a constrained environment.

或者由政府来做，然后政府取得专利，之后政府可以拍卖这些专利，或者将其授权等等。通常问题在于，并没有一个真正完美的解决方案。各种解决方案都各有缺陷。这就是生活，是的，这是一个取舍。这就是人性，很混乱，这是一个受限制的环境。

Obviously, I skew more towards a private property capitalist type solutions because even though they're not perfect, they have been proven to actually work. Once something is your property, you take care of it. You're not going to crap all over your own house. But it should probably be temporary property, not permanent property. You see a lot of countries around the world not doing this no foreign ownership of land thing, for example, or Mexico has no private ownership of beaches.

显然，我更倾向于私人财产资本主义类型的解决方案，因为即使它们并不完美，但实际上已经被证明是有效的。一旦某物是你的财产，你会好好照顾它。就像你不会对自己的房子不管不顾一样。但或许这种财产应该是临时的，而不是永久的。你会看到世界上很多国家不同意外国拥有土地，比如墨西哥就不允许私人拥有海滩。

You can draw the line at certain points. Do you enjoy doing this kind of thing where you break things down and give your perspective on things and try to illuminate certain complex objects? I'm not trying to illuminate it so much as talking to you, I learn as much as I say. I learn it for myself because I'm being forced to articulate it. I can sit around and think my thoughts all day long. A lot of it's going to be nonsense.

你可以在某些地方划定界限。你喜欢做这样的事情吗？比如拆解事物，用你的观点来解释，并试图阐明一些复杂的对象？我并不是特别想去阐明什么，只是在和你交谈中，我学到的和说出的一样多。当我被迫去表达时，我是在为自己学习。我可以整天坐着想我的想法，但很多时候这些想法可能都是无意义的。

I'm going to, because there are gaps in thinking where you make leaps because you're kind to yourself that you don't realize you're making. But when you're forced to write it down, and this is why I tweet, or when you have to talk to somebody, you have to complete those gaps and make it a proper logical chain. The mistake that I made when I was young was I always wanted to seem like the smartest kid in the room.

我要这么做，是因为在思考中会有一些跳跃，因为你对自己友好，所以没有意识到自己在进行这样的跳跃。但当你被迫把想法写下来时，这也是我为什么发推特的原因，或者当你必须和别人交流时，你需要把这些空隙补全，形成一个完整的逻辑链。我年轻时犯的错误是总想显得自己是房间里最聪明的人。

Just like you probably want to seem like the funniest kid in the room or the toughest kid in the room. We're all losers starting out. We want to be winners so we pick the thing we're good at and we double down on it. I always wanted to be the smartest kid in the room. What did I do? I read a lot of books. I memorized a lot of things. Then whatever I had memorized is pre-Google. I made it up. It sounded good. Pre-Google.

就像你可能想成为房间里最搞笑或最强壮的那个人一样。我们一开始都是失败者。我们想成为赢家，所以挑选我们擅长的事情，并下大力气去做。我一直想成为房间里最聪明的小孩。我怎么做的呢？我读了很多书，记住了很多东西。那些我记住的东西是在谷歌出现之前的。我自己编的，听起来不错。这都是在谷歌出现之前。

After Google fact checking started, I had to get better. Google improved me that way. A lot of people. Exactly. Now what I realize is that the biggest mistake was memorization. When you're actually trying to live your life in congruence with reality, you want to have a deep understanding of what you do and why you do it. It's much more important to know the basics really well than to know the advanced.

在谷歌开始事实核查之后，我不得不变得更好。谷歌以这种方式提高了我。很多人也是如此。确实如此。现在我意识到最大的错误是死记硬背。当你真正尝试与现实保持一致地生活时，你会想深入理解你所做的事情以及为什么这样做。比起掌握高级知识，真正了解基础知识要重要得多。

Knowing calculus wouldn't help you today. It doesn't help you in business. It doesn't help you in most things. But knowing arithmetic really will help you really, whether it's at the corner grocery store or counting change, to figuring out the value of your podcast business, to figuring out how to do the probability math on some action that you want to take. Understanding basic mathematics cold is way more important than memorizing calculus concepts.

学微积分对你今天没有帮助。在商业上也没有帮助，在大多数事情上都没有帮助。但真正掌握算术对你确实有帮助，无论是在街角的杂货店还是数零钱，无论是计算你的播客业务的价值，还是计算你想采取某个行动的概率。扎实理解基础数学要比记住微积分概念重要得多。

The problem is, and this is true of I think all reasoning. It's much better to know the basics from the ground up. Solid foundation of understanding. A steel frame of understanding. Then it is to just have a scaffolding. We're just memorizing advanced concepts. This is why there are a lot of people I'm sure that you listen to who are really smart. They use a lot of jargon. You can't quite follow their reasoning. You don't know how they're putting things together and you have this deep down suspicion. They don't even really understand. If you look at the most powerful thinkers, especially the ones where money or life is on the line, they have to understand the basics really, really well. Richard Feynman, the famous physicist, was able to, he had this piece in one of his lectures where he takes you from counting numbers on your hand all the way to calculus in four pages of text, orally, but written down four pages of text. It's a complete unbroken logical chain that takes you through geometry, trigonometry, calculus, analytic geometry, graphs, everything, all the way to calculus. He understood numbers at a core level. He didn't have to memorize anything. When you're memorizing, it's an indication that you don't understand. You should be able to redraw anything on the spot. If you can't, you don't know it.

问题在于——我认为这适用于所有的推理——从基础开始了解会好得多。理解的基础要牢固，就像钢铁框架，而不仅仅是一个临时支架。相反，仅仅背诵高级概念就像是搭建一个脚手架。这就是为什么你可能会听到很多看似聪明的人，他们使用很多术语，但你无法跟上他们的推理。你不知道他们是如何把事情组合起来的，心里会有一种怀疑，他们自己可能也不太理解。如果你观察那些最有影响力的思想家，特别是在金钱或生命攸关的情况下，他们必须非常透彻地理解基础知识。著名的物理学家理查德·费曼在他的某次讲座中展示了这一点，他能够在口头讲解的基础上，用四页文字将你从手上的数数带到微积分。他把几何、三角学、微积分、解析几何、图表，所有东西都贯穿到了一起，形成了一条完整而不间断的逻辑链。他对数字有着核心层次的理解，不需要死记硬背。记忆往往表明你没有理解。你应该能够随时重现任何概念。如果不能，那就说明你对其没有真正掌握。

So do you apply that to things other than mathematics? You apply it to everything. Everything. You don't even make attempt to memorize things. Just make contempt to understand them. You can't help but memorize things. But if you can't, and this is where Twitter is great for me, is I try to understand something. And then I try to write it down in such a way that I can remember it. Just the basic hook that'll point towards the deeper understanding. And I'm forced to explain it to people. And that's how I know I understand something. So this is what I meant originally we talked about reading. A good book, I'll read one page in a night and then I'm spending the rest of the night thinking about it. Or I'm chasing down references on Wikipedia or weird blog posts trying to understand it.

那么你会将这种方法应用到数学以外的东西上吗？其实你把它应用到一切事物上。所有事情。你甚至不刻意去记忆东西，而是努力去理解它们。你无法停止记忆东西，但如果不能，这就是我觉得 Twitter 对我有帮助的地方。我尝试去理解某些东西，然后努力把它写下来，以便能够记住。只是一个基本的线索，能指向更深的理解。我必须向别人解释，而这正是我知道自己理解某事的方式。这正是我们最初谈论阅读时我所指的。一本好书，我会在一个晚上读一页，然后花剩下的时间去思考它，或者在 Wikipedia 上查找参考资料，或者看一些奇怪的博客文章，努力去理解它。

So for example, I was dealing with, this is a few months back, I was dealing with a question of stupid topic, but the meaning of life. Right? How could that be stupid though? Well, it says, it's right. It's right. You're not supposed to think about it. It's something you ask your parents when you're young. They tell you don't worry about it. Or they say it's. You're going to job hippie. Exactly. I'm going to job you freaking hippie. Or here's God. God is the meaning of life. And so I was just trying to resolve for myself. What could the answer be? Not what is the answer. What could the answer be? And so at a core level, I was forced to kind of hunt down all these weird little things and really understand for myself. And it's got to be personal. But I've established for myself what it could and could not be. And that gave me some level of peace. So now I don't have to keep asking that question. What is the meaning of life? I mean, I think the question is more interesting than the answer. Everyone should explore this on their own. But let me just explore a few parts with you.

举个例子，几个月前，我在考虑一个看似愚蠢的话题，但其实是关于生命的意义。对吧？这怎么可能愚蠢呢？确实如此。人们总是觉得不应该去想这个问题。这是你小时候问父母的问题，他们会告诉你不用担心，或者给你一个简单的答案，比如找一份工作，嬉皮士。这时候就有人大声说：我要给你找一份工作的，混蛋嬉皮士。或者他们告诉你，上帝就是生命的意义。所以我试图为自己找出答案，不是“答案是什么”，而是“答案可能是什么”。在这个过程中，我逼着自己去探索各种奇怪的小东西，从而真正理解它对我个人的意义。我为自己设定了可能是什么和不可能是什么，这给了我一些内心的平静。这样，我就不用再反复问“生命的意义是什么”这个问题了。我觉得这个问题本身比答案更有趣。每个人都应该自己探究这个问题，不过我愿意和你们一起探讨几个方面。

So first is, if I gave you an answer, if I said the meaning of life is to please God. Well, which God? Okay. Judeo-Christian God. Well, okay. Why that one? Why this thing? The problem is it's a why question. You can keep asking why forever. Right? Any answer I gave you, you'll just ask why again. Why again? Why again? That's right. And you end up in a place called Agrippa's Trilemma. Okay. This is a philosophical exercise. But I kind of thought it through then googled around it. There's a thing called Agrippa's Trilemma. Agrippa's Trilemma says that any questioning like this, why, will always end in one of three places. Okay. First is infinite regress. Right? Why? Because of this. Why that? Why that? Why? It's just keep going forever. The second is circular reasoning. Well, A, YA, because of B, or YB, because of A. If I can get trapped in that.

首先，如果我给你一个答案，比如说“生命的意义就是取悦上帝”。那么问题来了，哪位上帝呢？好，假设是犹太-基督教的上帝。可为什么是这个上帝呢？为什么是这样的解释呢？问题在于“为什么”这个问题本身是无穷无尽的。任何答案我给你，你都会继续问为什么，一次又一次。这种情况会让我们陷入一个叫做阿格里帕三难困境的地方。这是一个哲学性的思考。我稍微想了一下然后在网上查了查，发现确实有一个东西叫做阿格里帕三难困境。这个困境表明，任何像这样不断追问“为什么”的过程，总会有三种结果。第一种是无限后退：为什么？因为这个。为什么那个？为什么那个？这样无休止地继续下去。第二种是循环论证：A为什么成立？因为B。那么B为什么成立呢？因为A。这会让我们陷入一个死循环。

Or the third is an axiom. And the most popular axiom is God. But it could be anything because of math, because of science, because of the Big Bang, because of simulation. Right? And these are all just stopping points. Saying simulation, we're in a simulation, or saying it's the Big Bang, it's just another way of saying God. It's just God's a dirty word, so we don't use it as much anymore. But same thing. So you end up in one of these three dead ends, essentially. Right? So there is no answer. The real answer is because. Right? What is the meaning of life? Yeah. You get to make up your own answer is the beauty. If there was a single answer, we would not be free. We would be trapped. Because then we would all have to live to that answer. Then we'd be borged like robots, each one competing with each other to fulfill that single meaning more than the others. Back to signaling. Like I'm better at it than you are. But luckily there is no answer. So you just do whatever you want.

翻译如下：或者，第三种情况是一个公理。而最常见的公理就是上帝。但由于数学、科学、大爆炸或模拟理论，这个公理也可以是任何事物，对吧？这些都是思维停止点。说我们生活在一个模拟中，或说大爆炸是起源，只是另一种说法的上帝。只是因为“上帝”这个词已经变得敏感，所以我们现在不常用它。但意思是一样的。所以，你最终会走入这三种思维死胡同之一，对吧？所以没有明确的答案。真正的答案是因为。生命的意义是什么？美妙的是，你可以自己创造答案。如果有一个统一答案，我们就不再自由，而是被困住了。因为那样我们都必须为了那个答案而活。我们就像机器人，互相竞争去实现比别人更能体现那个单一意义的生活。又回到了信号问题：像是我比你更擅长。但幸运的是，并没有这样的答案。所以你可以随心所欲地生活。

The meaning of life. It's funny that that's the basis of all existential angst. That you don't. You don't know why you're here. When you have this feeling that it could be meaning less. It is, I mean, when you start pondering the multiverse, the universe, the galaxies, the solar system, the planet, the organism, the cells inside the organism, the bacteria, the parasites, the symbiotic relationship we have to our environment and you start going, Jesus Christ, am I just a little piece of this thing? It's like, well, the answer is to all the great questions are paradoxes. So for example, you're asking, do I matter? That's really the question you asked. How do I matter in this infinite universe? Well, on the one hand, you're separate. No two points are the same. Every point is, every two points are infinitely different. You're completely separated. No one will have your thoughts, your emotions, your feelings, your experience. So your life is a single player game. You're trapped inside your head and you're just aware of a bunch of things going on. And that's it.

生命的意义。这真是所有存在主义焦虑的根源。因为你不知道。你不知道自己为什么在这里。当你有这种感觉，觉得生活可能毫无意义时，就会开始思考多元宇宙、宇宙、星系、太阳系、地球、生物体、生物体内的细胞、细菌、寄生虫，以及我们与环境的共生关系。你会想：“天哪，我只是这个大系统的一小部分吗？” 事实上，所有伟大问题的答案都是矛盾的。比如说，当你问“我有意义吗？”其实你是在问“在这个无限的宇宙中，我如何体现自己的重要性？” 一方面，你是独立的。没有两个点是相同的。每两个点之间都有无限的差异。你完全是独一无二的。没人会有你的思想、情感、感觉、经历。所以，你的人生就像一个单人游戏。你被困在自己的脑海中，只是对周围发生的一切有所意识。就是这样。

On the other hand, I cannot say the word Joe Rogan without invoking the entire universe. Joe Rogan, alien comes along says, what's that? Joe Rogan. What's Joe Rogan? It's a human, what's a human bipedal ape? What's an ape on the earth? What's the earth planet? What's a planet solar system? Where was the carbon made inside stars? Instead, I have to create the entire universe to just say the words Joe Rogan. So in that sense, you're connected to everything. It's inseparable. So the answer to that question of do I matter is I am nothing and I am everything. And you'll find this with all the great questions. The answers are all paradoxes, which is why at some level it's sort of pointless to pursue them to find a trite answer like I'm giving. But the act of pursuing them is actually really useful because then it gives you certain intrinsic understanding in your life that brings a level of peace.

从另一个角度来看，我无法只说出“乔·罗根”这个词而不涉及整个宇宙。假如有个外星人来了，问：“那是什么？”我会说：“乔·罗根。”接着它会问：“乔·罗根是什么？”我会回答：“一个人。”它会继续问：“人是什么？”“是双足行走的猿。”再问：“猿是什么？”“是地球上的生物。”又问：“地球是什么？”“是一个星球。”如果再问：“星球是什么？”“是太阳系的一部分。”最后可能会问：“碳是从哪里来的?”“是在恒星内部生成的。”所以，要说出“乔·罗根”这几个字，我得创造整个宇宙。从这个意义上说，你和一切都是相连的，不可分割。所以，对“我是否重要”这个问题的回答是：我既是无，也是一切。你会发现，对所有伟大问题的答案都是矛盾的。这就是为什么在某种程度上，追求一个像我这样给出的简单答案是无意义的。但探索这些问题的过程其实非常有益，因为它能给你的生活带来某种内在的理解，从而带来一种平和。

I feel like there's with many people this stress of this question is also accentuated by unhappy lives. It's accentuated by unhappy choices by being trapped. There's a big difference between not knowing what the meaning of life is and God, I got to get the fuck out of this job. I have to, I can't live my life this way. What's the meaning of life if this is my life? Which is why I always start with let's get you rich first. That's why I'm very practical about it because, look, you know, Buddha was a prince. He started out really rich and then he got to go off in the woods. In the old days what happened was if you wanted to be peaceful inside, you would become a monk, you would renounce everything. You would become an ascetic. You would give everything up. You would renounce women, men, you'd renounce children, you renounce money, you renounce politics, science, technology, everything. You would go out in the woods by yourself to give everything up to be free inside. Well today we have this wonderful invention called money where you can just store stuff up in a bank account. You can basically save up, you can work really hard, you can do great things for society and society will give you money for giving it things that it wants and it doesn't know how to get.

我觉得很多人面临这个问题的压力是因为他们的生活不快乐，这种压力被不幸的选择和被困住的状态放大了。有很大的区别是：不知道生活的意义和感觉必须逃离现有的工作，不能再这样生活下去。如果这就是我的生活，生活的意义在哪里？这就是为什么我总是首先建议你先变得富有。我这么实在是因为，你看当初佛陀是个王子，他起初就很富有，然后才到森林里修行。过去，如果你想内心平和，你通常会成为一名僧侣，放弃一切，成为苦行者。你会放弃女性、男性、孩子、金钱、政治、科学、技术等等，你会独自到森林里，以此获得内心的自由。而现在，我们有了一个叫做金钱的美好发明，你可以把东西存到银行账户里。基本上，你可以通过努力工作、为社会做贡献来获得金钱，社会会因为你提供了它想要而无法自己获取的东西而给予你回报。

Then you can save that up and you can live well below with your means and you can find a certain freedom in that and that will give you the time and the energy to pursue your own internal peace and happiness. I believe the solution to making everybody happy is to give them what they want. Let's get them all rich, let's get them all fit and healthy and then let's get them all happy. Are those things even possible? Absolutely. Everyone can be rich. Everyone can be rich.

然后你可以把那些存起来，你可以靠低于你收入的水平生活，你会在其中找到一定的自由，这会给你追求内心平和与快乐的时间和精力。我相信让每个人幸福的方法就是给他们想要的东西。让我们让所有人都富有，让每个人都健康，然后让每个人都快乐。这些事情可能实现吗？当然可能。每个人都可以变得富有。

Here's my thought exercise for you. Now it seems like we're in an infomercial. Everyone can be rich. I'm not selling any. I'm not selling any. I'm not selling any. This is my Rolls Royce. Yeah, no, so that's a good point. So everything that I've ever created on this topic of how to make money, I will never charge a dollar for because that would ruin it.

这是我给你的一个思维练习。现在感觉我们好像在一个电视购物节目中。每个人都可以致富。但我不在卖任何东西。我不在卖任何东西。我不在卖任何东西。这是我的劳斯莱斯。嗯，是的，那是个不错的观点。所以我在这个如何赚钱的话题上所创造的所有内容，我永远不会收取一分钱，因为那样会破坏它。

That would show that I'm just another huckster who's trying to get rich off of you. There are no get rich quick. That's just somebody else trying to get rich off of you. To me, it's more of a philosophical contribution for it to have meaning and to be legit. I can't charge you anything for it. But yes, everybody can be rich. Let me give you a thought exercise. Imagine if tomorrow we could wave a wand and everybody was trained as a scientist or an engineer. Everyone.

这会显得我只是另一个试图从你身上发财的商人。快速致富的捷径是不存在的，那只不过是别人试图从你身上挣钱的方法。对我来说，这更多是一种哲学上的贡献，只有这样才能有意义并且是真实的。我不能向你收取任何费用。不过，是的，每个人都可以致富。让我给你一个思维实验：想象一下，如果明天我们可以挥动魔杖，让每个人都接受科学家或工程师的培训。每个人。

Even if you weren't very good, you had enough understanding of computers, you could write some code, you could build some hardware. And don't tell me people can't do it because they can. That's just the tyranny of soft expectations. That's just you looking down on somebody else. They can't do it. They just have to be educated. Now, if they're educated all this hardware, software, engineer, scientist, biologist, technicians, hard sciences, not the social sciences, we would all be done within five years.

即使你不是特别擅长计算机，你也具备足够的理解力，可以编写一些代码，能够组装一些硬件。别告诉我人们做不到，因为他们能做到。这只是不切实际的低期望在作祟，是你在轻视别人。他们并不是不能做到，只是需要接受教育而已。如果所有人都在硬件、软件、工程师、科学家、生物学家、技师、硬科学领域，而不是社会科学领域接受教育的话，我们五年内就能完成所有事情。

Robots would be doing everything from cleaning toilets to cooking food to flying airplanes and driving movers. So what we would be doing, we would be doing all creative jobs to entertain each other and researching science and technology. We would have wonderful lives. So it is really just a question of education, nothing else. Is this a scale issue though? I mean, you're talking about it as if this would work with 300 million people. It'll work with 10 billion people. It'll work with a space-faring race with 100 trillion people.

机器人将做所有事情，从清洁厕所到烹饪食物，再到驾驶飞机和运送车辆。那么我们人类会做什么呢？我们将从事各种创造性的工作来互相娱乐，同时研究科学和技术。我们的生活将非常美好。所以这其实只是教育的问题，没有其他。这是一个规模的问题吗？我的意思是，你说得好像这一切能在3亿人中实现，也能在100亿人中实现，甚至可以在一个拥有100万亿人的太空文明中实现。

We have the resources. We have the ability. The universe is infinite resources. You build it, have you heard of a disense sphere? You pull the disense sphere on a star and you gather all its energy. There's so much energy out there. One asteroids got all the minerals that we need. One sun, one solar system has got all the power we will need for a long, long time. We can extract it out of nuclear fusion.

我们拥有资源和能力。宇宙是无限的资源。你听说过戴森球吗？如果在一颗恒星上建造一个戴森球，你就可以收集到它的所有能量。宇宙中有如此多的能量，其中一颗小行星就含有我们所需的所有矿物。一颗太阳，一个太阳系，拥有我们可以长期使用的所有能量。我们可以通过核聚变来提取这些能源。

We're not that far from those kinds of technologies working. It's just a question of guts and interest. We should be building nuclear fusion test plants on the moon. The moon should be littered with the snow down side. Right. Yeah. If you could, how would that work? Well, if you could send a bunch of people up there to work. Oh, the problem, robots.

我们离这些技术能够运作并不远，这只是个勇气和兴趣的问题。我们应该在月球上建造核聚变试验工厂。月球上应该布满降雪的痕迹。对吧？对。如果可以的话，那会怎么运作呢？嗯，如果能派一大批人上去工作的话。哦，问题是机器人。

The problem with nuclear fission is that nature creates energy through nuclear energy. The sun creates energy, nuclear energy. Now for transmission, we use photons because photons don't interact. And so photons are great for information transmission, but they're actually not great for energy transmission. For energy creation, you want nuclear to work. And the problem is because nuclear energy, we built it with a bomb.

核裂变的问题在于，自然界通过核能来产生能量。太阳就是通过核能来产生能量的。在传输过程中，我们使用光子，因为光子之间没有相互作用。因此，光子在信息传输方面非常优秀，但在能量传输上就不那么出色了。为了产生能量，我们需要核能发挥作用。但问题在于，我们是以制造炸弹的方式来开发核能的。

We have dirty nukes, all those kinds of problems with Fukushima, three-mile island Chernobyl. We don't innovate anymore on nukes. Imagine if when the first steam engine blew up, we said, oh, no more steam engines for a while, or very carefully regulated, billion dollars of regulation. You can't innovate that way. When the first airplane crashed, we said no more innovation in airplanes.

我们有脏核弹以及福岛、三里岛、切尔诺贝利等问题。我们不再对核技术进行创新。想象一下，如果第一台蒸汽机爆炸时，我们说：“哦，暂时不要再发展蒸汽机了，”或者给它设定非常严格的监管，投入几十亿进行规范管理，这样你就没法创新。当第一架飞机坠毁时，我们如果说不再对飞机进行创新，也是同样的道理。

So we need a way to iterate on nuclear fission and eventually fusion and get them working safely, cleanly passive failure, et cetera, if we're going to find our way out of the energy trap. And the best place to do that is someplace like on the moon or Mars. Do you think that it's actually a possibility that they could get nuclear power to the point where it's not a detriment? Because what everyone's worried about is a meltdown, right? And we do have these old plants that are running on this.

所以，我们需要一种方法来不断改进核裂变，并最终实现核聚变，使它们能够安全、清洁地运行，能够被动失效等等，只有这样，我们才能摆脱能源困境。而在月球或火星这样的地方进行实验是最合适的。你认为有可能使核能达到不再有危害的程度吗？因为每个人担心的都是核电站的熔毁，对吗？而且我们确实有一些老旧的核电站在运行。

This is 50-year-old technology. It's crazy because there's no ability to shut them off. Right, very old technology. They do now have Gen 4 nuclear reactors that are passive fail-safe. So in other words, when they fail, they fail into a - when you pull the plug on them, they fail into a state where there's no leakage, there's no problem. Their default is a positive outcome as opposed to the current ones, the old ones where if you unplug them, like -

这是50年前的技术。这很疯狂，因为没有办法关闭它们。对，这就是非常古老的技术。现在已经有第四代核反应堆，它们是被动式的自我保护系统。换句话说，当它们出现故障时，断电后会自动进入一种无泄漏、无问题的状态。它们的默认状态是积极的结果，而不是像那些旧的技术一样，断电后可能会出现问题。

And these - even these Gen 4 are just Gen 4, they're not Gen 5 - The Gen 80, Gen 100, where we're microprocessors, right? And that should be something that people are working towards. I hope so. I mean, in an ideal world, we would – the problem is if you have nuclear energy on the moon, how do you get it home? Right. So what you actually got to do is you got to rev it on the moon and you're using it there maybe to launch more satellites, more rockets further out into the solar system. And that's the initial use case. But then eventually the technology gets so good you can bring it home.

这些——即便是这些第四代产品，也仅仅是第四代而已，它们还不是第五代产品——不是第80代、第100代那种程度，那时我们将变成微处理器，对吧？而人们应该为此努力。我希望如此。我的意思是，在一个理想的世界里，如果你在月球上拥有核能，问题是你如何将其带回地球，对吧。所以实际上你需要做的是在月球上使用它，也许用于发射更多的卫星、更远距离的火箭到太阳系深处。这是最初的使用场景。但最终技术会进步到一个程度，你就可以把它带回地球了。

I want to go back to this idea of getting people rich that somehow or another that's going to make people happy. How do you stop the natural progression that people have of, you know, oh, you know, I have got a nice Chevrolet, but I really want to BMW. I've got a nice BMW, but now I want a Mercedes. I have Mercedes. I want a Ferrari. How do you stop that material possession trap? You can't at some level, but I think most smart people over time realize that possessions don't make them happy. Right. It's just you have to go through that. You have to buy your stupid car to realize that it doesn't attract attractive girls. It actually just attracts other dudes who are like, hey, I like that car, man. Right.

我想回到这样一个观念，即让人们变得富有就能让他们幸福。但怎么阻止人们在物质上的无止境追求呢？比如说，我有了一辆不错的雪佛兰，但我真的想要宝马。有了宝马，我又想要奔驰。有了奔驰，我又想要法拉利。怎么才能不陷入这种物质陷阱呢？从某种程度上来说是无法完全避免的。但我认为大多数聪明人最终会意识到，物质财产并不能带来真正的幸福。你可能需要亲自经历，买辆所谓的“酷”车，才会明白它并不能吸引漂亮的女孩，只会吸引其他想要讨论车的男士而已。

Like you have some expensive cars out there, some fancy cars. Tell me how much that attracts women versus men. Well, Mary, those are for me. They're for me. I just enjoy machines. Yeah. So that's me, they're toys. That's a particular thing where you enjoy machines, but I think very, as you get older, you just realize that there's no happiness in material possessions. Now a lack of material possessions can make you very unhappy. Yes. So being poor can make you unhappy, but being rich is not going to make you happy. And what happens, unfortunately, a lot of people struggle through their whole lives to make money. They make some, they're exhausted. And then they're like, well, now why am I not happy? I guess I'm just not a happy person and smart people aren't happy.

就像你有一些昂贵的车，一些炫酷的车。告诉我，这些车对女性和男性的吸引力有多大。嗯，玛丽，那些车是我的。它们是给我自己的。我只是喜欢机器。是的，那就是我，它们是玩具。这是你享受机器的一个方面，但我认为，当你渐渐长大时，你会意识到物质财富并不能带来快乐。当然，没有物质财富会让你很不幸福。是的，贫穷会让你不幸福，但富有并不会让你幸福。不幸的是，许多人一生都在为赚钱而奋斗。他们赚到一点钱后，感到疲惫，然后会觉得，为什么我还是不快乐？我想我天生就不是个快乐的人，或者聪明人是不快乐的。

That's like a great little way that people feel better about it. They say, well, if you're smart, you're not happy, right? Whereas I positive the other way. If you're smart, you should be able to figure out how to be happy. Otherwise, you're not that smart.

这是一种很好的方式，让人们感觉好一些。他们会说，如果你聪明的话，那你就不会快乐，对吧？而我的观点正好相反。如果你聪明，你应该能够找到让自己快乐的方法。否则，你就不算真正聪明。

Yeah, that is an offensive statement that if you're smart, you're not happy. I've heard that before and I just do not understand the logic of that other than self-justifying. I understand where it comes from. It comes from if you're smart, it's usually because you thought things through and you're a very busy mind. And so a busy mind can often rob you of peace of mind. Because the peace that we seek is not peace of mind, it's peace from mind. So if you look at all the crazy activities you do to be happy, whether it's like trying to get laid and have an orgasm or extreme sports or looking at something beautiful or taking a psychedelic, you're trying to get out of your own mind. You're trying to get your monkey mind to stop chattering at you for a moment. You're trying to get peace from the mind. And there are other better ways to do that. So the way is we try to get peace from mind or indirect.

这句话很有攻击性，说如果你聪明，就不会快乐。我以前也听过这种说法，但除了自我辩解，我实在不明白其背后的逻辑。我明白这想法的来源：因为聪明通常意味着你会深思熟虑，思维活跃。而活跃的思维常常会夺走你的内心平静。我们所追求的平静，不是心理上的平和，而是摆脱思维的纷扰。所以，看看你做的那些疯狂事情来寻找快乐，无论是追求性爱和高潮，还是参加极限运动，欣赏美丽事物或是服用迷幻药，实际上都是在尝试摆脱自己的思绪。你在试图让喋喋不休的思维停止片刻，试图从思维中获得宁静。而我们可以通过更好的方式实现这一点。这样的方式是我们尝试从思维中获得宁静，虽然是间接的。

Whereas if you understand things, if you see things properly, you will naturally slowly develop peace from mind. Sorry if I went on a tangent there. No, it's a good tangent. It's a good tangent because I think oftentimes the pursuit is what's thrilling to people and the possibility that one day they'll be able to rest and that they'll reach this goal. That's the fundamental delusion that there is something out there that will make me happy and feel forever.

理解事物、正确地看待事物，自然而然就会慢慢从内心中获得平和。抱歉，如果我有些跑题了。不，这其实是个很好的延伸。我觉得很多时候，人们追求的是那种令人兴奋的感觉，以及有一天能休息并实现目标的可能性。这是一种根本性的错觉，以为有某样东西在外面能让我感到永远的快乐和满足。

Yes. To golden years. There is, it's called death. Oh, I'll take care of everything. That's the great level there. But when people look at particularly social media, we bring back to that, when you see someone who, you know, you see them posed in front of their mansion with their beautiful car and their leany against it with their designer clothes on, their expensive watch, you go, I want that. That's what I want. What you really want is freedom. You want freedom from your money problems. And I think that's okay.

是的，关于黄金岁月。是的，这有一种结局，叫做死亡。哦，我来处理一切，这就是最后的公平。不过，当人们特别是看到社交媒体上的内容时，我们回到这个问题上，当你看到一个人在他们的豪宅前摆拍，靠着他们的豪车，穿着名牌衣服，戴着昂贵的手表时，你会想，我也想要那样的生活。我想要的就是这个。但实际上，你真正想要的是自由，是摆脱经济问题的自由。而我觉得这没有问题。

So people, once someone can solve their money problems, either by lowering their lifestyle or by making enough money, and you know, essentially what you want to get everybody to the retirement, but not retirement in the, I'm 65 years old, sitting in a nursing home collecting a check retirement. Different definition. Different is when you stop sacrificing today for some imaginary tomorrow. Yes. Okay. When today is complete in and of itself, you're retired.

所以，一旦一个人解决了他们的经济问题，不论是通过降低生活水平，还是赚足够的钱，在这个过程中，大家的目标是达成一种退休状态。但我说的不是传统意义上的退休，不是指65岁坐在养老院领取退休金的那种退休。这个“退休”的定义不同。它指的是不再为某个虚幻的未来而牺牲今天的生活。当今天本身就足够完整时，你就算是“退休”了。

Yeah. And so how do you get there? Well, one is you can have so much money saved up that just your passive income off of that without you having to lift a finger, coverage your burn rate, keep your burn rate low, right? A second is you just drive your burn rate down to zero. You become a monk. A third is you're doing something you love. You enjoy it so much. It's not about the money. Right. So there are multiple ways to that path, but the most common is people just say, I need to make more money. And the kind of wealth creation that I talk about is about creating timeless principles and adapting yourselves that making money won't be an issue. And you can do it by doing what you love, right?

好的，那么你该怎么达到那个目标呢？一种方法是，你可以存下大量的钱，仅靠这些钱产生的被动收入就能覆盖你的花销，而你几乎不用动一根手指，同时保持低开销，对吧？第二种方法是，你可以把花销降到零，过上像僧侣一样的生活。第三种是你做着自己热爱的事情，因为太喜欢了，钱反而变得不重要。所以，实现这个目标有多种途径，但最常见的是人们会说，我需要赚更多钱。而我所谈论的财富创造是关于建立永恒的原则，并让自己适应，不让赚钱成为问题。这可以通过做你热爱的事情实现，对吧？

Like we get into this model of I must work for other people, work my way up the ladder. I must like do what that person is doing to make money. But really today in society, you get rewarded for creative work, for creating something brand new that society didn't even know yet that it wanted. It doesn't know how to get other than through you. So the most powerful money makers are actually individual brands, people like yourself or Elon or Kanye or Oprah or Trump, right? These are individual brands, eponymous name brands who themselves are leverage, like you're leveraged.

我们常常认为必须为别人工作，逐步晋升。这种观点让我们觉得要模仿他人的赚钱方式。但是，在当今社会中，创造性的工作反而更容易获得回报，你去创造一个社会尚未意识到自己需要的新事物，别人只能通过你来获得。所以，最成功的赚钱者往往是个人品牌，比如你自己，或者像Elon Musk、Kanye West、Oprah、特朗普这样的人。这些人本身就是品牌，他们通过自己的名字和影响力而成功，就像你也可以这样。

You have podcast media going out to everybody that's leverage the podcast work for you when you sleep. They have knowledge that nobody else has, which is your knowledge is the knowledge of being Joe Rogan. Who else is a UFC fighter and a commentator and a podcaster and a comedian and interested in all these things and all these people can't replace you? So we have to pay you what you're worth. And who's that? I never fought in UFC though. Oh, you did. Okay, sorry. Or whatever, you're involved in that whole scene. You just have a unique set of skill sets. So because of this unique, what I call specific knowledge, because of the accountability that you have with your name, because the leverage that you have through your media, you're a money-making machine.

你拥有一个播客平台，可以在你睡觉的时候继续为你工作。你拥有别人没有的知识，这就是你的价值所在，因为你是乔·罗根。谁还能同时是UFC拳手、解说员、播客主持人和喜剧演员，并对这些领域及相关人物感兴趣呢？没人能替代你，所以我们要付给你与你价值相符的报酬。还有谁能达到呢？我从未参与过UFC比赛。哦，你参与过？不好意思，或者无论如何，你参与其中的整个圈子。你有一套独特的技能组合。所以因为这种独特的、我称之为特定的知识，因为你用自己的名字承担的责任，因为你通过媒体获得的影响力，你是一个赚钱机器。

I'm sure at this point, I could make you start over tomorrow, wipe out your bank account, you'd be rich again in no time, because you have all the skill sets. So once people have those skill sets and the beauty is the way you've done it is you don't have any competition. There's no substitution. If Joe Rogan were to disappear off the air tomorrow, it's not like random podcasted number 12 would step in and fill that thing. No, it's just gone. So the way to get out of that competition trap is actually to be authentic.

我相信现在，如果我明天让你重新开始，把你的银行账户清空，你很快又会变得富有，因为你拥有各种技能。一旦人们具备了这些技能，你的优势在于你所采用的方式让你没有竞争对手，没有替代品。如果Joe Rogan明天从媒体上消失了，并不会有随机的播客节目填补他的空缺，那只是一个缺失。所以，要摆脱竞争的陷阱，实际上就是要做真实的自己。

The way to retire is actually to find the thing that you know how to do better than anybody. And you know how to do that better than anybody because you love to do it. No one can compete with you if you love to do it. Be authentic. And then figure out how to map that to what society actually wants. Apply some leverage, put your name on it so you take the risks, but you gain the rewards, have ownership and equity in what you do, and then just crank it out. I think people have to be very careful to not get trapped along the way with things that you can afford with your current lifestyle, like the way you're living and the way you're earning.

退休的秘诀其实是找到你最擅长并且热爱的事情。当你热爱做一件事时，就没有人能与你竞争。要做真实的自己。然后，把你的这种特长与社会的需求结合起来。运用一些杠杆效应，把你的名字放在上面，这样你承担风险，但也获得回报，对你所做的事情拥有所有权和股份，然后继续努力。我认为，人们要特别小心，不要被当前生活方式和收入所能负担的东西困住。

But they're also imprisoning you and the fact that you are now going to have to work this 40-hour-week job in order to get this thing that you can afford. But now you're saddled down to this job. You're not saving. You're not putting things in a good place. And you're working for these things. Working for things as rewards is a real trap that a lot of people fall into. It's the biggest one. And that's the same tell that I've also said that under two great addictions, heroin and a monthly salary. And that's why you can't get rich, rent and count your time. Because even when you start charging more and more for your time, it's this slow upgrade loop and then you upgrade your house at the same time, you pick your car at the same time, you move in the neighborhood. You really also have to get used to ignoring your peers or upgrading or changing the definition of your peers.

他们也在束缚你，而现在你必须要做这个每周40小时的工作来获得你负担得起的东西。但你却被锁定在这份工作中。你没有存钱，没有把事情放在一个好的位置，而只是为了这些东西工作。为了物质奖励而工作是很多人陷入的一个真正陷阱。这是最大的一个。这就像我常说的两大瘾头一样：海洛因和拿月薪。因此，你无法致富、租房和计算你的时间。因为即使你开始对你的时间收取越来越多的费用，也只是一个缓慢的升级循环，然后你同时升级你的房子，挑选你的汽车，在社区里移动。你还得学会忽视同龄人，或者改变你对同龄人的定义。

There are a lot of people here who are poor here, but they would be rich if they were living in Thailand and Bali. And if they have the luxury of a remotely doable job, they may want to be living there and saving up money. But ignoring the peers is an issue because the keeping up with the Joneses is a real phenomenon. Yeah, envy makes the world go around. And then there's a other thing that people have to avoid even allowing their mind to think. When they're hearing what you're saying and all this logical, fantastic advice, there's these six dirty words, that's easy for you to say. That is a terrible trap.

这里有很多人生活贫困，但如果他们住在泰国和巴厘岛，他们就会变得富有。如果他们有能够远程工作的机会，他们可能会想住在那里攒钱。然而，忽视周围的同龄人是个问题，因为与邻居比较的心理确实存在。是的，嫉妒推动着世界运转。还有一件事，大家需要避免让自己的思维陷入其中。当他们听到你说的这些理性、绝妙的建议时，可能会冒出一句话：“这说得轻巧。”这是一个可怕的陷阱。

I grew up as a first generation immigrant in Jamaica, Queens with zero money, single mom, two kids working day and night, going to school. I watched dishes. I was working catering jobs. I was mowing lawns. I was working since the age of 11 on and off here and there. I didn't have two cents to rub together. I had to borrow 400 hours to go to college. Like a short 400. 400. I had to find 400 dollars. I didn't have it. It got rejected from a job at Dunkin Donuts. So like, okay, it's not to say that it's easy.

我在牙买加皇后区长大，是第一代移民，家庭经济十分困难。我的妈妈独自一人抚养两个孩子，她日夜工作，还要去上学。我负责洗盘子、做宴会服务，还给别人割草。从11岁开始，我断断续续地到处打工。那时候我身无分文，连上大学都需要借400美元。我没有那笔钱，所以借了400小时的工作时间，但连在Dunkin Donuts的工作都没有申请上。所以可以说，生活并不容易。

It's not easy. It's actually really frickin hard. It is the hardest thing you will do. But it's also the rewarding thing. Look at the kids who are born rich, no meaning to their lives. It's a terrible place. Your real resume is just a cataloging of all your suffering. If I were to ask you to describe your real life to yourself, when you look back in your deathbed, you're going to go back and say, what are the interesting things I've done? It's all going to be around the sacrifices that you made and the hard things that you did. Anything you're given doesn't matter. You have your forelimbs, you have your brain, you have your head, you have your skin. That's all for granted.

这并不容易。事实上，这真的非常困难。这是你能做的最难的事情。但这也是最有成就感的事情。看看那些富有的孩子，他们的生活没有意义。这是一个可怕的境地。你真正的履历就是你所经历的所有痛苦的记录。如果我让你向自己描述你真正的人生，当你躺在病床上回顾时，你会回想起你做过的有趣事情吗？所有这些都会围绕着你所做的牺牲和那些艰难的事情。任何你被给予的东西都不重要。你有四肢，你有大脑，你有头脑，你有皮肤。这些都是理所当然的。

So you have to do hard things anyway to create your own meaning in life. Having money is a fine one. Yeah, struggle. It is hard. I'm not going to say it's easy. It's really hard. But the tools are all available. It's all there. There's also these traps that people sort of establish in their own mind of giving themselves excuses or giving themselves in insurmountable obstacles, insurmountable paths and terrain. Victim mentality. Yeah. It's somebody else's fault. It's my skin color's fault. It's the system's fault. Yeah. Those people are sinking. They're sinking into them. I want to shake them out of it and say, actually, you can get out of it. You just have to stop thinking it's everybody else's fault. It's all to the perspective.

所以，无论怎样你还是得做一些困难的事情来创造你自己的人生意义。赚钱是一个不错的选择。是的，会有挣扎，会很困难。我不会说这很容易，因为它确实很难。但所有的工具都已经存在。人们在自己心中也会设下这样一些陷阱，比如给自己找借口，或认为面前有无法逾越的障碍。不幸心理，对，总觉得是别人的错，是肤色的原因，是制度的原因。这样的人正在陷入自己的思维之中。我想唤醒他们，让他们明白，其实是可以走出来的。只要停止认为一切都是别人的错，改变一下视角就行。

Yeah. But it's so difficult for people to do. It's one of the most difficult things for people to do is to change the way they approach reality itself. At the end of the day, I do think even despite what I said earlier, life is really a single player game. It's all going on in your head. Whatever you think you believe will very much shape your reality, both from what risks you take and what actions you perform, but also just every day experience of reality. If you're walking down the street and you're judging everyone, you're like, I don't like that person because they're skin color. I don't like that. Oh, she's not attractive. That guy's fat. This person's a loser. Oh, who put this in my way? The more you judge, the more you're going to separate yourself and you'll feel good for an instant because you'll feel good about yourself.

是的，但这对人们来说真的很难。改变他们对现实本身的看法是人们最难做到的事情之一。归根结底，我认为尽管之前我说了其他的想法，但生活其实是一场单人游戏。一切都在你的脑海中发生。无论你相信什么，都将极大地影响你的现实，无论是从你冒险的选择、行动，还是日常的现实体验来看。如果你在街上走过时，对每个人都加以评判，比如因为某人的肤色而不喜欢他们，或者觉得某人不够有吸引力、某人太胖、某人是个失败者，甚至是谁把这个东西放在路上，越是这样评判，你越会将自己与他人隔离开来，一瞬间你可能会因为对自己感觉良好而感到满足。

I'm better than that. But then you're going to feel lonely and then you're just going to see negativity everywhere. The world just reflects your own feelings back at you. Reality is neutral. Reality has no judgments. To a tree, there's no concept of right or wrong or good or bad. You're born. You have a whole set of sensory experiences and stimulations and lights and colors and sounds and then you die. And how you choose to interpret that is up to you. You do have that choice. So this is what I meant. The happiness is a choice. If you believe it's a choice, then you can start working on it. And I can't tell you how to find it because it's your own conditionings that are making you unhappy. You have to uncondition yourself. It's just like I can't fix your eating habits for you. You can give you some general guidelines, but you've got to go through the hard habit forming of how to eat right. But you have to believe it's possible. And it is absolutely possible.

我值得更好。但随后你会感到孤独，然后你会在每个地方看到消极。这世界只是反射出你自己的感觉。现实本身是中性的，没有评判。对一棵树来说，没有对错、好坏的概念。你出生，经历完整的感官体验，看到各种光影色彩，听到各种声音，然后你去世。如何诠释这些感受取决于你自己。你确实有这个选择。所以这就是我的意思——幸福是一种选择。如果你相信这是一个选择，那么你就可以开始努力实现它。我无法告诉你如何找到幸福，因为让你不开心的是你自身的条件反射。你需要“解构”自己，就像我无法为你改变饮食习惯。我可以给你一些指导，但你必须经历形成好习惯的艰难过程。不过，你必须相信这是可能的，而且绝对是可能的。

I was miserable. I'm happy as a clam. It's not just the money I got there before the money. You got happy before the money. Mostly. How did you get happy before the money? I started getting older. I just realized life was short. I'm going to die. That's again. Try it. Try it in many ways. Well, Confucius had a great saying that every man has two lives. And the second starts when he realizes he has just one. And I read that. It was one of those book dropping lines. It's like mic drop. Confucius had a lot of mic drops. Confucius was a bad motherfucker. He was. That was a great one. Or another one is next time you get sick. Because everybody gets sick every now and then it's like a happy person wants 10,000 things. A sick person just wants one thing. So it's your unlimited desires that are clouding your peace, your happiness, have desires. Your biological creature stands up and says, I can do something. I move. I resist. I live. But just be very careful of your desires. This is the oldest, most trite wisdom. Desire is suffering. That's what it means. Every desire you have is an access where you will suffer. So just don't focus on more than one desire at a time. The universe is rigged in such a way that if you just want one thing and you focus on that, you'll get it. But everything else you got to let go.

我感到很痛苦，但现在我开心得不得了。这不仅仅是因为钱，事实上，我是在拥有财富之前就感到快乐了，你也是如此。大部分情况下是这样的。你是怎么在没钱之前就快乐起来的呢？我渐渐意识到自己正在变老，生命短暂，而终有一天我会离开这个世界。这一念头再次提醒我：尝试用多种方式过好每一天。孔子曾说过一句很棒的话：每个人都有两次生命，而第二次生命开始于他意识到他仅有一次生命的时候。我读到这句话时，非常震撼，就像听到精彩的演讲后的一瞬间。孔子有很多这样令人深思的名言。他确实是很了不起的。还有另一个观点：下次当你生病的时候，因为每个人偶尔都会生病，健康的人追求的东西成千上万，而一个生病的人只想要一件事，那就是康复。所以，是你无限的欲望蒙蔽了你的内心宁静和幸福。欲望是好的，因为你是生物个体，会说“我能做些什么，我移动，我抗争，我生存。”但你要对自己的欲望非常谨慎。这是最古老、最传统的智慧：欲望即痛苦。当你有欲望时，就可能因此而痛苦。因此，不要同时关注超过一个的欲望。宇宙的运行方式是，如果你只想要一件事情并专注于此，你就会得到它，但其他一切都得放下。

Did you make a gradual shift to happiness or was it a radical change? It's ongoing. It's gradual. Every day. So you're happier today than you were a month ago. Yeah. Allegedly. Yeah. I'm very happy these days. Deliriously so. It's actually hard for me to hang out with normal people. Really? So you've made a significant shift over the period of like how many years? Like about eight years. Eight years. Yeah. Wow. And is this something that you've pursued through certain books or is it just like you've made an understanding or gained an understanding in your own mind and then started pursuing it based on understanding? Yeah. It's very, very personal. It's basically you have to decide it's a priority. And then I tried every hack I possibly could. I used to, you know, I tried all the, I tried meditation, I tried witnessing, you know, I even tried a necessary just to see what it would feel like. How did it feel? It was, it turned me from a pessimist to an optimist, but I didn't like the physical side effects in order that I want to be on a drug for a sustained basis. So I dropped it and I felt. But it turned you into an optimist. Yes. Interesting.

你是逐渐变得快乐的还是有个突然的变化？这是一个持续的过程。是逐渐的，每一天都有变化。所以你今天比一个月前更快乐。是的。据说如此。是的，我现在非常快乐，快乐得不可思议。和普通人一起待着对我来说反而有些困难。真的吗？所以你在大约多少年的时间里有了明显的改变？大约八年。八年，哇。这是你通过某些书籍追求的，还是你通过自己的理解，然后开始追求快乐？对，这非常个人化。基本上，你必须决定把它当作一个优先事项。然后我尝试了能想到的所有方法，我试过冥想，试过观察，甚至试过某些药物，只是想看看感觉如何。那感觉如何？它让我从悲观主义者变成乐观主义者，但是我不喜欢其带来的身体副作用，所以我不想长期依赖药物。于是我放弃了它，但是它确实让我变得乐观。很有趣。

At the time I used to be a pessimist. Yeah. I started doing things like I would start looking at the, you know, in every moment and everything that happens, you can look on the bright side of something. Right. And so I used to do that forcibly and then I trained it until it became second nature. So for example, like a friend of mine, wife's was over and she, when we were dating and she took all these photos, she took like hundreds of photos and then she sends them all to us. And my immediate reaction was like, why are you dumping hundreds of photos of my phone? I don't need hundreds of photos. I have some judgment. That's my immediate reaction. And then I could say, actually, how nice of her? She sent me hundreds of photos. I can pick the one that I like. Right.

当时我曾经是个悲观主义者。是的。我开始尝试在每个时刻和每件事情中寻找积极的一面。最初我是强迫自己这样做的，后来经过训练，这种方式变成了一种习惯。例如，我有个朋友，他的妻子在我们约会时拍了很多照片，大概有几百张，然后她把这些照片全发给了我们。我的第一反应是，为什么要把几百张照片发到我手机上？我不需要这么多照片，我有些不满。但随后，我会换个角度想，其实她这样做很贴心，因为我可以从中挑选出自己喜欢的照片。

There are two ways of seeing almost everything. There are a few things that are like high suffering. So you can't do that other than just saying, well, this is a teacher. Right. So I slowly worked through every negative judgment that I had until I saw the positive and now it's second nature to me. I also realized that like what you want is you want to clear minds. You want to let go of thoughts, happy thoughts disappear out ahead automatically. Very easy to let go of them. Negative thoughts linger. So if you interpret the positive and everything very quickly, you let it go. Right. You let it go much faster.

几乎所有事情都有两种看法。有些事情可能会带来极大的痛苦，所以只能把它们看成是一种学习机会。我慢慢地处理了所有消极的判断，直到我看到其中的积极面，现在这已经成为我的一种习惯。我还意识到，你真正想要的是清晰的头脑，你需要放下思想。快乐的想法会自动消失，很容易放下，而消极的想法则会徘徊不去。所以，如果你能快速地在每件事情中找到积极的一面，你就能更快地放下它们。

Simple hacks get more sunlight. Right. Learn to smile more. Learn to hug more. Release serotonin and reverse. They aren't just outward signals of being happy. They're actually feedback loops to being happy. Spend more time in nature. You know, these are obvious. Watch your mind. Watch your mind all day long. Watch what it does. Not judge it. Not try to control it. But you can meditate 24-7. Meditation is not a sit down, close your eyes activity. Meditation is just basically watching your own thoughts like you would watch anything else in the outside world and say, why am I having that thought? Does that serve me anymore? Is that conditioning from when I was 10 years old? Like, for example, getting ready for this podcast. You got ready? I didn't. Oh, good. I did. But I did. But I did.

简单的方法让你多晒太阳，对吗？学会多微笑，学会多拥抱。释放血清素，带来反转。这些不仅仅是外在的快乐信号，它们实际上是通往快乐的反馈循环。多花时间在大自然中，这些都很明显。观察你的思想，整天观察它。不要评判它，不要试图控制它。但你可以全天候冥想。冥想并不是坐下闭眼的活动。冥想基本上就是像观察外部世界的事物一样观察自己的思想，并问自己：“为什么我会有这个想法？这对我还有用吗？还是从我十岁时留下的条件反射？”例如，为了准备这次播客。你做好准备了吗？我没有，哦，好吧。我做了准备，但我做了。我做了。

I couldn't help it. And what happened was the few days leading up to this, my mind was just running. And normally my mind is pretty calm and it was just running and running and running. And every thought I would have, I would imagine me saying it to you. My brain couldn't help but rehearse what it's doing. It's just rehearsing all the time to talk to you. And then I was even rehearsing, telling you about the rehearsal. Right? So I was all playing all these meta games and I was like, shut up, stop it. What is going on? And it took me a while to figure out, oh yeah, you know what it is? When I was a kid in Queens and I had no money and I had nothing and I needed to save myself, the way I got out was by sounding smart, not being smart, sounding smart. That was the skill I perfected. So I am hardwired to always rehearse things so I will sound smart. It's a disease that keeps me from being happy.

我忍不住了。事情是这样的，在这几天前，我的思绪不断翻腾。通常我脑子是很平静的，但这些天却一直不停地想着。我想到的每一个念头，都会想象自己在对你说。我的大脑就是忍不住去排练自己要说的话，一直在排练跟你说话的内容。甚至我连告诉你关于排练的事都在排练。于是，我就在不停地玩这些“心里的小把戏”，然后对自己说：“闭嘴，停下，怎么回事？”过了一段时间，我才明白，哦，原来是这么一回事。小时候我住在皇后区，那时候没有钱也一无所有，急需拯救自己。我的出路就是让自己“听起来聪明”，而不是“真正聪明”，这成了我练就的技能。所以我天生就忍不住去排练事情，只为了听起来聪明。这个毛病让我无法快乐。

But when you see that, when you realize that, when you understand something, then it naturally calms you down. So after that I stop rehearsing as much. Wow. But it's still a train habit. That is a really interesting point that you want to sound smart. That many people do that and especially young people. You see someone who is smart or someone who appears smart, they say smart things. They kind of want to sound smart. I want people to think about me the same way I think about that person. That is my disease. That is my feeling. It is what clutters my mind.

但当你看到、意识到，并理解一些事情时，它自然会让你冷静下来。所以在那之后，我不再频繁地练习。哇。不过这仍然是一种习惯。这是一个非常有趣的观点，就是你想要显得聪明。很多人，尤其是年轻人，都会这样做。当你看到一个聪明的人或者看起来聪明的人，他们总是说一些聪明的话。你也想显得聪明。我希望别人对我的看法和我对这个人的看法一样。这是我的困扰和感觉，也是让我心烦意乱的原因。

The thing I have to ask myself now is, would I still be interested in learning this thing if I couldn't ever tell anybody about it? That's how I know it's real. That's how I know it's something I actually want to know. That's a common thing though. I know I suffered from that when I was young. The desire to sound smart. It's very common. Well, all of us start out. Everything you're the winner now in your life is because you were a loser at some point. If you had gotten all the girls, if you had all the money, if you had everything you want, you were good looking in junior high or high school, you wouldn't have done anything with your life. And you would have peaked early. It's like the Bruce Springsteen Glory Day song.

我现在要问自己的是，如果我永远不能告诉别人我学会了这件事，我还会对它感兴趣吗？这样我才能知道这是真正的兴趣，我是真的想学。其实这是很常见的情况。我知道在年轻的时候，我也曾有过这种渴望，希望别人觉得我聪明。这很普遍。我们都是这样开始的。你现在人生中的成功，都是因为你曾经失败过。如果你从小到大都很受欢迎，有很多钱，拥有一切你想要的东西，或者在初中高中就长得很好看，那么你可能就不会在生活中取得什么成就，而且可能早早就达到了巅峰。这就像布鲁斯·斯普林斯汀的《光辉岁月》这首歌唱的一样。

You would have married your high school sweetheart. You'd be living in your hometown. You'd be a manager at the local McDonald's, whatever the first dream job you had. Thank God we didn't all get what we wanted when we were young. Or we would be trapped in that. You have to be able to break out of where you came from. I don't know where I was going. That is interesting too about people who peaked too early. Or maybe those people that peaked too early can do the Elon Musk thing and just abandon it and start something new. And then learn the joys of sucking at something. Yeah.

你本会娶你的高中恋人，住在你的家乡，成为当地麦当劳的经理，或者其他你小时候梦想的工作。幸好我们年轻时并没有得到我们想要的一切，否则我们就被困在那个状态中了。你必须有能力突破自己的起点。我不知道自己要去哪里。对于那些过早达到巅峰的人，这也是很有趣的。或者那些过早达到巅峰的人可以像埃隆·马斯克那样，抛开过去，开始新的事物，然后去体验不擅长某事的乐趣。是的。

And actually in our profession especially when you're high visibility, the problem with peaking is that you then get drowned in death of a thousand cuts. People have expectations of you. Hey Joe, can you come to my event? Hey Joe, can you look at my business plan? Hey Joe, can you give me advice on this? Can you talk to my friend? Can you come in this podcast? You're just being assaulted all the time with inbound opportunities. So you have no time to start over with anything. So you have to ruthlessly, ruthlessly disappoint everybody. Eliminate and clear your schedule. Drop all the meetings. Not even respond to the emails.

在我们的行业中，尤其是当你处于高曝光度的时候，成功的同时也会面临"千刀万剐"的困境。人们对你有各种期待。比如说：“嘿，乔，你能来参加我的活动吗？” “嘿，乔，你能看看我的商业计划吗？” “嘿，乔，你能给我一些建议吗？” “你能和我朋友谈谈吗？” “你能来参加这个播客吗？” 你不断地被各种机会围攻，所以根本没有时间去重新做其他事情。因此，你必须无情地让每个人失望。清理并腾出你的日程安排。取消所有会议，甚至不回复电子邮件。

The only way you're going to be able to start over with anything. Yeah. And we talked about this and I'd love your approach to meetings. Thank you for that. Life or death. I have the same way. I avoided a good one recently and this was someone that was just tracking me down as a high profile person and a big organization. And I'm like, can we just talk on the phone? And then we talked on the phone. There was nothing to say. It was just they wanted to get me in the office. Yeah.

要重新开始任何事情，唯一的方法就是......是的，我们谈过这个，我很喜欢你对会议的处理方式，谢谢你分享。我也有同样的感觉。最近我避免了一次不必要的会议，对方只是因为我是个知名人士，来自一个大企业，就一直想联系我。我当时想，能不能直接电话聊？结果我们电话聊了以后，发现根本没有什么话题，他们只是想让我去办公室见面。是的。

Meeting should really be phone calls. Phone calls should be emails and emails should just be text. Right? Many of them, right? With meetings, I mean, I despise meetings. I used to own the domain, I don't do coffee.com. I eventually let it go. But I used to respond from the wallet, I don't do coffee. Oh, that's hilarious. It was a little bit of a jerk move. But really what it comes from is when I was young, one of my principles was I knew I had to make money. I had an overwhelming desire. And one of the things I did was I said, okay, I'm never going to be worth more than what I think I'm worth. Okay. No one's going to pay me more than what I think I'm worth.

会议其实应该变成电话。电话应该变成电子邮件，而电子邮件应该只是短信，对吧？很多情况下是这样，对吧？关于会议，我的意思是，我真的很讨厌开会。我过去还拥有一个域名叫 "我不喝咖啡.com"。后来我放弃了，但我过去的回复就是 "我不喝咖啡"。哦，这太搞笑了。这有点像一个傲慢的举动。但实际上，这来源于我年轻的时候，我的一个原则是我知道我必须赚钱，我有一种强烈的渴望。于是我决定，我永远不会比我认为自己值多少钱更有价值。没有人会支付给我超过我自认为价值的报酬。

So what am I worth? So I picked an hourly rate for myself that I was worth. And I said, I'm never going to squander my time for less than this. So if originally it was 500 bucks an hour, then I would upgrade to 5,000 bucks an hour and it's ludicrous. But picking aspirational hourly rate, aspirational, it has to be a little ludicrous. And then what I would do is if I have to return something, I'm standing in line to return something and it's below my hourly rate, I'll throw it away. If I have to, if I have or give it away, if I have to do some task and I can hire somebody to do it for less than my hourly rate, I would hire them.

那么我价值多少呢？于是我给自己定了一个时薪，认定这是我的价值。我告诉自己，绝不会为了低于这个时薪的事情浪费时间。如果最开始我的时薪是500美元，那么我会把目标提升到5000美元，即便这听起来有些荒谬。但设定一个有点荒谬的目标时薪是必要的。然后如果我需要退货，但排队的时间不值得这个时薪，我就会把物品扔掉或送人。如果有些任务可以花比我时薪低的钱雇人来做，我就会雇人去做。

And so I just became extremely jealous of my time, which doesn't mean you can't have fun, rest, leisure, spending time with your friends and family. That's all great. Don't count that. But if you're doing anything you don't want to do, which is the definition of work, it's a set of things that you have to do that you don't want to do, if you're working, it better be for your hourly rate. Otherwise don't do the work. And so once it came out of that, then I just read the cost of meetings. A cost of meetings is so high, especially given all the people who are in there, right? One person's talking, seven people listening, you're literally just dying an hour at a time.

所以，我变得非常珍视自己的时间。这并不意味着你不能享受乐趣、休息、闲暇，或者和朋友家人共度时光，这些都是很好的，不用考虑在内。但如果你正在做任何你不愿意做的事情，那就称为工作，工作就是一套你不得不做但又不想做的事情。如果你在工作，那最好是为了你的每小时报酬，否则就别做这些工作。一旦明白了这一点，我开始意识到会议的代价太高了，特别是在那么多人参与的情况下对吧？一个人在说话，七个人在听，你真的就是每小时在浪费生命。

So you have to just drop non-urgent meetings or figure out how to be more efficient with them if you're going to do anything great. The extreme example is business travel, getting on a plane to fly half around the world for one meeting, which never amounts to anything, and then like wasting your whole little life there and then flying back. So about five years ago I resolved, I am never going to travel for business. And I haven't traveled for business since. I only travel if the travel experience will be so entertaining and joyous because I have friends or it's a place I want to see or whatever that it will be complete in and of itself because I know that whatever the business meeting I came from is never worth it. Wow.

所以，如果你想做出伟大的事情，就必须放弃那些不紧急的会议，或者想办法提高会议的效率。一个极端的例子是出差：为了一个会议坐飞机绕地球飞半圈，结果什么成果都没有，浪费时间在那里，然后再飞回来。大约在五年前，我决定永远不为工作出差。自那以来，我从未为工作旅行过。我只会在旅行体验本身非常有趣和愉快的时候才旅行，例如因为有朋友或者我想去的地方。我知道，为了任何工作会议而旅行都不值得。哇。

And actually that principle applies larger than just travel. It applies to life in general. One of the secrets to happiness is to really embrace what you're doing in that moment. That's trite. But where that comes from is saying, I only want to do actions that are complete in and of themselves, right? If I'm looking for some ulterior motive down the line, it's not going to materialize. And if you think it is, maybe even if it does, it'll be very short lived. Anything you wanted in your life, whether it was a car or whether it was a girl or whether it was money, when you got it a year later, you were back to zero. Your brain had hedonically adapted to it and you were looking for the next thing. That's a great statement.

实际上，这个原则不仅仅适用于旅行，更适用于生活。幸福的秘诀之一就是全心投入当下正在做的事情。这听起来有些老套，但它的真正意义在于告诉我们，只做那些自身就能带来满足感的事情。如果你总想着追求某种未来的动机，它可能不会实现。即使实现了，也可能只是昙花一现。生活中任何你渴望得到的东西，无论是一辆车、一个伴侣还是金钱，当你得到它们一年后，你会发现自己又回到了原点。你的大脑已经习惯了这些，开始追求下一个目标。这是一种很有意义的表达。

Hedonically adapted. That is what happens to people. You get accustomed to whatever it is. I realized that when I first got a new apartment, it was a nice apartment. After a while, I got used to it. I was like, oh, OK. This is just an apartment. It's just where I live. I'm used to it's nice, but I'm used to it. Yeah, we all go through this learning. It's writing the first wheel of life. It's like you get on at the bottom. You're like, I want to get to the top. This is so exciting. You ride it up. You get a little dopamine rush and get a little serotonin.

习惯性满足。这就是人们的常态。无论是什么，我们都会慢慢习以为常。我意识到这一点是从我第一次搬进新公寓的时候开始的。那是一间很漂亮的公寓。过了一段时间，我就习惯了，感觉，哦，就这样吧。这只是一间公寓，只是我住的地方。我习惯了它的美好，但也不过如此。是的，我们都经历过这样一个过程。这就像人生的第一次乘坐摩天轮。刚开始在底部，你会想着我要到顶部去，感到非常兴奋。当你往上升的时候，会有一些多巴胺的刺激和一丝血清素的愉悦。

Then you ride it back down as that wears off. Then you need another high. Then you ride it back up and you ride it back down. In fact, the more high as you get, the harder it gets to go around the wheel. The more bored you get of it, the harder it goes to go back up. So what lights your fire now? What gets you motivated to do things and to act? Art. Art. This is art. Oh, OK. Art is just creativity. It's just anything that's done for its own sake.

然后，当那种兴奋感消退时，你就会回到低谷。然后你又需要另一次兴奋。你再一次达到高潮，然后回到低谷。实际上，你得到的兴奋越多，循环往复就越困难。你越感到无聊，越难以重新振奋。那么，现在是什么点燃了你的激情？是什么让你有动力去做事和行动？是艺术。艺术。就是艺术。哦，好的。艺术就是创意，就是为了本身而做的任何事情。

So what are the things that are done for their own sake? There's nothing beyond loving somebody, creating something, playing art. To me, creating businesses play. I create businesses early stage because it's fun because I'm into the product. Even when I invest, it's because I like the people. I like hanging out with them. I learn from them and I think the product is really cool. So these days, I will pass on all kinds of great investments because I'm like, the product is not interesting. It's boring.

那么，有哪些事情是为了它们本身而做的呢？没有什么比爱一个人、创造某物、进行艺术活动更重要的了。对我来说，创建企业是一种玩乐。我在早期阶段创建企业是因为觉得有趣，因为我对产品感兴趣。即使在投资时，也是因为我喜欢与这些人相处。我喜欢和他们在一起，我从他们那里学习，并且认为产品非常酷。所以这些天来，我会放弃各种不错的投资机会，因为我觉得产品不够有趣，太无聊了。

I'm not going to learn anything. That's a beautiful luxury. It is a luxury. Art and learning. Yeah. It is a luxury. These are not 100% or zero things. You can, in your life, start moving more and more towards that. Right. But it's a goal. It's a goal. When I was younger, I used to be so desperate to make money that I would have done anything. If you'd shown up and said, hey, I got a sewage trucking business and you're going to go into that.

我不打算学习任何东西。这是一种美好的奢侈。是的，这确实是一种奢侈。艺术和学习都是奢侈品。它们不是非此即彼的事情。在生活中，你可以慢慢地朝着这个方向努力。不过，这只是一个目标。当我年轻的时候，我曾经非常渴望赚钱，以至于我愿意做任何事情。如果那时有人出现并对我说，嘿，我有个污水卡车生意要让你加入，我可能都会去做。

I was like, great, let's do it. I'm going to make money. Thank God. No one gave me that opportunity. I'm glad that it went down the road of technology and science, which I genuinely enjoy. And so I got to combine my vocation and my avocation. I mean, what are you doing? You're playing. You're doing art. You're not working. No. That's what I always say when people say I work hard and I'm like, sort of, not really. I'm always working, but it looks like work to them, but it feels like play to me. And that's how I know no one can compete with me on it because I'm just playing 16 hours a day.

当时我想：“太好了，我们就这么做吧。我可以赚钱了。谢天谢地。”没有人给我这个机会。我很高兴我走上了科技和科学这条路，我真的很喜欢这方面。这样我就能把职业和爱好结合起来。我总是这样想：“你到底在做什么？你在玩，你在做艺术，你不是在工作。”每当有人说我工作很辛苦时，我总是说：“算是吧，但也不完全是。”我一直在工作，但在别人看来是工作，而在我看来像是在玩。这就是为什么我知道没有人能在这方面与我竞争，因为我每天玩16个小时。

And if they want to compete with me and they're going to work, they're going to lose because they're not going to do it 16 hours a day, seven days a week. Listen, man, there are some gems of wisdom in this conversation. And I hope people pull things out of this and apply them to their own life. And I'm certainly going to listen to you again and try to apply some of this to my own life, stuff that I'm not already applying. But I really appreciate your time and I really appreciate you coming in here. Thanks for having me.

如果他们想和我竞争，他们必须努力工作，但他们会失败，因为他们不会每天工作16个小时、一周七天。听着，这次对话中有一些智慧的宝藏。我希望人们能从中提取出一些东西并应用到自己的生活中。我肯定会再听一遍你的话，尝试将一些我还没有应用到我自己生活中的东西融入进去。我非常感谢你的时间，也非常感谢你来到这里。谢谢你邀请我。

And please tell people, you know, small little podcast is just the novall podcast, right? Yeah. Best way to find me is on Twitter, actually. Okay. I'm just at novall. Then I have a website at nav.al. I have a YouTube channel, novall. And I have a podcast in the wall. That's it. Well, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Really appreciate it. Thank you. Bye, everybody. Bye-bye.

当然，请告诉大家，我的小型播客就是Novall播客，是吧？对。最好的联系我的方式是在推特上。我就是@novall。我还有一个网站，地址是nav.al。我也有一个YouTube频道，叫novall，还有一个播客，叫In The Wall。就是这样了。非常感谢。谢谢你。真的很感激。谢谢。再见，大家。再见。