Trump AI Speech & Action Plan, DC Summit Recap, Hot GDP Print, Trade Deals, Altman Warns No Privacy
发布时间 2025-08-01 23:56:35 来源
以下为The All-In Podcast 这一集内容的中文翻译：
这一期 All-In Podcast 以一段幽默的对话开场，讨论 J-Cal 在录制过程中使用尼古丁袋的情况，引发了一场关于他是否因为产品代言而获得报酬的辩论。 随即，话题迅速转向了最近在华盛顿特区举行的 AI 峰会，该峰会由 Sachs 和 Friedberg 牵头，旨在消除对 AI 的负面叙述。
Freeberg 回顾了在短短十天内组织这次活动的挑战，强调了令人印象深刻的演讲者阵容，包括来自 AMD 的 Lisa Su 和来自 Nvidia 的 Jensen Huang，以及政府官员。 他指出，他们不得不拒绝许多科技公司的 CEO，以确保信息集中在 AI 在新兴产业和支持基础设施中的经济繁荣潜力上。 他强调了管理演讲时间的难度，即使是内阁成员，也因为总统安排的出席而受到限制。
Sachs 分享了他对这次活动的兴奋之情，强调团队在发布行政命令和行动计划方面的成功。 好友们回忆了与特朗普总统会面的情景，Jason 回忆说，他因即将到来的讨论做准备而感到惊讶，几乎拒绝了合影的机会。
对话随后转向讨论特朗普总统关于 AI 的演讲内容。 Sachs 将其描述为类似于肯尼迪宣布太空竞赛，强调美国赢得 AI 竞赛的重要性。 他强调了特朗普赢得竞赛的关键支柱，即创新、基础设施和 AI 出口。 他还强调了特朗普强调的美国工人是 AI 驱动繁荣的核心，并防止政府采购的 AI 模型中存在意识形态偏见。
小组成员讨论了特朗普总统在峰会上签署的三项行政命令，旨在促进 AI 出口、改善 AI 基础设施许可，并防止联邦政府中使用“觉醒”AI，他们将其等同于基于偏见的审查。 与会者一致认为，联邦政府不是试图控制私营公司，而只是为那些向政府出售产品的公司设定标准。
讨论随后涉及政府的整体氛围和运作节奏，Sachs 指出特朗普总统始终如一的工作速度以及白宫团结的团队。 该小组还讨论了最近的关税是否可以被视为谈判的初步要价策略。
在关于能源和太阳能的辩论中，谈话发生转折，J-Cal 反驳了他认为一位嘉宾对可再生能源的虚假信息。 这导致了好朋友之间一场有趣但激烈的争论。 话题随后转回到尊重知识产权和尊重版权材料的问题上，尤其是关于合理使用原则的问题。
他们研究了 AI 和互联网整合的最终潜力。 Jason 展示了 New York Times 文章和 Disney 角色如何与 Chat GPT 结合使用来创建付费和互动内容的演示原型，引发了一些版权问题。 随后，讨论转变为如何处理被盗和使用的版权材料。
讨论涉及未来一两年内正在审理的几起诉讼。 Chamath 提出了一个发人深省的概念，即一个没有专利或版权的世界，以及如果两家竞争公司从头开始发明一种新材料会发生什么。 面板的其他成员讨论了政府、公司和个人可以做好的各种准备。
本期节目还介绍了 OpenAI 的 Sam Altman 关于用户隐私的内容。 他说，目前在使用 Chat GPT 时没有法律保密性。
最后，好朋友们开始讨论经济新闻。 据报道，第二季度的 GDP 增长比预期高出 50%。 个人消费支出 (PCE) 上涨了 30 个基点。 他们转而讨论特朗普与欧盟的协议，即美国产品的关税为 0%，但进入美国的欧洲产品需缴纳 15% 的关税，但美国将获得来自欧洲的投资和产品。
The All-In Podcast episode begins with a humorous exchange about J-Cal using a nicotine pouch during the recording, sparking a debate on whether he's being paid for a product endorsement. This quickly transitions into a discussion about a recent AI summit in DC, spearheaded by Sachs and Friedberg, who aimed to dispel negative AI narratives.
Freeberg recounts the challenges of organizing the event in just ten days, highlighting the impressive lineup of speakers, including Lisa Su from AMD and Jensen Huang from Nvidia, alongside government officials. He notes that they had to turn down numerous tech CEOs to ensure the message focused on AI's economic boom potential across new industries and supporting infrastructure. He emphasizes the difficulty of managing stage time, even with cabinet members, due to the President's scheduled appearance.
Sachs shares his excitement about the event, emphasizing the team's success in publishing an executive order and action plan. The besties reminisce about meeting President Trump, with Jason recounting his experience of being surprised and almost declining the photo opportunity due to his preparation for an upcoming discussion.
The conversation then shifts to discussing the substance of President Trump's speech on AI. Sachs frames it as similar to Kennedy's declaration of a space race, emphasizing the importance of the US winning the AI race. He highlights Trump's key pillars for winning, which were innovation, infrastructure, and AI exports. He also underscored Trump's emphasis on American workers being at the center of AI-driven prosperity and preventing ideological bias in government-procured AI models.
The panel discusses President Trump signing three executive orders at the summit to promote AI exports, improve AI infrastructure permitting, and prevent woke AI in the federal government, which they equated to censorship based on biases. It's agreed that the federal government isn't trying to control private companies, only setting standards for those selling to them.
The discussion then touches upon the overall atmosphere and operational cadence of the administration, with Sachs noting President Trump's constant working pace and the cohesive team at the White House. The group also discusses whether recent tariffs could be considered an effect of an opening bid strategy for negotiations.
The conversation takes a turn during a debate about energy and solar, with J-Cal pushing back against what he sees as misinformation from a guest about renewable energy. This leads to a playful but intense disagreement among the besties. The subject then shifts back to the topics of respecting IP and the issue of respecting copywrite material, particularly concerning the fair use doctrine.
They examine the end-game potential with the integration of AI and the internet. Jason shows prototypes of how New York Times articles and Disney characters could be used with Chat GPT to create paid and interactive content, raising some copyright concerns. This discussion then transitions into how to handle copyright material that has been stolen and used.
The discussion touches on several lawsuits pending in the next year or two. Chamath brings up a thought-provoking concept about a world without patents, or copyrights and what might happen if two competing companies invented a new material from scratch. The rest of the panel discusses a variety of ways that the government, corporations and individuals can prepare.
The episode then covers user privacy with Sam Altman of OpenAI. He says there is currently no legal confidentiality when using Chat GPT.
Finally, the besties begin to discuss economic news. GDP growth was reported to be 50% higher than expectations in Q2. PCE rose by 30 Bips. They transition to discussing Trump's deal with the EU, where 0% tariffs on American products are offset by European products paying 15% tariffs coming into the US, but will see the US get investment and products from Europe.
摘要
(0:00) Bestie intros! (1:44) Recapping "Winning the AI Race" in DC: Trump's speech, best moments, key takeaways (16:39) AI ...
GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......
中英文字稿 
How much founder mode did you do? You're saying that I popped an out? I need an out right now. Hold on. You don't need anything right now. Are you chewing it? What are you doing? No, you put this nicotine pouch, you upper deck it, releases it, and then you become a god. Is that the out that Tucker said you? Yeah, Tucker and I are going to do a crossover. Wait, did you work out a side hustle here? I haven't represented it to the group for a vote yet. You're preempting. Wait a second. Are you being paid for this plug right now? Yes, you're saying. If you use the promo code, J-Cal. Wait a second. promo code J-15. Okay, he broke up, which is good. Is he on drugs? Is he taking drugs? He's on drugs. No, I'm not on drugs. And he's doing a deal with drugs. This is like a PSA for not taking this stuff. You're so out of control. Do you take two of them? What are you doing? I thought the stuff relaxes you. What the hell is going on? Your internet's on the Fritz too. I fixed it. I fixed it. I fixed it. That was Putin's got my internet. Putin's got my internet. My god. What flavor are you eating? Or using. Today's chill, the man. Today's chill, the man. You don't see very chill. You see. This is the first time I've had a date in English.
您昨天做了多少创始人模式的工作？你是说我突然冒出来了一个解决方案？我现在需要一个解决方案。等一下。你现在不需要任何东西。你在嚼吗？你在干什么？不，你把这个尼古丁袋子放到上颚，它会释放尼古丁，然后你就会感觉像个神。那是Tucker给你建议的解决方案吗？是的，Tucker和我打算来个合作。等等，你这里是不是找到了一个副业？我还没有向团队提议投票。你这么做太抢先了。等一下，你现在是在收钱做广告吗？是的，你说得对。只要使用促销代码J-Cal。等等，是促销代码J-15。好，他信号断了，这倒是个好事。他是不是在嗑药？他在嗑药吗？他在嗑药。不是，我没有嗑药。他正在做个药品交易。这像是宣传不要碰这些东西的公益广告。你太失控了。你用了两个吗？你在干什么？我以为这东西能让你放松。到底发生了什么？你的网络也出了问题。我修好了。我修好了。我修好了。那是普京搞了我的网络。天哪。你吃的是什么味道？或者使用的是什么味道。今天是“放松，大兄弟”的味道。你看上去一点也不放松。这是我第一次用英语约会。
No, I'm trying to get us back to that original all-in energy where we laughed and we had fun and we enjoyed each other's company. No, but J-Cal, seriously, do you have a side deal going on without right now? No, I don't have a deal. Yet, I don't know if I have a deal. There's no deal. I'm texting Tucker now just in cutting it. Go in all-in. Go in all-in. Go like your winner's ride. Bring man David Sack. Go in all-in. And I said we open-source it to the fans and they've just got a reason. Love you guys. I'm Queen of King Wild. I'm going all-in. All right, everybody. Welcome back to What Chanson From Nvidia Has Confirmed is the number one podcast in the world. Yes, the All-in podcast is here. We had an amazing time in DC last week. And we'll get into that. But hey, Freeberg, you crushed it on all those incredible speakers last week. Ten days you had to pull off that event, Freeberg, and you did it. Chamath and I just parachute it in to DC last week for the AI Summit. Sack's was busy working with Podas to get all those executive orders done. Take us behind the scenes, Freeberg. All of these incredible speakers. You got Lisa from AMD. You had to let Nick, I liked him. Best end, I liked him. We had to say no to a lot of tech company CEOs that found out about the event and wanted to speak on stage.
不，我是在努力让我们回到那种原始的全情投入状态，那时我们笑着，玩得开心，享受彼此的陪伴。不是的，J-Cal，我是认真的，你现在有没有私下进行什么交易？没有，我没有交易。到目前为止，甚至不确定会不会有交易。没有交易。我正在给Tucker发信息，就是下定决心，全面投入。全情投入。像赢家一样行动。带上David Sack，全情投入。我说我们把它开源给粉丝，他们就有了理由。爱你们，我是狂野之王，我要全情投入。好了，大家。欢迎回到Nvidia确认的世界第一播客。 是的，All-in播客又来了。我们上周在华盛顿过得非常愉快。稍后会聊到它。Freeberg，你上周的那些精彩演讲真是太棒了。在短短十天内你就组织好了活动，真了不起。Chamath和我上周空降去华盛顿参加了AI峰会。Sack忙着和总统一起完成所有的行政命令。带我们看看幕后，Freeberg。所有这些精彩的演讲者。你找到了AMD的Lisa，虽然Nick也不错，不过我更喜欢他。我们不得不对许多得知活动消息并想在舞台上演讲的科技公司CEO说不。
So there was a big kind of cutoff that we had to make around, making sure that we got our message across. I think if you watch the content, we talked briefly about it at the beginning. But the focus was really on trying to dispel the negative AI narrative and myth that AI is just here to destroy jobs because there's this big economic boom that's happening, both with respect to new industries that are emerging, which is why we showcase hate, rain, and others. But then also the infrastructure needed to support the AI race with data centers, chips, mining, and energy. And so we highlighted each of those four industries. And then the cabinet people found out about it and wanted to get involved. So we were unfortunately squeezing people on and off stage. It's kind of crazy to tell the secretary of treasury he has to get off the stage because he's passed his 20-minute allocation. But we had to line everything up so that the president could get his secret service detail to clear the stage and get set up in time. That's why we were rushing everyone. But man, what a week, what a rush. It was awesome. Thanks to David Sachs for the leadership and pulling it all together, bringing those folks to the table.
所以我们不得不做出了一个很大的决定，以确保我们的信息能够传达出去。我想如果你看了内容，会注意到我们在开头简要提到了这一点。但我们的重点确实是努力打破关于人工智能的负面传言和“人工智能只是来抢工作”的误解，因为新兴行业的出现正在带来经济繁荣。因此，我们展示了人工智能在阻止仇恨、下雨等方面的应用。同时，我们也谈到了支持人工智能发展的基础设施需求，比如数据中心、芯片、矿产和能源产业。我们重点介绍了这四个行业。后来，内阁的人知道了这件事，也想参与进来。因此，我们不得不让一些人上台又下台。这有点疯狂，比如告诉财政部长他要下台，因为他超出了20分钟的时间分配。但我们必须安排好一切，以便总统的秘密特勤人员能够迅速清场并做好准备。所以我们不得不催促大家。不过，这真是不可思议的一周，令人兴奋。感谢David Sachs的领导和协调，把所有人聚集在一起。
And Sachs congrats on getting your EOS sign and your action plan published. That was pretty cool. Pretty awesome to meet the president and meet all those cabinet members. And have all of this day come together because of the work you've been doing. How does it feel? Sachs, how are you doing in the afterglow there? I could see that you're in the afterglow. You sent me a picture of the four besties with our incredible 47th president. How are you feeling right now? I'm good to put that on the screen. I mean, we have it. I don't know if that's allowed to put that on the screen. I don't know what the protocol is. Yeah, I think we can. Yeah. I mean, I haven't gotten my picture. I did notice that I was unfortunately when they took the picture of the four of us with the president somehow I got cropped out by accident. I think maybe they were using a wide lens. What was it like for you to meet the president?
恭喜萨克斯，你的EOS标志和行动计划发表了，这真是太酷了。见到总统和那些内阁成员真是令人兴奋，而这一切的实现都归功于你所做的工作。感觉如何？萨克斯，余辉中的你感觉怎么样？我能看出来你很开心，你给我发了一张你和我们敬仰的第47任总统合影的照片。你现在感觉怎么样？我可以把那张照片展示出来。我不知道能不能这样做，也不清楚相关的规定。是的，我想我们可以。不过，我没拿到我的那张照片。我注意到，在我们四个人和总统的合影中，我不幸被不小心裁掉了。也许他们用了广角镜头。见到总统对你来说感觉如何？
Because just for the audience, we all stood in line. And then we took a photo with the president backstage and then we did a photo with the four of us. But Jason, when you had your moment with the president, what did you say? Did you ask him about immigration? Did you have your photo, my lady? I have your photo with the president. Oh, do you have a cell phone? Did you bring up solar panels with him? Like what was your big moment all about? I didn't know we were taking a picture. That was like sprung on me. So I was like, oh, we're taking a picture. So my brother, Josh, who runs security for us, was like, they need you in the back to take a picture with the president. And I was like, yeah, I'm good. I got to prepare for some, you know, some, Oh, you were gonna pass? Well, I thought he was joking with me. So I was like, yeah, yeah, I'm good. I'm good. He's like, no, no, I'm serious. You're taking pictures with the president. I was like, we are? Okay. So I ran back and they put us in line.
为了让观众了解情况，我们大家都排了队，然后在后台和总统合影，还拍了一张我们四个人的照片。但是，杰森，当你和总统见面时，你说了什么？你问他关于移民的问题了吗？你有没有和总统的合影，我有你的合影哦。哦，你有手机吗？你有没有和他说太阳能板的事？你的重要时刻是怎样的？我当时不知道要拍照，这让我有点措手不及。所以我就想，哦，原来要拍照啊。我的兄弟乔什负责我们的安保工作，他对我说，他们需要你到后台和总统合影。我当时还说，好啊，我得准备一下，做好准备。你本来打算拒绝？我以为他在开玩笑，所以我就说，好的好的，不用我去了。他说，不，我是认真的，你要和总统合影。我这才意识到是真的，于是赶紧跑回去，他们安排我们排好队。
And then I was like, I think I'm getting punked here because they kept repeating to me. Okay, Jason, you're last. You're last. And they, you know, and I know you guys like to put a new joke or two. So I, you know, I just got in line last. And it's obviously, you know, it's a big deal to take a picture with the president. So I didn't want to, you know, use that time inappropriately or anything. So I just said it's a pleasure to meet you. Just say it already. You like it. Just say it. Just, let's get it. Get to the end. You like him. You tried not to, you know, you're all Mr. fucking big shot, Mr. Big Talk. And then you got in front of him and you like him. Just say it. What I will say is, Jesus Christ. I'm just like him. What a joke. You're such a good. I had a great time. I had a great time predictable. You're a predictable goon. You know, you know, you don't even know what good is. Okay, stop, Riz. Stop or a farming.
然后我当时觉得，我可能被骗了，因为他们一直对我重复说：“好的，Jason，你是最后一位，你是最后一位。” 我知道你们喜欢开新玩笑，所以我就排在了最后。显然，和总统合影是件大事，我不想不恰当地使用这个时间。所以我只是说：“很高兴见到你。” 你就说出来吧，你喜欢他，就说出来。让我们结束这个。你喜欢他，你试着不表现出来，你装得很了不起，但当你站在他面前时，你就是喜欢他。你就说吧。我会说的是，天啊，我就像他一样，真是个笑话。你真是个好人。我玩得很开心。你真是太好猜了。你根本不知道什么是好。好了，别再刷存在感了。
You don't know what gooning is. Okay. I had a great time meeting him. It was a great event. You're a farming. Obviously, he's trying to get his Riz up to impress his kids. But it was great. And I didn't know what to do. Just say you're so good. And we can move on. What do you think of his speech? I can't give you a shout out. Jason or even after the president gave you a shout out. I don't know about love. He said, even Jason, how many times have you listened to that clip over and over? How many times? How many times have I been to people have you shared that with? How many times have you played with? I'm going to play the clip. I want to also say hello and thank you to Jamath and his wonderful wife, Nat. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you very much. It was great seeing you again. Great couple. David Friedberg and even as we know, Jason Gallicano. That's for you. I say even, thank you, Jason.
你不知道“gooning”是什么意思。好吧。我很高兴见到他。那是个很棒的活动。你是个农场主。显然，他想提升自己的魅力来给孩子们留下深刻印象。但那真的很好。我不知道该怎么做，只能说你真厉害，然后继续聊。你觉得他的演讲怎么样？我不能给你特别表扬，杰森，甚至在总统给你大声名赞之后。我不懂什么是爱。他还提到了杰森，你听过那段视频多少次？多少次？你和多少人分享过？你反复播放了多少次？我现在就放那段视频。我还要向贾马斯和他可爱的太太奈特问好并表示感谢。非常感谢你们来到这里。再次见到你们真好。你们真是对好夫妻。还有大卫·弗里德伯格，当然还有我们都知道的杰森·加利加诺。我特别感谢你，杰森。
I'm very, very happy. I appreciate that. That is good person. I mean, it's a good person. He called you a good person. So here we are. What president's ever called you a good person before? Come on. I mean, it's obviously surreal for all of us, I think, to be this close to the administration and then for sacks to be part of it. What I will say is you have to give a lot of credit to this administration for the velocity they're going, what they're accomplishing, even if you disagree with certain items on the margins. And their ability to engage with leaders doing important work. And if we compare that to Biden and Kamala, like there weren't even letting people come to the White House.
我非常非常开心。我对这件事非常感激。这是个好人，我的意思是，这是个很棒的人。他称赞你是个好人。想想看，之前有哪位总统称赞过你是好人吗？这对我们所有人来说都是超现实的，离政府这么近，而且Sacks还参与其中。我想说的是，你必须给予这个政府很高的评价，他们的速度和成就令人赞赏，即使你对其中一些边缘的事情持不同意见。他们能够与做重要工作的人进行互动和交流。如果我们拿他们跟拜登和卡玛拉相比，那边甚至不让人去白宫。
Is this like a few like administration? I love the administration. I like Trump. This is a cabinet of CEOs. Let me just say this. I'm not in love with Trump. I'm in like with Trump. That's where I'm at. I'm not in love with Trump. I'm in like with Trump. But what better team has ever been put together? It is a cabinet of CEOs. It is a cabinet of managers. It's a cabinet of people who are not going to get done. And every time I go there, I'm impressed by this cabinet. I pull my hair out when I'm even going to be in contact.
这就像是一个行政团队吗？我喜欢这个行政团队。我喜欢特朗普。这是一个由首席执行官组成的内阁。先让我这么说吧，我不是爱特朗普，我是喜欢他。这就是我的立场。我不是爱特朗普，我是喜欢他。但还有哪个团队能比得上呢？这是一个由首席执行官组成的内阁，一个管理者的内阁。他们是那些不会停止做事的人。每次我去那里的时候，我都对这个内阁印象深刻。当我可能要接触的时候，我都要抓狂了。
You're pro-Trump. Finally, Friedberg, you've been splitting it. You've been dancing around the issue. Are you full 100% in support of Trump? You want to sit here and put me on the spot? I put you on the spot. I support my president. I support the president. Okay, so you voted for him and you love Trump. You voted for him and you love Trump. I love what he's doing and you voted for him. And I have issues with the spending and that's not been resolved. So like I said before.
你支持特朗普。终于，Friedberg，你一直在回避这个问题。你是不是完全支持特朗普？你想在这里让我难堪吗？我让你难堪。我支持我的总统。我支持总统。好吧，所以你投票给他，也爱特朗普。你投票给他，也爱特朗普。我喜欢他正在做的事情，而且你也投票给他。同时我对开支问题有些顾虑，这个问题还没有解决。所以我之前说过的。
Okay, great. Here we are folks. My full-throated endorsement will come around when doge actions are taken seriously and or the White House puts pressure on Congress to take action on spending. Okay, fair enough. What is everybody's favorite moment? Favorite other than Trump being absolutely amazing, great speech. He said he's hilarious, whatever. We'll put POTUS outside that because it's hard to compete with the president of the United States. Do you have a couple of favorite moments? Give us a couple of favorite moments.
好的，太好了。各位，我们现在到了这里。我会全力支持，当狗狗币的行为被认真对待，或者白宫施压国会采取行动控制开支时。好的，没问题。大家最喜欢的时刻是什么？除了特朗普绝对惊艳的演讲，他说过他很幽默等等之外。我们暂且不讨论总统的表现，因为很难和美国总统竞争。你有没有几个喜欢的时刻？告诉我们几个你喜欢的时刻。
First of all, I think we should talk about the substance of the speech because I think this was the first speech that President Trump has given on AI since AI boom began. He's spoken about it before, but this was a full-length policy speech and he declared that the United States was in an AI race. It's a global competition. I think the language that he used was reminiscent of how President John F. Kennedy declared that America was in a space race. In a similar way, President Trump declared that we had to win the AI race.
首先，我认为我们应该讨论一下这次演讲的内容，因为我认为这是自人工智能热潮开始以来，特朗普总统首次全面发表关于人工智能的政策演讲。他之前曾谈及此事，但这次是完整的政策演讲，他宣称美国正处于一场人工智能的竞赛中。这是一场全球竞争。我觉得他使用的语言让人联想起肯尼迪总统宣布美国正在进行太空竞赛时的说法。同样地，特朗普总统宣称我们必须赢得这场人工智能竞赛。
I think you can argue that the AI race is more important than the space race. It's going to reshape the global economy. It's going to determine who the superpowers are of the 21st century. President Trump was really clear that we had to win it and that he was going to support a strategy for winning it and then he laid out with some of those key pillars are. Number one was innovation. We have to get the red tape out of the way and let our geniuses cook. It clearly was very supportive to a lot of the CEOs and entrepreneurs in the crowd.
我认为你可以说，人工智能竞赛比太空竞赛更重要。它将重塑全球经济，并决定21世纪的超级大国是谁。特朗普总统非常明确地表示，我们必须赢得这场竞赛，并且他将支持赢得竞赛的策略，并列出了其中的一些关键支柱。首先是创新。我们需要消除繁琐的规定，让我们的天才们充分发挥。这一立场显然得到了许多在场的首席执行官和企业家的支持。
Number two is infrastructure. He touted the hundreds of billions of dollars of investments in energy and power generation and grid upgrades and data centers that he's supporting. He also supported AI exports. He said that we have to make America's tech stack the global standard. I think those were really important messages. On top of that, I think there was also some parts of the speech that maybe have gotten less attention but are also important where he said that it's not only important that we win. He said it's important how we win.
第二个重点是基础设施建设。他赞扬了在能源、电力生成和电网升级以及数据中心领域投入的数千亿美元投资，并表示对此表示支持。他还支持人工智能出口，提到我们必须使美国的技术架构成为全球标准。我认为这些都是非常重要的信息。此外，我认为他演讲中还有一些可能没有引起足够关注但同样重要的部分，他提到胜利固然重要，但取得胜利的方式同样重要。
He mentioned three non-negotiables here. Number one was that American workers have to be at the center of the prosperity that we create. Number two is that the AI models that the government procures and buys must be free of ideological bias, so no woke AI. He also signed an executive order to prohibit woke AI in the federal government. We can talk about that in a second. That probably was my favorite moment. That was your favorite moment. That was my favorite moment. That was the red meat moment. That was the red meat moment. That was the red meat for the base.
他提到了三个不可协商的原则。第一，美国工人必须处于我们创造的繁荣中心。第二，政府采购和购买的人工智能模型必须没有意识形态偏见，也就是说不要有偏见的人工智能。他还签署了一项行政命令，禁止联邦政府中的偏见人工智能。我们可以稍后再讨论这一点。那可能是我最喜欢的时刻。那是你最喜欢的时刻。那是我最喜欢的时刻。那是激起支持者热情的时刻。那是激起支持者热情的时刻。那是让支持者十分振奋的内容。
The third thing is he did say that we do want to prevent our technologies from being misused or stolen by malicious actors. Look, we are going to monitor for emerging and unforeseen risks. We're not going to disregard the risk. But he had this really good line in the speech about how even though AI, look, it's a daunting technology because it's so powerful and like any revolutionary technology like that, it can be used for bad as well as good. But the daunting nature of it is all the more reason why we have to do it in the United States.
第三点是他确实说过，我们希望防止我们的技术被恶意分子滥用或盗取。我们会密切关注新出现和无法预见的风险，绝不会忽视这些风险。演讲中有一句非常精彩的话，说虽然人工智能是非常强大的技术，让人感到望而生畏，而且像任何革命性的技术一样，它既可以用于好也可能被用于坏。但正因为它让人感到敬畏，我们更应该在美国发展这项技术。
Why would the United States have to be the pioneer and the leader is because we don't want the power of that technology being developed in other parts of the world. At least other parts of the world are going to have it. But we want to be the ones on the cutting edge where we're defining and leading it. Fantastic. So I think it was a really important speech, I think. This idea of an AI race that is similar to the space race, I think is going to be the dominant frame on AI policy for years to come. Well, it's pretty clear, you know, this presidency, this term is going to be earmarked. I think by four key initiatives, AI, crypto, immigration and tariffs, I think that feels like what they're locking into as what's important for the next three and a half years. I think you would agree with that. And it's just great that you're spearheading and helping the president with two of those four. And just the velocity to me is what's super impressive.
为什么美国必须成为先锋和领导者？因为我们不希望这项技术的力量在世界其他地方被开发。至少其他地方也会拥有它，但我们希望自己能站在前沿，去定义和引领它。太好了！我认为这真的是一次非常重要的演讲。这种类似于太空竞赛的人工智能竞赛的观点，我觉得在未来几年会成为人工智能政策的主导框架。很显然，这届政府的任期会以四个关键举措为标志：人工智能、加密货币、移民和关税。我觉得这将是他们在未来三年半时间里锁定的重要事项。我想你会同意这一点。并且，你带头并帮助总统推进其中两个方面，真是太棒了。而让我印象深刻的是发展的速度。
Anyway, you could take us behind the scenes of how this stuff is getting done so quickly. It feels like there's some operational cadence here that we didn't see in his first term, certainly didn't see in the Biden term. But there's a cadence here that's different. Yeah, start up speed. How is that? Well, yeah, we call it, he's working at tech speed. I just think that the president's constantly working. I mean, he's just so energetic. I mean, he basically works like two full work days. I think it's well known that he doesn't need a lot of sleep and he's continues to work late into the night. And I just think his energy pedals everything forward.
无论如何，你可以带我们了解一下幕后是如何让这些事情完成得如此迅速的。感觉这里有一种我们在他第一任期内没有看到过的运营节奏，在拜登任期内更是没有见到过的。但是这里的节奏确实不一样。是创业公司的速度吗？是的，我们说他在按照科技速度工作。我认为总统一直在努力工作，他真的非常有活力。他基本上像是每天工作两个完整的工作日。我想大家都知道他不需要太多的睡眠，并且会一直工作到深夜。我想他的精力推动了一切向前发展。
I also think that there's a very cohesive team at the White House. Under the chief of staff, Susie Wiles, I think it's very important. I think she runs a tight ship and then got the deputy chief of staffs under her. And I think most of you have been working together for a long time. And it's a team that works well together. And I just feel very coherent and cohesive to me. So I think it's a very effective team. It does feel like that. The pace is great. It means you're going to get more shots on goal. You'll be able to try more things and get more accomplished. Just like we see in startups.
我也认为白宫有一个非常团结的团队。在幕僚长苏西·怀尔斯的带领下，这一点非常重要。我觉得她管理得很好，下面有副幕僚长支持她。我认为你们大多数人已经合作了很长时间，是一个合作得很好的团队。我觉得这个团队非常有凝聚力和一致性。所以我认为这是一个非常高效的团队。这样的节奏非常棒，也意味着你们会有更多的机会去尝试不同的事情并取得更多的成就，就像我们在初创公司中看到的那样。
Chema outside of the president's talk, we'll go around the horn here. Top two or three moments from the discussions, just lightning round here, rapid fire. What do you got? Top two or three moments for you, Chema. Just in the discussions that were enlightening to you, inspiring to you, notable to you. I came out of it very motivated. I think that the combination of the speech, the executive orders and the clarity of the big, beautiful bill. Now give those of us that are in these markets a ton of runway. To go and execute. And so those things reinforced by the various members of the cabinet, I think were very important. That was one. And then the second thing were the market commentary from both Lisa Sue and Jensen. I thought was really valuable.
在总统演讲之外，Chema，我们来简单回顾一下。在讨论中，你觉得最值得注意的两个或三个瞬间是哪些？就像闪电轮一样，快速来回答。对你而言，在讨论中哪些瞬间让你觉得有启发、激励或值得关注？我出来时感到非常有动动力。我认为演讲、行政命令以及关于宏伟法案的清晰解释结合在一起，为我们这些在市场中的人提供了很大的行动空间。内阁各成员对此的补充也很重要，这是其中之一。第二个则是Lisa Sue和Jensen的市场评论，我觉得非常有价值。
And then the third was Chris Wright and Doug Bergen talking about energy. And I tweeted this yesterday. But we are sort of back to basics almost in a sense where in the absence of power, I think AI is not going to be the thing that we think it can be. So that's going to create an enormous amount of appetite by the federal government to do deals and get players on the field. And that's to me very exciting. So yeah, I came away really, really risk on, I guess is best way to sit. I love it. Freeberg, you have two or three moments outside of the president's speech. Obviously that's the pinnacle there. So let's just go below the pinnacle. What were the other two or three moments for you that were salient? Inspiring, notable.
然后，第三位是Chris Wright和Doug Bergen在谈论能源。这段内容我昨天在推特上提到过。我们几乎回到了基础阶段，因为在没有能源的情况下，我认为人工智能不会成为我们期望中的样子。这将会激发政府强烈的兴趣去达成协议并吸引参与者，这让我非常激动。可以说，我对此的态度是非常乐观积极的，我喜欢这样的氛围。Freeberg，除了总统的演讲之外，你还有两三个时刻是值得注意的吗？显然，那是顶点时刻。那么，我们就从顶点往下看，还有哪个两三个时刻对你来说是鼓舞人心的或值得注意的呢？
I thought Jensen did a great job. I don't know what you guys thought, but he is very compelling and has an incredible vision and view on where AI is taking us, where it's headed and what the challenges are. So I really appreciated him taking the time to come and join us. Last minute, he rearranged his schedule to come out for it. And it was great. By the way, on the point on energy, which I still think is the biggest unsolved issue right now in America, besides the federal deficit and the debt problem. Chris Wright agreed to rearrange his schedule to come and join us at the All in Summit in September to continue the conversation.
我认为詹森做得非常出色。我不清楚你们的看法，但他确实非常吸引人，他对人工智能的发展方向以及面临的挑战有着非凡的见解。我很感激他能抽出时间来参加我们的活动。他甚至在最后一刻调整了自己的日程来参加。这真是太棒了。顺便提一下关于能源的问题，我仍然认为这是除联邦赤字和债务问题之外，美国当前最大的未解难题。克里斯·赖特也同意调整他的日程，来参加我们九月的All in峰会，继续讨论这个话题。
We didn't get enough time to talk about it. So we are going to hear more from Chris, particularly with a particular focus, which is what I wanted to spend time on. We didn't get a chance last week on nuclear. And where are we? Because he actually is very passionate, like he said, it's where he's spending most of his time right now. And I think it's very good to hear the deep dive on where we are in the cycle on trying to accelerate nuclear energy deployment in the United States. Zach, same question to you. After POTUS, you got two or three moments that stood out?
我们上次没有足够的时间来讨论这个话题。所以这次我们将更多地听取克里斯的意见，尤其是在我想花时间探讨的重点上。上周我们没有机会讨论核能。因为他实际上非常关注这个议题，就像他说的，他目前大部分时间都是在投入这个领域。我认为听他详细讲解一下美国在加速核能部署周期中的现状是非常有意义的。扎克，你也同样的问题。在总统讲话之后，有没有两到三个让你印象深刻的时刻？
Let's just talk about the executive orders for a second. Because I think it's pretty cool that the President of the United States signed three executive orders at the All in Summit that we just hosted. I mean, that was pretty amazing. One of them was to promote AI exports because we want the American tech stack to become the global standard. The second was around AI infrastructure to make permitting easier so we can help solve those energy problems you're talking about Freeberg.
让我们来聊聊这些行政命令。我觉得很酷的是，美国总统在我们刚举办的全员峰会上签署了三项行政命令。这真是令人惊叹。其中一项是促进人工智能出口，因为我们希望美国的技术架构成为全球标准。另一项是关于人工智能基础设施的，这项命令将使审批更加容易，以便我们能够帮助解决你提到的能源问题，Freeberg。
And then the third one was on preventing Woke AI in the federal government. And that, to me, is probably my personal favorite because we spent a couple of years on the show talking about how, when we talk about Woke, you really talk about censorship, right? We were talking about censoring people's views based on bias. We saw it was happening in social media before Elon bought X that helped bring things back. But we were on a track, I think, before President Trump's election, to repeat that whole social media censorship apparatus in the form of AI bias or AI censorship.
然后，第三个议题是关于如何防止“觉醒”人工智能在联邦政府中的应用。对我来说，这可能是我个人最喜欢的一个话题，因为我们在节目中讨论了几年“觉醒”这个概念。实际上，谈到“觉醒”，我们就是在谈论审查制度，对吧？我们讨论的是基于偏见的观点审查。在埃隆·马斯克收购X之前，我们看到这种情况已经在社交媒体上发生，而那次收购帮助恢复了平衡。但我认为，在特朗普总统当选之前，我们正走在一个复刻社交媒体审查机制的道路上，这次是在人工智能偏见或人工智能审查的形式上。
And we saw this with the whole Black George Washington and where some AI models were saying it was worse to misgender someone than to have a global thermonuclear war. And this wasn't an accident because if you go back to the Biden executive order on AI, there was something like 20 pages of language on there encouraging DEI values to be infused into AI models. So again, we were on track to repeat all the social media censorship, all the trust and safety stuff in this new world of AI.
我们看到类似“黑人乔治·华盛顿”这样的例子，一些AI模型竟然认为错误地为某人指代性别比发生一场全球热核战争更糟糕。这并非偶然，因为如果你查看拜登关于人工智能的行政命令，其中大约有20页的内容在鼓励将多样性、公平性和包容性（DEI）价值观融入到AI模型中。所以，我们有可能在这个人工智能的新世界中重蹈社交媒体审查和信任与安全问题的覆辙。
But it would have been even more insidious because at least when someone gets censored, you kind of find out about it. It's explicit. It's not. It's explicit. Yeah. But with AI, it would have been worse because you wouldn't have even known. It would just be their rewriting history in real time to serve a current political agenda. We've been brainwashing our kids. And people trust these AIs more than they should. I mean, these things are making a prediction of the next word coming. This is not like God given truth here.
但这会更加隐蔽，因为至少当某人被审查时，你多少还能知道。这是显而易见的。然而，使用人工智能就更糟了，因为你可能根本不会知道，它们实时修改历史以迎合当前的政治议程。我们正在给孩子们洗脑。而且人们对这些人工智能的信任超过了应有的程度。我的意思是，这些AI只是预测下一个可能出现的词语，并不是真理。
And so Freeberg, you wanted to interject that about this one because this is actually, I'll be honest, Saks, I'm surprised you're saying this was the most important one to you. I like that you clarified it because it was the one that was mocked or kind of like people were like, what? Why is this important? I think you made a good case for why it's important. Freeberg, your response, yeah.
好的，Freeberg，我知道你想插入关于这一点的看法，因为说实话，Saks，我很惊讶你说这个对你来说是最重要的一个。我喜欢你澄清了这一点，因为这个观点曾被嘲笑过，或者人们会质疑：这重要在哪里？我认为你很好地解释了它的重要性。Freeberg，你怎么看呢？
But Saks, this is not about broadly making quote AI non-ideological. Private companies should still have the right through freedom of speech or freedom of expression or freedom to operate to make AI that does whatever they wanted to do. What the EO was was that the federal government would not procure ideologically biased AI. Is that correct? Yeah, so exactly. No, we're aware. Just to make sure that the federal government is not trying to instruct private companies how to operate. It's simply saying if you want to sell to us, these are the rules of the road.
萨克斯，这并不是要广泛地让人工智能变得“非意识形态化”。私人公司在言论自由、表达自由或经营自由的范围内，仍然有权制造他们想要的任何类型的人工智能。行政命令（EO）的意思是联邦政府不会采购带有意识形态偏见的人工智能。是不是这样？是的，没错。我们知道，只是为了确保联邦政府不会试图指导私人公司如何运营。它只是说，如果你想把产品卖给我们，这就是必须遵守的规则。
Yes, that's true. Yes. So we were very careful about the First Amendment issues. And you're right that if a private company wants to put out a biased AI product, we're not going to tell people they can't use it. Right, and it could work. It could be successful. People might like it. We got it. Yeah, we're just saying that the federal government is not going to spend taxpayer money, buying AI models that have compromised their accuracy and quality because they're beholden to some ideological agenda.
是的，这是事实。是的。所以我们非常注意第一修正案的问题。你说得对，如果一家公司想推出一个有偏见的人工智能产品，我们不会阻止别人使用。对，这样做可能有效，也可能会取得成功，人们可能会喜欢。我们明白。我们的意思是，联邦政府不会花纳税人的钱去购买那些因为遵从某些意识形态而影响准确性和质量的人工智能模型。
Which is similar to the approach with the universities, right? Hey, listen, you could have a biased university. We're just not going to fund it. We're not participating. I think it's quite reasonable in that way. Yeah, I would just say that, you know, we were a lot more careful about this than the Biden administration was when they required that DEI be inserted into all these models. They didn't distinguish between public and private money or government procurement versus private models.
这与对待大学的方式类似，对吧？听着，你可以有一个有偏见的大学。我们只是不会资助它，我们不参与。我认为这样做是相当合理的。是的，我只想说，我们在这方面比拜登政府更谨慎。当他们要求在所有这些模式中加入多元化、公平和包容性（DEI）时，他们没有区分公共资金和私人资金，也没有区分政府采购和私人模式。
So they just, they were trying to suffuse DEI into everything. And what we're looking for here is just neutrality, right? We're looking for a lack of ideological bias. The first step was to get rid of that Biden EO, which the president did his first week in office. This goes a little bit further and it's a little bit of a shot across the bow of these Silicon Valley companies saying, look, you need to play it straight. You need to be ideologically unbiased as the default, as the default, when you sell to the government, you can insert your values at the expense of accuracy. Look, at the end of the day, accuracy and true seeking is the standard, right? You can measure the goal. That's the goal. That's the goal. So we don't want the quality, accuracy and true seeking to be sacrificed because of these ideologically biased, right?
所以，他们之前试图将多元化、公平和包容（DEI）融入到所有事物中。而我们现在寻求的是中立，无意识形态的偏见。第一步是废除拜登的行政命令，这位总统在上任的第一周就这样做了。这次行动更进一步，向硅谷公司发出了一个警示，告诉他们在向政府销售时需要保持公正和意识形态的中立为默认状态。你不能为了推动自己的价值观而牺牲准确性。最终，准确性和探求真相是我们的标准，是我们的目标。我们不希望因为这些意识形态偏见，而牺牲质量、准确性和求真精神。
Any laws, policies. Are you still seeing that? Like, when you say these Silicon Valley companies, I mean, is this still kind of a widespread concern or widespread deployment from your point of view where you're sitting? Like, are you still seeing a lot of the models being trained on ideological systems that are preferential to one group and not to another? I think it was a much bigger concern six months ago. I think there's been such a huge vibe shift since President Trump's election and taking office that the work stuff is sort of going away on its own. But I think that's the trajectory we're headed. But it was something. But you're something that's important enough to make sure that there's an yield. Yeah, it's like, look, this is to make sure this thing doesn't come back from the dead. I think there's been a huge vibe shift since President Trump's election and woke has definitely fallen out of favor and it seems to be going away on its own.
任何法律、政策。你是否仍然看到这些问题？当你提到这些硅谷公司时，我的意思是，从你的角度来看，这仍然是一个普遍关注的问题或普遍存在的现象吗？你是否仍然看到许多模型的训练偏向某个特定群体而不是其他群体？我认为六个月前这还是一个更大的问题。自从特朗普总统当选并就职以来，社会氛围发生了巨大变化，以至于这些工作相关的问题似乎正在逐渐消退。但我认为这是我们正在走的方向。然而，这确实是一个足够重要的问题，需要确保其停止。就好像我们需要确保这种情况不会重新出现。我认为自特朗普总统当选以来，社会氛围发生了巨大变化，这种“觉醒文化”已经明显不再受欢迎，并且似乎在自行消退。
But we could still get, you know, Orwellian outcomes with AI. I do think it's very important to just keep underscoring that what AI models should be focused on is the truth, is on accuracy. And we don't want ideological agendas to sacrifice that. And I think that even though this is a less saline issue now than six months ago, precisely because of the vibe shift, I still think it's important to underscore this point that we don't want. Would you go so far as to make it taking an Orwellian direction? Yeah, would you go so far as to limit free speech and make it non-ideologically biased? Like would you make that law if you could? No. Because again, the decision about the federal government procuring versus what these private companies can choose to reflect as their, quote, values in their systems.
我们仍然可能在人工智能上产生类似于奥威尔式的结果。我认为非常重要的一点是，人工智能模型应该专注于真相和准确性。我们不希望因为意识形态的议程而牺牲这一点。尽管由于趋势的变化，这个问题现在比六个月前显得不那么紧迫，我仍然认为强调这一点很重要：我们不希望发生这种情况。你会走到极端，让它走向奥威尔式的方向吗？你会为了保证没有意识形态偏见而限制言论自由吗？比如说，如果你能立法，你会这么做吗？不会。因为这涉及到联邦政府采购与这些私人公司选择在他们的系统中反映自身所谓“价值观”之间的决策问题。
No, you just, you already answered. You know, you would not. Yeah, no, look, we understand the difference between public procurement and private speech. And again, in a way that the Biden administration did not because they were saying that all AI models have to be able to do that. That's a few specific ideologies to the C.E.I. stuff. So it was an ideology they wanted embedded in it. You're saying don't put an ideology. But just to be clear here, I want to make one point. This is the defaults.
不，你已经回答了。你知道，你不会的。是的，不，看，我们理解公共采购和私人言论之间的区别。而拜登政府在这方面没有做到，因为他们说所有的AI模型都必须能够嵌入几种特定的意识形态到C.E.I.的内容中。这是一种他们想要嵌入的意识形态。而你是说不要加入任何意识形态。但为了说明白，我想强调一点：这只是默认设置。
Anybody who wants to, when they start their prompt or they set up their preferred language model, could say, I'm an atheist. Here's what I believe. Please speak to me with this in mind. Or I'm a Catholic. You know, I'm a pro. That's right. Whatever you want. That's right. Never reference, you know, these three subject matters in this way. So this is the default. I think it's a great thing. You think I'm perfectly. I think that's a great example. J.Kell, I do think we'll end up seeing religious AI. I think we'll see AI that's queuing to people's religious beliefs. I was back then. I have one of the startups we did was doing the learning app and they were struggling and they just made a prayer app. And their prayer app went parabolic. And now they're just like printing money. So there is definitely a huge market here. Check out where your highlights. It was great to be included in everything. So I appreciate that.
任何人都可以在开始输入提示或设置他们偏好的语言模型时说明自己的信仰背景。例如，可以说“我是无神论者，这是我的信仰，请根据这一点和我交流”或者“我是天主教徒”之类的。不管你的立场是什么，你都可以明确表示哪些主题不希望以某种方式被提及。因此，这成了默认设置。我认为这是件好事。J.Kell，我确实认为我们最终会看到与宗教相关的人工智能，我认为我们会看到与人们的宗教信仰相呼应的人工智能。过去我们开发过一个学习应用程序，但因为遇到困难，后来转而开发了一个祈祷应用程序，这个祈祷应用程序变得非常受欢迎，他们现在财源滚滚。显然这里有一个巨大的市场。能够参与到其中实属荣幸，我对此表示感谢。
We had some. No, I mean, that's the right thing. We're actually finally going to get lost in the mail. No, but here's the thing. I think this could have been a non-all-in thing. It could have just been, you know, you could have done it and just invited who you wanted to. So I like that it was under the all-in umbrella and that we didn't censor anything. And we went right at hard topics. I'm a moderate. You know, people want to make me into like a stupid live, but I am an independent moderate. And there were moments in time when we had great debate too. This wasn't just a love letter to the administration. One of the great moments was JD Vance. It was just great that he wanted to come and chop it up and just hang with the besties.
我们有过一些这样的经历。不，我的意思是，这是正确的做法。我们终于要在邮件中迷失了。不，不过事情是这样的。我认为这本来可以不是一个全方位参与的事。它本可以只是你想做、并邀请你想要邀请的人来就够了。所以我喜欢它是在完全参与的框架下进行的，而且我们没有审查任何内容。我们直接探讨了困难的话题。 我是个中立派，你知道，人们总想把我看成是个愚蠢的自由派，但其实我是一个独立的中立派。期间有些时刻我们也展开了激烈的辩论。这不只是给政府的情书。一个很棒的时刻就是JD Vance。他愿意来这里，和我们一起讨论、闲聊，真是太好了。
And he came out and he went right at me. He was like, hey, you treated me like, boom, at the thing we had a big debate and, you know, he went right at me. And then I was like, okay, it's on. We want to talk about stuff. And he said, yeah, let's get into it. And that's what I love about JD. JD to me seems like the politician of the future. I know this is like the Trump's administration. He's saying like him. Absolutely. No, I'm in like with Trump. I'm in love with JD because he's young. He's opinionated and he likes to mix it up. He's on Twitter all day long. He engages people on Twitter. He engages people in other groups. I'll leave it at that.
他走出来直接冲我而来。他就像，“嘿，你在那个辩论会上对待我很不客气。” 然后，我心想，好吧，要开始讨论了。我们想讨论一些事情。他说，“对，我们开始吧。” 这就是我喜欢JD的地方。在我看来，JD就像是未来的政治家。我知道这就像是特朗普的政府。他是说他。不，我是支持特朗普，但我非常喜欢JD，因为他年轻，有主见，喜欢参与讨论。他整天在Twitter上活跃，与人互动，也参与到其他群体中。我就说到这里。
And we had a really, I think, honest discussion about immigration and we got back to the high-skilled immigration question. That's the third rail for MAGA and for the country right now immigration recruiting. I mean, you brought it up right off the bat. No, no. He said he made a great, super spicy point that I want to point out here on Amplify. If companies are going to be laying people off and there was an incredible chart that came out. It was in the financial times. But male college graduates versus non-college graduate males. And there was usually a huge gap in unemployment between those two. In other words, if you had the college degree, you had a much better chance than the non-college degree male.
我们进行了一个非常坦诚的讨论，讨论的主题是移民问题，并且回到了高技能移民的问题。对于MAGA（“让美国再次伟大”运动）和整个国家来说，移民招聘目前是一个非常敏感的问题。我想指出，这里有一个非常具有刺激性的重要观点：如果公司开始裁员，将会有一个令人震惊的图表显示出来。图表刊登在《金融时报》上，显示的是男性大学毕业生与非大学毕业男性之间的对比。通常情况下，这两者之间的失业率存在巨大的差距。换句话说，如果你拥有大学学位，比起没有学位的男性，你获得工作的机会要大得多。
And now those two things have flipped or they're like neck and neck. If you have a college degree, you have no advantage as a man coming out in this 20 to 27-year-old range. This is men. They're actually doing better. More women in college than men. Yadda Yada. But he's very attuned to this. And he said he's got big concerns right now. So this is again, why I love JD. Because JD is very tuned into the fact that people are asking for more H1B visas and that typically is to save money and supposed to be a very skilled people. But why is Microsoft laying off 9,000 people than asking for more H1B visas? This is a really honest, truth-seeking question.
现在，这两件事情已经发生了逆转，或者说它们势均力敌。如果你有个大学学位，在20到27岁的年龄段，作为男性并没有什么优势。事实上，这些男性的表现更好。上大学的女性比男性多，诸如此类。但他对此非常敏感，他说他现在非常担忧。这也是我喜欢JD的原因之一。因为JD非常关注人们在要求更多H1B签证，而通常这是为了节省成本，并假定这些人非常有技能。但为什么微软一边裁员9,000人，一边又要求更多H1B签证？这是一个真正诚实并且追求真相的问题。
And it's hard for this administration to talk about this issue because I know you've got Steve Miller, batting whatever people are all the way on one side who wanted to port 20, 30 million people, Tucker. And then you have other people who are more moderate. And I thought that was a really great moment in time for America and for us as a podcast to challenge and have a really important discussion. And he made some great points there. Number two, we had a great debate, I think, about energy.
这个政府很难讨论这个问题，因为我知道有像史蒂夫·米勒这样的人，坚持要驱逐2000万到3000万人，而这只是一个极端的观点。同时，也有其他更温和的人。我认为，这对美国和我们的播客来说，是一个极好的时机去挑战和进行一次非常重要的讨论。他在这方面提出了一些很好的观点。其次，我认为我们就能源问题进行了很好的辩论。
No, disagree. You disagree. I don't agree with the point. I think you challenged him with things that were not facts and not true. And I'm happy to debate that with you. Great question. He was caught off guard. But I think it was pretty rough and inappropriate. 100, if you think it's inappropriate, that's fine. I was. Take how favorite moments were all the ones where he got on bad ends with a guest. That's where you're describing.
不，我不同意。你不认同这个观点。我认为你向他提出了一些不是真实的事情，而这些都不是事实。我很乐意和你辩论这个问题。这个问题问得很好。他措手不及。但我认为这个做法相当粗暴且不合适。如果你认为这是不合适的，那很好，我也是。你提到的那些尴尬时刻正是他与嘉宾关系不好的时候。
No, no, where there were debates. When you got into it with the vice president, you got into it with the Secretary of Energy. It's a big. That's when you got to. Okay, great. So, okay, fine. I like when there's a little conflict, a little debate about an important issue. And when I walked the audience, which was, you know, 90 percent Republican GOP, Maga, et cetera, people said, that was a great moment. I really liked that debate because he kept saying like non-reliable energy and whatever.
不，不，那里有过辩论。当你与副总统和能源部长深入探讨时，那很重要。很好，我喜欢在重要问题上有一些冲突和辩论。当我走到观众中时，其中90%是共和党人、MAGA 支持者等，他们说那是一个精彩的时刻。我真的很喜欢那个辩论，因为他一直在谈论一些不可靠的能源之类的话题。
And I was like, he's talking about solar. And I think there was a little misinformation. It's not reliable. No, it's not. You put it with a battery right now. Texas is 30 percent some days. Wind and energy. You know, like, I can tell you I live in the great state of Texas. Texas is a Texas is not doing that. Texas is not doing that. Just so you know, what's that? Texas is roughly 5 percent solar. Right. And wind puts it up to 25 to 30 percent on the top days is coming from that.
我当时的感觉是，他在谈论太阳能。我觉得有些信息有点误导。太阳能并不可靠。确实不可靠。你需要配合电池使用。目前，德克萨斯州有些日子风能和太阳能占到30%。你知道，我可以告诉你我住在德州这个伟大的地方。德州并没达到那种程度，只是想让你知道，德州的太阳能大约只占5%。在风能的配合下，好的日子里可达到25%到30%的能源来自风能和太阳能。
My point about that is, and it's cheaper to put in a solar and add on a farm than a new coal plant. It is 100 percent. We can pull up the stats. It is twice the cost to do solar than it is to do net gas. It takes 4,000 acres. I said coal. I said coal. I said coal. I said coal. The big advocacy with these guys is to use net gas to use methane. He was saying these methane coal, clean coal, clean coal, at least 50 times.
我的意思是，安装太阳能电池板和建立一个农场比建设新的燃煤电厂要便宜。这是百分之百可以确定的。我们可以查看相关数据，太阳能的成本是天然气的两倍。需要占用4000英亩。我说的是煤。我说的是煤。我说的是煤。我说的是煤。但这些人大力主张的是使用天然气和甲烷。他提到甲烷煤、清洁煤、清洁煤至少有50次。
These methane plants are half the cost of solar. They can get stood up in less than two years, absolutely. To generate a gigawatt. And instead of being 4,000 acres of solar, you can get it done for, you know, call it 20 acres. Now, talk a little bit about pollution. And that's a big part of why they're doing this. Well, a big part of methane is that it's actually cleaner than coal, which is why they're using a cleaner than oil. Cleaner than nuclear. Cleaner than oil.
这些甲烷发电厂的成本仅为太阳能的一半。它们可以在不到两年的时间里建成，能够发电一千兆瓦。而且，与需要4000英亩太阳能电厂不同，甲烷发电厂只需要大约20英亩的土地。现在来说说污染问题，这也是他们选择这样做的一个重要原因。甲烷的一大特点是它实际上比煤更清洁，这也是为什么他们用甲烷替代石油。相比核能和石油，甲烷也是更清洁的选择。
And the two degrees of getting energy. Now science guy now do. So I'm trying to get into facts about why it is cheaper and faster, which is what he was making an advocacy for, right? It's not about like solar. Yes, you're right. It has a lower carbon footprint when you're running it. But at the end of the day, what these guys are focused on and a big challenge for America is how do we scale energy production in the states? And scaling energy production, I personally think we need to fix the regulatory roadblocks in nuclear and Chris Wright's been very vocal. And we're all agree on that.
翻译如下：
关于两种获取能源的方式。现在，科学家正在研究。我正在尝试了解相关事实，为什么这种方式更便宜、更快捷。他正是在倡导这一点，对吧？这并不是关于太阳能。是的，你说得对，太阳能在运行过程中确实有较低的碳排放。但归根结底，这些人关注的问题以及美国面临的一大挑战是我们如何在国内扩大能源生产规模。对于扩大能源生产，我个人认为我们需要解决核能方面的监管障碍，克里斯·赖特对此持有明确的观点。我们都对此表示认同。
But the fact is this Nat gas supply that we have in the United States and the fact that we can deploy Nat gas energy production very quickly is what makes it such a reliable source right now. If the US wants to have a chance at scaling from one terawatt to two faster than the totally agreeable netted to do. But I think we do need to. And that's the reason. You know, it's not it's not about like solar is being bad, solar is bad.
但是事实是，我们在美国拥有的天然气供应，以及我们能够非常迅速地部署天然气能源生产的能力，使得天然气成为目前非常可靠的能源来源。如果美国想要更快地从一个太瓦特增长到两个太瓦特，这就是关键所在。我认为我们确实需要这么做。这并不是说太阳能不好，而是因为天然气在当前情况下更具稳定性。
Like that's not the argument. It's just like, dude, we got to get moving fast and we got to have reliable energy. I just want to point down. But the fact that it's not a point in our debates when there's bad faith moments. I think it's a bad faith moment for when I say coal versus solar. And then you say, no, you're wrong. It's solar versus Nat gas. And that's what he was doing. This is what politicians do. You're on all in. We like to do, you know, a fact-based truth first up, not buy stuff.
这不是争论的重点。我们只是觉得，伙计，我们必须快速行动，并且需要可靠的能源。我只是想指出这一点。但在我们的辩论中，有些情况下并不是在探讨这个问题，而是在不诚实地争论。当我提到煤炭和太阳能时，有人却说我错了，说应该是太阳能和天然气。他就是这样做的，这就是政客们的作法。我们喜欢以事实为基础，优先考虑真相，而不是随便买入一些东西。
And so solar, you're comparing, you know, solar and how fast it is versus how fast it is to go to Nat gas. Of course, it's faster to go to Nat gas if we have those available. Let's put that aside. It's an important debate. The fact that you and I are debating it is important. And I also thought Lisa from AMD was fantastic. I haven't heard from her. By the way, I just want to point out that when I got back to the conference, so I left for a time to go back to the White House and then I came back.
翻译如下：
“因此，关于太阳能来说，你知道的，比较太阳能的速度，以及它与天然气相比的速度。当然，如果我们有现成的天然气，那么使用天然气的速度会更快。我们先把这个问题放在一边，这是一个重要的讨论。你我在讨论这个问题本身就很重要。我还觉得AMD的Lisa表现得很出色，我之前没有听过她说话。顺便说一下，我想指出的是，当我回到会议时，我曾暂时离开去白宫，然后又回来了。”
The first thing everyone said to me when I got back was, did you see Jake Al being a jerk to Chris Wright? They were everyone was like, all it's busy about that. Yeah, a jerk. He's a civil servant. He has to answer hard questions. You didn't talk to him in the way that you would. Basically everyone was like, you were a jerk to Chris Wright and you were kind of a jerk to JD. And what are your favorite moments? What are your favorite moments from the conference you're reminiscing about?
我一回来，大家对我说的第一件事就是，"你看到Jake Al对Chris Wright态度很差吗？" 他们都在讨论这件事。是的，他确实表现得很无礼。他是个公务员，必须回答一些尖锐的问题。你不能像那样和他说话。基本上，所有人都觉得你对Chris Wright态度很差，而且对JD也不太友好。那么，你在回忆会议时最喜欢的时刻是什么？
I'm not saying you were an asshole to me. Anyway, the point is, one thing you're going to get here at the all in. I'm alright. This is what I'm going to say. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. You're almost derailed the whole thing. No, we are derailed. You're a civil servant, Mr. Sacks. You're a silvid servant. You're all silvid. Yeah, I've been putting it out with you for five years of this podcast.
我不是说你对我很差。不管怎样，重点是，有一件事你会在这里明白。我没事。我想说的是，你几乎让整个事情偏离了正轨。不，我们确实偏离了正轨。Sacks先生，你是个公务员，你们都是公务员。我已经和你一起录了五年的播客了。
And you take the hard questions. It was perfect training for government services beyond the podcast being interrupted by you for five years. Yes, that's why I'm so ready. You learned well. You learned about you work for us. All of you. And you're all going to take hard questions and you're all going to take hard questions on September 7th, 8th and 9th. We have the all in summit in Colossus.
你负责回答那些困难的问题。这是一个完美的训练，为政府服务打下了基础，虽然因为你的原因，播客中断了五年。是的，这就是为什么我已经准备好了。你学得很好。你明白了，你是为我们工作的，你们所有人都是。你们所有人都将要面对困难的问题，你们都将在9月7日、8日和9日回答这些艰难的问题。我们将在Colossus举办万众峰会。
By the way, by the way, one thing I'll say is Chris Rice chief of South care to me afterwards. And I said, I'm sorry, I heard Jake, how was it jerk to to secretary right? And he's like, oh, no, Chris loved it. He loves mixing it up. Okay. He's coming to he's coming to all in summit and on September 8th. Can't wait to debate a more. So can't wait to mix it up. So he likes mixing it up. So kudos to him.
顺便说一下，我想说的一件事是，Chris Rice，南方护理的负责人，事后对我说。我说，很抱歉，我听到Jake了，对秘书态度过于无礼。他说，哦，不，Chris很喜欢这样，他喜欢交流互动。他会参加9月8日的全员峰会，迫不及待地想和大家辩论更多，所以他非常喜欢这种交流方式。为他点赞。
Okay. And so did so did JD Vance. I'm going to invite the vice president to you. Stop calling JD by the way. Well, I mean, listen, I just want to say, Vice president JD Vance and I have been directly communicated. We have a we yes. No, you have it. David, it's actually a worst nightmare. Oh, my God. You're worse than me. The nation is ruined. What the fuck? We let Jake, Alan, so Washington and now look what's happening.
好的。JD·万斯也是一样。我打算邀请副总统过来。顺便说一下，不要再称呼JD了。我只是想说，副总统JD·万斯和我一直在直接沟通。我们有一个……没有，你没有。戴维，这实际上是最糟糕的噩梦。天哪，你比我还糟。国家毁了。到底怎么回事？我们让杰克、艾伦，还有华盛顿，现在看看发生了什么。
Yes. And listen, I want to level set with everyone. We I am going to ask whatever fucking question I want to whatever guest we have and nobody stopping the only way you're going to stop me is by writing me a huge fucking check to buy me out of this podcast and replacing me with some mid or if the secret service gives you off stage, which might be an option. Or secret service keeps up thing.
是的。听我说，我想和大家分享一下我的看法。我会向我们的任何嘉宾提出任何我想问的问题，没有人能阻止我。阻止我的唯一办法就是给我一大笔钱，把我从这个播客中买出去，然后找个普通人来代替我，或者让特勤局把我带走，这可能是一个选择。也许特勤局会插手。
But the truth is this is one of the great things about this administration. Sex is that they love to mix it up. They like great debate. You know, who didn't like great debate and ran from it? Kamala, I'm a ding dong. You wouldn't even come on this podcast. You know, who doesn't like to bake? We get that Bernie's Biden. Who didn't even know what a podcast is. Tim Walst, who doesn't know. You definitely you definitely have your moments. But Tim Walst doesn't own an equity. He doesn't own one share of any company. He doesn't own his home and Kim Walsh is on there giving a hard time about the Trump savings accounts. I mean, I don't even know if that's a. Kamala, you know, what you love, do you thought that was going in the election? I thought he might be able to speak to like the middle of America. And then I find out like when they do the deep op-o research that the guy doesn't own one stock. The guy doesn't own his home. He's financially illiterate and we're making him. He's been employed by the government. He's been employed by the government. It's whole life. I mean, have you.
但是事实是，这就是这届政府的一个优点之一。性别是他们喜欢掺和进来，他们喜欢激烈的辩论。你知道谁不喜欢激辩并且避之不及吗？卡玛拉。我是个笨蛋。她甚至都不愿意来参加这个播客。你知道谁不喜欢烘焙吗？我们知道，那就是伯尼、拜登。谁甚至都不知道播客是什么？蒂姆·沃尔斯，不知道。他虽然偶尔也会有些高潮时刻，但蒂姆·沃尔斯没有任何股票投资。他没有任何公司的股份，没有自己的房子，而金·沃尔什还在那抱怨特朗普的储蓄账户。我甚至不知道那是什么。卡玛拉，你知道你喜欢的，你以为那是要进入选举的吗？我以为他可能可以和美国中部地区的人沟通，然后我发现，当他们进行深度背景调查时，这个人甚至没有一只股票，也没有自己的房子。他在财务方面完全无知，我们却让他来处理这些事务。他一辈子都在政府工作，你经历过吗？
There it is. There it is. That's what Jake Kothaw would win them the elections. You're never going to live that down. I remember when you tweeted you thought that was it. You thought that was the master stroke. I thought it might. The master stroke that was going to win them the election. I listen, no stricannis does not bat a thousand. No, even no stricannis cannot bat a thousand. But it did come out by the way. That Nancy Pelosi wanted to do the speedrun primer. I don't know if you saw that just not to rehash too much stuff. Sax, I want to say there was one point of difference if you want to get into it. Okay. But the content part of it where, and this is something that the press was having a field day with and they really keyed on, which was, hey, respecting IP, respecting copyright. What's the feedback been so far on that, which was a pretty spicy part of President Trump's speech?
在那里，就是这样。那就是杰克·科塔赫认为能给他们赢得选举的关键。你永远无法抹去这个印象。我记得你发推文时，你以为就是这个计划，你以为这是那一记妙招。我也曾这么想，认为这妙招会让他们赢得选举。听我说，没有哪个预言都是百分之百准确的。甚至连预言大师都不能总是命中。但是顺便说一下，南希·佩洛西确实想要加速推进那个计划。我不知道你是否看到了，所以不再重提太多。萨克斯，如果你想详细讨论，有一点不同意见我想指出。关于内容部分，媒体乐于炒作并抓住这个点，即尊重知识产权和版权的部分，这在特朗普总统的演讲中是个相当敏感的话题。到目前为止，关于这一点的反馈如何呢？
Well, I think what the president said was just very pragmatic. He said we had to have a common sense approach towards intellectual property. And he said if you have to make a deal with every single article on the internet, every single website, every single book, every piece of IP, in order to train an AI model, it wasn't feasible. He said, look, I appreciate the work that went into people creating these works, but you're not going to build a negotiate a deal for every single one of them. And if we require our AI models to do that and China doesn't and they won't, they're just training on everything, whether it's, you know, pirated or not, then we're going to lose AI race. So I think he took the side of a fair use definition. I don't know if he used the term fair use, but effectively, he was taking the side of a reasonable fair use.
我认为总统的讲话非常务实。他表示，我们需要对待知识产权时采取一种常识性的方式。他提到，如果我们必须为互联网上的每篇文章、每个网站、每本书、每个知识产权条目都达成协议，以此来训练AI模型，这是不可行的。他说，他很欣赏那些创作者的辛勤付出，但不可能为每一项作品单独谈判协议。如果要求我们的AI模型这样做，而中国则没有，他们只是随便使用所有的资料，无论是否是盗版，那么我们将在AI竞赛中落于下风。因此，我认为他站在合理使用定义的一边。我不确定他是否使用了“合理使用”这个词，但实际上，他就是支持一种合理的、常识性的使用。
What did you think of that part, Dave? Fiber? You have any thoughts or traumatic on that part? I think he's absolutely right. I've said this before. If something's in the internet, if something's in the open domain and I strongly disagree with the idea that AI getting trained is the same as AI replicating copyright material. If AI outputs theft or outputs audio or outputs video that contains copyright material, it is 100% in violation of copyright. And he said that, by the way. Yes. And if the AI is learning, it is understanding patterns, it is understanding reasoning, it is understanding concepts by reading copyright material, just like humans do. A writer, an author reads a bunch of fiction, learns good techniques, learns good concepts, learns good theory from reading all those books, and then goes and writes his or her own book. They are not violating copyright material in the same way that AI.
你觉得那个部分怎么样，戴夫？关于使用材料的问题？你对此有什么看法或感到不安的地方吗？我认为他说得非常对。我之前也说过，如果某些东西在互联网上、在开放领域中，我极力反对将AI的训练等同于AI复制版权材料的想法。如果AI的输出包含了盗版内容、音频或视频，那就是100%侵犯了版权。他也提到了这一点。而且，如果AI在学习过程中只是通过阅读版权材料来理解模式、推理和概念，就像人类一样。一个作家通过阅读大量小说，学习好的技巧、概念和理论，然后去写出自己的书，这并没有侵犯版权，这和AI的行为是一样的。
Freeberg. What if it's all the New York Times, if it's behind the open internet? 100%. You're 100% correct. That should be paid for or licensed. I'm talking about the open internet. I'm talking about open material. I'm talking about stuff that's in the open domain. Which is a thing called common problem. If there was, if somebody stole 100 books, let's say, and put them on their website, and it was a pirated Russian website with a thousand books on it, and you accidentally crawled, you would be obligated to take that out then. Correct. Correct. Correct. Because that's what a lot of the lawsuits around.
弗里伯格。如果所有内容都来自《纽约时报》，而且都在开放互联网之外，那就应该付费或者获取授权。你说得完全正确。我说的是开放互联网，开放的材料，是公共领域中的东西，也就是所谓的“共有问题”。举个例子，如果有人偷了一百本书，然后把它们放在他的网站上，而那个网站是一个有一千本书的俄罗斯盗版网站，你不小心爬取了这些内容，你就有义务将其删除。没错，没错。这正是很多诉讼的焦点所在。
So I think we're reaching something. I just want to say, this is such an important point, especially to me as a content creator and somebody who spent his career in this. I've been thinking about the end game, and I'm here in Park City, I was just giving this a keynote, and I wanted to show you something I made, a sax. I think we have to get to the end game here. So in my talk, I talked a little bit about how can we get through this fight and then maybe getting to a solution.
所以我想我们正在达到某种结果。我只是想说，这一点非常重要，尤其是对我这样一个内容创作者来说，我的职业生涯都是在这方面度过的。我一直在思考最终结果，我现在在帕克城，我刚刚做了一个主题演讲，我想展示给你们看的是我自己做的一个萨克斯。我认为我们必须走到终点。所以在我的演讲中，我稍微讲了一下我们如何能度过这场斗争，然后可能找到一个解决方案。
So I had my team mock up the New York Times website here, and chat GPT doing a deal with them. So here you see you're on the New York Times website, and you ask it a question powered by GPT. You ask it, hey, you might ask this question. In fact, you log in with your chat GPT credentials. It could be GROC, it could be Gemini. Give me the earliest mentions of Putin. If you were a fan of Putin or something, and it would then go through that and give you your Putin references.
我让我的团队仿制了《纽约时报》的网站，并设置了一个与ChatGPT合作的场景。在这里，你可以看到你正在《纽约时报》的网站上，并使用GPT技术来提问。例如，你可以通过ChatGPT的帐号登录，可能是GROC或Gemini，然后提问，比如想知道有关普京的最早报道。如果你对普京感兴趣，系统就会帮你搜索并提供相关的普京参考资料。
And then I made another one. And then obviously, this would be an exclusive to chat GPT. It would be one of those things where they get an exclusive. And then here on the Disney Plus channel, imagine you could make yourself into a Jedi knight and you could then upload your photo. Kids might really get into this. You upload your photo. You talked about this free burn a couple of times of the future of narrative storytelling, upload your photo, and then it makes you into a Jedi knight.
然后我又做了一个。显然，这将是ChatGPT的独家内容。这类的东西让他们拥有独家权利。想象一下，在Disney Plus频道，你可以把自己变成绝地武士，然后上传你的照片。孩子们可能会对此很感兴趣。你上传你的照片。你曾几次提到关于未来叙事 storytelling 的自由燃烧，你上传你的照片，然后系统就能把你变成绝地武士。
There's Dorothy Calacanis. So that looks to me like you're infringing on their trademark. What's that? Are you infringing on their copyrights? This is fair use. This is fair use. This is a perfect example of fair use for editorial. You're also infringing on some ozempic. That's a really good ozempic. Trust me. I am definitely infringing on some ozempic. I'm going to peptide now, man. I'm on the Wolverine Protocol. So look at you.
这是 Dorothy Calacanis。这看起来像是在侵犯他们的商标。那是什么？你是在侵犯他们的版权吗？这属于合理使用。这是一个关于编辑用途的完美合理使用的例子。你还侵犯了某些 Ozempic（药物？）。那真是个不错的 Ozempic。相信我，我肯定是在侵犯一些 Ozempic。我现在要用肽类产品了，伙计。我正在使用金刚狼协议。看看你。
Yeah, I started doing the, I mean, I don't take a pot. What could go wrong? Don't take a pot. Don't take a pot. Passers advice on your healthcare rule number one. Take Chimaltz advice because he's got a 6% body fat, which I think attributes to much of your pomp and circumstance around your privates. I think it has to do with the lack of fat, but I'm going to leave it at that. First of all, it's 11 and a half, but you know, that's like that's like right before I go on summer vacation and it ends up at 12 o'clock.
好的，我来翻译并简化这段话：
是的，我开始尝试了，我的意思是，我不吸大麻。会出什么问题呢？不要吸大麻。不要吸大麻。遵循健康建议的第一条规则。听Chimaltz的建议，因为他的体脂率只有6%，我觉得这跟他引以为豪的体态有很大关系。我认为这与缺乏脂肪有关，但不多说了。首先，他体脂是11.5%，但你知道的，这就像我准备去度假前一样，然后最后变成了12点。
Did you go get that? Did you go get that gelato? What was that place we went that we love? I've gone there every day, every day so far. Did you do two or one? Be honest. Two or a row. I've had, I've been doing a procession. Do you do two or one? Be honest. I start with the medium and I finish with a small. Exactly. This stuff is so good. I've never tasted any gelato like this. It's incredible. I mean, just unbelievable. We have to license it for the United States.
你去拿了吗？你去买那个冰淇淋了吗？我们去的那个特喜欢的地方叫什么来着？我到现在每天都去那里。你买了两个还是一个？诚实点。连续两个。我一直都在坚持这个流程。你是买两个还是一个？诚实点。我先买个中的，再买个小的。没错。这东西太好吃了。我从没尝过这么好吃的冰淇淋，简直不可思议。我们得把它引入到美国。
It's incredible. We have to license it from them. It's really incredible. But Chimaltz, just generally speaking, or anybody who wants to have added, Friedberg, Sachs, what do we think about the end game here? Because there's some major lawsuits here that are going to get settled in the next year or two. What do we think about sort of the future I've shown here today? I think what Sachs has highlighted is exactly right. Look, we got to have a commonsense approach here or we're going to lose the AI. We're going to raise.
这真是令人难以置信。我们不得不从他们那里获得许可，实在是太不可思议了。就Chimaltz来说，或者一般来说，任何想要发表意见的人，无论是Friedberg还是Sachs，我们对这里的结局有何看法？因为接下来一两年内会有一些重大的诉讼要解决。我们对今天展现的未来有何看法？我认为Sachs强调的观点非常正确。听着，我们需要采取一种常识性的方式，否则我们将在人工智能这一领域中失利。我们将提升竞争。
I mean, one of the key determinants of AI quality is the amount of data that you have. It's very simple, right? There's a few building blocks. There's energy. There's chips. And there's data and there's algorithms. And if you lose on any one of those dimensions, then you're in trouble. So look, you just can't have a situation where China can train on the entire internet. And R.A.I. models are hamstrung by needing to contract. Totally. So you can take contracts with every single website.
我的意思是，AI质量的一个关键决定因素是你拥有的数据量。这很简单，对吧？AI的几个基础要素包括：能量、芯片、数据和算法。如果在这些方面中的任何一个失利，你都会面临麻烦。所以，你不能让中国能够用整个互联网来训练AI，而我们的AI模型却因为需要逐一与每个网站签订合同而受限制。
But right now, Elon owns X, right? He owns Twitter for now X. Does Sam Altman have the right to use X in his corpus? It's publicly available. No, it's not. No, it is not publicly available. It's not a public endpoint. It's not a public endpoint. I just honestly, I don't know the answer to that. There's some edge cases here. We're going to have to come up with a very useful. It's not about whether it's behind it at paywall or not. It's whether these APIs exist and whether you're actually contractually allowed to use them or not. It's correct. The terms of service, it's published on every website what the terms of service are. With respect to the content. I think it would be okay to let people opt out. So we already have this with Common Crawl. You can put in the footer of the website, you put in robust.txt and you opt out of Common Crawl. Common Crawl is this nonprofit organization that basically archives the entire web every few months. Funded by Gil Elbas. Formerly of Google. Formerly of Google. Great fan of the pod shows up to our summit. It's great guy. And all of OpenAI was built off of Common Crawl originally. And he put there very clear, by the way, they say you have to clear copyrights. You don't get you just use open crawl.
这段文字大致可以翻译为：
“但现在，埃隆确实拥有X，对吗？他现在拥有Twitter，而现在它被称为X。山姆·奥特曼可以在他的语料库中使用X吗？它是公开可用的吗？不是的，它不是公开可用的。它不是一个公开的端点。我坦诚地说，我不知道答案。这其中存在一些不太明显的情况。我们需要想出一个非常有用的解决方案。这不在于它是否在付费墙后，而在于这些API是否存在，以及你是否有合同上的许可去使用它们。服务条款在每个网站上都会公布。关于内容，我认为可以允许人们选择退出。我们已经在Common Crawl上有这样的机制。你可以在网站页脚中加入robust.txt来选择退出Common Crawl。Common Crawl是一个每隔几个月就会存档整个网站的非盈利组织。由Gil Elbas资助，他曾在谷歌工作，是我们峰会的常客，非常好的人。而OpenAI最初就是基于Common Crawl构建的。他们非常明确地表示，你必须清除版权，而不仅仅是使用open crawl。”
Can I go out and I'll let you guys saw this Amazon deal with the New York Times for $25 million. Did you see that today? No. I didn't see it today. Explain it please. I think that the New York Times licensed Amazon all of their content, including the athletic and a bunch of other things for training. 20 million. Sorry. 20 million a year. Okay. Here I read that and I thought this is the peak of these deals. These deals will only go down in terms of dollar value from here. And it actually brought me to this point where I was thinking to myself, is it even realistic to believe that patents and copyrights actually exist in five years? And I went through this exercise of like, if a computer studies the periodic table and also understands the laws of physics, the laws of biology, the laws of chemistry, and then independently derives some material that is otherwise patent-tuned, what will happen. And then separately, if two competing AIs invent a new material from scratch, how will the international course deal with this? And if you take all of these examples to the limit, at the limit, the idea that there are copyrights, enforceable copyrights, I think is a very fragile assumption. So I'm actually thinking more that we have to spend some time understanding the landscape of a world that doesn't have copyrights and patent protections.
可以让我出去一下吗？顺便和你们聊聊今天我看到的有关亚马逊和《纽约时报》之间的2,500万美元的交易。这事你今天看到了吗？没有，我今天没看到。能解释一下吗？我觉得《纽约时报》将其所有内容，包括The Athletic和其他一些东西授权给亚马逊用于培训，每年20,000万美元。抱歉，每年2,000万美元。我看到这个消息后觉得这类交易已经达到顶峰，以后这种交易的金额只会下降。其实这让我开始思考，在五年后，专利和版权的存在是否还可信。我自行推演了一下：如果一台计算机学习了元素周期表，并了解物理学、生物学和化学的定律，然后独立推导出一种本来是专利的材料，这会发生什么？另外，如果两个竞争的人工智能从零发明一种新材料，国际法庭会如何处理？如果把所有这些例子推到极限，认为有可执行的版权，我觉得这是一个很脆弱的假设。因此，我认为我们确实需要花些时间去理解没有版权和专利保护的世界格局。
And instead, what is the surface area in which you compete? What is trade secret? What does that mean in a world of AI? And I think it's quite an interesting thing to think about. Patents are a totally different piece. I think that's a fascinating string to pull on. I will tell you, I will take the other side of the bet. If we want to make a polymarket on this, I will guarantee that this will be the beginning of the deals and the deals we will up from here. I'll tell you why. The reason the New York Times made that deal is to make it apparent that what OpenAI has done has damaged their business. Because now they have a customer. And their customer is Jeff Bezos at Amazon and Jassy. And now they can show damages. Because now those damages could give them an injunction against OpenAI. And OpenAI has got to take it out of their crawl, of their construct. And that's going to be really expensive for them. It's not doable, but it's going to be expensive.
翻译成中文如下：
那么，你的竞争领域是什么？商业机密是什么？在人工智能的世界中，这意味着什么？我认为这是一个非常有趣的话题。专利则是完全不同的领域，我觉得这很值得深入探讨。如果我们要在这方面进行判断，我愿意下注。如果我们想在这个话题上设立一个预测市场，我保证这将是交易的开端，之后会有更多的交易。我来告诉你原因。纽约时报与OpenAI达成协议的原因是为了明确OpenAI对他们业务造成了损害。因为现在他们有了新的客户，这个客户就是亚马逊的杰夫·贝索斯和安迪·贾西。现在，他们可以证明损失，因为这样他们就可以对OpenAI提出禁令。而OpenAI必须解决这个问题，这对他们来说将是非常昂贵的。虽然并非做不到，但会非常昂贵。
Let's think on a societal basis of what we want as a society. Do we want a society in which journalists, writers, artists, musicians, filmmakers, actors cannot make a living? Podcasts? What do we want a world in which they can? And I think you're assuming, hold on, let me finish. But you're assuming that as a technologist, we typically think if we can crawl at its ours, what I can tell you is an artist is if I make it, it's mine. And you need my permission because it's my art. And I think the industry will do better if they respect them because now the New York Times can hire more fact checkers.
让我们从社会的角度来思考，我们想要一个怎样的社会。我们是否希望生活在一个记者、作家、艺术家、音乐家、电影制作人和演员无法谋生的世界里？还是希望他们能够在这个世界上生存？我认为，你可能会这样设想，等等，请先让我说完。作为技术人员，我们往往认为只要是我们能获取的信息，就是我们的。但作为一名艺术家，我会认为，如果是我创作的，那就是属于我的。你需要经过我的允许，因为那是我的艺术作品。我认为，如果行业能尊重这些创作者，它的发展会更好。这样一来，《纽约时报》就可以聘请更多的事实核查员。
But can I just ask you a question? Yeah, sure. But why do you have to connect the two as immutable things? Meaning why can't somebody make something? Still, let's just say it's a song. But that song can now be made by multiple AI models. But if they make the song, there's a reasonable claim that even if they don't have the copyright, more people will want them to perform the song than some random AI. So can't you make a living without having the copyright? Which is the choice of the artist. Some artists were very well known for not wanting their art to exist in some mediums. As a perfect example, the Rolling Stones were a long time thought they would sell out if they had their music used in commercials. And when they did start me up with windows, that was a really big concession from them. And that's up to the artist to make that decision. You make a valid claim.
但我能问你一个问题吗？可以，当然可以。但是，为什么你必须将两件事连接为不可改变的东西呢？意思是，为什么一个人不能创造一些东西呢？比如说，一首歌。而这些歌现在可以由多个人工智能模型创作出来。但是如果他们创作了这首歌，即使他们没有版权，也能合理地声称可能会有更多人希望他们演唱这首歌，而不是某个随机的人工智能。所以，难道你不能在没有版权的情况下谋生吗？这其实是艺术家的选择。有些艺术家很出名，因为他们不希望自己的艺术作品以某些媒介形式存在。一个完美的例子是滚石乐队，他们很长时间以来认为如果将他们的音乐用于商业广告，那就是“出卖”了。而当他们让他们的音乐用于“启动”Windows时，那对他们来说是一个很大的让步。这就是艺术家来做出这样的决定。你的观点是有道理的。
Hey, yeah, you go on tour and you make more money. That's the artist's decision, not the technologist or the people stealing their content. And by the way, $20 million a year is a hundred, $200,000, highly paid journalists, fact checkers at the New York Times. They're going to get ten of those deals. And it's going to create a golden hour of age of journalism and content. And we should be happy about that. I told you this example, Jason. But at Beast, we did a licensing deal of our content to allow open AI to learn, to run training runs on our videos. And at the board, the thing that we kept talking about was I was really concerned like, let's just do a couple of your deal max. Sure.
嘿，是的，你去巡演还能赚更多钱。这是艺术家的决定，而不是技术人员或那些盗窃他们内容的人的决定。顺便说一下，每年2000万美元相当于在《纽约时报》雇10位年薪10到20万美元的高薪记者和事实核查员。这会带来一个新闻和内容的黄金时代，我们应该对此感到高兴。我之前和你提过这个例子，Jason。在Beast，我们曾与一家机构达成内容授权协议，以便让开放AI使用我们的影片进行训练。在董事会会议上，我们一直在讨论这个问题，我真的很担心，所以建议最多只做几年合约。
And the reason is we have no idea what this looks like in five or ten years. And there's just as much chance to your point that we get it wrong is right. Now that was about six months ago. And so the intuition that I had back then was maybe we should keep the deal term as short as possible. And now when I see how important AI is in the global landscape and what China is doing, I think on the margins that this idea that these copyrights will mean something. In my mind, I am underwriting the value of these things going to zero. And I'm asking myself instead for my businesses, how are we actually building a real defensive remote and not a piece of paper that we can use to sue somebody?
翻译成中文：
原因是我们无法预料五到十年后的情况。正如你所说的，我们可能做错的几率和做对的一样多。那是大约六个月前的事。那时我的直觉是，也许我们应该尽量缩短交易期限。而现在，当我看到人工智能在全球范围的重要性以及中国在这方面的动作时，我觉得这些版权会有意义的这个想法边际上有所变化。在我看来，我倾向于认为这些东西的价值可能趋向于零。我反而在问自己，对于我的企业，我们到底如何建立真正的防御，而不是一张可以用来起诉他人的纸。
Okay. Freeberg, you want the less word here? We got to move on to some other topics. I just want to be clear. I just want to be clear that nobody is losing their copyright. Copyright is the right not to have your work copied. And if an AI model produces outputs that copy or plagiarize your work, then that's a violation of the law. And I think the president specifically said that. We're not allowing copying or plagiarizing. The question is whether AI models are allowed to do math on the internet. Patron recognition. Basically, that's what it is. And it's, and Jake, I think you're conflating the two. And I don't want to interrupt it. I just want to say this.
好的。Freeberg，你想要更精简些的表达吗？我们得继续讨论其他话题。我只是想澄清一下，没有人在失去他们的版权。版权是指不让他人复制你的作品的权利。如果一个人工智能模型产生的输出是复制或剽窃了你的作品，那就是违法的。我认为总统明确表示，我们不允许复制或剽窃。问题在于人工智能模型是否被允许在互联网上进行数学运算。保护赞助者识别。基本上就是这个意思。Jake，我认为你把两者混为一谈了。我不想打断，只是想说这些。
I understand the distinction. And I think that this idea that like I can't, for example, go to the library, rent a book, read it, and then learn some of the good techniques on how to write a good book should be restricted to humans in this AI context. Like this is exactly what they're doing. They're identifying patterns. And then they're building predictive algorithms that allow them to output stuff that starts to fit within different kind of, you know, variable settings. Do you guys think it's possible that if you allocated enough compute at the problem, you could write Michael Criton's Jurassic Park Denoval without ever having read it? Yes. Me too. Me too.
我理解这个区别。我认为，不能简单地说我不能去图书馆借本书，读完后学习一些好的写作技巧，这样的观点仅适用于人类，而在人工智能的背景下不应该如此。这正是人工智能正在做的事情。他们识别模式，然后构建预测算法，使他们能够在不同的变量设置中输出符合期望的内容。你们觉得，如果投入足够的计算资源，是否可能在从未读过迈克尔·克莱顿的《侏罗纪公园》的情况下写出这样的小说？我觉得可以。我也这么认为。
I don't know what that would mean. Like, well, this is my point. I know Michael Criton's and I know what Jurassic Park is. I don't know what it means. I don't know what it means to say can AI write that? But you guys remember the edge here in lawsuit? Do you remember the lawsuit? Yeah, I did, but let me just make one point here on this because you're saying I don't understand it. I spent my career in it. I understand it much better than you do. And I understand it from lawsuits and being in the weeds on it. Like I understand it for the first principles, which you do not.
我不知道那会意味着什么。就像，这是我的观点。我知道迈克尔·克莱顿，也知道《侏罗纪公园》，但我不知道那意味着什么。我不知道“AI能写这个吗”到底是什么意思。但是，你们还记得那个埃奇的诉讼案吗？你还记得那个诉讼吗？是的，我记得，但让我在这儿讲一个观点，因为你说你不理解。我在这个领域花了一辈子的时间，比你更了解。我从诉讼中以及深入其中的细节来理解它。我从最基本的原则来理解它，而你却不这样。
And I will say this is what we're talking about here is the definition. It's the definition of a derivative work. And the output matters. So if you were to take my knowledge and then create a derivative work from it and you used a percentage of my work and that's where this will get into the nuance is what percentage of the original work is used in the derivative work and under what context, a commercial context or a non-commercial. This is clearly a commercial one. If it's a, if open AI was a nonprofit right now, we'd be having a distinctly different discussion because it would, there would be, you wouldn't be competing with me as the copyright holder to use this new medium and create the derivative works.
这段话主要在讨论“衍生作品”的定义以及其输出的重要性。作者指出，如果你利用他的知识创作一个衍生作品，并使用了他作品的一部分，关键就在于使用了原作品的多少比例，以及在什么情境下使用，是商业还是非商业。这里明显是商业用途。如果OpenAI现在是个非营利组织，我们的讨论会截然不同，因为在那种情况下，你们不会作为版权持有者的竞争对手来使用这个新媒介并创作衍生作品。
And it has to change substantially. So if it's a, if it's a cliff notes, when China has the only models that are able to meet your stringent definitions of copyright. Well, no, here's the thing. I think the China fear, the China fear shit is bullshit. I'll be totally honest here. Just because China steals IP does not mean you get to steal from Americans in America we have rules. And when you go to China and by the way, we spent all that 30 years, the major issue with China is not Taiwan. It has been re-backing. Let me re-back this issue. Let me re-back this issue itself. Let me finish. The technology industry itself has leaned on our government for 30, 40 years, including Microsoft, including Google to make sure our trade secrets are not stolen. Our IP is not stolen. Our movies are not stolen. That is the key issue with China.
这需要进行重大改变。如果想要一个简明扼要的观点，那就是中国有能力符合我们对版权严格定义的唯一模型。但问题是，我认为对中国的恐惧是无稽之谈。坦率地说，仅仅因为中国窃取知识产权，并不意味着在美国你就可以窃取美国人的东西。在美国，我们有我们的规则。当涉及到中国时，过去30年里，主要问题并不是台湾，而是知识产权的保护。让我继续说完。技术行业在过去30到40年里，包括微软和谷歌，都依赖我们的政府确保我们的商业秘密、知识产权和电影不被盗取。这才是与中国的关键问题。
So just because China is a fear does not mean American companies get to you. Have you seen, have you seen the latest batch of Chinese open source models or open with models? They steal everything. Does that mean you should be able to steal windows? Should you be able to steal? Jason, let me ask you a question. Jason, let me ask you a question. We know it's a good stealing. Elon has said this pretty clearly, but GROC-5 and for sure GROC-6 will not use common crawl. It will not use the internet. It will just be an enormous amount of synthetic data. And back to what Freeberg and I just agreed upon, if you synthetically go and try to generate all this content to learn across, you're invariably going to produce something that's already been created.
所以，仅仅因为中国受到一些担忧，并不意味着美国公司就能为所欲为。你看过最新一批中国的开源模型或者开源的模型吗？它们不时被指责窃取所有东西。这是否意味着你也应该可以窃取 Windows？你应该能够窃取吗？Jason，我来问你一个问题。我们都知道偷窃是不对的，Elon 已经很明确地表示，GROC-5 和未来的 GROC-6 都不会使用公共网页抓取的数据，也不会使用互联网数据，它们将仅仅依靠大量的合成数据。而回到 Freeberg 和我一致认可的观点，如果你通过合成数据试图生成所有的内容进行学习，那几乎不可避免地会产生已被创造出来过的东西。
And so, it's like some sci-fi level. I understand. But that's what's happening now. It's happening now. If something happens to GROC-5 or GROC-6, is that violating copyright? It didn't even know that it existed. On the output, yeah, that's fine. On the output created a similar work, they would need to then take it down. And so that would be a really interesting new, that's a new space we're going to have to contend with. So, can I give you an example? Can I give you an example? If it does happen, is a new concept that we would have to address in a new way.
这就像是某种科幻水平。我明白，但这正是现在正在发生的事情。如果GROC-5或GROC-6出了什么问题，那算不算侵犯版权？它甚至不知道自己存在。在输出方面，是的，那没问题。如果输出创造了类似的作品，他们就需要把它撤下来。所以这将是一个非常有趣的新领域，我们将不得不与之打交道。那么，我可以给你举个例子吗？如果这种情况发生了，那将是一个我们必须以新的方式解决的新概念。
I'll give you a science corner example of this EVO-2 model that they publish at the Art Institute, which Patrick Collison, you know, is the name of the Baltimore. We talked about it. So, that EVO-2 model, they just ingested all the DNA data they could find in the world. Trillions and trillions of base pair of data that they ingested. And then they looked at patterns in DNA. And that's it. They had no context for what the DNA represented. They had no context for the concept of genes. None of the structured understanding of what that DNA does, what it is. And you know what it did? They fed in the BRACA gene variant. And the thing output, a warning saying, I think that this is a pathogenic variant to DNA.
我给你一个关于EVO-2模型的例子，这是在艺术学院发表的一个科学角落的内容，其中提到了Patrick Collison，你知道的，那个来自巴尔的摩的人。我们谈过这个问题。EVO-2模型收集了世界上所有能找到的DNA数据，数量高达数万亿对碱基。然后他们分析了DNA中的模式，仅此而已。他们没有关于这些DNA代表什么的背景信息，对基因的概念也一无所知，没有任何关于DNA是什么或其具体功能的结构化理解。你知道他们做了什么吗？他们输入了BRACA基因变体，结果模型输出了一个警告，表示它认为这是一个致病的DNA变体。
Without having any context, this is the breast cancer allele. And it didn't have any knowledge. And it wasn't trained on that at all. It had no knowledge that there are pathogenic variants for cancer. And it identified that this was a genetic variant that can cause some sort of pathogenic outcome in the organism. So that's a great example where there's a lack of understanding at the human level on what really drives some of the patterns in nature, the patterns in society, the patterns in behavior that are kind of emergent phenomena, perhaps, that these AI models are starting to identify. And I think to Jamal's point, we may end up seeing this in things like entertainment as well.
在没有任何背景信息的情况下，这被认为是乳腺癌的等位基因。而且它（指人工智能模型）对此没有任何了解，完全没有接受过相关训练。它也不知道癌症有致病变异。但它识别出这是一种可以导致某种致病结果的基因变异。这是一个很好的例子，展示了在某些新兴现象上，人类的理解存在欠缺，例如自然中的某些模式、社会中的某些模式以及行为中的某些模式，而这些模式正被这些人工智能模型逐渐识别。我认为如贾马尔所说，我们可能会在娱乐等领域也看到类似现象的出现。
All right. This has been an amazing debate. We got to move on and you know what? We're going to have more amazing debates September 7th through 9th in Los Angeles at the All in Summit. The lineup is stacked. Ali Bob is co-founder Joe Sy. Tom Abravo co-founder, Arcan Vest, Kathy Wood, Ubers CEO Dara. Sequoia's role of both YouTuber, Cleo Abram and many, many more coming. So actually get the last word here. Go. I was just highlighting this tweet that I saw where talking about Chinese open-weight models are basically open source models. So basically all the leading American models are closed source and all the leading Chinese models are open source. This is kind of what they have played out.
好的。这场辩论非常精彩。我们要继续前进，你知道吗？9月7日至9日，我们将在洛杉矶举行的All in 峰会上举办更多精彩的辩论。阵容非常强大，有阿里巴巴的联合创始人蔡崇信、Tom Abravo 的联合创始人、Arcan Vest 的Kathy Wood、Uber的CEO Dara、红杉资本代表、YouTuber Cleo Abram等等，还有更多嘉宾即将参加。所以实际上这里给你最后发言的机会。开始吧。我刚才只是想强调一下我看到的一条推文，讨论了中国的开放权重模型基本上就是开源模型。换句话说，所有领先的美国模型都是闭源的，而所有领先的中国模型都是开源的。这就是他们的表现。
It's a pretty good technique for catching up is to open source because then you get the larger open source developer community helping you out. It's great. But the point is just that these open source models are catching up pretty fast. We're ahead in many other aspects. Our chips are a lot better or data centers are better and so on. And I'd say our closed source models are better. But they have this one area of open source models. So again, if you hamstring our AI models access to data by creating a whole bunch of new requirements for contracting negotiations like we could really lose the AI race. This is a really big deal. It's not a made up concern. I don't know why you think it's made up. I never said that it's made up.
这是一种非常好的追赶技术，就是开源，因为这样可以得到更广泛的开源开发者社区的帮助。这非常棒。但关键是这些开源模型的进展非常快。在许多其他方面，我们仍然领先。我们的芯片更好，数据中心更先进等等。我认为我们的闭源模型也更强。但是在开源模型这一方面，确实存在一些挑战。因此，如果通过创建一系列新的合同谈判要求来限制我们的AI模型获取数据，我们可能在AI竞赛中真的会失去优势。这是一个非常大的问题，不是凭空担心的。我不知道你为什么认为这是凭空捏造的，我从来没说过这是凭空捏造的。
I think it's an opportunity for America to actually have a distinct advantage, which is that $20 million from Amazon alone is 1% of the New York Times revenue. And that's going to go directly to the bottom line. It's going to allow them to hire more journalists. Then that protected site will have be giving in real time something. These language models are going to have to go hack and steal. That real time data is going to be a distinct advantage for Gemini, OpenAI, Amazon, whoever chooses to do it. And we can create a wide-angle key. You have this nostalgic, quasi-romantic notions about journalism and the need to save your time. It's also art. All the stuff.
我认为这对美国来说是一个机会，可以获得明显的优势。因为仅仅来自亚马逊的2000万美元就占了《纽约时报》收入的1%。这笔钱将直接增加他们的净利润，并使他们能够雇佣更多的记者。这样，那些受保护的网站就能够实时提供内容。这些语言模型将不得不去破解和窃取这些内容。而实时数据将为选择这样做的Gemini、OpenAI、亚马逊等提供明显的优势。我们可以创造一个广角的视角。你对新闻业和拯救你的时间可能怀有怀旧和半浪漫的想象。这也是一种艺术，所有这些东西。
You can say all the derogatory things you want about me personally, Saks. That doesn't work. I didn't say that. No, no, you just said I have this whole nostalgia, whatever. When you do, you're nostalgic for journalism as it used to exist. When I know I've beat you in the debate is when you make it personal like that. It's not personal. I'm not being nostalgic. I'm trying to create a sustainable advantage for America. When you are our public servant and you're trying to create, you will take my feedback. You're trying to create. We're going to ignore your feedback. We're going to ignore your feedback. We're going to ignore your feedback. We're throwing in the trash. No, you take it. And I will be showing up at the White House for my tour.
你可以对我个人说任何贬低的话，Saks，那对我没用。我没那么说。不不，你刚才说我怀旧什么的。你说的时候，你是在怀念过去的新闻业。当我知道我在辩论中胜过你时，就是你开始这样针对个人的时候。这不是针对个人。我不是在怀旧。我是在努力为美国创造可持续的优势。当你作为我们的公职人员时，你在努力创造，你就需要接受我的反馈。你在努力创造，我们将无视你的反馈。我们将无视你的反馈。我们将无视你的反馈。我们会把它扔进垃圾桶。你必须接受。我会去白宫参加我的参观。
You have this crazy idea that we're going to win the AI race by tying one hand behind our back so that you can subsidize journalists. No, you can subsidize them. You can subsidize them. You're trying to broken business law. You'll get more content. You said before you want more training data. Pay for it. Pay for more training data. Your bizarre. Take it back to POTUS. All right. Let's keep moving here. We have to keep moving. We have a great debate. This is great debate. Great debate here on the All in Podcast. It's not going to stop folks. It's just you yelling. It's just you yelling saying things. You don't make sense. But you can say that.
你有一个疯狂的想法，认为为了补贴记者，我们要在AI竞争中自我设限（比如比喻为绑住一只手）来赢得比赛。不，对记者的补贴是你自己的事。你试图破坏商业法来获取更多内容。你之前说过你想要更多训练数据，那就自己掏钱去买更多的训练数据吧。你的想法很奇怪，把它带回去告诉总统。好吧，我们得继续了。我们一定要继续讨论。这是一场精彩的辩论，这确实是一场精彩的辩论，All in Podcast上的精彩辩论。争论不会停下来的。只是你在喊，只是你在喊一些没意义的话。但你可以继续说下去。
You can only have like three topics to take. Freeberg. Freeberg. Freeberg. You can personally attack that. No, you know what it is. It's like we got to let in more immigrants. Number one. I still do immigrants. Yeah, I was going to put everyone out of work. By the way, no sense of perceived contradiction between those two things. Number three, we need to like some rise. Here comes the personal text. You know, the audience says. No, it's the same topic. When the three of you guys attack me. No, it's the overall. He's the when the audience. I can create an AI. You can't not put me like this. And the three of you gang up. And you personally attack me. The audience comes up to me and they say, wow, you really nailed it. And beat that.
你只能有三个话题。Freeberg。Freeberg。Freeberg。你可以对这个进行个人攻击。不，其实你知道这意味着什么。我们需要让更多的移民进来。第一点。我还是支持移民。对，我本来打算让所有人都失业。顺便说一下，尽管这两个观点看似矛盾，但并没有违和感。第三，我们需要某种形式的提升。个人信息来了。观众会说。这是同一个话题。当你们三个一起攻击我时。这是整体的。当观众。我可以创造一个AI。你不能这样针对我。当你们三个人一起围攻我，进行个人攻击时，观众会过来对我说，哇，你说得真好。打败它。
Have I done that today? No, not yet. Not yet. A bit a little bit of the ozamic. But it was pretty exciting. You just been eating. He's been strangely uninvolved and just eating. He's amazing. He's 11% body fat. Let him eat. Let him cook. All right, listen, you and I, Sacks will do more debate. And it's going to be amazing all in.com slash yada yada yada for tickets. Get in there, folks. We have to get to the docket where an hour in and we still have all the news. We should talk about this AI privacy issue that Sam Altman mentioned.
我今天做了吗？不，还没有。还没有。稍微有点Ozamic。不过这还挺激动人心的。你一直在吃东西。他表现得挺奇怪的，没有参与，只是在吃东西。他很厉害，体脂率只有11%。让他吃吧，让他大显身手。好了，听我说，你和我，Sacks，我们会进行更多的辩论。这将会很精彩，访问all in.com斜杠yada yada yada获取门票。赶紧报名，朋友们。我们得赶快进入议程，已经一个小时了，我们还有所有的新闻要谈论。我们应该讨论一下Sam Altman提到的AI隐私问题。
All right. That's a great segue because I saw that as well, David Sacks. And as our civil servant working on AI, this is something where you can have an additional contribution. It's more work than giving you. All right, listen, here it is. AI user privacy is becoming an issue because friend of the pod. Sam Altman says there is no legal confidentiality when using his product, chat GPT. Here's a 30 second clip. Again, friend of the pod. FOP. Sam Altman. On Theo Vaughn. People talk about the most personal shit in their lives to chat GPT. Young people especially like use it as a therapist, a life coach, having these relationship problems. What should I do? And right now, if you talk to a therapist or a lawyer or a doctor about those problems, there's like legal privilege for it.
好的。这是一个很好的切入点，因为我也看到了这个，David Sacks。作为一名从事人工智能工作的公务员，这是你可以做出额外贡献的地方。这比给你的工作要多。好了，听我说，事情是这样的。AI用户隐私正成为一个问题，因为我们节目的朋友Sam Altman说，使用他的产品ChatGPT时没有法律保密性。这里有一个30秒的片段。再次提到，我们节目的朋友Sam Altman在Theo Vaughn上。人们会跟ChatGPT谈论他们生活中最私人的事情。尤其是年轻人，喜欢把它当作心理治疗师、生活教练，讨论他们的感情问题。我该怎么办？而现在，如果你跟治疗师、律师或医生谈论这些问题，是有法律特权保护的。
We haven't figured that out yet for when you talk to chat GPT. So if you go talk to chat GPT about your most sensitive stuff and then there's like a lawsuit or whatever, like we could be required to produce that. And I think that's very screwed up. I think we should have like the same concept of privacy for your conversations with AI that we do with a therapist or whatever. Okay. Sacks. This is bringing up something super important. What's your take on it? Okay. Well, I think this is an interesting topic because like copyright, this is an area where we have existing law, but it does make you rethink whether those laws are truly applicable or make as much sense in this new world.
我们还没有想出在与Chat GPT交谈时如何处理这类问题。如果你和Chat GPT讨论你最敏感的事情，然后遇到诉讼或其他问题，我们可能需要提供相关信息。我认为这一点非常糟糕。我觉得我们应该像对待与治疗师的谈话隐私一样，对待与AI的对话隐私。Sacks，这提出了一个非常重要的问题。你怎么看？我认为这是一个有趣的话题，因为这就像版权问题一样，我们在这一领域有现行法律，但这让人重新思考这些法律在这个新世界中是否真正适用或合理。
So the existing law, the existing example is search history. You know, the government can get a copy of your search history. They can subpoena it. Yeah. Every true crime story starts with a person search for how do I kill my husband slowly with poison and then they, yeah, that's exactly the point is though that I think Sam is right about the legal treatment right now, which is that your chat history isn't any different than the search history in the eyes of the law, but it is much more personal.
现行法律中，有一个例子就是搜索记录。政府可以获得你的搜索记录。他们可以用传票调取这些记录。是的，每个真实犯罪故事都是从一个人搜索“如何慢慢用毒药杀死我的丈夫”开始的。关键是，我认为Sam对目前法律的看法是正确的，那就是在法律眼中，你的聊天记录和搜索记录没有区别，但聊天记录更加私人化。
It's much more interactive than your search history. You are using it, like you said, you could use it as a, as your doctor, you could use it as your therapist. You could use it as your lawyer. And so the ability for the federal government to be intrusive is so much greater than with your search history. So I don't know what like the right policy should be yet, but I will say it does make me uncomfortable. Yeah, there's a more.
这比你的搜索历史互动性强得多。正如你所说的，你可以把它当作医生、治疗师或律师。在这种情况下，联邦政府进行干预的能力比对你的搜索历史要强得多。因此，我还不确定什么才是合适的政策，但我必须承认这让我感到不安。是的，还有更多内容。
That. Can I make a recommendation to my AI? Can I ask for a answer? Yes, please. He's our third. Why don't we let AI models get bar certified and get medically certified? So if the AI models, it turns out, are actually proving to be more accurate, more thoughtful, more responsive, more reasonable, whatever it is, whatever metric we're using. And they pass the same criteria as one would need to pass to qualify for the bar or to qualify for a doctor certificate.
当然。我可以对我的人工智能提出建议吗？我可以请求一个答案吗？当然可以。他是我们的第三个。为什么我们不让AI模型获得律师执照和医学认证呢？如果这些AI模型最终证明在某种程度上更加精准、更有思考力、更能响应、更合理，或者任何我们使用的标准。那么，如果它们通过了与获得律师资格或医生认证所需的相同标准，为什么不可以呢？
Why don't we do that for the AI? If that then happens, then the same privilege accrued to the AI as it does to the individual human that doesn't. And now if you extrapolate from where that takes us, if we're suddenly giving AI the same sort of privileged rights that we give to privileged humans, where is that going to take us ultimately with respect to the overall rights for AI? Well, they have responsibilities.
我们为什么不为人工智能这样做呢？如果那样的情况发生，那么人工智能就会享有和个人一样的特权。而现在，如果你从这个出发点进行推测，如果我们突然给予人工智能与某些特权人类相同的特权，最终这将如何影响人工智能的整体权利？其实，它们也有责任。
That's a longer form. Hold on a second. Actually, I'll point out here once again, you have a mind-blowing concept here. Have never heard anybody vocalize that. Could they actually be certified in that knowledge? And if they pass the test, it makes sense they would, but then you also get responsibility. So with a great power from its great responsibility, I will tell you this. You can turn this stuff off, but this is an opportunity.
这是一个较长的版本。稍等一下。实际上，我想再次指出，你提出了一个令人震惊的概念。我从未听过有人如此表达这个想法。他们实际上可以在这方面获得认证吗？如果他们通过了测试，这确实合乎情理，但是这也带来了责任。正如那句名言所说，能力越大，责任越大。我想告诉你，你可以选择关闭这些东西，但这也是一个机会。
I'm going to send a note to you on this. And it sounds crazy today, but I guarantee if you put it on polymarket, there will be a date when this happens. That's a great power market shout out to Shane. Let's get that up there. I just want to point out, and I'm going to email Elon about this when I get off the pod. This is an opportunity to create the signal of a signal equivalent of an LLM.
我要给你发一个说明。这听起来今天可能有点疯狂，但我保证如果你把这放在Polymarket上，总会有一天会实现的。这是一个很棒的市场预言，特别鸣谢Shane。我们需要把这个放上去。我还想指出，当我结束这个播客后，我会给Elon发邮件。这是一个创造类LLM（大型语言模型）信号等效物的机会。
All of your chats should be encrypted. All of it should be by default. Encrypted by default on GROC. Make it so that GROC can't even see it. They don't have it. If you try to subpoena it, you can do what Tim Cook does, which he says, I don't have it. If you want to try to backdoor it, you can. That's a market opportunity.
你所有的聊天记录都应该加密，并且这应该是默认设置。所有内容在GROC平台上默认加密。这样就算是GROC也无法查看这些记录，他们根本就没有这些数据。如果有人试图通过法律手段索要这些数据，你可以像蒂姆·库克一样回应说：我没有。如果想要破解加密，那就是一个市场机会。
I can tell you, I only use the Brave browser and Brave search for this reason. I don't want my search history like save somewhere or whatever. That you can take control of this as an individual, but the defaults matter and you have to then do the work. It's a great market opportunity, Chimoff. I don't even want to know what you're talking to chat GPT about. What's in your chat GPT logs?
我可以告诉你，我只使用Brave浏览器和Brave搜索引擎，原因就是我不希望我的搜索记录被保存或被别人看到。虽然个人可以控制这点，但默认设置很重要，所以还需要一些调整。这对市场来说是个很好的机会，Chimoff。我甚至都不想知道你和ChatGPT聊了什么。你的ChatGPT聊天记录里有什么内容？
What's in there, Chimoff? How to extend, how to get the extra centimeter? What's in there? I keep asking it to find me a moderator. Oh, great. I keep asking it to find me a participant. It was not a douche. Oh my god, you are so deep in your Villanera and you're leaning into it. And I'm so here for it, Chimoff. I love your Villanera. You know why? I am so.
里面有什么，Chimoff？怎么才能延伸，怎么才能再多拿一厘米？里面有什么？我不断地要求它帮我找个调解人。哦，太好了。我继续让它替我找个参与者。结果不是个自大狂。天哪，你真是深入到了你的Villanera状态，而你还全情投入其中。我真是太喜欢你的Villanera了，你知道为什么吗？就是这样。
Why are you going into your Villanera? I am so risk on right now. You are. It's liberating, actually. It's amazing. It's really amazing. Is there any blowback to how outlandish you've become this year? Any blowback at all? Has it had any negative consequence on business or hiring or anything? No, but I will landish. How? How have I been outlandish?
为什么你要进入你的“反派时期”？我现在是如此的敢于冒险。你也是。这很解放，真的太棒了，真的是不可思议。今年你这种特立独行的表现有没有带来任何反弹？有没有对业务、招聘或其他方面产生负面影响？没有，不过我确实有特立独行吗？我怎么特立独行了？
You're just filter off. You're filter off. And I think it's great. I think the over two windows back. It's absolutely fantastic. We're seeing here. I asked chat GPT about my future and my IQ. It's very interesting when you ask chat GPT to analyze you. I suggest everyone do it. Well, actually, yeah, when you just ask chat GPT or whatever, what do you know about me? And it's scary how much it already does. It's scary. There's this great personality test. You can put this personality test into GROC. And this guy made this prompt and it goes and it tells you all your personality based on your Twitter ex history. It is wild how accurate it is. What does it say about you, Tiko? I'm actually curious. It says the same thing about all of us. We're all like network, narcissists, ENTJ. You can literally run the Myers-Briggs against your chat history. It's actually, but I like your mind blowing concept there, by the way, of like them becoming certified in some way.
你已经完全不设防了。你就是不设防的状态。我觉得这太好了。我认为这有一种非常棒的表现，我们在这里看到绝对精彩的事情。我询问了Chat GPT关于我的未来和智商，这真的很有趣。当你请Chat GPT分析你的时候，我建议每个人都去试试。实际上，是的，当你询问Chat GPT或其他相关工具，它们对你了解多少时，会让人感到惊讶。真的很吓人。有一个特别棒的人格测试，你可以把这个人格测试放到GROC中。一个人设计了这样的提示，它可以基于你的Twitter历史记录告诉你所有的人格特质。惊人的是它的准确性。Tiko，它怎么评价你的？我真的很想知道。它对我们所有人的评价都一样。我们都像网络自恋者一样，是ENTJ。你甚至可以把Myers-Briggs测试应用到你的聊天历史上。顺便说一下，我很喜欢你的思维方式，作为一种获得某种认证的想法，真的令人震惊。
Okay, fresh, economic news. It's time for the administration to take their victory lap. GDP growth was 50% higher than expectations in Q2 as the Fed held rates at 4.25%. In Q1, GDP is equivalent to 50 basis points. That's probably due to the imports. People were stockpiling goods. That's the most pointless chart ever. Okay. And then, yeah, it is, I agree. It's a little bit distorted by one of that. I wanted to have both. I want to have both as bar charts. This one is totally undrived. You're totally undrived. Just say it. It's okay. What drugs are you on? I have coffee in and out. I'm out. I'm out. We're all friends. You can tell us. Is it really just out? All right. That's it. I'm taking it out. Oh my god. I took it out. And now let's get back to the here.
好的，新鲜的经济新闻。现在是政府庆祝胜利的时候了。第二季度的GDP增长比预期高出50%，而联邦储备保持利率在4.25%。第一季度的GDP相当于50个基点。这可能是因为进口，人们在囤积商品。那张图表是最没有意义的。好的，我同意，有点被其中一个因素扭曲了。我想要两个，我想要两个都是柱状图。这个完全没驱动。你完全没驱动。直说就好，没关系。你在吃什么药？我只喝咖啡。好了，没问题，我们都是朋友，可以告诉我们。真的只是咖啡吗？好吧，那就这样吧，我把它拿出来了。哦天哪，我拿出来了。现在让我们回到这里。
Okay. The Fed cap rates unchanged for the fifth straight meeting this time. Who out of 11 Fed governors dissented for Powell's decision to the dissenters were both Republicans nominated by Trump. So it seems like the Fed is becoming a little polarized now too. First time in 32 years that more than one governor dissented. And yeah, even one person dissenting is rare. Here's a 25 second clip of Powell explaining how GDP factored into the cut decision. Nick, please play the clip. Election indicators suggest that growth of economic activity has moderated. GDP rose at a 1.2% pace in the first half of this year, down from 2.5% last year. Although the increase in the second quarter was stronger at 3%, focusing on the first half of the year helps smooth through the volatility in the quarterly figures related to the unusual swings in net exports.
好的。这次美联储连续第五次会议保持利率不变。在美联储的11位官员中，谁反对鲍威尔的决定呢？反对的人都是特朗普提名的共和党人。这似乎表明美联储内部也有些政治分歧了。这是32年来首次有超过一位官员表示反对。而且，即便只有一人反对也是很少见的。这里有一段鲍威尔解释GDP如何影响利率决策的25秒视频。尼克，请播放这段视频。选举指标显示经济活动的增速有所放缓。今年上半年GDP增长了1.2%，比去年的2.5%有所下降。虽然第二季度的增长更强劲，达到3%，但关注上半年的数据有助于平滑与净出口异常波动相关的季度数据的波动。
The PCE index and then I'll throw this over to you, Sachs, for the official position here for June dropped on Thursday. PCE is the Fed's preferred gauge of inflation over CPI. PCE rose 30 Bips in June in line with estimates. And if you remember, we talked about in previous episodes CPI rose a bit 13% or 30 Bips for May to June. So we're not any, we're not close to the 2% target. And that's what the Fed keeps saying. We're not there yet. And the economy is Elfwego. Sachs, you note, I don't know if you notice this, Sachs. But people are talking about the QDP, the second quarter print, which was amazing for GDP. You were talking about it a bunch, Jamoth on the socials. He keeps referencing the first half. So he's trying to blend those two together, I think, because of the the tariff differences or, you know, maybe to smooth it out as he said.
PCE指数在周四发布了6月份的数据，我接下来会请Sachs来介绍一下官方立场。PCE是美联储偏好的通胀衡量指标，相较于CPI更被重视。6月份PCE上升了30个基点，符合预期。如果你还记得，我们在之前的节目中谈到CPI从5月到6月也上涨了13%或者说是30个基点。因此，我们还没有接近2%的目标，这就是美联储一直强调的事情：我们还没达到目标。经济现在看起来有点“失控”。Sachs，不知道你有没有注意到，人们现在在讨论第二季度的GDP数据，表现非常出色。Jamoth在社交媒体上也多次提到这一点。他经常提到上半年，可能是因为关税差异或者其他原因，他试图把这两个数据结合起来，或者像他说的那样，为了平滑数据表现。
What's your take on this? The GDP boomed in, you know, 3%, which is pretty great. But is that? The problem, you know, the problem that Jerome Powell has is that he's trying to smooth it because it allows him to justify his political decision. Okay. But the reason why you have to segregate Q1 and Q2, Q1 was before tariffs and Q2 was after tariffs. So I think you have to segregate these two things. And if you look at the run rate from Q2, what you're probably going to see in Q3 and beyond is more similar to Q2, which is to say, a large surplus, good GDP expansion and moderating inflation. So why does the Fed not cut? Because at this point, not cutting is the only thing that you can do to slow the Trump administration down, going into the midterms if you wanted to politicize the job.
你怎么看这个问题？国内生产总值增长了3%，这确实很不错。但是，这真的是好事吗？杰罗姆·鲍威尔面临的问题是，他需要调整经济增长过程，以此来为他的政治决策辩护。你需要区分第一季度和第二季度的数据，因为第一季度的数据是在关税实施之前，而第二季度是之后。所以，我认为必须将这两者分开来看。如果你查看第二季度的增长率，可能会发现第三季度及以后的趋势会更接近第二季度，也就是说，会出现大量盈余，GDP良好增长，同时通胀会出现缓和。那么美联储为什么不降息呢？因为在这个阶段，不降息是放慢特朗普政府步伐的唯一手段，特别是在中期选举之前要将这个问题政治化的话。
If however, on the other hand, you just take the data as is and you ignore Q1 because it was pre-tariff and you start to look at Q2 and you project forward. If you inject a hundred basis point cut into the economy, this thing is going to go gang busters and Trump is going to look like an economic genius going into 2026. So I think that again, in the absence of politics, you cut. Okay. Sax, what's the take from inside the administration around it? I know you're not speaking for the president on this issue, but you're in the administration. So I'm assuming you're.
然而，如果你只是按照现有数据进行分析，并忽略第一季度的数据（因为那是在关税之前），然后从第二季度开始进行预测。如果向经济中注入100个基点的降息，经济将飞速发展，特朗普将在2026年看起来像一个经济天才。因此，我认为在没有政治因素干扰的情况下，你会选择降息。好吧，Sax，来自政府内部关于这个问题的看法是什么？我知道你不是在代表总统发表意见，但你在政府中，所以我猜你有些见解。
Yeah. I'm not speaking for anyone. But obviously the 3% number is way ahead of expectations. It's a fantastic number. It just feels like, you know, everything's humming on all cylinders here. One thing you didn't mention, but I think as relevant is the new trade deal with the EU. We're about to get to that, by the way. That's the next story. Okay. Well, I mean, I would include that because I mean, I think it was a deal that just got announced where the EU is going to open its markets to US products, no tariff on US products, but they will pay a 15% tariff coming into the US.
好的。我不代表任何人发言。不过显然，这个3%的数字远远超出了预期。这是一个很棒的数字。感觉一切运转得十分顺利。你没有提到的一件事是我认为同样重要的，就是与欧盟的新贸易协议。顺便说一句，我们即将讨论这个话题。那将是下一个新闻。好的，我认为应该包括这个，因为我认为这个协议刚刚宣布，欧盟将对美国商品开放市场，美国商品将不受关税，但欧盟商品进入美国时将需支付15%的关税。
They're going to be investing 600 billion in the US. They're going to be buying 750 billion of US energy. And then some very large number, I guess they didn't specify number on defense products, basically American military products, hundreds of billions, which is the follow-up to their commitment to raise their contribution to NATO to 5% of GDP up from, I guess it was sort of like 2% before. So I mean, this is a huge deal for the United States. I think it's a huge win for the Trump administration.
他们将在美国投资6000亿美元，并且将购买7500亿美元的美国能源。此外，他们还计划购买数量庞大的国防产品，主要是美国的军事产品，金额可能达到数千亿美元。这是他们承诺将对北约的贡献提升到GDP的5%，而之前似乎只有2%。这对美国来说是一个巨大的交易，我认为这是特朗普政府的重大胜利。
And the deal is so good that what I'm seeing from European sources on X, European publications, just commenters, is that they were like outrage. They felt like they got taken to the cleaners here. Good. And you see a lot of that on X by Europeans. A lot of the European leaders are saying that Ursula chickened out. So all those stupid taco memes are going away now because people are realizing that Trump's willingness to raise tariffs on these countries as a threat to renegotiate better trade deals is working. It's working. Extraordinarily well.
这个交易好得令人震惊，我在X平台上看到的欧洲消息来源、欧洲出版物和评论者都表示愤怒。他们感到自己在这个交易中吃了大亏。没错。在X平台上，很多欧洲人也有同样的看法。许多欧洲领导人正在说乌尔苏拉退缩了。因此，那些关于塔可的愚蠢表情包现在消失了，因为人们开始意识到，特朗普为了重新协商更好的贸易协议而威胁对这些国家提高关税的策略正在奏效，而且效果极佳。
Does this EU deal only to think about it? Is you add it all up? It's about $2 trillion. It's effectively $2 trillion of stimulus into the US, but without money printing. Yeah. Over the next three years. So it's noninflationary. It's not insignificant. It's a free bird, your thoughts on the Fed, the GDP print. And maybe you could get into the granular details of that print. If you pull up the schedule of data, so this is the national income and product accounts data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
这段英文翻译成中文，可以表达为：
"这个欧盟协议是不是只是在考虑中呢？如果你把一切加起来，大约是2万亿美元。这实际上相当于对美国的2万亿美元刺激，但不涉及印钞。在未来三年内进行，所以它不会导致通货膨胀。这不是一个小数目。它是一个自由的机会，你对美联储和GDP数据报告有何看法？或许你可以深入探讨一下该报告的细节。如果你查看数据时间表，那么这是美国经济分析局提供的国家收入和产品账户数据。"
So this is where the inflation print comes from. I think there are two lines worth taking significant note of. The first is the furnishings and durable household equipment line. So in June, the cost for furnishings and household stuff jumped 1.3% month over month on an annualized basis, right? That's almost 15% year over year if it were to continue at that level. And then the second one is this recreational goods and vehicles. That jumped 0.9% month over month. Neither of those categories have jumped that much in kind of recent history.
所以，这就是通货膨胀数据的由来。我认为有两个方面值得特别关注。第一个是家具和耐用家庭设备这一项。在六月，这类家具和家用物品的成本按月环比上涨了1.3%。如果按这种速度持续下去，年化涨幅接近15%。第二个是娱乐产品和交通工具，这一项的月环比涨幅是0.9%。最近一段时间，这两个类别的涨幅都没有这么大过。
So part of the argument that's being made is that what we are seeing in these jumps is actually some of the first effects of the tariffs and the cost of goods that are being imported because these are largely imports. Having an adverse effect on the consumer. And so I think this is kind of a weight and sea moment on some of these categories that are predicted to have a tariffs price effect starting to show through. So I think this is where a lot of folks are keeping it close.
有人提出的观点之一是，我们目前看到的价格跳涨，其实是由于关税和进口商品成本增加造成的初步影响，因为这些商品大多是进口的。这对消费者产生了不利影响。因此，我认为这是一个观望时刻，因为在一些类别上，预计关税价格影响将开始显现。我认为这也是为什么很多人对此密切关注的原因。
So I wanted to kind of provide a little bit of the support for the economists that are saying we should keep rates steady because if we are seeing a significant inflationary effect here, it's worth noting that there's something that we need to be thoughtful about in the rate policy. I think this is a really good point. If you look at in this debate, which is obviously highly political, we're at inflation 2.567%, spending is increasing obviously. Stock market at an all-time high, unemployment trending down again.
我想为那些建议维持利率稳定的经济学家提供一些支持。因为如果我们确实看到显著的通胀影响，我们需要在制定利率政策时加以注意。我认为这个观点很重要。在这场显然具有高度政治性的讨论中，我们的通胀率为2.567%，显然开支在增加，股市达到了历史新高，失业率又在下降。
So we're at like 4.1%. And people are just yoloing into crypto and they're doing sports betting, Bitcoin at all-time high. I think the Fed now is in a position where cutting rates seems like putting a caracene on the fire. If Trump tanked the economy in Q2, he probably would have gotten the rates. But now I don't think it's reasonable, as you're saying, Dave, the reasons to not cut are building because the economy is on fire.
所以我们现在的失业率大约是4.1%。人们纷纷大举投资加密货币，并进行体育博彩，比特币也处于历史高位。我认为美联储现在的处境就像是削减利率会火上浇油。如果特朗普在第二季度让经济崩盘，他可能会得到降息。但现在我认为降息是不合理的，正如你所说，Dave，不降息的理由越来越多，因为经济非常活跃。
So maybe the shock and bore approach to tariffs, which is now becoming a playbook. I had a nice talk with Letnik about this, who I love, by the way. He really described to me how they're doing these and the shock and bore playbook is basically Trump says something completely outrageous, shocking. Everybody goes crazy. The media loses their mind, business leaders lose their mind. Letnik told me that what he does is he sets the table and proposes something reasonable because now I'm a big direct contact with all the administration, so I thank you for that. Letnik, and he described it, Trump comes in, sees all the stuff, and then he starts making his micro tweaks. So it's on the finish line. It's in the red zone, five yard line. Trump comes in and then he sticks it to them again with three or four extra asks, and then they wrap it up and that this is becoming really effective.
也许“冲击与乏味”这个关税策略正在成为一种常规手段。我和莱特尼克聊过这个话题，我非常欣赏他。他向我详细描述了他们是如何运作的，所谓的“冲击与乏味”策略基本上就是特朗普发表一些完全出乎意料、令人震惊的言论。大家都反应激烈，媒体和商业领袖都焦头烂额。莱特尼克告诉我，他所做的就是先铺好台面，提出一些合理的方案，因为我现在与整个政府有了直接的联系，所以对此表示感谢。莱特尼克描述说，特朗普介入时，会查看所有的内容，然后开始做细微调整。事情已经接近完成，就像是在红区五码线一样。然后特朗普再提出三到四个额外的要求，紧接着就敲定了。这种策略现在变得相当有效。
So it was chaotic at first. It seemed nonsensical. But they've put the Fed in a really bad position because they never seen this before. They've never seen this before. So now they're going to be in this defensive position of what if we cut it and the market rips to your point, you just said the market will rip the second they cut that. And the cynical view of this is the market rips as we go into the midterms, which is the same claim the Republicans made about the cuts that Biden did in September right before the election. Some level of politics and gamesmanship going on here, but you have to hand it to the Trump administration for what they're doing with this sort of 2.0 playbook.
起初一片混乱，显得毫无意义。但他们让美联储陷入了非常不利的境地，因为他们以前从未遇到过这样的情况。因此，现在美联储将处于一种防御状态，考虑如果削减利率，市场可能会飙升，就像你刚刚提到的那样，他们削减后市场将立即飙升。而持较为愤世嫉俗观点的人会认为，市场在中期选举前会飙升，这与共和党人对拜登在选举前九月削减措施的指责相同。这其中无疑存在一定程度的政治和权谋，但不得不佩服特朗普政府在这方面所采取的2.0策略。
If this was sacks premeditated and we all just didn't understand it, fine. The outcome here is this administration has to live or die by the results of these 600 billion from the EU, 550 billion in investment from Japan. You put those two together. IS, let Nick is that at the event. Is that going into the sovereign wealth fund and how does that get you know, spend? And he said at the discretion of the president and he's advising him to spend it on putting more nuisance. So that's fascinating. We have a trillion dollars now that we can put into nuclear power plants and these small module reactors. And that's what let Nick said. He wanted to spend it on. He's going to advise the president spend it on. But now we've got them investing in our country. It's absolutely brilliant if it works out.
如果这是Sack事先计划好的，而我们都没有理解，那也没关系。关键是，这届政府必须对来自欧盟的6000亿美元和来自日本的5500亿美元投资的结果负责。把这两笔投资加在一起。IS，让Nick在活动上发表见解。这些资金是否会进入国家主权财富基金，怎么花费？他表示，这将由总统自行决定，他建议总统将这些钱用于增加新建项目。非常有趣的是，我们现在有一万亿美元可以投入到核电站和这些小型模块化反应堆上。这就是Nick希望花钱的地方，他会建议总统将钱用于此。但现在，他们正在投资我们的国家。如果能成功，绝对是个绝妙的计划。
Look at what we're we are. April 2nd was liberation day. And the media went crazy. They were predicting a black Monday, the market crash. They basically tried to spook the markets and create fear. They said that we're going to go into a session or depression. And now look at where we are. Since a few months later, all the markets are at all time highs. Trump has extracted billions of dollars in these trade deals that people didn't even know yet. And we just had a few moves because of the media, by the way. And we just had those moves because they were scared. And we just had a 3% GDP growth print.
看看我们现在的状况。4月2日是解放日，而媒体却疯了。他们预测会有一个"黑色星期一"，市场会崩溃。他们基本上是在试图吓唬市场，制造恐惧。他们说我们会进入衰退甚至经济萧条。然而现在看看我们所处的位置。几个月后，所有市场都达到历史新高。特朗普从这些贸易协议中获得了数十亿美元的收益，很多人当时根本不清楚。而我们之所以采取了这些行动，某种程度上是因为媒体，他们制造了恐慌。我们还取得了3%的GDP增长。
So I don't think that's going to be what I think happened is that President Trump saw an opportunity here that other people ignored. It's like when a CEO comes in to a company, a new CEO comes in. And that company's been mismanaged for a decade. But it's got wonderful assets on its balance sheet. It's got a market position that's still very strong. This has been underutilized. And he came in and understood that the United States had tremendous leverage in all these trade negotiations. Actually, they weren't even trade negotiations then. In all these trade relationships.
所以，我不认为那是将要发生的事情。我觉得特朗普总统看到了别人忽视的一个机会。这就像新任CEO进入一家公司，而那家公司已经被管理不善了十年，但它在资产负债表上还有很好的资产，并且市场地位依然很强。这些都没有被充分利用。他进来后意识到美国在所有这些贸易关系中有巨大的影响力。实际上，那时这些甚至还不是贸易谈判。
And he was able to essentially renegotiate all of them. And look at the results. I mean, they're just staggering. And everyone said that, oh, Trump's going to check in all these, not going to hang tough. It's all these other countries that have folded like, I don't know, launchers. I mean, they have all capitulated. Yeah, they're fully electric. It's really remarkable. But you're not answering my question. Was this pre-meditated? Give us some insight here. I don't know what this is. What are you talking about? When they came out and they was like, oh, 100% tariffs, 200% tariffs, the market was not making that reaction based upon the media. They were making it based on Trump was saying.
他基本上能够重新谈判所有协议。看看结果，真是令人震惊。大家都说特朗普不会坚持立场，不会和这些国家硬碰硬。结果却是，其他国家一个接一个地妥协，就像多米诺骨牌一样倒下了。真的很了不起。可是你没有回答我的问题，这是不是事先策划的？给我们一些内幕。我不知道你在说什么。当他们宣布100%关税、200%关税时，市场的反应并不是基于媒体，而是基于特朗普所说的话。
So was it pre-meditated this shock and bore shock and reasonable negotiating strategy? Or do you not know? Well, you're not privy to it. Look, I'm not speaking as an insider here, but we said at the time that all of that was happening and Larry Summers was on the pod preaching doom is that all of that was an opening bid. It was all the start to a negotiation. And we had to see where it ended up and that the administration still had to stick the landing.
所以，这次冲击和令人大为震惊的做法是事先计划好的合理谈判策略吗？还是你不清楚？嗯，你对此并不知情。听着，我不是从内部消息的角度说这些的，但我们当时就说过，当这一切发生时，Larry Summers在播客上发表悲观言论，说这只是一个开场出价。这一切都是谈判的开始。我们需要看看结果怎么样，同时政府还需要妥善收尾。
I got to say based on EU, Japan, and South Korea. I mean, this is looking really good right now. Well, listen, it's the top five that are like 90% of the negotiation. As Trump said, there was another little note he did in the keynote when he kind of drifted into his different things he wanted to talk about where he said, I don't even need to know about the bottom countries. I've never even heard that names of some of these countries. He just got a nail of what? The top five, the top 10. And we're done.
根据欧盟、日本和韩国的情况来看，我得说现在的情况真的不错。听我说，最重要的五个国家占据了90%的谈判内容。正如特朗普所说，他在主题演讲中提到了一个小点，当时他谈到了自己想讨论的各种话题，他说他甚至不需要了解那些底部国家的情况，甚至都没听过其中一些国家的名字。只需要搞定什么？前五名或者前十名国家就行了。
And this administration has to stick the landing as well because these are handshake deals right now. They have to be inked. They have to be approved. So there's a lot more work left to be done. But I am one of the pieces as well. There's one of the pieces. So we talked about the fact that Europe has 0% tariffs on American products, but even after this deal that the European products that coming into the US won the 15% tariff.
这一届政府必须要完美收官，因为现在这些只是协议初步达成，事实上协议必须正式签署并获得批准。还有很多工作要完成。而我也是其中的一部分。我们之前提到过，欧洲对美国商品的关税是零，但即便在这项协议之后，欧洲进入美国的产品仍需要支付15%的关税。
And we're not including the $600 billion of European investment in the US. We're not including the 750 billion of sales of American energy to Europe. Okay, just talking about the tariff, that 15% and what we're seeing now across the board is generating about 300 billion a year of additional tariff revenue that goes to help balancing the budget. So 300 billion a year of a 10 years is $3 trillion. That is a big number. It's incredible.
我们没有计算欧洲对美国的6000亿美元投资，也没有计算美国对欧洲出售的7500亿美元能源。这里只谈论关税，那15%的关税，现在每年大约能产生3000亿美元的额外关税收入用于帮助平衡预算。也就是说，10年就是3万亿美元。这是一个非常大的数字，真令人难以置信。
Yeah. It's got to take care of it. So I don't know if that completely satisfies Freeberg, but that's a big help. Freeberg, do you think that there is a chance that inflation is going to tick up because of all this? That's a lot of money being pushed into the system again. So could we see a three hand a lot inflation in the next six months? Or what's the probability of that in your mind? That's the big concern everybody has.
好的。这件事必须解决。我不知道这是否能完全满足Freeberg的期望，但这已经是很大的帮助了。Freeberg，你认为因为这些，通货膨胀会上升的可能性有多大？这又是大量资金流入系统。那么在接下来的六个月里，我们会看到通货膨胀率达到3%吗？或者在你看来，这个可能性有多大？这是大家都很担心的问题。
I don't know. I don't know. I think the big question, if you look at each of these categories, one way to think about it is how much margin is the seller making? If they're making 30% margin and we charge a 15% tariff, does their margin go down to 15% or do they take their margin down to 20% and raise the price by 5%. What's the right balance? And what will happen is that now with this effective tariff, which is a sort of tax on the system, a tax on the market, market will find its kind of new equilibrium where the buyers are willing to pay X and the sellers are willing to sell it Y.
我不确定。我不确定。我认为最大的疑问是，如果你查看每个类别，一种考虑方式是卖家的利润率有多少？如果他们的利润率是30%，而我们征收15%的关税，他们的利润率会降到15%吗？还是他们把利润率降到20%，并把价格提高5%呢？什么才是正确的平衡？随着这个有效关税的引入，这就像对系统和市场的一种税，市场会找到一种新的平衡状态，在这种状态下，买家愿意支付的是X，卖家愿意出售的是Y。
And I think every market is going to be a bit different. So I think in some of these categories, we will see significant inflation where there is a very thin margin that the seller has in selling. And in some of the categories where there's a monopoly and they have a big margin, they're going to eat it because they don't want to have competition and they don't want to see pricing competition emerge. So I think we'll see it vary by category and we'll see how it goes.
我认为每个市场都会有些不同。所以，在一些类别中，我们会看到显著的通货膨胀，因为这些类别的销售商利润本来就很薄。而在一些垄断的类别中，由于它们的利润空间很大，它们可能会自己承担这些成本，因为它们不想引发竞争，也不希望价格竞争出现。因此，我认为根据不同的分类，情况会有所变化，我们只能拭目以待。
All right, listen, this has been another amazing, amazing episode of the number one podcast in the world according to Jensen Wohn from Nvidia and me and great job everybody. Great job to everybody. It's a classic goal. Great job, everyone. I think I'm going to have a great job. Even Jensen got a great job. And actually I want to thank Freeberg because Freeberg did most of the work to organize the AI summit. He did.
好的，听我说，这又是一期精彩绝伦的节目，这是世界排名第一的播客，根据英伟达的Jensen Wohn和我的评价，以及每个人都做得很棒。大家都干得很好。这是一个经典的目标，干得好，伙计们。我想我也完成了一项了不起的工作，甚至连Jensen都做得非常好。我还要特别感谢Freeberg，因为他为组织这次AI峰会做了大部分工作。确实如此。
Let's give him a big shout out. There's me and the president. Great job. I mean, guys, can we just make a note here? One of us can run for Manchurian candidate president in eight years and look at me and the president. I put on the red tie out of respect. I put my blue suit on out of respect for the president. Does it not look like I'm running? Jason. Hmm. Dot com.
让我们为他大声喝彩。我和总统在一起。干得好。我的意思是，大家能不能注意一下？我们中有人八年后可以竞选“满洲候选人”总统，看看我和总统。我出于尊重戴上了红领带，还穿上了蓝西装以示对总统的尊重。看起来我就像在竞选一样。Jason. Hmm. Dot com.
All right, listen, that photo could be like, you know, that famous photo of Bill Clinton meeting JFK, you know, that could be the thing that that could be the thing that I'm in like the president. The president image that propels you to the presidency. I'm in like, thank you for giving me that and for putting me in touch with each member of the administration directly. Thank you for that.
好的，听我说，那张照片可能会像那张著名的照片，就是比尔·克林顿和约翰·肯尼迪见面的那张，你知道的，那可能就是能让你像总统一样的东西。总统形象，有助于推动你进入总统之位。谢谢你给我这个机会，并让我能直接与每位政府成员取得联系。谢谢你。
And we had a wonderful tour of the White House the next day. What a wonderful tour. Some of us had at the White House the next day. But in a lot of state, no, I was. Did you? No, I was taking the pictures. That was my joke. This was all of you guys were going to give you a tour. We could have gotten you a tour.
第二天我们在白宫进行了精彩的参观。多么美妙的旅行啊。有些人在白宫度过了愉快的一天。但是在很多州，我不在。你去了？不，我在拍照。这是我的笑话。当时本来是你们所有人都要去给你们做导游的。我们本可以让你们参观一下。
I mean, listen, I love Jay. Did you ask for a tour? I did ask for this. I'm not the kind of guy that is kind of a guy. Some of us have actual meetings to do, bro. I mean, you're good. I got a lot going on. I got a lot to announce. It happened in the coming weeks. But sax did you take us behind the scene here? And I think it was hilarious. So I don't mind getting trolled by the president. It was great. But how did you, how did that go about behind the scenes that he now that showed? Don't don't leave it. What did you do? I mean, because that looked like it was workshoped. Or is he just naturally, I mean, he's obviously naturally comedic. But did you put that in with him? Did you have to clear that with him?
我的意思是，听我说，我很喜欢杰伊。你要求参观了吗？我确实要求过。我不是那种随便的人。有些人是真的有会议要开的，兄弟。我的意思是，你很好，我现在非常忙，有很多事情要宣布，会在未来几周发生。不过，萨克斯，你能带我们看看幕后吗？我觉得真的很好玩，所以不介意被总统调侃。这很棒。但是幕后是如何操作的？他现在展示了。不要停下来，你做了什么？因为看起来像是精心策划的。还是说他天然就很有喜剧天赋？你有和他协调过吗？你需要得到他的同意吗？
Hey, Duncan, J. Cal, whatever. Well, they asked me for the names of my co-hosts so they could do shout outs. So I gave him the list. Oh no. And I just, I said, and I put even J. Cal. So I didn't tell a pro. But I mean, he went for it. No, he got the, we went through it. So he got the joke. He got the joke. We went through it. He got the laugh. He got it. He heard the laugh and he doubled down. I thought it'd be funny. But no, we went through everyone's names beforehand. And I mean, talk about EQ. The guy's EQ is off the charts, man. He just, he's actually, I suggested, I suggested the name J. Cal. And he's like, no, no, give me his full name. He thought was more courteous.
嘿，Duncan，J. Cal，不管是谁。他们问我要我合作主持人的名字，好给大家打招呼。所以我给了他们一个名单。哦不。我还开玩笑地说，包括J. Cal。我没告诉他这是个笑话，但他还是理解了。他真的明白了我们的玩笑，还笑了出来。在我们报名前，我们把所有人的名字过了一遍。谈到情商，他的情商真是高得惊人。我提议用J. Cal这个名字，但他说，不不，给我他的全名，他觉得这样更礼貌。
Oh, he's actually a very courteous man. Yeah. He wanted to use your full name, not just your nickname. I think what he probably realized was for my parents who were just over the moon. So thank you for that. It meant a lot to my dad, who's that's lovely. Yeah, he's been struggling a bit. And it really, let me get a little choked up here. My dad's been struggling a bit. And I got to see him in Brooklyn after that. And we were on a tech stream and it meant a lot, you know, because for a kid from Brooklyn to get a shout out from the president of the United States is you made it. I mean, it's just your father, your father should be really proud of you.
哦，他真的是个非常有礼貌的人。是的，他想用你的全名，而不仅仅是你的昵称。我想他可能意识到这对我父母意义非凡，他们都高兴极了。所以对此我表示感谢。对我爸爸来说，这意义重大，这真是太好了。他最近有些困难。这让我有点感动。我爸爸最近有些困难。这之后我在布鲁克林见到了他。我们在一个技术论坛上，这对我们真的很重要。因为对于一个来自布鲁克林的孩子来说，能得到美国总统的认可，说明你真正成功了。我是说，你的父亲应该为你感到非常自豪。
Thanks, man. I appreciate it, boys. All right, listen, for your Sultan of science, the amazing Dave Freiburg, we'll put that event together in 10 days and then jumped right in and he's got to run a hollow at the same time. So I just want to give our MVP of the. Would you give us up to the Hill and Valley guys for partnering with us? Yeah, Jacob. Jacob Helper did a great job. I love Jacob. I love Jacob. And Delian and Chris. Thank you, guys. They were our partners on the event. Hill and Valley did a great job. Yeah, I love those guys. But yeah, just I'm giving the MVP of the week for of the besties to you, David Freiburg, you put a lot of work into this. So we appreciate it. You're running a hollow and then you went right into working on the all in summit, which will be added a couple of weeks.
谢谢，伙计们。我非常感激你们。好吧，听着，为了我们的科学苏丹——了不起的Dave Freiburg，我们在10天内组织了这个活动，他同时还在运行一个hollow项目。所以，我想给我们这周的MVP颁给你们。感谢Hill and Valley团队与我们的合作，是的，Jacob。Jacob Helper做得很棒。我很喜欢Jacob。还有Delian和Chris。谢谢你们。你们是我们活动的合作伙伴。Hill and Valley做得很棒。我很喜欢那些家伙。不过，我想把这周的最佳MVP颁给你，David Freiburg，你为此付出了很多努力。我们非常感激。在你忙于hollow项目的同时，还全力以赴地投入到all in峰会的筹备中，这将会在几周后举行。
Chimap, thank you for buttoning up. We're getting a little complaints from the HR department about the buttons. And so we've now renegotiated that. I'm going to I'm going to button three buttons now and walk around for it. Perfect. And Sacks, I will see you at the White House. JD and I will be in the commissary. So we'll invite you to lunch with us. I'm a JD. It's called the Navy mess. Actually, in the most, yeah. And you know what? I'm just having us as well. And who's our energy guy, Chris, Chris said he wanted to jump in on that. So maybe you can join us. I'll invite you now that I am deep into the administration.
Chimap，谢谢你把扣子扣好。我们收到了一些来自HR部门的投诉，关于扣子的问题。所以我们已经重新商量了一下。我要扣上三个扣子，然后四处走动。很好。Sacks，我会在白宫见到你。JD和我会在食堂，所以我们会邀请你和我们一起吃午饭。我是JD，那地方实际上叫做Navy Mess。其实，嗯，你知道吗，我也会在那里。我们的能源专家Chris也说想加入，所以或许你也可以一起来。我现在已经深入行政部门了，所以邀请你。
Thank you for tuning in everybody all in.com events. The scholarship tickets are up. So if you want to try to get one of the very few scholarship tickets, we always like our up and comers. Please, if you're if you're of means, don't apply for the scholarship, you won't get it in. But if you're up and coming and you're part of the audience, and you want to get one of those discounted tickets, we have a limited number of those available all in.com such events.
感谢大家收看 all in.com 的活动。奖学金票现已上线。如果你想尝试获取有限的几张奖学金票之一，我们一直支持有潜力的新秀。请注意，如果你经济条件允许，请不要申请奖学金票，因为这样的申请不会被批准。不过，如果你是一位新秀，并且是我们活动的观众，想要获得一张优惠票的话，我们有数量有限的此类票券。请访问 all in.com 查看相关活动。
Love your besties. Bye-bye. Love your winners. We'll let your winners ride. Rainman David South. Love your winners. Love your winners. And it said we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it. Love your besties. I speak to you. Love your winners. Love your winners. Love your winners. Love your winners.
爱你的好朋友。再见。珍惜那些成功者。让你的成功者自由发展。Rainman David South。珍惜你的成功者。珍惜你的成功者。我们说要把这个开源给粉丝，他们对此非常疯狂。爱你的好朋友。我在跟你说话。珍惜你的成功者。珍惜你的成功者。珍惜你的成功者。珍惜你的成功者。
Besties are gone. Go for it. That's the funny dog thing in it. I wish you're driving. We're at home. We're at home. Oh, man. My hands are moving. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug or two because they're all just like this like sexual tension that they just need to release.
最好的朋友们不在了。去做吧。这就是里面那个滑稽的狗的事情。我希望是你在开车。我们在家，我们在家。哦，天哪。我的手在动。我们真应该找个房间，大家来个大大的拥抱，或者两个，因为他们之间有一种性紧张，需要释放出来。
What? Be. What? You're a B. What? You're a B. What? We need to get my besties aren't at all. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on. I'm going on.
这段文字的确很难理解，因为它缺乏清晰的上下文。不过，我可以尝试提供一个更易读的中文翻译：
"什么？是个B。什么？你是个B。什么？你是个B。什么？我需要让我的好朋友们全都不在。我要继续，我要继续，我要继续，我要继续，我要继续，我要继续，我要继续。"
注意：这个翻译只是对原文的逐句翻译，由于原文缺乏连贯性，中文翻译可能也有些难以理解。如果有更多的背景信息或者上下文，可能会有助于获得更准确的翻译。