Plausible Tomorrows | Vinod Khosla

violet. If the bit. init the Reds !!! fear � p So So Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the node Tesla. Good morning. I love watching that video because that's what all of you Are actually doing. This is not just a promotion video. It's something one of you is definitely doing. And together it's just a phenomenal type of good stuff and Exciting stuff you're doing. We had some great sessions Tomorrow yesterday, talked about a lot of ai stuff. I want to paint for you an optimistic picture. I'm not a mess about what tomorrow could be. These are the plausible tomorrow's all of you are creating. This is actually happening and we can talk about it if we have time. There's only two questions. First, I'm very down on experts. They extrapolate the past. Predict what can't be done. To me, there's only two questions. Who will do it? And it's one of you, I hope, or a new entrepreneur Out there. And will they let it happen? The experts always tell us fusion can't be done. Public trains that can't be done. AI doctors and therapists can't Be done. So I think they discourage radical Change and frankly prevent too much progress. Let me point to this retrospectively. I started innovation in 1980 and I worked only on innovation. I had this argument. Email for grandma. I got laughed out of a dinner because I had my Email address in the 80s on my business card. My MBA friends, business school friends, just thought that was So nerdy. Every major telco in the United States Tchpip would never happen. And they can't imagine Google.

紫罗兰。如果一点。初始化红色!!! 害怕 � p 所以，所以女士们，先生们，请欢迎 Tesla 节点。早上好。我喜欢看那个视频，因为那是你们所有人都在做的事情。这不仅仅是一个宣传视频，这是你们中的某一个人绝对在做的事情。一起做这些令人惊叹的事情真是太棒了。 昨天我们有一些很棒的讨论，谈论了很多关于人工智能的内容。我想给大家描绘一个乐观的图景。关于明天可能会是什么样的，我并不悲观。这是你们所有人正在创造的可能的明天。这确实在发生，如果有时间我们可以讨论。只有两个问题。首先，我对专家们并不怎么看好。他们总是根据过去做预测，告诉我们什么事情是做不到的。对我来说，只有两个问题。谁会去做这件事？希望是你们中的某一个，也可能是外面的新创业者。他们会让它发生吗？专家们总是告诉我们，核聚变是不可能的，公共交通是不可能的，人工智能医生和治疗师也是不可能的。所以我认为他们阻止了激进的变革，实际上也阻碍了太多的进步。 让我回顾一下。我在1980年开始接触创新，并且只工作于创新领域。我当时有这样的论点：“给奶奶发电子邮件”。因为我在80年代的名片上写了我的电子邮件地址，结果在一顿晚餐中被人嘲笑。我的MBA朋友、商学院的朋友们都认为这太宅了。在美国的每一家主要电信公司都觉得这永远不会发生，他们无法想象Google的出现。

In the year 2000, pervasive mobile was laughed on. In 2005. My point is, and I won't go through all of them, And iPhone was unimaginable. Completely changed the user interface For how we use computers. I can keep going on. Experts always tell you what won't happen. But law change is almost always driven by entrepreneurs. And that's what excites me. That's why entrepreneurs excite me. Was this done by Airbus or Boeing, Lockheed? No. Space was really changed by entrepreneurs. So was cars, Electric cars, retailing, housing, transportation. You get the idea. I couldn't add enough things. And people tell me the auto industry will cause change, not Tesla or Raymo. Even the media companies didn't change media. In fact, companies that didn't know they were doing media Changed media. So entrepreneurs with a passion for a vision invent the future they want. In the 40 years I've been doing innovation. I can't think of one example of a law change driven by a large company or an institution or a policy. Every single large innovation, and you saw some of them, were driven by innovation. So for the earliest I could think of as a bank America, put credit cards on plastic in the early 70s. In my lifetime, 40 years of innovation, I haven't seen one. So what is possible? What is this future all of you are creating?

在2000年，全方位的手机技术还被嘲笑。到2005年，我的观点是，我不会详细阐述所有的例子，但在那时，iPhone是不可想象的。它完全改变了我们使用计算机的用户界面。我可以继续举例。专家们总是告诉你什么事情不会发生。但几乎所有的法律变革都是由企业家推动的。这就是让我激动的原因，这也是为什么企业家让我激动。这些变革是由空中客车、波音或洛克希德公司主导的吗？不。太空探索真正的变革是由企业家推动的。汽车、电动汽车、零售业、住房、交通运输也是如此。你明白我的意思了。我列举的例子还不够多。人们告诉我，汽车行业会引发变革，而不是特斯拉或Raymo。甚至媒体公司也没有改变媒体行业。事实上，那些不知道自己在做媒体的公司反而改变了媒体行业。所以企业家们怀着对愿景的热情，创造了他们想要的未来。在我做创新的40年里，我想不出有哪一次变革是由大公司、机构或政策驱动的。你看到的每一项重大创新，都是由创新推动的。可以追溯到最早的例子，比如美国银行在70年代初将信用卡做成塑料卡。在我一生中，40年的创新历程中，我没有见到过一个不是由创新驱动的变革。那么，可能的是什么？你们所有人正在创造的未来又是什么？

And I was glad to see yesterday both in any room, Sam and Bill Gates, They had come around to being as optimistic as me about the future we can create. Almost all expertise on the planet will be free. Whether you're talking about structural engineers or oncologists. Every religion in India will have access to in oncologists. God forbid they get cancer. My own dream is every person on the planet has free tutors. Every child has a few tutors and every person on the planet has free primary care and mental health. I'm very excited about this. Labor will almost be free. People talk about jobs and jobs displacement and I worry about it. Working at the General Motors assembly line, eight hours a day, mounting a tire on a car for 30 or 40 years is not a job. For me, it's servitude. We have to free humanity from those kinds of jobs. And I do believe we will create enough abundance for sharing.

昨天见到Sam和比尔·盖茨两人我非常高兴，他们也和我一样对我们可以创造的未来持乐观态度。几乎所有的专业知识都会免费，无论是结构工程师还是肿瘤专家。在印度的每个人都能获得肿瘤专家的帮助，希望大家都能远离癌症。我的梦想是，每个人都能有免费的辅导老师，每个孩子都有几个辅导老师，每个人都能享受到免费的初级护理和心理健康服务。这让我非常激动。劳动力几乎会变得免费。人们谈论工作和工作流失的问题，我确实担心。像在通用汽车装配线上工作，每天工作八小时，连续30到40年给汽车装轮胎，这不是工作，对我来说，这是奴役。我们必须将人类从这些工作中解放出来。我相信，我们将创造足够的财富来分享。

I'm a real techno optimist but a little different than some other people. I say you have to be a techno optimist with caring and empathy. With that, it's just a wonderful vision for the future. I think there will be a billion bipedal robots doing more labor than all the labor farm workers and assembly line workers and restaurant workers do today. And Bill and I started to get into will the remaining large problem be a purpose for human beings. Much to be debated, I won't have time today but I'm very optimistic about that. Computer use will grow expansively. Now we think computer use is expansive today. But today we have to learn how to use computers. And I think computers will learn humans instead of humans needing to learn computers. We will talk to them in natural language. And because of that, it will become like a utility in the background.

我是一个真正的科技乐观主义者，但与其他一些人略有不同。我认为你必须以关怀和同情心为基础，成为科技乐观主义者。在这种基础上，未来将会非常美好。我认为未来会有十亿个双足机器人从事比现在所有农场工人、装配线工人和餐馆工人更多的劳动。比尔和我开始讨论，剩下的一个大问题会不会是人类的目标。这个问题有很多值得探讨的内容，今天我没有时间详细展开，但我对此非常乐观。电脑的使用会大规模增加。现在我们觉得电脑的使用已经很广泛了。但今天我们需要学习如何使用电脑。而我认为将来是电脑会学习人类，而不是人类需要学习电脑。我们将用自然语言与它们交流。因为这一点，电脑将像背景中的一种工具一样，变得无处不在。

We don't think about electricity. My funniest anecdote is in the 1920s companies had a VP of electricity. Just like they have a CIO or VP of IT today. And I hope we get to that because a billion programmers will make so many applications possible. We will have much better use of this massive utility called computers. Five years ago, I said computers will create music, very personalized music for the mood you want for the state your brain is in today right now. And I got laughed at this was in Toronto. It's become obvious today. I actually think the amount of diversity in entertainment and the amount of creativity in entertainment will increase dramatically. People have this dystopian vision that will be so less music. That's the term I get used. I'm absolutely convinced whether it's AI alone, AI enhancing human artists or otherwise we will see a lot more creativity and diversity.

我们平时不会去思考电的存在。最有趣的一件事是，上世纪20年代公司里竟然有一位负责电力的副总裁，就像今天的首席信息官（CIO）或信息技术副总裁一样。我希望我们能够回到那种状态，因为有十亿程序员将能实现大量的应用程序。我们将能够更好地利用这项庞大的资源——计算机。五年前，我曾说过，计算机将能创作音乐，并根据你的情绪和当前的脑状态为你量身定制音乐。那时，我在多伦多提出这个观点，还被嘲笑了一番。但今天这一点已经变得显而易见了。我坚信，娱乐的多样性和创造力将大大增加。有人认为未来会有更少的音乐，甚至有些人持悲观的看法，但我完全相信，不论是人工智能独自创作、还是人工智能增强人类艺术家，或者其他形式，我们都将看到更多的创造力和多样性。

Internet access, we think of the Internet design for humans. It will mostly be by agents. Tens of billions of them running around. All 7 billion people on the planet will have access to multiple agents. In fact, yesterday, Saram, one of our large language model companies in India was talking about reducing the cost in India to 1 cent per minute of use of agents. At that point, in a voice-only nation or a voice-first nation, it becomes so accessible. I think we have a very, very different world. So my personal view, we will see much more inclusion, much more accessibility. I call it instead of disenfranchisement of people by technology, we will see enfranchisement of people, even though that's not a word, by technology because of the way we access computers, because of the way they learn our behaviors. Medicine will also change. Highly personalized. It bothers me. We all get recommended the same dose of aspirin. 30% of the humans on this planet can't metabolize aspirin. Everybody gets the same dose.

互联网接入时，我们通常认为互联网是为人类设计的。但实际上，它大多数是由代理程序在运行。到时候会有数以亿计的代理程序在运作。全球70亿人都会使用多个代理程序。事实上，昨天，我们在印度的一家大型语言模型公司Saram提到，他们正在努力将印度代理程序的使用成本降低到每分钟1美分。在一个以语音为主的国家，这将使互联网变得非常容易访问。我认为我们将看到一个非常不同的世界。就个人观点来看，我们将看到更多的包容性和更高的可访问性。我称之为由技术带来的“授权”——虽然这个词并不存在，但因为我们访问计算机的方式和它们学习我们行为的方式，这种“授权”将取代技术对人的排斥性。医学也将发生改变，会变得高度个性化。让我感到困扰的是，我们目前都被推荐同样剂量的阿司匹林，而实际上地球上有30%的人无法代谢阿司匹林，但每个人得到的剂量都是相同的。

And it's okay for aspirin. But when you have a blood thinner like clavics, in no institution today, uses your pharmacogenomics to decide how much flavics of blood thinner you should get or monitor it, we will have personalized medicine. Each cancer will have a drug developed for one person's cancer so we can cure it, hopefully even avoid it. I'm very, very excited of what this form of personalized medicine will do for us. The level of medicine we have today, I call it the practice of medicine. Every decade, it's gone substantially better. And I can say today it's better than it was 10 years ago, which was better than it was 20 years ago. But we are limited by human learning. A physician who treats a patient in Boston at MGH does no amount of teaching to a physician in Phoenix, Arizona. The Institute of Medicine in the early 90s called for the learning health system, where every case informs every physician.

这段话的主要意思如下： 对于阿司匹林来说，这样做是可以的。但是当你使用像Clavix（一种抗凝血剂）这样的血液稀释剂时，目前没有任何机构会使用药物基因组学来决定你应该使用多少以及监测它。未来我们将拥有个性化医学，每一种癌症都会有针对具体患者的药物，这样我们就能够治愈癌症，甚至是预防它。我对个性化医学将为我们带来的变化感到非常兴奋。我们现有的医学水平，我称之为“医学的实践”。每过十年，医学水平都在显著提升。我可以肯定地说，现在的医学比十年前要先进，而十年前又比二十年前要好。然而，我们的医学水平仍受限于人类的学习能力。在波士顿MGH（麻省总医院）治疗患者的医生，无法与在亚利桑那州菲尼克斯的医生进行有效的教学交流。20世纪90年代初，美国医学研究所呼吁建立学习型健康系统，每一个病例都能为每一位医生提供信息。 希望这段翻译能让你更好理解原文的意思。

The only way that kind of medicine and very personalized medicine is possible is if we have AI doing that medicine. We will have new kinds of foods and fertilizer. If you haven't talked to Nitro City here, they literally produce fertilizer from thin air. It's a fertilizer production thing that feeds off solar power and has no inputs, just water in there. Why? Because nitrogen is produced at nitrates or nitrous oxide when lightning strikes in a thunderstorm. That nature is fertilizer. So all they did is put lightning in a bottle. In a remote part of Africa, unconnected to anything else, solar panels can produce nitrogen. I'm excited about that. And by the way, certified organic nitrogen is the only nitrogen you can feed organic plants produced by nature the way nature does it.

要实现这种类型的医学和非常个性化的医疗，唯一的方法是通过人工智能来执行这些医疗任务。我们将有新的食品和肥料。如果你还没有和Nitro City联系过，他们实际上是从空气中生产肥料的。这是一种依靠太阳能来生产肥料的装置，没有其他投入，只需要水。为什么会这样？因为当雷电在雷暴中击中时，氮会以硝酸盐或一氧化二氮的形式产生。大自然本身就是肥料。所以他们只是把闪电“装进了瓶子里”。在非洲的一个偏远地区，没有连接到其他任何地方，太阳能电池板可以生产氮。我对此感到非常兴奋。顺便说一下，认证的有机氮是唯一一种你可以用来喂养有机植物的氮，它是按照自然的方式生产的。

The largest one, the largest crops in the planet is alfalfa. We feed it to cattle all over the world, rich in protein. It's in fact any place you see outside and see green, which is chlorophyll, right behind it is most likely alfalfa or rubisco as a protein. The most abundant protein cultivated a knot on the planet. We don't use it other than to feed it to cattle. And some small single digit percentage of it makes it as meat on our table. We think we can take that protein out and feed it directly to humans. By the way, it's more nutritionally complete than whey protein. It's more digestible than whey protein. It's more soluble and more tastier than whey protein. I do think we can have new protein sources on the planet beyond corn and soy.

全球种植面积最大的作物是苜蓿。我们在世界各地用它来喂养牛，因为它富含蛋白质。事实上，任何你看到的绿色植物（即叶绿素），很可能就是苜蓿或是富含蛋白质的Rubisco（核酮糖-1,5-二磷酸羧化酶/加氧酶）。这是地球上种植最多的一种蛋白质作物。我们除了用它喂牛之外，并没有其他用途。而这些苜蓿中的一小部分才会最终以肉类形式出现在我们的餐桌上。 我们认为可以直接将这种蛋白质提取出来，供人类食用。顺便说一下，这种蛋白质的营养成分比乳清蛋白更加全面，更容易消化，更容易溶解，而且味道更好。我确实认为，除了玉米和大豆之外，我们可以在地球上找到新的蛋白质来源。

One of my favorites, I think you've seen the car outside. I do think in the next 20-25 years, we can replace more scars in more cities. If you do it the right way, if you do self-driving the dumb way, which is VAMO, we will congest our streets and make it accessible to only a few people. If you do self-driving in a closed transit system, you can't access the capacity of a street. In six foot bicycle inverts, you can put more transport capacity than a light rail system than a 72 foot foot. Think about it. The only thing fixed in our cities is street width because you can't knock down the buildings on both sides of the street. You have to increase throughput capacity and it solves both the throughput. Transportation congestion problems in our cities.

这是我最喜欢的话题之一，我想你已经看到外面的那辆车了。我确实认为在未来的20到25年里，我们可以在更多的城市中减少更多的交通拥堵。但前提是你正确地推行自动驾驶。如果你以错误的方式，比如VAMO，只会让我们的街道更加拥堵，并且只有少数人能够享受到这种福利。如果在封闭的交通系统中使用自动驾驶，街道的容量也得不到有效利用。而在六英尺宽的自行车道上，你可以容纳的运输量要比72英尺的轻轨系统还要多。仔细想想。我们城市中唯一固定的就是街道的宽度，因为你不能拆掉街道两旁的建筑物。你必须增加通行能力，这样不仅可以解决交通量的问题，还能缓解城市中运输拥堵的问题。

It also solves the housing problem because now in a 30-minute transit ride, you can go much further. Much more capacity travels much further, much faster. And this public transit system is like Uber. It shows up when you show up. If you get off your restaurant job at 1 AM, you get a personalized vehicle that shows up there. You're not taking a 100,000 pound steel car and having one person traveling at 1 AM and they have to wait till the schedule allows. It's on demand. It doesn't stop anywhere. It's your personal vehicle stops where you stop and you can have very frequent stops because it's not stopping to pick up and drop other people. I'm very excited about what we can do to our cities in general. I love this particular one.

这也解决了住房问题，因为现在只需30分钟的交通时间，你就可以走得更远。更多的人可以更快地前往更远的地方。而且这个公共交通系统像Uber一样，当你需要时它就会出现。如果你凌晨1点从餐馆下班，你会得到一辆为你专门来到的车辆。你不需要等着看时间表、开着一辆5万公斤的钢铁车在凌晨1点一个人行驶。这是按需服务，它不会在任何地方停下来。而是你的专属车辆在你要停的地方停，并且由于没有中途上下其他乘客，可以有更频繁的停靠点。我对这个系统能给我们的城市带来的变化感到非常兴奋。我特别喜欢这个设计。

Mach 5 transport 4000 miles an hour, 6000 kilometers an hour or so if you're European, it will make the world a closer place. It's a non-sustainable aviation fuel, I believe. My favorite source of sustainable aviation fuel is gasifying municipal waste and turning it into a aviation sustainable aviation fuel. Humans will not stop generating waste. But we can use it as aviation fuel. We're doing that today. Experts tell me this is impossible replacing every coal and natural gas plant in this country. They think you have to build fusion plants from scratch.

时速 5 马赫的运输，每小时 4000 英里，或每小时 6000 公里左右（如果你是欧洲人）。它将使世界变得更近。我认为这是一种不可持续的航空燃料。我最喜欢的可持续航空燃料来源是将城市垃圾气化，转换成可持续航空燃料。人类不会停止产生垃圾，但我们可以将其用作航空燃料。我们今天就在做这件事。专家告诉我，这个国家的每个燃煤和天然气工厂都不可能被替代。他们认为必须从头开始建造核聚变工厂。

In fact, we can replace the boilers and maybe the turbines in coal plants. The example, when people tell me it can't be done, I give them the following analogy. Before the Second World War, the US built five liberty warships in the 10 years preceding. In the next five years, we built 5,000 liberty warships because we put our mind to it. There's a Liberty Warship Museum in San Francisco and the Macdarrow go visit it. It's a lot more complex than a fusion boiler.

实际上，我们可以更换煤炭电厂的锅炉，甚至是涡轮机。当有人告诉我这做不到时，我会给他们打个比方。第二次世界大战前，美国用了十年时间建造了五艘自由战舰。而在接下来的五年里，我们建造了5000艘自由战舰，因为我们集中精力去做了这件事。旧金山有一个自由战舰博物馆，有空可以去看看。建造这些战舰要比建造一个聚变锅炉复杂得多。

Why can't we build 5,000 of them? Which we've already demonstrated in the 1940s to replace every carbon emitting power plant in this country. And then, of course, in the rest of the world. So I'm excited about what's possible. People tell me there's not enough resources, not enough lithium for batteries, not enough copper for us. In fact, I say we haven't started to look. In fact, we haven't started to develop the tools that let us look one kilometer under the earth's surface to see what's there. Or recover or recycle our lithium from batteries.

为什么我们不能建造5000个这样的设施？我们在20世纪40年代就已经证明，可以用它们来取代这个国家的每一个碳排放发电厂。然后，当然，还可以推广到世界其他地方。所以，我对未来的可能性感到兴奋。有人告诉我资源不够，没有足够的锂来制造电池，也没有足够的铜供我们使用。其实，我认为我们还没有真正开始寻找。事实上，我们还没有开始开发可以让我们看到地球表面一公里以下情况的工具，也还没有开始从电池中回收或再利用锂资源。

All that is not only possible, but it's starting to happen. So I'm excited about that. I'm in fact optimistic about almost every carbon emitter. The mistake we have made, the environment says shut down cement plants, shut down coal plants. Wrong answer because you make enemies who fight you. And they have a lot more money and power in Washington, D.C. And the right way to do it is to say, can we upgrade them? We just opened the cement plant in Northern California, not very far from here. The total output for the same limestone input for the cement factory, the total output of the cement factory. The total output of the cement goes up.

这一切不仅是可能的，而且已经开始发生了。所以我对此感到兴奋。事实上，我对几乎所有的碳排放源都抱有乐观态度。我们曾犯的错误是，环保主义者认为应该关闭水泥厂和煤矿。这是错误的，因为这样会树立敌人，而他们在华盛顿特区拥有更多的钱和权力。正确的做法应该是问自己：我们是否可以升级这些设施？我们刚刚在北加州开了一家水泥厂，离这里不远。工厂投入的石灰石量不变，但水泥产量增加了。

Why? Because the CO2, which is weight after the limestone goes in the air, destroys our air. We repurpose it into calcium carbonate back. So the plant capacity actually goes up. We avoid shipping cement from China into this plant. And the cost per ton of cement goes down. So if we can repurpose coal power plants, if we can upgrade cement plants to be low carbon and more output and lower cost, that's the way to solve this problem. We can do the same with steel. I won't go through every one of these, but I'm pretty excited about what can be done. It takes only a few entrepreneurs. It does take the right policy because policy can slow down or increase the pace of innovation. Unfortunately, more policy is under incumbent control.

为什么？因为石灰石燃烧后产生的二氧化碳会释放到空气中，破坏我们的环境。我们将它重新转化为碳酸钙。所以工厂的产能实际上提高了。我们避免了从中国运水泥到这个工厂，这样每吨水泥的成本就降下来了。如果我们能够重新利用燃煤电厂，如果我们能够改进水泥厂，使其低碳化、提高产量并降低成本，这就是解决问题的方法。我们也可以用同样的方法处理钢铁。我不会详细讲解每一个细节，但我对能够实现的事情充满了兴奋。只需要少数几个企业家。确实也需要适当的政策，因为政策可以减缓或加快创新的步伐。遗憾的是，大多数政策被现有的利益集团所掌控。

And that's why we need to get incumbents on our side. We need to help them turn a poor power plant that Wall Street is saying, this is absolutely dangerous. This is an absolute asset. We will undervalue you and say this is now a 30-year asset. It's good for humanity. It's good for the incumbent. It's good for carbon. There are many reasons this won't happen. I won't go into it. But I think this abundant future is possible if more entrepreneurs take shots and go. We don't have to be certain these things succeed. We just need enough entrepreneurs with passion taking shots and goal and not giving up when the first setbacks happen.

这就是为什么我们需要让现有的企业站在我们这一边。我们需要帮助他们把华尔街说非常危险的糟糕电厂变成有价值的资产。这些电厂可以变成30年的资产，对人类有利，对现有企业有利，对减少碳排放也有利。虽然有很多原因可能导致这一目标难以实现，但我不会详细讨论这些。我相信，只要有更多充满激情的企业家勇敢尝试并不断努力，这种充满希望的未来是可能的。我们不需要确保每一项尝试都成功，只需要有足够多的企业家敢于尝试，不在第一次挫折面前放弃。

So it is up to all of you to make this happen. And others like you outside, outside our portfolio. So let me stop there and tell you I'm very, very optimistic about what all of you are doing. When I see all of you at a meeting like this, I get very, very excited about the change you're causing, about the world we can create despite the naysayers, despite the experts who've been wrong every single time for the following reason. Experts think improbables are not important. I argue only the improbables are important. We just don't know which improbable. All of these plausible tomorrows are implausible. But I can't see one reason why any of them will not happen if we take enough shots and go. Thank you. I'll take a question or two.

所以，这要靠你们大家来实现这一切。还有像你们一样的其他人，不在我们旗下的团队里的人。所以我就说到这里吧，我非常、非常乐观地看待你们正在做的事情。当我在这样的会议上看到你们所有人时，我对你们带来的改变感到非常兴奋，尽管有反对者，尽管有那些每次都出错的所谓专家。专家们认为不太可能的事情不重要，而我认为只有那些不太可能的事情才重要。我们只是还不知道哪些不太可能的事情最终会发生。所有这些看似可能的未来实际上都不大可能。但如果我们尝试足够多的机会，我看不出任何理由为什么它们不会发生。谢谢。我可以回答一两个问题。

I especially like the skeptics. Yes. I've had skeptics challenge me, invite them to challenge me, and I can almost always defend them. Only answer I get is, oh, but it'll take longer. Which is okay by me. That was going to be my question. I remember listening to you in 2006 or something, and you're talking about some of these things. And I think at the time it felt like it will take five or ten years. And clearly a lot of that didn't happen. But now it's like it's perfectly timed. So do you think you were optimistic or do you think now is something fundamentally different happening in the technical world?

我尤其喜欢那些持怀疑态度的人。是的，我遇到过一些怀疑论者向我发起挑战，我也欢迎他们挑战我，几乎总是能自圆其说。他们唯一的回答是，哦，这会花更长时间。对于我来说，这没关系。这就是我想问的问题。我记得大概在2006年听你谈论这些事情，当时感觉这些事情可能需要五到十年才能实现。但显然，很多事情并没有发生。但现在的时机似乎恰到好处。那么，你认为你当时过于乐观了吗？还是现在在技术领域发生了一些根本性的变化？

Is there a difference happening in the tech landscape that suddenly it all seems much more possible? Well, first I would say skeptics never did them possible. And that's why I never want to be a skeptic. I don't want to be the person who says why things can't be done. If there isn't a reason it can't be done, like a physics reason, then we'll find another way. But otherwise I'm an optimist. Does it matter in saving the planet instead of taking five years, it took fifteen years to build a cement factory? No, it doesn't. Does it matter that it took five years instead of three years to build a fusion magnet? No, it doesn't. In the context of 25 years from now and saving humanity, these things are worth trying. I like to say, and many of you fit in this category, I don't mind a 90% probability of failure if there's a 10% chance of changing the world. And we do have more than a 10% chance of changing the world in all these. That's why you have to take a can-do app, I have to say, you should try and fail, not fail to try. Because, and that's not an original quote, it's Seneca. If you fail to try, you have failed before you started.

科技领域是否发生了某些变化，突然间一切似乎都变得更有可能了？首先，我会说怀疑者们从未认为这些事情是可能的。这就是为什么我不想成为一个怀疑者。我不想成为那个总是说为什么事情做不了的人。如果没有物理这样的原因阻碍事情的实现，那么我们会找到另一种方法。除此之外，我是个乐观主义者。 在拯救地球的过程中，建造一个水泥厂用了十五年而不是五年重要吗？不，重要的不是时间长短。建造一个聚变磁体用了五年而不是三年重要吗？同样不重要。在从现在起的25年内以及拯救人类的大背景下，这些尝试都是值得的。我喜欢说，而且你们中的许多人也符合这个条件，我不介意有90%失败的概率，只要有10%改变世界的机会。而在这些事情上，我们改变世界的概率远远超过10%。这就是为什么你必须抱着一种“能干”的态度，我要说，你应该尽力尝试并且可能失败，而不是不尝试就失败。因为，这句话并不是我的原创，而是塞内加说的：如果你不尝试，你在开始之前就已经失败了。

So let's try. Any other question? Thank you. So one, we absolutely will change the world, especially when it comes to decarbonization, and I think everyone knows that's where the market's going. But how bad do you think things will get in terms of climate disasters before we see an acceleration in investment and adoption and deployment? And I think one of my slides said we can't hold a fine carbonization solution if we have time. I started off on the environmental journey soon after the year 2000. Actually 2004, 2005, I delayed it by four or five years for a funny reason. In the year 2000, I decided I would either work on poverty or work on climate. And I decided first to attempt poverty. And I went to Bangladesh, spent time with Professor Yunus, and worked in microfinance. And I then decided we didn't have enough time for climate and started focusing on climate. That's a personal journey.

那我们试试看。还有其他问题吗？谢谢。那么，首先，我们肯定会改变世界，尤其是在去碳化方面，我认为大家都知道市场正在朝这个方向发展。但是，你认为在看到投资、采用和实施加速之前，气候灾难会恶化到什么程度？ 我的一个幻灯片上说，如果有时间，我们无法坚持一个细致的碳化解决方案。我在2000年之后不久就开始了环境之旅。实际上是在2004或2005年，我因为一个有趣的原因拖延了四五年。2000年，我决定要么致力于解决贫困问题，要么致力于气候问题。我决定先尝试解决贫困问题。于是我去了孟加拉国，与尤努斯教授一起工作，并从事小额信贷工作。后来我认为我们没有足够的时间来应对气候问题，于是开始专注于气候。这是我的个人历程。

But I can't tell you we have enough time. But if we don't get started, whenever climate gets exponentially bad, and it is already proving to be much worse than we planned. The models were mostly optimistic, not pessimistic. So do we have enough time? I don't know. But I don't care because I can't do anything about the fact that it may happen sooner. All we can do is do the best we can to reduce it if it does happen. Last question I'm going to take. I think it's me. Maybe I'll take another question in the back there. I know we are sort of out of time. But yes, go ahead. Peter? Oh, yes, sorry. So I think we needed this presentation, particularly after Messina's presentation yesterday. I think we were super depressed. And I don't think Samir gave us a lot of optimism either with Messina. But I agree with everything you said. And so just a quick, you know, and maybe this is a little deeper question of a note, but you got to be optimistic. Forget the cynics, I agree. Forget being pessimistic, I agree. But at what point do you, does reality kick in and balance your optimism? So you have an idea, you have a company, but it's not materializing or it's not. Let me give you my view. I never feel stress. Why don't I feel stress? Because my approach to life is if I have a problem, I do the absolute best I can do. I even say to myself, good and to my children. It's very frustrating for them. Good isn't good enough. Great is barely acceptable. But after you've done, as my son, he's there, he heard this. He always heard this. When he got a 98th percentile on one of his sat-scores, he didn't tell me for two weeks. But after you've done the most you can, you can't do any more. So why stress about what you can't do anything about? Life will come at you, shit happens, you live with it, you be resilient through it. But do the most you can and then be happy, you've done the most you can.

但是我不能告诉你我们是否有足够的时间。如果我们不开始行动，当气候变得急剧恶化时，情况会比我们预期的还要糟糕得多。模型大多是乐观的，而不是悲观的。所以我们有足够的时间吗？我不知道。但我不在乎，因为我无法改变它可能会提前发生的事实。我们所能做的就是尽力减少其影响。最后一个问题，我要回答。我想是我。也许我会在后面再接受一个问题。我知道我们的时间快到了。但没关系，继续，彼得？哦，对不起。所以我觉得这次演讲很有必要，特别是在昨天梅西纳的演讲之后。我觉得我们当时非常沮丧。我认为萨米尔的演讲也没让我们更加乐观。但我同意你所说的一切。所以，简单说一下，也许这是一个更深层次的问题，但你必须保持乐观。忘记那些愤世嫉俗的人，我同意。忘记悲观，我也同意。但在某一刻，现实会不会让你重新审视你的乐观？比如你有一个想法，有一个公司，但它没有实现，或者没有进展。我给你说说我的看法。我从来不感到压力。为什么我不感到压力？因为我对生活的态度是如果我有问题，我会尽我所能做到最好。我甚至对自己说，对我的孩子也说。对他们来说，这很令人沮丧。好是不够的，伟大才勉强可以接受。但当你尽力后，你就不能再做更多了。所以，为什么要为自己无法改变的事情感到压力？生活会向你袭来，糟糕的事情会发生，你要与之共存，并在其中保持韧性。但要尽你所能做到最好，然后开心地接受你已经尽力了。

So, last question in the back there. Thank you. I was curious if you could talk a little bit to why did you choose the vehicle of CoSLA ventures versus something like what Bill Gates did with maybe the CoSLA foundation? How have you thought about your strategy for impact and kind of realizing these futures? Well, it frustrates some LPs. I always say in us fundraising decks that mission is as important as ambition. Mission being IRR for them, mission being what the impact we can make. And I think we may be the only venture capital deck on the planet that actually talks about mission to our investors.

那边最后一个问题，谢谢。我很好奇你们为什么选择了CoSLA创业而不是像比尔·盖茨那样选择CoSLA基金会？你们是如何思考实现影响力和这些未来的策略的？ 虽然这让一些有限合伙人感到沮丧，但我总是在我们筹资演讲中说，使命和野心同样重要。对他们来说，使命是内部收益率（IRR）；对我们来说，使命是我们能带来的影响。我想我们可能是唯一一个在投资者演讲中实际谈论使命的风险资本公司。

Why this vehicle? Because, you know, we have, and I don't even know the number, some large number of dollars under management far more than my personal network. And we need to give them a return so we can deploy the money for the purpose of having an impact. And frankly, a lot of fun for me. This is why at age 69, I say I have another 25 years health permitting to go do this and make the world a different place, the world we are trying to create.

为什么选择这辆车？你知道，我们管理着大量资金，具体数字我都记不清了，远远超过了我的个人资产。我们需要让这些资金产生回报，这样才能把钱用在有意义的地方。坦白讲，这对我来说也充满乐趣。这就是为什么在69岁时，我还说自己有健康允许的情况下还可以再做25年，去改变这个世界，去创造我们想要的世界。

Thank you. Thank you.

谢谢你。真的，非常感谢你。