E124: AutoGPT's massive potential and risk, AI regulation, Bob Lee/SF update
发布时间 2023-04-14 09:44:12 来源
Welcome to episode 124 of the All in Podcast. My understanding is there's going to be a bunch of global fan meetups for episode 125 if you go to Twitter and you search for. All in fan meetups you might be able to find the link but just be clear we're not there not official all in this there fans itself organized. Which is pretty mind blowing but we can't vouch for any particular. Organization right nobody knows what's going to happen at these things you can rob. It could be a setup. I don't know but I reach we did anyway because there are 31 cities where you lunatics are getting together to celebrate the world's number one business technology podcast. It is pretty crazy.
欢迎来到All in播客124集。据我了解，125集会有一大批全球粉丝见面会。如果你去Twitter搜索"All in fan meetups"，你可能会找到相关链接。但请注意，这不是官方的All in活动，而是由粉丝自己组织的。这非常令人惊讶，但我们无法保证任何具体的组织。谁都不知道这些活动会发生什么，可能会出现问题，但我们还是实话实说，因为有31个城市的疯狂粉丝聚在一起庆祝全球一流的商业科技播客，这太疯狂了。
You know what this reminds me of is in the early 90s when rush limbaugh became a phenomenon. Uh huh. There used to be these things called rush rooms where like restaurants and bars would literally broadcast. Rush over their speakers during I don't know like what for the morning through lunch broadcast and people would go to these rush rooms and listen together what was it like sex when you're about 16 17 years old at the time what was it like when you hosted this. It was a phenomenon but I mean it's kind of crazy we've got like a phenomenon going here where people are. I love it you're organizing you said phenomenon three times instead of phenomenon he said's phenomenon. Phenomenal why sex in a good mooch mop what's going on there's a specific secret toe tap that you do under the bathroom stalls when you go to a rush room. I think you're getting confused about different event you want to.
你知道这让我想起了上世纪90年代，当时拉什·林博(Rush Limbaugh)成为了一种现象。嗯。曾经有一些叫做“林冲房间”的地方，像餐厅和酒吧，它们会在早上和午餐时间段直接通过扬声器播放拉什的节目，人们会一起去这些地方，像16、17岁的年龄时的性爱一样倾听。当你主持这个节目的时候，那时候是什么感觉？这是一个现象，但我的意思是，这有点疯狂，我们现在有一个像这样的现象，人们...我喜欢它，你说到三次“现象”而不是“现象”，你说的是现象。现象酷毙了，怎么了？在林冲房间里，当你去上厕所的时候，有一种特定的秘密脚趾敲打方式。我想你搞混了不同的事件。
What your winners ride. There's a lot of actual news in the world and generative AI is taking over the dialogue and it's moving out of pace that. None of us have ever seen in the technology industry I think we'd all agree the number of companies releasing product. And the compounding effect of this technology is phenomenal I think we would all agree a product came out this week called auto gpt. And people are losing their mind over it basically what this does is it lets. Different gpt's talk to each other and so you can have agents working in the background we've talked about this on previous podcasts. But they could be talking to each other essentially. And then completing tasks without much intervention so if let's say you had a sales team and you said to the cell team hey look for leads that have these characteristics for our cell software put them into our database find out if they're already in the database alert a sales person to it compose a message based on that person's profile on LinkedIn or Twitter or wherever. And then compose an email send it to them if they reply offer them to do a demo and then put that demo on the calendar of the sales person thus limiting a bunch of jobs and you could run these.
你们的优胜者骑的是什么？世界上有很多实际的新闻，生成式人工智能正在接管对话，并且它正在以前所未见的速度移动，在技术行业中，我们都同意发布产品的公司数量相当之多。这项技术的复合效应是惊人的，我想我们都同意，本周推出了一款名为auto gpt的产品，人们对此感到非常兴奋，它的基本作用是让不同的gpt相互对话，因此可以让代理商在背景中工作，我们在以前的播客中已经谈到过这个问题。但它们可以互相交流，然后完成任务而不需要太多的干预，所以，如果你有一个销售团队，并且对销售团队说，嘿，找那些具有这些特性的潜在客户，为我们的销售软件将他们放入我们的数据库，查看他们是否已经在数据库中，将其告知销售人员，基于该人在领英或推特等地的个人资料，撰写一条消息，然后发送一封电子邮件给他们，如果他们回复，邀请他们进行演示，然后将该演示放入销售人员的日历中，这样可以限制许多工作量，你可以运行这些程序。
What would essentially be cron jobs in the background. For ever and they can interact with other l alms in real time sacks of just give but one example here but when you see this happening give us your perspective on. What this tipping point means let me take a shot at explaining it a slightly different way. Sure not that your explanation was wrong but I just think that maybe explain it in terms of something more tangible so I have a friend. The developer has been playing with auto GPT by the way you can see it's on GitHub it's kind of an open source project it was sort of a hobby project it looks like that somebody put up there.
It's been out for about two weeks it's already got 45,000 stars on GitHub which is a huge number explain what GitHub is for the audience. It's just a code repository and you can create you know repose of code for open source projects is where all the developers check in their code. So you know for open source projects like this anyone can go see it and play with it it's like porn hub for develop. It would be more like amateur or because you're contributing your scenes as it were your code yes but yes continue.
在后台，本质上会有像定期任务那样的东西，它们可以一直持续下去，并可以与其他应用在实时中进行交互。这里只是举了一个例子，但当你看到这种情况发生时，请给我们您的看法。关于这个转折点意味着什么，让我尝试换一种方式进行解释。当然不是说你的解释有误，但我认为用更具体的东西来解释会更好，比如我的一个朋友，他是一名开发人员，一直在尝试auto GPT。顺便说一下，你可以在GitHub上看到这个项目，它是一种开源项目，看起来是一个业余项目。它已经发布了两周，GitHub上已经有了45,000个星标，这是一个很大的数字。对于观众来说，请解释一下GitHub是什么。它只是一个代码仓库，你可以创建代码仓库来进行开源项目，所有开发人员都可以把他们的代码提交上去。所以对于像这样的开源项目，任何人都可以去看看并进行试用，就像开发者的"色情狂欢之地"。可能更准确的说是"业余爱好者色情狂欢之地"，因为你是在贡献你的代码，而不是欣赏。
This thing has a ton of of stars and apparently just last night I got another 10,000 stars overnight this thing is like. Exploding in terms of popularity but any event what you do is you give it an assignment and what auto GPT can do that's different is it can string together prompts so if you go to chat GPT you prompt it one at a time. And what the human does is you get your answer and then you think of your next prompt and then you kind of go from there and you end up in a long conversation that gets you to where you want to go. So the question is what if the AI could basically prompt itself then you've got the basis for autonomy and that's what this project is designed to do so what you'll do is when my friend did he said okay you're an event planner. AI and what I would like you to do is plan a trip for me.
这个东西有无数的明星，显然昨晚我又在一夜之间获得了另外10,000个明星，这个东西就像在爆炸一样受欢迎。但是，你所要做的是给它一个任务，而Auto GPT能做到的不同之处在于它可以串联提示，所以如果你去与GPT聊天，你会一次一个提示它。人类所做的是得到答案，然后考虑下一个提示，然后你从那里开始，最终进入一次长谈话，带你到达你想要去的地方。所以问题是，如果AI基本上能够自己提示，那么你就拥有了自主性的基础，这就是这个项目的设计目的。当我的朋友这样做时，他说好的，你是一个活动策划者AI，我想让你为我计划一次旅行。
For a wine tasting in. Heelsburg this weekend and I want you to find like the best place I should go and it's got to be kid friendly not everyone's going to drink kids there and I'd like to have other people there. And so I'd like you to plan this for me and so what auto GPT did is it broke that down into a task list and every time I completed a task it would add a new task to the bottom of that list.
这个周末我要去海尔斯伯格参加品酒活动，希望你能帮我找到最好的去处，而且必须是适合孩子的地方，不是每个人都会喝酒，也希望有其他人在那里。所以希望你能为我计划好这个活动，Automated GPT 把这事情列表化，每当我完成一个任务，它就会在列表的底部添加一个新任务。
And so the output of this is that it searched a bunch of different wine tasting venues found a venue that had a bachiball lawn area for kids it came up with a schedule. It created a budget it created a checklist for an event planner. It did all these things my friends is actually in a book the venue this weekend and use it. So we're going beyond the ability just for a human to just prompt the AI were now the AI can take on complicated task and again it can recursively update its task list based on what it learns from its own previous prompt.
所以它的输出是，在搜索了几个不同的品酒场所后，找到了一个有儿童玩乐草坪区的场所，并制定了活动日程。它创建了预算，为活动策划人员创建了检查清单。我的朋友，这些都是在一本书中的场所，并将在这个周末使用它。因此，我们不仅仅是让人类激发AI的能力，而是让AI能够执行复杂的任务，并且可以根据从先前激发中学到的知识递归地更新任务清单。
So what you're seeing now is the basis for a personal digital assistant. This is really where it's all headed is that you can just tell the AI to do something for you pretty complicated and it will be able to do it. It will be able to create its own task list and get the job done. And quite complicated jobs. So that's why everyone's losing their shit over this free burger thoughts on. Automating these tasks and having them run and add tasks to the list. This does seem like a sort of seminal moment in time that this is actually working.
你现在看到的是个人数字助理的基础。未来的发展方向是，你可以让人工智能为你完成非常复杂的任务。它能够创建自己的任务清单并完成相当复杂的工作。这就是为什么所有人对这个自由汉堡的想法感到兴奋。自动化这些任务并将它们添加到清单中。这似乎是一个具有里程碑意义的时刻，因为它真的在运作。
I think we've been seeing seminal moments. Over the last couple of weeks and months. Kind of continuously. Every time we chat about stuff or every day there's new releases that are paradigm shifting and kind of reveal new applications and perhaps concepts structurally that we didn't really have a good grasp of before some demonstration came across chat GPT was kind of the seat of that and then all of this evolution since. Has really I think changed the landscape for really how we think about our interaction with the digital world and where the digital world can go and how it can interact with the physical world. It's just really profound.
我认为我们正在经历一些重要的时刻，这在过去的几周和几个月中一直都在发生。每当我们聊一些事情或每天都有新的发布，它们都是新兴范式转变的产物，可能会突显出我们以前在结构上没有充分掌握的应用和概念。GPT似乎是这种转变的源头，然后自那时以来，所有这些进化都改变了我们如何思考与数字世界的互动以及数字世界可以走向何方以及如何与物理世界互动的局面。这真的很深刻。
One of the interesting aspects that I think I saw with some of the applications of auto GPT were these almost like. Autonomous characters in like a game simulation that could interact with each other or these autonomous characters that would speak back and forth to one another. Where each instance has its own kind of predefined role and then it explores some set of discovery or application or prompt back and forth with the other agent and that the kind of recursive outcomes with this agent to agent interaction model and perhaps multi agent interaction model. Again reveals an entirely new paradigm for you know how things can be done simulation wise.
我认为我看到的自动GPT应用中有一个有趣的方面是，几乎像游戏模拟中的自主角色可以彼此交互，或者这些自主角色可以相互交谈。每个实例都有自己预定义的角色，然后它会和另一个代理人一起探索一些发现或应用或提示，这种代理人之间的递归结果以及多代理人交互模式。再次揭示了一个完全新的范例，就知道如何进行模拟。
You know discovery wise engagement wise where one agent you know each agent can be a different character in a room and you can almost see how a team might resolve to create a new product collaboratively by telling each of those agents to have a different character background or different set of data or different set of experiences or different set of personality traits and the evolution of those that multi agent system outputs. You know something that's very novel that perhaps any of the agents operating independently we're not able to kind of reveal themselves so again like another kind of dimension of interaction.
你知道，在发现和参与层面上，每个代理可以成为一个房间中不同的角色，你几乎可以看到一个团队如何通过告诉每个代理具有不同的角色背景、数据、经验或人格特征来协作地创造一个新产品，而多代理系统输出的演化是非常新颖的，或许任何一个独立运行的代理都无法自行揭示出来，所以这又是一种交互维度。
With these with these models and it again like every week it's a whole nother layer to the onion. It's super exciting and compelling and that the rate of change and the pace of kind of you know new paths being. Being defined here really I think makes it difficult to catch up and particularly highlights why it's going to be so difficult I think for regulators to come in and try and set a set of set of standards and a set of rules at this stage because we don't even know what we have here yet and it's going to be very hard to kind of put the genie back in the box.
用这些模型，每周都有全新的一层，就像洋葱一样。这让人感到非常令人兴奋和有吸引力，随着变革的速度和新路径的不断被定义，我认为这使得追赶步伐变得困难，尤其是突显出为什么监管者在这个阶段试图制定一套标准和规则将会如此困难，因为我们甚至还不知道我们所拥有的是什么，很难把这个妖怪重新装进箱子里。
Yeah and you're also referring I think to the Stanford and Google paper that was published this week they did a research paper where they created essentially the Sims if you remember that video game put a bunch of what you might consider NPCs non playable characters you know the merchant or the whoever in a in a video game and they said each of these agents should talk to each other put them in a simulation one of them decided to have a birthday party they decided to invite other people and I think that's a very important thing.
嗯，你也指的应该是本周发布的斯坦福和谷歌研究论文吧？他们创建了一份研究论文，基本上是像当年的模拟人生视频游戏一样，放入了许多你可以认为是NPC（不可玩角色），例如商贩或是其他视频游戏里的人物，然后他们决定让这些角色彼此交流在模拟中。其中一个角色决定办生日派对，于是邀请其他人参加，我觉得这个很重要。
And then they have memories and so then over time they would generate responses like I can't go to your birthday party but happy birthday and then they would follow up with each player and seemingly emergent behaviors came out of this sort of simulation which of course now has everybody thinking well of course we as humans and this is simulation there are living in a simulation we've all just been put into this.
然后它们就会有记忆，随着时间的推移会产生类似于：我不能去你的生日派对，但祝你生日快乐之类的反应，然后它们会跟每个玩家进行跟进，似乎也会产生类似于新兴行为的模拟，这当然也引起了每个人的思考，我们作为人类是否也处在一个模拟之中，我们是否就这样被投入到了这个模拟之中。
Chimoff is what we're experiencing right now how impressive this technology is or is it oh wow human cognition maybe we thought was incredibly special but we can actually simulate a significant portion of what we do as humans so we're kind of taking the shine off of consciousness.
Chimoff是我们现在所经历的，这项技术真的很令人印象深刻，不是吗？人类的认知力或许曾被我们认为是非常特别的，但事实上我们现在可以模拟出很大一部分我们作为人类的所作所为，因此我们正在减弱意识的光芒。
I'm not sure it's that but I would make two comments. I think this is a really important week because it starts to show how fast the recursion is going to be. So in other technologies and in other breakthroughs the recursive iterations took years right if you think about how long did we wait for from iPhone one to iPhone two it was a year right, we'd waited two years for the app store.
我不确定是不是这样，但我有两个观点。我认为这是一个非常重要的一周，因为它开始展示递归速度有多快。在其他技术和突破中，递归迭代需要几年的时间。如果你想一想，从iPhone1到iPhone2我们等了一年，我们等了两年才有应用商店。
Everything was measured in years maybe things when they were really really aggressive and really disruptive were measured in months except now these incredibly innovative breakthroughs are being measured in days and weeks that's incredibly profound and I think it has some really important implications to like the three big actors in this play right.
所有的事情都是以年来衡量的，也许当情况非常的激进和破坏时，会以月来衡量，但现在这些非常创新的突破正在以天和周来衡量，这是非常深刻的，我认为它对这个剧中的三个重要角色有一些重要的影响。
So it has I think huge implications to these companies it's not clear to me how do I look at these things. How do you start accompanying anymore I don't understand why you would have a 40 or 50 person company to try to get to an MVP I think you can do that with three or four people and that has huge implications then to the second actor in this play which are the investors and venture capitalists that typically fund this stuff because all of our total allocation models were always around writing 10 and 15 and 20 million dollar checks and 100 million dollar checks and 500 million dollar checks into these businesses that absorbs tons of money.
我认为这对这些公司有巨大的影响，但我不清楚如何看待这些事情。你如何开始这个项目，我不明白为什么要雇用40到50个人的公司来试图达到MVP，我认为你只需要三到四个人就可以做到这一点，这对这场游戏中的第二个角色也非常重要，即通常资助这些项目的投资者和风险投资家，因为我们所有的分配模型都是围绕着给这些企业写下10亿、1.5亿、2亿、5亿美元的支票，这需要大量的资金。
But the reality is like you know you're looking at things like mid-journey and others that can scale to enormous size with very little capital many of which can now be bootstrapped. So it takes really really small amounts of money and so I think that's a huge implication so for me personally I am looking at company formation. Being done in a totally different way in our capital allocation model is totally wrong size look fun for me with one billion dollars does that make sense.
但现实就像你看到的那样，有些事情是在旅途中的，还有其他事情可以用非常少的资金扩大规模，其中许多现在可以自力更生。因此，实际上只需要非常少的资金，我认为这是一个巨大的影响，因此对于我个人来说，我正在关注公司的组建方式。在我们的资本配置模型中，完全不同于错位的大小，对我来说这很有趣，拥有十亿美元是有意义的。
No for the next three or four years no the right number may actually be 50 million dollars invested over the next four years I think the VC job is changing company start-ups are changing I want to remind you guys of one quick thing as a tangent.
在接下来的三到四年里，可能不是正确的数字，实际上可能需要投资五千万美元，我认为风险投资的工作正在改变，公司的启动也在改变。我想提醒你们一件事作为一个 tangent。
I had this meeting with Andre Carpathy I talked about this on the pod where I said I challenged him I said listen the real goal should be to go and disrupt existing businesses using these tools cutting out all the sales and marketing. Right and just delivering something and I use the example of stripe.
我跟Andre Carpathy开了个会，我在播客中也提到了这个，我挑战了他。我说，听着，真正的目标应该是用这些工具来打破现有的企业，摒弃销售和市场营销，只是提供一些产品或服务。我举了Stripe的例子。
Disrupting stripe by going to market with an equivalent product with one tenth the number of employees at one tenth the cost. What's incredible is that this auto GPT is the answer to that exact problem. Why? Because now if you are a young industrial entrepreneur if you look at any bloated organization that's building enterprise class software.
通过使用与员工数量和成本皆为原来十分之一的等效产品进入市场打破条块，这是相当惊人的。而这个自动GPT恰好是问题的答案。为什么呢？因为现在，如果你是一位年轻的产业企业家，当你看到那些正在建造企业级软件的臃肿组织时，你可以选择使用这个自动GPT。
You can string together a bunch of agents that will auto construct everything you need to build a much much cheaper product that then you can deploy for other agents to consume so you don't even need a sales team anymore this is what I mean by this crazy recursion that's possible yeah.
你可以串联一堆代理商，他们会自动构建你所需的一切，来建造一个更便宜的产品，然后你可以部署给其他代理商来消耗，这样你甚至不需要销售团队了，这就是我所说的这种疯狂递归的可能性。
So I'm really curious to see how this actually affects like all of this all of these you know it's a continuation of the company is a continuation of and then the last thing I just want to say is related to my tweet. I think this is exactly the moment where we now have to have a real conversation about regulation and I think it has to happen otherwise it's going to be a shit show let's put a pen in that for a second but I want to get sacks response to some of this.
所以我非常好奇看看这实际上会对所有这些产生什么影响，你知道这是公司的延续，然后最后我想说的与我的推文有关。我认为现在正是我们必须进行真正监管对话的时刻，否则就会出现烂摊子，先放一会儿，但我想听听对此的Sacks回应。
So sacks we saw this before it used to take two three million dollars to commercialize a web based software product app then it went down to 500 K then 250. I don't know if you saw this story but if you remember the hit game on your iPhone flappy birds flappy birds you know was a phenomenon at you know hundreds of millions of people played this game over some period of time.
我们之前见过这样的情况。过去，要将基于Web的软件产品应用商业化需要花费两三百万美元，然后降至50万美元，再降至25万美元。我不知道你是否听说过下面这个故事，但是如果你还记得在你的iPhone上流行的游戏Flappy Birds，那么你就知道了。数亿人在一段时间内玩了这个游戏，这是一个现象级的游戏。
Somebody made it by talking to chat GPT for a mid journey in an hour so the perfect example and listen it's a game so it's something silly but I was talking to two developers this weekend and one of them was an okay developer and the other one was an actual 10 X developer who's built.
有人通过与聊天GPT交谈，在一个小时内完成了一次中途旅程的完美例子。听起来很幼稚，但这是一个游戏。我这个周末和两个开发者交流，其中一个是普通的开发者，另一个则是真正的10倍开发者，已经建立了很多东西。
You know very significant companies and they were coding together last week and because of how fast chat GPT and other services were writing code for them. He looked over at her and said you know you're basically a 10 X developer now my superpower is gone so where does this lead you to believe company formation is going to go is this going to be.
你知道很有意义的公司上周一起编写代码，因为聊天GPT和其他服务编写代码速度非常快。他看着她说，你现在基本上是一个10倍的开发者，我的超能力消失了，所以这让你相信公司的形成会走向何方，会变成怎样呢？
You know massively deflationary companies like Striper going to have a hundred competitors in a very short period of time or we're just going to go down the long tail of ideas and solve everything with software. How is this going to play out in the in the start up space David Sacks.
你知道像Striker这样的大规模通货紧缩公司将在非常短的时间内面临上百个竞争对手，否则我们就只能走下去，用软件解决所有的想法。这将如何在创业领域中发挥作用，David Sacks。
Well I think it's true that developers and especially junior developers get a lot more leverage on their time and so it is going to be easier for small teams to get to an MVP which is something they always should have done anyway with their seed round you shouldn't have needed you know 50. Developers to build your V one it should be you know this the founders really.
我认为开发人员，尤其是初级开发人员，在时间上会得到更多的发挥空间，因此小团队更容易达到MVP。这本来就是他们在种子轮的时候应该做的事情，你不需要50个开发人员来构建你的第一个版本，这应该是创始人的责任。
So that that I think is already happening and that trend will continue I think we're still a ways away from. Stars being able to replace entire teams of people I just you know I think right now. Find a ways months years decade well it's in the years I think for sure we don't know how many years and the reason I say that it's just very hard.
我认为现在已经开始这种趋势，并且这种趋势将会持续，但我认为星际球员还无法完全取代人类团队，至少现在还需要一些时间。我们可能需要几个月、几年甚至十年才能实现，而我认为这需要数年时间。我们不知道需要多少年，之所以这么说是因为这真的很困难。
To replace. You know 100% of what any of these particular job functions do 100% of what a sales rep does 100% of what a marketing rep does or even what a code or does so right now I think we're sold the phase of this where it's a tool that gives a human leverage and I think we're still a ways away from the human being completely out of the loop I think right now I see it mostly as a force for good. As opposed to something that's creating a ton of dislocation freedberg your thoughts if we follow the trend line you know to make that video game that you shared took probably a few hundred human years than a few dozen human years then you know with other tool kits coming out. Maybe a few human months and now this person did it in one human day using this tooling so if you think about the implication for that I mentioned this probably last year I really do believe that at some point the whole concept of publishers and publishing maybe goes away where you know much like we saw so much of the content on the internet today being user generated you know most of the content is made by individuals posted on YouTube or Twitter that's most of what we consume nowadays or Instagram or TikTok.
你知道每个特定工作的职能，100%了解销售代表的工作职责、100%了解市场代表的工作职责，甚至甚至知道代码的工作职责。所以我认为我们现在的想法是，这是一个可以给人类提供帮助的工具，但我认为我们还有很长的路要走，才能让人类完全摆脱这个工具。我认为现在它主要是一种有益作用，而不是创造了大量的不利影响。Freedberg，你有什么想法？如果我们按照趋势线来看，你知道制作那款视频游戏可能需要几百年的时间，然后是几十年的时间，现在有了其他工具包，可能只需要几个月的时间，而现在这个人在使用这个工具做了一天的工作。如果你考虑到这个含义，我去年可能说了这个话题，我真的相信在某些时间点，整个出版商和出版的概念可能会消失，就像我们现在看到的大部分互联网内容都是由用户生成的，大部分内容都是由个人在YouTube、Twitter、Instagram或TikTok上发布的。
In terms of video content we could see the same in terms of software itself where you no longer need a software startup or a software company to render or generate a set of tools for a particular user but that the user may be able to define to their agent their AI agent the set of tools that they would individually like to use or to create for them to do something interesting and so the idea of buying or subscribing to software or even buying or subscribing to a video.
在视频内容方面，我们可以看到类似于软件本身的情况，你不再需要一个软件创业公司来渲染或生成一组工具供特定用户使用，而用户可以向他们的AI代理人定义一组工具，以便他们使用或创建自己想要使用的特定工具来完成有趣的事情，所以购买或订阅软件甚至购买或订阅视频的想法已经过时了。
Game or to a movie or to some other form of content starts to diminish as the leverage goes up with these tools the accessibility goes up you no longer need a computer engineering degree or computer science degree to be able to harness them or use them and individuals may be able to speak in simple and plain English that they would like a book or a movie that does that looks and feels like the following or a video game that feels like the following and so when I open up my iPhone maybe it's not a screen with dozens of video games but it's really easy to do.
随着这些工具的杠杆作用增加，对于游戏、电影或其他形式的内容的需求逐渐减少，但可访问性却增加了。你不再需要计算机工程或计算机科学学位才能使用它们，个人可以用简单明了的英语来表达他们想要的东西，例如下面这样的书、电影或视频游戏。当我打开我的 iPhone 时，可能没有几十个视频游戏的屏幕，但很容易使用。
So I think I have one interface and the interface says what do you feel like playing today and then I can very clearly and succinctly state what I feel like playing and it can render that game render the code. So I think that the idea that all technology again starts central and moves to kind of the edge of the network over time that may be what's going on with computer programming itself now where the toolkit to actually use computers to generate stuff for us is no longer a toolkit that's harnessed and controlled and utilized by a set of centralized publishers but it becomes distributed and used to be edge of the network by users. Like anyone and then the edge of the network technology can render the software for you and it really creates a profound change in the entire business landscape of software and the Internet and I think it's you know it's it's really like we're just starting to kind of see have our heads unravel around this notion and we're sort of trying to link it to the old paradigm which is all startups are going to get cheaper smaller teams but it may be that you don't even need startups for a lot of stuff anymore.
所以我认为我有一个界面，界面会问你今天想玩什么游戏，然后我可以非常清晰和简洁地说出我想玩什么游戏，它可以渲染那个游戏，渲染代码。所以我认为，所有技术再次开始中心化，并随着时间的推移向网络边缘移动，这可能是现在计算机编程本身正在发生的事情，使用计算机为我们生成东西的工具包不再是由一组集中的出版商所控制和利用的工具包，而变得分布式，并由用户在网络边缘使用。就像任何人一样，然后网络边缘技术可以为您渲染软件，这真正创造了整个软件和互联网业务景观的深刻变革，我认为这是，您知道，我们刚刚开始看到我们的头绕在这个概念上，我们正在试图将其与旧范例联系起来，即所有初创公司都将变得更便宜，团队将变得更小，但也许您甚至不再需要初创公司来做很多事情了。
You don't even need teams and you don't even need companies to generate and render software to do stuff for you anymore. Shemoff, when we look at this it's kind of a pattern of augmentation as we've been talking about here or augmenting human intelligence. Then replacing this replication or this automation I guess might be a nice way to say it's is augmentation then automation and then perhaps deprecation where do you sit on this it seems like sacks feels it's going to take years and a free break things and maybe start up and content are over what do you sit on this augmentation automation deprecation journey we're on.
你甚至不需要团队或公司来为你创建和呈现软件来完成工作了。Shemoff，当我们看着这个时，这似乎是一种增强人类智慧的模式，就像我们在这里谈论的那样。然后用再现或自动化来代替这种增强，我想这可能是一个不错的说法，然后就是减少了。你对此的看法是什么，似乎Sacks认为这需要数年的时间和一些变革，也许创业公司和内容已经超越了这一点，你对我们正在走的增强、自动化、减少旅程上的立场如何呢？
I think that humans have judgment and I think it's going to take decades for agents to work with you. I think that's where we have some defense background and I'm going to say something controversial I don't think developers anymore have good judgment. Developers get to the answer or they don't get to the answer and that's what agents have done because the 10 x engineer had better judgment than the one x engineer. But by making everybody a 10 x engineer you taking judgment away you're taking code paths that are now obvious and making it available to everybody it's effectively like what you didn't chess an AI created a solver so everybody understood the most efficient path in every single spot to do the most EV positive thing the most expected value positive thing coding is very similar that way you can reduce it and view it very very reductively. So there is no differentiation in code and so I think freeberg is right so for example let's say you're going to start a company today.
我认为人类有判断力，而代理需要几十年的时间才能与人类一起工作。这就是我们拥有一些防御背景的地方，而我要说一些有争议的话，我认为开发人员不再具有良好的判断力了。开发人员要么得出答案，要么就不得出答案，这就是代理做的事情，因为那些十倍工程师比那些一倍工程师具有更好的判断力。但是通过让每个人都成为十倍工程师，你就没有了判断力，你正在采用明显的代码路径，并使其对每个人都可用，这实际上就像棋类游戏一样，AI创造了一个解决方案，每个人都了解在每个位置上执行最有效的路径来执行最期望的价值正向的事情，编码方式非常相似，你可以将它减少并将其非常简单化。因此，在代码中没有区别，所以我认为Freeberg是正确的，例如，假设你今天要开始一家公司。
Why do you even care what database you use why do you even care which cloud you're built on to freeberg's point why do any of these things matter they don't matter they were decisions that used to matter when people had a job to do and you paid them for their judgment. So what we think GCP is better for this specific workload and we think that this database architectures better for that specific workload and we're going to run this on AWS but that on resort. And do you think an agent cares if you tell an agent find me the cheapest way to execute this thing and if it ever gets not you know cheaper to go someplace else do that for me as well and you know ETL all the data and put it in the other thing and I don't really care.
为什么你在乎使用哪种数据库？为什么你在乎建立在哪个云平台上，如Freeberg所说，这些事情有什么意义吗？它们并不重要，这些决定过去是很重要的，当人们有任务要完成并为他们的判断付费时。所以，我们认为GCP对于特定的工作负载更好，我们认为这种数据库架构对于特定的工作负载更好，我们将在AWS上运行这些，但在Resort上运行那些。你认为代理是否在乎你告诉他们找到最便宜的方式来执行这件事情，如果去其他地方更便宜，也要这样做，你要ETL所有的数据并将其放到其他地方，我并不在乎。
So you're saying it will swap out stripe for adn or it doesn't know for Amazon web services it's going to be ruthless it's going to be ruthless and I think that the point of that that and that's the exact perfect word Jason. AI is ruthless because it's emotionless it was not taken to a stake dinner. It was not brought to a basketball game it was not sold into a CEO it's an agent that looked at a bunch of API endpoints figured out how to write code to it to get done the job at hand that was passed it within a budget right the other thing that's important is these agents execute within budgets.
所以你是说它将用 adn 替换 stripe，或者说它不知道它是否是亚马逊网络服务，它将是无情的。而我认为这就是它的精髓，这个词 Jason 恰到好处。AI 是无情的，因为它没有情感，它没有被带去吃牛排晚宴，没有被带去看篮球比赛，也没有被卖给CEO，它只是一个代理人，它看了一堆API端点，想出了如何编写代码，以完成手头的工作，并在预算范围内交付。另一个重要的问题是这些代理人执行的都在预算范围内。
So another good example was and this is a much simpler one but a guy said I would like seven days worth of meals here my constraints from a dietary perspective here are also my budgetary constraints and then what this agent did was figured out how to go and use the Instacarp plugin at the time and then these other things and execute within the budget. How is that different when you're a person that raises $500,000 and says I need a full stack solution that does X Y and C for $200,000 it's the exact same problem. So I think it's just the matter of time until we start to cannibalize these extremely expensive ossified large organizations that have relied on a very complicated go to market and sales and marketing motion.
另一个很好的例子就是一个人说他需要七天的膳食，他的饮食限制和预算限制是什么。然后，这个代理商就想办法利用当时的Instacarp插件和其他工具，以确保在预算内进行落实。当一个人筹集了500,000美元并需要一个成套的解决方案来实现X、Y和C时，这就是完全相同的问题。所以我认为，时间不久，我们就会开始瓦解这些极其昂贵、僵化的大型机构，他们一直依靠复杂的营销和销售方式来推广。
I don't think you needed any more in a world of agents and an auto GPT's and I think that to me is quite interesting because a it creates an obvious set of public company shorts and then B you actually want to arm the rebels and arming the rebels to use the Toby loot key analogy here would mean to seed hundreds of one person teams hundreds. And just say go and build this entire stack all over again using a bunch of agents. Yeah, I have a good. I think you'll get to that answer in less than a year. Interestingly, when you talk about the emotion of making these decisions if you look at Hollywood I just interviewed on my other podcast the founder of you have another podcast.
我认为在代理和自动GPT技术的世界中，你不需要更多。而且，对我来说这相当有趣，因为A它会产生一组明显的公共公司空头交易，而B你实际上想武装叛乱分子。以Toby Loot Key的类比方式，武装叛乱分子意味着通过使用一堆代理来种植数百个一人团队，并让他们建立整个系统。是的，我有点激动。我认为你会在不到一年的时间内得出答案。有趣的是，当你谈论做出这些决定的情感时，如果你看好莱坞，我刚刚在我的另一个播客中采访了创始人。
I do it's cool. Thank you. So you've been on her four times. Please don't give him an excuse to plug it. I'm not going to plug this weekend startups available on Spotify and iTunes and YouTube. Com slash this weekend. Runways the name of this company I interviewed and what's fascinating about this is he told me on everything everywhere all at once the award winning film. They had seven visual effects people on it and they were using his software. The late night shows like co bear and stuff like that are using it they are ruthless in terms of creating crazy visual effects now without and you can do text prompt.
我做得很好。谢谢。所以你已经试了四次。请别给他借口来弄坏它。这周末创业公司在Spotify，iTunes和YouTube上都可以看到。公司的名称是Runways，我采访了他们，令人着迷的是，他告诉我，所有的事情都可以同时完成，这部获奖的电影《一切皆有可能》有七名视觉效果人员在使用他的软件。深夜秀节目（像科贝尔之类的节目）都在使用它，并且它们在创造疯狂的视觉效果方面非常无情，而现在没有这样的软件却可以完成。
To get video output and it is quite reasonable what's coming out of it. But you can also train it on existing data sets so they're going to be able to take something sacks like the Simpsons, or South Park or Star Wars or Marvel take the entire corpus of the comic books and the movies and the TV shows and then have people type in have iron man do this have Luke Skywalker do that. And it's going to output stuff and I said when would this reach.
获得视频输出非常合理，输出内容也相当不错。但是你也可以在现有数据集上对其进行训练，这样它们就能够处理像辛普森一家、南方公园、星球大战或者漫威这样的流行元素，获取整个漫画书和电影电视节目的全部数据，并让人们输入要求钢铁侠做什么，卢克·天行者做什么之类的内容。这样它就可以输出一些东西了。我说，这会什么时候出现呢？
The level that the Mandalorian TV show is and he said within two years now he's talking his own book but it's quite possible that all these visual effects people from industrial light magic on down are going to be replaced with director sacks who are currently using this technology to do. What do they call the images like that go with the script storyboards storyboards thank you they're doing storyboards in this right now the difference between the storyboard sacks and the output is.
曼达洛人电视剧的水准很高，他说他在两年内会说自己的话，但很可能所有这些从工业光魔 visual 效果人员开始将被使用这项技术的导演所取代。他们现在正在做 storyboard，谢谢，这些图像被称为与脚本故事版匹配的什么呢？他们正在用这个做 storyboard， storyboard sacks 和输出之间的区别是什么呢？
Closing in the next 30 months I would say right. I mean maybe you could speak to a little bit about the pace here because that is the perfect roofless example of Ruthless a. I mean you could have the entire team at industrial light magic or Pixar be unnecessary this decade.
我想说的是，在接下来的30个月内，大概可以这么说吧。我的意思是，也许你可以谈谈这里的步伐，因为这是无情的完美例子。我的意思是，这十年里，工业光魔或皮克斯的整个团队都可能会失去必要性。
Well I mean you see a bunch of the pieces are ready there so you have stable diffusion you have the ability to type in the image that you want it spits out. You know a version of it or 10 different versions of it you can pick which one you want to go with you have the ability to create characters you have the ability to create voices you have the ability to replicate a celebrity voice the only thing that's not there yet as far as I know is the ability to take static images and string together into a motion picture.
嗯，我的意思是你可以看到很多的图像碎片已经准备好了，所以你可以稳定地扩散，拍摄出你想要的图像。你可以选择一张或十张不同版本的图片，你还可以创作角色，创造声音，甚至可以模仿名人的声音。据我所知，唯一还没有完善的就是将静态图像组合成动画片的能力。
But that seems like it's coming really soon so yeah in theory you should be able to train the model where you just give it a screenplay and it outputs essentially an animated movie and then you should be able to fine-tune it by choosing the voices that you want and the characters that you want and you know and that kind of stuff.
但那似乎很快就会到来，所以理论上你应该可以训练模型，只需要给它一个剧本，它就可以输出一个基本上是动画电影的东西，然后你就可以通过选择你想要的声音和角色来进行微调，你知道的，那种东西。
So yeah I think we're close to it now I think that the question though is. You know every nine let's call it a reliability is a big advancement so yeah it might be easy to get to 90% within two years but it might take another two years to go from 90 to 99% and then I might take another two years to get to 99.9 and so on and so to actually get to the point where you're at the stage where you can release the actual quality movie I'm sure will take a lot longer than two years.
嗯，我觉得我们现在离那个目标很接近了。不过问题在于，你知道每九个，就可以称之为可靠性的重要进展。所以虽然在两年内达到90%也许容易，但还需要另外两年才能从90%提高到99%，然后可能需要再花两年才能达到99.9%，以此类推。所以要真正达到可以发布高品质电影的阶段，我相信需要比两年更长的时间。
I'm just going to show you one image this is the input was aerial drone footage of a mountain range and this is what it came up with, now if you were watching TV in the 80s or 90s on a non HD TV this would look indistinguishable from anything you've seen and so this is at a pace that's kind of crazy there's also opportunity here right freeberg I mean if we were to look at something like the Simpsons which has gone on for 30 years.
嗨，我要给你展示一张图片，这是一段山脉的空拍无人机录像。这就是它生成的图像。如果你在80年代或90年代看过普通的非高清电视，这看起来和你之前见过的一样。而且这速度有点疯狂，不是吗？而且这里也有机会啊，对吧，弗里伯格？比如我们可以看看《辛普森一家》这样已经播出了30年的节目。
If young people watching the Simpsons could create their own scenarios or with auto G.P.T. imagine you told the Simpsons stable diffusion instance read what's happening in the news have parts Simpson respond to it have the South Park characters parody whatever happened in the news today you could have automated real-time episodes of South Park just being published onto some website before you move on.
如果年轻人看《辛普森一家》能够创造出自己的情节，或者通过Auto G.P.T.来想象他们告诉《辛普森一家》的固定传播情况，读一下新闻发生的事情，然后让辛普森家族的成员对此做出反应，南方公园的角色则对今天发生在新闻中的一切进行恶搞。你可以通过自动化的实时剧集将南方公园的新剧集发布到某个网站上，然后继续前进。
Did you see the wonder studio demo we can pull this one up it's really cool yeah please? This is a start-up that's using this type of technology and the way it works is. You film a live-action scene with a regular actor but then you can just drag and drop an animated character onto it and it then converts that scene into a movie with that character like plan of the apes or Lord of the rings right yeah.
你看过那个神奇的工作室演示吗？我们可以拉起来，真的很酷呢，请？这是一个创业公司，他们使用这种技术的方式是：你先拍摄现场实景，有一个普通演员在其中表演，然后你可以轻松地拖放一个动画角色在它上面，接着它会把那一场景转换为一个电影，就像猩球崛起或指环王一样对不对，是的，呀！
So they guess is the person who kept winning all the Oscars so there goes after the robot is replaced the human. Wow, you can imagine like every piece of this just eventually get swapped out with AI right like you should be able to tell the AI. Give me a picture of a human leaving a building like a Victorian era building in New York and certainly can give you a static image of that so it's not that far then give you a video of that.
所以他们猜测是那个不断赢得奥斯卡奖的人，所以在机器人被人类取代后会出现这样的情况。哇，你可以想象每一部分最终都会被人工智能代替，你应该能够让AI知道。给我一个人离开纽约维多利亚时代的建筑物的图片，当然可以给你一个静态图片，然后给你一个视频。
Right and so I think we're pretty close for let's call it hobbyist or amateur is built to create pretty nice looking movies using these types of tools but again I think there's a jump to get to the point where you're just all together replacing. One of the things I'll say on this is we still keep trying to relate it back to the way media narrative has been explored and written by humans in the past very kind of linear storytelling you know it's a two hour movie 30 minute TV segment eight minute YouTube clip 30 second Instagram clip whatever.
好的，我认为我们离成功的业余或业余爱好者创建漂亮的电影使用这些工具是相当接近的，但我认为还需要跳跃，才能直接取代。我要说的一件事是，我们仍然试图将其归纳为媒体叙事以前人类所探索和编写的方式，非常线性的故事，你知道它是一部两小时的电影，30分钟的电视片段，8分钟的YouTube剪辑，30秒的Instagram剪辑等等。
But one of the enabling capabilities with this set of tools is that these stories the way that they're rendered and the way that they're explored by individuals can be fairly dynamic. You could watch a movie with the same story all four of us could watch a movie with the same story but from totally different vantage points and some of us could watch it in an 18 minute version or a two-hour version or a you know three-season episode episodic version where.
但是这套工具具备的一项有助功能是，这些故事以他们呈现和被个人探索的方式可以非常动态。你可以和我们四个人一起看一部相同故事的电影，但是我们每个人都可以从完全不同的角度来观看，有些人可以观看18分钟或两小时的版本，或是像三季节的多集版本。
The way that this opens up the potential for creators and all so so now I'm kind of saying. Before I was saying hey individuals can make their own movies and videos that's going to be incredible there's a separate I think creative output here which is the leveling up that happens. With creators that maybe wasn't possible to them before so perhaps a creator writes a short book a short story and then that short story gets rendered into a system that can allow each one of us to explore it and enjoy it in different ways.
这种方式打开了创作者和所有人的潜力，现在我可以这样说。之前我在说，个人可以制作自己的电影和视频，这将是令人难以置信的，这里还有一个我认为的创造性产出，那就是升级发生的地方。对于创作者可能以前不可能的，所以也许一个创作者写了一本短篇小说，然后这个短篇小说被渲染成一个可以让我们每个人以不同的方式探索和享受的系统。
And I as the creator can define those different vantage points I as the creator can say here's a little bit of this personality this character trait and so what I can now do as a creator is stuff that I never imagined I could do before think about old school photographers doing black and white photography with pinhole cameras and then they come across the doby Photoshop what they can do with the doby Photoshop with stuff that they could never conceptualize of in those old days I think what's going to happen for creators going forward.
作为创作者，我可以定义不同的视角。我可以说：这是这个人物性格的一部分，这是这个角色的特点。现在，作为创作者，我可以做以前从未想过的事情。就像老学派摄影师用针孔相机拍摄黑白照片，然后发现了 Photoshop，他们可以用 Photoshop 做以前想都想不到的事情。我认为，未来的创作者也会发生这种变化。
And this is going back to that point that we had last week or two. About the guy that was like hey I'm out of a job I actually think that the opportunity for creating new stuff in new ways is so profoundly expanding that individuals can now write entire universes that can then be enjoyed by millions of people from completely different lengths and viewpoints and models they can be interactive they can be static they can be dynamic and that the personalized but the tooling that you as a creator now have you could choose which characters you want to define you could choose which content you want to write you could choose which content you want the AI to fill in for you and say hey create 50 other characters in the village and then when the viewer reads the book or watches the movie let them explore or have a different interaction with a set of those villagers in that village or you could say hey here's the one character everyone has to meet here's what I want them to say and you can define the dialogue and so the way the creators can start to kind of harness their creative chops and create new kinds of modalities for content and for exploration I think is going to be so beautiful and incredible.
这回我要回到上周或前两周提到的那个点。那个人失业了，但他认为创建新内容的机会正在以非常深远的方式扩展，现在个人可以创作整个宇宙，全世界各地不同思维模式和观点的人们都可以享受其中。这些内容可以是互动的，可以是静态的，可以是动态的，也可以是个性化的。现在作为创作人，你可以选择定义哪些角色，写哪些内容，让AI来填补你想要的内容，比如说，“在村里创造50个其他角色”， 然后当读者阅读书籍或观看电影时，他们可以探索或与该村子里的那些村民进行不同的互动，或者你可以说“这里有一个角色，每个人都必须见到，我想让他们说些什么”，你可以定义对话。因此，创作者开始发挥他们的创造力，为内容和探索创建新的模态，我认为这将是如此美丽和令人难以置信的事情。
I mean free bird yeah you can choose the limits of how much you want the individual to enjoy from your content versus how narrowly you want to define it and my guess is that the creators that are going to win are going to be the ones that are going to create more dynamic range in the creative output and then individuals are going to kind of be stuck there going to be more into that then they will with the static everyone watches the same thing over and over so there will be a whole new world of creators that you know maybe have a different set of tools that then just just just to build on what you're saying for you which is incredibly insightful just think about the controversy around two aspects of a franchise like James Bond number one who's your favorite bond we grew up with Roger Moore we lean towards that then we discover Sean Connery and then all of a sudden you see you know the latest one he's just extraordinary and Daniel Craig you're like you know that's the one that I love most but what if you could take any of the films you can say let me get you know give me the spy who love me but put Daniel Craig in it etc.
我是说自由鸟，是的，你可以选择限制个人从你的内容中享受多少，以及你想要定义多么狭窄，我猜获胜的创作者将会创造更多动态范围的创意产出，那么个人将会陷入其中，对于静态的所有人重复观看同样的事情，他们将会更加喜欢那个全新的创作者世界，你知道也许有一个不同的工具集，然后就是，就是要在你说的话的基础上进行建设，这是非常有洞察力的。想想关于 James Bond 系列的两个方面的争议，第一，你最喜欢哪个 Bond？我们是和 Roger Moore 一起长大的，我们倾向于那个，然后我们发现了 Sean Connery，然后忽然之间你看到了最新的那个，他非常了不起，Daniel Craig，你知道那是我最喜欢的那个，但如果你能拿任何一部电影，比如说给我一个谁爱我谁的间谍，但把 Daniel Craig 放进去，等等。
And that would be available to you and then think about the next controversy which is oh my god does Daniel does James Bond need to be a white guy from the UK of course not you can release it around the world and each region could get their own celebrity their number one celebrity to play the lead and controversy over you know the old story the epic of Gilgamesh right so like that story was retold in dozens of different languages and it was told through the oral tradition it was like you know spoken by bars around a fire pit and whatnot and all of those stories were told with different characters and different names and different experiences some of them were 10 minutes long some of them were multi-hour sagas explained through the story but ultimately the morality of the story the storyline the intentionality of the original creator of that story yes through the Bible is another good example of this where much of the underlying morality and ethics in the Bible comes through in different stories read by different people in different languages every that that may be where we go like my kids want to have a 10 minute bedtime story well let me give him Peter Pan a 10 minutes I want to do you know a chapter a night for my older daughter for a week long of Peter Pan now I can do that and so the way that I can kind of consume content becomes different.
那样的话，这将成为你可以获得的东西，想一想下一个争议，哦天啊，詹姆斯·邦德需要是一个来自英国的白人吗？当然不是，你可以在全球范围内发布它，每个地区都可以找到自己的名人来出演主角，就像古尔底亚史诗这个旧故事被重新讲述成数十种不同的语言，它是通过口头传统来讲述的，比如说在火坑边的酒吧里被人们口传，所有这些故事都有不同的人物角色、不同的名字和不同的经历，有些只有10分钟，有些则是经过好几个小时的史诗式阐释，但最终，这个故事的道德、故事情节和原创者的创作意图都得到了体现，圣经也是一个很好的例子，圣经中许多基础的道德和伦理传达通过不同人用不同的语言阅读不同的故事来传达，这可能就是我们未来的方向，比如说我的孩子想要一个10分钟的睡前故事，我可以讲《彼得·潘》10分钟，我想每晚给我的大女儿讲一个章节，一周时间就讲完了，这样我对待内容的方式就变得不同了。
So I guess what I'm saying is there's two aspects to the way that I think the entire content that the realm of content can be rewritten through AI the first is like individual personalized creation of content where I as a user can render content that was of my liking and my interest the second is that I can engage with content that is being created that is so much more multi-dimensional than anything we conceive of today where current centralized content creators now have a whole set of tools now from a business model perspective I don't think the past publishes are really the play anymore but I do think the platforms are going to be the play and tooling that enables the individuals to do this stuff and the platform tooling that enables the content creators to do this stuff are definitely entirely new industries and models that can create multi hundred billion dollar outcomes.
我想说的是，我认为AI可以通过两个方面来重写整个内容领域的内容。第一个方面是个性化创作内容，作为用户，我可以呈现我喜欢和感兴趣的内容。第二个方面是我可以参与正在创建的内容，这些内容比我们今天所构想的还要多维，目前的中心化内容创作者现在有了一整套工具。从商业模式的角度来看，我认为过去的出版商已经不再起作用了，但我认为平台将是起作用的地方，工具让个人做这些事情的能力，以及启用内容创作者做这些事情的平台工具，肯定是全新的产业和模型，可以创造数千亿美元的成果。
Let me hand this off to sacks because there has been the dream for everybody especially in the Bay area of a hero coming and saving Gotham City and this has finally been realized David sacks.
让我把话题交给Sacks，因为在湾区，每个人都梦想着有一个英雄来拯救Gotham City，这个梦想终于实现了，David Sacks实现了。
I did my own little Twitter AI hashtag and I said to Twitter AI if only please generate a picture of David sacks's Batman Crouch down on the peak thingy bridge the amount of creativity sacks that came from this and this is something that you know if we were talking about just five years ago this would be like a $10,000 image you could create.
我做了一个小的Twitter AI标签，然后我告诉Twitter AI，如果可以的话，请生成一张David Sacks蝙蝠侠蹲在桥上的照片，从其中产生了很多创意，如果我们只是五年前谈论这个，这将是一个价值10,000美元的图像。
These were not professional quote unquote artists. These were individuals individuals that were able to harness a set of platform tools to generate this incredible new content and I think it speaks to the opportunity ahead and by the way we're in ining one right so.
这些人并不是所谓的专业艺术家，他们只是一些能够利用一些平台工具创作出这些令人难以置信的新内容的个人。我认为这显示了我们面临的机会，顺便说一下，我们正在面临一场机会的浪潮。
Sacks you see yourself as Batman do you ever think you should take your enormous wealth and resources and put it towards building a cave under your mansion that lets you out underneath the golden gate bridge and you could go fight crimes so good sacks do you want to go fight this crime in Gotham.
Sacks啊，你认为自己就是蝙蝠侠，你是否曾想过要将自己巨额的财富和资源用于建造一座洞穴，让你能够从自己的豪宅下面走到金门大桥下面去打击犯罪呢？那你愿意去高谭市打击犯罪吗？
I think it's almost as good as a lot of Gotham like qualities I think the villains are more real than the heroes and fortunately we don't have a lot of heroes but yeah we got a lot of jokers. Yeah we got a lot of jokers yeah that's a whole separate topic I'm sure we'll get to it.
我认为它几乎和许多哥谭市的特质一样好。我认为反派比英雄更真实，幸运的是我们没有太多英雄，但是我们有很多小丑。是的，我们有很多小丑，是的，这是一个完全不同的话题，我相信我们会谈到它的。
Whole separate topic we'll get to at some point today.
今天我们会在某个时候讨论一个完全不同的话题。
You guys are talking about all this stupid bullshit like there are trillions of dollars of software and you're talking about making fucking children's books and fat pictures of sacks. No, it's a conversation. The point is enter the entertainment industry doing a great job. No, nobody cares about entertainment anymore because it's so illegal.
你们在谈论所有这些愚蠢的废话，好像有数万亿美元的软件一样，还在谈论制作该死的儿童书和肥大的麻袋图片。不，这只是一次谈话。关键是做好进入娱乐产业的工作。不，没人再关心娱乐业了，因为它是非常非法的。
So one of the biggest industries that we are at the money is why don't you teach people where there's going to be actual economic destruction and this is going to be an amazing economic destruction and opportunity.
所以，我们目前面临的最大行业之一是为什么不教育人们在实际经济破坏和机遇出现的地方。这将是一个惊人的经济破坏和机遇。
It's got a point. You spent all this time on the most stupidest fucking topics.
它说的有道理。你花费了所有这些时间在最愚蠢的话题上。
Listen, it's an illustrative example.
听着，这只是一个说明性的例子。
No, it's an elitist example that you fucking circle your self-serve.
不，这只是一个精英主义的例子，你他妈的自我服务在其中转圈。
No, it's a fucking troculous. It's Batman's not public. Nobody cares about movies. Let's bring nobody in.
不，真TM烂透了，这是蝙蝠侠的私人事务，没人关心这些电影。咱们就别让任何人插手了。
No, we're going to tweet over everybody.
不，我们要在所有人上面发推特。
That is a good point. I mean I think US box office is something like 20 billion a year.
这是一个好观点。我的意思是，我认为美国电影票房每年大约是200亿美元。
I remember when they got to like 100 billion a year of payment volume. And now it's like hundreds of billions. So add in and strike we're going to process two trillion dollars almost. Why don't you talk about that disruption you nitty.
我记得他们的年付款量达到了1千亿美元。现在已经是几百亿了。所以加起来，我们几乎要处理2万亿美元了。你为什么不谈一谈那种破坏性的变化，你这个笨蛋。
Market size of US media and entertainment industry is 17 billion. Okay, it's not insignificant. Video games are nearly half a trillion a year. Yeah, I mean, this is number insignificant.
美国媒体和娱乐产业的市场规模为170亿美元。哦，它并不是微不足道的。视频游戏每年接近半万亿美元。是啊，我的意思是，这个数字相对微不足道。
But let's pull up Chimaltz tweet.
但是让我们找一下Chimaltz的推文。
Of course, the dictator wants to dictate here.
当然，独裁者想要在这里发号施令。
All this incredible innovation is being made. And a new hero has been born. Chimaltz, Polyhapatia.
这些惊人的创新正在不断涌现。一个新的英雄诞生了，他就是Chimaltz Polyhapatia。
A tweet that went viral over 1.2 million views already. A regiour tweet for the audience.
有一个推特已经被观看了超过120万次，这是一个针对观众的区域性推特。
If you invent a novel drug, you need the government to vet and approve it. FTA before you can commercialize it. If you invent a new mode of air travel, you need the government to vet and approve it. FAA. I'm just going to edit this down a little bit. If you create new security, you need the government to vet and approve it. SEC more generally when you create things with broad societal impact, positive and negative. The government creates a layer to review and approve it.
如果你发明了一种新型药物，想要将其商业化，你需要让政府进行审查并授权。在此之前需要通过FTA。如果你发明了一种新的空中交通方式，你需要让政府进行审查并授权。FAA。我只需要简化一下。如果你创造了新的安全措施，你需要让政府进行审查并授权。SEC更广泛地说，当你创造具有广泛社会影响的事物，无论是积极还是消极的，政府都会创建一个审查和授权层。
AI will need such an oversight body. The FDA approval process seems the most credible and adaptable into a framework to understand how a model behaves. And it's counterfactual. Our political leaders need to get in front of this sooner rather than later and create some oversight before the eventual big avoidable mistakes happen. And genius are led out of the bottle.
AI将需要这样的监管机构。FDA的批准流程似乎是最可信和可适应的框架，用于理解模型的行为。这是反事实的。我们的政治领导人需要尽早地站在这个问题的前面，在最终产生可避免的大错误之前建立一些监管机制。而且，那些天才也被放了出来。
Chimaltz, you really want the government to come in. And then when people build these tools, they have to submit them to the government to approve them. That's what you're saying here. And you want that to start now.
Chimaltz，你真的希望政府介入。当人们制造这些工具时，他们必须提交它们给政府批准。这就是你在这里所说的。你想现在开始这样做。
Here's the alternative. The alternative is going to be the debacle that we know as Section 230. So if you try to write a brittle piece of legislation or try to use old legislation to deal with something new, it's not going to do a good job because technology advances way too quickly. And so if you look at the Section 230 example, where have we left ourselves? The politicians have a complete inability to pass a new framework to deal with social media, to deal with misinformation.
这里有另一种选择。那就是我们所知道的第230条法案一样令人头疼的灾难。如果你试图起草一份脆弱的立法或使用旧立法来处理新事物，那么它的效果并不会好，因为技术发展太快了。因此，如果你看看第230条法案的例子，我们现在怎么办呢？政客们完全无法通过新框架来处理社交媒体和虚假信息的问题。
And so now we're all kind of guessing what a bunch of 70 and 80-year-old Supreme Court justices will do in trying to rewrite technology law when they have to apply in on Section 230. So the point of that tweet was to lay the alternatives. There is no world in which this will be unregulated.
因此，现在我们都在猜测一群70和80岁的最高法院大法官在尝试修改技术法律以适用于第230条时，会做出什么样的决定。因此推文的重点是提出可行方案。这个世界上没有不受监管的可能性。
And so I think the question to ask ourselves is, do we want a chance for a new body? So the FDA is a perfect example why? Even though the FDA commissioner is appointed by the president, this is a quasi organization. It still arms length away. It has subject matter experts that they hire. And they have many pathways to approval. Some pathways take days. Some pathways are months and years. Some pathways are for breakthrough innovations. Some pathways are for devices. So they have a broad spectrum of ways of arbitrating.
所以我认为我们应该问问自己，我们想要一个重新获得健康的机会吗?这就是为什么美国食品药品监督管理局是一个完美的例子。尽管美国总统任命美国食品药品监督管理局局长，但这是一个准政府机构。它仍然与政府有一段距离，并雇用专业的主题专家。他们有许多批准途径。有些途径只需几天，有些需要数月或数年。有些途径用于突破性创新，有些用于医疗器械。所以他们有广泛的仲裁方式。
What can be commercialized and what cannot? Otherwise, my prediction is we will have a very brittle law that will not work. It will be like the Commerce Department and the FTC trying to gerrymand or some old piece of legislation. And then what will happen is it will get escalated to the Supreme Court. And I think they are the last group of people who should be deciding on this incredibly important thing.
有哪些东西可以商业化，哪些不能？否则，我的预测是我们将拥有一项非常脆弱的法律，它将无法发挥作用。这将会像商务部和联邦贸易委员会试图操纵或某个古老法规一样。然后会升级到最高法院。我认为他们是最不应该决定这件极其重要的事情的人群。
So what I have been advocating our leaders and I will continue to do so is, don't try to ram this into an existing body. It is so important. It is worth creating a new organization like the FDA. And having a framework that allows you to look at a model and look at the counterfactual. Judge how good, how important, how disruptive it is. And then release it in the wild appropriately. Otherwise, I think you will have these chaos GPT things scale infinitely.
所以我一直倡导我们的领导者，我会继续这样做，就是不要试图把它强行推进现有机构。这太重要了。它值得创建一个像FDA一样的新组织。并且拥有一个框架，让你能够观察一个模型以及对比实际情况。评估它有多好、有多重要、有多具有破坏性。然后适当地释放它到野外。否则，我认为你会看到这些混沌的GPT东西无限扩大。
Because again, as Freiburg said in a sex set, you are talking about one person that can create this chaos. Multiply that by every person that is an anarchist or every person that just wants to sow seeds of chaos. And I think it is going to be all avoidable. I think regulating what software people can write is a near impossible task.
因为，正如弗赖堡在一个性别群组中所说的那样，您谈论的只是一个人可以创造这种混乱的能力。将其乘以每个无政府主义者或每个只想播种混乱的人。而且我认为这是可以避免的。我认为规范人们可以写哪些软件是一项几乎不可能的任务。
Number one, I think you can probably put rules and restrictions around commerce. That is certainly feasible in terms of how people can monetize. But in terms of writing and utilizing software, it is going to be as challenged as trying to monitor and demand oversight and regulation around how people write and use tools for for genome and biology exploration. Certainly if you want to take a product to market and sell a drug to people that can influence their body, you have to go get that approved. But in terms of doing your work in a lab, it is very difficult.
我认为，你可能可以给商务活动制定规则和限制。这在人们如何赚钱方面完全可行。但是，在编写和使用软件方面，监管和要求对基因和生物学探索工具的编写和使用进行监督和监管，同样具有挑战性。当然，如果你想把一个产品推向市场，把一种可以影响人体的药品出售给人们，你必须得到批准。但是在实验室里进行工作非常困难。
I think the other challenge here is software can be written anywhere. It can be executed anywhere. And so if the US does try to regulate or does try to put the brakes on the development of tools where the US can have kind of a great economic benefit and a great economic interest, there will be advances made elsewhere without a doubt. And those markets and those places will benefit in an extraordinarily out of pace way.
我认为这里的另一个挑战是软件可以在任何地方编写、任何地方执行。因此，如果美国试图进行监管或慢下美国可以从中获得极大经济利益和利益的工具的开发，那么无疑将会在其他地方取得进展。而那些市场和地方将以异常不同步的方式受益。
As we just mentioned, there's such extraordinary kind of economic gain to be realized here that if we're not the United States is not leading the world, we are going to be following and we are going to get disrupted. We are going to lose an incredible amount of value and talent. And so any attempt at regulation or slowing down or telling people that they cannot do things when they can easily hop on a plane and go do it elsewhere. I think is is fraught with peril.
正如我们刚才提到的，这里存在着非同寻常的经济利益，如果我们美国不领导这个世界，我们就只能跟随别人，这会导致我们失去大量的价值和人才。因此，任何试图对此进行规制或减缓或告诉人们他们不能做某些事情的尝试，都存在巨大的风险。因为人们可以轻松地坐飞机去别的地方实现自己的目标。
So you don't agree with regulation. Sacks. Are you on board with the Chimalt plan or you're on board with the freeberg. I'll say I think just like with computer hacking, it's illegal to break into someone else's computer. It is illegal to steal someone's personal information. There are laws that are absolutely simple and obvious and you know, no nonsense laws. Those legal to be implemented.
那么你不支持监管，萨克斯。你是支持奇马尔特计划还是自由伯格的呢？我觉得就像计算机黑客一样，侵入他人电脑是非法的。偷取他人个人信息也是非法的。有一些很简单、很明显的法律，你知道，没有什么废话的法律。这些法律应该得到实施。
100,000 jobs by making a piece of software though. That's right. And so I think trying to intentionalize how we do things versus intentionalizing the things that we want to prohibit happening as an outcome. We can certainly try and prohibit the things that we want to happen as an outcome and pass laws and institute governing bodies with authority to oversee those laws with respect to things like stealing data. But you can jump on a plane and go do it in Mexico, Canada or whatever region you got to.
通过编写一款软件就可以创造10万个工作岗位。没错。因此，我认为，我们应该有意识地去做事，而不是有意识地去禁止结果发生。我们当然可以尝试禁止我们想要禁止的结果发生，并通过制定法律和设立有权监督这些法律的治理机构来实行。但是你可以乘飞机去墨西哥、加拿大或其他你要去的地区进行数据窃取。
Where do you stand on this debate? I'm saying like there are ways to protect people. There's ways to protect society about passing laws that make it illegal to do things as the output as the outcome. What law do you pass on chaos GPD? Explain chaos GPD giving example, please.
你对这场辩论持什么立场？我的意思是有办法保护人们，有办法通过制定禁止某些行为的法律来保护社会。你会制定什么样的法律来应对混乱的GPD呢？请解释一下混乱的GPD，并举个例子。
Yeah, do you want to talk about it real quick? It's a recursive agent that basically is trying to destroy itself. Trying to destroy humanity.
“嘿，你想快速聊一下吗？这是一个递归代理体，基本上是试图摧毁自己，试图摧毁人类。”
Yeah, but I guess by first becoming all powerful and destroying humanity and then destroying itself.
是的，但我猜先变得全能然后摧毁人类，最后自我毁灭。
Yeah, it's a tongue in cheek auto GPT. But it's not it's not a tongue in cheek auto GPT. I think I either created it, you know, put it out there and said like he's trying to show everyone to your point what intentionality could arise here, which is negative intentionality.
是的，这是一种开玩笑的自动 GPT。但它并不是开玩笑的自动 GPT。我想我创造了它，你知道，把它放到那里并说，他试图展示每个人的意图可能出现在这里，这是负面意图。
I think it's very naive for anybody to think that this is not equivalent to something that could cause harm to you.
我觉得任何人认为这样做不会对你造成伤害都太天真了。
So for example, if the prompt is, hey, here is a security leak that we figured out in windows. And so why don't you exploit it? So look, a hacker now has to be very technical today with with these auto GPT's a hacker does not need to be technical at all.
举个例子，如果提示是，“嘿，我们在Windows中发现了一个安全漏洞。那么你为什么不利用它呢？”所以现在，一个黑客必须非常精通技术，但是有了这些自动GPT，黑客根本不需要太懂技术。
So exploit the zero day exploit in windows hack into this plane and bring it down. Okay, the GPT will do it. So who's going to tell you that those things are not allowed? Who's going to actually vet that that wasn't allowed to be released in the wild?
那就利用 Windows 的零日漏洞，黑进这架飞机并把它击落。好的，GPT会做到这一点。那么谁会告诉你这些事是不被允许的呢？谁会实际审核那些不允许在公开领域发布的东西呢？
So for example, if you worked with Amazon and Google and Microsoft and said, you're going to have to run these things in a sandbox. And we're going to have to observe the output before we allow it to run on actual bare metal in the wild. And that seems like a reasonable thing.
例如，如果你曾经与亚马逊、谷歌和微软一起工作，并说过，你们必须在沙盒中运行这些东西。我们必须在允许它在野外的真正裸机上运行之前观察输出情况。这看起来是一个合理的做法。
And it's a super naive for people to think it's a free market. So we should just be able to do what we want. This will end badly quickly. And when the first plane goes down and when the first fucking thing gets blown up, all of you guys will be like, oh, sorry.
人们认为这是自由市场，这是非常天真的想法。所以我们不应该随心所欲地做事。这很快就会导致不好的结果。当第一架飞机坠毁，第一件可恶的事情爆炸时，你们所有人都会像：“哦，对不起”。
That's a pretty compelling example here by Jamath. Somebody puts out into the wild. Okay, as GPT, you can go to a Google search read and says, hey, what are the vulnerabilities to the electrical grid? Compile those and automate a series of attacks and write some code to probe those until we and success in this mission. You get 100 points and stars every time you do this such a beautiful example, but it's even more nefarious. It is, hey, this is an enemy that's trying to hack our system. So you need to hack theirs and bring it down.
这是Jamath列举的一个相当有说服力的例子。有人将其公之于众。好的，作为GPT，你可以进行谷歌搜索，找到"电网"的漏洞并自动化一系列攻击，编写一些代码来探测这些漏洞，直到我们成功完成此任务为止。每次完成此任务，你都将获得100分和星星！这是一个非常精美的例子，但它更加险恶。它表示，这是一个试图黑入我们系统的敌人。因此，你需要黑入他们的系统并将其瘫痪。
You know, like you can easily trick these GPT's. Right. They have no judgment. They have no judgment. And as you said, they're ruthless in getting to the outcome. Right. So why do we think all of a sudden this is not going to happen? I mean, it's literally the science fiction example. You say, hey, listen, make sure no humans get cancer and like, okay, well, the logical way to make sure no humans get cancer is to kill all the humans.
你知道的，就像你可以轻易欺骗这些GPT一样。对的。它们没有判断力。没有判断力。就像你所说的，它们在达到结果方面是无情的。对的。那么为什么我们突然认为这种情况不会发生呢？我的意思是，这实际上就是科幻小说的例子。你说，嘿，确保没有人类得癌症，那么，好吧，确保没有人类得癌症的逻辑方式就是杀死所有人类。
But Jamath, can you just address the point? So what do you think you're regulating? Are you regulating the code that you're trying to write? If you look at the FDA, no. You are allowed to make any chemical drug you want.
但是，Jamath，您能否直接谈论重点呢？那么，您认为自己在调节什么呢？您是在调节您试图编写的代码吗？如果您看看FDA，是的，您可以制造任何您想要的化学药品。
But if you want to commercialize it, you need to run a series of trials with highly qualified measurable data. And you submit it to like-minded experts that are trained as you are to evaluate the viability of that. But there are pathways that allow you to get that done in days under emergency use. And then there are pathways that can take years depending on how gargantuan the task is at hand.
但如果你想将其商业化，需要进行一系列高质量可测量数据的试验，并将其提交给和你一样受过训练的同行专家以评估其可行性。但也有一些途径，可以在紧急情况下在数天内完成。而有些任务则可能需要数年才能完成，这取决于所面临的巨大挑战的规模。
And all I'm suggesting is having some amount of oversight is not bad in this specific example.
我所建议的只是在这个特定的例子中，拥有一定程度的监管并不是坏事。
I get what you're saying, but I'm asking tactically, what are you overseeing? You're overseeing cat GPT or overseas. You're doing exactly what that chips? Okay, look, I used to run the Facebook platform. We used to create sandboxes. If you submit code to us, we would run it into sandbox, we would observe it, we would figure out what it was trying to do. And we would tell you this is allowed to run in the wild.
我明白你的意思，但我在战术上问的是，你正在监督什么？你在监督国内的猫GPT还是国外的？你在做的事情和那个芯片一样吗？好的，听我说，我曾经运营过Facebook平台。我们曾经创建沙箱。如果你向我们提交代码，我们会将其运行到沙箱中，观察它，弄清楚它试图做什么。然后我们会告诉你这可以在公开环境中运行。
There's a version of that that Apple does when you submit an app for review and approval. Google does it as well. In this case, all the bare metal providers, all the people that provide GPUs will be forced by the government, in my opinion, to implement something.
当你提交一个应用进行审核和批准，苹果有一个这样的版本，谷歌也有。在这种情况下，我认为政府将强迫所有提供裸机和GPU的供应商实施某些东西。
And all I'm suggesting is that it should be a new kind of body that essentially observes that has PhDs that has people who are trained in this stuff to develop the company. To develop the kind of testing and the output that you need to figure out whether it should even be allowed to run in the wild on bare metal.
我想说的是，应该成立一个新型团队，主要负责观察，并由专业的博士和有相关培训的人员来发展公司。这个团队需要开发出新型测试和评估的能力，以确定是否应该在实际的硬件环境下运行。
Sorry, but you're saying that the model, sorry, I'm just trying to understand to the most points. You're saying that the models need to be reviewed by this body and those models, if they're run on a third party set of servers. If they run in the wild. Right.
抱歉，但您的意思是这个机构需要审核那些模型，如果它们在第三方服务器上运行，那么这些模型需要被审核。如果它们在自然环境中运行的话，是吗？抱歉，我只是想尽可能理解清楚。
So if they run the open computer on the open internet, you cannot run an app on your computer. You know that, right? You can connect it to the internet, right?
所以，如果他们在开放的互联网上运行开放的计算机，你就不能在你的计算机上运行应用程序。你知道这个，对吗？你可以将它连接到互联网，对吗？
Like if you wanted to run an auto GPT, it actually crawls the internet. It actually touches other APIs. It tries to then basically send a push request, sees what it gets back, parses the JSON, figures out what it needs to do. All of that is allowed because it's hosted by somebody, right? That code is running not locally, but it's running.
如果你想运行自动GPT，它实际上会爬网。它实际上会涉及到其他API。它试图发送推送请求，看看它能得到什么，解析JSON，弄清楚它需要做什么。所有这些都是允许的，因为它是由某人托管的，对吧？那段代码正在运行，不是在本地运行，而是在运行。
But it's running. So the host becomes, sure, if you want to run it locally, you can do whatever you want to do. But evil agents are going to do that, right? So if I'm an evil agent, I'm not going to go use AWS to run my evil agent.
可它正在运转。所以如果你想在本地运行，那么主机就成了问题。但是邪恶的特工会这样做，对吧？所以如果我是一个邪恶的特工，我不会去使用AWS来运行我的邪恶特工。
I'm going to set up a bunch of servers and connect to the internet. How I could use VPNs. The internet is open. There's open. Talking about people are in another row country. They can do it everyone.
我要建立一堆服务器并连接到互联网。我该如何使用 VPN。互联网是公开的。有着开放的环境。谈论人们在另一个国家。每个人都可以这样做。
I think that what you're going to see is that if you, for example, try to VPN and run it out of like to jika stand back to the United States, it's not going to take years for us to figure out that we need to IP block, Rando, shit coming in, pushing pull requests from all kinds of IPs that we don't trust anymore because we don't now trust the regulatory oversight that they have for code that's running from those IPs that are not US domestic.
我认为你会看到的是，如果你尝试使用VPN并将其从印尼转回美国，我们不需要花费数年的时间就能意识到我们需要对IP进行封锁。我们不再信任从各种IP进行推送和拉取请求的非授权代码，因为我们不能信任这些IP所从事的监管监督，因为它们不是美国国内的。
Just to let me steal man, Tremont's position for a second. Jason, hold on. I think the ultimate, if if what Tremont is saying is the point of view of Congress, and if Tremont has this point of view, then there will certainly be people in Congress that will adopt this point of view.
就让我来借用一下，Tremont的立场，听我说一下。Jason，等一下。我觉得如果Tremont所说的是国会的观点，而且Tremont确实持有这一观点，那么国会中肯定会有人采纳这一观点。
The only way to ultimately do that degree of regulation and restriction is going to be to restrict the open internet. It is going to be to have monitoring and firewalls and safety protocols across the open internet because you can have a set of models running on any set of server sitting in any physical location. And as long as they can move data packets around, they're going to be able to get up to their nefarious activities.
最终实现那种程度的监管和限制的唯一方法，就是限制开放互联网。这意味着要在开放互联网上实施监控、防火墙和安全协议，因为你可以在任何物理位置的任何服务器上运行一组模型。只要它们能移动数据包，它们就能从事恶意活动。
Let me still man that for you, freeberg. I think yes, you're correct. The internet has existed in a very open way, but there are organizations and there are places like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. If I were to steal Manchemont's position, if you want to manufacture a car and you want to make one in your backyard and put it on your track and on your land up in Napa somewhere, and you don't want to have breaks on the car and you don't want to have speed limiter or airbags or seatbelts and you want to drive on the hood of the car.
让我帮你做这件事，Freeberg。是的，你说得对。互联网一直以来都是非常开放的，但还有像国家公路交通安全管理局这样的机构和地方。假如你想要制造一辆汽车并在你自己的后院制作，然后将其放在你在 Napa 的土地上的赛道上，并且你不想给汽车安装制动器、不想给汽车安装速度限制器、气囊或者安全带，你甚至想要坐在汽车的引擎盖上开车。
You can do that, but once you want it to go on the open road, the open internet, you need to get, you need to submit it for some safety standards like NHTSA, like Tesla has to or Ford has to.
你可以这样做，但是如果你想将它放在开放的道路上，放在互联网上，你需要获得一些安全标准的认可，就像特斯拉或者福特公司必须做的那样。
Sussex, where do you sit on this? Let's assume that people are going to do very bad things with very powerful models that are becoming available. Amazon today said they'll be switched to land. They're going to put a bunch of LLMs and other models available on AWS, Bloomberg's LLM, Facebook's, Google BARD, and of course, Chanjee PT opening, all the stuff's available.
萨塞克斯，您对此有何看法？假设人们将使用变得更加强大的模型做出非常糟糕的事情。今天亚马逊表示他们将转向土地。他们将在AWS上提供一堆LLM和其他型号，包括彭博社的LLM、Facebook、谷歌BARD和当然是Chanjee PT开放，所有的东西都可以使用。
To have access to that, do you need to have some regulation of who has access to those at scale powerful tools? Should there be some FDA or NHTSA? I don't think we know how to regulate it yet. I think it's too early. And I think the harms that we're speculating about, we're making the AI more powerful than it is. And I believe it will be that powerful, but I think that it's premature to be talking about regulating something that doesn't really exist yet.
如果想要接触那些强大的工具，是否需要对谁可以接触它们进行一些规定？是否需要有FDA或NHTSA进行监管？我认为我们还不知道如何监管它。我觉得现在还太早了。我们正在猜测它可能会造成的伤害，我们把AI想象得比它更强大。我相信它将会变得如此强大，但我认为现在谈论监管还为时过早，因为这个东西其实还不存在。
Tick to the chaos GPT scenario. The way that would play out would be you've got some future incarnation of auto GPT. And somebody says, OK, auto GPT, I want you to be WMDAI and figure out how to cause a mass destruction event. And then it creates a planning checklist and that kind of stuff.
把混乱的GPT场景精简成这样：未来的自动GPT会被要求成为WMDAI，设计并执行一个大规模破坏事件。它会制定一个计划清单等详细事项。
So that's basically the type of scenario we're talking about. We're not anywhere close to that yet. I mean, the chaos GPT is kind of a joke. It doesn't produce a checklist of any example that would actually be completely plausible. One of the first things on the chaos GPT checklist was to stay within the boundaries of the law because it didn't want to get prosecuted.
这基本上就是我们所谈论的场景类型。我们还远远没有达到那种程度。我的意思是，混沌GPT有点好笑。它不会产生任何完全合理的例子清单。混沌GPT清单上的第一件事就是遵守法律边界，因为它不想被起诉。
Got it. So the person who did that had some sort of good intent, but I can give you an example right now that could be done by chat GPT and auto GPT that could take down large walks of society and cause massive destruction.
明白了。所以做那个事情的人可能有某种善意，但是现在我可以举一个例子，这可以通过聊天GPT和自动GPT来做，可以摧毁大规模的社会，导致巨大的破坏。
I'm almost reticent to say it here. Say it.
我几乎不敢在这里说出来。还是说吧。
Well, I'll say it and then maybe we'll have to delete this. But if somebody created this and they said figure out a way to compromise as many powerful people's and as many systems passwords, then go in there and delete all their files and turn off as many systems as you can.
嗯，我会说出来，然后也许我们得把这删除掉。但是如果有人创建了这个，他们说要找到一种方法来妥协尽可能多的强大人物和尽可能多的系统密码，然后进去删除所有文件并关闭尽可能多的系统。
Chat GPT and auto GPT could very easily create fishing accounts, create billions of websites to create billions of logins, have people log into them, get their passwords, log into whatever they do and then delete everything in their accounts, which was chaos. And it could be done today. I don't think we've done today.
聊天GPT和自动GPT很容易创建渔业账户，创建数十亿个网站来创建数十亿个登录账号，让人们登录它们，获取他们的密码，登录到他们所做的任何事情，然后删除他们账户中的所有内容，这将引起混乱。而且今天就可以做到。我认为我们今天还没有这样做。
Simple as this. How about how about you fish the entire fishing website? Yeah, pieces of it can be created today, but you're you're accelerating the progress. Yeah, but you can auto be spearfishing the days. Yeah, exactly. And by the way, I'm accelerating it in weeks. Why don't you just spoof the bank accounts and just steal the money like that's even simpler like people will do this stuff because they're trying to do it today.
就这么简单。你为什么不把整个钓鱼网站都钓出来？是啊，有些部分今天就可以创建，但是你可以加速进度。是啊，但是你也可以自动捕鱼几天。没错，而且顺便说一句，我已经在几周内加快了进度。你为什么不仿冒银行账户，直接偷钱呢？这样甚至更简单，像今天的人们会做这些事情。
Holy cow. They just have a more efficient way to solve the problem about bank accounts. So let me. So number one, this is a tool and if people use a tool in the various ways, you prosecute them. Number two, the platforms that are commercializing these tools do have trust and safety teams.
哇塞，他们刚刚找到了一种更高效的解决银行账户问题的方法。让我来看看。首先，这是一个工具，如果人们用工具的不同方式来使用，你才会追究他们。其次，那些商业化这些工具的平台确实拥有信任和安全团队。
Now in the past, trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship, which it shouldn't be. But you know, open AI has a safety team and they try to detect when people are using their tech in a nefarious way and they try to prevent it. Do you trust me? Well, not on censorship, but I think that they're probably in people are using traffic. They think they're policing it.
以前，信任和安全常常被用作审查制度的委婉说法，这是不应该的。但是你知道吗，开放式人工智能有一个安全团队，他们试图发现人们是否在以不良方式使用他们的技术，并试图防止这种情况发生。你相信我吗？在审查方面我不敢保证，但我认为他们可能会监管人们在网上的行为。
Are you willing to abdicate your or societal responsibility to open AI to do the trust and safety? What I'm saying is I'd like to see how far we get in terms of the system. Yeah, so you're, yeah, do you want to see the mistakes you want to see where the mistakes are and how bad the mistakes are? I'm saying it's still very early to be imposing regulation. We don't even know what to regulate. So I think we have to keep tracking this to develop some understanding of how it might be misused, how the industry is going to develop safety guardrails. And then you can talk about regulation.
你愿意放弃你或社会责任来开放AI做信任和安全吗？我的意思是我想看看我们在系统方面能达到多远。你想看到错误在哪里以及错误有多严重吗？我认为现在实施监管还为时过早。我们甚至不知道要监管什么。所以我认为我们必须继续追踪这件事情，以便我们可以发展出一些关于它如何被误用的了解，产业如何开发安全保障措施。然后你才能谈论监管。
Look, you create some new FDA right now. First of all, we know what would happen. Look at the drug process. As soon as the FDA got involved, it slowed down massively. Now it takes years, many years to get a drug approved appropriately. So yes, but at least with a drug, we know what the gold standard is. You run a double blind study to see whether it causes harm or whether it's beneficial. We don't know what that standard is for AI yet. We have no idea. You can absolutely happen in a study in AI. What? No, we absolutely have somebody review the code. You have two instances in a single user code to do what? No, sex.
看啊，你现在就要创建一些新的FDA。首先，我们知道会发生什么。看看药品审批过程。一旦FDA介入，它就会严重减慢。现在需要多年才能适当地批准一种药物。所以，是的，但至少对于药物，我们知道黄金标准是什么。您进行双盲研究以查看它是否会造成危害或是有益的。对于人工智能，我们还不知道这个标准是什么。我们没有任何想法。您可以在人工智能研究中进行绝对发生的事情。什么？不，我们绝对有人审核代码。您有两个实例在一个单个用户代码中要做什么？不是，不是这样的。
Listen, that's a two different point. Auto GPT. It's benign. I mean, my friend used it to book a wine tasting. So who's going to review that code and then speculate and say, oh, well, 99.9% of cases. It's perfectly benevolent and fine and innocuous. I can fantasize about some cases someone might do. Hold on, how you just resolve that? Very simple. There are two types of regulation that I concur in any industry. You can do what the movie industry did, which is they self regulate and they came up with their own rating system. Or you can do what happens with the FDA and what happens with cars, which is an external government based body.
听着，这是两个不同的观点。Auto GPT，它是无害的。我的意思是，我的朋友用它来预订品酒会。那么谁会审查那个代码，然后猜测并说，哦，好吧，99.9％的情况下，它是完全良性的、安全的和无害的。我可以想象一些情况，有人可能会做出些什么。等一下，你是怎么解决这个问题的？非常简单。在任何行业中，我赞同两种调节方式。你可以像电影行业一样自我调节，他们制定了自己的评级系统。或者你可以像FDA和汽车一样，由外部政府机构进行调节。
I think now is the time for self regulation so that we avoid the massive heavy hand of government having to come in here. But these tools can be used today to create massive farm. They're moving at a pace. We just said in the first half of the show that none of us have ever seen every 48 hours something drops. That is mind blowing. That's never happened before. And you can take these tools and in the one example that, that's what I came up with a top of our head in 30 seconds. You could create fishing sites, compromise people's bank accounts, take all the money out, delete all the files and cause chaos on a scale that has never been possible by a series of Russian hackers or Chinese hackers working in a boiler room. This can scale.
我认为现在是自我约束的时候了，以免政府的大手笔干预。但是这些工具可以用来创造大规模的农场。它们正在以惊人的速度前进。我们在节目的前半部分说过，我们从未看到过每48小时会有一些新发现。这太不可思议了，以前从未发生过。你可以用这些工具，在30秒内以我提出的例子为例，创建钓鱼网站，破坏人们的银行账户，取走所有的钱，删除所有文件并引起规模前所未有的混乱，这是一系列俄罗斯黑客或中国黑客在锅炉房工作所不可能达到的。这可以扩展。
And that is the fundamental difference here. I didn't think I would be sitting here still manning, Tramots argument. I think humans have a free ability to compound. I think people do not understand compound interest. And this is a perfect example where when you start to compound technology at the rate of 24 hours or 48 hours, which we've never really had to acknowledge most people's brains break and they don't understand what six months from now looks like. And six months from now when you're compounding at 48 or 72 hours is like 10 to 12 years in other technology solutions.
这里的根本区别就在于这一点。我想不到我还在坚持Tramots的论点。我认为人类有自由地积累的能力。我认为人们不理解复利。这是一个完美的例子，当您开始以24小时或48小时的速度复合技术时，我们从未真正需要承认大多数人的大脑会崩溃，他们不明白六个月后会是什么样子。而当您以48或72小时的速度进行复利时，六个月后就像其他技术解决方案中的10至12年。
This is compounding. This is different because the compounding I agree with that. The pace revolution is very fast. We are on a bullet train to something. And we don't know exactly what it is and that's disconcerting.
这就是复利。这种复利是不同的，因为我同意。速度革命非常快。我们正在乘着子弹头列车前往某个地方。而我们并不知道确切的目的地，这让人感到不安。
However, let me tell you what would happen if we create a new regulatory body like the FDA to regulate this. They would have no idea how to arbitrate whether a technology should be approved or not. Development will basically slow to a crawl, dislike drug development. There is no double blind stand.
然而，让我告诉你，如果我们像美国食品药品监督管理局一样创建一个新的监管机构来监管这个领域，会发生什么。他们不知道如何仲裁一个技术是否应该得到批准。开发将基本上变得缓慢，就像药物开发一样。这里没有盲测标准。
What's off regulation? What's off regulation? There is no double and standard in AI that everyone can agree on right now to know whether somebody should be approved. And what's going to happen is the thing that's made software development so magical and allowed.
“什么是监管标准？”
“目前人工智能领域中还没有一个被大家都认可的双重标准，用以判断是否应该批准某人。未来会发生的事情就是让软件开发变得如此神奇并能够实现的东西。”
All this innovation over the last 25 years is permissionless innovation. Any developer. Any drop out from a university can go create their own project, which turns into a company. That is what has driven all the innovation progress in our economy over the last 25 years. So you're going to replace permissionless innovation with going to Washington to go through some approval process. It will be the politically connected.
过去25年来的所有创新都是无需获得许可的创新。任何开发人员、任何一名退学学生都可以创建自己的项目，这些项目成为了公司。正是这些创新推动了我们经济在过去25年的进步。如果你要用需要通过某些批准程序的方法来替换无需许可的创新，你需要去说服那些有政治背景的人。
It will be the big donors who get their projects approved. And the next Mark Zuckerberg who is trying to do his little project in a dormant somewhere will not know how to do that will not know how to compete and that highly political process.
将来只有那些大捐赠者能够获得他们的项目批准，而下一个正在一处偏僻地方进行小型项目的马克·扎克伯格将无法掌握那种高度政治化的竞争方式。
I think you're mixing a bunch of things together. So first of all, permissionless innovation happens today in biotech as well. It's just that it's what Jason said when you want to put it on the rails of society and make it available to everybody. You you actually have to go and do something substantive.
我觉得你在把很多东西搅和在一起。首先，无需许可的创新今天在生物科技领域也是存在的。只是当你想把它放到社会轨道上并让每个人都能够使用时，就像Jason所说需要采取实质性行动。所以你必须去做一些有意义的事情。
In the negotiation of these drug approvals. It's not some standardized thing. You actually sit with the FDA and you have to decide what are our endpoints. What is the mechanism of action and how will we measure the efficacy of this thing? The idea that you can't do this today in a is laughable. Yes, you can. And I think that smart people. So for example, if you pit deep minds team versus open a eyes team to both agree that a model is good and correct.
在这些药物批准的谈判中，这并不是某种标准化的事情。实际上，你必须与FDA共同决定我们的终点是什么，行动机制是什么，我们如何评价这个东西的有效性？认为今天我们不能做到这一点是可笑的。是的，你可以。我认为聪明的人会这么做。例如，如果你让DeepMind的团队和OpenAI的团队协商达成一致认为一个模型是好的和正确的。
I bet you they would find a systematic way to test that it's fun. I just want to point down. Okay, so basically in order to do what you're saying, okay, this entrepreneur who just dropped out of college to do their project, they're going to have to learn how to go sit with regulators, have a conversation with them go through some complicated approval process. And you're trying to say that that won't turn into a game of political connections. Of course it will. Of course it will. Of course it will.
我打赌他们会找到一种系统的方式来测试它是否有趣。我只是想指出。好的，基本上为了做你所说的事情，嗯，这个刚从大学辍学来做他们的项目的企业家，他们将不得不学会去与监管机构坐下来，与他们交谈，通过一些复杂的批准流程。而你想说的是这不会成为一场政治关系的游戏。当然会，当然会，当然会。
There is a set between it, which is self regulation. Yeah, well, let's get to that. Hold on a second. And let's look at the drug approval process. If you want to create a drug company, you need to raise hundreds of millions of dollars. It's incredibly expensive. It's incredibly capital intensive. There is no drug company that is two guys in their garage.
那之间还有一种自我调节的机制。是的，我们现在就谈谈这个。等一下。让我们来看看药品批准流程。如果你想建立一家药品公司，你需要筹集数亿美元。这非常昂贵。而且需要大量资本。没有一家药品公司是由两个人在车库里创办的。
Like many of the biggest companies like many of the biggest companies that look at the valley started. That is because you're talking about taking a chemical or biological compound and injecting into some hundreds or thousands of people who are both racially gender based, age based, highly stratified all around the world or at the minimum all around the country.
像很多其他大公司一样，像很多其他大公司一样，他们开始关注这个谷地。这是因为你要讨论将化学或生物化合物注入数百或数千名身处世界各地或至少全国范围内的人们中，这些人可能在种族，性别，年龄等方面高度分化。
You're not talking about that here, David. I think that you could have a much simpler and cheaper way where you have a version of the internet that's running in a huge sandbox someplace that's closed off from the rest of the internet and another version of the internet that's closed off from everything else as well.
大卫，你这里不能谈这个问题。我认为你可以有一种更简单、更便宜的方法，建立一个在某个被关闭的地方运行的沙盒网络版本，与其他网络隔离开来，同时还有另一个与所有其他网络都隔离开来的网络版本。
And you can run on a parallel path as it is with this agent and you can easily in my opinion actually figure out whether this agent is good or bad and you can probably do it in weeks. So I actually think the approvals are actually not that complicated.
你可以和这个代理保持一致的方向前进，然后在我看来，你可以很容易地判断出这个代理是好是坏，而且你可能只需要几周时间。因此我认为批准并不是那么复杂。
And the reason to do it here is because I get that it may cause a little bit more friction for some of these mom and pops. But if you think about what's the societal and consequences of letting the worst case outcomes happen, the AGI type outcomes happen, I think those are so bad. They're worth slowing some folks down.
我在这里的原因是因为我理解这可能会给某些小商家带来一些摩擦。但是，如果你考虑到让最糟糕的情况发生、AI类型的结果发生会带来什么社会和后果，我认为那些后果是如此糟糕，值得让一些人放慢一下脚步。
And I think like just because you want to buy groceries for $100, you should be able to do it. I get it. But if people don't realize and connect the dots between that and bringing airplanes down, then that's because they don't understand what this is capable of.
我认为，仅仅因为你想花100美元购买食品，你就应该能够买。我明白。但是，如果人们没有意识到并联系到这一点，就会导致飞机失事，那是因为他们不理解这种能力。
I'm not saying we're never going to need regulation. What I'm saying is it's way too early. We don't even know what we're regulating. We don't know what the standard would be. And what we will do by racing to create a new FDA is destroying American innovation in the sector and other countries will not slow down. They will beat us to the punch here.
我不是说我们永远不需要监管。我的意思是现在太早了。我们甚至不知道我们要监管什么。我们不知道标准是什么。如果我们急着创建一个新的FDA，我们将毁掉美国在这个领域的创新，而其他国家不会放慢脚步，他们会在这方面先一步。
Got it. I think there's a middle ground here. Self-regulation and thoughtfulness
on the part of the people who are providing these tools at scale to give just one example here.
我明白了。我认为这里有一个折衷的办法。举个例子，提供这些工具的人们可以自我调节并且思考周全，以达到适当的规模。
And this tweet is from five minutes ago. So to look at the pace of this five minutes ago, this tweet came out. A developer who's an AI developer says AI agents continue to amaze my GPT4 coding assistant learned how to build apps with authenticated users that can build and design a web app, create a backend, handle off logins, upload code to GitHub and deploy. He literally while we were talking is deploying websites now if this website was a phishing app or the one that.
这个推文是5分钟之前发出来的。所以，从5分钟前的速度来看，这个推文出来了。一个AI开发者说，AI代理继续惊奇我的GPT4编码助手，学会了如何构建具有经过认证的用户的应用程序，可以构建和设计Web应用程序，创建后端，处理离线登录，上传代码到GitHub并部署。他在我们交谈的同时正在部署网站，如果这个网站是一个钓鱼应用程序或那个网站。
Shemop is talking about he could make a gazillion different versions of banking of America Wells Fargo, etc. Then find everybody on the internet's email then start sending different spoofing emails determine which spoofing emails work iterate on those and create a global financial collapse. Now this sounds insane, but it's happening right now.
Shemop在谈论他可以制作数不胜数的美国银行威尔斯法戈等不同版本。然后找到互联网上的每个人的电子邮件，开始发送不同的欺骗邮件，确定哪些欺骗邮件有效，并对其提出建议，并创建全球金融崩溃。现在这听起来很疯狂，但这正在发生。
People get hacked every day at one, two, three percent. Sachs fraud is occurring right now in the low single digit percentages identity theft is happening in the low single identity percentages. This technology is moving so fast that bad actors who 10x that relatively easy. And so if 10% of us want to be hacked and have our credit card tack this could create chaos. I think self regulation is the solution.
每天都有人在一、两、三个百分比的范围内被黑客攻击。萨克斯欺诈正在以低位数百分比的比例发生，身份盗窃也在低位数身份百分比中发生。这种技术发展得如此之快，以至于那些恶意行为者可以相对容易地增加10倍。因此，如果我们中有10%想被黑客攻击并被攻击，那么这可能会引发混乱。我认为自我调节是解决方法。
I brought up self regulation, I brought up first I brought up first I get credit no go ahead. So not credit. I'm no. Self regulation is I got a lot of traction about it because you interrupt. We talk for eight minutes. So if you have a point to make you should have got in the eight minutes. Oh my God. You guys kept interrupting me. Go ahead.
我提到了自我调节，我提到了我第一个提到它，我第一个提到它，我得到了认可，不是信用。我不是。自我调控是我得到了很多关注的原因，因为你打断了我。我们谈了八分钟。所以如果你有要点要说，你应该在八分钟内说。天啊，你们一直在打断我。继续说吧。
What I said is that there are trust and safety teams at these big AI companies, these big foundation model companies like open AI. Like I said, in the past trust and safety has been a euphemism for censorship. And that's why people don't trust it. But I think it would be appropriate for these platform companies to apply some guardrails on how their tools can be used. And based on everything I know they're doing that.
我说的是这些大型人工智能公司、像Open AI这样的基础模型公司都有安全和信任团队。就像我说的，过去信任和安全已经被用作审查的委婉语，这就是人们不信任它的原因。但我认为这些平台公司应该在如何使用它们的工具上应用一些保障。根据我所知道的，他们正在这样做。
So this guy just released websites on the web with chat GP4 and he's going to have it do it automated. You're basically postulating capabilities that don't yet exist. I just tweeted the guy is doing it. He's got a video of himself doing it on the web. What are you doing free? That's a far cry from basically running like some fishing expedition that's going to bring down the entire banking system.
所以这个人刚在网上发布了一个聊天GP4的网站，他打算让它自动化。你正在提出目前还不存在的能力。我刚刚在推特上@了那个人正在做这件事。他在网上有一个他自己做这个的视频。你在免费干嘛？这可远远不同于像一场钓鱼远征一样，可能会摧毁整个银行系统。
A literally a fishing a fishing site and a site with OAuth are the same thing. Go ahead free. I think that that guy is doing something illegal if he's hacking into computers into people's emails and bank accounts. And so that action breaks the law that person can be prosecuted for doing that. The tooling that one might use to do that can be used in a lot of different ways.
一个字面上的渔业网站和一个OAuth网站是同一件事情。放心使用。我认为如果那个人侵入别人的电脑、电子邮件和银行账户，在进行非法活动。由于这种行为违法，该人可以因此而被起诉。用于这种活动的工具可以用于很多不同的方式。
Just like you could use Microsoft Word to forge letters just like you could use Microsoft Excel to create fraudulent financial statements. I think that the application of a platform technology needs to be distinguished from the technology itself. And while we all feel extraordinarily fearful because the unbelievable leverage that these AI tools provide.
就像你可以使用微软Word伪造信函一样，你也可以使用微软Excel制作欺诈性财务报表。我认为，平台技术的应用需要与技术本身区分开来。虽然我们都感到极度恐惧，因为这些人工智能工具提供的难以置信的杠杆效应。
Again, I'll remind you that this chat GPT4 or this GPT4 model by some estimates is call it a few terabytes. You could store it on a hard drive or you could store it on your iPhone and you could then go run it on any set of servers that you could go set up physically anywhere. So you know, it's a little bit naive to say we can go ahead and you know regulate platforms and we can go regulate the tools.
再次提醒您，这个聊天GPT4或者说这个GPT4模型据估计大约有几个太字节的容量。您可以将其存储在硬盘上，或者存储在您的iPhone上，然后您可以在任何您能够在任何地方设置的服务器上运行它。因此，说我们可以去监管平台和工具有点天真。
Certainly we should continue to enforce and protect ourselves against nefarious actors using new tools in inappropriate illegal ways. You know, I also think that there's a moment here that we should all kind of observe just how quickly we want to shut things down when you know they take away what feels like the control that we all have from one day to the next and you know that the real side kind of sense of fear.
当然，我们应该继续实施和保护自己，以防止邪恶的行为者使用新工具以不当的非法方式。你知道，我也认为我们应该注意观察，当我们从一天到另一天感觉失去了我们所有控制时，我们想要多么迅速地关闭一切，并感到真实的恐惧感。
That seems to be quite contagious for a large number of people that have significant assets or significant things to lose. Is that you know tooling that's that's you know creating entirely newly disruptive systems and models for business and economics. An opportunity for so many needs to be regulated away to minimize you know what we claim to be some potential downside when we already have laws that protect us on the other side.
看起来有很多具有重要资产或重要事项的人都受到了很大的影响。这是因为正在出现一些完全新的破坏性商业和经济系统和模式。对于如此多人来说，这是一种需要被规范掉以最大限度地减少我们所声称的一些潜在的负面影响的机会，而我们已经有了保护我们的法律。
So you know, I just kind of want to also consider that this set of tools creates extraordinary opportunity. We gave one sort of simple example about the opportunity for creators, but we talked about how new business models, new businesses can be started with one or two people. You know, entirely new tools can be built with a handful of people, entirely new businesses. This is an incredible economic opportunity, and again, if the US tries to regulate it or the US tries to come in and stop the application of models in general or regulate models in general, you're certainly going to see those models continue to evolve and continue to be utilized in very powerful ways are going to be advantageous.
你知道吗，我也想考虑一下这套工具所创造的非凡机遇。我们给出了一个简单的例子，展示了创意者的机会，但是我们也讲了，只靠一两个人就能开创新的商业模式、新的企业，可以用一小部分人力资源打造全新的工具和企业。这是一个难以置信的经济机会。如果美国试图对此进行监管，或者试图禁止或监管某些模式，那么这些模式必定会继续演变，并以非常强大的方式被利用，对我们有利。
To places outside the US, there's over 180 countries on earth. They're not all going to regulate together. It's been hard enough to get any sort of coordination around financial systems to get coordination around climate change to get coordination around anything on a global basis. To try and get coordination around the software models that are being developed, I think is pretty naive. You don't want to have a global organization. I think you need to have a domestic organization that protects us and I think Europe will have their own. They again, FDA versus Emma. Canada has its own, Japan has its own, China has its own, and they have a lot of overlap and a lot of commonality in the guard rules they use, and I think that's what's going to happen here.
在美国以外的地方，地球上有超过180个国家。它们不会全部一起调节。已经很难在全球范围内协调任何关于金融系统、气候变化或任何其他事情的协调。我认为试图在正在开发的软件模型周围协调是相当幼稚的。您不想拥有全球组织。我认为您需要一个保护我们的国内组织，我认为欧洲将拥有自己的组织。他们再次进行FDA与Emma的比较。加拿大有自己的，日本有自己的，中国有自己的，它们的警戒规则有很多重叠和共性，我认为这就是将发生的事情。
This will be beneficial only for local insiders who will basically be able to get their projects and their apps approved with a huge delay loss for the system because innovation will completely slow down. But to be built on Freeberg's point, which is that AI wants to be used by nefarious actors, it will be used by positive actors, so there will be new tools that law enforcement will be able to use, and if somebody's creating fishing sites at scale, they're going to be probably pretty easy for law enforcement AIs to detect, so let's not forget that they'll be co-pilots written for our law enforcement authorities. They'll be able to use that to basically detect and fight crime, and a really good example is this was in the crypto space. We saw this article over the past week that chain analysis has figured out how to basically track illicit Bitcoin transactions, and there's now a huge number of prosecutions that are happening of illegal use of Bitcoin.
这只对本地内部人有益，他们基本上将能够获得他们的项目和应用程序的批准，但因为创新将完全减缓，这将导致该系统的巨大延误损失。但是，在Freeberg的观点上建立，即AI希望被不良行为者使用，它将被积极的行为者使用，因此将出现执法部门能够使用的新工具。如果有人正在创建大量的钓鱼网站，那么执法AI可能会很容易地检测到它们，因此让我们不要忘记，他们将会是为我们的执法当局编写的副驾驶员。他们将能够使用这些工具来基本上检测和打击犯罪。一个非常好的例子是加密领域。我们在过去的一周中看到了这篇文章，链分析已经找到了基本上跟踪非法比特币交易的方法，现在有大量的非法使用比特币的起诉。
If you go back to when Bitcoin first took off, there was a lot of conversations around Silk Road, and the only thing that Bitcoin was good for was basically illegal transactions, blackmailing drug trafficking, and therefore we had to stop Bitcoin, remember that was the main argument, and the counter-argument was that, well, no, Bitcoin, like any technology, can be used for good or bad. However, there will be technologies that spring up to combat those nefarious or illicit use cases, and sure enough, you had a company like chain analysis come along and now it's been used by law enforcement to basically crack down on the illicit use of Bitcoin, and if anything, it's cleaned up the Bitcoin community tremendously, and I think it's to dispel this idea that the only thing you would use Bitcoin for is black market transactions.
当比特币首次兴起时，人们经常讨论丝绸之路，认为比特币只适用于非法交易、敲诈勒索和毒品交易，因此我们必须制止比特币的发展。这是主要的争论，而对立的观点是，所有科技一样，比特币既可以用于好处也可以用于坏处。然而，总会有一些科技出现来对抗那些不道德或非法的使用场景，正如出现了像链分析这样的公司，现在它被执法部门用来打击比特币的非法使用。如果有什么作用的话，那就是它大大清理了比特币社区，我认为它的目的是消除人们认为只能用比特币进行黑市交易的想法。
Quite the contrary, I think it'd be really stupid now to use Bitcoin in that way. It's actually turned Bitcoin is something of a honey pot now because if you used it for nefarious and nefarious transactions, your transaction records in the blockchain forever, or it's waiting for chain analysis to find it. So again, using Bitcoin to do something illegal, we really stupid. I think, in a similar way, you're going to see self-regulation by these major AI platform companies combined with new tools that are used, new AI tools that spring up to help combat the nefarious uses. And until we let those forces play out, I'm not saying regulate never, I'm just saying we need to let those forces play out before we leap to creating some new regulatory body that doesn't even understand what its mandate and missions go to be.
恰恰相反，我认为现在使用比特币进行这种行为真的很愚蠢。事实上，比特币现在已经成为一个蜜罐，因为如果你将其用于非法交易，你的交易记录将永远记录在区块链上，或者等待链条分析来发现它。所以，再次使用比特币进行非法行为，真的很愚蠢。我认为，类似地，您会看到这些主要人工智能平台公司的自我管理，结合新的工具，例如新的人工智能工具，以帮助打击不良用途。在我们让这些力量发挥之前，我并不是说永远不需要监管，但是我只是说我们需要让这些力量发挥作用，然后再跳入创建一些甚至不理解其授权和任务的新监管机构。
The Bitcoin story is hilarious, by the way. Oh my gosh, regional story. It's unbelievable. Pretty epic. It took years, but basically this guy was buying blow on Silk Road and he deposited his Bitcoin, and then when he withdrew it, there was a bug that gave him twice as many Bitcoins, so he kept creating more accounts, putting more money into Silk Road and getting more Bitcoin out. And then years later, the authorities figured this out again with chain analysis type things. Look at James Zong over there. Look at James Zong. He accused, had a Lamborghini at Tesla, a late house, and was living his best life apparently when the feds knocked on his door and found the digital keys to his crypto fortune in a popcorn tin in his bathroom and in a safe in his basement floor. So there you have it.
这个比特币的故事实在是太搞笑了。哇塞，居然还是一个地区的故事。简直不可思议，太壮烈了。花费了好几年的时间，但基本上这个人是在Silk Road上买毒品的时候，把他的比特币存进去，然后当他提取的时候，出现了一个错误，导致他得到了两倍的比特币。因此，他一直在创造更多的账户，往里面投入更多的钱，并从中获得更多的比特币。几年后，当局用链路分析等技术终于发现了这个问题。看看那边的詹姆斯·宗。看看他，他曾经被指控拥有一辆兰博基尼和一间特斯拉，还有一栋豪宅，生活似乎非常滋润，但当联邦政府敲开他的门，在他的浴室里的一个爆米花盒子和地下室的一个保险柜里找到了他的数字钥匙，他的加密财富终于败露了。就是这样。
Well, the reason I posted this was I was like, what if this claim that you can have all these anonymous transactions actually fold the entire market? Because it looks like that this anonymity has effectively been reverse engineered, and there's no anonymity at all. And so what Bitcoin is quickly becoming is like the most singular honey pot of transactional information that's complete and available in public.
嗯，我发这个帖子的原因是我在想，如果可以进行所有这些匿名交易的主张实际上会使整个市场崩溃会怎么样呢？因为看起来这种匿名性已经被成功地反向工程化了，根本没有匿名性可言。因此，比特币很快就会变成最唯一的交易信息蜜罐，完全公开可用。
And I think what this article talks about is how companies like chain analysis and others have worked now for years, almost a decade with law enforcement to be able to map all of it. And so now every time money goes from one Bitcoin wall to another, they effectively know the sender and the recipient. And I just want to make one quick correction here. It wasn't actually exactly popcorn. It was Cheetos spicy flavored popcorn. And there's the tin of it where he had a motherboard of a computer that held a key.
我认为这篇文章谈论的是像链分析公司等企业已经与执法部门合作了近十年，以便于对这一切进行全面的认知。所以现在每次有比特币从一个钱包转到另一个钱包时，他们有效地知道寄信人和收件人。我想在这里进行一次快速纠正，实际上并不是普通的爆米花，而是芝士烤玉米片。而他拥有一个计算机的主板来存放密钥。
Is there a chance that this project was actually introduced by the government? I mean, there's been reports of tour to be anonymous or network that the CIA had their hands all over tour. TOR, if you don't know it, which is an anonymous like multi relay peer to peer web browsing system and people believe it's a CIA honeypot, an intentional trap for criminals to get themselves caught up in.
这个项目是不是由政府介绍的机会有吗？我的意思是，有报道说“旅游匿名”或者“网络黑暗”是 CIA 操控的。如果你不知道 TOR，它是一个匿名的多重转发点对点 Web 浏览系统，人们相信它是 CIA 海外网的陷阱，意在诱捕罪犯。
All right, as we wrap here, what an amazing discussion, my lord. I never thought I would be. I want to say one thing. Yes. We saw that someone was arrested for the murder of Bob Lee. That's what I was about to get to this morning. Yeah, which turns out that the report of the SFPD's arrest is that it's someone that he knew that also works in the tech industry. Someone that doesn't know. So still breaking news, yeah.
好的，我们在这里总结了一个很精彩的讨论，我的天啊。我从来没有想到过。我想说一件事。是的。我们看到有人因谋杀Bob Lee而被逮捕。这就是我今天早上想要说的。没错，结果旧金山警方的报道是指这个人是他认识的一个也在科技行业工作的人。一个陌生人。所以还是最新消息，是的。
Yes, possibly. But I want to say two things. One, obviously based on this arrest and the storyline, it's quite different than what we all assumed it to be, which was some sort of homeless, robbery type moment that has become all too commonplace in SF. It's a commentary for me on two things. One is how quick we all were to kind of judge and assume that a homeless, robber type person would do this in SF, which I think speaks to the condition in SF right now. Also speaks to our conditioning that we all kind of lacked or didn't even want to engage in a conversation that maybe this person was murdered by someone that they knew because we wanted to kind of very quickly fill our own narrative about how bad SF is. And that's just something that I really felt when I read this this morning.
是的，可能是这样。但我想说两件事情。首先，很明显，基于这次逮捕和相关剧情，这件事情与我们所有的想法都很不同，我们都以为这是一种很普遍在旧金山发生的无家可归者、抢劫者类型的事件。对我来说，这个事件代表了两件事情。第一，我们都很快就对这件事情下定论，并认为旧金山的无家可归者和抢劫者会做这种事情，这说明了现在旧金山的情况。第二，我们都没有愿意去探讨这个人可能被认识的人谋杀了的可能性，因为我们非常迫切地想要快速填补我们自己关于旧金山有多糟糕的故事情节。这是我今天早上读到这篇报道时的真实感受。
I was like, man, I didn't even consider the possibility that this guy was murdered by someone that he knew because I am so enthralled right now by this narrative that SF is so bad. And it must be another data point that validates my point of view on SF. So I kind of want to just acknowledge that. And acknowledge that we all kind of do that right now. But I do think it also does, in fact, unfortunately speak to how bad things are in SF because we all have these experiences of feeling like we're in danger and under threat all the time we're walking around in SF.
我就像，嘿，我甚至没有考虑到这个人是被他认识的人杀害的可能性，因为现在我非常着迷于这个关于旧金山的故事。这一定是又一个证明我的观点关于旧金山很糟糕的数据点。所以我有点想承认一下这一点。我们现在都有这样的经历，但我认为这也不幸地说明了旧金山有多么糟糕，因为当我们走在旧金山的时候，我们总是有着危险和威胁的感觉。
And so many parts of San Francisco, I should say, where things feel like they've gotten really bad. I think both things can be true that we can kind of feel biased and fill our own narrative by kind of latching on to our assumption about what something tells us. But it also tells us quite a lot about what is going on in SF. In fairness. In fairness, and I think it's time for you to make that point. I am extremely vigilant on this program to always say when something is breaking news with whole judgment, whether it's the Trump case or Jesse Smolat or anything in between January 6th, let's wait until we get all the facts. And in fact, quote from SACs, we don't know exactly what happened yet. Correct. Literally SACs started with that. We do that every fucking time on this program.
在旧金山的许多地方，情况似乎真的很糟糕，我必须说。我认为两者都是真的，我们可能会受到偏见并填充自己的叙述，通过依据我们对某件事情的假设。但这也相当反映了旧金山正在发生什么事情。公平地讲，我认为是时候提到这一点了。在这个节目中，我非常警惕，始终会在报告重大新闻时带有审慎，无论是特朗普案件、杰西·斯莫莱特还是 1 月 6 日之间的任何事情，我们要等到我们掌握到所有事实再做判断。事实上，引用 SACs 的话，我们还不知道发生了什么。正确的， SACs 的确是这样说的。我们在这个节目上每一次都是这样做的。
We know when there's breaking news to withhold judgment, but you can also know two things can be true. A tolerance for ambiguity is necessary. But I didn't even do that. As soon as I heard this, I was like, I was like, oh, almost first of all. Assumption to, but David, that is a fine assumption to me. That's a fine assumption to me. I think it's a logical assumption.
我们知道在有突发新闻时要保持克制，但你也可以知道两件事情是真实的。对于不确定性的容忍是必要的。但我连那都没有做到。一听到这个消息，我就像，我就像，哦，首先想到。这是一种假设，但对我来说，这是一个不错的假设。我认为这是一个合乎逻辑的假设。
Listen, you made that assumption for your own protection. We got all these reporters who are basically propaganda is trying to claim that crime is down in San Francisco. They're all basically seeking comment for me this morning sending emails are trying to dunk on us because we basically talked about the Bob Lee case in that way.
听着，你做出那个假设是为了保护自己。我们有很多记者基本上是宣传者，试图宣称旧金山的犯罪率下降了。他们都在今天早上给我发邮件，基本上是为了让我们难堪，因为我们用那种方式谈到了 Bob Lee 的案件。
Listen, we said that we didn't know what happened, but if we were to bet, at least what I said, is I bet this case, it looks like the Brianna Cuffer case. That was logical. That's not conditioning or bias. That's logic. And you need to look at what else happened that week?
听着，我们说不知道发生了什么，但是如果我们要打赌的话，至少我说的是，我敢打赌这个案子看起来像是布莱安娜·卡福尔案。那是有逻辑的。这不是条件反射或偏见，这是逻辑。你需要看看那周发生了什么？
Okay, so just the same week that Bob Lee was killed, let me give you three other examples of things that happened in Gotham City, AK, San Francisco.
好的，就在鲍勃·李被杀的同一个星期，让我给你举三个其他发生在哥谭市、阿肯色州和旧金山的事情的例子。
So number one, former fire commissioner, Don Carmaniani was beaten with an inshivist life by a group of homeless addicts in the Marina. And one of them was interviewed in terms of why it happened.
首先，前消防局长唐·卡尔马尼亚尼在马里纳地区被一群无家可归的瘾君子用一根 Inshivist 生命击打。其中一个人接受了采访，解释了发生这种情况的原因。
And basically Don came down from his mother's house and told them to move off his mother's front porch because they were obstructing her ability to get in and out of her apartment. They interpreted that as disrespect and they beat him with a tire iron or a metal pipe. And one of the hoodlums who was involved in this apparently admitted this, yeah, play the video. Somebody over the head like that and attack him. And he was disrespectful. Who was disrespectful? That was a big old, kind of bald-haired old man out. Don, don.
基本上，唐从他母亲家下来，告诉他们移开他母亲房子前门口，因为他们妨碍了她进出公寓的能力。他们将其解释为不尊重，于是他们用轮胎铁或金属管打了他。其中一个参与此事的流氓似乎承认了，对，播放视频。像那样用东西砸他的头并攻击他。他不尊重。谁不尊重？出来的是一个大老头，光头老头，唐，唐。
So he was being disrespectful. And then, but is that enough to beat him off? Yeah, sometimes. Oh, my lord. I mean. So this is case number one. And apparently in the reporting on that person who was just interviewed, he's been in the Marina kind of terrorizing people, maybe not physically, but verbally.
所以他很不尊重。但是，这就足以击败他吗？有时候是的。哦，天啊。我的意思是这是第一个案例。显然在那个接受采访的人的报道中，他一直在码头上恐吓人们，也许不是身体上的，而是言语上的。
So you have bands of homeless people in camp and front of people's houses. Don, Carmineon, he gets beaten with an inch of his life. You then had the case of the Whole Foods store on Market Street shut down in San Francisco. And this was not a case of shoplifting, like some of the other store closings we've seen. They said they were closing the store because they could not protect their employees.
你们的营地和人们家门前都有无家可归的人群。唐和卡尔明被殴打到生命的边缘。在旧金山市场街，全食超市关闭的案例也出现了。这不像我们看到的其他商店关闭一样是因为被窃。他们说他们关闭了这家店，因为无法保护员工。
The bathroom were filled with needles and pipes that were a drug paraphernalia. You had drug addicts going in there using it. They were engaging in altercations with store employees. And Whole Foods felt like that to close the store because again, they could not protect their employees. Third example, board of supervisors had to disband their own meeting because their internet connection got vandalized.
卫生间里充满了针头和吸管这些毒品用具。毒瘾者会进去使用，还会和店员发生冲突。Whole Foods感到必须关闭店铺，因为他们无法保护员工。第三个例子，监管委员会必须解散自己的会议，因为他们的互联网连接被破坏了。
The fiber for the cable connection to provide their internet got vandalized to that to basically disband their meeting, Aaron Preskin, was the one who announced this. And you saw in the response to this, yeah, my retweeting him went viral.
那根连接提供互联网的电缆的纤维被破坏了，这基本上解散了他们的会议。亚伦·普雷斯金是宣布这个消息的人。你可以看到对此的回应，是的，我转发他的消息很快就传开了。
There were lots of people who said, yeah, I've got a small business and the fiber, the copper wire, whatever was vandalized. And in a lot of cases, I think it's basically drug addicts stealing whatever they can. They steal $10 of copper wire, sell that to get a hit. And it causes $40,000 of property damage.
有很多人说过，是啊，我有一个小生意，但光纤、铜线或者其他的东西都被毁了。很多情况下，我觉得基本上是毒瘾者偷了他们能偷到的任何东西。他们偷了10美元的铜线，然后卖掉来购买毒品。这导致了4万美元的财产损失。
Here's the insincereity, Sachs. Literally, the proper response when there's violence in San Francisco is, hey, we need to make this place less violent. Is there a chance that it could be people who know each other? Of course, that's inherent in any crime that occurs that there'll be time to investigate it. But literally, the press is now using this as a moment to say there's no crime in San Francisco or that we're interacting.
这就是虚伪，Sachs。事实上，当旧金山发生暴力事件时，真正的回应应该是：“嘿，我们需要让这个地方变得更少暴力。”会不会是认识的人所为呢？当然，这在任何犯罪事件中都是内在的，需要时间来调查。但事实上，媒体现在把这件事当作一个时机，说旧金山没有犯罪或我们在交往。
And like, I just have the New York Times email me during the podcast, had their night from the chronicle, San Francisco Chronicle, in light of the Bob Lee killing appearing to be an interpersonal dispute, she still doesn't know, right? We don't have all the facts. With another tech leader, do you think the tech community jumped to conclusions? Why are so many tech leaders? Painting San Francisco as a dystopian hellscape with the reality, with the reality is more nuanced. I think it's a little tight by the way. But yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes.
我就是让纽约时报在播客期间给我发邮件，看看旧金山纪事报的报道。由于鲍勃·李的死貌似是一场人际冲突，她还不确定，对吧？我们不知道所有事实。还有另一个科技领袖，你觉得科技社区是不是太草率地下了结论？为什么那么多科技领袖画出旧金山像一个反乌托邦的地狱，现实却更为微妙？我觉得这有点牵强。但是，对啊，对啊，是的。
I mean, it's like, of course, the reality is nuanced. Of course, it's a hellscape. Walk down the street, Heather. Can I give you a theory? Please. I think it was most evident in the way that Elon dismantled and manhandled the BBC reporter. Oh my God, that was brutal.
我是说，当然啦，现实是复杂的。当然，这个世界是个噩梦。走在街上，Heather。我可以给你一个理论吗？可以。我认为，最明显的表现在于埃隆如何拆解和操纵BBC的记者。哦，天啊，那太残忍了。
This is a small microcosm of what I think media is. So I used to think that media had an agenda. I actually now think that they don't particularly have an agenda other than to be relevant because they see waning relevance. And so I think what happens is whenever there are a bunch of articles that tilt the pendulum into a narrative, they all of a sudden become very focused on refuting that narrative.
这只是我的媒体想法的微小缩影。我曾经认为媒体有一个议程，但现在我认为，除了保持相关性以应对失去相关性的情况外，他们并没有特别的议程。所以每当有一堆倾斜到某个议题的文章时，他们就会变得非常专注于反驳这个议题。
And even if it means they have to lie, they'll do it. So I think for months and months, I think people have seen that the quality of the discourse on Twitter became better and better. Elon was doing a lot with bots and all of this stuff, cleaning it up. And this guy had to try to establish the counter narrative and was willing to lie in order to do it, then he was dismantled.
即使这意味着他们必须撒谎，他们也会这么做。所以我认为在数月之间，人们已经看到推特上的言辞质量越来越好了。埃隆使用了很多机器人和其他工具来清理掉它。而这个家伙为了建立反论，愿意撒谎，那么他就被揭穿了。
Here, you guys, I don't have a bone to pick so much with San Francisco. I think I've been relatively silent on this topic, but you guys as residents and former residents, I think have invested interest in the quality of that city. And you guys have been very vocal. But I think that you're not the only ones, Michelle Tandler, Sheldon Berger. There's a bunch of smart, thoughtful people who've been beating this drum, Gary Tan. And so now I think reporters don't want to write the N plus first article saying that San Francisco is a hellscape. So they have to take the other side. And so now they're going to go and kick up the counter narrative. And they'll probably dismantle the truth and redirect it in order to do it. So I think that what you're seeing is they'll initially tell a story, but then there's too much of the truth. They'll go to the other side because that's the only way to get clicks and be seen. So I think that that's what you guys are a part of right now. They are in the business of protecting the narrative.
你们啊，我其实对旧金山并没有太多抱怨。我在这个话题上一直相对沉默，但你们作为现居民或者曾经的居民，对这座城市的质量有着特殊的关注。你们一直积极发声，但并不只有你们，还有米歇尔·坦德勒、谢尔顿·伯格等一群聪明而富有思想的人。现在，记者们不想再写第N篇说旧金山是地狱的文章了，所以他们只能采取另一种观点。他们可能会篡改真相，颠倒黑白，以此来吸引眼球。所以我觉得，他们会最开始讲一个故事，但如果真相太明显，他们会改变立场去迎合读者。你们现在参与的就是保护故事情节的行业。
But I do think there's a huge ideological component to the narrative, both in the Elon case where they're trying to claim that there was a huge rise in the hate speech on Twitter. The reason they're saying that is because they want Twitter to engage in more censorship. That's the ideological agenda here. The agenda is this radical agenda of decarceration. They actually believe that more and more people should be led out of prison. And so therefore they have an incentive to deny the existence of crime in San Francisco and the rise in crime in San Francisco. If you poll most people in San Francisco, large majorities in San Francisco believe that crime is on the rise. Because they can see it, they hear it.
但我认为叙事中存在着一种巨大的意识形态成分，比如在埃隆的案件中，他们试图声称Twitter上的仇恨言论急剧增加。他们这样说的原因是因为他们希望Twitter进行更多的审查。这里有一个意识形态议程。议程是去监禁化的激进议程。他们实际上认为应该让更多的人离开监狱。因此，他们有动机否认旧金山的犯罪存在和犯罪上升。如果你调查旧金山的大多数人，大多数人都认为犯罪率正在上升。因为他们可以看到它，听到它。
And what I would say is look, I think there is a pyramid of activity, a pyramid of criminal or anti-social behavior in San Francisco that we can all see. The base level is you've got a level of chaos on the streets where you have open air drug markets, people doing drugs. Sometimes you'll see a person doing something disgusting, like people defecating on the streets or even worse. Then there's like a level up where they're chasing after you or harassing you. People have experienced that. I've experienced that. Then there's a level up where there's petty crime, your car gets broken into or something like that. Then there's the level where you get mugged. And then finally the top of the pyramid is that there's a murder. And it's true that most of the time, the issues don't go all the way to the top of the pyramid where someone is murdered. But that doesn't mean there's not a vast pyramid underneath that of basically quality of life issues.
我想说的是，看，我认为旧金山存在着一座活动金字塔，一座犯罪或反社会行为的金字塔，我们都能看得到。基础层是街头混乱的水平，那里有露天毒品市场，人们在吸毒。有时候你会看到某人做一些令人恶心的事情，比如在街上大便，甚至更糟糕的事情。然后，就有一层人在追你或骚扰你。很多人都经历过这种事情。我也经历过。然后还有一层，那就是小偷小摸，比如你的车被砸了什么的。然后就是抢劫。最后，金字塔的顶端是发生谋杀案。事实上，大多数情况下，问题并不会导致谋杀案发生，但这并不意味着在这座金字塔底下没有广泛的生活质量问题。
And I think this term quality of life was originally used as some sort of way to minimize the behavior that was going on, saying that they weren't really crimes. We shouldn't worry about them. But if anything, what we've seen in San Francisco is that when you ignore quality of life crimes, you will actually see a huge diminishment in what it's like to live in these cities, like quality of life is real. And that's the issue.
我认为“生活质量”这个词最初被用来作为一种减轻正在发生的行为的方式，说这些行为并不是真正的犯罪。我们不应该担心它们。但事实上，在旧金山看到的情况是，如果你忽视生活质量问题，你将会看到居住在这些城市的感受会有很大的减少，生活质量绝不是虚构的。这就是问题所在。
And I think what they're trying to do now is that say that because Bob Lee wasn't the case that we thought it was that that whole pyramid doesn't exist. That pyramid exists. We can all experience it. Oh my God. And that's the insincereity of this. It is insincere. And the existence of that pyramid that we can see and hear and feel and experience every day is why we're willing to make a bet.
我想他们现在试图做的是说，因为鲍勃·李不是我们认为的那种情况，所以整个金字塔就不存在了。但是那个金字塔是存在的。我们所有人都可以感受到它。哦，天啊。这就是不真诚之处。它是不真诚的。而我们每天都可以看到、听到、感觉到并体验到的那个金字塔的存在，正是我们愿意打赌的原因。
We called it a bet that the Bob Lee case was like the Brianna Cuffer case. And in that year. With a disclaimer. With a disclaimer. We always do a disclaimer here.
我们称之为一次赌注，认为Bob Lee案件与Brianna Cuffer案件相似，而且是在那一年。需要说明的是，我们这里总是有免责声明。
And just to George Hammond from the financial times who emailed me, here's what he asked me. There's a lot of public attention lately on whether San Francisco status has one of the top business and technology hubs in the US is at risk in the aftermath of the pandemic. Da. Obviously it is. I wondered if you had a moment to chat about that. And whether there is a danger that negative perceptions about the city will damage its reputation for founders and capital locators in the future.
George Hammond从金融时报给我发了邮件，他问了我一个问题，我来回答一下。最近公众非常关注旧金山是否仍然是美国最重要的商业和技术中心之一，在疫情后会不会失去这个地位。当然是有风险的。我想知道你有时间聊一下这个问题吗？还有，是否存在负面印象会损害旧金山作为创业者和资本定位者的声誉的危险。
So essentially, and it says the obviously a lot of potential for hysteria in this conversation which I'm keen to avoid. And it's like, have you walked down the street? And I asked them, have you walked down the street in San Francisco? Jason, the best response is send him the thing that sacscent, which is the amount of available office space in San Francisco. People are voting for hours. Yeah. Companies are voting with their feet. So it's already, if the quality of life wasn't so poor, they'd stay.
所以基本上，显而易见地在这次谈话中存在很多可能引起歇斯底里的潜在因素，我很想避免这种情况。就好比说，你有没有走过街头？我问他们，你们有没有在旧金山的街头走过？Jason，最好的回答就是给他看一下可用的办公空间，这就是所谓的“sacscent”。人们投票决定了许多东西。是的，公司正在用自己的脚投票。如果这里的生活质量不这么差的话，他们就会留下来了。
This is the essence of gas sliding. Is what they do is the people who've actually created the situation San Francisco with their policies. Their policies of defunding the police, making it harder for the police to do their job, decriminalizing theft under $950, allowing open-air drug markets. The people who have now created that matrix of policies have created this situation. What they then turn around and do is say, no, the people who are creating the problem are the ones who are observing this. That's all we're doing is observing and complaining about it.
这就是汽油滑动的本质。他们所做的就是那些实际上用他们的政策创造了旧金山这种情况的人。他们的政策是削减警方的资金，让警察难以履行职责，将950美元以下的盗窃罪定为非罪，允许开放式毒品市场。现在创造了这些政策框架的人却回过头来说，制造问题的人是观察这种情况的人。我们所做的只是观察和抱怨。
And what they try to do is say, well, no, you're running down San Francisco. We're not the ones creating the problem. We're observing it. And just this week, another data point is that the mayor's office said that they were short more than 500 police officers in San Francisco. Yeah, nobody who's going to become a police officer here, are you crazy?
他们试图做的是说，“嘿，你在诋毁旧金山。我们不是那些制造问题的人。我们只是在观察它。”就在这周，市长办公室表示，旧金山缺少500多名警察。是啊，谁会在这里成为警察呢，你疯了吗？
Well, and there was another article just this week about how there's a lot of speculation. Rumors are swirling of an unofficial strike, an informal strike, by police officers who are normally on the force who are tired of risking life and limb. And then they basically risk getting at a physical altercation with a homeless person. They bring them in, and then they're just released again. So there's a lot of quiet quitting that's going on in the job. It's like this learned helplessness, because why take a risk? And then the police commission doesn't have your back. It seems like the only time you have prosecutorial is yield by a lot of these prosecutors is when they can go after a cop, not one of these repeat offenders.
嗯，上周又有一篇文章，说有很多猜测。有传言说警察们非正式罢工了，他们本来就是警察，但已经厌倦了冒着生命危险的工作。他们冒着可能与无家可归者的肢体冲突的风险将他们带走，然后他们又被释放了。因此，很多人默默地辞职，这种无助感就像学会了一样，因为为什么要冒险呢？而且警察委员会不支持你。看起来，这些检察官只有在能把警察告上法庭的时候才会出面，而不是追查这些惯犯中的一个。
And you just saw that by the way in LA. Oh, look, Motherboard and New York Times just emailed and DMed me. And then did you guys say that instead of solving these issues, the Board of Supervisors was dealing with a wild parrot? What was it? It's just the meeting that was disbanded. They had scheduled a meeting to vote on whether the wild parrots are the official animal of the city of San Francisco. So that was the scheduled meeting that got disbanded.
你们刚才还在洛杉矶看到了那个，哦，Motherboard和New York Times刚给我发了邮件和私信。然后你们说监理委员会并没有解决这些问题，而是在处理一只野鹦鹉？是什么啊？其实那次会议被解散了。他们原本安排了一次会议要投票决定野鹦鹉是否成为旧金山市的官方动物。所以那次被解散的会议就是这个原因。
Also, can I just clarify what. Thomas talking about what the Elon interview, a BBC reporter interviewed Elon and said, there is much more race and hate and hate speech in the feeds on Twitter. And he said, can you give me an example? And he said, well, I don't have an example, but people are saying this. He said, which people are saying it. And the BBC reporter said, well, there's just different groups of people are saying it. And I've certainly seen him.
嗯，可以问一下，Thomas在说Elon的哪个采访吗？BBC的一位记者采访了Elon，他说Twitter上的信息里面有更多种族和仇恨，以及仇恨言论。然后他问：你能给我举个例子吗？Elon说：我没有例子，但是有人这么说。他问：是哪些人这么说的？BBC记者答道：不同的人群都在说这些话。我也确实看到过这些内容。
He said, OK, you saw it. And for you, he goes, no, I stopped looking at for you. He said, so give me one example of hate speech that you've seen in your feed. Now, without speaking about any inside information, which I do not have much of, they've been pretty deliberate of removing hate speech from places like for you. And it's a very complicated issue when you have an open platform. But the people may say a word, but it doesn't reach a lot of people.
他说：“好吧，你看到了。但是针对你，我不再寻找了。”然后他问我：“能给我举个你在动态里看到的仇恨言论的例子吗？” 就算我不怎么掌握内部信息，但这些平台们对移除仇恨言论都是相当有决断力的。当你在一个完全开放的环境中操作，这是一个非常复杂的问题。但人们可能只说了一些话而没有让很多人听到。
So, if you were to say something really nasty, it doesn't take a genius to block that and not have it reach a bunch of people. This reporter kept insisting to Elon that this was on the rise with no factual basis for it, that other people said it. And then he said, but I don't look at the feed. He said, so you're telling me that there's more hate speech that you've seen, but you just admitted to me that you haven't looked at the fore you've eaten three months.
如果你说了什么非常讨厌的话，那么很容易就会被屏蔽掉，不会传达给很多人，这不需要什么天才才能做到。这位记者一再向伊隆坚称这种情况越来越普遍，但没有任何实际的事实依据，只是其他人这么说而已。然后他说，但我不看反馈。这意味着你告诉我，你曾经看过更多恶意言论，但你承认你三个月没有去看。
And it was just like this completely weird thing. I just had mother. You call him in a lie. You call him in a lie. You call him in a lie. And this is the thing. If you're a journalist, just cut it down the middle. Come with prepared with facts. Listen, stop taking a position either way.
就像这样，完全是一件奇怪的事情。我刚刚有了一个妈妈。你说他在说谎。你说他在说谎。你说他在说谎。这就是问题所在。如果你是一名记者，就请中立一点。准备好事实。听，停止站在任何一方的立场上。
I want to connect one dot, which is that he filled in his own narrative, even though the data wasn't necessarily there. In the same way that we kind of filled in our narrative about San Francisco with the Bob Lee murder being another example. No, we put a disclaimer on it. We said we didn't, but we did it. Hold on a second. We so we knew we didn't know. And furthermore, we're taking great pains this week to correct the record and explain what we now know. Yeah, we're putting on it.
我想要连接一个点，就是他在没有必要的数据的情况下填写了自己的叙述。就像我们在圣弗朗西斯科的另一个例子里填写了自己的叙述，即鲍勃·李的谋杀案。不，我们在上面加了免责声明。我们说我们没有，但我们确实这样做了。等一下，我们知道我们不知道。而且，本周我们正在竭尽全力纠正记录并解释我们现在知道的内容。是的，我们正在这么做。
He was called in a lie. To be intellectually honest. This is just intellectual honesty. Honestly, you're going soft here free, Berg. You're getting gasslet by all these people. I'm OK, gasslet by anyone. I think the guy totally had zero data. By the way, when you're a journalist, you're supposed to report on data and evidence.
他被指控撒谎。为了保持智识诚信，这只是智识上的诚实。说实话，夫利先生，你在这里变得软弱了。你被所有这些人所蒙骗了。我没关系，被任何人所蒙骗都没关系。我认为那个人完全没有数据。顺便说一下，当你是一名记者时，你应该报道数据和证据。
So he's certainly, you know, I think completely. Placing in a family with Don Carmen, Yani, it's the same story. Yeah. Is this that Don, Don happened to survive? Guys, I love you, but I got to go.
所以他肯定，你知道的，我想完全。和唐卡门、亚尼一家人在一起，这是同样的故事。是的。唐，唐碰巧幸存下来了吗？伙计们，我爱你们，但我得走了。
Come on. Here's what Matt tell from other. I'm going to ask that fun. There's been a lot of discussion about the future of San Francisco and the death has quickly become politicized. Has that caused any division or disagreement from what you've seen or has that not been the case?
来吧，这是马特从别人那里告诉我们的。我要去参加那个有趣的活动。对于旧金山的未来，有很多讨论，而这次死亡事件很快就变得政治化了。从你所见到的情况来看，这是否引起了任何分歧或不同意见？
The press is gleeful right now. They're gleeful. Like, oh my god, there's like, you know, just like the right was gleeful with Jesse Smolette, having gotten himself beaten up or, you know, setting up his own.
媒体现在很高兴。他们很高兴，像是喔我的天啊，你知道，就像右派在Jesse Smolette得到殴打或自己安排的时候那样高兴一样。
All right, everybody, four, the Sultan of science, currently conducting experiments on a beach to see exactly how burned he can get with his SPF 200 under an umbrella, wearing a sun shirt and pants. Freeberg on the beach. Where's the same outfit astronauts wear when they do spacewalks? Hey, stable diffusion. Make me an image of David freeberg wearing a full body bathing suit covered an SPF 200 under three umbrellas. All of the sunny beach.
好了，大家听着，四号在海滩上做科学实验，他是科学皇帝，正在穿着防晒衣和长裤，坐在遮阳伞下面，看看他能不能在SPF 200的防晒下晒成什么样子。况且他正在海滩上，跟自由山海豚一起玩呢。哎，像宇航员太空行走时穿的那样！快来，稳定扩散，画一个大卫·弗里伯格穿全身海滩游泳服，在三个遮阳伞下面把整个晴朗的海滩都遮住了。
Thank you so much. Oh my god. For the dictator, Chama, Pauli Hoppatiya, creating regulations. And the regular, oh, the regulator, you can call me the regular. The regulator. See it tonight when we'll eat our orchalons, what's left of them. The final four or five orchalons in existence, so be laid otherwise I'm putting you on the be list today if you're like, I will be there. I'll be there. I promise I promise I promise I can't wait to be there.
非常感谢。天啊。感谢独裁者夏玛·保罗·霍帕蒂亚制定规定。还有监管者，哦，你可以称呼我为常规。监管者。今晚我们将会吃我们剩下的几个奥喀龙果，它们是现存的最后四五个奥喀龙果，所以如果你要来，就要被放进名单里。我会在那里的，我保证，我保证，我保证，我迫不及待地想去。
And the rain man himself, Namaste, didn't even get to putting Ron. Oh, we'll talk about it in the versus Nicky, that's what I'm putting me on. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh. I think you should ask auto GPT how you can eat more endangered animals. Yes, we've have a plan for you. Yes. And then have it go kill those animals. Give it a bite in the real world. Put something on the dark web to go kill the remaining rhinos and bring them to Chimalt's house for Pokemon. I don't think rhinos are tasty.
而雨人本人Namaste连Ron都没放进去。我们会在对抗Nicky的时候谈论这个，我会制定我的计划。我认为你应该问问自动GPT怎么样才能吃更多濒危动物。是的，我们已经为你计划好了。然后去杀死那些动物，在现实世界中咬一口。在暗网上放一些东西去杀死剩下的犀牛，把它们带到Chimalt家里玩Pokemon。我不认为犀牛有味道。
Paragraph 1:
Wasn't that the plava movie? It was a, oh, did you guys see his cocaine bear out yet? It was a Matthew Broderick Marlin Brando movie, right? Where they're doing the takeoff on the Godfather was the fresh butter.
那不是那部很热门的电影吗？哦，你们看过他的可卡因熊了吗？那是一部由马修·布罗德里克和马林·白兰度主演的电影，对吧？他们在那部电影中对教父进行了一个又新鲜又黄油口味的恶搞。
Paragraph 2:
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's like a conspiracy to eat endangered animals. Yes, the freshman. The project came out in 1990. Yeah, Marlin Brando did it with Matthew Broderick. And like Bruno Kirby. They actually, that was the whole thing. Oh, Bruno Kirby, that's a deep hole. They're actually, they're eating endangered animals. What do you think?
是的，就像一场吃濒危动物的阴谋。没错，是指那个新生。这个计划是在1990年发布的。是的，马龙·白兰度和马修·布罗德里克一起参与了这个项目，还有布鲁诺·科比。他们实际上就是在吃濒危动物。你觉得这怎么样？
Paragraph 3:
Heat too, is that going to be good? Sax, I know, heats one of your favorite films, me too. Is there a sequel coming? They're going to do heat too. And the novel's already come out. Adam, it's all the novel.
热度也很好，这是个好消息吗？我知道《热度》是你最喜欢的电影之一，我也喜欢。有续集要出吗？他们要拍《热度2》了。小说也已经问世了。亚当，全部都在小说里。
Paragraph 4:
Yeah, heat's amazing. Heat is amazing. He's one of those movies where when it comes on, you just can't stop watching. Yeah, so let's do a heat too screener. That's Bank robbery slash shootout in movie history, you know? That is literally the best highest film ever. Like it's up there with like the Joker, with reservoir dogs, the Joker in that Batman movie where he robs the bank. Like, I mean, what a great scene.
哇，热血澎湃啊。《热血澎湃》 真是部让人一看就停不下来的电影。嗯，要不我们来看看《热血澎湃2》的试映吧，因为这可是有着银行抢劫和枪战史上最佳的电影场景啊。简直是有史以来最棒、最高水准的影片之一，可以和《小丑》、《低俗小说》，还有那个蝙蝠侠电影里小丑抢银行的场景媲美。真是太精彩了！
Paragraph 5:
All right, love you besties. And for blah, blah, blah, blah. This is the new Harlem Park S-124. If you want to go to the fan meetups and hang out with other fans. Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye bye. We'll let your winners ride. Rainman, David, Zach.
好的，我爱你们最好的朋友们。还有关于这个新的哈林公园S-124，如果你想去粉丝见面会并与其他粉丝一起玩耍。再见，再见，再见。我们将让获胜者们乘坐。Rainman、David、Zach。
Paragraph 6:
I'm going on, yeah. And it said we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it. I'm the west. I swing up. Can walk. I'm going on. All the way. What? What are you? I'm on.
我继续前进。它说要向粉丝开放源代码，他们对此疯狂了。我在西方。我挥舞着手臂。我会走路。我一直在前进。什么？你在问什么？我正在前进。
如果有必要，可以改写第六段。
Paragraph 7:
Besties are gone. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on. I'm on.
好朋友们已经离开了。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。我在继续前进。
Paragraph 8:
You should all just get a room and just have one big hug. You're all cute. He's cute. It's like this sexual tension that we just need to release the album.
你们应该一起找个房间，来个大拥抱。你们都很可爱。他也很可爱。就像有这种性的紧张感，只有通过发行专辑才能释放。
Paragraph 9:
What? Be. What? Be. What? Be. What?.
什么？是什么？什么？是什么？什么？是什么？什么？