Reid Hoffman on Building AI and Other Tech More Responsibly
发布时间 2023-04-25 13:00:35 来源
On IdeaCast, we bring you insights from leading thinkers in business. For more advice on growing your business, you should check out the podcast Masters of Scale. LinkedIn co-founder Reed Hoffman joins top minds in business to explore their unconventional paths to scale. Check out Masters of Scale, wherever you get your podcasts.
在IdeaCast节目中，我们为您带来商界领先思想家的见解。为了获取发展您的企业的更多建议，您可以听听Masters of Scale这个播客。LinkedIn的联合创始人Reed Hoffman与商业顶尖人才一起探索他们的非传统扩张路径。请在您获得播客的地方查看Masters of Scale。
Welcome to the HBAR IdeaCast from Harvard Business Review. I'm Allison Beard. When any new technology comes along, people, especially those in the tech industry itself, tend to get really excited about all the good it's going to bring. Social media connects people around the world, crypto democratizes finance, generative AI supercharges productivity, and so on. The evangelist crowd is loud and proud. But as we've seen over the past decade, the potential downsides of the latest tech innovations don't always get as much attention. Yes, you'll see some skeptics warning about unintended consequences and negative externalities. But it doesn't seem like industry insiders, the people building and deploying these new tools and the leaders overseeing that work, are thinking all that hard about what challenges they might inadvertently create.
欢迎来到《哈佛商业评论》(Harvard Business Review)的HBAR IdeaCast。我是艾莉森·比尔德。当任何新技术出现时，人们，尤其是科技行业内的人，往往对它所带来的好处感到非常兴奋。社交媒体连接了全世界的人，加密货币民主化了金融，生成式人工智能增强了生产力等等。热心支持的人群非常响亮自豪。但是，就像我们在过去的十年中所看到的一样，最新技术创新的潜在负面影响并不总是得到足够的关注。是的，你会看到一些怀疑者警告意外后果和负面外部性。但是，似乎行业内部人士，那些正在构建和部署这些新工具以及监督这项工作的领导者，并没有认真思考他们可能无意中产生的挑战。
Our guest today is an unabashed techno optimist. He really does believe in the power of technology to improve our lives. But he also knows how important it is for tech companies to think more carefully and responsibly about the problems they're trying to solve and the products and services they're putting out into the world.
今天的嘉宾是一个毫不掩饰的科技乐观主义者。他真的相信科技可以改善我们的生活。但他也知道科技公司更加谨慎和负责地思考他们试图解决的问题以及他们推出的产品和服务的重要性。
Reed Hoffman is a founding board member of PayPal, a founder of LinkedIn, a partner of the Venture Capital from Greylock, and a director of several companies including Microsoft, although he recently stepped down as a board member of OpenAI. He's also a podcaster hosting Masters of Scale and the new show possible. Reed, welcome. Great to be here.
里德·霍夫曼是PayPal的创始董事会成员、领英的创始人、Greylock风险投资公司的合伙人，以及包括微软在内的多家公司的董事。尽管他最近辞去了OpenAI的董事会成员一职，但他仍然是一名播客主持人，主持Masters of Scale和新节目Possible。欢迎里德光临。非常高兴在这里见到你。
Okay, first off, how do you define responsible or ethical technology?
首先，你如何定义具有责任感或道德技术？
简而言之，对于具有责任感或道德的技术来说，这些技术应该符合一系列关于用户权利、数据保护、环境影响以及社会影响等方面的标准。因此，这些技术应该考虑对人类和生态系统的影响，并且应该在设计和实施过程中积极地纳入社会、文化和经济因素。此外，这些技术应该被设计为可持续的、安全的、可靠的和易于使用的，以便广大人民能够自由地使用并从中获益。
So one of the illusions that is sometimes promulgated is that technology is essentially value neutral. And that doesn't mean that it embodies values in kind of a simple way that like, you know, I believe in democracy or I believe in some other form of human organization, you know, or kind of the various values debates we're having within the US and other countries.
有时候会有一种错觉，即技术本质上是价值中立的。这并不意味着它以一种简单的方式体现价值观，好比我相信民主，或者我相信其他形式的人类组织，以及我们在美国和其他国家进行的各种价值观辩论。
I think that the question is you say, well, how does this affect the human condition? What does it mean for different individuals like are there bias issues or are there things where it creates some kind of bad social impact?
我认为问题在于您说，这会对人类的情况产生什么影响？对于不同个体来说，这意味着什么？是否存在偏见问题或是否会导致某些不良社会影响？
And you have to ask these questions. Obviously, one of the challenges when you're dealing with things of scale is it's never all good. Like 100% everything on the thing. What you have to do is you have to make it on broad, really good and then try to make sure that you're not disadvantaging groups that don't have power or a voice. So for example, you say, well, cars, well, cars are generally speaking very good at enables transportation, enables mobility, enables people to live in different areas on the other hand, of course, in the US, we have 40,000 deaths per year in driving, and then of course, climate and all the rest. So you have some kind of challenges and you try to shape it so that on balance is very good and you're dynamically improving as you learn and refine.
你必须问这些问题。显然，当你处理规模的事情时，不可能一切都很好。没有100%完美的事情。你必须做的是广泛而好，然后尽量确保不会 benachteiligt 那些没有权力或声音的群体。例如，你说，汽车，汽车通常非常擅长促进交通，促进流动性，让人们生活在不同的地区，但在美国，每年会有40000人死于驾驶，当然还有气候和其他方面的问题。所以你面临一些挑战，你要努力塑造它，让其总体上非常好，并且在学习和完善的过程中不断改进。
As someone who has been a leader in the tech industry for a really long time, what is your honest assessment of the job that you all are doing in considering not just the upsides but also the downsides and then trying to mitigate those risks, whether that social media a decade ago or a generative AI today?
作为科技行业的领袖之一，您对我们在考虑社交媒体十年前或生成式人工智能今天等方面的影响时，既要关注优势，又要考虑风险，并尝试缓解这些风险的工作进行了诚实的评估。
Well, it's a little bit hard to talk about the entire tech industry because there's some people I think who are doing pretty good jobs and I think there's some people who are doing pretty awful jobs. You know, the story of social media, as you said in the intro, is when it opens with blogs and social networks and all the rest. It's like, oh, we're giving voice to the people who didn't otherwise have voices and people who might be a minority of some sort somewhere in the world, whether it might be, you know, kind of sexual orientation or might be religious or might be a racial minority, they can discover their voice and they can connect with other people. It isn't that awesome. And of course, it is and it continues to be.
嗯，谈论整个科技行业有点难，因为我认为有些人做得非常好，也有些人做得非常糟糕。正如你在介绍中所说的那样，社交媒体的故事始于博客和社交网络等，这就是给那些原本没有发言权的人们提供了发声机会，无论这些人在世界的哪个角落，他们都可以表达自己的声音，联系其他人。这难道不是很棒吗？当然，它真的很棒，而且它还将继续下去。
But you say, well, now it becomes where everyone's there and then all of the issues that become part of why we have government, why we have regulation and how we make society work together, those then come in place in full.
然而你可能会说，现在所有人都在这里，然后所有的问题都成了我们为什么需要政府、为什么需要规章制度以及如何让社会共同运作的一部分。这些问题全部应运而生。
And like, for example, one of the classic things that I've been debating since as long as I've been on basically television, I think I did a 1996 firing line on this on freedom of speech. Is this like, oh, we don't regulate freedom of speech.
比如说，有一件我从早期做电视的时候就在辩论的经典事情，就是1996年我在《枪火》节目上就自由言论做了一个辩论。这意味着我们不会管理自由言论。
And it's like, well, of course, we do. We have truth in advertising. We have issues around hate speech or violence or there's all kinds of ways we regulate speech.
这意味着，当然，我们会这么做。我们有真实的广告。我们有关于仇恨言论、暴力等方面的问题，有各种方式来规范言论。
Many of you say, well, my freedom of speech allows me to say false advertising and to sell drugs that are harmful for lots of money. You're like, well, that we don't allow a society.
你们中的很多人说，我的言论自由允许我进行虚假广告和销售有害药品赚很多钱。但是，我们社会是不允许这样做的。
And I think that's what the tech industry is still coming up to speed on in terms of how do we navigate what is our definition of truth in collective discussion and how do we navigate that?
我认为科技行业在如何导航我们集体讨论中对真相的定义上仍然需要逐步提高认识，我们该如何应对？
Now when it gets to AI, which is obviously the thing I've been spending a ton of time on the last number of years, I think the tech industry has learned from the social media side to pay more attention here.
现在当提到人工智能时，这显然是我过去几年来花费大量时间的领域，我认为科技行业已经从社交媒体方面学到了更加关注这一领域的经验。
So the question's around, well, is it biased or might there be unintended consequences in jobs or misinformation?
问题是，它是否有偏见，或者会在就业或误导方面产生意想不到的后果？
The way that ethics starts is by asking the questions and checking as you're building. You're not going to get it perfect. You're not going to launch something scale and get it perfect. But if you're asking the questions and you're measuring and you're improving, then you'll eventually get to a very good place.
伦理学的开始是通过提出问题并在构建过程中进行检查。你不可能一开始就完美无缺，也不可能在启动一个规模较大的项目时就做得完美。但如果你一直在提问、衡量和改进，最终会走向一个非常好的地方。
So it seems like you're saying that technologists today and leaders of tech companies have maybe learned from the era of social media and that the famous move fast and break thing era is over.
所以，您似乎在说，如今的技术专家和科技公司的领导人也许已经从社交媒体时代中吸取了教训，那个以“快速行动并破坏一切”的时代已经结束了。
What I'd say is, okay, you know, I'm the author of Blitzkailing. I'm a definite move fast person. The question is, what things do you break? You break your servers? Fine, no problem. You break society. No, that's a problem.
我要说的是，好的，你知道，我是《闪电式销售》的作者。我是一个喜欢行动迅速的人。问题是，你打破了什么东西？你打破了你的服务器？没问题。你打破了社会？那就是个问题了。
And what I'd say is some tech leaders, you know, Sachin Adela, Sam Altman are well on the learning curve. I think it'd be a fool's statement to say, oh, we've learned we're good. It's like, no, no.
我要说的是有一些科技领袖，比如萨钦·阿德拉、山姆·阿尔特曼已经踏上了学习曲线。我认为说我们已经学会了，我们做得很好，这是愚蠢的说法。事实并非如此。
Part of what you're doing is we're exploring this new stuff and we're building these new things and you can't predict all of it. You're learning as you go and you're fixing.
你所做的一部分是我们正在探索这些新事物并建立这些新东西，你无法预测所有的情况。你会在实践中不断学习并进行修正。
What factors are they considering when making business decisions?
在做出商业决策时，他们考虑了哪些因素？
You know, what is the general public maybe not see or hear about what's going on behind the scenes, both in the VC community and within the companies themselves?
您知道，在风险投资社区和企业内部，一般公众可能无法看到或听到幕后发生的事情吗？
So I'd say that every technology company that I'm a part of, that my partners at Greylock are part of are all at least asking the questions and doing it as part of how they develop the technology and the questions can range from are we being responsible stewards of data and people's trust?
我认为，我所在的每个科技公司，以及我在Greylock的合作伙伴所在的公司，都至少在询问以下问题，并将其作为他们开发技术的一部分。这些问题可能包括，我们是否是数据和人们信任的负责任的管理者？
Might there be groups that are being disadvantaged by this technology that is a structural bad thing like for example, racial disadvantage?
这项科技可能会让某些团体受到不利影响，例如种族歧视等结构性问题，是否存在这样的情况？
Whereas you say, well, we're just advancing criminals. And that's okay. That's fine. You know, fraudsters. And the best we can are we red teaming and thinking about blind spots or things that could go wrong?
你说，我们只是在推进罪犯。那也没关系，没事。你知道，是欺诈者。我们最好红色团队和思考盲点或可能出错的事情吗？
Are we thinking about what happens when this gets the scale? Do we have a good theory about why this will be net really positive and how we can remediate or diminish harms?
当这一规模扩大时，我们是否考虑了会发生什么？我们是否有一个良好的理论来解释为什么这将是净收益，以及我们如何能够减轻或降低伤害？
I think all of those questions in every tech company that I'm part of are a center and we go out and learn. We hire people and ask for, you know, what are the other things we should be thinking I'm doing here?
我认为在我参与的每个科技公司，这些问题都是中心，并且我们会去学习。我们雇用人才并询问，你知道，我们在这里应该思考什么其他事情？
Yeah. And bigger picture is the industry and I'm sorry for keeps saying the industry as a whole.
是的，更大的图片是这个行业，我很抱歉一直说整个行业。
But most of the people you know, you know, are you now focusing on more important problems than perhaps you once did?
你所认识的大多数人，是不是现在把注意力放在比之前更重要的问题上了？
You know, there's the famous Peter Till quote, we wanted flying cars. They gave us 140 characters. And now it's more like we want climate change solutions, but we're getting a chatbot that can write stanzas like Shakespeare.
你知道的，有一个著名的彼得·蒂尔的名言，我们想要飞行汽车，却拿到了只有140个字符的限制。现在，我们更需要的是应对气候变化的解决方案，却得到了一个能够写出莎士比亚式诗句的聊天机器人。
Well, yes and complicated.
好的，对和复杂。
这句话的含义有些复杂，可以理解为“是的，但是有一些复杂的情况需要考虑”。
So for example, flying cars, I'm on the board of jovy. We are working on flying cars. And that's to redefine space in a climate change way that will help with gridlock and pollution and a bunch of other things and be accessible.
例如，飞行汽车，我是jovy的董事会成员。我们正在研发飞行汽车，这将以应对气候变化的方式重新定义空间，有助于解决交通拥堵和污染等问题，并且易于使用 。
On the other hand, the natural pattern of these things is to try to figure out what's the easiest work to do that's most valuable. And so that's why people tend to do a lot of software.
另一方面，这些事情的自然模式是尝试找出最有价值的最容易完成的工作。因此，人们往往会做很多软件。
And you know, I tend to think that actually chatbots can be really valuable. They can be valuable for, you know, anything that ranges from, give me some good information to help me solve this problem to any number of things that could play into human life.
你知道吗，我倾向于认为聊天机器人实际上可以非常有价值。它们可以为你提供从帮我解决这个问题到涉及人类生活的任何事情的有价值的信息。
But on the other hand, of course, solving hard problems like climate change, ocean, deacidification, you know, other kind of things are super important. And people are working on those. They're just harder because it's a lot more expensive with the economic rewards being much more challenging.
但另一方面，解决像气候变化、海洋去酸化等难题，当然非常重要。人们正在着手处理这些问题，但由于经济回报更为具有挑战性，成本也更高，因此这些问题更难解决。
One of the things that, you know, I try to give thinking to and advice to is how do we create an incentive system that also goes after the hard problems more? Yeah, absolutely. And you use the word valuable. So let me press on that a little bit.
我尝试思考和提供建议的一件事情是，如何创造一个激励系统，更多地解决难题？没错，你提到了“有价值”，让我详细探讨一下。
By valuable, do you mean valuable to society, valuable to investors? You know, where is that purpose, profits, trade off, or balance falling for your community now?
“Valuable” 的定义是指对于社会的价值，还是对于投资者的价值？您知道吗，您的社区现在在社会价值、利润、权衡或平衡方面的目标在何处？
Well, in an ideal system, you align them so that the high functioning of business, where the product that's offering their customers, it's really good for the well-being of the customers in society and the stakeholders that are in, there are of course places where that gets misaligned. And it's not only within the tech industry, it's, you know, this is one of the challenges we can have with making industries work.
在一个理想的系统中，您需要使业务运转高效，使产品向客户提供的服务能够真正有益于客户和社会中的利益相关者。当然，有时候这种协调不一定能够实现，这不仅仅是在技术行业中出现的问题，这是让产业正常运转的挑战之一。
And look, there is a, in all of society, there's a whole bunch of people who are doing things only for money or only for profits. That's part of our, how we design the alignment of society that goes all the way back to Adam Smith. But the question is also that people will say, I want to hold my head up with my friends and my community in SAP doing a really good thing.
你看，社会上有一大群人只为了赚钱或牟取利益而做事。这是我们社会设计的一部分，可以追溯到亚当·斯密。但问题也在于，人们会说，我想在SAP公司为我的朋友和社区做好事情，让自己昂首挺胸。
All the people I hang out with are focused on, how is it that we're also making the world and society better with what we're doing? And so for example, that's one of the questions we ask at Greylock, I'm going to invest in, is to make sure that we are positive on those vectors that we have to do so within the context of a strong business.
我与所有的朋友们都关注于，我们通过做的事情如何让世界和社会变得更好？例如，在Greylock，我们会问一个问题，那就是，我要投资的目标是否可以在强大的业务框架内保持积极？在此背景下，我们必须考虑到这些因素。
But you know, if you're asking a question and intentionally trying to do that, then that's at least half the game. And so as of you see at Greylock, you know, what are you looking for, seeking out both in business ideas, business models, and founders right now?
但是你要知道，如果你在提出问题时有意识地尝试这样做，那至少已经成功了一半。因此，就像你见到的在Greylock，你正在寻找什么样的商业想法、商业模式和创始人？
Part of the thing that's a delight about venture investing is while you may have a very active theory of the game. So I've been doing, you know, a generative AI for the last few years. I co-founded a company called Inflection with Mustafa Soliman. We have adept in Cresta and Storkel and all these other companies at Greylock. And so we have a very active thesis on artificial intelligence and have had for, you know, five plus years.
风险投资的迷人之处在于，虽然你可能对游戏有非常积极的理论，但你永远不知道下一步会发生什么。我过去几年一直在研究生成型人工智能。我和穆斯塔法·索利曼共同创立了一家名为Inflection的公司。我们对Greylock的Cresta和Storkel等公司的人工智能有非常活跃的投资观点，这种观点已经持续了五年以上。
We're also being surprised by the amazing things brought to us. So you know, just to kind of illustrate what I think the quality of being surprised is, when Brian Chesky and Nate and Joe brought Airbnb to me, I hadn't really been thinking about, you know, a marketplace for space, a question about how you can not just travel to a place to see a monument, but to experience local culture, to enable people to transform their own economic outcomes of being able to afford their house or their space. But yet that's just software and that brings all that together.
我们也被带给我们的惊人事物所惊讶。你知道，为了阐述我认为惊喜的质量，当布莱恩·切斯基、内特和乔把Airbnb带给我时，我并没有想过，你知道，一个关于如何不仅仅旅行去看一座纪念碑，而是去体验当地文化的空间市场，让人们改变自己的经济结果，能够负担得起他们的房子或空间。但这只是软件，将所有这些东西结合在一起。
So you know, for me, in addition to AI, I also tend to look at networks that redefine our social society space. That's part of the reason I created, you know, LinkedIn with my co-founders, things that we've done in various other investments at Greylock, including like, for example, you know, like take Roblox, which is, you know, okay, you've got developers building entertainment and educational things that generally speaking, mostly appeal to kids, but a whole range of experiences, we're looking to be surprised.
你知道，对我来说，除了人工智能，我还倾向于关注重新定义我们社会空间的网络。这就是我和我的联合创始人创造领英等项目的原因之一，以及在 Greylock 进行各种其他投资，比如像 Roblox 这样的项目。Roblox 允许开发者构建娱乐和教育产品，通常更适合儿童，但它提供了整个体验的范围，我们正在寻求惊喜。
And the question we ask is, are the customers really benefited from this and are the, is the community and society that they're in broadly also benefited? And does it have a very strong business that will transform industries? And you know, if we see all that and we see an entrepreneur that we think is high integrity and that we would be delighted to be in business with our entire lives, then we get really excited and join forces.
我们所问的问题是，顾客真正从中受益了吗？他们所在的社区和整个社会也受益了吗？这是否有一个非常强大的业务，将改变行业？如果我们看到所有这些，并且看到一个我们认为具有高度诚信并且我们愿意与其一起经商一生的创业者，那么我们会非常激动并加入合力。
Yeah, that high integrity piece, you know, finding people, founding teams who are absolutely trying to scale and run with their ideas and make a change, but then also will take that moment to step back and ask the questions about, you know, ethical construction, deployment, etc. How do you evaluate for that?
嗯，那就是高诚信度的团队。你知道，找到那些完全想要扩大规模并付诸实践，改变世界的人，但也会花时间退后一步，探讨关于道德建设、部署等方面的问题。你如何评估这一点呢？
Well, it's not a simple formula, but one of the things we do pretty rigorously is reference checking. You haven't completed your reference checks until you found a negative reference check on everybody in the world.
嗯，这不是一个简单的公式，但我们做得非常严谨的一件事就是背景调查。只有在世界上找到了每个人的负面背景调查，你才完成了所有的背景调查。
So, for example, if someone was reference checking me in depth, what they would find is, oh my gosh, he's a really great creative problem solver, but he's not particularly good at making the trains run on time, right?
例如，如果有人深入了解我的背景，他们会发现，哦天哪，他是一个非常出色的创造性问题解决者，但他并不特别擅长按时严格执行安排。
And obviously, you know, when you're asking the integrity question, you're asking a question of, how much do you actually, in fact, walk the walk, not just talk the talk, how much do you, when you're getting positions of stress, do you make decisions, like, for example, that say, no, no, yeah, that would be the easy decision, but that takes risks and other people's well-being.
显然，你知道当你问诚信问题时，你要问的是，你实际上有多少真正践行行动，而不仅仅是说说而已。当你在承担压力的职务时，你有多少会做出决策，比如说，“不，那是容易的决定，但这会涉及风险和其他人的福祉。”
Let's take the hard decision. Do you honor your commitments? And therefore, you know, when you're saying, hey, we're going to have a commitment to make sure that we are tracking how we impact society. We're going to have dashboards on it, and we're going to be improving them year by year. Will you be doing that?
让我们做出艰难的决定。你能够遵守自己的承诺吗？因此，当你说我们会承诺确保追踪我们对社会的影响时，你知道自己在做什么。我们会有仪表板对此进行跟踪，并且我们会每年不断改进。你会这样做吗？
Talk a little bit about the role that the tech world, the BC world, and industry that is still very much dominated by rich white men has to play in increasing inclusivity and also decreasing socioeconomic equality.
谈一下科技界、区块链界以及富有白人男性主导的行业在增加包容性和减少社会经济不平等方面所扮演的角色。
One of the things that I've been saying for maybe a decade plus now, anytime you look at a problem, you go, that's important to solve, you go, if you're not part of the solution that you're part of the problem, so you need to be saying, how am I as an individual, and also, of course, as a firm in every house, investing and trying to solve this problem?
我已经说了十年以上的一件事情，每当你遇到一个问题，你说：“这个问题很重要，需要解决。”如果你不是解决问题的一部分，那么你就是问题的一部分，所以你需要问自己：“作为个人，以及作为一个公司或家庭，我应该如何投资和努力解决这个问题？”
How am I putting in sweat and blood into trying to make this happen? So relative to diversity and inclusion in making sure that you have a regular workflow and process by which you're trying to recruit, you're trying to meet entrepreneurs.
我是如何付出汗水和心血来尝试让这件事情实现的？相对于多样性和包容性，确保你拥有一个定期的工作流程和过程，通过这个过程你尝试招募、尝试与创业者会面。
I mean, we do things at Greylock like have a set of office hours that's only for underrepresented minority entrepreneurs. We do any recruiting thing, we make sure that we are interviewing disproportionately large numbers of underrepresented minorities, including unfortunately, venture women, which is like, well, aren't they half the population? Yes. Yes.
我是说，在格雷洛克我们会采取一些措施，例如为少数族裔创业者设立专门的办公时间。我们在招聘上也会采取一系列措施，确保我们面试了更多的少数族裔，包括女性创业者。不幸的是，女性创业者的比例并不高，他们占人口的一半，对吧？是的，是的。
And doing everything you can. And so, for example, we've helped stand up kind of new venture firms, because when they come to us and say, hey, we're going to, we think that one of the things may just be having a venture firm that's entirely focused on funding women entrepreneurs might be a good way of doing it. Great. We'll help you. And so you have to do all that kind of stuff. And what I want the progress to be 10x faster than it is going absolutely.
尽你所能去做。比如我们已经帮助成立了一些新的风险投资公司，因为当他们来找我们，说：“嘿，我们认为专门支持女性创业者的风险投资公司也许是一个好方法。”我们就很乐意帮助他们。你必须做出所有这些努力。我希望进步的速度可以比现在快10倍。
And if someone figures out a way to make that happen, we'll help. We'll support. On the economic gaps, it's always a little tricky because it's dynamic over time.
如果有人想出了实现这个想法的方法，我们将提供帮助和支持。在经济差距方面，因为它随时间动态变化，所以有点棘手。
For example, one of the things that I do, the same thing in my philanthropy as I do in my investing, which you find an amazing entrepreneur. In this case, it's Byron Aguiste, who says, look, there's all of this massive growth in the tech jobs and tech industry.
举个例子，我在慈善事业和投资方面都做着一件相同的事情，那就是寻找杰出的企业家。比如，我发现了拜伦·阿吉斯特。他指出，科技行业和科技工作的快速增长机遇正在爆发。
I'm like, sure, that works for the community's color, works for women, works for other minority groups. Let's go make sure that a whole bunch of these people have pathways in the tech jobs and make that happen, and so they at least can begin to bring their families and understand what the tech opportunities are, have their communities begin to be able to benefit from participating in these industries.
我认为这对于社区的多样性、妇女以及其他少数群体都是适用的。让我们确保许多这样的人能够在科技领域找到工作，并让这成为现实。这样，他们至少可以开始为家人谋取科技机会，了解科技的机会，并让社区参与这些行业，从中受益。
But by the way, when you're growing a new company, the new company makes the executives and the founders the most money and the next group of people, the next most money, etc. As ways work.
顺便说一下，当你在扩展一家新公司时，这家新公司会让高管和创始人赚取最多的钱，下一群人赚的钱排在其次，以此类推。这是一种有效的方式。
So it doesn't necessarily immediately cause distribution economics, but you're trying to get everyone participating and then you're trying to make sure that the next generation of founders has the diversity that we have in society.
因此，它不一定会立即导致分配经济，但您正在努力让每个人都参与，并确保下一代创始人拥有我们社会的多样性。
If you're leading a business today, one thing certain, tech is fast moving and sometimes confusing. TechTrends is a new series from Kaspersky that unpacks tech trends to give you insight to make the right decisions for your business's tech and cybersecurity investments.
如果你现在在领导一家企业，有一件事是确定的，那就是科技发展速度很快，有时会让人感到混淆不清。TechTrends是卡巴斯基公司推出的一个新系列，旨在解读科技发展趋势，为你的企业科技和网络安全投资提供洞察并作出正确的决策。
An expert will tackle a current tech trend during each episode, like Smart Energy, AI and Blockchain, and then you'll hear from someone in business who's using the tech and the decisions they've made and challenges they've faced. That's insight story. TechTrends unpacked for business leaders.
每一期节目中，专家将解析当前的技术趋势，例如智能能源、人工智能和区块链，然后您将听到一位运用这些技术的商务人士讲述他们所做出的决定和面临的挑战。这就是深入洞察的故事，为商业领袖揭示科技趋势的秘密。
You mentioned other industry leaders that you respect and admire who you think are modeling, good leadership, not only on the, I'm running a great business, but also on the, I'm working to improve society front.
你提到了其他行业领袖，你尊重和钦佩他们，认为他们不仅在经营一家出色的企业方面做出了表率，也在致力于改善社会的领导方面做出了表率。
But the poster boys for the tech industry, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, they definitely aren't perceived that way. No matter how much money they might give to charity or how many rockets they might launch into space.
然而，科技行业的代言人埃隆·马斯克、杰夫·贝佐斯、马克·扎克伯格并不被视为这样的人。无论他们捐赠多少钱给慈善机构，或者将多少火箭发射进入太空。
Do you get the sense that the good guys, as Kara Swisher might call you, are developing as many accolades as the people who do still cling to that move fast and break things, ethos?
你有没有感觉到，像Kara Swisher一样称呼你们为好人的人，正在获得与那些仍坚持“快速行动，打破规则”理念的人一样多的赞誉？
Well, when I myself argued with Mark Zuckerberg about freedom of speech issues and all of things, but for example, one of the things I do with him is the CZI biohub where he's trying to cure infectious disease for people all around the world and putting a lot of money to that. And that's because he's such the poster boy for other intelligent criticisms, he doesn't get as much credit near the here Priscilla for all this other amazing stuff he does. So I just kind of feel it's important to make that gesture. Yeah. And there's no question that a lot of the people who make a lot of money then do a lot of good. I guess it's just trying to marry the two is what we're talking about.
我曾与马克·扎克伯格在言论自由问题上争论过，但我们一起做的一件事是CZI生物中心，他在为全世界人民治疗传染病并投入了大量资金。他是其他聪明批评的代表人物，但他在这些了不起的事情上却没有得到太多认可，与普丽西拉相比。因此，我认为提及这一点很重要。许多赚很多钱的人确实做了很多好事，我想我们正在谈论的就是如何把这两者结合起来。
Yeah. Well, that's important to do too. But like, for example, there is a differentiation between people who go all of my economics is for my own self-glorification and people go, look, I'm making a bunch of economics and I'm also doing a bunch of things that I'm caring for a bunch of communities that has nothing to do with my self-glorification. And I just, I say that in part because it's too easy to get on the criticism bandwagon and I just, you know, I think it's important to note.
是的，那样做也很重要。但是例如有一种区别，那就是一些人认为我的经济学全部是为了自我吹嘘，而另一些人则认为我创造了很多经济学成果，并且也在为许多社区尽力，这和我的自我吹嘘没有关系。我提到这一点是因为批评往往太过苛刻，我认为需要注意这一点。
Now I'd say that the folks who are perhaps not beating these drums is extremely tend to have less, I think the word you used was accolades. You know, I think it's because it's the principal way that you get accolades is by defining something pretty extreme and beating that drum and then people who, you know, think that you're the Messiah for beating the drum in that direction, then come follow you.
我认为那些不打鼓的人可能会获得较少的赞扬。你说的词是“赞誉”。我想这是因为主要获得赞誉的方式是通过定义某些极端的事情，并不断宣扬，接着那些认为你是“救世主”的人就会跟随你。
If you're kind of like measured and saying, you know, like things I've been saying here, which is, look, it's a net benefit is the goal. I think you do have to move fast. I think you have to build things quickly. I think you will break things, including things that you don't want to break in doing it. I think you have to do it with care and attention, but I think if you don't do it with speed, then the people who do it with speed who don't care about what the impact is, you know, set the rules.
如果你有点像我在这里所说的那样，认为净效益是目标，那么我认为你必须尽快行动，迅速建立事物。我认为你会破坏一些东西，包括你不想破坏的东西。我认为你必须小心谨慎地去做，但是如果你不以速度行事，那么那些不关心影响的快速行动者会制定规则。
And so I tend to think that, you know, it's less good, call it media coverage to talk about the people who are trying to be thoughtful than the people who are being extreme.
我倾向于认为，媒体报道的时候谈论那些试图思考的人，比那些极端行为的人要少，这是不够好的。
Do you think that Silicon Valley still sort of leads the world in terms of what the tech industry is thinking about or do you see sort of different ecosystems developing their own ethos around purpose and profits?
您认为硅谷在技术行业的思考方向上仍然领先于全球，还是您看到不同的生态系统正在围绕目的和利润发展自己的理念？
Well, I'd say the two areas in the world that are the most tech leading are both Silicon Valley and a set of cities in China, mostly along the coast.
我认为全球两个科技领先的地区分别是硅谷和中国一些城市，主要分布在沿海地区。
I try as much as I possibly can to help create other tech innovation centers in other areas of the world. I was just in Italy, France, and the UK, you know, high-principled democracies that have a really good concept of kind of like what the human rights should be in so forth. I try to help as much as possible in facilitating the creation of entrepreneurial bases and tech industries.
我会尽我所能帮助在世界其他地区建立科技创新中心。我最近去了意大利、法国和英国，这些都是有着很好的人权概念的高贵民主国家。我会尽量帮助创业基地和科技产业的创立。
I think Silicon Valley continues to be along with, like we learn a whole bunch of stuff from China, the kind of driving drumbeat.
我认为硅谷一直与中国紧密联系在一起，就像我们从中国学到很多东西一样，这是一种推动力量。
And it's one of the reasons why I think it's a very good thing that the discourse is, like I'm in dinner parties in Silicon Valley where, you know, part of the discussion is to say, well, how do we, now that tech is continuing to have larger and larger impact, what is the way that we make sure that we're doing the right thing?
我认为这是一个非常好的事情，其中一个原因是，现在在硅谷的晚宴上有这样的话题讨论：随着科技影响范围不断扩大，我们应该如何确保我们在做正确的事情。
Let's talk about China, are those questions being asked over there also? Well, not being a native Chinese speaker and not having been there for a few years. You know, I would say, I think any group of people, you've got a million people, you've got a distributed smart people, you've got a distribution of ethical people, you've got a whole bunch of different things.
让我们谈论中国，那些问题在那里也被问到了吗？嗯，我不是中国的母语使用者，而且几年没去过那里了。但是，我想说，任何一个群体，无论有多少人，都会有聪明人和道德人的分布，也会有许多不同的事情。
I would say that their environment is more tuned at the moment to the, has it were the rise of China and the success of the business and somewhat less to, you know, like, for example, you know, what does this mean for disadvantaged minorities within society? You know, in China, I don't think you have any discussion in the tech and companies of what it means for the weakers, what it means for, you know, other kinds of things. I think people are people. I'm not saying anything about the quality of the people in doing that. I just think it's the environment that they're operating in.
我认为他们目前的环境更关注中国的崛起和商业的成功，而不太关注社会中弱势少数群体的处境。在中国的科技公司中，我认为没有讨论对于弱者和其他群体意味着什么的讨论。我认为人都是平等的，我并不是在说这些人的质量。我只是认为这是他们所处的环境。
Are there opportunities for more collaboration, interaction, knowledge sharing?
是否有更多的合作机会、互动交流、知识共享的可能性？
So for example, one of the things I've been highly focused on along with the OpenAI and Microsoft folks, which is like AI safety and making sure that when you build these new, very large, very capable systems that the net impact is very good, that there are no really bad impacts. And you say, okay, well, how do we make sure that the work that we're doing, even though we've put in a whole bunch of work and energy and cost and hiring, I think there's hundreds of people at Microsoft who work on AI safety, how do we essentially just distribute it for free? I think we've offered everybody, including our competitors and so forth in China in order to try to get to good places because that's part of being intentional and good people.
举个例子，我和OpenAI和微软的人一起高度关注的事情之一是人工智能的安全性，确保当您构建这些新的、非常庞大、非常强大的系统时，其净影响非常好，没有真正的负面影响。您可能会问，好的，我们如何确保我们所做的工作即使我们已经投入了大量的工作、精力、成本和招聘，即使在微软有数百人致力于人工智能的安全工作，如何实现免费分配呢？我认为我们已经向所有人提供了这个服务，包括我们的竞争对手和中国，以便我们走向更好的地方，因为这是成为一个有意识和好人的一部分。
So I do want to turn to your new show. It's a very interesting, you know, your sort of addition of the show possible to your masters of scale franchise, because one is sort of the founders, the entrepreneurs, the leaders of companies who made it big, basically, and then possible seems to feature people behind the scenes working on these really difficult problems you mentioned earlier, you know, so on democratizing higher education through technology, nuclear fusion, you know, to help solve some of our climate issues. Talk about why you wanted to launch the show and focus on those people as opposed to the famous corporate leaders.
我想谈一下你的新节目。它非常有趣，你通过这个节目展示了你对“规模之王”品牌的不同补充。其中一个节目特别介绍了那些成功的创始人、企业家和公司领导人，而另一个节目则似乎关注那些在背后致力于解决之前提到的一些困难问题的人们，比如通过技术实现高等教育民主化，实现核聚变等以帮助我们解决气候问题。你为什么想要推出这个节目，关注这些人，而不是那些有名的企业家领袖呢？
So you know, one of the things that I see a lot in the US and seen in some places or the rest of the world is what is referred to as tech lash, which is more negativity and uncertainty about what technology is bringing versus the positive sides. And I believe as a hypothesis, but very strongly and argue for the whatever scale problem you're trying to solve, whether it's climate change, whether it's economic justice, whether it's criminal justice, other things, 30 to 80% of the solution is technology. What I mean by that is technology changes the scope of what's possible. It changes cost curves, it changes what you might be able to pull off with the resources that we have. We can help solve these really fundamental problems with technology. And it isn't technology is the only solution, part of the solution.
你知道的，我在美国和世界其他地方看到的是一种被称为科技蔑视的现象，即关于科技所带来的负面和不确定性胜过积极方面。我的假设是，无论你想要解决什么规模的问题，包括气候变化、经济公正、刑事司法和其他方面，技术都可以占30到80%的解决方案。我的意思是技术改变了可能性的范围，改变了成本曲线，改变了我们拥有的资源可以实现的东西。我们可以用技术来帮助解决这些根本性的问题。这不是说技术是唯一的解决方案，而是解决问题的一部分。
It's also how we organize ourselves as a society, what we value, what we invest in versus other things, other kinds of things. But technology is an essential part of making that scale solution work. And so we want to go to essentially the leaders, the innovators, the imaginers of what the world could be in this really good new way and to talk to them and to share that sense of here is where we should row towards. And I think we can, for example, solve these really big problems, climate change. And oh my gosh, we could build a world that's so much better than we are today. Let's get to it.
科技也是我们作为一个社会组织自己的方式，它反映了我们所重视的、我们愿意投资的事物相对于其他类型的事物。但科技是实现规模化解决方案的重要组成部分。因此，我们希望与那些领袖、创新者、想象者们交流，并分享我们应该朝着哪个方向前进的感觉。例如，我们可以解决气候变化这些巨大的问题，建立一个比今天更好的世界。让我们开干吧。
Does the new generation of founders seem excited about that even if it means their big paydays might be two decades in the future as opposed to becoming unicorn within five years? Well, again, I think some are and more are. It won't be all are. It won't be, some people will still be creating. I mean, I'm not going to, I try not to throw entrepreneurs under the bus, but various things that I go, well, that's not a pretty great thing to create. Delivering liquor to your front door or something along. Whatever, whatever the thing might be, I guess the one I most often pick on is jewel. But like creating electric cigarettes or vape things, I think are net not positive.
新一代创业者是否会因此而感到兴奋，即使这意味着他们的丰厚报酬可能需要二十年，而不是在五年内成为独角兽？嗯，我认为有些人会，而且越来越多的人会这样做。并不是所有人都会这样做。并不是所有人都在创造。我的意思是，我不会故意让创业者陷入困境，但我会去挑剔一些我认为不太好的事情。比如将烈酒送到你家门口之类的。无论是什么，我想我最经常挑剔的是Juul。但是，我认为创造电子香烟或电子雾化器等产品是个负面影响。
But go and have the imagination that through entrepreneurship, through technology, through invention, you could solve these things. And as we get, there's a super amount of very talented people in the world and we just want more of them working on these problems. And thinking about the fact that they could make a difference by creating a technology, a business, a project that could focus on this and make it work. And that's the dialogue we're hoping to increase and they kind of applying our imagination to how we create the future.
通过创业、技术和发明，你可以想象你可以解决这些问题。我们世界上有很多非常有才华的人，我们希望他们更多地参与这些问题的解决。他们可以通过创造技术、商业和项目来解决这些问题，并让它们运作起来。我们希望增加这种对话，并应用我们的想象力来创造未来。
Yeah. We haven't yet talked about the role of government in innovation and in regulation. So some of the greatest technologies, GPS for one, stemmed from government investment initially. So do we need more of that as part A of this question and part B is, where do you stand on regulation for emerging technologies like generative AI? Should there have been more regulation on social media, etc?
是的，我们还没有讨论政府在创新和监管中的作用。有一些最伟大的技术，比如GPS，最初源于政府投资。那么，作为这个问题的A部分，我们是否需要更多这样的投资呢？作为B部分，您对于像生成式人工智能这样的新兴技术的监管立场如何？社交媒体等领域是否应该有更多的监管？
One of things where people say, for example, what do I believe that most Silicon Valley, or a lot of Silicon Valley people don't believe is actually in fact government's absolutely essential. It helps create a lot of things, help create not just rule of law and society and healthy functioning economy, but also baseline investment in universities and technologies. And so I'm a big believer in those.
人们常说，例如，我相信大多数硅谷人不相信的事情之一，实际上是政府的绝对必要性。 它有助于创造很多东西，不仅有法治、社会和健康的经济运作，还有对大学和技术的基本投资。 因此，我非常相信这些事情。
I also think that regulation can be an important part of that. One of the challenges of regulation is that the baseline conception of how most people tend to think of regulation is to ask for permission, not forgiveness to tell you that you continue to do things the way you've done them in the past and you're kind of locked in with very slow change from that and tend to be done by people who don't necessarily understand what the innovation clock looks like.
我也认为监管可以成为其中重要的一部分。监管所面临的挑战之一是，大多数人对监管的基本理解是要求许可，而不是请求原谅。这意味着你必须继续以过去的方式做事，并且很难实现任何快速的变革，而且监管人员可能并不真正理解创新的本质。
And so the principle that I usually articulate here is, when is bad regulation better than no regulation? And by the way, the answer is not that's not a rhetorical question or never, because like for example, when you get to the financial system, the absolute necessity of the financial system continuing to run, you say, well, actually, in fact, bad regulation is better than no regulation to make sure that the banking system doesn't break. And other kind of things, because it's just too critical, otherwise.
因此，我通常表达的原则是：什么时候，坏的监管比没有监管更好呢？顺便说一句，答案并不是不作为或从未，因为就比如金融系统，金融系统继续运行是绝对的必要，所以说，坏的监管比没有监管更好，来确保银行系统不崩溃。还有其他一些类似的事情，因为否则太关键了。
Now when you get to a lot of technology, you say, well, you're inshining the past. The problem is, is well, if the actual solution is technology in the future, then a regulation that particularly slows you down or anchors you to the past will be potentially more damaging to humanity than not doing it in various ways.
现在，当你涉及到许多技术时，你可能会认为你在阻碍进步。问题在于，如果未来的解决方案是技术，那么一项特别会减缓你脚步或使你停滞不前的规定，在某些方面可能对人类造成更多的伤害，甚至比不采取行动更糟糕。
And so it's a world you say, no regulation is a course thought. So what you do is start by defining like what are the outcomes that you're looking for? And can you set those outcomes to essentially the innovators, the companies, the other things to say more of these outcomes and less of these outcomes. And we'd like to see a dashboard. We'd like to see it tracked by your auditors.
所以你说这是一个无规定的世界，这是一种可行的想法。因此，你可以从定义你想要的结果开始。你可以设置这些结果，让创新者、公司和其他人知道更多的这些结果，更少的这些结果。我们想要看到一个仪表板。我们希望你的审计人员对其进行跟踪。
And so for example, when we'd like to see less violence on video. So do you say, well, I'm going to have a regulation to say you must have a five minute delay between uploading the video and the broadcast of it. And you say, okay, well, that may not actually solve your violence in video problem because you know, terrorists or whatever else might trick or hack the system for it in your regulation, really just created a whole bunch of processes that didn't do anything.
举个例子，当我们想要看到视频中的暴力行为减少时，我们该怎么做呢？你可能会想，我要制定规定，规定在上传视频和播放视频之间必须有五分钟的时间延迟。然而，实际上这可能并不能解决你所关心的视频暴力问题，因为恐怖分子或其他人可能会利用漏洞或黑客攻击系统。你的规定可能只是创造了一堆没有用的流程。
Whereas what you said to companies is said, well, okay, I recognize you can't get to zero because again, large scale systems. So let's say for the first 100 views, it's a thousand dollar fine, for the next thousand views, it's a 10,000 dollar fine. And for every view after that, it's a hundred thousand dollar fine. You figure out how not to show, you know, murders on video, right? And that's what I mean by defining outcomes in ways and then having the innovation do that. And that's the kind of thing that I think is the pattern that we need to apply when it gets to technology.
你所说的向公司传达的观点，我认为可以理解为你承认由于大规模系统的存在，不可能完全消除问题，但我们可以设定规定，比如对于前一百个观看，罚款一千美元，接下来的一千个观看，罚款一万美元，之后每个观看，罚款十万美元。这样要想避免展示视频中的谋杀等不当内容，创新想必会应运而生。这就是我所说的通过设定规则，借助创新技术的方式，来达到预期效果的模式，我认为这是我们在技术领域所需要应用的模式。
So what advice do you give to people who are early in their tech careers right now? What are some of the pitfalls to watch out for? And how can they become great, more responsible builders of technology? I think everybody needs to think about their own life path with a tool set of an entrepreneur doesn't mean they have to be an entrepreneur.
所以，对于那些刚开始科技职业生涯的人，你有什么建议？有哪些需要注意的陷阱？他们怎样才能成为伟大的，更有责任感的技术建设者？我认为每个人都需要考虑他们自己的人生路线，使用企业家工具集，但这并不意味着他们必须成为企业家。
I think another thing is to realize that the, you know, all the way back to the beginning of our discussion that the creation of technology can be itself a great good if you're asking the right questions. I think that even, you know, questions when you say, well, you know, obviously like take an area that's fraught with a whole bunch of things, genetic modification, genetic and engineering. So that could be really bad.
我认为另一个重要点是意识到，从我们讨论的开始，如果你提出正确的问题，创造科技本身就可以是一件好事。即使是那些令人担忧的领域，比如基因修饰和基因工程，只要提出正确的问题，科技也可以起到积极的作用。
Obviously, but of course it could be really good getting rid of genetic diseases in ways that just cause suffering. So if you're asking the right questions and you're doing it the right way and you're thinking about how do you shape it the right way, you can have a scale impact in the world that leaves humanity much better because of your effort. And I think that's the, you know, ask the right questions and help create the future.
显然，当然如果能够消除遗传疾病的方法只会带来痛苦，那么这将非常好。因此，如果你提出了正确的问题并以正确的方式做到了这一点，并思考如何正确塑造它，你可以在世界上产生规模的影响，因为你的努力让人类更好。我认为这是提出正确的问题并帮助创造未来的核心。
Reid, thank you so much for being on the show. My pleasure. Thank you. That's Reid Hoffman, entrepreneur, investor and podcaster with the new show possible. And we have more episodes and more podcasts to help you manage your team, your organization and your career, including an upcoming IdeaCast bonus series about how artificial intelligence will change work. Find them at hbr.org slash podcasts or search hbr an Apple podcast Spotify or wherever you listen.
瑞德，感谢你来参加节目。很高兴能够来。谢谢。这是企业家、投资人和播客人瑞德·霍夫曼，他有一档新的节目《可能性》。我们还有更多的剧集和播客，可以帮助您管理团队、组织和职业生涯，包括即将推出的一个关于人工智能将如何改变工作的IdeaCast奖励系列。您可以在hbr.org/podcasts上找到它们，或在Apple Podcasts、Spotify或您听的任何地方搜索HBR。
This episode was produced by Mary Doe. We get technical help from Rob Eckhart, our audio product manager is Ian Fox and Hannah Bates is our audio production assistant.
本期节目由玛丽·多负责制作。我们得到了罗布·埃克哈特的技术帮助，我们的音频产品经理是伊恩·福克斯，汉娜·贝茨是我们的音频制作助理。
Thanks for listening to the HBO IdeaCast. We'll be back with a new episode on Tuesday.
感谢您收听HBO IdeaCast。下一期新的节目将于周二更新。
I'm Allison Beer.
我是艾莉森·比尔。
Hi, it's Allison. Before you go, I have a question. What do you love about hbr?
嗨，我是艾莉森。在你离开之前，我有一个问题。你喜欢哈佛商业评论的哪些方面？
I worked at newspapers before I came to hbr and the thing that has impressed me most is the amount of attention and care that goes into each and every article. We have multiple editors working on each piece. They put their all into translating these ideas typically from academia or from companies in practice into advice that will really change people's lives in the workplace.
我来到《哈佛商业评论》之前曾经在报纸工作过，最让我印象深刻的是每篇文章都受到了大量的关注和细心的关照。我们有多名编辑为每篇作品进行编辑。他们全力以赴地将学术或企业实践中的想法转化为真正可以改变人们工作生活的建议。
If you love hbr's work, the best thing you can do to support us is to become a subscriber. You can do that at hbr.org slash subscribe IdeaCast, all one word, no spaces. That's hbr.org slash subscribe IdeaCast.
如果你喜欢哈佛商业评论的作品，最好的支持方式是成为我们的订阅者。你可以在 hbr.org/subscribeIdeacast（全字母连写，无空格）进行订阅。
Thanks.
谢谢。请您提供更多的上下文和原文，以便我能够更准确地翻译出您所需要的内容。