E126: Big Tech blow-out, Powell’s recession warning, lab-grown meat, RFK Jr shakes up race & more
发布时间 2023-04-28 20:06:22 来源
I can't wait to talk about Lobgrown Meat. I have been trying to get people to. Oh God. No. Oh please. Don't, let's not get canceled.
我迫不及待地想谈论Lobgrown Meat。我一直想让人们了解它。哦天啊，不，求求你了，我们不要被取消。
But the four of us are functional again. We'd like each other. We enjoy it. We look forward to doing the show again.
但是我们四个人现在重新开始了。我们喜欢彼此，享受这种感觉。我们期待着再次演出。
Everything's styled in. Is your lab grown meat that you use hormones? My lab grown meat was a little. .sounds like a. Let me ask you this about your lab grown meat. Do you have to. I did say age? No. No? No. You know, I was told that my lab grown meat was a little.
所有的东西都准备好了。你的实验室培育的肉中含有激素吗？我的实验室培育的肉有点。听起来像。让我问问你关于你的实验室培育的肉。你需要吗？我说过年龄了吗？没有。没有？没有。你知道，我被告知我的实验室培育的肉有点。
I've injected some flavors of tobacco, black cherry. Some notes? Some notes. Or simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons. For simmons.
我已经注入了一些烟草味，黑樱桃味。一些注释？一些注释。或者西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。为了西蒙斯。
And then we open source into the fiancee. They just go crazy with her. Love you, guys. Queen of kilowatt.
然后我们向未婚妻介绍开源，他们对此激动不已。爱你们，伙计们。千瓦女王。
简单解释：这句话为开源软件世界中的一个段子，意思是当我们向普通人介绍开源技术时，他们通常会感到很激动，因为开源技术可以改变行业和世界。作者对这种现象感到很高兴，并称赞自己的未婚妻成为了“千瓦女王”，也就是在能源效率方面表现出色。
So let's go to Big Tech earnings. Google stock is up 5%. After beating on the top line and bottom line, estimates, some high-level takeaways.
所以让我们来看看科技巨头的收益。谷歌股价上涨了5%。在打败了一线和底线的估计后，有一些高层次的收获。
Google announced a $70 billion stock buyback plan. And that their cloud unit was profitable for the first time in its history. As we mentioned last week, Sundar officially announced that deep mind was merging with brain.
谷歌宣布了一项规模为700亿美元的股票回购计划，并且他们的云计算部门首次盈利。正如我们上周提到的那样，桑达正式宣布DeepMind正在与Brain合并。
This is kind of controversial because it's really hard according to some sources for Sundar to get all his lieutenants to work together and row in the right direction. Google's Q1 search revenue up year over year, 2% down, 5% quarter of a quarter, just kind of to be expected because of seasonality and because we're in a down market right now, obviously with the recession. YouTube down 2.5% year over year, down 16% quarter of a quarter, other bets, which is like nest and some other products down 35% year over year. Net income, $15 billion.
这有点具有争议性，因为根据一些消息来源，Sundar 很难让他的副手们共同合作并朝着正确的方向努力。谷歌 Q1 搜索收入同比增长，环比下降 2%，季度环比下降 5%，这在当前季节性和经济下行的市场条件下是可以预料的。YouTube 同比下降 2.5%，季度环比下降 16%，其他投注项目，例如 Nest 和一些其他产品，同比下降 35%。净收入为 150 亿美元。
Any thoughts? Freeberg on what is a mixed quarter by Google and I guess the wide macro environment.
有何想法？Freeberg谈论Google的混合季度以及我猜测的广泛宏观环境。
意思：你有什么想法吗？Freeberg谈论了Google发布的混杂季度报告，以及我猜测的整个宏观环境。
What was so striking about the earnings call is not necessarily what was presented but what was not presented, which was a stronger voice and a strategic plan going forward for dealing with two major issues that the company one is the operating cost model and the second is the AI strategy and the response to this evolution in AI.
这次收益电话会议中最引人注目的并不是介绍了什么，而是没有介绍强有力的声音和应对两个重要问题的战略计划，这两个问题分别是运营成本模式和人工智能战略以及对人工智能演进所做出的反应。
I've heard from a lot of folks that the AI strategy in particular, it's almost like Google already has this in the bag but they just haven't kind of let it out of the bag. It's like they've got a Tasmanian devil and they're ready to go with it and there's from my read an incredible amount of confidence that there's something that's going to happen and a set of things that are going to happen, they're going to be very profound and powerful.
我听到很多人说，特别是在人工智能战略上，谷歌几乎已经掌握了这个市场，只是他们还没有将它公布出来。就像他们已经拥有了一个塔斯马尼亚恶魔，准备好使用它了。根据我的了解，人们对即将发生的事情和将要发生的一系列有着极高的信心，这些事情将会是非常深刻和强大的。
I even heard some anecdotal stories about hey, we don't have this feature in this product but ChatGPT does and then people basically showed up to this meeting and there was all this debate about well we can't let it out because we're not sure the classic kind of like we're scared of doing wrong versus leading forward and taking risks. Don't be evil you're referencing? No it was just more about regulatory concern and getting things wrong and making a mistake and so there's this total fear of like again, regulatory and fear. So someone kind of slammed the table and said let's just put it out and the next day they put it out.
我甚至听到一些趣闻轶事，就是有人在会议上说：“我们的产品没有这个功能，但是ChatGPT有这个功能。”于是人们开始争论，有人认为我们不能发布这个功能，因为我们不确定会不会出现问题，我们害怕冒险。这是你提到的“不作恶”吗？不是的，这更多的是关于法规上的担忧，害怕出错。所以大家都有一种恐惧感。但是，有人一拍桌子，说让我们把它发布出去吧，第二天就发布了。
So there's definitely a cultural change happening internally is what I've heard anecdotally but what was really missing which is what Wall Street needed to hear what investors and shareholders needed to hear is what's the strategy there? How are you going to compete? How are you going to resolve what's going to go forward?
根据我的个人经验听到的消息，公司内部确实正在发生文化变革。但是，华尔街和投资者、股东们最关心的问题却是：公司有何竞争战略？如何解决面临的问题并取得进展？这些问题必须得到明确的回答。
And secondly, what are you going to do about the cost structure of the company? Because everyone else, you know, in contrast to meta being up 11-12% after hours with their cost cutting model and demonstrating that they're going to start pulling cash out of this business, Google's top, you know, kind of top story was hey, we're stopped serving peanut M&Ms in the cafeteria or something ridiculous and you know that doesn't really address the real structural question.
第二个问题是，你们准备如何处理公司的成本结构？与Meta运用削减成本模式，展示他们将会开始从业务中提现而涨了11-12%的反应形成对比。Google的头条新闻是他们停止在自助餐厅提供花生巧克力，这并不能真正解决实际的结构性问题。
So I think the stock buyback, the $70 billion stock buyback is an authorization to repurchase. It's not a plan to repurchase. So it's unclear if when or how that capital does actually get deployed in the market to buy back stock and so there is also this big kind of shareholder sentiment of being let down that there isn't an improvement in either cash coming out of the business or in cash being used in a smart way with the business.
我认为这个70亿美元的股票回购是授权回购而不是回购计划。因此，目前还不清楚这些资本何时以何种方式被投入市场用于回购股票。同时，股东们也感到失望，因为业务现金流或是业务资金使用方面并没有明显改善。
And it was the the silence in the earnings call that I think really stunned a lot of people which is why you didn't see a lot of stock movement despite the actual business numbers being better than expected. And so there's a lot that Google I think still has to catch up to with respect to their peers both on a product and strategy point of view but also on a cost cutting and a communication of that cost cutting point of view to the market and to the street.
在收益电话中的沉默，我认为真的震惊了很多人，这就是为什么尽管实际业务数字超出预期，股市并没有出现很多波动的原因。因此，我认为Google在产品和战略方面仍有很多要赶上其同行的地方，但在成本削减和向市场和街道传达成本削减观点方面，也需要更好的沟通。
Otherwise shareholder is going to start to lose faith if they're not already and they're going to start to put their capital with other folks who they feel are better leading and leaning into this new evolution of technology like Microsoft and Apple and meta which is really where those big capital allocators end up picking stuff to go.
否则，如果股东们没有失去信心，他们很快也会开始失去信心，并会将他们的资金投向其他人，他们认为更能领导和推动这种新技术演变的公司，如微软、苹果和Meta。这些大资本配置者最终会选择这些公司作为他们的投资对象。
One final thing I'll say it's extraordinarily important to note that I think Google has such an incredible AI advantage over Microsoft and you know Microsoft is almost solely dependent on open AI. This small startup company and all of Bing chat is powered by it and Microsoft hasn't built out the the infrastructure the team the rigor the depth the models that Google has and Google made a few strategic blunders you know they shouldn't have been as open with the transformer work that they did and shared that publicly it certainly enabled open AI and others to compete. But Google certainly has an incredible set of tools and capabilities that is leap years ahead of Microsoft they're in a position to really compete they just have to have the will and the leadership to do it slam the table say here's we're going to stop wasting money and we're going to start leading and driving this this this industry forward and this this could be a quick turnaround story for this stock and for this company and and I hope it'll happen.
最后, 我要说的是要特别注意的是，我认为谷歌在人工智能方面比微软拥有非常惊人的优势，而微软几乎完全依赖于开放AI，这家小型初创公司以及所有的必应聊天都由它驱动，微软还没有建立起谷歌拥有的基础设施、团队、严谨性、深度模型等。谷歌犯了一些策略性错误，他们不应该在共享变形金刚的工作时如此公开，这肯定使开放AI和其他人能够进行竞争。但谷歌确实拥有一组不可思议的工具和能力，比微软领先了好几个年，他们有能力真正竞争，只要有意愿和领导力发挥作用，他们就可以把这个行业推向前进，这可以是该公司和股票的迅速回报故事，我希望这样的事情能发生。
Jamath what are your thoughts on Google's leadership specifically is Sundar the right person to run the company going forward. It is he have the founder authority to get the ship and to get the lieutenant's all kind of rolling in the same direction there's a need to be a leadership change which is the big discussion of topic in Silicon Valley right now. I think he's very capable. That's in a more of a organization of so many different competing interests. The thing that doesn't add up about the Google earnings release but then also what Freeberg just mentioned is there was this article that kind of tried to paint Sundar as sort of a caretaker CEO right where Larry was the actual shadow CEO. Well if that's true you know Larry has more incentive than anybody else to kind of force change and there was all these kind of like gripes and complaints that were articulated and I don't put much stock in all of this stuff. I think that he is the right person for the job and I think what they have to do is just do the simple basic things like it doesn't take a CEO change for a board of directors to have the emotional wherewithal to authorize a 15 or 20 percent reduction in force for a company that is so profitable that clearly is not yet humming on all cylinders and so you don't need to go through all of this drastic change to do these simple obvious things.
Jamath，你对Google的领导力持什么样的看法？特别是Sundar是否是继续领导这家公司的合适人选？他是否拥有创始人的权威来让船只顺利前行，并让中下级管理者朝着同一个方向奋斗？现在，领导层变革是硅谷的一个重要讨论话题。我认为他非常有能力，尤其是在处理许多具有竞争性利益的组织中。关于Google的财报和Freeberg所提到的内容，让人感到困惑的是，有一篇文章试图把Sundar描绘成一位照顾好公司的CEO，而实际上Larry才是实际的影子CEO。但如果这是真的，那么Larry比任何其他人都有更多的动力来强制改变。有很多不满和抱怨被表达出来，但我对这些内容并不十分看重。我认为他是适合这个工作的人选，而他们要做的就是简单的基本事情，例如，公司正在赢利，显然尚未完全发挥出其效益，因此董事会没有必要进行CEO变更来授权公司实施15%或20%的员工裁减。所以，没有必要经过这些剧烈的变化来执行这些简单的明显的事情。
My takeaway across all of these four big companies is we are in a really unique moment to observe something that may sound controversial or hurt people's feelings that like these companies but I think we're now well-past peak big tech. Their valuations may still go up because they generate such an enormous amount of cash flow but these are exactly those kinds of businesses now. They are X growth large cash flow businesses. Blue chip you might say? Well they were always blue chip but the way that they grow is not through innovation. If you look at Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple and ask yourself when was the last hugely disruptive thing that they've created? Your hard press to find something that was even done in the 2010s. Yeah actually that's a good thought. I mean the iPhone for Apple. iPhone was 2007. Yep. Microsoft was in the 1990s. Google was in 1998 with core search. Maybe there was maps and Gmail and the 2000s. Chrome. They bought some of that. Facebook it was the core service that we built in the 2000s and then they acquired brilliantly. I'm not saying that they didn't acquire well. My point is that core organic innovation hasn't been there for a long time.
我的理解是，我们正处在一个非常独特的时刻，可以观察到一些可能听起来有争议或会伤害到喜欢这些公司的人们的情绪的事情，但我认为我们已经过了大型科技公司的高峰期了。它们的估值可能仍然会上涨，因为它们产生了巨额的现金流，但它们现在正是那种类型的企业。它们是X增长大现金流企业，可以说它们是蓝筹股吗？嗯，它们一直是蓝筹股，但它们成长的方式不是通过创新。如果你看看谷歌、Facebook、微软和苹果，问问自己什么时候它们最后一次创造了巨大的颠覆性事物？你会很难找到在2010年代甚至做过什么的。是的，实际上这是一个不错的想法。我的意思是说，对于苹果来说是iPhone，但那是2007年的事情。对于微软来说是20世纪90年代的事情。谷歌是在1998年通过核心搜索实现的。也许在2000年代出现了一些地图和Gmail，谷歌买了一些东西。对于Facebook来说，是我们在2000年代建立的核心服务，然后他们进行了精明的收购。我并不是说他们没有成功地进行收购。我的观点是，核心有机创新已经消失了很长时间。
So this is a moment to just be reflective of the fact that these are some incredible companies with ginormous cash flows. But now you've had this foundational platform shift which exposes the fact that they really aren't good at innovating. And at times when they've tried to organically innovate, they've massively misallocated capital.
所以，现在应该反思一下，这些公司拥有巨大的现金流量，具有不可思议的实力。但是现在，这个基础平台的转变暴露了一个事实，即它们并不擅长创新。有时候，在试图自主创新的时候，它们会严重错误地分配资金。
Either through a bloated balance sheet. So someone claimed that Google overspends or through just pure misallocation by starting projects that just are not large but consume large amounts of cash. That would be the Facebook VR example. But in all of this I think when you cut staff and expenses as a way to meet and beat and top line growth is in the low single digits.
有人声称谷歌支出过度，要么是因为资产负债表膨胀，要么是因为开始了无法履行的大型项目而消耗了大量资金，例如Facebook VR。但是在所有这些情况下，我认为当你削减员工和开支以达到并超过营收增长时，增长率通常只有低个位数。
It's an important moment to recognize that these companies have now transitioned to being cash cows. And if you look at sort of how financial markets value cash cows, they're very valuable. But it's not where you look for growth. And so in a world where rates eventually get cut and we start to come out of a recession, it tends to be that other people get rewarded. So that's an idea that's worth adding to your point here.
现在，认识到这些公司已经转型为现金奶牛是一个重要时刻。如果你看看金融市场如何评估现金奶牛，你会发现它们非常有价值。但是这并不是你寻找增长的地方。因此，在利率最终下降，我们开始走出衰退的世界里，往往是其他人得到奖励。所以这是一个值得添加到你的观点的想法。
They're not allowed to acquire anything. Microsoft's acquisition thing dead. Dead. So they're not going to be allowed to buy stuff. So then you're right. What is the growth here? They're not able to innovate. I think these companies are X growth which is why they use their cash flows to do what borrow money cheaply to buy back stock to manipulate their equity.
它们不被允许收购任何东西。微软的收购计划已经流产了。完全失败。因此，他们将被禁止购买任何东西。那么你是对的，这里的增长在哪里？他们无法创新。我认为这些公司的增长已经达到了顶峰，因此他们使用现金流去借贷廉价资金回购股票来操纵股权。
You can manipulate and overcome delusion. You can manipulate earnings per share. You can manipulate the number of shares outstanding. And so just by the nature of that whole game, a bunch of passive investors will end up buying more which helps the active investors who own that stock. So it's a game. So if we're not in the world, financial engineering would be the most charitable way to say it. We're in the financial engineering phase which is fine.
你可以操作和克服错觉。你可以操纵每股收益。你可以操纵流通股数量。因此，由于整个游戏的本质，一些被动投资者最终会购买更多股票，这有助于拥有该股票的主动投资者。所以这是一种游戏。因此，如果我们不在这个世界上，金融工程可能是最慈善的说法。我们处于金融工程的阶段，这很好。
And by the way, you can make a lot of money Facebook's up 90%. So there's a lot of there's a lot of meaning just this just this here. Oh yes. So there's a lot of room for financial engineering but it's not where you need to look to figure out where these big improvements and uses of this next generation platform technology are going to come from most likely.
顺便说一下，你可以赚很多钱，Facebook的股价涨了90%。所以这里有很多意义。但是，要找出这些下一代平台技术的大幅改进和使用的源头，最可能不是在财务工程学中。
Sax is a fair assessment in your mind looking at the major tech companies, the fangs. Yeah, I mean, their growth is down to single digits. So I think Microsoft had 7% year-over-year revenue growth. Google was at 3%. I think Facebook was 4% for sales rose 3% from a year earlier. But at least that was an improvement because it's gushing on down for three straight quarters. So yeah, but you're down to single digit year-over-year growth rates.
Sax认为，在看待主要科技公司（即FANG）时，单看其增长情况是公正的。他说，这些公司的增长率都降至个位数。例如，微软的年同比收入增长率为7%，谷歌的为3%，Facebook的销售额同比增长4%，而总体来看依然是下滑状态，三个季度都在下滑。所以可以说，这些公司的年同比增长率都降至个位数。
Nevertheless, most of these companies beat expectations. So Microsoft shares rose 9%. Meta jumped 12% might be up more now. And I guess Google got a little bit of a balance and they all gave a pretty upbeat forecast. The only one that wasn't a beat was Google where the CFO Ruth Porat said that the outlook remains uncertain. But all the other ones seem to indicate that things were going to get better.
然而，大部分公司的表现都超出了预期。因此微软的股价上涨了9%。Meta可能上涨了12%或更多。我猜谷歌也略微获得了平衡，并且它们都给出了相当乐观的预测。唯一没有达标的是谷歌，CFO Ruth Porat表示，前景仍然不确定。但其他公司都表明事情会变得更好。
So I think what's interesting about that is just the mismatch that we have between how well these companies did in this quarter versus how uncertain the rest of the economy is looking right now. And maybe the Fed's behavior? Yeah, so maybe this is the flip side what you want to say is they're not growing very fast, but they are profitable machines generating a lot of earnings. And they seem to be pretty immune from what's happening in the economy right now. Or at least that's what they're saying.
我认为这很有趣的一点是，这些公司在本季度的表现非常好，而整个经济环境却充满不确定性。或许这跟美联储的行为有关吧？是的，或者我们可以说他们的增长速度不那么快，但是它们是盈利机器，创造了很多收益。它们似乎对目前经济的情况比较免疫，或者至少是这样说的。
Now you're right in a parallel track, there was an interesting interview that Powell did. So Jerome Powell gave an interview. It was actually kind of like one of these hoax calls where a couple of people were attending to be Solinsky engagement and interview. Oh my god, that was crazy. We got that reference. They've done this a number of times where they've gotten you know major leaders.
现在你们正好在一条平行轨道上，Powell进行了一次有趣的采访。所以Jerome Powell接受了一次采访。实际上这有点像一些恶作剧电话，其中几个人冒充Solinsky邀请他进行采访。哦，天啊，那太疯狂了。我们懂得这个参考。他们已经多次这样做，他们得到了一些重要的领导者。
I think they did this to Macron and some other people where they pretend to be Solinsky and they do an interview. It's like Oligine. Yeah, but they played it straight. I don't care that he was fooled into giving the interview. It's like who cares? But some of the things he said were really interesting.
我认为他们对马克龙和其他一些人做了这件事，他们假扮成Solinsky进行采访。这就像Oligine。是的，但他们表现得很真诚。我不在乎他被愚弄参与采访的事情。但他说的一些话真的很有趣。
I mean number one. Powell said that the economic outlook for the year was looking pretty uncertain. And he said the most likely scenarios were either sub one percent growth. So staying out of recession, but just barely or he said going into recession. So he thought that was roughly about equally likely. He admitted that we had the worst inflation of 40 years and that's why interest rates were necessary.
我指的是第一件事。鲍威尔表示，今年的经济前景看起来相当不确定。他表示，最有可能的情况要么是低于1%的增长率，因此仅仅避免衰退，要么就是陷入衰退。他认为这两种情况的可能性相当。他承认我们有40年来最严重的通货膨胀问题，这就是为什么需要利率的原因。
And he said that it was necessary to slow the economy in order to combat inflation. And he then even went further and said that it was necessary to cool off the labor market and even to cool off wages specifically because that's how you combat inflation. That's the only thing we know how to do in a situation like this. So I think this is certainly a political mistake for Powell to say that his objective here is to hurt the wages of the American people and to basically cause a recession. But that is his view apparently.
他说必须减缓经济增长以打击通货膨胀。他甚至进一步表示，有必要冷静劳动力市场，甚至特别冷静工资，因为这就是打击通货膨胀的方法。在这种情况下，这是我们唯一知道如何做的事情。因此我认为，鲍威尔说他的目标是伤害美国人民的工资，并基本上导致经济衰退，这肯定是一种政治错误。但这是他的看法。
And I think that we are headed for it seems like a recession. I'm a little surprised that the earnings reports from these tech companies are so good because or at least their forecasters are so good. Well, they can cut spending. And we talked about this last year when we were trying to predict what would happen. I remember saying, well, I think Trimoth and I were talking about this and I said, well, Trimoth was saying, hey, earnings are going to go down and there's a PE and I said, well, what if they just stop spending or they make a lot of cuts? Well, here we are. People are just saying, you know what? We're going to cut our way to and do stock buybacks. And that's another way of financial engineering to route around the Fed, right? And to make the stock go up.
我认为我们正面临经济衰退的可能性。我有点惊讶这些科技公司的收益报告如此良好，因为他们至少是预测得很准。他们可以削减开支。去年我们谈论这个话题时，我们在尝试预测会发生什么。我记得我说过，嘿，如果他们停止开支或大幅削减开支会怎样？现在我们就在这里了。人们只是说，你知道吗？我们要通过削减开支和股票回购来实现目标。这是绕过联邦储备委员会的另一种财务工程方式，可以让股票价格上涨。
You worked incredible for Facebook. I mean, my lord, they were at $91 to share and they're over 200. Right, but just to bring it back to the economy. So look, I think we agreed that these tech companies seem to be pretty immune. They've got a large cushion in terms of their ability to continue generating earnings because of all the blow that actually gives them like a margin of error where they can just keep cutting to prop up earnings.
你在 Facebook 表现得太出色了。我的天啊，它们的股价从 91 美元上涨到了 200 美元。但是，回到经济领域。我认为我们都同意，科技公司似乎相当免疫。由于它们得到的所有机遇，它们能够继续产生盈利，因此具有较大的缓冲能力，这使它们能够随意削减以支撑收益。
I'm a little surprised that they think their revenue forecasts are going to be so positive because again, they were guiding upwards generally. So they seem to think they're not going to be impacted by the recession. And maybe they won't be. Again, I think what was interesting from Powell is the way that he seemed to think that the only thing we know how to do, this is basically what he said, the only thing we know how to do in the situation with inflation is to kill the economy. It's to slow the economy and specifically to kill jobs and wages.
我有点惊讶他们认为他们的收入预测会如此乐观，因为他们通常都是向上调整预测。所以他们似乎认为他们不会受到经济衰退的影响。也许他们不会受到影响。再说一遍，我认为鲍威尔的有趣之处在于他似乎认为，我们在面对通货膨胀时，唯一知道的做法就是破坏经济。即放慢经济增长，具体地说，是要破坏就业和工资。
And that was pretty remarkable to me because there are other things we could do such as, okay, well, one thing is that you don't have to print so much money. Cut spending or sterile. So yes, our fiscal policy remains completely out of whack. We're running $2 trillion annual deficits right now past COVID. So he could have said, listen, we could get off this reckless fiscal policy and be more restrained, but he didn't want to go there.
对我来说，那是相当令人注目的，因为我们还可以采取其他措施，例如，你不必印刷那么多钞票。削减支出或强制执行节制。所以，是的，我们的财政政策完全失调。在新冠疫情之后，我们目前每年的赤字达到了2万亿美元。因此，他本可以说，听着，我们可以摆脱这种鲁莽的财政政策并更加克制，但他不想讨论这个话题。
The other thing he could have done was address the supply side. One of the ways that you can reduce inflation is not just to kill demand. You could actually affect supply chains. So like cost of energy, for example, energy is a huge input into the economy. And one of the things that happened at the beginning of this administration is they made it much harder to drill for oil and gas. And I think Biden sort of reversed course on that at the state of the union memory. He had that line where he said, we can't get off oil and gas for 10 years and the audience started laughing.
他可以采取的另一种方法是解决供给方面的问题。减少通货膨胀的方法不光是消减需求，还可以影响供应链。例如，能源成本是经济的重要投入之一。这届政府开始做的一件事就是让石油和天然气的钻探变得更加困难。我认为拜登在国情咨文中改变了这个政策。他说我们在10年内无法从油气中脱离，观众们开始笑了。
But in any event, the point is just that it's too little too late. They could have done more on energy to keep cost low. And then there's a whole bunch of other critical inputs in the economy besides labor. And what you could do is I think you could go category by category and say, how do we get the price of these key inputs into our economy down? How do we resolve supply chain bottlenecks? How do we make it easier to get access to whatever the key commodity is? And I think there's things they could do if they're just willing to work at it.
但不管怎样，重点是太迟了，太少了。他们本可以在能源方面做得更多，以保持成本低廉。此外，在劳动力之外，经济中还有许多其他关键的投入。您可以分类讨论，比如说，我们如何降低这些关键投入的价格？我们该如何解决供应链瓶颈问题？我们该如何更容易地获取关键商品的资源？如果他们愿意尽力，我认为他们还可以做些事情。
Maybe this isn't the Fed's job. This is more the administration. But what you could do is say, listen, we're going to make it easier for people to produce and create supply. And if you have a higher supply of goods and services, then you will start to bring inflation down because inflation is just the amount of money in the system divided by the amount of goods and services. And when the amount of goods and services hasn't gone up, but the money supply has gone up tremendously, you're going to have inflation.
也许这不是美联储的职责，更应该由政府来解决。但你可以说，我们将让人们更容易生产和创造供应，如果有更多的商品和服务供应，那么通货膨胀就会逐渐降低，因为通货膨胀就是系统中的货币总量除以商品和服务的总量。当商品和服务的总量没有增加，但货币供应量却大幅增加时，就会出现通货膨胀。
And that's why I think it's a little bit misplaced to be killing demand the way they're killing it is because fundamentally, the problem here is they flooded the economy with money both through government stimulus and through quantitative easing. And then also they made it harder on the supply side to produce, certainly with energy. So it seems to me that the approach they're taking for us to get out of this is like taking a meat cleaver to the economy or a sledgehammer, really. And it's the most violent possible way that they could solve the problem they previously created of too much inflation.
因此，我认为他们现在消减需求的做法有些错位，因为根本的问题在于，他们通过政府刺激和量化宽松洪泛经济体系，并且对能源等方面的生产供给施加了更多限制。所以，在我看来，他们采取的解决方法就像把一把肉切刀或者一把大锤砸向经济，这是最暴力的解决之前造成的通货膨胀过高问题的途径。
Any other thing, obviously, is jobs. We're still sitting here with close to 10 million job openings. And the thing I'm hearing from the streets is that unemployment hacking is become a high art. And so labor force participation remains low. It's nowhere near the historic highs.
另一个显而易见的问题就是就业。目前我们仍有近1000万个工作岗位空缺。我听到的情况是，失业率的欺骗达到了高水平，使得劳动力参与率仍然很低，远远没有达到历史高点。
We have been very permissive during COVID for good reasons to give people very extended benefits. People have now learned is my understanding. And this is something that's happening on a regional level, state by state level. People are learning how to hack unemployment and not going to work. And people are just not taking the jobs that are open, which are service industry jobs. Americans don't want to work them. We don't want to let people into the country. We got to record low people coming into the country. It seems to me that would be a much more productive way to do this, right?
翻译：出于好的原因，我们在COVID期间非常宽容，为了给人们提供更长期的福利。据我了解，现在人们已经学会了什么。这是在地区层面上发生的事情，逐个州地发生。人们正在学习如何利用失业救济并不去工作。而且，人们只是不接受目前开放的服务业工作。美国人不想做这些工作。我们不希望让人们进入国家。我们记录到了进入国家的人数的历史低点。在我看来，这可能是更有效的方法，对吧？
表达意思：我们在COVID期间为了人们的利益做出了很多宽容的措施，但现在人们学会了如何利用失业救济而不去工作。在地区和州的层面上，这已经是一个正在发生的趋势。服务业的岗位空缺，但美国人似乎不想去做这些工作。此外，我们的国家不希望让外国人进入国家，这似乎是一个更有成效的处理方法。
So yes, yes, I think it's an excellent point because exactly what you're doing there is addressing the supply side, which is you're unlocking the supply of a key input into the economy, which is all this unused labor. It's all these people aren't working. You're right. The labor force participation rate is still much lower than it could be. So if you get more people into the economy, then that helps alleviate the cost of labor. It helps fill these jobs, but it doesn't kill the economy. So it would be a much more positive way to address this.
你说的很对，我认为这是一个非常棒的观点，因为通过这种方式，你解决的是供给侧问题。也就是说，你释放了经济的一个关键输入，也就是所有这些未被利用的劳动力。这些人都没有工作，你说得对。劳动力参与率仍然比可能的要低得多。如果你把更多的人引入经济，那么这有助于缓解劳动力成本，填补这些工作空缺，但不会破坏经济。所以，这将是解决这个问题的更积极的方式。
So I just think it should alacquic creativity for him to say that the only thing we can do in this situation is not just to raise rates. He did say that, but to go further and cool off the job market, increase unemployment, and cool off wages. I mean, that's going to be a very unpopular thing to say, I think, because we're basically saying is you're going to hurt the wages of the American people. Who wants that?
我认为他应该更加创新地表达，而不仅仅是说唯一的解决办法就是提高利率。他确实说了这个，但更进一步呼吁冷却就业市场、增加失业率并减少工资。我的意思是，这可能是一个非常不受欢迎的说法，因为我们基本上是在说你将会伤害美国人的工资收入。谁想要这样呢？
Here's the chart for job openings. We thought this would collapse. It went down, certainly, as we, you know, I don't want to obsess over macro stuff, but it's still way up there. And so the fact that we can't get people to take these jobs, I don't know, Chimoff, what do you think about the employment and participation situation, and how that might unlock things?
这是职位空缺的图表。我们本以为这个图表会倒塌。它确实下降了，我们知道，我不想过度关注宏观问题，但它仍然很高。所以我们无法让人们接受这些工作，我不知道，奇莫夫，你对就业和参与情况有什么想法，以及这可能如何解锁事情？
I also wanted to know from you, Chimoff, this concept of the fed is reacting to data just so slowly. And then you have these companies that maybe are more nimble, and they have better data than the fed. I think that that's the truism. And I don't think anything about that is going to change.
我也想从您这里了解一下，Chimoff，联邦储备委员会对数据反应如此缓慢的概念。然后你会发现这些公司可能更灵活，他们拥有比联邦储备委员会更好的数据。我认为这是真理。我认为这种情况不会发生改变。
I mean, I think we talked about how these folks calculate non-farm payrolls or how they calculate CPI. It's incredibly outdated, right? It's people with clipboards walking around, talking to people and checking boxes and filling out forms. Can that change? Probably it could. Will it change? It probably won't. And so they're going to focus on the most simple, but most powerful measure that they have, which is controlling the money supply. And of what SACS talked about.
我的意思是，我认为我们已经谈论了这些人如何计算非农就业和CPI。这个方法已经非常过时了，对吧？他们用笔记本走来走去，与人交谈、填写表格。这种做法能否改变呢？可能可以。但是它会改变吗？可能不会。所以他们将集中精力于他们拥有的最简单但最强大的控制货币供应的方法。这就是SACS所谈论的。
So they're going to manipulate the money supply to either put more liquidity in the system, in which case markets go up and asset prices go up. But then inflation goes up or constrained liquidity, which then causes markets to go down, asset prices to go down, and inflation eventually to go down.
所以，他们将通过操纵货币供应量来增加系统的流动性，这将使市场和资产价格上涨。但这会导致通货膨胀上升，或者他们会限制流动性，这将导致市场下跌、资产价格下跌，最终通货膨胀也会下降。
The thing that we're facing today when you look at this labor market chart is a couple of things that I think we've talked about before. And I just want to reiterate them, which is you have to remember that we're in this new world order, which is the X China world order. And in that, there is no more unitary economy that can do things cheaper, faster and better globally around the world.
看这份劳动力市场的图表，我们今天面对的问题包括一些我们之前已经讨论过的事情。我想重申一下，就是我们需要记住我们现在处于X中国的新世界秩序中。在这个秩序中，不再有一个单一的经济体可以在全球范围内做到更便宜、更快和更好。
Right? So we're going to near shore or on shore, all kinds of things that used to be done by the Chinese. They'll sit in Mexico or they'll sit in Central America. Maybe in some cases, they'll sit in Canada and all of that will feed into the United States. The problem with all of that is that that will keep costs higher because it'll be naturally more inefficient.
对吧？所以我们将把之前由中国人完成的种种任务迁移到近海或者岸上，他们会留在墨西哥或者中美洲。在一些情况下，他们可能会留在加拿大，这些任务无一不将输入美国。但所有这一切的问题在于，这将使成本更高，因为它天然地更加低效。
It will naturally take more money and that will naturally cause the prices of those things to be higher, which means that terminal inflation, I think, is just roughly higher. As a result, I think that more power, if you will, goes to labor.
这意味着自然会需要更多的资金，而这自然会导致这些东西的价格更高，这意味着终端通货膨胀率应该会更高。因此，我认为更多的权力将掌握在劳动力手中。
So in this constant tension that we have in an economy between labor and capital, the people that own the factories or the businesses and the people that run them and work inside of them, we've been in this position where the pendulum has swung so far towards capital, the owners, the shareholders, that all this financial engineering has tremendous upside. That's why companies engage in it.
在经济中，劳动力与资本之间存在着不断的张力，即拥有工厂或企业的人以及管理和工作在其中的人之间的张力。我们一直处于这种位置，振荡向资本、所有者、股东端倾斜得如此之远，以至于所有这些金融工程都有巨大的上升空间，这就是为什么公司会参与其中的原因。
But when you show that chart, Jason, what it means is it's just really hard to find people. And so the only way you're going to get people off their butt to go into work, to sit in a chair, to do a job that you need them to do is to pay them more. And in finding that, wages will have to go up.
但是，Jason，当你展示那个图表时，它意味着很难找到人才。因此，唯一的办法是通过提高薪资，让人们下床去上班，坐在椅子上做你需要他们做的工作。通过这种方式，工资将不得不上涨。
The counterbalance of that is what AI will do, which I think we all agree is that is the key, which is massively deflationary. So that is going to be the tension that we're in now for a really long time as we explore this.
AI的平衡作用是对抗通货膨胀的关键，这一点我们可以认同。因此，随着我们探索AI技术，这种张力将在很长一段时间内存在。
I don't know if you guys saw today, but Sequoia let a $20 million around in this thing called Harvey dot AI, the legal, which is like a legal super wizard for law firms. Yeah, we knew that was coming. And my partners and I were debating it. And what we thought of was, well, how much do you pay out of the $800 or $1000 an hour that you charge to Harvey dot AI? Maybe you're willing to pay 5% or 10%. But then the reality is that one of the most powerful things it does is is able to go into West law, find all these cases and say, yeah, this is germane to the thing that you're working on right now. That's a very useful thing. But the end plus first law firm will also use that tool. And instead of charging $800 an hour, they'll say, well, we'll charge 600 bucks an hour. And we're still willing to give you 5 or 10%. So I just don't see a world where, on the one hand, physical labor will continue to be more expensive, they'll demand more and more money to do the job that they're asked to do. And the knowledge work will become increasingly more deflationary because so much of it will be automated by AI that those folks will charge less and less. And there's going to be attention there.
我不知道你们今天是否看到了，但 Sequoia 投资了 2000 万美元给一家叫做 Harvey dot AI 的公司，这家公司是为律师事务所量身打造的法律超级向导。我们早已预料到了这种情况。我和我的合伙人们正在辩论这个问题。我们当时所想到的是，你会从每小时 800 或 1000 美元的收费中支付多少给 Harvey dot AI 呢？也许你愿意支付 5% 或 10% 的费用。但现实情况是，它最强大的功能之一是能够进入 West Law 平台，找到所有相关的案例，并告诉你哪些与你目前正在处理的事项有关。这是非常有用的。但是，最高端的律师事务所也会使用这个工具。他们会将收费从每小时 800 美元降至 600 美元，并仍然愿意支付 5% 或 10% 的费用。因此，我不认为在现实世界中，劳动力将继续越来越昂贵，他们会要求越来越多的薪资来完成他们需要做的工作。而知识性工作将变得越来越通货紧缩，因为越来越多的工作将被人工智能自动化，这些工作人员的收费将越来越少。这将会引起一种紧张情绪。
I don't exactly know what's going to happen. I did a couple of experiments this week. I've been rolling up my sleeves and playing with these tools. It's pretty amazing. And I would try and to use them for actual tasks in our companies. What have you learned? What did you do? And what have you learned?
我不太确定接下来会发生什么。这周我进行了几次实验。我一直在动手操作这些工具，感觉非常神奇。我想把它们用在公司的实际任务中。你学到了什么？你做了什么？你学到了什么？
So I got on the open AI plugins. Greg, thank you. I sent him my email and he got me onto that. And you can connect it to Zapier. So I have two projects I'm working on currently. One of them, I was, since I'm raised so raised in launch run 4 and I'm actually going out to people not just taking inbound. I was like, hey, can I get the names of all the major LPs and start doing some research there, putting a table, stuff that's actually what he does blog post. But then I started connecting it with finding people's Twitter handles, finding their LinkedIn profiles.
我开始使用开放的AI插件了，感谢格雷格，他把我的邮箱地址发给了我。还可以连接到Zapier。目前我正在进行两个项目。其中一个，因为我想要去接触人们，而不是只接收来自内部的信息。所以我请求得到所有主要LP的名称，并开始进行研究，制作一个表格，这些都是我在博客文章中所做的。但随后我开始查找人们的Twitter帐户和LinkedIn档案，并将它们连接在一起。
And then the next piece I'm working on is automatically following them, DMing them on Twitter, let's say, or following them and doing an in-message saying, hey, we haven't met. Here's the deal memo for my next fund. We'd love to get together. This is sent from Jason's AI script. I was going to actually tell them, but here's my real email. If after you read the summary of the next fund, you want to meet. And then I was, I'm going to pair that. And this is a piece I'm going to probably need a developer to do with our internal LP database to not email people who already duplicates.
接下来，我正在处理的下一个项目是跟随他们自动在Twitter上向他们发送私信或在私信中关注他们，然后说“嘿，我们还没见过面，这是我下一个基金的协议备忘录，我们很想见你”，这是由Jason的人工智能脚本发送的。我本来想亲自告诉他们，但这是我的真实电子邮件地址。如果你在阅读下一个基金的摘要后想要见面，我就会联系你。然后，我要将其配对。这可能是我需要一个开发人员与我们的内部LP数据库合作来避免给已经有重复内容的人发送电子邮件的一个项目。
And then inside with newsletters, I have it building a database of every newsletter we've ever sent, the writing style. And then I'm having it go find in real time news stories that we should be including in the newsletters, which I think will make the writers right now a third more productive. But these are things that would cost 40, 50 bucks an hour, 30 bucks an hour for, you know, college educated Americans and Canadians. And I have already figured out, and I'm not a developer anymore. I had to script them. And I'm actually thinking about learning to code again just so I can do this myself.
然后在我们的新闻通讯中，我建立了一个数据库，记录了我们曾经发出过的每一封新闻通讯的写作风格。并且我让它在实时中寻找应该包含在新闻通讯中的新闻故事，我认为这会让现在的作者们效率提高三分之一。但这些都是需要雇用受过大学教育的美国或加拿大人每小时40美元或50美元的成本。我已经想好了解决方法，尽管我不再是一名开发人员。我必须编写脚本。我真的在考虑再次学习编程，只是为了我自己能完成这个。
And so on Saturday, I'm going to do a little coding with a friend of mine and get back up to speed on that. I think about 30% of what knowledge workers do right now is possible. So I put every single person at both companies on chat GPT4 and the, the playground. About 30% of what knowledge workers at both firms can do currently is doable if you can figure out. And this stuff is not perfectly scripted yet.
所以这个星期六，我将和我的一个朋友一起编程，重新掌握一些技能。我认为现在的知识工作者所能做到的只有30%。于是我把两家公司的每个人都放到了聊天GPT4和游戏平台上。如果你能找到方法，30%的双方知识工作者现在所能做的事情是可以做到的。但这些东西还没有完全脚本化。
So I've been doing some stuff in travel as well, playing with the kayak, interface, expedient interface, etc. to look at travel planning. And it's pretty good as well. So it's, it's, this is the real deal folks. I think by the end of this year, 30% of knowledge work could be done by this.
我也在旅游方面做了一些事情，例如使用皮划艇、界面和方便接口等来进行旅行规划，效果非常不错。因此，我认为这是真正的妙招。我认为到今年年底，有30％的知识工作可以通过这种方式完成。
And then additionally, on Monday, I went back to work in person. And I went to, I hosted our accelerator in person. And then I hosted found a university in person in the city. The city was absolutely dead. But we had a hundred people fly in from around the world for our found university. And a lot of them are working on AI projects. And what's very interesting is like there's this big debat going on. Friedberg between, is this going to be built into chat GPT4 or Bard or, you know, Poe or whatever it is? Or should I even bother, so should I bother building, you know, a verticalized app? And it turns out like I think you should do the verticalized app. And you're going to be able to put together multiple of these aIs that have different specialities.
然后，星期一，我亲自回到办公室工作。我亲自主持了我们孵化器的活动，也在市区举办了“Found University”的活动。那个城市非常冷清，但我们有一百个从世界各地飞来参加我们“Found University”活动的人。他们中的许多人正在从事人工智能项目。现在正在进行大规模的争论，是将人工智能集成到聊天机器人GPT4或Bard或Poe等中去，还是专注于开发一个垂直应用程序。而事实证明，我认为应该专注于开发垂直应用程序。同时，您还可以将多个具有不同专业特长的AI组合在一起。
So I'm super stoked about it. But I do think if you're not using this, if you hear my voice right now and you're a white collar worker and knowledge worker and you're not using this. This year and getting up to speed on it, I think you'll be out of a job within the next two.
我对它感到非常兴奋。但是我认为，如果你现在听到我的声音，你是一个白领工作者或知识工作者，而你没有使用它，今年并且没有快速上手，我认为在接下来的两年内，你将会失业。
She's well. I just don't think you'll compete. It would be like trying to compete without knowing how to use micro soft office 20 years ago. Right? Like could you work and not know email? Remember when we came into the workforce 30 years ago and some people knew office and email and web research and then other people didn't. Those other people retired. They were phased out. If you didn't know how to use a computer and type and use an Excel spreadsheet or do a PowerPoint, you were done.
她状态很好。我只是认为你不可能参加这次竞争。就像20年前不知道如何使用微软办公软件去竞争一样，你也是这样。对吧？就像你不能不知道电子邮件就工作一样。还记得我们30年前开始工作时，有些人会使用办公软件、电子邮件和网页搜索，然而其他人不会。那些不会的人最后选择退休了，他们被逐渐淘汰了。如果你不会使用电脑打字、使用Excel电子表格或做PowerPoint演示，你就不能胜任工作了。
I think there's two possible ways you can interpret what you're saying. So in terms of the economic impact. So one is that you could say, well, AIs going to do 30% of the knowledge work. Therefore, 30% of the knowledge workers are going to be put out of work. I think the different way to put it would be every knowledge worker can get 30% more work done. Correct.
我认为你所说的有两种可能的解释方式。所以就经济影响而言，一种观点是你可以说，人工智能将会完成30%的知识工作，因此30%的知识工作者将会丧失工作。我认为另外一种方式是，每一名知识工作者可以完成多30%的工作。没错。
So if that's the case, then they're more productive. And we're just talking about the problem of how do you increase real wages in the economy without having inflation? Well, the way to do that is for every worker to be more productive. So if every worker is 30% more productive in theory, their wages should be able to go up by up to 30%. That's how you get wage growth.
如果是这样的话，那么他们就更具生产力。我们主要在讨论如何在不引起通货膨胀的情况下增加实际工资的问题。而解决这个问题的方法是每个工人都要更加具有生产力。理论上说，如果每个工人的生产力提高了30％，他们的工资应该能够提高高达30％。这就是获得工资增长的方法。
Now, maybe there will be some companies that don't need all those employees because now they're able to get whatever or third more done, but there will be other companies who can hire them. They can go off and do other jobs for other companies, especially when you've got this backlog of like you said, eight or 10 million new jobs that are on.
现在可能会有一些公司不需要那么多员工，因为现在他们能够完成更多的工作，但是还有其他公司可以雇佣他们。他们可以去其他公司做其他工作，特别是当你有像你说的那样的800万或1000万个新工作积压时。
Those jobs are all service though. They're not. You're actually going to have this big group of knowledge workers, but there's just nothing for them to do. Oh, no, I just don't agree with you. But I think there's going to be a group of knowledge workers who do not embrace this and do not make the transition because it is, it's going to require an upskilling. Like I think you're actually going to need to know how to do some basic programming and coding to really take advantage of these, at least like scripting level stuff.
这些工作都是服务性的。不是的，实际上你将会有一大群知识劳动者，但他们没有什么可以做的。哦，不，我不同意你的看法。但我认为将会有一群知识劳动者不会接受这种变化而不进行转型，因为这需要技能的提高。就像我认为你实际上需要知道一些基本的编程和代码知识来真正利用这些，至少是脚本级别的东西。
I don't know. That's pretty easy to use. I agree with you there. You can do it there. You can do it there. You can do it there. You can do it there. You can do it there. It's not quite there. It's not hard. This is like a chatbot. It is. I think it takes level two programming skills.
我不知道。那很容易使用。在这方面我同意你的看法。你可以在那里做到。你可以在那里做到。你可以在那里做到。你可以在那里做到。你可以在那里做到。虽然不完全达到要求，但也不难。这就像一个聊天机器人。确实如此。我认为需要二级编程技能。
No, it doesn't. No, you don't have no to program. You just have to know how to prompt it in natural language. It's the option of need to learn how to code. The thing that makes coding hard is that you have to learn the specific commands. It's like it's own language. You have to learn a new language. With this, you don't. In fact, one of the cool things about some of these OpenAI APIs is that you just tell it what you want it to do. There's not even like a scripting language. Love it's in natural language. That makes it incredibly easy to use, even for developers.
不，它并不需要。不，你不需要编程。你只需要知道如何用自然语言提示它。这是学习如何编码的选择。编码难的原因在于你必须学习具体的指令语言，就像是学习一门新语言。但是这个API不需要。实际上，有些OpenAI API的特点就是你只需要告诉它你想要做什么，甚至没有编程语言。这就使得它非常易用，即使你是开发者也可以轻松使用。
I don't think this is a hard technology to use. I agree with you there. Maybe people are resistant to it because there's always people who are resistant to change in new technology and you're right. If they don't adapt, they're going to be dinosaurs. I don't think this is a hard technology to grow how to use and get benefit from. You might be right.
我认为这并不是一项难以使用的技术。我同意你的看法。或许人们抗拒这项技术是因为总会有人抗拒新技术和改变，你是对的。如果他们不适应，他们将落后。我认为这并不是一项难以学习和受益的技术。你也许是对的。
Right now, it's so new that the glue between systems is just not there yet. Maybe you'll be able to talk to chat GPT-4 and it'll connect your database on notion. It will take a type form and a survey monkey and put it all together and figure that all out for you. That's the whole game right now. It's still connecting all these things. That's what I'm talking about. That's not there yet. The auto GPT stuff, you need a developer right now.
现在，系统之间的粘合剂还没有真正出现，所以处于非常新颖的阶段。也许到了某个时候，您将能够与聊天 GPT-4 交谈，并将其与您在 Notion 上的数据库连接。它将接受 Typeform 和 Survey Monkey 的信息，并将它们全部整合在一起，为您分析出结果。这就是现在的核心游戏。目前还在不断地将所有这些系统相连接，这正是我所说的。但还没有达到这个阶段，如果要使用自动GPT，您需要一名开发者。
Anyway, I'm deep in it. I am more excited right now. This feels to me like 2005 to 2012 period when you just saw Ajax and the web and speed just all coming together so quickly. And the rapid iteration is just unbelievable.
不管怎样，我深陷其中。我现在更加兴奋。对我来说，这感觉就像2005年到2012年期间，当你看到Ajax、网络和速度就迅速地融合在一起。而快速迭代是令人难以置信的。
Every day I find a new use for it, I have made my default webpage opening. When I open a new page on my PC, it just opens chat GPT-4 now. Just so I'm forcing myself to use it for every possible task. The people who work for me, some of them are doing it, most of them are not. I'm just trying to drag everybody along.
每天我都发现新的用途，我已经将它设为默认的网页打开方式。当我在电脑上打开一个新页面时，现在它只是打开聊天GPT-4。这样我就能够尽可能地利用它完成各种任务。我雇用的员工中，有些人正在使用它，大部分人还没有使用。我只是试图拉着大家一起使用。
And then you have at the same time this remote work thing happening where salaries I'm finding are starting to normalize not across cities but across countries. So hiring somebody in Canada, Estonia, Sao Paulo, and then you add the AI to it.
随着远程工作的兴起，我发现工资开始在不同的国家间趋于一致，而不是在不同的城市间。因此，可以在加拿大、爱沙尼亚、圣保罗招聘人员，再加上人工智能技术。
The cost to do things is this is like, I don't know. I think everything's going to cost about 10. All this knowledge work is going to be 10% is expensive to do. I don't think it's 10% less, or I think it's like 90% 10 cents on the dollar. 10 cents on the drawing. I agree. And it's not, this is not a five year 10 year prediction. This is like five quarter 10. We said that the first organizations to use this, like the Canary and the coal mine would be the consulting organizations. And today when Harvey got announced one of the things that that right on the heels of that price water as Cooper's announced like a billion dollar investment into AI, which makes sense because as a consulting organization full of lawyers and accountants and IT folks, those are the services jobs that you get tremendous leverage. If you were to use these tools.
做事情的成本就像是，我不知道。我认为一切都会花费大约10块钱。所有这些知识工作将需要付出10%的高昂成本。我不认为它会便宜10%，我认为它只会便宜90%，即1美元只能买到10美分的成果。我同意这种说法。这不是五年或十年的预测，而是五个季度或十个季度。我们说过，首批使用这种技术的组织，比如金丝雀煤矿，将是咨询组织。今天当哈维宣布消息时，彼得水平的库珀宣布了对人工智能的十亿美元投资，这是有道理的，因为咨询组织中充满了律师、会计和IT人员，而这些服务工作在使用这些工具时可以得到巨大的优势。
Freeberg any thoughts? I don't know. I mean, I think we kind of beep as a horse to death. We've talked about it for a couple of months and I think we just keep repeating ourselves. Are you doing anything when you're first hand? Are you playing with it yourself?
Freeberg，你有什么想法吗？我不知道。我的意思是，我觉得我们已经谈论了好几个月了，似乎讲了很多遍。你第一手有在做些什么吗？你自己玩过它吗？
Yeah. Look, I talked about that. By the way, one thing I will say, we all talk about cost reduction and then, oh, you know, knowledge work is dead and we're going to save money and all this stuff. That is always the first reaction to any new point of leverage realized from some novel technology. The second is suddenly people start doing things that use that leverage to do things that they couldn't have done before. So it's not just about dropping costs. It's about enabling new things that does a hundred times more or unimaginable things prior. I think the next phase of this AI shockwave that hit us and hit the world and enterprises is going to be the evolution of integrating those tools in a very unique way with other tools to drive very novel things forward to create new things, new projects, new progress that was unfathomable before. So it's not just about cost savings. It's going to be about new stuff.
嗯。看，我已经谈论过那个了。顺便说一句，我要说的是，我们所有人都谈论降低成本，然后，哦，你知道，知识工作已死，我们将节省金钱等等。这总是对一种新技术产生的任何杠杆点的第一反应。第二个则是人们突然开始使用这种杠杆来做一些以前无法做到的事情。因此，它不仅仅是降低成本。它还可以实现能做到之前无法想象的一百倍或不可想象的新事物。我认为，下一阶段的人工智能冲击波将是将这些工具与其他工具以非常独特的方式集成，以推动非常新奇的事物前进，创造以前不可想象的新事物、新项目和新进展。因此，这不仅仅是关于成本节省。它将关乎新的东西。
I shared a link on Twitter yesterday. There was some guy. I want to quote him correctly. His name is McKay Riggly. So it shut out to McKay on his Twitter page. It says that he didn't know how to code in 2019. He learned how to code for the first time. He taught himself. He put together an object recognition tool with chat GPT. I saw this video with his webcam. Basically, he holds up a diet coke. Tell me how many calories are in it. It's like, oh, there's no calories in it. It's a diet coke. He does this three different times with three different objects. He hacked this thing together in a couple of hours. That is a product that was theoretically unfeasible or very difficult to see how you would put that piece together quickly and easily with one person in a room in a few hours a year ago.
昨天我在Twitter上分享了一个链接，里面有一个人，我想正确引用他。他的名字是麦凯·里格利。所以我在他的Twitter页面上向麦凯致敬。上面说他在2019年还不会编程，但他自学了一次编程，并利用聊天GPT开发了一个物体识别工具。我看到了他用网络摄像头拍的视频，基本上他拿起了一罐健怡可乐，然后告诉我里面有多少卡路里。然后他又用三个不同的物体重复了两次这个过程。他仅用几个小时就把这个东西拼凑在一起了。这是一个理论上不可行或非常难以实现的产品，在一年前一个人独处的房间里只用几个小时就能轻松地将其组装起来。
Here you see a demo of this person who didn't know how to code not too long ago putting it together and creating this product that would have been such a profound startup. Imagine if you went to VCs 18 months ago and were like, look, I've got this thing and I hold stuff up in front of it. It tells me all about it and it talks to me. I literally use my voice to talk to it. He basically strung together a text-to-speech chat GPT, an object recognition tool, all of this stuff completely open source and a plugin that does web browsing. The whole thing is basically like your own interactive visual robot. It's an incredible product demo. I thought it was so amazing and profound. I sure it's a prototype and it's kind of janky. It was done in a few hours on almost a no-code basis.
在这里，您可以看到一个不久前还不会编写代码的人演示如何将它们组合在一起，创建出一个如此深奥的创业产品。想象一下，如果你18个月前去见风险投资者，告诉他们：“看，我有这个东西，我把它放到物体前面，它会告诉我关于它的所有内容，并且可以通过我的语音与我交流。”他基本上组合了一个文本到语音聊天GPT，一个物体识别工具，全部都是完全开源的插件，并且还有一个浏览网页的插件。整个东西就像是你自己的交互式视觉机器人，这是一个令人难以置信的产品演示。我认为它非常惊人和深奥。它肯定是原型机，有点粗糙，它几乎是在无代码的情况下在几小时内完成的。
It's incredible. What's going to come from that is a whole set of new products and ideas and things that we are certainly not thinking about today but in six months is going to become almost mainstay and many new categories of products, many new industries, many new businesses are going to emerge that we're not even thinking about.
这太不可思议了。从那里将产生一整套新产品、新想法和我们今天肯定没有想到的东西，在六个月内将几乎成为主要产品，并有许多新产品类别、新兴产业、新兴企业将涌现出来，我们甚至没有想到。
The lead-eyed argument of, oh, this is going to destroy jobs and destroy the economy and drop costs by 90 percent. Lawyers are going to get cheaper, et cetera, et cetera. I think that doesn't even matter. It's the tip of the iceberg. What's more exciting is all the new evolutionary stuff that's going to hit the market that's really going to transform the things that we can do and that we didn't realize we could do.
这个主张指出，“这将毁掉工作，毁掉经济，降低成本90%。律师费会变得更便宜等等。”然而，我认为这些都不重要，这只是冰山的一角。更令人兴奋的是，将有大量新的进化性的东西进入市场，真正改变我们可以做和我们没有意识到我们能做的事情。
There's going to be incredible analogy for this because what you're really talking about is more people being able to use tools and be creators. What happened in the 80s and 90s when the NBA started playing exhibition games around the world was more people around the world started playing basketball and then you started seeing people like Luca or before him, Yao Ming, Matambo. You started to have people from around the world who had never been exposed to basketball. Just incredible, porzingis, incredible talents emerged because you just had more people playing with basketball. I think you're going to have more people playing with code and building products. You're going to have incredible amounts of creativity from people who maybe you didn't expect because they didn't go to school for coding or have that opportunity.
这里可能会有一个令人惊叹的类比，因为实际上你所谈论的是更多人能够使用工具并成为创作者。80年代和90年代NBA开始在世界范围内举办表演赛后，全世界的人开始打篮球，然后你就开始看到像卢卡或他之前的姚明、马塔姆博这样的人。你开始有了从未接触过篮球的世界各地的人。因为你有更多的人玩篮球，所以出现了许多令人难以置信的天才，如波尔津吉斯。我认为你将有更多的人使用代码并构建产品。你将会看到来自那些没有接受编码教育或没有这个机会的人惊人的创造力。
I mentioned I was in FIDI and I was at a family office in the Wilsonson scene. Offices to law firms being law firms in the financial district in the market era. It was an absolute ghost town. When I say ghost town, I mean like serious ghost town. Weird. This is still like being in some dystopian science fiction thing where the last man on earth. Then we saw in the group chat today, 350 California Street was worth $300 million for years. It's a 22 story glass and stone tower. It's a picture of it. It's going up for sale. They believe, according to the Wall Street Journal, that bids will come in at $60 80% decline. We talked about this commercial real estate would have this moment.
我提到我在FIDI，我在Wilsonson场景的一个家庭办公室工作。在市场时代里，律师事务所所在的办公室都在金融区。这是一个绝对的鬼城。当我说鬼城的时候，我的意思是非常鬼城。很奇怪。这仍然像是在一些末日科幻小说中的最后一个人。今天在我们的群聊中，我们看到加利福尼亚街350号多年价值$3亿。这是一个22层的玻璃和石头塔。有一张它的照片。它要出售了。据华尔街日报报道，他们相信出价会下降80％，至60美元。我们谈论过这个商业房地产会有这样的时刻。
A lot of the banks, the small original banks own this debt, sacks. What do you think is going to happen here? Who is the person who would buy an office tower in downtown even at an 80% discount knowing that you have to pay all those carrying costs. There's so much big in office space and it's only increasing. Right. Who buys this? It's called land banking. Okay. So in other words, okay. What I mean is, you're right, there's 30% vacancy in San Francisco right now, maybe going up even more in the next few years as Lisa's role and people take less space.
许多银行和小型原始银行持有这些债务。你认为会发生什么？谁会以80%的折扣购买市中心的办公楼，知道你必须支付所有的运营成本？办公空间很庞大，而且只会增加。是啊，谁会购买呢？这被称为土地储备。换句话说，就是现在旧金山的空置率达到了30%，也许在未来几年会继续上升，因为Lisa的作用和人们占用更少的空间。
You may have a countervailing effect in terms of new companies moving back because of AI or expanding. So it's possible you start to see some growth in the office market in San Francisco. But the bottom line is 30% plus vacancy is going to take years and years of growth in order to absorb. So you're right, this building, they can slash its rent, but they still probably can't fill it. I mean, there's just no demand. So you're going to be sitting on that property for five years, 10 years before the market comes back the way that you needed to. But there's some value. Right.
你可能会在AI技术的影响下看到新公司开始回归或扩张，从而产生反向效应。因此，旧金山的办公市场可能会出现一些增长。但底线是，30%以上的空置率需要多年的增长才能消化掉。所以你是对的，这栋建筑可以大幅削减租金，但他们仍然很难填满它。这是因为市场上没有足够的需求。因此，在市场恢复到所需水平之前，你可能需要等待五年或十年才能售出该物业。但这段时间内仍然有一些价值。
Oh, it's going to trade way below its replacement cost. If you were to build that building today, it would cost you many times what they're going to pay for it. The problem is you can't finance that purchase with debt because the building's not going to generate enough revenue. So that's why I mean by land banking. It's going to have to be an equity investor who's willing to think long term and say, I'm going to buy this at a super distressed price. And I'm just going to sit there and hold it and wait. Carry it. Like you said, bear the carrying costs until the market comes back.
哦，它的交易价格将远低于其更换成本。如果您今天要建造那座建筑物，它将花费您多倍于他们将支付的费用。问题在于您无法通过债务来融资该购买，因为建筑物无法产生足够的收入。这就是我所说的土地储备的原因。必须是愿意长期思考的股权投资者来购买这个超级折扣价的建筑物。我将坚持保持它，等待市场回暖。像你所说的那样，承担维持成本。
But Jake, I want to say something I think it's a great analogy because public growth stocks have declined 70 plus percent since the market started to decline. And we've talked a lot about the statistic that I've shared a bunch publicly on how 70 percent of publicly traded companies that have gone public since 2020 are trading below their total cash invested since founding, which should translate to an estimate that call it somewhere in the order of 70 percent of private companies are probably worth less than their preference stack. And so they're not worthless companies. They just have a capital structure that is upside down.
但是，杰克，我想要说一些话，我认为这是一个很好的比喻，因为公共成长股自市场开始下跌以来已经下降了70%以上。我们已经多次谈到了我公开分享过多次的统计数据，即自2020年以来上市的70%以上的上市公司的股价低于其创立以来的总投资额，这应该转化为一个估计，即大约70%的私营公司可能价值低于其优先股。因此，它们并不是毫无价值的公司，而是拥有反转的资本结构。
Those companies are making products for customers. Those customers are paying money for those products. There's value there. There's real value there. The value has just been reset. And so it's interesting. It's not just the asset class of growth stocks and the asset class of private companies or private tech. It's also in commercial real estate. We try and create each of these as if they were in isolation.
这些公司为顾客生产产品，而顾客支付钱购买这些产品，所以这里是有价值的，真正的价值已经被重新定价了。这很有趣，这不仅涉及增长股和私营科技公司这样的资产类别，也包括商业地产。我们试图将每个类别看作是独立的。
But the problem is many of these assets were funded with some degree of leverage. Preferred stock is leverage. And it is a form of debt because it has a preference over the shareholders. They're the common shareholders, the equity holders. And the same is true with this commercial real estate market that there was a certain amount of debt. So the availability of low-cost capital, I'm secured ties against the asset in the form of debt or in the form of preferred stock in a private company has the same effect, which it allowed the valuations to balloon on the equity.
问题在于，这些资产中许多都是使用某种程度的杠杆融资而来的。优先股是一种杠杆融资，并且是一种债务，因为它比普通股股东——即股权持有人——具有优先权。商业房地产市场也存在一定程度的债务。因此，低成本资本的可获得性，无论是以债务形式还是以私营公司的优先股形式对资产进行担保，都具有相同的效果，即使股权估值膨胀。
（翻译仅供参考，仅代表机器翻译水平）
And now that the market has re-rationalized, the price is down 70 plus percent across all three of these connected, but somewhat disparate asset classes, you're kind of having this big reset moment. And funny enough, the other statistic is the cell phone traffic down 70% in downtown SF. So it's funny all four of these numbers are pretty much on track.
现在市场重新理智化了，这三种相关但有些不同的资产类别的价格下跌超过70％，你会感到有这样一个重置的时刻。有趣的是，另一个统计数据是旧金山市中心的手机流量下降了70％。所以有趣的是，这四个数字几乎都很正确。
Yeah, this chart is crazy. It's literally like you have some cities that have more cell phone traffic than they did last year or a couple years ago. This is downtown by the way. Yeah, the wider Bay area is I don't know, say booming, but it's vibrant. I said on last week show I was looking for a place to host the accelerator in San Mateo area. I got dozens of people contacting me hundreds of locations and offers at 25% of what their carrying cost is or like the carrying cost, the rent was and people offering the major companies offering me free space just because they would like to have founders hanging around. And there was one project that I really like, the purpose is like I'll give it to you for whatever, just because I want to get more people to downtown San Mateo. So that does sort of prove to the point that there is a thing that I saw this in New York City during the 90s when things were so cheap people just got creative with space. It inspired people to say I'm going to create an art gallery. I'm going to create a performance space and I don't know when that happens in San Francisco with these spaces, but feels like it's going to be a while.
这个图表真是疯狂。有些城市的手机流量比去年或几年前还要多。这是市中心附近的情况。整个湾区都非常繁荣。上周我在节目中说我正在寻找一个托管加速器的地方，有数十人联系我，提供上百个地点，他们的租金仅为原来的25%，或者像一些大公司一样，直接提供免费场地，只是因为他们想要创始人在周围闲逛。有一个项目我非常喜欢，目的只是想将更多的人吸引到圣马特奥市区。这证明了一点，当事物变得如此便宜时，人们会变得更具创造力。这激励着人们说：“我要创造一个艺术画廊。我要创造一个演出场所。在这些地方发生在旧金山我不知道，但感觉还要很久。
I don't know what you when do you think there would be demand for this space sex if you had to pick a year over and give us an over under. I mean, five years plus, I mean, just to give you some numbers, I think a healthy vacancy rate and an office market is 5 to 10%. A high vacancy rate in a city was considered like 15%. Like you wouldn't want to be an office investor in a market that had 15% vacancy. 5 to 10% was sort of the normal range. If you were under 5%, it was a super hot market and then 10 to 15 was sort of a not great market from an investor standpoint. So there are 30% plus. And like I said, it could get worse before it gets better because as Lisa's role, people are going to shed more space that they might not already be subleasing. So the real number might be like 40%. So I mean, I think it's like, yeah, it doesn't seem like a decade. It's a decade assuming that San Francisco gets this house in order and companies come back speaking of new companies are created and they don't completely wreck it. It's not clear to me that like things will go in the right direction.
我不知道你认为什么时候会有对太空性交的需求，如果你必须选一年并告诉我们，那么我就不知道了。我的意思是，五年以上，我是说，只是为了给你一些数字，我认为一个健康的办公市场的空置率应该是5到10％。在城市中高的空置率被认为是15％。就像你不想成为一个在市场上有15％空置率的办公投资者一样。5％至10％是正常范围。如果你低于5％，那就是一个超级热门市场，而10％到15％则是一个从投资者的角度来看不是很好的市场。现在是超过30％，就像我说的，这在变得更好之前可能会变得更糟，因为随着Lisa的角色，人们将放弃更多的空间，他们可能已经没有转租。所以真实数字可能高达40％。因此，我认为除非旧金山能够有所改善，公司回来并创建新公司而不会完全毁掉它，否则这可能需要十年的时间。这并不清楚。
I mean, speaking of that, do we want to bring up this horrific bear spray attack now? You want to cue that up, socks? I mean, we're like in full on Gotham City now. Now we have vigilantes. There was a story of a fire commissioner named Don Carmoniani who was beaten with a metal pipe by a gang of homilist addicts who were encamped in front of his mother's house. And apparently they were harassing her and they were doing drugs, smoking drugs or whatever right in front of not not pot. It was like, federal, federal or meth or crack something like a hard drug. And so what we know is he went down their head words with them, bought a beep, bought a boop, you know, and they bashed him upside the head with a pipe. And now it turns out that he was accused by the defendant's lawyer, the one who assaulted him. So we don't really know what's true here of using bear spray on them first. So the DA dropped charges. The lawyer for the defendant in that case is saying that he apparently was the perpetrator of these bear spray attacks on homeless people going back a number of years. I guess there's a, like you said, pretty gnarly video of that. We don't know that. We don't know that. That's it. But obviously the DA thought something was kind of hinky because they dropped charges against the guy who assaulted him. We shouldn't. The person who sprays the bear spray and the person who beats somebody with a pipe shouldn't both people.
我是说，说到那个，我们现在想不想提这次可怕的熊喷雾攻击？你想放这个，袜子？我的意思是，我们现在就像完全进入了哥谭市。现在有了私刑者。有一个叫唐·卡蒙尼亚尼的消防署长的故事，他被一群无家可归的瘾君子用一根金属管子打伤，这些人就露宿在他母亲的房子前面。显然他们正在骚扰她，还在她的门前吸毒，吸那种联邦禁止的毒品，像是甲基苯丙胺或可卡因之类的硬毒品。我们所知道的是，他会去跟他们说话，突然他被冲上去，然后他们用那个管子打他的脑袋。现在事实证明，袭击他的被告律师指控他先用熊喷雾攻击他们。因此，检察官撤销了罪名。那个被告的律师称他自己也是攻击无家可归者的熊喷雾攻击者，已有多年。我想有一段相当恶心的视频。我们并不知道真相，但显然检察官认为有些可疑，所以他们撤销了对被告的指控。我们不应该把用熊喷雾攻击人的人和用管子打人的人都视为罪犯。
Yeah. Yeah. Of course. Listen, there's video of somebody bear spray homeless people. That's clearly wrong. However, that was from a couple of years ago. The one that was released is from 2021. We have video from the night that Carboniani was assaulted that they were chasing him down. They're chasing him down. Yes. With the metal pipe and even if they're acting in self-defense, you can't go chasing the guy to that self-defense more damage on it. Exactly. That's vengeance. That's not self-defense. Yes. They took it out of that zone of self-defense and they were chasing after him.
当然。听着，有人用熊喷雾攻击无家可归的人，这显然是错误的。但这是几年前的事了。现在公布的是2021年的视频。我们有从Carboniani被袭击的那个晚上的视频，他们在追逐他。他们在追他。是的。他们手里拿着金属棍子，即使他们是在自卫，也不能追赶那个人，使自卫变得更加残酷。确切地说，那是复仇而不是自卫。是的。他们把自卫的范畴超出了，开始追赶他。
If you saw what he looked like after the attack, they were using deadly force. He could have been killed. Donna got killed by the metal pipe. I don't think it'd be a defense that he bear sprayed them first. To that, it would have been an excessive use of force. But in any event, we're the DA ended up on this. It was just a drop charges from that night. We know that they're going to drop those charges. I think that that's going to be untenable.
如果你看到他在袭击之后的样子，他们使用了致命武力。他本来可能会被杀死。唐娜被金属管杀死了。我不认为他用了熊喷雾作为自卫是一个合理的辩护理由。这将是过度使用武力。无论如何，我们的地检察官已经结束了这件案件。那晚的指控只是被撤销了。我们知道他们将会放弃这些指控，我认为这是不可接受的。
They already dropped the charges. They have to. Justice has to be blind. Correct. I mean, you're a trained lawyer here. We have to apply the law equally to the sadistic and sane person who. Wait a second. They arrested the guy who hoes the person down. Didn't they arrest them as well? I remember seeing a perp walk. We talked about that on the previous one. Anyway, it's got them, city folks.
他们已经撤掉了指控。他们必须这样做。正义必须是盲目的。没错。我的意思是，你是一位受过训练的律师。我们必须平等地适用法律于施虐和理智的人。等等，他们抓到那个用锄头砍人的人了。他们也被逮捕了吗？我记得看到了一个嫌疑人走廊。我们在之前已经谈论过这个了。无论如何，这让城里人们感到恐慌。
This is gone to pure. I don't think this just proves anything. I mean, again, what they're trying to say now is that because of the actions that Don took that San Francisco is safe and there's nothing to worry about. And these. Patents. People who are encamped on the sidewalks doing drugs, doing hard drugs. There's nothing to worry about because somehow they were provoked by Carmen Yani. And I just think I agree with you that this is part of an overall pattern of chaos and lawlessness in the city. It is like Gotham City. So, you know, it doesn't make me feel a lot better about what's happening on the streets. It's nuts.
这太不可思议了。我认为这并没有证明什么。我的意思是，现在他们试图说因为唐的行动，旧金山现在安全了，不用担心什么。这些专利，营地上的人在人行道上吸毒，吸一些毒品。因为他们被Carmen Yani激怒了，所以现在也不用担心了。我同意你的观点，这是城市中总体混乱和无法无天的一部分。就像高谭市一样。所以，你知道，这并没有让我感到街头发生的事情变得更好。这太疯狂了。
Timothy wanted to add something. I love freeberg to. Oh, Riffon Labby. Oh, yes. Well, there was actually a story about this. I guess there's two types of lab. There's two types of mock meets. I've had the impossible burger. I've never craved an impossible burger. There's so many great burgers. You can get out there, Shachak 5 guys in and out. Why would I go to get this impossible burger unless I was doing it like vegan stuff?
蒂莫西想要添加一些内容。我也很喜欢Freeberg。哦，里弗顿·拉比。哦，对了。实际上有一个关于这个的故事。我想有两种实验室，还有两种模拟比赛。我吃过不可能汉堡，但我从来没有渴望过它。外面有那么多美味的汉堡，比如Shachak 5 Guys和In-N-Out，除非我是为了素食主义之类去吃这个不可能汉堡，否则为什么要去呢？
But then there was also so many 3D-apprented meets. And this stuff seems to be taking forever. Where is this at? Because there was a story in the Wall Street Journal about how poorly this is apparently going. So, there's three categories of these alternative proteins, the traditional animal protein.
然而，还有很多3D打印出来的蛋白结构的会议。这些事情似乎需要很长时间。这些事情现在进展到哪一步了呢？因为《华尔街日报》上有一篇报道说这进展不顺利。所以，这种替代动物蛋白有三个类别：传统的动物蛋白。
The first is these call it alternative proteins where you use things like soy protein or pea protein. Beyond burger, it's a good example. They have a pea protein based burger. And so, that category was kind of hot for a minute where everyone is like, oh, it's an eco-conscious decision people will make the shift. And, you know, beyond meat had this massive IPO and the stock went crazy.
首先是所谓的“替代蛋白质”，其中使用的物质像是大豆蛋白或豌豆蛋白。Beyond Burger就是一个很好的例子，它使用了豌豆蛋白制作汉堡。这个类别曾经非常流行，大家都认为这是一种关注生态环境的决定，人们会开始改变饮食习惯。除肉公司（Beyond Meat）曾推出一系列具有豌豆蛋白基础的产品，这些产品受到了很多关注，上市之后股票也一度疯涨。
And I. Someone said, it was the biggest return ever for Kleiner Perkins. But it really was just taking plant protein. Processing it and trying to make it sort of mimic the texture and flavor and taste of animal protein. And it's more expensive. So, I've generally been fairly negative on whether that really moves the needle, right? The needle for me is can you replace animal proteins traditionally? And stop using all this land and putting all this carbon into the atmosphere and all this water and all these resources that we use to make all these animal proteins, which I think is both kind of ethically incorrect but also extraordinarily environmentally costly.
有人说，它是 Kleiner Perkins 创下的最大回报。但实际上，它只是将植物蛋白加工加工，试图使其模拟动物蛋白的质地、口感和味道。并且它价格更高。因此，我通常对于这是否真正有用持负面态度，对我来说，持平和动物蛋白是否能够替代是关键。停止使用所有这些土地，将所有这些碳排放到大气中，使用所有这些水和资源来制造所有这些动物蛋白是非常不道义的，并且成本非常高昂。
Sorry, can I ask a question? Qualifying question. Do you think it's also important for it to not just replace natural products despite all of those externalities you talked about with artificial products with chemicals and sugar? So, first of all, everything is a chemical. So, the, you know, I think the categorization of, you know, all chemicals are bad is silly because everything is made of chemicals.
对不起，我可以问一个问题吗？一个限定性问题。你认为除了你提到的外部成因，使用化学品和糖类人造产品代替天然产品也同样重要吗？首先，所有物质都是由化学品构成的。所以，我认为将所有化学品归为一类并认为它们是有害的是愚蠢的，因为每个物质都由化学品组成。
I think it's a question of are there bad things that are being put in there that's not good for your health to make it flavorful or whatever and that may or may not be the case. It's really product dependent. I only get to good generalization. But do you, so you think when I eat a salad, I'm just eating chemicals? It is chemicals, yeah. But healthy ones. Healthy chemicals are in a salad. There's good in there are bad, yeah, for sure. And then bad chemicals are in like sugary cereal. Yeah, like refined sugar is bad for sure, right?
我认为这个问题是关于是否有一些不利于健康但可以增加口感的坏东西被添加进去，这取决于产品本身。我的结论只能是泛泛而谈。但是你觉得当我吃沙拉的时候，我只是在吃化学物质吗？没错，那是化学物质。但是是健康的化学物质被添加到了沙拉中。沙拉里有好的东西也有坏的东西，当然没错。像含有精制糖的麦片，里面就有不好的化学物质。精制糖肯定是不好的，对吧？
That's a bad chemical. And I just want to understand you just viewed as a spectrum of chemicals some good some bad. Yeah, there's things that are good for you. There's good fats, there's bad fats, there's, there's, you know, and even in the category of sugar, some people say all sugars are bad, some people say some sugars are better than worse. Others as measured by the glycemic index. You know, there's a lot of ways to kind of look at this stuff.
这是一种有害的化学物质。我只想理解你是不是把化学物质看成了一系列的好和坏。是的，有些对你有好处，有好的脂肪，有坏的脂肪，还有，你知道，在糖的类别中，有些人认为所有的糖都是有害的，有些人说有些糖比其他糖更好，可以从血糖指数来衡量。你知道，有很多种方法来看待这些东西。
It's beyond meat and these P1s, they're all processed, highly processed. They got a lot of salt, they got a lot of fat, right? They're not good for you. So, the way that beyond and impossible and others have tried to make it taste good for people is they've added a lot of saturated fats, which is a way to drive the mouthfeel and make it taste good. But then a lot of doctors, the American Heart Association came out and said that those fats are really bad for your heart and you shouldn't eat them. And also, there's been a general kind of consumer sentiment shift.
这些P1型肉是高度加工的，含有大量盐和脂肪，对健康没有好处。为了使产品口感好，Beyond和Impossible等公司添加了大量饱和脂肪，这是一种提高口感的方法。但是，许多医生和美国心脏协会认为这些脂肪对心脏健康非常不利，建议不要食用。此外，消费者对这种食品的态度发生了普遍转变。
So a couple of years ago, these were the hottest products. It was like all the food ingredient companies were shifting to plant-based proteins and they were building plant-based protein business categories and it was this big hot thing. And then they came out and they're like, wait a second, this isn't going as we thought. What happens is people try them out and they're like, yeah, that's a cool thing. I want to do good for the planet. But would I rather pay five bucks for a do good for the planet burger that kind of doesn't taste that good or would I rather pay three bucks for a burger that tastes really good? And what happens is, B, B, I choose option B.
几年前，这些产品是最热门的。所有的食品原料公司都在向植物蛋白转移，并正在建立植物蛋白业务类别，这是一件非常热门的事情。但后来他们发现，情况并不像他们想的那样。人们尝试了这些产品，他们说：“是的，这很酷。我想为地球做点好事。”但是我是否更愿意为一份味道很不好的“为地球行动汉堡”付五美元呢？还是为三美元的味道很好的汉堡付款？结果是，我选择B选项。
Yeah, and so to most people, right? And so almost all people. And that's the point I view. I've always shared. I said it's just, it's not going to win the hearts and minds of the world unless it's cheaper and it's tastes better and healthier and identical. Yeah, and doesn't damage your health doesn't make you worse.
是啊，对大多数人来说都是这样的，对几乎所有人来说都是如此。这是我持有的观点。我一直认为，除非它更便宜、更美味、更健康且与原版无差异，否则它不可能赢得世界人民的心。是的，而且它不会危害你的健康或让你变得更糟糕。
Exactly. So the more challenging technical solution is the other two categories. The second category is, can you synthesize animal proteins using recombinant DNA? So this is where you take the DNA that codes for the protein, whether it's the milk protein or the egg protein or the cheese protein and you put it in a bacterial cell or yeast cell that are used to ferment that we used to make wine that we used to make beer and they each sugar and then they spit out a product.
没错，所以更具挑战性的技术解决方案是另外两个类别。第二类问题是，能否使用重组DNA合成动物蛋白质？这就是通过将编码蛋白的DNA，无论是奶蛋白还是奶酪蛋白，放入细菌或酵母细胞中，这些细胞用于发酵，制造葡萄酒，制造啤酒，他们会将糖棒出一个产物。
And in the case of wine and beer, they each sugar from grapes or from malt or whatever and they spit out alcohol ethanol. And Genentech was the first company to really pioneer recombinant DNA at a mass scale. They basically used recombinant DNA to make insulin.
就葡萄酒和啤酒而言，它们从葡萄或麦芽等中提取糖分，然后吐出酒精乙醇。而吉纳泰克是第一家真正开创大规模重组DNA技术的公司。他们基本上利用重组DNA制造胰岛素。
So they took the DNA from humans that that codes for insulin, the gene for insulin. They put it in E. coli bacteria and then they put the E. coli bacteria in a big tank and that E. coli start to duplicate and they make all this insulin. And that's how we make all the world's insulin today is using that bio manufacturing process. And it's how we make all of biologic drugs, all anybody drugs are made this way.
他们从人体中提取了编码胰岛素的人类DNA，即胰岛素基因。然后将其放入大肠杆菌中，再将大肠杆菌放入大罐中，使其复制并产生所有这些胰岛素。这就是我们今天使用的所有世界胰岛素生产方式，即生物制造过程。这也是我们制造所有生物制剂和所有药物的方式。
It's a $300 billion dollar your market just in biologic drugs. So when CRISPR kind of came about in 2012, suddenly the toolkit to go in and do a much better job and a much cheaper job of editing the genomes of the little microbes to make a more efficient at making these proteins became standard.
生物制药市场价值高达3000亿美元。当CRISPR在2012年出现时，突然出现一种更好且更便宜的工具箱，可以编辑微生物的基因组，使其更高效地制造这些蛋白质，从而成为标准。
And everyone said, let's go use this new category of what's being called synthetic biology or symbio to make all these animal proteins that we use animals to get today. So, sorry. Can I just ask a question? Is the idea that if you use recombinant DNA in this process, it would taste better and be healthier and all this chemically identical.
大家都说，我们可以使用一种被称为“合成生物学”或“共生”分类的新技术，来制造我们今天使用动物获得的所有动物蛋白质。所以，抱歉，我能问一个问题吗？这个想法是，如果在这个过程中使用重组DNA，那么口感会更好，也更健康，并且化学上是完全相同的吗？
So it's the exact same protein as you would get. I understand it would be the exact same under a microscope or whatever, but would it taste the same? Taste exactly. Totally. Exactly. So that's the whole doing. Do we know that or was that that was the guess? No, we know that. It's the same protein schema.
这个蛋白质和你原本得到的是完全一样的。虽然在显微镜下或者其他方面看来一模一样，但它的味道也会完全一样吗？绝对一样。完全就是这样。我们确定它是一样的蛋白质结构。
So whether you get the protein from the cow or you get the protein from the yeast cell, what's the issue with expensive to do this process? So the key metric in that second category is productivity grams per liter per day. How well can you get that little microorganism to make that protein? The more protein it makes per day, the cheaper the price per protein.
无论你是从牛身上还是从酵母细胞中获取蛋白质，进行这个过程的费用成为问题的关键。因此，在这第二类中关键的指标是每升每日生产的克数。你能否让这个微小的微生物生产更多的蛋白质？每天生产的蛋白质越多，每单位蛋白质的价格就越便宜。
And we're still a far ways off from getting this to be price competitive. So that's a challenged category right now. There's a lot of, I'm invested in a couple of companies in this space, where we're trying to make it faster and cheaper to do that strain engineering to edit the genome up front and make them make those little cells more productive to bring the price per gram down and hopefully make it compete ultimately with the traditional market for eggs, cheese, milk, etc. But what is the constraint? Is it an energy constraint or is it natural biological in capability?
我们距离价格有竞争力还有很长的路要走，所以这是一个目前有挑战的领域。我在这个领域投资了几家公司，我们正在尝试更快、更便宜地进行菌株工程，编辑基因并让这些小细胞更有成效，降低每克产品的价格，并最终与传统的蛋、奶酪、牛奶等市场竞争。但是，限制是什么？是能源限制还是天然的生物能力限制？
No, so the great thing is on our first principle basis, the biophysics indicates that this should make proteins cheaper. And that is good for the planet. It's good for human health, it's good for everything. We should be able to make eggs, cheese, milk, all this stuff exactly the same as what you get from an animal without the animal because the biophysics of a single cell making it is better than the biophysics of a whole animal.
我们的第一原则是基于生物物理学指出这应该使蛋白质变得更便宜，这是最棒的事情。这对地球有好处，对人类健康有好处，对一切都有好处。我们应该能够制造和动物提供的东西完全一样的鸡蛋、芝士、牛奶等产品，而不需要动物，因为单个细胞的生物物理学比整个动物更好。
Think about a chicken. It grows feather, it's a clux, it walks around, it has energy, it makes heat. So the chicken as a system is not that energy efficient. But a little cell that just eats sugar and it's programmed to do one thing and one thing only. Each sugar make protein, each sugar make protein and spit as much of it out, you theoretically can make it way more efficient. Exactly.
想象一只鸡。它长出羽毛，叽叽喳喳地走来走去，有活力，会产生热量。因此，作为一个系统，鸡并不是那么能源高效的。但一个只吃糖并且只被编程做一件事情的小细胞，每吃一粒糖就能产生蛋白质，然后尽可能多地吐出来，理论上能让它更加高效。恰恰是这样。
Now we're making great progress but we're not there yet. We're not at commodity price points. No, why? I'm trying to ask why. Where's the failure point?
目前我们取得了巨大的进展，但还没有达到商品价格点。为什么呢？我想问为什么。哪里出了问题？
There's two failure points. Sorry, I should say there's three. The first is strain engineering, which if you want to shuffle all the other genes in the organism to stop doing things like growing a bigger cell wall or taking your time to duplicate, you want to change the genome of the cell to get it to do stuff faster. The second stage is process engineering. When you put that cell in a tank, you're changing the sugar, the methanol, the CO2, the oxygen, the pH, everything about that tank and the condition of the tank has to be adjusted. So there's about 60 variables and those 60 variables all need to be tuned and tweaked before you optimize the performance of production. The third category is the hardest, which is scale manufacturing.
有两个失败的因素。对不起，应该说有三个。第一个是应变工程，如果想让有机体中的所有其他基因停止进行像增大细胞壁或花费更多时间复制等操作，需要改变细胞的基因组以使其更快地进行操作。第二个阶段是过程工程。当将细胞放入槽中时，需要调整糖、甲醇、二氧化碳、氧气、PH值等槽的条件。因此，大约有60个变量需要进行调整和优化，才能优化生产性能。第三个类别是最难的，那就是扩大生产规模。
There's about 100 million liters of biomanufacturing capacity on earth today. 95 million liters is owned and operated by companies that use, and when I say biomanufacturing capacity, I'm talking about big stainless steel tanks, you pour water, you pour sugar, you pour your cells in, they make copies and they make your stuff. Of that 100 million liters, 95 million is owned and operated by companies. 5 million is available for rent. Of that 5 million liters, 4 million is rented for its entire lifespan by some company, usually a biologic drug company, because very little of this is being done in food today. So there's only a million liters left to rent and there's 200 syn bios start-ups trying to make animal proteins and they've all competed for this capacity. So the capacity cost has gone up by about fourfold, but it sounds like the the latter two you can overcome with capital, but the first one is really bounded by science.
目前地球上有约1亿升的生物制造能力。其中，9500万升属于使用此能力的公司，而当我说生物制造能力时，我指的是大型不锈钢罐，您倒入水、糖和细胞，它们会产生拷贝并制造您的产品。在这1亿升中，9500万升归公司所有和经营，而500万升则可供出租。这500万升中，4百万升将被某家公司（通常是生物制剂公司）租用其整个寿命周期，因为目前对此的需求很少用于食品。因此，只有一百万升剩下可供租用，而有200多家基因合成初创企业正在竞争这个容量。因此，容量成本已经增加了四倍，但是它听起来可以通过资本来解决，但第一个限制在科学上。
It's more engineering because what you track is kind of what's called the tighter curves, which is grams per liter, and the more experiment you do, the higher that number goes. And so if you can increase your experimental rate. And the few grams that it does produce today, when a normal person tastes it, they're like, yep, this tastes the same as a Wadu ribeye.
这更多地涉及工程方面，因为你追踪的是所谓的更紧密的曲线，即每升克数，而且你做的实验越多，这个数字就会越高。因此如果你能提高实验速度，就能获得更多的克数。今天它只产生了几克，但一般人尝试后，他们会发现其味道与Wadu ribeye基本相同。
No, so remember, I'm talking about proteins right now. I'm not talking about cellular meat. I want to talk about cellular meat last, which is the hardest category, which is what you're talking about. I'm talking about taking that protein and then using it to make a product like a cheese or using it as an egg replacement or that kind of stuff. It's the same protein as what you would get from eggs or milk or what have you.
不，所以要记住，我现在在谈论的是蛋白质。我不是在谈论细胞肉。我想最后谈论细胞肉，这是最难的类别，也是你谈论的内容。我在谈论的是将蛋白质提取出来，然后制作像奶酪这样的产品，或将其用作替代鸡蛋的原料等。这种蛋白质与从鸡蛋或牛奶等得到的蛋白质相同。
This all just sounds so hard. Well, it's a big problem and it's a lot of money. So is that a problem? Eggs alone are $200 billion a year. I mean, the methane released from cows is one of the largest contributors to global warming. It's a real problem.
这听起来太难了。嗯，这是一个大问题，需要很多钱。这样做是一个问题吗？仅鸡蛋一项就每年有2000亿美元的销售额。我的意思是，来自牛的甲烷是全球变暖的最大贡献者之一。这是一个真正的问题。
Also, we're going to need to solve this Jamaat. There's a lot of resources. We're going to colonize Uranus. We're going to need to get food there. I just asked question, like if you go after the high-emission categories first, do you give yourself room to leave these things because you're doing so much already?
此外，我们需要解决这个Jamaat的问题。有很多资源可用。我们将要在天王星殖民地。我们需要在那里获取食物。我只是问了一个问题，比如如果你先处理高排放类别，你是否可以留出空间去解决这些事情，因为你已经做了这么多事情？
Just a question. Animal agriculture emissions are one of the largest and, unfortunately, one of the biggest drivers because as people's GDP per capita increments, the first thing they spend money on is protein. I get it.
这只是一个问题。动物农业排放是最大的之一，也是最大的驱动因素之一，因为随着人均GDP的增加，人们花钱的第一件事就是购买蛋白质。我理解这一点。
I'm saying something different, which is if we just invented better heat pumps, you'd have industrial heating and cooling, which represents almost a third of all greenhouse gas emissions. You get that off and you give yourself a lot of time in space and room and maybe you've let the cows roam and belch and burp because the meat just tastes better and you don't have to spend a bunch of time in effort. I don't think it's an ore. I think it's an anchimoth. I think we should be doing all these things.
我在说一些不同的东西，就是如果我们发明了更好的热泵，你就可以实现工业制冷和供暖，这几乎占据了所有温室气体排放的三分之一。如果你解决了这个问题，就为自己创造了更多的时间和空间，也许你可以让奶牛在户外自由地走动和打嗝，因为这样的肉口感更好，你也不必花费太多时间和精力。我不认为这是一种矿石，而是一种“Anchimoth”。我认为我们应该去做这些事情。
And I think that I'm a big believer as you guys know in markets. So I'm not a believer in transition for the sake of carbon saving because people aren't going to pay a premium as we've seen with the kind of alternative meat market. 15 dollar people want cheaper hamburgers. You're not going to want cheaper, cheaper, cheaper. So if you can make protein cheaper, it's also a great ROI. You can make money doing this and the market will buy it because it's cheaper protein.
我认为，正如大家所知道的，我非常相信市场。因此，我不相信仅仅为了减少碳排放而进行能源转型，因为我们已经看到，人们不会为可替代肉类的额外费用买单。15美元的汉堡才是人们想要的，而不是更加便宜的产品。因此，如果你能够生产更便宜的蛋白质，它也会有很好的投资回报率。你可以通过这种方式赚钱，市场也会购买它，因为这是更便宜的蛋白质。
I just want to hit on this because we keep side-tracking a little bit. The third category is the one that the article is about, which is cellular meat. So cellular meat is where you're trying to make your wagyu or your shrimp or your fish. You're trying to make cells, not just proteins, but entire cells, and those cells stick together, and they look and cook and feel and taste like cellular meat, like muscle, like what you eat when you eat fish or beef or whatever.
我想说这件事，因为我们有点跑题了。第三个类别是本文所讲的，即细胞肉。所谓细胞肉，就是我们试图制造像和牛、虾或鱼一样的肉类。我们不仅仅是要制造蛋白质，而是要制造整个细胞，这些细胞黏在一起，看起来、烹饪起来、口感和味道都像肌肉一样，就像你吃鱼、牛肉或其他肉类一样。
And the problem there is you're trying to take a cell and cells normally grow on bones and on tissue. And so there's scaffolding and all these systems that hold all the cells together. And so to get cells to grow in a tank and stick together and replicate without other cells signaling them turns out to be really expensive. There was an executive at Merck I spoke to a few months ago. And he said, we're going to sell fidel bovine serum, which is basically like this liquid that they get from the fetuses of cows. And this is how cellular meat started.
那里的问题在于你试图在没有骨骼和组织的情况下培育细胞。细胞通常会在骨骼和组织上生长。因此，需要一些支架和系统来保持所有的细胞在一起。所以，让细胞在培养罐中生长、粘在一起并复制自己，而没有其他细胞发信号给它们，这非常昂贵。我几个月前和默克公司的一位高管交谈过。他说，我们将销售菲德尔牛血清。这种液体基本上是从牛胎儿中提取的。这就是细胞肉的起源。
They took a cell from a cow and they put it in a tank with fidel bovine serum, and the cell started to replicate and duplicate. And then they could take those cells and try and turn them into a beef into a burger and sell it or try it. That was the million dollar burger if you remember that a couple years ago. And fidel bovine serum market has gone through the roof because so many companies are trying to make cellular meat. And the Merck exec was like, we're going to sell a billion dollars of fidel bovine serum and then we're going to sell zero because no one's going to be able to make money doing this. It's just impossible. You're not going to sell 500-dollar burgers.
他们从牛身上取了一个细胞，将它放进一个含有FBS的罐子里，这个细胞开始不断复制和繁殖。然后，他们可以将这些细胞尝试转化成肉，做出汉堡并出售或尝试。就像几年前那个百万美元汉堡一样。FBS市场也因为许多公司试图生产细胞肉而大热。默克公司的高管说，我们将会卖出10亿美元的FBS，但是我们最终会卖出零，因为这项生意是不可能盈利的。你不可能卖到价值500美元的汉堡。
So the technical challenge there is you have to edit the cells to get them to duplicate. You have to get them to grow in suspension, meaning in a tank instead of growing on bones and growing next to each other and scaffolding. And then you have to change the feedstock so that you're creating all these other proteins and signaling factors and hormones that you pour into the tank that trigger those cells to grow. Is there any chance that after all this it's it actually just taste slightly different or better? It may.
在这里面的技术挑战是你必须编辑细胞来使它们复制。你必须让它们在悬浮状态下生长，意味着在一个容器中而不是在骨头上生长，彼此之间和支撑结构。然后你必须改变饲料，使你创造所有这些其他蛋白质和信号因子和激素，倒入容器中触发这些细胞生长。在所有这些之后，它会实际上尝起来略微不同或更好吗？可能会。
Yeah, it may but likely not. I mean, let's be honest. These are you're taking a cow cell or a salmon cell or a chicken cell. I don't know if you I mean you don't eat meat so maybe you don't know this. But depending on where the water that they drink the actual grass that they eat the meat does taste different. And that's part of the the cow's massage. I mean, look at the acorn fed cows that we used to have at poker before our austerity measures. Life was so good in 2021. Well, that's that no, we can't get it anymore. Yeah, I know we're on a budget. I get it. No, not us. We can't get it anymore because they sell through one channel. But yeah, like I need to be so good. Yeah, the variation you're talking about is obviously at an echelon and a class of eating chimath. It's probably not mainstay like, you know, the $30,000 a year McDonald's burger and chicken nugget eater is probably happy to take my chicken nugget that I disagree with you because if you go into whole foods and you actually buy like a USDA top surloin, there's a certain taste that it has that things that are not USDA don't have. So even even at like the most basic layer of the food pyramid, you can differentiate on taste based on the same.
是的，可能是这样，但可能性不大。我的意思是，说实话，这些都是从奶牛细胞、鲑鱼细胞或鸡细胞中提取的。我不知道你懂不懂这个，因为你不吃肉，但根据它们饮用的水源、食用的草以及生活环境的不同，肉的味道是有区别的。这也是奶牛按摩中的一部分。比如我们在扑克之前所用的橡果饲养牛，生活在2021年，那时候真是好啊。但现在我们没法再得到了，因为它们只通过一个渠道销售。虽然我们有预算问题，但我还是要说一句，那种口感真是太好了。你所说的变化显然是极高、极级的饮食品质问题，可能不是平民百姓所关注的，比如那些年吃三万美金汉堡和鸡块的人可能很乐意接受我的意见。但是我还是不同意，因为如果你去整食店，真正购买美国农业部最高级别的上等肉，它们有一种与众不同的味道，而非美国农业部标准的肉就没有那种味道。因此，即使在最基本的饮食金字塔层次上，你也可以根据来源区分口味。
This is why I'm saying I think it's just a very complicated long drawn out process. And I just wonder if the people that are in these businesses, if they actually love food or not, I understand why they love the science, I get it, and why they would love to save the planet. I get that too. But unless some of these people are are also food lovers, they're going to miss. I think the thing where it all dies anyways.
这就是为什么我说这只是一个非常复杂，漫长的过程。我想知道在这些企业中，那些人是否真的热爱食物。我理解他们为什么热爱科学，我懂得为什么他们会希望拯救地球。但除非其中一些人也是美食爱好者，否则他们会错过某些事情。我认为最终这一切都无法继续下去的原因就在于这个。
I just want to restate again, for the final time, these are these are identical cells and identical proteins to what you're getting from the animal. So they are not like what we talked about in that first category, where you're trying to get other stuff to sort of taste like meat, you're literally trying to create the meat and create the protein using these systems.
我想再重申一遍，这些细胞和蛋白质与你从动物中获得的完全相同。因此，它们不像我们在第一个类别中谈论的那样，试图让其他东西尝起来像肉，而是要通过这些系统直接创造肉和蛋白质。
And I'm just trying to tell you that salmon, two pieces of salmon can taste totally different depending on where it's swam. Right. And I guess what I could say is the protein. Yeah, you could probably adjust the conditions in the tank if needed to change the characteristic. This is my point.
我的意思是告诉你，同是两条三文鱼，它们的味道可能因为游过的水域不同而大不相同。对的，我认为这可能与蛋白质有关。如果需要改变这种特征，你可能可以调整水缸中的条件。这就是我想说的。
Like you don't even know where to start. How is it the fucking kelp in the Atlantic ocean? Like what do you change it? Look, I don't know what kelp affects on the salmon. I don't know salmon. But this is my point. Nobody does. This is why we pay so much for the acorn fed beef.
“就像你连从哪里开始都不知道一样。大西洋海洋里的海藻到底是怎么回事？你凭什么改变它？我不知道海藻对三文鱼有什么影响。我不懂三文鱼。但这就是我的意思。没有人知道。这就是为什么我们为橡果饲养的牛肉付出如此高昂的代价。”
I get it, but most beef is not kelp from the Atlantic ocean fed salmon. It's animals grown in very large feed lots fed corn and water. That's it. Let me just say that again. 90%, 95% of animal protein consumed is cows, pigs and chickens grown in feed lots fed corn and soybeans and water. And that's it. Right.
我懂你的意思，但多数牛肉都不是从大西洋鲑鱼的海带中获得。它们是在大型饲养场里生长的，主要吃玉米和水。这就是事实。让我再说一遍，消耗的动物蛋白有90%到95%是在饲养场中生长的牛、猪和鸡，主要靠玉米、大豆和水为食。这就是实际情况。
But if you if you go to different countries and taste the meat that's fed in that exact same way, it tastes different. So for example, if you go to Argentina, I don't want those beauties. I appreciate what you're saying. But the point I'm going to make is you can recreate whatever the system is that you're talking about.
但是，如果你去不同的国家品尝以完全相同的方式饲养的肉，味道会不同。例如，如果你去阿根廷，我不想要那些漂亮的牛肉。我理解你的意思，但我要说的是，你可以重现你谈论的任何系统。
So I want to just get back to the unit economics. The cost per kilogram or the cost per gram of the protein. We are still many orders of magnitude away on cellular meat. So the problems you're laying out are really down the road problems of optimization. Right now we've got more fundamental problems on how do you actually get the stuff to be cost competitive.
我想回到单位经济学上来。即每千克或每克蛋白质的成本。在细胞肉方面，我们仍然相差很多个数量级。因此，您提出的问题实际上是优化问题，这是一个长远的问题。现在我们面临更根本的问题，那就是如何让产品成本具有竞争力。
Now fortunately, the tools of CRISPR and since CRISPR Cas9 came out 10 years ago, there are now hundreds of variants that are open source IP free royalty free and use very broadly and generally and DNA sequencing costs continue to decline. Those are the two basic tools that are being used by biochemists and engineers to do rapid evolutionary iteration needed to produce the recombinant production of proteins to produce the new cells to produce the feedstock for those tanks.
幸运的是，CRISPR技术及其Cas9基因编辑工具10年前问世以来，目前已经有数百种变体，均为开源软件，不需要知识产权使用费，并广泛应用于DNA测序中。这两种基本工具被生物化学家和工程师用于进行快速进化迭代，以生产重组蛋白质、新型细胞和生物反应器所需的生物饲料。同时，DNA测序成本不断降低。
And there's a cost curve that we're trying to get over. It's not happening overnight. Hundreds of millions of dollars and in several cases billions of dollars have gone into these systems. And it's very likely that these companies may need several more years and several billion dollars. We are going to get there. The technology is progressing. The rate of progress is a little slower and it's a little more challenged, I think, than the first round of investors had hoped. But I do think that scientifically and first principles, it is absolutely feasible.
我们正试图跨越成本曲线，这不可能一夜之间实现。数亿甚至数十亿美元已被投入这些系统。这些公司很可能需要再花费数年和数十亿美元。但我们终将实现目标。技术正在不断进步。进展速度可能比第一批投资者所希望的略慢一些，并且面临更多挑战。但我认为从科学原理上讲，这是完全可行的。
It's a function of engineering our way there to giving Chimath and everyone else that eats burgers and chicken nuggets. Everything that they want. Hopefully at a lower price. If you put it on the curve of self-driving cars, you know, we have crews doing some automated taxis in like a very constrained area in San Francisco, but we don't have it everywhere. Where do you put this on the curve? It's a great question.
这是一个通过工程手段实现的目标，即为Chimath和其他吃汉堡和鸡块的人提供他们想要的所有东西，希望能以更低的价格。如果将其放在自驾车道路曲线上，你知道，我们有一些团队正在旧金山某个非常受限制的区域进行一些自动驾驶出租车项目，但这不是遍地都是的。你会把这放在哪个位置？这是一个很好的问题。
So what's happened, by the way, as we've gotten down the cost curve, we are unlocking new markets. So new products are being produced. Existing proteins that come from animals. There's a good example of a product called PEPSIN. It's extracted from pigs today. It's very expensive. Similar to how we used to make insulin.
顺便问一下，随着成本曲线的下降，我们发现新市场的机会愈来愈多。因此，我们正在生产出新产品，包括现有的动物蛋白质。例如，PEPSIN这样的产品就可以从猪身上提取出来。但这个过程非常昂贵，与我们过去提取胰岛素的方式相似。
And we're replacing the sourcing of that product. We replaced insulin, which we used to get from pig splines. We now make it recombinally. We're now replacing PEPSIN. We're replacing the the rennet that's used to make cheese. So as we move down the cost curve, these high what are called high value proteins are the first to fall.
我们正在替换该产品的来源。我们曾经从猪背骨中提取胰岛素，现在我们通过重组技术制造它。我们现在替换的是胃蛋白酶。我们正在替换用于制作奶酪的凝乳酶。因此，随着我们沿着成本曲线前进，这些被称为高价值蛋白质的产物首先会下降。
Those markets collapse because we now make them recombinally. They were sorry, they collapse in price because they're now cheaper using recombinant systems instead of taking them from animals. And eventually we'll get to that cost curve where they're ubiquitous for all proteins or for all types of cells. In the mean time, they're pretty sizable markets to go after. These are multi-billion dollar markets that are getting knocked down. We don't talk about it every day. It doesn't show up in the news.
这些市场的瓦解是因为我们现在用重组技术来生产它们。它们失去了竞争力，价格下降了，因为使用重组系统比从动物中提取更便宜。最终，我们将达到成本曲线，使得它们在所有类型的蛋白质或细胞中都无处不在。同时，这些市场仍然是非常庞大的，有数十亿美元的价值。我们并不每天都谈论它们，也不会出现在新闻中。
But it's really profound and interesting to see that this technology is working. It's overturning multi-billion dollar markets. It's making progress. And hopefully it'll it'll get to the point that everything from the chicken nugget to the kelp fed salmon can.
这项技术真的非常深刻和有趣，可以看到它正在发挥作用。它颠覆了数十亿美元的市场。它在进步。希望它会达到这样的程度，从鸡块到海带饲养的鲑鱼都可以。
Have you guys tried it beyond burger or an impossible burger? I've had it. I've tried them a long time ago, but I've not tried them recently. They're like it's like eating something mushy that's 60% of average hamburger. It's not worth paying double for certainly for somebody who's a hamburger eater.
你们试过Beyond Burger或Impossible Burger吗？我尝过了。虽然我早就尝过了它们，但最近没有再试过。它们像是一种60%的普通汉堡肉，口感就像在吃一些糊状的东西。如果你是一个汉堡爱好者，双倍的价格根本不值得。
So while we were talking, by the way, Amazon's results came out. They crushed it. Ernie's per share of 31 cents versus 11. And stock is up 10%. 10% off hours. And it was up 4% today. Where are the insider traders? Exactly. You feel about your recession prediction. I'm sticking by it. I think we're still going to recession.
顺便说一下，当我们在聊天的时候，亚马逊的业绩公布了。他们表现出色，每股收益为31美分，而不是11美分。股票上涨了10%，在交易时间之外。今天上涨了4%。那些内幕交易员在哪里？确切地说，你对经济衰退的预测有什么看法？我仍然坚持我的看法，我认为我们仍然会经历经济衰退。
But it is an interesting paradox here. So I think there's only a couple of possibilities. Either tech is sort of a mule or they forecast down so much. They were so conservative in their forecast thinking we're going to be in a recession that it was easy to beat. Or look, I could be wrong about the recession, but Paul is saying it. And Paul is saying if it's not a recession, it's going to be less than 1% growth. It's going to be around a year to recession. So he's not credible. So I'm not revising my forecast. Well, I think Paul is credible when he's giving us bad news because their incentive is always to fluff it up and make it sound better than it is. So when he's telling you things look bad, maybe they're looking really bad.
这里有一个有趣的悖论。我认为只有几种可能性，要么科技是像骡子一样顽固不化，要么他们预测了这么多下滑。他们在预测中过于保守，认为我们将会进入经济衰退，所以它很容易被打破。或者说，我可能对经济衰退的看法是错误的，但是保罗在这方面的话是正确的。保罗表示，如果不是经济衰退，增长率也将不到1%左右，而衰退周期最长会持续一年左右。因此他是可信的。我不会改变我的预测。我认为保罗在传递坏消息时很可信，因为他们的激励始终是美化它，使其听起来比实际更好。因此，当他告诉你情况不好时，也许情况确实非常糟糕。
I don't know, man. But look, it's a tale of two cities right now. I mean, the big tech companies seem to be doing really well. So it's definitely a paradox. Yeah.
我不知道，但是看看吧，现在是两个城市的故事。我的意思是，大型科技公司似乎表现得非常好。所以这绝对是一个悖论。是的。
All right, everybody. Well, the whole RFK thing. Okay. That's a good topic. Yeah, great topic. Go ahead. I think we should tell people like what he's about. Where are all yours? I think he gave a terrific announcement speech. And it just give you some background for the younger viewers who may not know.
大家好。关于RFK的事情，这是一个很好的话题，可以讲一下他是谁，他代表了什么。我认为他的发表演说非常好。给年轻的观众一些背景知识，可能不了解他的人。
So Robert F Kennedy has father ran for the Democratic nomination in 1968 after his brother, John F Kennedy had been president. It was assassinated as we know. And they're early 1960s. What happened is at this time before the 1968 election, Linda B Johnson was the incumbent Democratic president. And everyone thought that he'd be the party's nominee and he was going to get reelected. And he was brought down by an extremely unpopular war, the Vietnam War. And it was RFK Jr's father who was a great critic of the Vietnam War. And he ran for the Democratic nomination. And I think that he very likely would have gotten it. On the night that he won the California primary, he was assassinated by Sir Hans Sir Henry.
罗伯特·F·肯尼迪的父亲在1968年的民主党提名大会上参选，这是在他的兄弟约翰·F·肯尼迪总统离世之后。我们都知道，他在此之后遭遇暗杀。在20世纪60年代早期的时候，即在1968年选举之前，林登·B·约翰逊是现任民主党总统。每个人都认为他会成为该党的候选人，并且会再次当选。但他由于越南战争的极度不受欢迎而下台。而正是RFK Jr的父亲是越战的批评者。他参选民主党提名，我认为他很可能会获得提名。在他赢得加利福尼亚州初选的那个晚上，他遭到了Sir Hans Sir Henry的暗杀。
Yeah. If you go back and look at the things that he was saying in that campaign, he really was saying a lot of beautiful things that are in his sons ad that I think would be worth playing here. But I think you have maybe the set up for a similar situation here. You've got to become a Democratic president who is sort of not that popular. He's sort of old and out of it. And Nink or Heron, he's presiding over a war that is rapidly becoming a debacle. You don't hear so much about the spring counteroffensive anymore.
是的。如果你回头看看他在竞选时所说的话，他真的说了很多美好的话语，在他儿子的广告中也有，我认为这值得在这里播放。但我认为你可能会面临类似的局面。你必须成为一个不太受欢迎的民主党总统。他有些老态龙钟，不那么精力充沛。而且尼克或海伦，他正在主持一个快速变成灾难的战争。你不再听到夏季反攻的事情了。
These new Pentagon papers that were leaked show that the Ukrainian casualties are at least five times greater than they've been publicly admitting. It looks like Russia is certainly not losing the war. They're used to be. They've captured 90% of окmo, which has been the most violent bloody battle of the war. And Biden at this point has no strategy to bring that to an end. In fact, he's rejected multiple attempts at a peace deal. And so now, it looks like it's the Chinese who are in the driver's seat potentially putting together some sort of diplomatic settlement.
这些新的五角大楼文件泄露表明，乌克兰的伤亡人数至少是公开承认的五倍。看起来俄罗斯肯定没有失败。他们曾经输过，但现在他们已经占领了战争中最激烈、最血腥的Oкmo的90％。而拜登目前没有结束这场战争的策略。事实上，他已经拒绝了多次和平协议的尝试。因此，现在看来的是中国人有可能掌握主导权，可能正在组织某种外交解决方案。
So I think, listen, if the economy ends up going into a session and this war ends up becoming the fiasco that's increasingly looking like, you could have a setup like 1968 where people are wondering why the hell is this guy our nominee? And let me tell you, RFK juniors are at eight pulling at 19%, which I think is pretty good considering he just came out of the gate. And people don't even know the substance of his campaign yet. Merriann Williamson's at 9%. So if she dropped out, you'd be at 28% for the alternative. And I think he could go up from here. And I think if you if you watched the speech he gave, I thought there was a lot of really beautiful sentiments in there.
我的想法是，如果经济陷入困境而这场战争变成了一场看起来越来越悲惨的失败，情况可能会像1968年一样，人们会想知道为什么这个家伙是我们的提名人？而且让我告诉你，RFK的儿子现在已经有了8%的支持率，这相当不错，考虑到他刚刚起步。而且人们甚至还不了解他的竞选内容。玛丽安·威廉姆森有9%的支持率。所以如果她退出，你就能得到28%的备选人支持率。我认为他的支持率还可以继续上升。如果你看过他的演讲，我觉得里面有很多非常美好的情感。
He's very good. He said that Biden has made Ukraine a pawn in a geopolitical battle that has put the flower of Ukraine's youth into an abattoir of death in order to exhaust Russia. He channeled America's anti-war traditions, he quoted John Quincy Adams, that America should not go abroad and search for monsters to destroy. He quoted Martin Luther King Jr. There's a direct link between poverty and violence and oppression at home and war abroad.
他非常出色。他说拜登把乌克兰变成了地缘政治斗争中的棋子，使得乌克兰的年轻人沦为死亡屠宰场，以耗尽俄罗斯的力量。他倡导美国的反战传统，引用约翰·昆西·亚当斯的话，即美国不应该走出国门去寻找要毁灭的怪物。他引用了马丁·路德·金的言论，贫困与国内的暴力和压迫以及国外的战争之间有着直接联系。
He talked about the role of the CIA during his uncle's administration where he said that John F. Kennedy eventually realized that the purpose the CIA had become to create a steady pipeline of wars to feed the military industrial complex. And he talks about how JFK came to distrust the CIA and realized that it was lying to him. And the biggest appallion of his speech was when he quoted JFK approvingly saying that he wanted to take the CIA and shattered into a thousand pieces and scatter to the winds.
他谈到了在他叔叔执政期间中央情报局的角色，他说约翰·肯尼迪最终意识到中央情报局的目的是创造一个稳定的战争管道，以供应军事工业复合体。他谈到了JFK如何开始不信任中央情报局，并意识到它向他撒谎。他讲话最大的震撼是他引用JFK的话说，他想把中央情报局打碎成一千块，四散在风中。
And this very same week that he gave the speech, we found out that five former CIA directors had participated in a giant hoax on the American people by claiming that this Hunter Biden story was Russian disinformation. They knew it was not. They knew it was not. The information on the hard drive was real. It showed that Hunter Biden received multimillion dollar payments from foreign governments, including China and Ukraine.
就在他发表演讲的同一周，我们发现五位前中央情报局局长参与了一个巨大的骗局，声称这个亨特·拜登的故事是俄罗斯的虚假信息，事实并非如此。他们知道这不是真的，这张硬盘上的信息是真的，展示了亨特·拜登从包括中国和乌克兰在内的外国政府获得了数百万美元的支付。
Okay. And regardless of what you think of that story, it should not have been suppressed by social media. And it certainly should not have been suppressed in a siop by 51 former intelligence officials, including five former directors of the CIA. And if that's the way they're going to behave, if they're going to metal in American politics that way, I think we do need to start over. We do need to ask what's going on with the security state. They're not supposed to be meddling in American politics that way. So I think if this is the way they're going to act, I say, shatter away, scatter that thing into a thousand pieces. Hey, it's Catholic. I'll vote for him.
好的。不管你对那个故事有什么看法，社交媒体都不应该禁止它。51名前情报官员，包括5名前中央情报局局长，在一次行动中禁止它，这当然也不应该发生。如果他们要这样参与美国政治，我认为我们需要重新开始。我们需要问问安全国家发生了什么事情。他们不应该以这种方式干涉美国政治。所以如果他们要这样行事，我说，粉碎它，把它散布成千上万个碎片。嘿，这是天主教的。我会投票给他的。
And he's called out the insanity of COVID lockdowns and mandates. I mean, that's the thing that he's saying. I guess that's the big controversy. He's an anti-vaxxer. I guess that's the one thing they're trying to position. And he does a little bit of conspiracy theory. So listen, if you go back and look at his record, he was an environmental activist from most of his career. Big time. He did the worship project in New York where they basically bought the land along the Hudson.
他谴责了COVID封锁和规定的荒谬行为。他的这个观点引起了很大的争议。他是反疫苗者。这似乎是他们试图夸大的一个问题。他也有一些阴谋论。如果你回头看他的记录，他是一个环保主义者大多数职业生涯。他在纽约进行了崇拜项目，他们基本上购买了哈德逊沿岸的土地。
I remember I've had some events for it. They wanted to clean the Hudson up. And they just bought the land and didn't people donated the land and they bought it. They raised money. And the Hudson today has like, you know, it's flourishing amazingly. And he's directly responsible for that. He was a big critic of the way that corporate greek could lead certain big companies to engage in environmental pollution. And at certain point, he realized that big pharma had a similar incentive.
我记得我参加过一些相关事件。他们想要清理哈德逊河。他们买下了土地，也有人捐赠了土地并购买了它。他们筹集了资金。今天的哈德逊河繁荣发展，他是直接负责的。他曾批评企业的贪婪使得某些大公司进行环境污染。在某个时刻，他发现大型制药公司也有类似的动机。
Now, I don't know if he was right about those vaccines, but I do know that he's right in the case of COVID. They had an incentive to push this dubious off. Get your buster in a shot on us so that we get boosted as Iliant times. And he's right about that. He was right about the fact that this should never have been mandated. We shouldn't have the lockdowns. And you know what? In his nomination speech or his declaration, the word vaccine was only mentioned once. So this is not what his campaign is about.
现在，我不知道他是否对那些疫苗说得对，但我知道他在COVID的情况下是正确的。他们有动力推销这种可疑的疫苗。让我们免费接种，以便我们在Iliant时期获得增强效果。而且他是正确的。他正确地指出这不应该被强制实施。我们不应该被锁定。而且你知道吗，他的提名演说或宣言中只提到了一次疫苗这个词。因此，这不是他的竞选主题。
I look forward to having a month. Yeah. And to be honest, I mean, look at all the other things that were deemed to be conspiracy theories that ended up being true. Oh, yeah. I mean, this has monster. Not that you go either way. Or it could be embarrassing. Let me ask you this, Axe, if it was him versus Trump, what do you have over?
我期待拥有一个月的时间。是的，说实话，看看所有被认为是阴谋论却最终被证实是真实的事情。哦，是的。我的意思是，这很恐怖。不是说不管怎样都可行，也可能尴尬。让我问你一下，艾克斯，如果他和特朗普竞选，你会支持谁？
Well, I'm going to reserve K versus Trump sex. I'm not going to take position on the general yet, but in the Democratic primary, I'm definitely endorsing RFK junior in the North Korean primary. Okay. I'm forwarding the Democratic primary. I would if I could. I'll do an event.
好的，我将保留 K 对阵特朗普的话题。我暂不偏向任何政治立场，但在民主党初选中，我肯定会支持 RFK Jr. 在朝鲜的初选。好的，我将支持民主党的初选。如果有机会，我也会参加活动。
All right, everybody. All the amazing people who got together for the episode of 120. I'm believable over 40 or 50 of them. Ray, great job. Shout out to Ray. Shout out to Ray. I'm going to dialed into a bunch of them. And I think, it's great. You're up and I don't know all over the place. No one got robbed or mugged or bear sprained. Hopefully. I don't know if they did any in San Francisco. There's no bear sprained since that's good. They'd have been turned up. Four of the Sultan of science, the dictator himself and the mouthfeel. Ray, man, I am the world's greatest moderator.
大家好！感谢120期节目的所有出色人才，他们中有不少超过40到50人，尤其是Ray，做得很好。Ray辛苦了！我会联系他们中的许多人，我想这很好。你们在这个领域很敬业，我们没有任何人被抢劫、被谋杀或被熊攻击，希望如此。我不知道在旧金山是否有这种情况，但没有人被熊攻击，这很好。我们的节目有四位科学之苏丹、独裁者和口感专家，而我呢，则是世界上最棒的主持人。
We'll see you next time, everybody. Love you boys. Bye-bye.
下次见啦，大家。爱你们哦，拜拜。
Oh, man. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug or two because they're all just like this like sexual tension that we just need to release our house.
噢，天啊。我们全部应该找个房间，给个大拥抱或者两个，因为我们都感觉到了这股性紧张气氛，我们需要排解一下这种心情。
What you're that big? What you're a beer of beef?
你是那么大的吗？你是一股牛肉的啤酒吗？（这句话没有明确的语境和意义，需要更多上下文才能理解。建议提供更多的背景信息）
We need to get mercy.
我们需要得到仁慈。
I'm doing all this. I'm doing all this.
我正在做所有这些事情。