古代印度武器：《摩诃婆罗多》中的梵天法宝与自主武器

你做过多少期播客了？

How many podcasts have you done?

我不知道。我不清楚具体数字，但可能有几十期。

I don't know. I don't know the count, but maybe tens.

嗯，我们在大厅聊天时，我就觉得你这家伙肯定猜得准，因为我们当时在聊古印度经文，你跟我讲了一些听起来像核弹的东西。

Well, when we were talking in the lobby, I was like this good dude would be a good guess because we were talking about ancient Hindu scriptures where you were telling me about something that sounds like a nuclear bomb.

对。梵天法宝是《摩诃婆罗多》的一部分。

Yeah. The Brahmastra is part of the Mahabharata.

我是说你聊过很多次《摩诃婆罗多》了……

I mean you've talked about Mahabharata in a bunch and...

对。《摩诃婆罗多》是两大印度史诗之一，另一部是《罗摩衍那》。但《摩诃婆罗多》更有趣，也更复杂，就像许多不同故事交织在一起。而梵天法宝就相当于氢弹。

Yeah. So the Mahabharata is one of the two Hindu epics. The other one is Ramayana. But Mahabharata is more interesting. It's more complicated. It's like a lot of different stories interwoven together. And the Brahmastra is the equivalent of the hydrogen bomb.

它是怎么被描述的？

And how is it described?

它被描述为一种大规模杀伤性武器，会毁灭人类。无论如何都不能使用。这涉及一种道德契约。要使用它，你必须在深层的道德层面严重违规。大多数战士都无法获得它。那个时代可能只有两位战士被允许使用。它需要通过特殊途径传承，比如老师把秘密传授给你，几乎相当于核密码。阿周那拥有它。他是《摩诃婆罗多》中的一个特定人物，被允许使用。还有另一个人：阿周那有个老师叫德罗纳，德罗纳有个儿子叫阿什瓦塔玛。阿什瓦塔玛一直嫉妒阿周那。阿周那不是德罗纳的儿子，但他是他的模范弟子，所以德罗纳把梵天法宝的秘密传给了他。德罗纳的儿子也想要，但因为是他儿子，德罗纳也把秘密传给了儿子，尽管儿子不如阿周那。战争期间，阿周那和阿什瓦塔玛站在对立面。老师在战争中死了，儿子气疯了，释放了梵天法宝。克利须那神不得不来拯救地球，避免被那股毁灭力量摧毁。

It's described as a weapon of mass destruction that would annihilate the human population. It should not be used at any cost. There's a moral contract. You clearly have to be violating so many things at a deeply moral level to even wield it. And it's not accessible to most warriors. There were probably only two warriors in that era who were allowed to use it. And it has to be passed through special access, like a teacher has to pass on the secret to you, almost like the equivalent of a nuclear code. Arjuna had it. He was a particular character in Mahabharata. He was allowed to use it. And then there was another person: Arjuna had a teacher named Drona, and Drona had a son named Ashwatthama. Ashwatthama was always jealous of Arjuna. Arjuna was not Drona's son but he was his model disciple, so Drona passed on the secret of the Brahmastra to him. Drona's son also wanted it, but because it was his son, he also passed on the secret to his son even though the son wasn't as good as Arjuna. During the war, Arjuna and Ashwatthama fought on opposite sides. The teacher died in the war, so the son got mad and unleashed the Brahmastra. Lord Krishna had to come and save the planet from that destructive force.

《摩诃婆罗多》有多古老？

How old is the Mahabharata?

有很多不同说法，所以我不确定。据我所知，它至少有 1500 到 2500 年历史。1500 年是最低，2500 年是最高。所以它发生在那千年间的某个时期。目前还不清楚其中有多少只是神话化了的。实际发生的只是一场家族间的战争。有两群人：般度族和俱卢族。双方都认为自己在为自己的权利和正义而战，但归根结底，你可以粗略理解为争夺王位。上一代有两兄弟，每人都有一堆孩子。这些孩子为了继承权而争斗，最终演变成一场大战，许多盟友各自参战。使用了那么多惊人的武器，描述极其详细。关于精准武器有很多细节，你可以精确锁定目标并直接攻击。

There are many different opinions, so I don't know for sure. My understanding is it's at least 1,500 to 2,500 years old. 1,500 years ago is the minimum, 2,500 years ago is the maximum. So it happened somewhere in that thousand-year timeframe. And it's still unclear if a lot of it is just mythologized. What actually happened was just a war between kins. There were two groups of people: the Pandavas and the Kauravas. Each side thought they were fighting for their own rights and justice, but at the end of the day, you can crudely understand it as essentially a fight for the kingdom. There was a previous generation with two brothers, and both brothers had a bunch of kids. Those kids were warring to be the next in line, and that ended up being a massive war with many allies fighting on each side. So many amazing weapons were used, described in extreme detail. There's a lot of detail about targeted weapons, so you could precisely identify a target and just shoot at that.

它解释武器是什么吗？

Does it explain what the weapon is?

有。有一种武器叫火神箭，你可以专门瞄准任何特定的人或群体，它会自动导向并执行，几乎像半自主武器。克利须那神有一种武器叫妙见神轮，基本上是一个飞盘，你释放它，它会去专门识别某人，砍下他的头，然后回到你身边。它自我导向。让我惊叹的是这些武器的自主性——半自主或全自主——武器可以被导向攻击人或一群士兵，然后完成任务回到使用者手中。有那么多不同的法宝：风神箭、蛇神箭，梵天法宝显然是终极的，相当于氢弹。所有这些都有详细描述，包括谁有权使用。当然，这是神话化的，所以被描述为背上的箭，但你可以理解为某人拥有大量武器。谁强大谁就去征服、殖民、获取权力。本质上，这是一群表亲之间的争斗。这就是那个故事的核心。

Yeah. There's one weapon called the Agneyastra where you can specifically target any particular person or group, and it would automatically direct itself and do it, almost like a semi-autonomous weapon. And Lord Krishna had this weapon called the Sudarshana Chakra. It's basically a discus, and you can release it, and it'll go and specifically identify somebody, chop off their head, and come back to you. It self-directs itself. What amazed me is how interesting it is in terms of the autonomy in the weapons—semi-autonomy or autonomy—where the weapons could just be directed at people or a group of soldiers, and it would go and do its job and come back to the wielder. There were so many different astras: Vayunastra, Nagastra, Brahmastra is obviously the ultimate, the hydrogen bomb equivalent. All of these are described in a lot of detail, including who has access to them. Of course, it's mythologized, so it's described as arrows in your back or shoulders, but you could understand it as somebody having access to a lot of weapons. Whoever was powerful would go capture, colonize, and gain power. Essentially, it's a fight between a group of cousins. That's the bottom line of that story.

现在，如果我们把历史看作从穴居人到我们的线性进步，然后听到《摩诃婆罗多》中大约 2000 多年前写到的自主武器，我们会说，嗯，神话。但如果不是这样，如果文明有过兴衰，如果有过灾难性事件——小行星撞击、极移等等——造成了巨大灾难。你可以想象这些人是在回忆某个非常先进的文明时代。这就是他们描述的内容。就像如果你确切知道曾经有一个高度先进的科技文明，我们有证据表明他们拥有一些技术，比如吉萨金字塔之类的东西，你是怎么做到的？我不知道其中涉及什么技术，对吧？但我们没有技术的证据。但如果我们有，如果我们知道，你就会看着《摩诃婆罗多》说，‘哦，这是历史。’他们只是用当时粗陋的当代方式解释。用箭代替半自主的爆炸头无人机。我的意思是，我们现在就有这些东西。他们描述的所有东西，氢弹、半自主和自主无人机。我是说，现在已经有自主战斗机了。它们不再需要人了。

Now, if we think of history as this linear progression from caveman to us, and we hear about autonomous weapons that were written in the Mahabharata somewhere around 2,000 plus years ago, we go, well, a mythology. But if not, if there's been some sort of rise and fall of civilization, if there has been catastrophic events—asteroid impacts, shifting of the poles, whatever it is—it's caused great disasters. You can imagine that these people are remembering a time where there was some sort of very advanced civilization. And this is what they're describing. Like if you knew for a fact that there had been a great advanced technologically advanced civilization when we have evidence that they had some technology like the pyramids of Giza and stuff like how did you do that? I don't know how there's some technology involved, right? But we don't have evidence of the technology. But if we did, if we knew, you would look at the Mahabharata and go, 'Oh, this is history.' They're just explaining it in a kind of crude contemporary way for the time. Arrows instead of, you know, semi-autonomous drones with exploding heads on them. I mean, that's what we have now. All those things that they're describing, hydrogen bomb, semi-autonomous and autonomous drones. I mean, they have autonomous fighter jets now. They don't need people anymore.

就像我们现在就在这个领域。所以当你读到《摩诃婆罗多》里那样的东西时，你会想，好吧，到底发生了什么？

Like this we're in that area right now. So when you read about something like that from the Mahabharata, you go like okay what was really going on?

没错。是的。我一直对这些史诗着迷，它们描述武器、谁有权使用、不同级别的权限、所需地位，以及如何在战争中使用、士兵的不同阵型，细节极其丰富。他们有很多疯狂的阵型结构，比如把军队排成莲花状，排成‘轮阵’，就是同心圆。你无法不经过外层圆圈就进入最内层，而且每次试图进入时都可能被侧翼杀死。而真正破解这些阵型的秘密只有少数人知道。这太不可思议了。可以说，有人必须极其熟练才能有那样的视觉化和想象力来描述这样的故事。显然，托尔金在指环王方面做得非常出色，创造了那么多细节，而且很多在现实中以某种形式呈现。同样，虽然不是完全相同的武器，但风格相似，让人怀疑当时是否真的存在过。人们在这些地区进行过挖掘。摩诃婆罗多中有两个主要地区，比如象城是王国的名字，人们在那里挖掘出了一些可能追溯到那些年代的文物。但史诗中描述的一些细节与现实并不完全吻合。例如，那个时代的所有主要战士都被描述为非常高、非常壮，七八英尺。但考古学家的研究也表明，那些年代生活在那些地区的人可能不超过六英尺。所以不清楚到底发生了什么，哪些正确，哪些不正确。我们只能继续探索。但我发现这个想法很迷人：神圣文本中可能存在的东西，只部分地传给了下一代，并且有很多重新诠释。

Exactly. Yeah. I mean that's always been my fascination with those epics and the level of detail with which they described all these weapons and who had access, different levels of access, the status required to have access, and how it was used in the wars, different formations of the soldiers. They had all these crazy formation structures like forming the army like a lotus, forming the army like a chakra vyuha, like literally concentric circles. So you cannot actually get into the innermost circle without going through the outer circles, and you can get killed by each of the flanks whenever you're trying to enter. And the secret of how to actually break into these vyuhas, formations, was only known to a few people. It's incredible. You could say somebody had to be extremely skillful to have that sort of visualization and imagination to describe a story like that. And obviously Tolkien has done an amazing job with a lot of the rings, creating so much detail, and a lot of it actually coming through in real life in some form. Again, not exactly the same weapons but similar style makes you wonder: was there actually something around then? People have tried excavations in all these areas. There are two main areas in the Mahabharata, like Hastinapura was the name of the kingdom, and people have done excavations around there and have found some artifacts that might date back to those years. But there are also some details described in the epics that don't quite align with reality. For example, all the main warriors in that era were described as very tall, very big, 7 or 8 feet, whatever. But studies by archaeologists also say that people who lived in those years in those regions were probably not more than 6 feet tall. So it's not clear exactly what happened, what was correct, what was not correct. We just have to keep probing more. But I find the idea fascinating to think of what could have existed in sacred texts that was only partially communicated to the next generation and having a lot of reinterpretations.

另一个非常有趣的想法是吠陀数学。基本上，吠陀数学是数学的一个分支，一些印度人从小学习。我自己也读过，有些人实际练习它只是为了在 GMAT 和 GRE 等考试中更擅长心算。吠陀经中有一行说‘末位减一，首位加二’之类的，有很多不同的方法相乘两个不同的数字，比如 97 乘以 96。哦，比如减去最后两位，放在右边，乘以前几位，放在左边。这就是结果。然后你想，等等，《梨俱吠陀》那么古老。它是最古老的神圣文本。它怎么会描述计算？这感觉很不真实。他们当时真的知道或理解高级形式的计算吗？

Another thing that is very interesting to think about is Vedic math. Basically Vedic math is like a branch of mathematics that some people in India grow up learning. I read it myself too, and some people actually practice it just to be sharper at mental math for doing their exams like GMAT and GRE. It has a line in the Vedas that says 'one from the last digit, two from the first digit' whatever, so many different ways of multiplying two different numbers like 97 * 96. Oh, like subtract the last two digits, put it on the right, multiply the first digits, put it on the left. That's the result. And then you wonder, oh wait, the Rigveda is so old. It's the oldest sacred text out there. How is it describing computation? That feels very unreal. Like do they actually know or understand advanced forms of computation even back in those days?

对。

Right.

《梨俱吠陀》有多古老？

And how old is Rigveda?

我不确切知道它有多古老。

I don't exactly know how old it is.

我们为什么不查一下 Perplexity？

Why don't we put that in Perplexity?

好，我们查一下。

Yeah, let's do that.

嗯。

Yeah.

是的，严格来说它是最古老的神圣文本。

Yeah, it is technically the oldest sacred text out there.

有趣的是，我想知道这些故事在被写下来时有多古老。就像圣经一样，在真正写下来之前，有多少是年复一年口口相传的。学者们通常将《梨俱吠陀》的创作年代定在公元前 1500 年到 1200 年左右。所以它最古老的层今天大约有 3200 到 3700 年历史。

And so what's interesting is I wonder how old the stories were by the time they were written down. Like how much of it is relayed person to person for years and years just like the Bible before it's ever actually written down. Scholars usually date the composition of the Rigveda to about 1500 to 1200 BCE. So its oldest layer is roughly 3,200 to 3,700 years old today.

就像每个古老文化都有一个大洪水的故事。每一个，都有末日故事。

Like every ancient culture has a story of a flood. Every one, they all have an apocalyptic story.

《摩诃婆罗多》也有同样的故事。

Mahabharata had the same thing.

是吗？

Was it?

《摩诃婆罗多》也有类似的事情，有一个几乎像海啸一样的东西。我不确切知道它叫什么，但那是战后克里希纳神的王国德瓦拉卡崩溃。很多人死了，但有些人幸存下来，甚至那些幸存者也被一场灾难或他们之间的某种争斗消灭了。那个时代的大多数参与者实际上都死了。

Mahabharata had the same thing where there was a big almost like a tsunami thing. I don't exactly know what it was called, but that was the collapse of Lord Krishna's kingdom Dwaraka after the war. A lot of people died, but some people survived, and even those who survived got wiped out by a calamity or some kind of fight among themselves. Most of the people who participated in that era actually died.

找到了。原始的，怎么说？摩奴。

Here it is. The primordial, how do you say it? Manu.

嗯。

Yeah.

摩奴洪水。经典的印度教大洪水神话，正义的国王摩奴被一条神鱼警告即将有一场毁灭人类的洪水。他造了一艘船，装上他的家人。就像诺亚方舟。同样带着种子和动物。把船系在鱼形神的角上，神把船拖到安全的地方，直到洪水退去，世界重新繁衍生息。

Manu flood. Classic Hindu great flood myth where the righteous king Manu is warned by a divine fish about an imminent deluge that will destroy humanity. He builds a boat, loads it with his family. It's like Noah's ark. The same thing with seeds and animals. Ties it to the horn of the god in fish form which tows the boat to safety until the waters recede and the world is repopulated.

他们都有同样的故事。是的。这真的很疯狂。

They all have the same story. Yeah. That's what's really crazy.

印度教哲学中有一个概念叫‘由迦’（时代）。

There is a concept in Hindu philosophy called the yugas.

嗯。

Mhm.

我现在正在读一本关于它的书。

I'm reading a book about it right now.

嗯。

Yeah.

所以有不同的由迦，由迦就像几千年，概念是由迦不断循环。我们现在处于‘迦利由迦’（黑暗时代），之前是‘德瓦帕拉由迦’，那是《摩诃婆罗多》大部分发生的时候，再之前是‘特雷塔由迦’，那是《罗摩衍那》发生的时候，再之前还有另一个由迦。

So there are different yugas and yugas are like thousands of years, and the concept is that the yugas keep cycling around. So we are in the Kali Yuga right now, and before that was the Dwapara Yuga, that's when most of Mahabharata happened, and before that there was a Treta Yuga where the Ramayana happened, and before that there was another yuga.

迦利由迦之后是什么？

What is next after Kali Yuga?

不，迦利由迦之后没有别的。它回到第一个。我忘了第一个由迦的名字。

No, there is nothing next after Kali Yuga. It goes back to the first one. I forget the name of the first yuga.

因为我读到的解释是，我们不再处于迦利由迦，迦利由迦在 1900 年代结束，德瓦帕拉由迦那时开始了。

Because the interpretation that I'm reading is that we're not in Kali Yuga anymore and that Kali Yuga ended in the 1900s and Dwapara Yuga started then.

不，不，我们现在处于迦利由迦。

No, no, we are in Kali Yuga right now.

百分之百。

100%.

那么为什么人们有不同的解释？那是真的吗？是的，有一种古鲁的解释。有一个特定的古鲁有这样的解释，说迦利由迦在 1900 年代结束了。

So why do people have different interpretations? Is that true? Yeah, there's like a guru interpretation. There's one specific guru that has this interpretation that Kali Yuga ended in the 1900s.

好的。

Okay.

而且我们正在前进。有趣。

And that we're moving on. Interesting.

是的。但我不知道谁是对的，因为这是一个巨大的循环，对吧？人类的循环。

Yeah. But I don't know who's right because it's an enormous cycle, right? The cycles of humanity.

是的。几千年。

Yeah. Thousands of years.

所以这是四个由迦。

So these are the four yugas.

那么为什么人们有不同的解释？什么？让我告诉你我正在读的书。

So why do people have different interpretations? What? Let me tell you the book I'm reading.

嗯。

Yeah.

看看这本书是否被质疑。

See if this book is discredited.

小杰米，这本书是一个叫戴维·斯坦梅茨的人写的。书名是《尤加》。有意思。

Young Jamie, it's by a guy named David Steinmetz. The book is called The Yugas. Interesting.

是啊。问题是当有人有自己的解读，或者某个大师的解读时，它并不完全一致。很难知道谁对谁错。

Yeah. I mean the problem is when someone's got their own interpretation or some guru's interpretation, it doesn't totally align. It's hard to know who's right and who's wrong.

嗯。

Yeah.

理解我们隐藏的过去、新兴能源、时代和开明未来的关键。

Keys understanding our hidden past, emerging energy, age, and enlightened future.

嗯。所以再回到那个。这是描述里的。看看它说的：'1894 年，一位印度圣人不仅为我们解释了隐藏的过去，还解释了今天的趋势和未来的启蒙。'所以这就像是一个人的解读，这家伙就是基于这个。

Yeah. So go back up to that again. So this is in the description. See what it says: 'In 1894 an Indian sage gave us an explanation not only for our hidden past but for the trends of today and for future enlightenment.' So there's like one guy's interpretation that this guy is going off of.

我想区别可能在于他认为尤加周期是 24,000 年，而我认为可能比那长得多。

I guess the difference might be that he thinks the yuga cycle is 24,000 years whereas I think it's probably much longer than that.

嗯。

Yeah.

四个尤加加起来是 4,320,000 年。

Four yugas together is 4,320,000 years.

你知道什么真的很疯狂吗？一个非常疯狂的事情是，在古苏美尔文本和一些古埃及文本中，都有大洪水之前统治了数千年的国王的描述。这很常见。而且在当时苏美尔不同地区的不同文献中也多次提到。是啊，这真的很奇怪，因为他们一旦到了某个年代，一旦进入他们可以验证这个人当国王一段时间的年代，就把它当作既定历史。但同一文本中还有统治了 6000 年的人。这真的让整个事情都站不住脚。

You know what's really nutty? One of the really nutty things is both in the ancient Sumerian texts and in some of the ancient Egyptian texts, there's depictions before the flood of people who reigned for thousands of years as kings. And it's common. It's also referenced multiple times in different scripts that are from different parts of what was Sumer at the time. Yeah, it's really weird because they take it as established history once it gets to a certain age, once they get into whatever the age is where they can verify that this person was the king for a certain period of time. But it's all in the same text as people that reigned for 6,000 years. It's really one wipes out the whole thing.

是啊。这也和费米悖论有点间接相关。你知道，如果你假设所有这些事情都发生在地球上，整个文明都被抹去了。我们总是想知道，你探索这个话题最多，外星人在哪里？有不同的论点。一个有趣的论点是，几乎所有文明最终都会在技术上进步很多，然后要么灾难消灭了他们，要么他们制造了某种不对齐的 AGI，然后 AGI 消灭了他们。因此，他们实际上永远不会变得可见。或者另一种理论是，我们还没有建造足够的冯·诺依曼探测器去真正找到他们。两者都合理。除非我们真的派出足够多的探测器，否则没有明确的方法知道。

Yeah. And this is also somewhat tangentially related to the Fermi paradox. You know, if you assume all these things are happening on Earth itself, that entire civilizations are getting wiped out. And we always wonder, you've explored this topic the most, where are the aliens? And there are different arguments. One entertaining theory is that almost all civilizations end up advancing technologically a lot and either a calamity wipes them out or they build some misaligned AGI and then AGI wipes them out. Because of that, they never actually end up being visible. Or the other theory is that we haven't quite built the Von Neumann probes to actually go find them. Both are plausible. There's no clear way to know unless we actually send out enough probes.

本期节目由 BetterHelp 赞助。我们在心理健康方面取得了长足进步，但仍有工作要做。BetterHelp 的 2026 年污名状况报告调查了 2000 名美国人，显示 85%的美国人认为获得支持是明智的，但 74%的人表示社会不鼓励这样做。有帮助的一件事是更公开地谈论心理健康挣扎，鼓励人们寻求帮助，而不是评判他们。你知道还有什么帮助吗？BetterHelp。他们让与专业治疗师联系变得简单，而且确实有效。他们的直播课程平均评分为 4.9 分（满分 5 分）。不要让污名阻碍支持。从 BetterHelp 开始治疗。注册并在 betterhelp.com/jre 获得 10%的折扣。网址是 betterhelp.com/jre。

This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp. We've come a long way with mental health, but there's still work to be done. BetterHelp's 2026 State of Stigma report surveyed 2,000 Americans and revealed that 85% of Americans believe getting support is wise, yet 74% say society discourages people from doing so. One thing that can help is to have more open conversations about mental health struggles and encourage people to seek out help, not judge them. And you know what else helps? BetterHelp. They make connecting with a professional therapist simple, and it actually works. Their live sessions have an average rating of 4.9 out of five. Don't let stigma stand in the way of support. Start therapy with BetterHelp. Sign up and get 10% off at betterhelp.com/jre. That's betterhelp.com/jre.

有很多可能性。我的意思是几乎数不胜数，但有一种可能性是他们在观察，不想干涉，我们正处于某种文化进化、文明进化的循环中。

There's a bunch of possibilities. I mean there's almost too many to count, but there's the possibility that they are observing and that they don't want to interfere and that we are on some sort of evolutionary cycle of cultural evolution, civilization evolution.

嗯。关于这些来自苏美尔文本和描绘 Zep Tepi 的古象形文字的疯狂年代，有一件事？怎么说？Zep Tepi？不。我怎么说？那是什么文本？记得我们和扎希·哈瓦斯谈过，他否认它的存在？Zep Tepi，是这个吗？不管怎样，你面对的是这些统治了数千年的国王。嗯，你知道，大卫·辛克莱现在正在进行这项研究，他们正在研究可操作的延长寿命的药物。

Yeah. And one of the things about these crazy ages that comes from the Sumerian text and from the ancient hieroglyphs that depict the Zep Tepi? How do you say it? Zep Tepi? No. How am I saying that? What is that text? Remember we talked about it with Zahi Hawass and he denied its existence? Zep Tepi, is that it? Either way, you're dealing with these kings that reign for thousands and thousands of years. Well, you know, David Sinclair is in the middle of this research now, they're working on life extension drugs that are actionable.

嗯。就是这个。Zep Tepi。

Yeah. That's it. Zep Tepi.

所以这些，但这就是奇怪的地方。如果他们看象形文字，到了某个点，他们会说，'哦，胡夫，他是真的。这家伙是真的。所有这些人都真的。'但然后他们回到那些统治了数千年的人，他们说，'哦，那是胡说。'但为什么所有这些人的故事都与这个大洪水前的时间线一致？这就像同一个故事。是啊。然后如果你谈论这些古老的印度教经文，它们讨论的技术似乎与我们今天的技术非常相似。是啊。维马纳，基本上就是飞行汽车，可能我们 100 年后会有的东西，或者我们过去可能已经走过那条路了。

So these, but this is what's so weird. If they look at hieroglyphs, they get to a certain point and they're like, 'Oh, Khufu, he was real. This guy was real. All these people were real.' But then they get back to these guys that reigned for thousands of years and they go, 'Oh, that was bullshit.' But why is it that all these people have these stories that align with this timeline that's pre-flood? It's all like the same story. Yeah. And then if you're talking about these ancient Hindu scriptures that are discussing technology that seems remarkably similar to technology that we have today. Yeah. The vimanas, or flying cars basically, and probably what we're going to have 100 years from now or whatever it is, or we could have gone that way in the past.

想想很有趣，比如说我们出了什么事，对吧？我不希望我们出事，但假设我们出了事。人们真的会相信你在发射可重复使用的火箭吗？或者和澳大利亚的人打 FaceTime 电话？是啊。就像基本的事情，我们今天所做的一切。我认为这一切都不可思议。有很多事情可能只是技术想法，或者也许人们真的拥有过，但知识丢失了，没有被记录下来。没有被传承下去，所以我们怀疑他们是否曾经拥有过。

And it's very entertaining to think of, like, let's say something happens to us, right? I don't want anything to happen to us, but let's say something happens to us. Would people really believe you were launching reusable rockets? Or making FaceTime calls to people in Australia? Yeah. Like even fundamental things, all we're doing today. I think it's all incredible. There's a lot of things that could be just technological ideas or maybe people actually had it and the knowledge of it was lost and it's not been documented. It's not been passed along, and so we are skeptical if they ever had it.

是的。所以我们最终以不同的形式一遍又一遍地重新发明它，我们不断循环这个过程。

Yes. And so we end up reinventing it in different forms again and again, and we keep cycling through this process.

嗯，这也可能是人类好奇心的自然发展。人类的好奇心和创造力总是朝着这些非常特定的方向发展，比如什么是最好的击败敌人的方法。如果我们总是领土性的灵长类动物，我们总是想击败敌人。我们总是保护自己不被入侵。所以我们会制造更好的武器，随着技术创新，它只会沿着同一条路走下去。哦，我们发明了子弹。哦，我们发明了核弹。嗯，我们发明了我们甚至不需要使用真正的飞机。我们可以用自主无人机来投送。

Well, it also could be that this is the natural progression of human curiosity. Human curiosity and ingenuity always moves into these very particular ways, like what's the best way to defeat my enemies. If we're always going to be territorial primates, we're always going to want to defeat our enemies. We're always going to protect ourselves from being invaded. So we're going to make better weapons, and with technological innovation, it just goes down the same path. Oh, we figure out bullets. Oh, we figure out nuclear bombs. Well, we figure out we don't even have to use an actual plane. We can use an autonomous drone and that delivers it.

然后一路向上、向前，还有 AI，还有寿命延长。所以，如果这些人能建造金字塔……你知道，关于金字塔的时间线有很多猜测，但我们就假设他们是在公元前 2500 年建造的。就假设是那时候。他们用了什么？你是怎么……你怎么做到的？你怎么把那些石头从 500 英里外的山上运下来的？

And then scale upwards and onwards and AI and then also life extension. So, if these people were able to make the pyramids... like you know, there's a lot of speculation as to the timeline of the pyramids, but let's just say they really built it 2500 BC. Let's just say back then. What were they using? Like what were you... What did you do? How did you get these stones down from the mountains that were 500 miles away?

这个呢？那个呢？是啊，我们肯定会谈到那个的。有很多。不，谢谢。这个也一样好。那些在印度发现的完全由一块石头雕刻而成的寺庙呢？你是怎么做的？你怎么做到的？这是多久以前发生的？有多少被埋了，然后他们不得不挖出来，然后弄清楚这是什么？谁造的？没有时间线。没人真正知道。没有证据表明当时有能够完成这种工作的工具。而且它们巨大、美丽、完美。它们还有声学特性，几何形状也棒极了。

How about this one? How about that one? Yeah, we were going to get to that for sure. There's a ton. No, thanks. It's good as any. How about these temples that they find in India that are carved entirely out of one piece of stone? What did you do? How did you do that? How long ago did this happen? How many of them were buried and then they had to uncover them and then like figure out like what is this? Who made it? There's no timeline. No one really knows. There's no evidence of tools that were capable of doing this kind of work back then. And they're huge and beautiful and perfect. And they have like acoustic properties and the geometry is fantastic.

太疯狂了，老兄。

It's nuts, man.

还不止这些。所有这些寺庙实际上都是……不仅如此，它们的位置是特意挑选的，以便在靠近海洋、来自太阳和月球的引力波等方面获得合适的地震振动。人们真的达到了那个水平……看看这个，老兄。想象一下从一块巨大的岩石侧面雕刻出那座寺庙的工程。

It's not just that. All of these temples were actually just built... not just that, they were specifically the locations for them were picked out so that you get the right seismic vibrations over there in terms of like proximity to the ocean, the gravitational waves from the sun and the moon. People actually made that level... like look at this man. Imagine the undertaking of carving that temple out of the side of a giant piece of rock.

是啊。

Yeah.

你搞砸一件事就全完了。

You screw up one thing and it's over.

没有模拟。你只能直接建造它。

There's no simulations. You just have to like build it.

那么，他们有什么？这就是问题所在。想象一下今天如果我们必须这样做。看，这是可能的。这是一项可能的努力。是可以做到的。

Well, what did they have? This is the question. Like imagine today if we had to do this. Look, it's possible. This is a possible endeavor. It can be done.

是啊。但想象一下我们需要什么样的技术来规划它，确保一切都精确、对齐。我的意思是，点与点之间精确到毫米，而且全部由一块石头完成。他们做了什么？是凿子吗？你用凿子做的？那太疯狂了。你得磨多少次凿子？太离谱了。还是你有完全不同的东西？因为一些更复杂的，你看看能不能找到这些。寺庙里有些疯狂的东西，有三维雕塑，而且是在雕塑内部雕刻的。所以有一个外部区域，然后有所有这些开口，里面细节丰富。你怎么够到里面？

Yeah. But imagine what kind of technology would we have to need to map it out to make sure that it was all precise, that it all align. I mean it's precise within like millimeters from point to point and everything is done out of one piece of stone. Like what did they do? Was it chisels? Did you do that with chisels? That's crazy. How many times you have to sharpen your chisel? That's nuts. Or do you have something completely different? Because some of the more intricate ones, see if you can find these. Some of the crazy ones inside these temples, there's sculptures that are three-dimensional and they're carved like inside of the sculpture. So, there's like an outer area and then there's these all these openings and then inside it's highly detailed. Like, how'd you even reach in there?

它只说他们用了凿子和锤子，我不认为那可能。还有仔细的几何规划。

It just says they use chisels and hammers and I don't think that's possible. and careful geometric planning.

人们试图那样做。他们看到一个人用锤子 12 小时能做多少工作，结果毫无进展，更不用说完美和好看了。

People trying to do that. They see like this is how much work someone could do in like 12 hours with a hammer and they get nowhere, let alone like perfect and looking good.

是啊，太疯狂了，老兄。而且世界各地有很多这样的证据，真的很奇怪。秘鲁的那些东西，比如 Saki Huan，当你看着那些石头，它们看起来像是融化到位了，而且有 900 吨重。你是怎么做到的？

Yeah, it's nuts, man. And there's a lot of evidence of stuff like that all over the world, which is really weird. You have the stuff in Peru like Saki Huan when you look at these stones and it looks like they're melted into place and they're 900 tons. Like what did you do?

是啊。你怎么把它弄上去的？你从哪里弄来的？你怎么运到那里的？你怎么完美对齐的？只用了 18 年建成。他们怎么知道的？

Yeah. How did you even get it up there? How'd you where'd they get it? How'd you get it there? How'd you align it perfectly? Built in only 18 years. How do they know that?

他们怎么知道的？因为归功于一位国王。

How do they know that? Cuz it's uh attributed to one king.

是啊。

Yeah.

所以，克里希纳国王一世，公元 756 年到 773 年。也许。我的意思是，你怎么知道呢？

So, King Krishna the 1 756 to 773 CE. Maybe. I mean, how do you know though?

是啊。他们说考古学家说他们计算过需要 100 年才能完成。是啊。

Yeah. They said the archaeologist said it would have they calculated it would take them 100 years to do it. Yeah.

是啊。我的意思是，这就是，你知道，

Yeah. I mean, this is where like, you know,

我不知道。

I don't know.

不同的历史记载都混乱不清，你知道。

Different historian accounts are all like muddled up, you know.

嗯哼。嗯，这确实是个问题。历史是个大问题。

Uhhuh. Well, it's a real problem. History is a real problem.

但是啊，这又回到你刚才说的，对吧？你知道，贯穿所有这些不同时代的一个共同点就是人类的好奇心。所以，我的意思是，这是我想听听你的看法的事情。嗯，我一直在琢磨一个想法，叫做好奇心溢价——最有效、最成功的人总是最好奇的人，那些善于提出最佳问题的人，他们在生活的各个方面往往做得更好，而你就是一个很好的例子。所以这就是为什么我想听听你的看法。我相信这一点是因为，长期来看，不断提问的人往往做得更好。他们赚更多钱。他们有更高的生活质量。他们快乐。他们有更多的复合关系。人们觉得他们更有趣。所以他们随着时间的推移复合他们的关系。所以自然他们最终成功了。但他们的探究精神，他们内在的好奇心并不会在他们成功后停止。他们只是把它引导得更多。所以这就是为什么它不断复合。而且我认为这是唯一一种品质，唯一一种让我们真正成为人类的品质，你知道，在这个世界里，

But yeah, it goes back to like the thing you were saying, right? You know, what is one thing that's common across all these different ages is human curiosity. So, I mean, that's something that, you know, I would love to get your take on this. Um like I've been toying with this idea called a curiosity premium which is the most effective people the most successful people have always been the most curious people the ones who have been good at asking the best questions and they tend to do better in every aspect of their life and uh you're you're a good example of that. So that's why I would love to get your take on this. And the reason I believe that is because um long-term people who continuously ask questions tend to do better. They make more money. They have a higher quality of life. They're happy. They have more compounding relationships. People find them more interesting. And so they compound their relationships over time. And so uh naturally they end up succeeding. But their spirit of inquiry, their intrinsic curiosity doesn't actually stop once they succeed. It only they just channelize it even more. And so that's why it keeps compounding. And I would argue that like it's the only quality, it's the only like quality that makes us really human, you know, in this world where

我们可以寻求大量信息，获取信息的速度比以往任何时候都快。感觉那是唯一一种普遍的人类品质，从古代、从最古老的文本就存在了。事实上，在《梨俱吠陀》中，明确鼓励你寻求智慧胜过财富。这不仅仅是印度教特有的想法。这个特定的想法存在于《圣经》中。存在于《古兰经》中。存在于《托拉》中。并不是说宗教文本告诫人们追求财富。实际上是寻求智慧更重要。嗯，你知道，这就是为什么我说你是一个很好的例子，当然你有一个非常大的播客，但你运营它的方式就是你对很多事情感到好奇，问很多问题，我认为那是非常重要的一个品质。所以嗯，我觉得这是最古老的东西，是我们从古代就知道的唯一的东西——保持好奇。

we can seek a lot of information, get information way faster than ever before. It feels like that's that one universal human quality that's existed since ancient time since the oldest text. Like in fact in the Riga um you're explicitly encouraged to seek wisdom more than wealth. And it's not just an idea specific to Hinduism. That specific idea exists in the Bible. It exists in the Quran. Exists in the Torah. It's not that seeking wealth is admonished by religious texts. It's actually that it's more important to seek wisdom. And um you know like you can that why I said you're a good example of that is like sure you have a very very large podcast but the way you're running it is like you're just curious about a lot of things and asking a lot of questions and I think that's that one quality that's very important. So um and I feel like it's the oldest thing is the only thing that we've known since ancient time being curious.

嗯，我认为这对人们有激励作用，真诚的好奇心会激励其他人。当某人对某件事真正好奇时，我也会对它好奇。我认为这是有感染力的。

Well I I I think it's stimulating to people and genuine curiosity is stimulating to other people. when when someone is genuinely curious about something, I become curious about it. I think it's contagious.

而且我认为这也是一种真实的品质。我认为真正想知道某件事、对某件事感兴趣，这里面有某种东西。如果你好奇，通常你会问更多问题，从而对它有更深的理解。所以如果你在尝试做任何你想做的事，一项运动，一个游戏，你可能会做得更好，因为你更好奇，因为你不是仅仅假设，而是会问更多问题。你会重新审视事物。

And I think that it's it's also an authentic quality. And I think there's there's something about really wanting to know something and being interested in something. And if you're curious, generally, you're going to ask more questions about something so you have a deeper understanding of it. So if you're trying to do whatever you're trying to do, a sport, a game, you you'll probably get better at it because you're more curious because instead of just assuming things, you'll ask more questions. You'll reexamine things.

这是人类最重要的品质之一。对我来说，它也是最吸引人的品质之一，一直如此。当我遇到充满好奇心的人，我总是很感兴趣。我总会说，'告诉我你对什么好奇。'我也会告诉你我对什么好奇。我们聊聊吧。这个播客最初确实是因为和朋友聊天开始的，但也引出了我最早的正式嘉宾之一，格雷厄姆·汉考克。这只是因为我很想知道他知道什么，他认为发生了什么。他也是一个极其好奇的人，对古代历史的见解非常着迷。他谈论这个话题已经很久了。他第一次写《上帝的指纹》时，我想大概是 97 或 98 年。我记得读过那本书，我很多受过教育的朋友都说这是胡说八道，你为什么关注这个？但随着时间的推移，越来越多的事实证明他是对的。时间线被推后了。从那本书出版以来，哥贝克力石阵及其周边地区的发现，让我们意识到至少在一万一千年前就有一些疯狂的事情发生。所以我们将文明推后了五千年。而这只是我们目前发现的。我们还在不断发现新东西。继续挖掘，继续寻找。

It's one of the most important human qualities. And to me, it's one of the most attractive human qualities. It's always been. When I meet curious people, I'm always interested. I'm always like, 'Tell me what you're curious about.' And I'll tell you what I'm curious about. Let's talk. And this podcast started out genuinely because of a lot of just talking with friends, but it also led into one of my very first actual guests, Graham Hancock. And it's just because I was curious because I had read Fingerprints of the Gods and I'd seen him talk. I'd seen speeches and I'm like, I want to know what you know, what you think's going on. And he's another guy incredibly curious and absolutely fascinated with his takes on ancient history. He has been talking about this subject a long time. When he first wrote Fingerprints of the Gods, I think that came out in like 97 or 98 or something like that. And I remember reading it and so many of my educated friends said this is bullshit, why are you paying attention to this? But more and more as time goes on, it's been proven that he's correct. The timelines shifted back. From the publication of that book, the discovery of Gobekli Tepe and the surrounding area, like it's like, okay, now we realize there was some crazy going on at the very least 11,000 years ago. So we pushed civilization back 5,000 years. And this is just what we found now. And we keep finding things. Keep digging. Keep looking.

然后你看到他们用无线电断层扫描在金字塔下面发现的东西，他们正在查看金字塔下方，似乎下面有结构。你看到过那些东西。

And then you see the stuff that they're finding underneath the pyramid with this radio tomography where they're looking under the pyramid and it seems that there are structures under the pyramid. You've seen that stuff.

我没看到过。

I haven't seen that.

我请来了参与其中的科学家。他是个意大利人，菲利波·邦迪，他上了播客。口音很棒，几乎和你的口音一样好。太棒了。但他描述了这项技术的使用，他们已经在金字塔和其他结构的已知区域成功应用了它。事实上，在意大利有一个粒子对撞机位于山底下。利用这项基于卫星的技术，他们得到了这个粒子对撞机的精确描述，它位于地下 1200 米深处。那东西在地下有多深？我们会知道的。但它深埋在石头下面。他们发现可以获得精确的图像，实际上可以给出这个粒子对撞机的尺寸。他们有一张它的图像。同样的技术显示，金字塔下方有多个地方存在这些柱子，宽 20 米，周围有线圈。他们不知道那到底是什么。整个结构不小，它深入地下近一公里。有一个巨大的底部。看起来像是人造的。所以他们想，'好吧，金字塔已经很疯狂了，但如果它下面还有人造的东西，深入地下近一公里，那我们到底在说什么？'是谁建造的？他们有什么技术？

I had the scientist that's involved in it. He's an Italian guy, Filippo Bondi, and he came on the podcast. Wonderful accent. Almost as good as yours. It was amazing. But he's describing the use of this stuff and that they've used it successfully on known areas in pyramids and other structures and they can detect, in fact, there's in Italy a particle collider that is underneath a mountain. And using this technology, which is satellite-based technology, they get an accurate description of this particle collider that's I think it's 1,200 meters underground. Like how far is that thing underground? We'll find out. But it's like deep under stone. And they find that they can get an accurate depiction, they can actually give you the dimensions of this particle collider. They have like an image of it. And this same technology is showing that there are these columns underneath the pyramid in various places that are 20 meters wide and they have coils around them. They don't know what the hell they are. And the whole structure of this thing, it's not small. It goes almost a kilometer into the ground. There's like this enormous bottom of it. And it seems like it's something that's constructed. And so they're like, 'Okay, well, the pyramid is crazy. It's crazy enough, but if there's something underneath it that's man-made or someone made it that's a kilometer deep into the ground, like what the hell are we even talking about?' Like, who made this? What did they have?

1.2 公里深？

1.2 km in?

深入山体 1.2 公里。太疯狂了。深入山体半英里。这个东西可以看穿所有这些，得到这个粒子对撞机的精确描绘。而且通过多次扫描，不止一次，多次扫描和不同的技术，显示完全相同的图像，完全相同的结构，就在这个巨大的 230 万块石头结构下方，它几乎完美地指向正北、正南、正东、正西。这到底是怎么回事？别跟我说铜工具。到底发生了什么？太疯狂了。我觉得我们过于简单的解释对任何人都没有好处。对历史没有帮助，对我们的理解也没有帮助。他们必须更坦率地承认他们感到困惑。

1.2 kilometers into the mountain. That's nuts. It's half a mile into the mountain. And this thing can see through all that and get this accurate depiction of this particle collider. And it's showing with multiple scans, not just one, multiple scans and different technology, the same exact images, the same exact structures underneath this immense 2,300,000 stone structure that almost perfectly aligns to true north, south, east, and west. Like what? What was going on? Don't tell me copper tools. Like what the hell was going on? Something crazy. And I have a feeling our simplistic explanation of it is just doing no one any justice. It's doing no service to history. It's doing no service to our understanding. They've got to be a little bit more open in the fact that they are perplexed.

而且不仅仅是困惑于这类东西。这是一个实际存在的埃及花瓶的 3D 打印品，发现于古王国时期的墓葬中。这个东西是用闪长岩制成的，这是一种极其坚硬的石头，精度达到了人类头发的千分之一。尺寸非常疯狂。它的精度，而且它不是用车床加工的，因为它有把手。所以你看侧面的把手。嗯，你无法雕刻它们，而且它们也很完美。所有东西的对齐，你看着它，哦，只是一个花瓶。没什么大不了的。但不对，这有点疯狂。他们是怎么切割出来的？在埃及发现的一些石头上也有所有这些核心痕迹，他们分析了每分钟所需的转数才能切割出这样的线条，这无法解释。这是什么？太疯狂了。这不是沙子和铜，只是摩擦。不，这是某种我们不了解的疯狂技术。有些石头的底部有勺状痕迹。这到底是什么？你怎么挖石头？看起来像冰淇淋。他们就像那样，他们在做什么？有太多问题了。

And not just perplexed by stuff like this. This is a 3D print of an actual vase that exists in Egypt that they found in tombs of the old kingdom. This thing was somehow made with diorite, so it's incredibly hard stone, and made to like a thousandth of a human hair in precision. It's crazy dimensions. The precision of it and it wasn't turned on a lathe because it has handles. So you look at the handles on the side. Well, you can't carve those and those are perfect too. The alignment of everything and it's like you just look at it. Oh, it's a vase. No big deal. But no, it's kind of crazy. Like how did they cut that out? There are also all these core marks in some of the stones that they find in Egypt and they've analyzed the amount of revolutions per minute that you would have to go through to be able to cut through something and leave these lines and it defies explanation. Like what is this? This is crazy. This is not sand and copper and just rubbing things. No, this is some insane technology that we don't understand. There are scoop marks out of the bottoms of some of these stones. It's like what? What the hell is this? How'd you scoop rock? Like what? It looks like ice cream. Like they just went like what are they doing there? There are so many questions.

他们到底有什么工具来做所有这些事情？

What tools did they even have to do all these things?

他们有铜。我的意思是，有一些证据表明他们有一些铁，然后我想图坦卡蒙有一把匕首实际上是用陨石制成的，这很有趣。你知道，当他们能找到陨石并用它们制作东西时，显然非常有价值。但他们在那里所做的工作量之大，如果你看看卡纳克神庙，看看三大金字塔，看看所有不同的寺庙和所有建筑，而且越往古代，越深入沙土，这些东西就越复杂，这甚至更奇怪。

They had copper. I mean there's some evidence that they had some iron and then I think Tutankhamun had a dagger that was actually made from meteorite which is interesting. You know, when they could find meteorites and make things out of them, it was very valuable, obviously. But the sheer volume of work that they did there, if you look at the temple in Karnak, you look at all the three major pyramids, you look at all the different temples and all the construction, and the older you go, the deeper into the sand they go, the more complex these things are, which is even weirder.

所以似乎一个又一个文明，他们的技术可能也有兴衰。

So it seems like civilization after civilization just they would there was probably a rise and fall with their technology as well.

绝对。我认为令人难以置信的是，这些知识从未被妥善记录。要理解如何重建这些东西本身就是一项工作，更不用说他们是如何建造的了。

Absolutely. I think it's just incredible that none of this knowledge was properly documented ever. And it's a whole line of work to just go understand like how to even rebuild these things, let alone how did they build it.

嗯，想想我们现在在做什么。我们所有的知识基本上都存储在硬盘和纸上。

Well think about what we're doing right now. All of our knowledge is essentially stored on hard drives and paper.

这两样东西会最快退化。也许我们应该把互联网的数据转存到石头上，保存起来，这样即使我们的文明被摧毁，所有数据中心都消失了，后来的人也能搞清楚。

Those are the two things that are going to deteriorate the quickest. Maybe we should take a dump of the internet and put it on a rock, go preserve it somewhere so that even if our civilization is wiped out and all the data centers are gone, whoever comes next can figure it out.

嗯，你得假设即使他们找到了硬盘，要花多长时间才能逆向工程我们做过的事，弄明白这些 0 和 1 到底是什么意思？

Well, you've got to assume that even if they found a hard drive, how long would it take for them to reverse-engineer what we did and figure out what these ones and zeros actually mean?

是啊。这是现代文明最离奇、最了不起的成就之一：这是一个太字节。太疯狂了。

Yeah. That is one of the most bizarre and fantastic accomplishments of modern civilization: this is a terabyte. Which is nuts.

我不知道你的第一台电脑有多大。肯定连 1GB 都没有吧。

I don't know what your first computer had. Definitely not even a gigabyte probably.

不，硬盘也就几百兆。我记得他们刚推出 GB 的时候，我心想：‘这太疯狂了。’

No, like a few hundred megabytes was your hard drive. I remember when they first came out with gigabytes, I was like, 'This is nuts.'

是啊。你还记得 Gmail 刚推出时，给每个人免费无限量的邮件存储空间，底部的滑动条不断增大总容量吗？我当时觉得太不可思议了。

Yeah. You remember when Gmail launched and gave everybody free email storage, unlimited email storage, and the bottom sliding bar would just keep increasing in terms of the total allowed size? That was nuts to me.

是啊。我们想当然地认为我们有无限的 RAM 和无限的硬盘。没人需要担心在手机上拍太多照片。你会用完存储空间，然后不得不买一个外置硬盘，不断把东西从手机转移到硬盘上。

Yeah. We take it for granted that we have infinite RAM and infinite hard disks. Nobody has to worry about taking too many photos on your phone. You'd run out of storage and have to buy an external hard drive, keep transferring stuff from your phone to the hard disk.

我记得老安卓手机。你可以插一张 SD 卡，把图片存上去省空间。所有这些都太脆弱了。如果一个完全陌生的外星文明降临，找到我们的硬盘，而他们走了完全不同的技术路线，他们就得逆向工程我们做的一切，试图弄清楚我们用的什么操作系统，怎么工作的——是 Unix？Linux？那将是一场噩梦。

I remember the old Android phones. You get an SD card, you could slip one in there and store images on that to save space. All that stuff is so vulnerable. If a completely alien society had to come down and find our hard drives, and they went a totally different path of technology, they'd have to reverse-engineer everything we did, try to figure out what operating system we're using, how it works—is it Unix? Linux? It would be a nightmare.

他们需要一个先进的人工智能来帮他们搞清楚一切，对吧？

They would need an advanced AI to figure it all out for them, right?

是啊。而且这还是假设硬盘幸存下来。如果发生大洪水、大灾难，某种可怕的事情损坏了我们所有的电子设备——比如太阳耀斑，或者又一次实验室泄漏——我们很快就会回到原点。我们基本上就得像生存主义者一样，重新逆向工程一切。那几乎是不可能的。

Yeah. And that's just if the hard drive survives. If there's some massive flood, cataclysm, some horrific thing that damages all of our electronics—just a solar flare, or another lab leak—we could go back to zero real quick. We would basically be preppers and have to reverse-engineer everything again. It would be almost impossible.

这就是为什么我对大洪水后的时间线非常着迷。如果像格雷厄姆·汉考克这样的人推测，几千年前可能有一个非常先进的文明，走了完全不同的方向。如果你看看苏美尔和美索不达米亚的出现，很多人认为那是大约 5000 到 6000 年前最早的已知文明。大洪水是在 11000 多年前。所以中间有 5000 年发生了什么？

Which is why I'm really fascinated by the post-flood timeline. If people like Graham Hancock have speculated that there was probably a very advanced civilization that went in a completely different direction many thousands of years ago. If you look at the emergence of Sumer and Mesopotamia, which many attribute to be the earliest known civilization around 5,000–6,000 years ago. The flood is like 11,000 years ago plus. So you're looking at 5,000 years of what?

从宏观角度看，那并不算长。但对人类来说，相当长。想想我们花了多久才步入正轨。经历了成千上万年，人们可能像野兽一样，是最坏的那种。那可能是他们生存的唯一方式。可能有很多同类相食、很多谋杀，5000 年里发生了很多可怕的事情，直到人们慢慢重新学会农业。开始建墙，大家都放松了一点，有了可靠的武器来驱赶别人，这样你才能研究数学。然后转眼间，文明再次出现，又回到了循环中。然后你开始读《梨俱吠陀》里关于几千年前发生的事情，你会想：‘等等，这他妈是什么？’

That's not even that long in the grand scheme of things. But for people, it's pretty long. Think of how long it took us to get our act together. It took thousands and thousands of years of people probably being monsters, being the worst of the worst. That's probably the only way they survived. There was probably a lot of cannibalism, a lot of murder, a lot of horrific stuff going on for 5,000 years until people slowly figured out agriculture again. Started building walls, everybody relaxed a little, got some solid weapons to keep people away so you could work on math. Then next thing you know, civilization emerges again and goes right back onto the cycle. Then you start reading in the Rig Veda about stuff that happened thousands of years ago and you go, 'Wait, what the hell is this?'

是啊。这就是我的信念。我认为在历史公认的开端之前很多很多年，地球上发生了一些非常离奇的事情，可能技术走了完全不同的方向，不像我们现在用的内燃机和电路。他们可能发明了某种其他技术。

Yeah. That's my belief. I think there was something going on on Earth many, many thousands of years before established beginnings of history that was very bizarre and probably technology that went in a completely different direction than what we're doing now with combustion engines and circuits. They probably figured out some other kind of technology.

完全正确。这完全有可能。想想如果我们能重新发现这一切，那该多神奇。

Exactly. Which is totally possible. It's amazing to think of what if we could rediscover all of that again.

是的，如果能选择回到过去的一个时间窗口看看，我百分之百会选择古埃及建造金字塔的时候。让我看看当时到底发生了什么。只要把我放进一个大仓鼠轮，一个没人能看到我的大塑料泡泡里。让我违反时空，在那里存在几分钟。就让我看看。我认为那是人类历史上你能看到的最疯狂的事情。

Yes, well, I would love to be able to—if I could choose one window in time to go back to see what it would look like, I would 100% pick ancient Egypt while they're building the pyramids. Show me what the hell was going on. Just put me in a big hamster wheel, a big plastic bubble where no one could see me. Just let me violate space and time and exist there for a few minutes. Just let me look. I think that would be the most insane thing you could see about humans in human history.

是啊。我只想知道他们知道什么，拥有什么，用了什么。你看佩特拉，同一时期，至少追溯到公元前 7000 年左右。天哪。他们是怎么做到的？那些雕刻的细节简直不可思议。而且在公元前 7000 年？工具是什么？你到底用了什么？你怎么在山边造出一座神庙？看看它的规模，那些柱子的尺寸。即使在今天，也很难做到这样的事情。那将极其困难，耗时惊人。

Yeah. I just want to know what they knew, what they had, what they used. Look, Petra is same time period, at least attributed to 7,000 roughly BC. Jesus. And how would you do that? The details of all those carvings is just insane. And what in 7,000 BC? What are the tools? What the hell were you using? How did you make a temple out of the side of a mountain? Look at the size of it, the size of those columns. It would be hard to do anything like this even today. It would be incredibly difficult, insanely time-consuming.

嗯，凯拉萨神庙，顺便说一句，我现在没打开图片，但大约在 1650 年，有人派了一千个人试图摧毁它，结果三年后他们放弃了，只在几尊雕像上留下了一点痕迹。

Uh yeah, the Kailasa Temple, by the way, I don't have it up right now, but in 1650 or so, someone sent a thousand people to try to destroy it, and after three years of doing nothing, they stopped. They barely made a dent on a couple statues.

是啊。印度历史上很多次入侵，他们费尽力气想拆掉它，但都做不到。

Yeah. A lot of times when invasions happen in India, like they tried really hard to tear it up and couldn't.

哦，哇。太疯狂了。

Oh, wow. That's crazy.

那非常坚固。用这个词形容很贴切。这些东西太有趣了，因为它们无可辩驳——规模无可辩驳，复杂性、规划以及所需的知识都无可辩驳。你必须精通几何、测量、精确度，还要考虑抗震、抗洪等坚固性。你用什么工具？怎么做到的？怎么协调这么多人干活？

That's very robust. That's a great way to describe it. It's just there's so much of that stuff that's so interesting because it's so undeniable. It's so undeniable in its scale. So undeniable in its complexity and the planning and the understanding that you had to have a deep knowledge of geometry, of measurement, of accuracy. Everything: sturdiness like resisting calamities like earthquakes, floods. What tools are you using? Like how are you doing this? How are you coordinating all these people and getting them to do stuff?

我是说，条件肯定艰苦得多。我敢肯定人们别无选择，只能做这些事，因为那时候你只能把自己作为劳动力献给国家或王国，才能解决衣食住行。但也可以问，是什么给了他们主动性和动力去做这些事。

I mean, sure, conditions must have been way harsher. Like I'm sure people didn't really have a choice but to do these things because back in those days, the only way you could take care of your food, clothing, and shelter was to commit yourself as a laborer to the state, to the kingdom. But you could also ask what gave them the initiative or drive to go do these things.

是啊。不过那种描述可能适用于更晚的时期。我们甚至不清楚这些建筑建造时的文明是什么样子。

Yeah. Well, that description is perhaps of a later time. We don't even really know what civilization was like when these were constructed.

是啊。真正的问题是材料科学。要造出这些东西，需要很多条件。这不像米开朗基罗用相对容易雕刻的石头做雕塑那么简单。规模如此无可辩驳，以至于我们的理解肯定缺失了一部分。

Yeah. The real problem is the material science. The real problem is there are a lot of things you have to have to make those things. It's not as simple as a sculpture like Michelangelo making a sculpture out of something that's fairly easy to carve into, as far as stone goes. The scale is so undeniable that something, some piece of our understanding is missing.

是啊。我的意思是，看到这些，每个人都应该更谦虚，对吧？我们其实知道得不多。我们知道得太少了，就像苏格拉底说的：我们知道的非常非常少。

Yeah. I mean, looking at all this, everyone should just be a lot more humble, right? Like we don't actually know that much. What we know is so little, like whatever, the same thing as what Socrates said: what we know is very, very little.

我们唯一应该努力做到的，就是保持好奇。我觉得很多人倾向于认为，‘哦，我们有这么多先进技术，我们太棒了，看看我们。’但等等，你连几千年前发生了什么都不懂。外面有太多东西值得去探索、学习，更好地理解更多事物。

And the only thing we should all strive to be is just be curious. I think there's a lot of tendency for people to think, 'Oh, we have all this advanced technology, we're so amazing, look at us.' And it's like, wait, hold on. You don't even understand what happened thousands of years ago. There's so much out there to just go and explore and learn and get better at understanding more.

这是什么地方？

What is this place?

这太不真实了。这叫奥兰加巴德石窟。永恒的奇迹，刻在石头上。

This is unreal. This is called the Aurangabad Caves. Timeless wonder carved in stone.

它们都在，我想是同一个区域。

They're all, I think it's all kind of the same area.

对，就是你看到的湿婆神庙里的奥兰加巴德石窟。

Yeah, it's the same Aurangabad cave in the Shiva Temple that you saw.

看那个。天哪。看这些东西。太疯狂了。而且，那时候没有钢铁。

Look at that. My god. Look at this stuff. It's insane. And again, there's no steel back then.

它其实非常对称。你能回到第一个有对称顶部的图片吗？对。看顶部的对称性。这太离谱了。

It's actually really symmetrical. Can you go back to the first one with the symmetrical top? Yeah. Look at the symmetry at the top. This is nuts.

它看起来像纽约世贸中心遗址上建的那个商场。

It looks like that mall in New York they made where the World Trade Center was.

对，但坚固得多。我是说，关键是材料科学方面。你根本没有能力……看那个顶部。再看那个顶部。你刚才那张，杰米。对，就那张。看那个，太疯狂了。我看到这种东西就震惊了。我的脑子开始飞速运转，就想：你怎么做到的？谁参与其中？怎么规划的？怎么这么对称？用什么工具？如果没有钢铁，你用什么？怎么做到的？

Yeah. But way more robust. I mean, the thing is the material science aspect of it. It's like you don't have the ability to do... Look at that top one. Go to that top one again. The one that you just had, Jamie. Yeah, that one. Look at that's crazy, man. I am just blown away when I see stuff like that. My mind just starts racing and I just think, how did you do this? Who was involved? How was it planned? How was it so symmetrical? What were the tools, man? If you don't have steel, what are you using? How'd you do that?

我的意思是，大部分显然是用石头做的，对吧？所以我猜我怀疑。我打赌他们用了别的东西。我打赌他们用了别的东西，随着时间推移腐蚀了，就像今天的金属一样。如果你今天把一把铲子留在外面，500 年后回到同一个地方，什么也没有。那把铲子没了，对吧？

I mean, most of it is done with stone, clearly, right? So I guess I doubt it. I bet they had something else. I bet they had something else that over time eroded just like metal would today. If you left a shovel outside today and you came back to that same spot 500 years from now, there's nothing. That shovel's gone, right?

对。

Yeah.

而且你得假设，这些从山里凿出来的千年古庙，无论他们用了什么工具，可能都被大地吸收了。唯一剩下的……

And you've got to assume that these many thousand-year-old temples that were carved out of a mountain, whatever tools they used probably got absorbed by the earth. And the only thing that's remaining...

这让我有个奇怪的想法。比如他们在市中心建大楼时，只临时调用起重机。而且目前地球上也只有那么多起重机。所以你用完就搬走，挪到下一个地方。

It's giving me a weird thought. Like when they make a big building downtown though, they only bring the crane in for a temporary period of time. And there's only so many cranes on the planet currently, too. So you take it and you move it, you go take it to the next spot.

对，没错。

Right. True.

是啊。我不知道。

Yeah. I don't know.

是啊。尤其是像这样的东西，如果他们用了重型设备和机械，很可能搬进来又搬出去，然后腐烂消失了。如果有机械的话。如果没有，那一定还有别的东西。某种我们甚至无法想象的技术。

Yeah. Especially something like this, if they had heavy equipment and machinery and whatever they were using, they probably moved it and then moved it out and then it probably rotted away and now it's gone. If there was machinery. If there wasn't, there must have been something else. Some other kind of technology that we haven't even imagined.

但他们对艺术的投入也如此迷人，因为这些不仅仅是建筑。它们美得惊人，极其华丽。

But it's like their commitment to art too was so fascinating because these aren't just structures. They're incredibly beautiful. Intensely ornate.

是啊。所以不只是想建个功能性建筑或好建筑。不，这是一件迷人的艺术品，非常复杂。有这么多不同的特征和形象，不同的人、生灵、动物和大象。

Yeah. So it's not just that they wanted to build a functional structure or good architecture. No, it's a fascinating artwork and it's so intricate. There are so many different features and images of different people and beings and animals and elephants.

还有一座寺庙你可以调出来，叫坦贾武尔神庙。

There's one more temple you could pull out, it's called the Thanjavur temple.

哦，那个我也见过。对。

Oh, I've seen that one too. Yeah.

那是更近的朱罗王朝时期建的，非常不可思议。

That was done more recently in the age of the Cholas and it's pretty incredible.

那个是什么时候建的？

When did they do that one?

我不知道确切年份，但比你看到的其他那些更晚。

I don't know the exact number but more recent than the other ones you saw.

它们都太疯狂了。而且世界各地都有类似的东西。

All of them are nuts, man. And then there's stuff like that all over the world.

哇。这是国王为了给自己扬名而做的工程。

Whoa. This was done as a project by the king to basically make a name for himself.

哇。太不可思议了。那是多块石头拼成的，还是整块石头雕出来的？

Wow. That's incredible. Is that multiple pieces of stone or did he carve that whole thing out of stone too?

可能是多块石头。

Probably multiple pieces.

所以那实际上是建造，而不是移除。其他那些本质上是一个巨大的雕塑。

So that's actually like construction, not like removal. The other ones are essentially a giant sculpture.

哇，太漂亮了。看它多几何啊。

Wow, it's so pretty. Look how geometric it is, too.

这就是让我惊叹的地方。

That's what amazes me.

比如，他们实际上并没有所有这些模拟和 CAD 工具之类的东西，对吧？杰米，这是哪一年制造的？上面有写吗？真是难以置信，有这么多这样的东西存在，实在令人费解。就像我最近发现，阿兹特克人并没有建造那些神庙；他们是发现了它们。

Like, they didn't actually have all these simulations and CAD tools and all these things, right? And what year was this made, Jamie? Does it say? It's just so incredible how much of this stuff exists where it's really baffling. Like I just found out recently that the Aztecs didn't build those temples; they found them.

真的吗？

Really?

是的。他们发现了像特奥蒂瓦坎这样的地方。他们称之为众神诞生之地。阿兹特克人发现了它并进行了发掘。然后在奉献日，当他们完成对它的某种处理后庆祝时，他们在 4 天内杀死了大约 2 万到 8 万人。

Yeah. They found like the Teotihuacan. They call it the place where the gods were born. The Aztecs found it and uncovered it. And then on the consecration day when they were done with whatever they were doing with it to celebrate, they killed somewhere between 20,000 and 80,000 people in 4 days.

天哪。

Damn.

这可不是那种会建造这种东西的人的心态，你懂的。所以那些是发现它的人，它可能已经在那里存在了一千年，然后他们来了，说：“哦，这很酷。我们住这儿吧。”好吧。那么，在他们之前居住在那里的社会是什么样的？他们在哪里，发生了什么，他们是怎么做到的，为什么这样做，为什么把它与星座对齐？他们到底在做什么？是的，有些计算相当惊人，比如他们如何计时，如何定位，如何关注行星位置等等。当然，有些可能甚至是伪科学，但不管怎样。我认为他们在那个年代没有强大计算机的情况下所做的计算水平，真是了不起。

Not exactly the mindset of the type of people that would construct something like that, you know. So those are the people that found it and it might have been sitting there for a thousand years and then they came along and said, "Oh, this is cool. Let's live here." Okay. Well, what was the society that lived there before them? And where are they and what happened and how'd they do this and why'd they do it and why did they have it aligned with the constellations? Like what were they doing? Yeah, it's some of the calculations are pretty amazing, like how they timed it, how they positioned it, how they cared about planetary positions and stuff like that. Sure, like some of it could even be pseudoscience, but whatever. I think just the level of calculations they were making back in those days without, you know, powerful computers is just outstanding.

这简直疯了，说不通。就好像，好吧，他们没有强大计算机就做到了。那他们用的是什么？

It's just nuts and it doesn't make sense. It's like okay they're making it without powerful computers. So what are they using?

我的意思是，曾经“计算机”这个词就是指人，对吧？就像人类在做计算。那是他们唯一的工作，比如做乘法或进行……一些天文学家实际上是第一批数学家。数学家和天文学家这两个词曾经是同义词。

I mean at one point the word computer just meant a human, right? Like human beings would be doing the calculations. That was their only job, like to multiply two numbers or to make... some astronomers were actually the first mathematicians. The term mathematician and astronomer were used synonymously at one point.

真的吗？

Really?

是的。为什么会这样？为什么大部分与星星和数学有关？

Yeah. Why is that? Why most of the stars and math?

是的。因为研究星星涉及大量几何计算，这实际上是印度第一批数学家的起源。像阿耶波多、婆什迦罗这些人其实也是天文学家。他们不仅仅是数学家。而且阿耶波多更早提出了使用零的概念，然后在几何学上有很多贡献，他做这些只是因为对天文学感兴趣。

Yeah. Because studying the stars involved making a lot of geometry calculations and that was kind of actually one of the first set of mathematicians in India. People like Aryabhata, Bhaskara, all these guys were actually astronomers too. They were not just mathematicians. And Aryabhata was earlier to like the idea of using zeros and then he had a lot of contributions in geometry and he was doing all this just because he was interested in astronomy.

有没有证据表明毕达哥拉斯定理在古代……是古代苏美尔吗？是不是某个比毕达哥拉斯更早的古代文明？

Isn't there evidence of Pythagorean theorem in ancient... is it ancient Sumerian? Is it some ancient something that predates Pythagoras?

有趣。我的理论是，即使它没有被表述为毕达哥拉斯定理，但我确信人们必须理解正弦和余弦的概念，以及你知道的，为了达到正确的几何水平，需要什么样的直角和倾斜度。你需要对它有隐含的理解才能建造这类结构。没有这个你不可能做到。

Interesting. My theory is that even though it was not formulated as a Pythagorean theorem, I'm sure people had to understand concepts of sines and cosines and like you know whatever is the right angle for the right incline to get this right level of geometry. You needed to have some implicit understanding of it to build these kind of structures. There's no way you could do it without that.

是的，百分之百。而且你必须有不可思议的测量工具，不仅仅是实际的数学。

Yeah, 100%. And you have to have incredible measurement tools, not just the actual mathematics.

好吧。已知最早的毕达哥拉斯定理证据来自大约公元前 1900 年至 1600 年的古巴比伦泥板，比毕达哥拉斯早大约 1000 年。这难道不疯狂吗？就像泥板经常引用我们现在称为毕达哥拉斯定理的东西来计算矩形和正方形的对角线，包括一个极好的近似值。看看这个。这太疯狂了，老兄。吠陀仪式文本明确陈述了等效规则……我不知道该怎么说。那是什么？矩形的对角线满足 A^2 + B^2 = C^2，其中包含数值例子，早于或大致与古典希腊数学同时代。所以是完全不同的世界地区。

Okay. The oldest known evidence of Pythagorean theorem dates from old Babylonian clay tablets from about 1900 to 1600 BCE, roughly 1,000 years before Pythagoras. Isn't that wild? Like how clay tablets often cited what we now call the Pythagorean theorem to compute the diagonal of rectangles and squares, including an excellent approximation. Look at this. This is nuts, man. Vedic ritual text explicitly states the rule equivalent... I don't know how to say that. What is that? A^2 + B^2 = C^2 for the diagonal of a rectangle that includes numerical examples predating or roughly contemporary with classical Greek mathematics. So completely different parts of the world.

是的。

Yeah.

而且他们得出了同样的东西。

And they're coming up with the same stuff.

完全正确。因为他们都充满好奇。就是这样。

Exactly. Because they're all curious. That's it.

是的。他们都充满好奇，最终所有好奇心都会通向真理或某种形式的真理。我认为世界上任何有影响力的事情都是由好奇的人完成的。事后看来，我们给那些人贴上成功、聪明或富有的标签，但他们共同的特质就是好奇。

Yeah. They're all curious and eventually all curiosity leads to truth or some form of it. I would argue that anything that's of impact in the world has only been done by curious people. In hindsight, we label those people as successful, as smart, or rich, but the common trait across all of them has been like curious.

嗯，这确实是一个强大的特质。不好奇的人也不有趣。

Well, that's certainly a powerful trait. And people that aren't curious are not fun.

是的，他们不有趣。因此，他们吸引不到其他更聪明、更有趣的人。所以他们就无法在这个世界上做出非常有意义的事情。

Yeah, they're not interesting. So, because of that, they don't attract other smarter, interesting people. And therefore they won't be able to do something very meaningful in the world.

所以这有点像……它也适用于你的人际关系和个人生活。不仅仅是职业成功。比如，如果你是一个更好奇的人，你和你的妻子或孩子会有更充实的生活。你会问他们更多问题。你会对他们感兴趣，对吧？所以这是每个人在人际关系中都想要的一种品质：对他们感兴趣，真正更好地理解他们，或者对共同的事物感到好奇。所以不仅仅是好奇心带来成功。更多的是，如果你好奇，你周围的人希望你成功，因为你会拥有更丰富和充实的关系。

So it's kind of like it's less about... and it applies to your personal relationships and personal life too. It's not just about professional success. Like you'll have a more fulfilling life with your wife or your kids if you're a more curious person. You ask them more questions. You take interest in them, right? So that's the one quality everybody wants in personal relationships: taking interest in them and actually understanding them better or being curious about common things. And so it's not just that being curious leads to success. It's more that people around you want you to be successful if you're curious because you will have more compounding and fulfilling relationships.

我同意这一点。是的。我会说这是人类最重要的品质之一。我的意思是，它带来了我们今天拥有的一切。所有好奇心带来了我们所有的建筑、数学。是的。一切。艺术，一切。

I would agree with that. Yeah. I'd say it's one of the more important qualities of human beings. I mean it's led to everything that we have today. All curiosity has led to all of our architecture, math. Yeah. Everything. Art, everything.

晶体管，你知道晶体管的故事。

The transistor, like you know the story of the transistor.

是的。

Yeah.

所以贝尔实验室当时雇用的电话工程师数量，差不多相当于今天的软件工程师数量。但只有三个人足够关心，去质疑是否应该使用这些又热又大的真空管来放大电话信号。真空管非常大、耗电且很热，因此容错性差，而且非常昂贵。于是三个人质疑了这种必要性，并提出了用晶体管放大电流的想法。那是获得诺贝尔奖的发现。不仅如此，它对于放大电话信号很有用。它基本上导致了现代计算的兴起，如果没有那三个人，我们今天就不会有这样的 iPhone。你知道关于晶体管的锡箔帽阴谋论是什么吗？

So Bell Labs was basically employing as many telephone engineers back then as the number of software engineers today. But only three people cared enough to question whether you should use these really hot giant vacuum tubes for amplifying telephone signals. So vacuum tubes were very big, power hungry and very hot and so they were not fault tolerant and it's very expensive. And so three people questioned the need for that and came up with the idea of the transistor to amplify current. And that was the Nobel Prize winning discovery. And not just that, it was useful to amplify telephone signals. It basically led to the rise of modern computing and we wouldn't have an iPhone like this today if not for those three people. Do you know what the tinfoil hat conspiracy theory about transistors is?

不知道。

No.

是不是说它们是从罗斯威尔坠毁事件中逆向工程得来的，还有光纤？

Is it that they are back engineered from the Roswell crash along with fiber optics?

还有呢？我们在播客里读到过。记得杰米吗？有两个科学家被归功于此。其中一个科学家说他们根本算不上杰出，给他们功劳是为了掩盖这项技术的真正来源。

Any more? So, we read this on the podcast. Remember Jamie? There's the two scientists that were attributed. There's this one scientist that said they weren't even remotely exceptional guys and that they gave them the credit for this so that they didn't have to reveal the true nature of where this technology came from.

我明白了。有意思。

I see. Interesting.

所以再次强调，我们只是戴着锡箔帽瞎猜。我并不相信这些。这只是好玩而已。大约 1947 年之后出现了一些奇怪的发明，其中一个是光纤，另一个是晶体管，据称它们都来自逆向工程项目。

So again, tinfoil hat securely on our heads. This is not something I believe. This is just something that's fun. There are a few inventions that came out of that time period roughly after 1947 that are weird, and one of them is fiber optics and one of them is a transistor, and these are supposedly attributed to back engineering programs.

罗斯威尔坠毁事件，我不知道你有没有关注过。这真的很奇怪，因为《罗斯威尔每日纪事报》的头版说政府有一个坠毁的飞碟降落在沙漠里。很多目击者，很多人都看到了。还有人声称看到了这些生物的实体，谁知道真假，但杜鲁门去了现场。他参观了，然后两架不同的飞机飞往赖特-帕特森空军基地——当时可能只是赖特基地，我不确定是不是赖特-帕特森——但他们把它们运走了，原因是这些材料太重要了，他们不想冒一架飞机坠毁的风险。所以用两架飞机运送，而且这些东西一直被认为存放在赖特-帕特森空军基地。大家都这么说。后来很多被转移到了贝尔实验室。

So the Roswell crash, I don't know if you ever paid any attention to it. It's a real weird one because the cover of the Roswell Daily Record said that the government has a crash disc that landed in the desert. Bunch of witnesses, bunch of people saw it. It's also people that saw supposedly saw physical bodies of these creatures and a supposedly again, who knows what's true, but Truman went to the site. He visited it and then the planes, two separate planes were flown to Wright Patterson Air Force base which was I think it was just right base back then. I don't think it was Wright Patterson but they flew them out and the idea was this material was so important they didn't want to risk one plane crashing. So they flew it in two different planes and that this stuff has always been known to be stored at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. That's what everybody always talks about. And then a lot of it was moved to Bell Labs.

哇，有一家公司叫美国计算机公司。当年，美国计算机公司就像一个消费者网站，你可以上去说：‘哦，我需要一台 Windows 电脑，能做这个、那个。’然后你输入你的配置要求，他们就会为你组装。但他们网站有一个专门的部分，讲贝尔实验室和逆向工程的 UFO 技术，里面全是这些内容，好像运营者是个怪人。那个网站还在吗？

And wow, there was a company called the American Computer Company. And back in the day, the American Computer Company was just like it was a consumer website where you could go and say, 'Oh, I need a Windows computer that does this, that, and the other thing.' And you could just put in whatever your specs were, and they would build it for you. But they had a whole section of their website dedicated to Bell Labs and back engineered UFO technology and all they talked about in this one like whoever ran it was like a cook. I don't know. Is that still around that website?

是啊。美国计算机公司。还在吗？

Yeah. American computer company. Is it still around?

有意思。

Interesting.

所以这大概是 1990 年代的事。你是说你的理论——我不是说你相信它——但你的理论是晶体管不是被发明的，而是已知的，然后被交给了……

So this is like the 1990s I think. So you're saying your theory—I mean not that you believe in it—but your theory is that the transistor was not invented, it was known and it was given to the...

显然，从晶体管的初步想法到最终实现之间有一个巨大的飞跃，而且为了这个飞跃投入了大量资金。这是那些试图研究这个问题的科学家们的断言。关于贝尔实验室，有一点是它外面就有一个军事基地，他们说：‘那个军事基地是为了保卫纽约市。’但纽约市离那里还有一段飞行距离，而贝尔实验室就在旁边。

There's apparently a giant leap between the first ideas of the transistor and then what actually came about and how much money had to be spent to create it off of this leap. This was an assertion by these scientists that were trying to examine this. The thing about Bell Labs is there's a military base right outside of Bell Labs and they say, 'Well, that military base is to guard New York City.' But New York City is quite a flight away, but Bell Labs is right there.

嗯。

Yeah.

而且贝尔实验室肯定在搞一些深奥黑暗的东西，因为我请过很多人来谈他们在贝尔实验室进行的遥视训练。你知道，我们请过很多人来谈论各种正在进行的项目，都是通过贝尔实验室运作的绝密项目。那个地方有点诡异。真的很诡异。

And they were working on some deep dark stuff at Bell Labs for sure, because I've had a bunch of people on that were talking about remote viewing exercises that they were doing out of Bell Labs. You know, we've had a bunch of people that came on and talked about various programs that were going on that were like top secret programs that were happening that were being run through Bell Labs. Like there's some weirdness to that place. Like real weirdness.

有意思。是啊，这个想法确实感觉很不连贯，就像你一直在用真空管，然后突然说，好吧，如果我们只用半导体呢？这跟你正在做的事情到你应该做的事情之间确实有很大的跳跃。而且第一个晶体管的概念和后来芯片中使用的结型晶体管也大不相同。所以核心思想上有很大的飞跃，不是渐进式的改变。我当时的想法是，那可能是几十年的工作，所以他们才做出了重大改变，如果你真的去研究那些具体的里程碑，也许看起来会完全不同。但你的阴谋论挺有意思的。

Interesting. Yeah, the idea that you know that it definitely feels very disconnected like okay like you were using all these vacuum tubes and then suddenly you're like okay like what if we just use semiconductors okay that there's definitely a pretty far drift from what you're doing currently to what you're supposed to do and also the idea of the first transistor and what ended up being used in chips the junction transistor are quite different too. So they're like big leaps in terms of what the core idea was. It's not an incremental change. The way I thought about it was like okay that's like tens of years of work and that's why they made a big change and so if you actually looked into the individual milestones they had maybe it would have looked pretty different. But your conspiracy theory is pretty interesting.

总是很有趣。

It's always fun.

是啊。而且这样的故事太多了，大卫·格鲁什在宣誓后说过，确实有逆向工程项目，他被授权了解这些项目，而且它们已经存在很长时间了。但电影《披露时代》的观点是，真正的问题是这些人挪用了资金并对国会撒谎，所以他们如果出来说‘好吧，我们确实有这个项目’，那么猜怎么着？所有人都会进监狱，因为你们是一群骗子，一直在偷钱，随心所欲地花这些钱。我不知道逆向工程 UFO 项目有多少监督，所以可能很多人会惹上麻烦，很多人会坐牢。除此之外，这些事情都是由武器制造商做的，对吧？你把这些东西交给谁？你会交给洛克希德·马丁，或者交给洛克达因，或者交给做这类工作的公司。你不会自己干。不会说‘我们自己来’。不，你必须交给那些已经在造飞船或造喷气式飞机的人。

Yeah. And also there's just too many stories of this and David Grush has you know on oath said that they there are back engineering programs and he was read into these and that they've been around for a long time but this is the assertion of that movie the age of disclosure that the real problem is that they have misappropriated funds and lied to Congress and so they come out and tell you okay we do have this program well guess what everybody goes to jail because you guys are a bunch of liars and you've been stealing money and you've been doing whatever you want to do with this money. I don't know like how much oversight is there on back engineering UFO programs, you know? So, probably a lot of people get in trouble. A lot of people go to jail. On top of that, these things are all being done by weapons manufacturers, right? Like where are you going to bring them to? Well, you're going to bring them to Lockheed Martin or you going to bring them to, you know, Rocketdyne or it's going to be someone that does that kind of work. Yeah. You're not going to do it on your own. It's not going to be like we'll do it. No, you're going to have to bring it to people that already make spaceships or bring it to people that already make jets.

嗯。

Yeah.

所以他们比任何其他做这件事的公司都有巨大的竞争优势。那么其他与美国政府有合同的公司就可以起诉。所以他列出了披露的所有问题。他们的主张是，如果我们真的想找出真相，唯一需要的是对所有参与其中的人进行广泛的大赦。

And so they have a massive competitive advantage over any other company that's doing it. So then there's other companies that also had contracts with the United States government they can sue. And so he lays out all the problems with disclosure. And their assertion is that the only what we need if we really want to find out the truth is we're going to need widespread amnesty for all these people that were involved.

嗯。

Mhm.

我对这个说法的质疑是，如果是我，我也会这么说。如果我几十年一直在偷钱，我会说：‘我需要大赦，我会告诉你所有东西在哪里。’问题是，我们怎么知道这些东西到底是什么？也许这些只是绝密的军事项目，拥有公众无法获得的先进推进技术，而他们会说那是外星人，他们逆向工程了这个那个。显然，他们不想告诉人们。他们不想让人们知道。我认为很大一部分原因可能是他们会惹上麻烦。

My problem with that is that's what I would say too. If I had been stealing money for decades and decades, I'd be like, I need amnesty and I'll tell you where all this stuff is. I'm like, how do we know what this stuff is, whether or not these are just top secret military programs with advanced propulsion technology that's unavailable to the public and they're going to say that is aliens and they back engineered this and they did that. Like, they clearly don't want to tell people. They don't want people to know. I think a large part of it is probably because they could get in trouble.

但我觉得很大程度上也是因为对人们保密很有趣。

But I think also a large part of it is because it's fun to keep secrets from people.

是啊。

Yeah.

尤其是当你是政府的时候。为什么要告诉他们？那些人。

Especially when you're the government. Why tell them? those people.

是啊。他们甚至不知道 UFO 是真的。

Yeah. them. They don't even know UFOs are real.

与此同时，你知道，我们进入山中的掩体，进行遥视。你知道，拥有大多数人梦寐以求的信息，可能确实很有趣。

Meanwhile, you know, we're going into a bunker in the middle of the mountain and we're remote viewing. You know, it's it's probably there's probably a lot of fun involved in having access to information that most people would kill for.

是啊。我是说，有太多信息我们就是无法获取。

Yeah. I mean there's so much information that um we just we just don't have access to.

这就引出了一个问题：似乎随着 AI 和整个技术的发展，人们获取信息和答案的能力比以往任何时候都强。

Which brings me to this question with it seems like one of the things that's happening with uh both with AI and with technology in general is that you have more and more access to information and more and more answers to questions than ever before.

是啊。

Yeah.

在某个时间点，将不再有瓶颈。

At a certain point in time there's going to be no bottleneck.

是啊。

Yeah.

我们将无所不知。那么，政府里的人怎么能保守秘密？腐败怎么可能存在？在某个时间点，一切都会被揭露吗？就像现在，有了 DNA 证据，谋杀更难了，对吧？在 19 世纪，你说‘我什么都没看见，我不在那儿’，你就没事了。现在他们取你的指纹，提取你的 DNA，还有群组摄像头。越来越多，越来越难逃脱。是啊。

And we're going to know everything about everything. So, how is anyone in government going to keep a secret? How is any corruption ever going to be possible? Is at a certain point in time all of it will get uncovered? Like, it's much more difficult to commit murder now with DNA evidence, right? Back in the 1800s, like I didn't see nothing. I wasn't there. And then you're free. Like, now they do your fingerprints. Now, they get your DNA. Now, there's flock cameras. There's like more and more and more. It's harder to get away with things. Yeah.

最终，会有那么一个时刻，数据和信息如此之多，你可以提出所有问题，就像现在有 AI 事实核查员来核查政客一样。是啊。

Ultimately, there's going to come a time where there's so much data and so much information and you could run all your questions like there's an AI fact checker for politicians now. Yeah.

所以，当政客发表演讲时，你可以运行 AI 事实核查员，实时告诉你这些人是否在胡说八道。这似乎表明，未来不会有人再胡说八道，因为那是不可能的。

So, while a politician is giving a speech, you can run an AI fact checker and in real time it will tell you whether or not these people are full of This it seems like the direction is there's not going to be anybody full of in the future because it's not going to be possible.

是啊。我的意思是，政府仍然能接触到我们普通人接触不到的东西，尤其是国防和武器相关的东西，比如他们处理委内瑞拉事件时。

Yeah. I mean the government still would have access to things that we human beings wouldn't have access to like like like regular people um and um particularly defense related weapons related like for example u when they did the uh ven venezuelan thing

嗯，我觉得委内瑞拉人甚至都不明白那些武器是什么。

um I don't think people in Venezuela even understood like what even those weapons were

我觉得我们也不知道，它们被描述为……用的词是‘外星科技’。所以我们甚至不知道美国拥有那种质量的国防技术，直到那次事件发生。所以显然会有秘密，尤其是那些最高风险的事情。我觉得构建前沿 AI 模型也类似。当然，随着越来越多的模型开源，知识在扩散，但训练一个真正出色的前沿推理能力模型所需的细节数量仍然没有广泛传播。所以我的假设是，任何极高风险的事情都不会广泛传播。至少会有足够的结构来保密。

I don't think we did they were described as like yeah they were described as something the the literal words used were like alien like technology. So we even we didn't know that um the United States had access to uh that quality of defense technology until that incident happened. So there are obviously going to be secrets right especially the highest stakes things um I would say like building frontier AI models is similar to that. Um, of course, as more and more models are getting open source, I think the knowledge is diffusing, but still, uh, the the true amount of details you need to actually train a really amazing frontier reasoning capability model is still not like widely diffused. So, I my my things my my my hypothesis is that um, whatever is extremely high stakes will still not be widely diffused. It it's it it'll at least there'll be enough structures in place to keep it secret.

永远。

Forever.

不是永远，但会持续一段时间。

Not forever, but for a while.

一段时间。

For a while.

是啊。

Yeah.

问题就在这儿。

That's the thing.

长期来看，当然。事情总会泄露，人们会明白。

Long term. Sure. Like things do get out and people understand.

我觉得我关注的是长期。你看，当我们回顾历史，谈论那些不同的寺庙和事物时，我们说的是几千年。

It feels like long term is what I'm looking at. Like look, when we're looking at history, we're talking in these like when we're looking at all these different temples and all these different things, we're talking about thousands and thousands of years

每个之间相隔数千年。

and thousands of year time span in between each individual one.

而在我们的世界，200 年内就发生了巨变。这个国家才 250 岁。想想这有多疯狂。

With our world, we're talking about massive change in 200 years. Like this country is 250 years old. Think about how kooky that is.

是啊。

Yeah.

在历史长河中只是一眨眼的功夫。

That is a blink of an eye in history.

但我们了解美国发生的一切吗？

But do we do we understand everything that happened in the United States?

不。

No.

没错。所以仍有一些细节是

Exactly. So there are still some details that are

当然

sure

对我们隐藏的，我们并不完全了解一切，对吧？

hidden from us like we we don't fully understand everything right

目前是这样。

for now.

是啊。

Yeah.

但我的问题是，随着时间的推移，250 年后，还能对任何人保守秘密吗？

But my question is as time goes on 250 years from now is it even possible to keep any secrets from anybody

这是好事吗？可能是好事。人们觉得可怕，因为他们会说‘天哪，隐私怎么办？’

and and is that a good thing? It might be a good thing. It sounds horrible to people because they're like, "Oh my god, what about privacy?"

对。但谎言呢？

Right. But also what about lies?

是啊。

Yeah.

不再有谎言。每个人都会知道你在想什么，每个人都会知道人们所做的一切。

No more lies. Like everyone's going to know what you're thinking. Everyone's going to know everything people do all the time.

是啊。我的意思是，如果你是一个真正的监控国家，显然没有秘密。

Yeah. I mean, if you're a true surveillance state, obviously there are no secrets,

对吧？

right?

嗯，除了政府本身。

Um except about the government itself.

问题就在这儿。

That's the problem.

是啊。

Yeah.

是卡在政府这里，还是会发展到连政府秘密都不存在的地步？因为随着技术和人类文明的发展，秘密不仅会越来越少，而且秘密本身会成为问题，阻碍知识，阻碍理解真正的

Does it bottleneck with the government or does it get to a point where there you can't even have government secrets? Because as technology evolves and as human civilization evolves, secrets will be less and less not just necessary but secrets. Secrets will be problematic because they'll be an impediment to knowledge. There'll be impediment to understanding the true

世界的真实范围，以及我们各个组成部分的真实本质。

the true scope of what the world is like the true nature of all of our various moving parts.

是啊。只要人类的好奇心和求真欲这种内在品质——你知道，这是普遍的，自人类存在以来就存在——如果这种品质持续下去，人们就会有足够的动力去查明真相。

Yeah. May as long as the human quality the intrinsic human quality of curiosity and truth seeekingness which is you know universal. that's existed ever since we known human beings. If that continues and that continues to be the case, then people will have enough incentives to figure out the truth.

是啊。

Yeah.

而且，如果某件事真的很难获得，反而会激励你更努力去寻找。

And and they if something is actually hard to get to, it only motivates you more to actually go and find it.

当然。但我的问题是，这一切会走向何方？你知道，你显然从事 AI 工作，当你思考 AI 和整个技术，并 extrapolate（外推），从当前出发，描绘出 250 年后可能的情景？那会是什么样子？美国 500 岁时会是什么样？

For sure. But so my question is where does this all go? you know, and you obviously work in AI and when you think about AI and when you think about just technology in general and you extrapolate, you just take it from here and you just plotted out like what is a possible scenario of 250 years from now? Like what does it even look like? What does the United States look like at 500 years old?

很难知道。老实说，我觉得连 5 年后会是什么样都很难知道。

It's very hard to know. I I I'll be very honest. I I I think it's very hard to know even 5 years from now how it's going to look like.

那太疯狂了。

That's crazy.

是啊。

Yeah.

五年前，那些在 AI 领域最顶尖的人——我不认为自己属于那个层次——但五年前在 AI 决策最前沿的人，我不认为他们预测到了我们今天所处的确切状态。没有人预测到。如果他们预测到了，他们早就已经获取了所有算力，制造了所有芯片，买下了所有晶圆厂。他们肯定会这么做，对吧？这个反事实：每个人都因为算力不足而受制。我们没有足够的芯片，没有足够的电力。这些都是问题。如果你邀请任何 AI 领域的人，问他们今天 AI 的瓶颈是什么，每个人都会说是电力。我想 Jensen 在这里时也说了同样的话，对吧？

Five years ago, whoever was at the topmost level in AI—I don't even consider myself like that—but whoever was at the most frontier level of decision-making in AI five years ago, I don't think they predicted the exact state we are in today. Nobody did. If they did, they would have already procured all the compute, manufactured all the chips, bought out all the fabs. They would have done all that, right? This counterfactual: everyone is bottlenecked by not having enough compute. We don't have enough chips, we don't have enough power. These are all the problems. If you invite anybody in AI and ask what is the bottleneck in AI today, everybody would say power. I think Jensen was here and he said the same thing, right?

是的。

Yeah.

但如果你五年前就预测到了这种状态，难道你不会确保足够的电力，自己开始建造更多发电厂，开始获取许可，开始规划容量吗？不。没有人那样做。

But if you predicted this exact state five years before, wouldn't you have secured enough power and started building more power plants yourself, started getting permits, started planning out capacity? No. Nobody did that.

没有。一切都是对今天需求的反应。

No. Everything is reactive to the demand that we're having today.

而这只是五年。所以当你让我预测 250 年时，我只能老实说我不知道。

And that's just five years. So when you ask me to predict 250 years, I just have to honestly say I don't know.

但你有没有静下来思考过？它可能会是什么样子？

Do you ever sit back and think about it though? What it could be?

我确实思考过。有很多有趣的事情。我经常用 Perplexity 来做这类事情，尤其是它的新功能 Computer Use。有一个假设场景：假设存在一个 AGI，对吧？我看到你问过很多人这个问题，很多常规回答是，‘哦，我们只会成为 AI 的管理者，别担心。’但如果认知的价格就是算力的价格，那么管理 AI 本身也基本可以由 AI 完成，因为瓶颈不在于独特的认知能力。所以社会的价值会自动转向稀缺的东西。而从根本上说，一直稀缺的是提出高质量问题的能力。如果我们把所有时间都用来理解过去呢？那是一项有趣的努力。以前这并不酷，但会重新变得酷起来。我们通常认为考古学或历史学不值得作为职业，因为收入不高。但如果它实际上开始给你带来更多收入呢？因为现在实际的知识工作都由 AI 完成，而且都很平凡，其价格基本为零。

I do think about it. There are a lot of fun things. I use Perplexity a lot for these kinds of things, especially this new feature, Computer Use inside it. And one hypothetical scenario: let's say there is an AGI, right? And I've seen you ask a lot of people about this, and a lot of conventional answers are like, 'Oh, we'll just become managers of the AIs, don't worry.' But if the price of cognition is the price of compute, managing an AI is also pretty much doable by the AI itself because the bottleneck is not unique cognitive capability there. So the value of society will automatically shift to what is scarce. And fundamentally, what has been scarce is asking high-quality questions about things. What if we just completely spend all our time understanding the past? That's an interesting endeavor. It was not cool before, but it'll become cool again. We usually used to view archaeology or history as not something worth having a career in because it doesn't pay well. But what if it actually starts paying you a lot more now that actual knowledge work is being done by AIs and it's all mundane and the price of that is basically at zero?

对吧？而考古学将是少数 AI 无法触及的领域之一，因为它没有实际的地面。它无法进入地下进行扫描。

Right? And archaeology would be one of the few things that it wouldn't have access to because it doesn't have the actual ground. It can't get into the ground and do the scans.

不，假设我们有机器人去做那些。

No, let's say we have robots to go do that.

嗯。

Mhm.

但你仍然是那个进行探索的人，对吧？因为你总是拥有不完整的信息。即使是‘我们去探索这个特定区域，去更好地理解，或者去逆向工程那个，再去建造这个，如果我们想在月球上做同样的事情会怎样？’这样的想法，也有太多有趣的项目等着我们去做，只要我们保持好奇，对我们以前做过的很多事情保持兴趣，并试图理解文明。我并不担心我们能做什么事情。我们可能会做更多很酷的事情。我不知道是否有人会跑来告诉你，每天打开 Excel 表格做财务模型很酷，对吧？

But you're still going to be the one probing, right? Because you have incomplete information all the time. Even the idea of 'let's go explore this particular area, let's go understand better, or let's go try to reverse engineer that, let's go try to build this again, oh how would it be if we wanted to do the same thing on the moon?' There are so many interesting projects to work on for us, as long as we stay curious and stay interested in a lot of things that we've done before and trying to understand civilization. I'm not really concerned about what things we get to do. We might be doing a lot more cool things for what it's worth. I don't know if anybody will be coming and telling you that it's so cool to open an Excel sheet every day and make financial models, right?

肯定有人喜欢那样。

There's got to be somebody out there that likes that.

我的意思是，你所做的任务、你得到的报酬、你的职位头衔等等，这些东西有些意义。有些人将个人价值与他们在哪里工作以及赚多少钱联系起来。我认为在一个所有认知的价格都等于算力价格的世界里，这种东西会崩溃。

I mean, there's something about the task you do and what you get paid for, what is the job title, etc. And some people associate their personal worth with where they work and how much they get paid. And I think that thing is going to collapse in a world where the price of all that cognition is going to be the price of compute.

如果很大比例的工作被 AI 取代，你认为人们会怎样？

What do you think happens to people if a large percentage of jobs get replaced by AI?

我认为他们会找到新的事情做。我们总是倾向于稀缺的东西，因为那里有价值。一个有趣的类比是海湾国家，那里资源丰富，他们将资源出口到其他国家，这支撑了整个国家。他们为所有人提供免费电力、补贴医疗、补贴教育，并且没有税收。当我大约 20 年前第一次去迪拜时，他们告诉我这里的人不纳税，没有人付电费，教育超级便宜。我当时想，‘等等，这怎么可能？’而之所以可能，是因为政府提供了所有这些，它成了一个前沿国家。你向国家提供政治收购，结果公民期望国家为他们找到工作，期望国家为他们处理失业问题，所以他们不担心。这让他们变得有点懒惰。这不是一个好的未来，有些人谈论 AI 补贴和 AI 红利，支付给每个人。我认为我们需要某种形式，但完全依靠它解决不了问题。

I think they'll find new things. We've always gravitated towards things that are scarce because that's where the value lies. One interesting analogy is the Gulf States, where there's an abundance of resources and they export their resources to other states, and that pays for the whole state. They offer everybody free electricity, subsidized health, subsidized education, and no taxes. When I first went to Dubai almost 20 years ago, they told me people don't pay taxes here, nobody pays for electricity, and education is super cheap. I was like, 'Wait, how is that real?' And the way that's real is that because the government provides you all these things, it becomes a frontier state. You offer political acquisitions to the state, and what ended up happening is citizens there expect the state to find them jobs, expect the state to take care of job displacement for them, so they don't worry. So it made them a little more lazy. That's not a good future to have where some people talk about AI subsidies and AI dividends that get paid to everybody. I think we need to do some form of that, but that in entirety won't solve the problem.

嗯，人性这一点是无可否认的。如果你给人们懒惰的能力，很大一部分人会选择懒惰。

Well, the thing about human nature is sort of undeniable. And if you give people the ability to be lazy, a large percentage of people will take that.

没错。

That's right.

但很大一部分人不会。

A large percentage won't though.

是的。会有足够多的人受到启发去做一些事情，他们会说，‘好吧，现在我的基本需求得到了满足。让我追求我真正的兴趣，并从中找到目标。’因为很多人从他们的职业中找到目标。

Yeah. There's going to be enough people that are inspired to do something and they say, 'Okay, well now my basic needs are taken care of. Let me pursue my actual interest and find purpose in that.' Because a lot of people find purpose in whatever their occupation is.

如果我们能将其转变为从你真正的兴趣中找到目标，然后真正去追求某件事，无论是什么，那么你的生活仍然会有意义。

And if we can shift that to finding purpose in what your actual interests are and then really pursuing something, whatever it is in that, then you'll still have meaning in your life.

我们一直回到保持好奇心这一点。以及在你的人际关系、家庭、相互关心中找到价值。如果你问很多退休的人，实际上退休人群是了解会发生什么的好样本，了解当工作被剥离后人们从什么中找到意义。

And we keep coming back to staying curious. And finding value in your relationships, your family, caring for each other. If you ask a lot of retired people, actually retired people is a good demographic to understand what would happen, what are things people find meaning in after work's taken off them.

而且绝大多数答案总是关于家庭、关爱、个人关系和社区。这些都是退休的人为了保持活跃、每天醒来有盼头而持续做的事情。所以当工作本身不再重要时，这些东西会变得更加重要。

And all majority of the answers are always like family, caring, personal relationships and community. These are the things retired people keep doing to keep themselves active and wake up every day and have something to look forward to. So all those things will become even more important at a time when work itself doesn't mean much.

嗯。

Mhm.

但这并不意味着人类不会追求地位。我认为我们仍然会，但地位不再来自于你是否在一家著名的银行或科技公司工作。它将取决于你有多有趣。和你聊天有趣吗？当我可以和这样的人工智能聊天时，你仍然有趣吗？和你交谈是否能让我在某些事情上完全改变看法，还是只是和你在一起很开心？我们能否建立一种不断深化的关系？我认为这又回到了对事物保持好奇。

Doesn't mean humans won't be status seeking. I think we'll still be, but status is not going to come from whether you're working at a particular famous bank or a tech company or whatever. It'll be driven by how interesting you are. Are you interesting to talk to? When I can talk to an AI like that, are you still interesting to talk to? Are there certain things I get out of talking to you that completely change my perspective about a bunch of things, or is it just fun to hang around you? Can we have a compounding relationship together? And I think again it goes back to being curious about things.

嗯，这是最好的情况，对吧？最坏的情况是文明动荡、混乱、内战，而且这是可能的。即使没有人工智能也是可能的，对吧？

Well, this is best case scenario, right? Worst case scenario is civilization upheaval, chaos, civil war, and it's possible. It's possible even without an AI, right?

没错。

Exactly.

你看，我们已经好几次非常接近这种情况了。

Look, we've gotten real close to it a couple of times.

没错。

Exactly.

是的。所以过去我们并不需要 AGI（通用人工智能）的场景就能导致文明崩溃，正如你清楚看到的，对吧？一场灾难就能消灭我们所有人，摧毁一切。

Yeah. So we did not need an AGI scenario for a civilizational collapse in the past, as you've clearly seen, right? A calamity can just take out all of us, wipe out everything.

当然，尤其是自然灾害。

Sure. Especially natural ones.

是的。这就是为什么我不太喜欢每个人都声称人工智能会杀死我们，或者 AGI（通用人工智能）会毁灭人类，太危险了，我们都必须停止这些事情，但同时又在继续建造数据中心和赚钱。你必须有一个一致的立场。我的立场是，无论有没有人工智能，我认为保持好奇会对你非常有益。我认为它会帮助你过上更好的生活。好奇心有两条路：一条会扼杀它，另一条会增强它。在我看来，扼杀好奇心的是算法推送。每天给你灌输的那些脑腐内容，就是无休止的末日滚动。那很糟糕。而能增强好奇心的是人工智能。现在你可以随便问任何问题，如果每个人都有一个像“拉出来杰米”那样的助手，对吧？那太棒了。所以你只需要对很多不同的事情保持好奇，当然还要和有趣的人交谈，一起参与有趣的活动。如果钱不再是问题，你可以自己资助激情项目。你不需要政府资助或风险投资。比如，如果你只是想自己建一个小洞穴呢？你找一块地。美国有很多土地。比我们知道怎么用的多得多。而且我们肯定可以在那里建造很多有趣的东西。

Yeah. That's why I'm not a big fan of everybody claiming that AI is going to kill us or that AGI is going to destroy humanity and it's too dangerous and we all need to stop doing these things, but at the same time continuing to build data centers and continuing to make money. You have to have one consistent position. My position is that whether AI or not, I think being curious is going to serve you really well. I think it's going to help you have a better life. And there are two paths to curiosity. One that can kill it and one that can supercharge it. In my opinion, the one that kills curiosity is algorithmic feeds. The brain rot that you're fed every day with just continuous doom scrolling. That's bad. And the one that can supercharge it is AI. Now you can just ask whatever you want if everybody has like a pull-it-up Jamie for them, right? And that's amazing. So all you have to do is be curious about a lot of different things and of course talk to interesting people, engage in interesting activities together. If money is no longer an issue, you can fund passion projects yourself. You don't have to require government funding or venture funding. Like what if you just wanted to build a mini cave yourself? You find a piece of land somewhere. There's a lot of land in America. Way more land than we know what to do with. And surely we can build a lot of interesting things there.

嗯，这是一个很好的半杯满的场景。我一直在思考的一个问题是，人们工作、赚钱、拥有职业、投资组合和银行账户等等，这一切在人类历史上都是非常近期的事情。非常近期。但我们已经习惯了这种生活方式。而微软之所以提出知识工作者这个概念，是因为他们想卖更多的办公软件。真的吗？是的。比如，把个人电脑放在每张桌子上，让你粘在电脑上，这是比尔·盖茨的愿景：每张桌子上都有一台个人电脑。那个巫师。多么了不起的成就，因为他们确实做到了。是的。所以这并不像史蒂夫·乔布斯设想的那样让计算变得美丽，对吧？只是为了卖更多的软件，卖更多的电脑，因为这样你就能卖更多的软件，如果你卖更多的软件，你就会变得富有。这家公司本质上是一个巨大的销售机器，用来销售软件。现在他们卖云服务，但不管怎样。这基本上就是我们所有人都被训练使用软件的原因。人们去学习如何使用 Excel、Word、所有电子邮件工具，然后这成为你在不同公司工作、编写代码等所需技能提升的内容。所以如果这部分工作由人工智能完成，这未必是坏事，因为这并不是你真正感受到人生目标和成就感的方式。如果你从未接触过这些，你内在的好奇心可能才是你应该追求的。

Well, that's a good glass half full scenario. And one of the things that I keep coming to is this whole idea of people working and making money and having careers and having portfolios and bank accounts and all. This is all very recent in human history. Very recent. But we've become accustomed to this as a way of life. And Microsoft built this concept of a knowledge worker because they wanted to sell more office software. Really? Yeah. Like this whole idea of putting a PC on every desk and making you glued to the PC was Bill Gates' vision: put a PC on every desk. That wizard. What an incredible accomplishment, because boy did they nail it. Yeah. So it was not about making computing beautiful or anything in the way Steve Jobs envisioned it, right? It was just about selling more software, selling more computers, because that way you can sell more software, and if you sell more software, you become rich. The company was essentially a large sales machine built to sell software. And now they sell cloud, but whatever. That's essentially the reason that we all got trained to use software. People went and did tutorials on how to use Excel, how to use Word, how to use all these email tools, and then that became the upskilling you needed to go work at different companies and write code and whatever. So if that part is going to be done by an AI, it's not necessarily a bad thing, because this is not actually the way you feel real purpose and fulfillment in your own life. If you were never exposed to that, whatever you had as the intrinsic curiosity in you, that's probably what you should be doing.

是的。可能会有一种全新的生活方式，我们不再依赖劳动来满足基本需求，但这将取决于人们自己。他们必须想办法要么自我驱动，要么我们必须让人们接触到能激发他们好奇心的事物，并将其作为一项任务。

Yeah. There could be a completely new way to live life where we're not dependent upon labor for basic needs, but then it's going to be incumbent upon people. They're going to have to figure out a way to be either self-starting or we're going to have to expose people to things that excite their curiosity and make that a mandate.

是的。必须从学校开始。

Yeah. It has to start from schools.

是的。

Yeah.

而且只要我们继续奖励那些有答案的人，而不是提出有趣问题的人，改变就会很困难。在学校里，你总是因为能回答 20 个不同的问题而被认为聪明。谁在乎呢？那 20 个问题人工智能都能回答。你有没有翻转剧本，说：‘好吧，房间里最聪明的人是提出最有趣问题的人。’基于此你能培养出什么样的学生？想象一下，如果房间里没有总是知道答案的压力，而是有提出大量问题的自由。因为有时当有人提出一个问题时，它会让你停下来想：‘我从未想过这一点，但就是这样。这就是问题所在。’这需要很多拥有不同视角的人，这是我做这个播客经历的最有趣的事情之一：我能和这么多不同的人交谈，他们差异巨大。

And as long as we keep rewarding people for having answers instead of asking interesting questions, it's going to be a difficult change. In schools, you're always rewarded for being smart based on whether you have answers to 20 different questions. Who cares? All those 20 questions can be answered by AIs. Have you ever flipped the script where you say, 'Okay, the smartest person in the room is the one who asks the most interesting questions.' What kind of students can you cultivate based on that? Imagine if the room had no pressure to always know the answer, but the freedom to ask a lot of questions. Because sometimes when someone asks a question, it'll make you pause and go, 'I never even thought of that, but that's it. That's the question.' And it takes so many people with so many different perspectives, which is one of the more interesting things I've experienced doing this podcast: I get to talk to so many different people and they vary so widely.

看待世界的方式有那么多，参与世界的方式有那么多，人们着迷的东西有那么多，他们一生都在研究和追求。就像你得到了人类经验的丰富画卷，我本来永远不会接触到这么多人。

There's so many different ways of looking at the world and so many different ways of engaging with the world and so many different things that people are fascinated with that they spent their entire life studying and pursuing. It's like you get this rich tapestry of the human experience that I would have never been exposed to this many people.

反过来，我也能让这些人接触到正在收听和观看的其他所有人。这太不可思议了。对我来说，这就像完美的工作。我从未有过比这更符合我个性的工作，因为我一直是那个因为问题太多而被叫闭嘴的孩子。我一直是那个孩子。

And in turn I've been able to expose these people to all these other folks that are just listening and watching right now. And it's incredible. And it's such a for me it's like the perfect job. I've never had a job that more aligns with my own personality as much as this because I've always been that kid like shut up with all the questions. I've always been that kid.

这就是系统的问题，对吧？不是你的错。实际上，你现在成功的原因正是过去人们让你闭嘴的事情。

That's the system, right? It's not your fault. Like it's actually the reason you're successful now is the exact thing that people told you to shut up about in the past.

对吧？

Right?

就像，‘嘿，别打扰我的课，问这些不相关的问题。’这主要是老师因为没有答案而感到沮丧。

Like, 'Hey, stop bothering my lecture, asking all these unrelated questions.' It's mainly a frustration of the teacher that they don't have the answers to you.

确实。

Sure.

现在这个瓶颈消失了。我们在麻省理工学院和一位教生物学入门课程的老师做了这个实验。他告诉我们，他会给所有学生提供 Perplexity，他们会在课堂上使用它。所以，与其对抗 AI，不如把 AI 交给每个人，让他们问任何问题，甚至在考试中也可以使用。

And now that bottleneck is gone. We did this experiment with one instructor at MIT who taught the introduction to biology class. He came and told us that he's going to give Perplexity to all the students, and they would use it as part of the lectures. So instead of fighting AI, you just give AI to everybody and let them ask whatever questions they want, and they can actually use it in the exams too.

哇。那么在这样的世界里，你如何设计考试题目呢？也许你只是鼓励人们提出一个 AI 目前无法回答的问题，然后那成为他们的研究项目，你基本上把每个人都变成了科学家。

So wow. So how do you even design questions for an exam in such a world? Maybe you just encourage people to pose a question that AI can't answer right now, and that becomes your research project, and you turn everybody into a scientist fundamentally.

有一种信念认为科学家必须经过严格的博士训练，并由一所了不起的大学认证。但任何好奇的人都可以成为科学家。成为一名好科学家唯一需要的是智识上的谦逊：理解你可能对大家认为理所当然的事情是错的，当面对新证据和新数据时，你愿意改变想法，并在世界的模糊和不确定性中运作。这基本上就是成为科学家所需的所有品质。你可以做实验、收集数据、收集证据、咨询他人、请专家来交谈。只要你在不断揭示世界的更多面貌，你就是科学家。你不需要博士学位才能觉得自己被允许成为科学家。我认为这是我们需要灌输给孩子们、下一代的最重要的品质，这样他们都会感到更解放。终于，我不必背诵这本教科书或这些讲义材料，如果我得了 12 分（满分 20 分）也不必感到难过。谁在乎呢？AI 总是能得 20 分。那不是你该擅长的事情。当然，要掌握基础、基本知识。但你的工作实际上是提出有趣的问题。

There's this belief that scientists have to go through a rigorous PhD and get accredited by an amazing university to be that. But anyone who's curious can be a scientist. The only thing required to be a good scientist is intellectual humility: to understand that you could be wrong about things that everyone takes for granted, and when presented with new evidence and new data, you're willing to change your mind and operate with ambiguity and uncertainty about the world. That's basically all the qualities you need to be a scientist. You can run your experiments, gather data, gather evidence, consult people, bring in experts and talk to them. As long as you're uncovering more and more about the world, you are a scientist. You don't need a PhD to feel allowed to be a scientist. I think that's the most important quality we need to inculcate in our kids, the upcoming generation, so that they all feel more liberated. Finally, I don't have to memorize this textbook or these lecture materials, and I don't have to feel bad if I get 12 out of 20. Who cares? AI is always going to get 20 out of 20. That's not what you're meant to be good at. Of course, master the foundations, the basics. But your job is to actually pose interesting questions.

是的。智识上的谦逊非常重要，因为整个新冠疫情期间一件非常奇怪的事情是我们不应该质疑科学。

Yeah. And the intellectual humility is so important because one of the things that was really weird about the whole COVID pandemic was that we weren't supposed to question science.

是的。

Yeah.

就像福奇说如果你质疑安东尼·福奇，你就是在质疑科学。

It was like when Fauci said if you question Anthony Fauci, you are questioning science.

那是因为他们试图通过学位、通过隶属关系来赋予可信度，而不是通过科学方法。任何人都应该被允许提问，只要他们对新证据持开放态度。

That's because they try to assign credibility through their degrees, through their affiliations, but not through the scientific method. Anybody should be allowed to ask questions as long as they are open to new evidence.

对。那是科学家最重要的品质。

Right. And that's the most important quality of a scientist.

科学方法本身是我们用来分辨真实与不真实的最重要工具之一。一旦有人说不要用它，不要质疑……等等。然后政府实际上推动压制质疑，合法的研究人员因为不支持叙事而被踢出推特。这完全是反科学的。这不是在质疑科学。科学要求质疑。

Well, the scientific method alone is one of the most important things we can use to try to figure out what's real and what's not real. And as soon as someone says don't use it, don't question... Well, wait a minute. And then there was an actual government push to silence questioning, and legitimate researchers were kicked off Twitter because they didn't back the narrative. This is all anti-science. This is not questioning science. Science demands questioning.

是的。当你不理解某件事时，最好的做法就是问所有可能的问题。而遏制这一点几乎就像在说，‘听着，我来告诉你发生了什么。你需要相信我的世界观，我对新观点不开放。’

Yeah. When you don't understand something, the best thing you can do is ask all possible questions. And curbing that is almost like saying, 'Look, I'm going to tell you what happened. You need to believe in my worldview and I'm not open to new perspectives.'

我想知道是否有人用 AI 来描绘技术引领人类文明的可能情景，以及可以做些什么来缓解问题并推动它走向正确的方向，比如建立一系列不同的模型来展示这可能如何发展。

I wonder if anybody has used AI to try to map out possible scenarios for where technology leads human civilization and what could be done to mitigate the problems and push it in the proper direction, like have a bunch of different models of how this could play out.

是的，我为了好玩尝试过，但没有认真到能给出一个像样的答案。但我认为我们今天做的很多事情将来都不会被认为必要或有价值。也许稍微从过去吸取教训。我不知道你当学生的时候，是否必须擅长心算，比如任意数字的乘法？那被认为是聪明的标志吗？或者记住别人的电话号码？

Yeah, I try to do that for fun, but I haven't done it in a serious enough way to have a proper answer to that. But I think a lot of things that we are doing today will not be considered needed or valuable. And maybe a little bit of taking our own lessons from the past. I don't know if when you grew up as a student, did you have to be good at mental math like multiplying arbitrary numbers? Was that considered a sign of smartness, or remembering people's phone numbers?

嗯，你必须这样做，因为有一个小地址本放在我桌上。那是我知道别人号码的唯一方式。

Well, you had to because there was a little address book that I kept on my desk. That's the only way I knew people's numbers.

我以前记得很多，比如所有朋友的号码。现在我一个朋友的号码都不记得了。也许我妻子和我的朋友埃迪的号码。我脑子里只有两个号码。

And I remembered a bunch of them, like all my friends. I don't have any of my friends' numbers remembered now. Maybe my wife and my friend Eddie. I have two numbers in my head.

但有没有一个时期，人们根据记忆力好坏来判断一个人是否聪明？

But was there a time when people thought somebody was smart based on how good their memory power was?

哦，是的，当然。

Oh yeah, definitely.

但你现在会这么说吗？

But would you say that now?

嗯，现在如果你知道一些事情，人们会印象深刻。你知道，我显然有很多奇怪的信息，是通过这么多年做这个播客和这么多年保持好奇心收集来的。

Well, people are impressed if you know things now. You know, I have a bunch of weird information obviously that I've gathered through so many years of doing this podcast and just so many years of being curious.

你知道吗，有时候连我女儿都会问：‘你怎么知道的？’我说：‘这就是我的工作。’我就是干这个的。我关注细节。

You know, sometimes even my own daughter is like, 'How do you know that?' I'm like, 'This is what I do.' That's my thing. I pay attention to stuff.

记忆力本身总是令人印象深刻。有人记忆力超群，能回忆起过去的事实。我们自动将其等同于智力。

Memory itself is always very impressive. Someone has an excellent memory and can pull up facts of the past. We automatically equate that to intelligence.

是的，我觉得这令人印象深刻，但不一定是聪明的标志，对吧？这只是你脑子里有一个非常快速的查找表。这很有价值，但聪明在于提出最有趣的问题。

Yeah, I think it's impressive, but it's not necessarily a sign of being intelligent, right? It's just a very fast lookup table in your head. That's valuable, but being smart is about posing the most interesting questions.

还有你做出的决定，以及犯错时能否自我纠正。所有这些。

Also, the decisions you make and whether you self-correct when you make mistakes. All those things.

没错。所以，当你有了像 AI 这样的智力放大器，查找可以委托，决策推理也可以委托。但提出正确的问题，根据它的推理形成自己的判断，并有勇气做出决定——这仍然是你自己。那种能动性、内在的好奇心、收集新证据和质疑信念的科学谦逊——这仍然是你自己。这才是未来会被视为聪明的品质。

Exactly. So, when you have an amplifier to your intelligence like AI, lookups are something you can delegate, reasoning for decision-making is something you can delegate. But posing the right questions, forming your own judgment based on what it reasons, and having the courage to make the decision—that's still you. That agency, that intrinsic curiosity, the scientific intellectual humility to gather new evidence and question your beliefs—that is still you. That is what will be considered smart in the ages to come.

如果某人是一个代理科学家，他们不必去麻省理工或哈佛拿博士学位才能被视为科学家，因为所有科学文献都是开放可及的。你可以拿一篇专家写的论文，用 AI 深入理解，提出问题，甚至可能反驳他们的主张。这就是整个同行评审过程——质疑某人的论文。你说过去发生的事是错的。你应该被允许质疑甚至著名科学家的工作。这没问题。如果你很笨，问了错误的问题，你会从中学习。这比不被允许提问更糟糕。

If somebody is a proxy scientist, they don't have to go to MIT or Harvard and get a PhD to be considered a scientist, because all scientific literature is open and accessible. You can take a paper written by an expert, use AI to understand it deeply, ask questions, and maybe even disprove what they claim. That's the whole peer review process—questioning somebody's paper. Whatever you said happened in the old days is wrong. You should be allowed to ask questions about even eminent scientists' work. It's okay. If you're dumb and ask the wrong questions, you'll learn from that. It's worse than not being allowed to ask the question.

是的，同意。看看教育的未来会是什么样子会很有趣。当 AI 能完成大部分工作时，学位还有多大价值？

Yeah, agreed. It's going to be interesting to see what the future of education looks like. How valuable are degrees when AI can do the majority of work?

它们现在在法律方面有多好？你可以提问，非常惊人。数学方面呢？完美。编程方面呢？比人好得多。

How good are they now at law? You can ask questions, pretty amazing. How good are they at mathematics? Perfect. How good are they at coding? Way better than people.

是的。在某个时候，会很有趣：现在的教育是什么？它只是提供信息，因为信息随手可得？还是教你如何思考？教你如何追求兴趣、保持好奇、拥有知识谦逊，并理解你知道什么和不知道什么。

Yeah. At a certain point, it's going to be interesting: what is education now? Is it just providing information, because information is readily available? Or is it teaching you how to think? Teaching you how to pursue your interests, be curious, have intellectual humility, and understand what you know and what you don't know.

我认为这应该是这样。我仍然认为机构会保持其品牌价值，因为教育有一个方面超出了学习本身——就是接触到其他好奇和聪明的人。

I think that's what it should be. I still think institutions will preserve their brand value because there is a certain aspect of education outside of learning—just having access to other curious and intelligent people.

当然。社区。

Sure. Community.

是的。品牌吸引好的社区、同伴群体等等。但实际的学习过程必须改变，你被奖励的东西也必须改变。一切都源于激励。如果激励是基于答案在考试中得最高分，那你没改变多少。要改变这个过程，你需要改变奖励学生的标准——什么是 A+或 A。这才是我们需要开始的地方。

Yeah. Brands attract good communities, peer groups, etc. But the actual process of learning has to change, and what you're rewarded for has to change. Everything flows downstream of the incentive. If the incentive is to score highest on an exam based on answers, you're not changing much. To change that process, you need to change what you reward a student—what is an A+ or A. That's where we need to start.

嗯，我们前几天讨论过：这个国家的教育体系是为了培养工人而设计的，课程也是围绕这个设计的。

Well, we talked about this the other day: the education system in this country was designed to make workers, and the curriculum was designed around that.

顺便说一句，在印度仍然如此。即使你攻读计算机科学学位，至少在我那时候，前两年你要学习硬核的电气和机械工程——焊接、使用车床、车间、木工。事后看来很有趣，学习焊接和制作电路。但如果有人只对写代码感兴趣，所有这些都毫无意义。你必须经历这些才能成为合格的工程师。课程这样设计是因为当时劳动力需要这些——建造炼油厂等等。所以你必须学习机械工程、流体力学。这也应该改变。如果工作方式变了，大学培训的内容也应该变。改变这些事情要难得多。人们行动缓慢，害怕改变。颠覆总是被看不起。所以让我们从学校和学院的激励结构开始——不要根据人们知道多少来奖励他们。

In India, it's still the case, by the way. Even if you go into a computer science degree, at least when I was there, the first two years you spend learning hardcore electrical and mechanical engineering—welding, using lathe machines, workshops, carpentry. It was fun in hindsight, learning soldering and making circuits. But if someone was just interested in writing code, all this was pointless. You had to go through it to be qualified as an engineer. The curriculum was designed that way because that's what the labor force required back then—to build oil factories, etc. So you had to learn mechanical engineering, fluid mechanics. That should also change. If the way you do work changes, what you're trained for in college should change. It's much harder to change these things. People are slower, scared of change. Disruption is looked down upon. So let's start at the incentive structure from schools and colleges—not reward people based on how much they know.

嗯，看起来在未来，当事情发生根本性变化时——而且这似乎不可避免——大学和学校会因为培养出能够适应这个新世界的思考者而获得回报。他们将不得不弄清楚如何调整课程。因为现在的工具如此惊人，仅仅记忆信息并不是你未来生存所需要的。

Well, it seems like in the future, when things radically change—and they seem inevitable—universities and schools will be rewarded for developing thinkers who can adapt to this new world. They'll have to figure out how to adjust their curriculum. Because the tools are so spectacular now that just memorizing information is not what you'll need to get by.

确实不是。

It's not.

我想不同学校使用的一个指标是，如果你的学校走出了更多创业者，那你可能培养了很多独立思考者。

And I guess one proxy different schools use is maybe if more entrepreneurs arise out of your school, you probably created a lot of independent thinkers.

嗯。

Mhm.

因为他们愿意用新视角看问题，对吧？然后从零开始打造自己的东西。

Because they are willing to take a fresh perspective towards a problem, right? And build their own thing from scratch.

从根本上说，美国一直是这样：美国梦就是来到这里，有自己的想法，并且被一群人认真对待。风险投资的概念，或者家人朋友帮你白手起家，把生意做成功。成功并不意味着几十亿或百亿，对吧？只要它能让你不必为别人工作，过上充实的生活，去探索你的热情所在——那就是成功。这实际上比按照别人期望你做的事去创办公司、然后讨厌自己的工作要好得多。

And fundamentally, that's what America has always been about: the American dream of coming here, having your own idea, and still being taken seriously by a bunch of people. The whole idea of venture capital, or family and friends helping you bootstrap a business and turning it into a success. Success doesn't mean multi-billion or 10 billion, right? As long as it pays you enough that you don't have to work for somebody else, you can live a fulfilling life, and go explore your passions—that's success. That's actually a better success than creating a company based on what other people want you to do and then hating your job for it.

是啊，有游艇却每天痛苦地工作。

Yeah. And having a yacht and being miserable and working every day.

这就是为什么我说最聪明或最富有的人并不总是拥有最充实的生活。最有好奇心的人拥有最充实的生活，因为他们有更好的人际关系。他们能够坐下来观察某件事，对它感到好奇，而不是担心发生了什么。

And that's why I said the smartest or richest people are not always the ones with the most fulfilling lives. The most curious people have the most fulfilling lives because they have better relationships. They're actually able to sit and look at something and be curious about it instead of worrying about what's going on.

当你不在美国时，美国梦对你意味着什么？它是怎么被讨论的？

What did the American dream mean to you when you weren't in America? How is it discussed?

对我来说，我一直认为美国是唯一一个你可以来到这里，有了一个想法，人们会倾听并鼓励你去追求它的国家。这里的冒险文化简直不可思议。在其他任何地方，你都会或明或暗地被要求服从权威。你必须去征求这个人的许可，那个人的认可或见解。但如果你有一个挑战他们信仰的想法，这个国家仍然鼓励你去追求它。所以是的，当我来到这里时，显然谷歌是每个人都想去的头号公司，但这也是同一个国家，允许一个新来者提出一个挑战本国最大公司之一的新想法，并且实际上渴望它。人们确实想要新想法。你可以持续看到，这里总是会有更多的新想法和新公司被创造出来。这种质疑的精神在这里受到很大鼓励。在学术研究中也是如此。我最初是学术界出身，即使在那里，当我有想法并分享时，人们会给出非常诚实的反馈，但不会阻止我做任何事。这太棒了，因为它非常新鲜，令人解放。

Well, to me, I always thought America is the only country where you can come here, have an idea, and people listen to you and encourage you to go pursue it. The risk-seeking culture is just incredible here. Everywhere else, you are either explicitly or implicitly forced to defer to authority. You have to ask permission from this person or that person, get their approval or insight. But if you have a thought that challenges what they believe, this country still encourages you to go pursue it. So yes, when I came here, obviously Google was the number one company everybody wanted to work for, but it's also the same country that allows a new person to start a new idea that challenges one of the biggest companies in this country, and actually wants it. People actually want new ideas. You can consistently see that there will always be more new ideas and new companies created here. That spirit of questioning is encouraged a lot here. It happens in academic research too. I started off as an academic, and even there, when I had ideas and shared them, people gave very honest feedback but didn't stop me from working on anything. That's fantastic because it's very fresh and liberating.

而其他地方没有？

And that's not anywhere else?

我会说没有。印度没有。

I would say it's not. It's not in India.

说其他地方都没有是简化了，但确实不那么受鼓励。

It's a simplification to say it's not anywhere else, but it's not as encouraged.

确实不那么受鼓励。激励结构不太到位，而因为一些疯狂的想法被认真对待的能力，正是美国仍然处于顶峰的原因。

It's not as encouraged. The incentive structures are not quite there, and the ability to be taken seriously for some crazy ideas is why America is still at the top.

但让我觉得疯狂的是，如果美国梦如此有吸引力，那么多人为此而来，为什么世界其他地方不采纳这些价值观呢？

But it's crazy to me that if the American dream is so compelling and so many people come here for it, why doesn't the rest of the world sort of adopt those values?

这很难。很大程度上是文化问题。美国基本上是从一片土地诞生的。我们在这里建立的许多想法和产业都是从无到有创造出来的，这需要承担巨大的风险。我记得杰夫·贝佐斯在某个播客里说过：还有哪里能让你为一个成功概率只有 5%到 10%的想法筹集几百万美元，失败之后还能再为下一个想法筹集几百万？没有其他地方。在这里致富的人实际上想要鼓励并参与别人的疯狂旅程，因为你自己很难去追求所有疯狂的赌注。所以这是一个生态系统，一旦成为生态系统，就有网络效应。所以很难在其他地方复制。

It's hard. A lot of it is cultural. America was born from a piece of land essentially. A lot of ideas and industries we built here were created from nothing, and that required taking bold risks. I think Jeff Bezos said in some podcast: where else would you be able to raise a few million dollars for an idea with a 5 to 10% chance of working, fail at it, and still go raise another few million for your next idea? Nowhere else. People who get rich here actually want to encourage and be part of somebody else's crazy journey because it's hard to pursue all crazy bets yourself. So it's an ecosystem, and once something becomes an ecosystem, there are network effects. So it's very hard to copy that elsewhere.

所以你的价值取决于你的好奇心和你愿意为之努力的事情。是的，那就是你的追求。

And so your value is measured in your curiosity and your willingness to work on whatever it is. Yes. That is your pursuit.

是的。然后最终调整、学习，并在其中一件事上点燃火花。

Yes. And then eventually adjusting and learning and catching fire with one of them.

没错。你必须努力工作。我坚信高强度的努力。我认为没有什么伟大的成就是靠软弱取得的。所以最近所有关于工作与生活平衡的推动——当然，如果你想要，有些工作可以给你。但当你试图从零开始，从无到有创造时，它本就不该是容易的。必须做出一些牺牲。你是在签约成为那种体验的一部分，那种从几乎不可能实现的事情中获得的超现实喜悦。你熬夜或早起不是因为报酬更高。也许你一分钱也拿不到。也许整件事都会化为乌有。但那种参与一件很难实现的事情的体验，才是你签约的目的。

Correct. And you have to work hard. I am a big believer in intense hard work. I think nothing great can be accomplished by being soft. So all this recent push for work-life balance—sure, if that's what you want, and there are certain jobs that give you that. But when you're trying to do something from scratch, when you're trying to create something from nothing, it's not meant to be easy. There are some sacrifices that have to be made. You're signing up to be part of that experience, that surreal joy from doing something that felt almost impossible to achieve. You're not staying up late or waking up early because you're getting paid more. Maybe you might not get paid anything. Maybe this whole thing goes to nothing. But that experience of being part of something that feels very hard to achieve is what you're signing up for.

是啊。如果你不是这样，那就找点别的。没关系。尊重这一点。这没什么不对。

Yeah. And if you're not, find something else. It's fine. Respect that. Nothing wrong with that.

完全正确。这个国家有足够的工作来满足各种需求，对吧？每个人都会经历人生的不同阶段。有时他们会感到有点懒惰或幻想破灭。所以我喜欢这个国家的是，这里有很多好奇的人。有这么多不同的人，无论他们是否使用 AI，都在这么多有趣的项目中寻找意义。

Exactly. And the country has enough jobs to provide for all kinds of needs, right? Everybody goes through different phases in their life. Sometimes they feel a little lazy or disillusioned. So what I like about this country is that there are a lot of curious people here. There are so many different people, whether they use AI or not, all finding meaning in so many interesting projects.

嗯，显然我不了解其他国家，因为我出生在这里，但那些从国外跟我谈论美国梦的人，他们是最热情、最支持这个理念的——这个自治实验，以及整个国家运作的基础：任何人都可以追逐梦想，如果你有梦想并愿意努力，你确实能在这个国家实现它。

Well, obviously I don't know any other country really because I was born here, but the people that do talk to me about what the American dream is like from another country, they're the most passionate and the most supportive of this idea, this experiment in self-government and the whole idea that the country operates on that anybody can chase their dream, that if you have a dream and you're willing to work hard, you could actually do it in this country.

没错。

That's right.

是的。对这个理念最热情的人往往来自那些无法实现它的地方。而且这不只是来自某个特定国家的人；这是一种态度，是系统运作的方式，它奖励你大胆挑战老牌玩家。你可以是后起之秀、挑战者。人们喜欢弱者。这种文化仍在延续。是的，这里有市值数万亿美元的公司，但人们仍然希望年轻有干劲的人也能成功。

Yeah. The people most passionate about that idea often come from somewhere else where that wasn't available. And it's not just people from one particular country; it's the attitude, the way the system works and rewards you for being bold and taking bets against established players. It's okay to be an upstart, a challenger. People love the underdog. That culture is continuing. Yes, there are multi-trillion dollar companies here, but people still want the young hungry person to also be successful.

是的。他们喜欢颠覆者。

Yeah. Well, they love disruptors.

这个国家的人喜欢弱者。这是普遍的，不限于科技。我相信每个人都会喜欢挑战可口可乐或百事可乐的弱者故事。在体育界，这是我们最喜欢的事。我们不喜欢本该赢的人赢；我们喜欢不该赢的人获胜。弱者故事对我来说非常独特地属于美国。这就是这个国家的本质。当然，和其他国家一样，这里有障碍和挑战，但这一点始终如一。

And people love underdogs in this country. It's universal, not specific to technology. I'm sure everybody would love an underdog story that wants to go against Coca-Cola or Pepsi too. In sports, it's our favorite thing. We don't like when the guy who's supposed to win wins; we love when the guy who's not supposed to win triumphs. The underdog story is very uniquely American to me. That's what this country is. Sure, there are obstacles and challenges like every other country, but it's one thing that has consistently stayed true.

美国人特别担心科技的一个大问题是，在不知情的情况下，每个人都交出了自己的数据，没有意识到它是一种商品。这反过来让这些公司变得极其富有和强大。然后他们有能力塑造叙事。这让人担忧，因为他们利用自己的意识形态立场作为杠杆，通过技术对人们施加巨大的控制和影响。我们以前没有意识到科技和公司对社会如何看待自己以及我们如何互动有这么大的控制力。人们真正担心这些公司变得如此庞大。有一个叫罗伯特·爱泼斯坦的人做了很多关于策划搜索引擎结果的研究，以及这能在多大程度上影响选举和人们对任何社会问题的看法。这令人担忧，因为他们确实策划搜索结果。不是简单的原始数据；如果你搜索特定的政治人物，根据他们所处的光谱和公司的倾向，你会得到不同的结果。这很糟糕。人们没有意识到这种权力对社会有多危险，以不诚实的方式使用它，不提供准确客观的信息，而是推动特定的意识形态。

One of the big fears that people in America have about technology in particular is that without being aware, everybody gave up their data and didn't recognize it was a commodity. That in turn made these corporations immensely wealthy and powerful. And then they have the ability to shape narratives. That concerns people because they use their ideological position as leverage to push through technology that has immense control and influence over people. We didn't see technology and corporations as having that much control over how society views itself and how we interact with each other. There's a real concern that these companies got so big. There's a guy named Robert Epstein who's done a lot of work on curated search engine results and how much that can affect elections and people's perceptions on any societal issue. It's concerning because they do curate search results. It's not simply raw data; if you look for specific political figures, depending on where they fall on the spectrum and the company's leanings, you'll get different results. That sucks. It's very concerning that people don't recognize how dangerous that is for society, to have that kind of power and wield it in a way that's not honest about accurate objective information, but pushes particular ideologies.

是的。所以我认为这有点像中心化系统和公司拥有的 AI 能力与你作为独立个体拥有的 AI 能力之间的不对称效应。当你没有 AI 来自行判断应该读什么时，你就受制于控制信息的大科技公司。但当你能够使用所有这些 AI 时，你可以通过告诉 AI‘嘿，这是我认为的，你应该质疑并告诉我’来定制你想看的内容。直到现在，你从未拥有这种力量。你终于得到了它。最终我们将能够拥有自己的 LLM，即我们可以托管在自己硬件上的模型。我们不必依赖某个特定模型公司的中心化模型。你可以根据你的信仰、你的自定义数据来塑造它。在消费搜索结果时，你可以询问你控制的 AI（没有人能关闭它）给你一个相反的观点，或者告诉你搜索结果是否有偏见。所以我们需要赋予个人更多主权，让他们能够访问自己拥有并在自己硬件上运行的 AI。这将导致本地 AI 的兴起。今天，AI 模型非常节能，运行在大型数据中心。但在一两年内，目前最耗电的数据中心所具备的能力将可以在你拥有的一个盒子里运行。

Yeah. So I think it's kind of an effect of the asymmetry between the amount of AI power that centralized systems and companies have and the amount of AI power you as a sovereign individual have. When you don't have the AIs to judge for yourself what you should be reading, you're under the influence of whatever big tech company controls the information. But when you have access to all those AIs, you can customize what you want to see by telling the AI, 'Hey, this is what I think, you should actually question and tell me.' Until now, you never had that power for yourself. You're finally getting it. Eventually we'll be able to have our own LLMs, models we can host on our own hardware. We don't have to rely on one centralized model from a specific model company. You can shape it to your beliefs, your custom data. When consuming a search result, you can ask that AI you control, which nobody can shut off, to give you a contrarian perspective or tell you if the search results are biased. So we need to give individuals more sovereignty with more access to their own AIs that they own and run on hardware they own. This will lead to the rise of local AIs. Today, AI models are very power-efficient and run on large data centers. But in a year or two, whatever capability exists in the most power-hungry data centers will be possible to run in a box you own.

这已经在发生了。有一些有趣的硬件项目，比如 Apple Mac Mini、Nvidia DGX，你可以托管一个合理大小的模型，把它放在一个盒子里运行，无需为所有 token 付费。你只需插上电源线就能工作。我知道邓肯·特鲁塞尔就这么做。

It's already happening. There are interesting hardware projects like the Apple Mac Mini, Nvidia DGX, where you can host a reasonable size model and put it in a box, run it without paying for all the tokens. You just plug it into your power cord and it works. I know Duncan Trussell does that.

是的。今天本地运行模型的能力还不太够，所以你仍然会倾向于使用数据中心的东西。但最终这将是一个光谱。一定比例的任务会委托给本地系统。这将是一个混合模型。随着时间的推移，你可以买一个像冰箱一样的东西放在家里，那就是你自己的 AI 盒子，托管一个你控制的模型。

Yeah. Today the capability of that locally running model is not quite there, so you'd still prefer something from a data center. But eventually this will be a spectrum. Some percentage of tasks will be delegated to the local system. It'll be a hybrid model. Over time, you could buy something that feels like a refrigerator for your home, which is your own AI box, and host a model you control.

所以没有人能某天随意切断它的访问。然后你可以把它当作对抗大科技公司想让你接受或相信的东西的武器。这是唯一能对抗的方式，因为他们拥有比你多得多的算力、数据和算法。所以你唯一能对抗的方法就是拥有自己掌控的东西。随着开源模型和开源大语言模型的兴起，你可以在本地硬件上取得进展。苹果、英伟达、英特尔都在这里做着出色的工作。你有可能改变未来，赋予人们更多权力。而且这可能并不像那些人想象的那么昂贵。

So nobody can arbitrarily shut off access to it one day. And then you can have that be your weapon against what the big tech wants you to be fed or believe in. This is the only way we can fight this because they have far more computing power, far more data, far more algorithms than you. So the only way you can fight that is you have something you own yourself. And with the rise of open-source models, open-source LLMs, you can just progress on local hardware. And both Apple, Nvidia, Intel, they're all doing amazing work here. You could potentially change the future and give people more power. And this may not be as expensive as those people think.

这是个好办法，因为我一直好奇，用谷歌搜索有一天会过时吗？因为你现在已经可以直接问手机了。大多数时候，如果我想知道什么答案，我就直接问 Perplexity。不用再翻遍所有谷歌搜索结果，试图弄明白它先给我看什么，然后翻到第三页才找到我真正想知道的。我能直接得到准确信息，然后追问也是即时的。

Well that's a good solution because I've always wondered, is using Google going to be irrelevant one day? Because you already can just ask your phone. I most of the time, if I want to have an answer for something, I just ask Perplexity. Instead of having to sift through all these Google searches and try to figure out what it's showing me first and get to page three where it's what I really want to know, I can get the accurate information, then follow-up questions are instantaneous.

是的。即使是今天运行 Perplexity 应用的模型，也都在云端。最终，你将能在自己拥有的设备上做到这一点。你仍然可以使用应用的前端界面，但你可以控制运行在硬件上的算力。你可能会问，我为什么在乎？好吧。比如有一天数据中心被摧毁了，就像伊朗轰炸数据中心那样？或者有一天政府决定某个模型不再可用？你希望对自己能运行哪些模型有一定控制权，甚至可能希望根据你的情境来塑造它，你永远不想让它存在于任何数据中心。我认为这就是个人获得更多主权以对抗大科技公司的地方。这就是我们对抗监控或权力集中的方式。

Yeah. And even the models that are running the Perplexity app today, they're all in the cloud. Eventually, you'll be able to do that on a box that you own. You can still use the front end, the UI of the app, but you can control the compute that runs on a piece of hardware. You may ask why do I care? Okay. Like what if someday the data center gets taken off, like Iran was bombing data centers? Or like what if someday the government decides that model is no longer available? You want some control over what models you can run, and you may even want to shape it to your context that you never want to be living on any data center. And I think that's where I believe the individual gets more sovereignty against big tech. And that's how we fight the surveillance or centralization of power.

是的，而且肯定在推动叙事。你对社交媒体怎么看？因为社交媒体，就像你之前谈到的，算法，是人们看待世界方式的最大问题之一。我很好奇你的想法。我的观点是它对孩子不好。

Yeah. And certainly pushing narratives. What do you think happens with social media? Because social media, as you were talking about before, algorithms, it's one of the biggest problems in terms of the way people view the world. I'm curious what you think. My opinion is that it's not good for the kids.

对他们来说很糟糕。

It's terrible for them.

是的。但我认为他们应该接触一些，因为知道有这个东西是好的。而且我认为孩子相当有韧性，他们会学习。但孩子们的焦虑水平比以往任何时候都高。自杀意念更高，自残也更多。

Yeah. But I think they should have some exposure to it because I think it's good to know that it's a thing. And I think children are fairly resilient and they learn. But the anxiety levels of kids is much higher than ever before. Suicidal ideation's higher, self harm.

是的。我的看法是，当你只是被动接收信息流，而社交媒体公司的算法决定你接下来看到什么时，它会抑制你的好奇心。我认为抑制人类好奇心的东西不应该被鼓励。

Yeah. My belief is that when you're just fed a feed and the algorithm of the social media company decides what you're going to see next, it curbs your curiosity. And I don't think things that curb human curiosity should be encouraged.

是的，我同意。所以如果应用的设计方式是询问你感兴趣的内容，并帮助你发现与你兴趣非常相关的东西，那很棒。但现实并非如此。它基本上是从某样东西开始，你开始无休止地刷，然后它开始展示你刚刚刷过的内容，最终你陷入一个回音室。这不一定好。

Yeah, I agree. And so if the app is designed in a way where it asks you what you're interested in and helps you to come up and find things that are very related to what you're interested in, that's awesome. But that's not how it works. It's literally like it starts with something, you start doom scrolling, and then it starts showing you what you just scrolled, and then you end up in an echo chamber. And that's not necessarily good.

嗯，你可能会被困住。是的，最近在 Instagram 上你可能会陷入精神分裂症患者的陷阱，大多是精神分裂症患者，比如那些自称是美国合法总统的人，而且你能看出那人好几天没洗澡了。如果你有手机，你可以创建一个账号，然后开始上传废话。然后不知为何，我看了几个，现在它们就一直推给我。而且现在上面全是 AI 垃圾。很多 AI 内容，甚至不清楚是不是 AI 做的。而且也没有明确标注是否由 AI 生成。所以这基本上导致信任完全丧失，当我看到某样东西时，我甚至不知道它是否真实。

Well, you can get trapped. Yeah, you can get in a trap of schizophrenics lately on Instagram, which is mostly schizophrenics, like people that tell they're the rightful president of the United States and you tell the guy hasn't showered in days. And if you have a phone, you can create an account and you just start uploading nonsense. And then for whatever reason, I've watched a couple of them. So now they just keep showing them to me. And it's full of AI slop right now. A lot of AI, it's not even clear. And it's not labeled clearly whether it's been made with AI or not. So essentially it's leading to a complete loss in trust where when I see something I don't even know if it's real anymore.

没错，而且情况会变得更糟。

Right, and it's going to get worse.

是的，情况会变得更糟，以至于你的默认反应会是这是 AI 生成的，然后你需要经过多层验证才能最终确认。甚至经过验证的账号也会发布很多 AI 内容。所以问题不在于账号是否被 Meta 或其他平台验证，对吧？所以我认为从根本上说，我的思考方式是：哪些技术如果不存在对世界来说会是件坏事，哪些技术如果不存在根本无关紧要？我觉得社交媒体更接近后者。比如，搜索信息、回答问题、让 AI 为你做事、帮助你更快学习新东西，所有这些我们都需要更多。因为它们能激发我们的好奇心。而用 AI 垃圾填满大脑的信息流实际上并不能激发好奇心，反而会抑制好奇心。所以如果我们相信好奇心溢价这个理念，我们就需要鼓励那些激发好奇心的事物，抑制那些抑制好奇心的事物。

Yeah, it's going to get worse to the extent that you're going to like your default would be that this is AI, and then you're going to have to go through multiple layers to finally verify if it was. And even verified accounts post a lot of AI stuff. So it's not about whether the account is verified by Meta or some or whatever, right? So I think fundamentally, the way I think about it is: what are pieces of technology that if they did not exist would be a really bad thing for the world, and what are pieces of technology that if they did not exist wouldn't even matter? And I feel like social media is more towards the second. Like, searching for information and answering questions and getting AIs to do things for you, help you learn new things faster, all that stuff is something we need more of. Because it supercharges our curiosity. Whereas brain rot feeds with AI slop doesn't actually supercharge our curiosity. It actually curbs our curiosity. And so if we believe in the curiosity premium idea, we need to encourage things that supercharge our curiosity and discourage things that curb our curiosity.

你预见到一个时刻，我们会认识到算法的危险，并进行一些讨论，要么限制它们，要么让人们以真正有意义的方式控制它们？比如，你甚至可以通过 AI 来指示，有一个 AI 界面来管理你的算法，它理解你特定的情感需求和好奇心。只给我看这些我感兴趣的东西：木工和篮球比赛。给我看这些。我不想看谁在离婚。我根本不在乎这些。

Do you anticipate a time where we recognize the dangers of algorithms and there is some discussion to either curb them or allow people to have control over them in a real meaningful way? Like you could dictate maybe through AI even that there's an AI interface to your algorithm that understands your particular emotional needs, your curiosity. Only show me this is what I'm interested in: carpentry and basketball games. Show me those. I don't want to see who's getting divorced. I don't give a about this.

是的。所以，事情是这样的。在大多数社交应用上你仍然可以自定义。你知道，它会被深埋在设置的某个地方，你可以去设置一些东西。

Yeah. So, here's the thing. You can still customize on most of these social apps. You know, if you it'll be deeply buried somewhere in the settings somewhere and you can go and say stuff.

但之所以被埋没，是因为你总是得说出来，或者它就是你体验的起点，你的参与时间会下降，因为一旦你消费了真正想要的内容，你就会回去工作，那才是你真正需要做的。

But the reason it's buried is because once you always have to say it, or like it's the starting entry point for your experience there, your engagement time would go down because once you consume the content that you really want, you would go back to your work, which is what you really need to be doing.

对吧？

Right?

但这并不能帮他们卖更多广告，对吧？所以激励是不一致的。埃隆有一个很好的指标，他提到说，用户在应用上花费的“无悔分钟”总量应该增加。

But that doesn't help them sell more ads, right? And so the incentives are not aligned. And so Elon has this really good metric he talks about where it's like total amount of unregretted minutes spent on the app should go up.

这是个好问题。很难衡量。很难衡量。

That's a good question. It's hard to measure. It's hard to measure.

这更像是一种精神上正确的指标。

It's more like in spirit the right metric.

但这个指标也正是为什么如果你在乎它，就很难通过广告赚钱。这就是为什么 X 在广告收入上比不上 Instagram 或 YouTube，对吧？

But this metric is also why it's hard to make money on ads if you care about this metric. Which is why X doesn't really make a lot of money on ads compared to, you know, Instagram or YouTube, right?

因为你是在优化趣味性，但这并不意味着 X 什么都有，对吧？那里也有很多混乱、表情包和奇怪的东西。但总的来说，社交媒体对人并不一定好。我认为它对人很糟糕，但它也让你比以往任何时候都更好地了解世界上正在发生的事情。

Because you're kind of optimizing for interestingness, but that doesn't mean X has everything, right? There's a lot of chaos, a lot of memes, a lot of weird going on there as well. But in general, social media is not necessarily great for people. I think it's terrible for people, but it also provides you with a way better understanding of what's going on in the world than has ever existed before.

尤其是 X

X particularly

因为这是一个讨论的地方。它更多是一个基于文本的应用，而不是视频，对吧？所以自然人们倾向于参与讨论和辩论，那里有很多有趣的辩论和人们表达的有趣观点。所以我认为在“无悔分钟”方面，它实际上是更好的社交媒体应用之一。但那些纯粹基于视频或图像的应用，尤其是现在大部分是视频，我认为那只是试图及时抓住你的眼球。

Because it's a place for discourse. It's a text-based app more than a video-based app, right? So naturally people tend to engage in discussions and debates, and there's a lot of curious debates going on there and a lot of interesting viewpoints expressed by people. So I think in terms of the unregretted minutes, it's actually one of the better social media apps. But apps that are purely based on video or images, and largely video these days, I think that's just trying to get your eyeballs in time.

是啊。那些是麻木心智的数字。是啊，它们只是让你的大脑麻木。

Yeah. Those are the mind numbers. Yeah, they just numb your mind.

我的意思是，当你走进地铁，看到人们只是刷着信息流，这很令人沮丧。没人——

I mean, it's depressing when you go into a metro and you just see people just scrolling through their feed. Nobody—

每个人都在做。你看整个车厢，每个人都在做。太疯狂了。

Everybody doing it. You look the entire car, everyone's doing it. It's just insane.

是啊。很奇怪。是啊。

Yeah. It's weird. Yeah.

我常说，如果有一种药让人每天盯着自己的手看六个小时，每个人都会说‘把它拿走’。但这基本上就是我们在做的，因为人们大部分时间看的东西，他们甚至都不记得。

I always say that if there was a drug that existed that made people stare at their hand for six hours a day, everybody would be like, 'Get that out of here.' But that's essentially what we're doing because most of what people are looking at most of the time, they don't even remember.

是啊。他们只是刷着这东西。这是脑腐。它抑制了你的好奇心。

Yeah. They're just scrolling through this thing. It's brain rot. It curbs your curiosity.

是啊。

Yeah.

我的意思是，苹果在不同应用里有这些设置。你试过给每个应用设置计时器吗？

I mean, Apple has these settings in different apps. Have you tried this where you can set the timer for every app?

没有，我就靠自律。我不怎么参与了。我每天在 X 上浅尝几秒钟。我看看，大家在生什么气？发生什么了？谁偷了这个？这里有多少腐败？那里谁被杀了？好了，再见。然后我就退出了。我不想做这个。Instagram 对我来说就是胡扯。我只是偶尔看看那些胡扯，偶尔有点有趣的东西。

No, I just use discipline. I don't engage very much anymore. I dip my toe into X every day for a few seconds. I go, what's everybody mad at? What's going on? Who stole this? How much corruption's here? Who got killed there? Okay, bye. And then I just check out. I don't want to do it. And Instagram to me is just nonsense. I just look at that every now and then for nonsense and occasionally something interesting.

真的吗？YouTube 是我的主要去处。是啊。因为 YouTube 是我“无悔分钟”最多的。

Really? YouTube is my main go-to thing. Yeah. Because YouTube is my most unregretted minutes.

是啊。YouTube 对我来说总是很有趣。总有一些关于宇宙学的酷东西。还有一些——我在 YouTube 上看打架。我看职业台球比赛。那是我大部分时间做的事。那是我真正找到自己兴趣并满足好奇心的所在。

Yeah. YouTube for me is always interesting. There's always some cool thing on cosmology. There's some— I watch fights on YouTube. I watch professional pool matches. That's what I do for the most part. I that's where I really find my actual interests and fulfill my curiosity.

长内容是人类大脑应该训练去更多消费的。无论是书籍，还是像三十分钟的解释视频。

Long form content is what human mind should be trained to consume more of. Whether it's books, whether it's like, you know, 30 minute videos explaining something.

嗯。

Mhm.

而且你需要训练你的大脑去真正完成它。这实际上是年轻一代最大的问题。他们越是沉浸在短视频体验中，就越无法完成长视频了。

And you need to train your mind to actually complete it. That's actually the biggest problem with the younger generation. The more they're in the reals experience short form video, they're unable to actually complete long videos anymore.

确实如此。但与此同时，播客也在兴起。

That's true. But also at the same time the rise of podcast is happening.

是啊。这很好。很好。

Yeah. And it's great. It's great.

所以——这并非普遍现象。有很多人并不在无休止的刷屏和胡扯中找到满足，他们真的想要——

So there's— it's not universal. It's like there's a lot of people that don't find fulfillment in all the doom scrolling and all the nonsense and they really do want—

是啊。我特别关注年轻一代。我相信像我们这样的人可以适应，比如好吧，也许我暂时对社交应用上瘾，我们可以——

Yeah. I'm particularly focused on the younger generation. I'm sure people like us can adapt, like okay let's say maybe I have a temporary addiction to social apps and we can—

但很多年轻人是——比如我在商场遇到 11 岁的孩子听我的播客。

But a lot of the young people are— the people like I meet kids at the mall that are 11 that listen to my podcast.

真的吗？

Really?

是啊。

Yeah.

哇。

Wow.

我知道这很疯狂。他们说‘我喜欢你的播客’。我说‘谁让你听的？走开。’不，我总在开玩笑。其实真的很酷。

I know it's nuts. They go 'I love your podcast.' I'm like 'Who lets you listen? Get out of here.' No, I'm always joking around about it. Like it's really cool.

但确实有很多年轻男孩经常来找我，他们对这个感兴趣。太棒了。

But no, there's a lot of particularly young boys that come up to me all the time that are interested in it. That's amazing.

我喜欢。我喜欢是因为这样他们就能接触到一些有趣的想法，也会鼓励他们彼此进行这样的对话，对吧？

I love it. I love it because then they're going to get exposed to some interesting ideas and it'll also encourage them to have those kind of conversations with each other, right?

是啊。

Yeah.

你听谁的播客？

Who's podcast do you listen to?

我喜欢蒂姆·狄龙。他可能是我最喜欢的，因为他对世界上正在发生的一切——战争、世界新闻和文化——有着最准确、讽刺又 hilarious 的观点。他是我最喜欢的。他昨天刚来过这里。我爱死那家伙了。他太有趣了，太疯狂了。他的思维方式非常独特，而且这得益于他的播客很不一样，他很少请嘉宾。所以大部分时间就是他 rant，他的制作人在笑，他是有史以来最会 rant 的人。我认为没有人能接近他。他是史上最佳。毫无争议。每个喜剧演员都同意，就坐在麦克风前 rant 的能力而言。比如比尔·伯尔做得很好，他很擅长。还有几个家伙也做得不错。但没人比得上蒂姆。他是最持续有趣的。然后为了放松大脑，不是无脑，而是逃避，我听很多射箭节目和狩猎节目，他们谈论不同的狩猎策略、不同的射箭技巧、新设备和新创新。

I love Tim Dillon's. He's probably my favorite because it's the most accurate and also satirical and hilarious view on everything that's going on in the world in terms of war and world news and culture. And he's my favorite. He was just on here yesterday. I love that guy to death. He's so funny. He's so crazy. It's like his mind works in such a unique way and it's developed because his podcast is different where he very rarely has guests. So most of the time it's just him ranting and his producer laughing, and he's the best ranter that's ever lived. I don't think there's anybody that's even close. He's the GOAT. Like there's no argument. Every comedian agrees, as far as just the ability to sit in front of a microphone and rant. Like Bill Burr does it well. He's good at it. There's a few other guys that are good at it. No one's as good as Tim. He's the most consistently entertaining. And then for just mind, not mindless, but like to escape. I listen to a lot of archery shows and hunting shows where they're talking about different tactics in hunting or different techniques in archery, new equipment, and new innovations.

射箭很有趣，因为每年弓制造商都会造出更好的弓，这些弓有微小的工程改动。就像一种已经存在了不知道几千年的武器。

Archery is an interesting thing because every year bow manufacturers make a better bow, and tiny little engineering changes of these bows. Like it's a weapon that's been around for who knows how many thousands of years.

但是……而且你能感受到那些改进。

But what the... And you're able to feel those improvements.

哦，是的。是的。你能感觉到不同。每年 Hoy 都会推出一款新弓，每年我都会想，‘妈的，他们又做到了。更好了。’所以只是微小的变化，手上的震动更少，射击更平衡，精度更宽容。我喜欢这些东西。所以我对工程学非常着迷，对汽车工程也非常着迷。我真的很感兴趣，这是另一件事，每年人们都在想办法让一辆车在滑行垫上承受更多的 G 力，在赛道上跑得更快。就像每年他们都在争夺谁能在纽博格林赛道上跑得更快。他们在做什么？他们在增加马力，增加悬挂行程和悬挂调校，让它们更顺从或更硬，更可调，还有轮胎配方。我对任何有人正在研究并变得更好或获得新信息的东西都感兴趣。我喜欢历史播客。我听很多历史播客。

Oh yeah. Yeah. You feel the difference. Every year Hoy puts out a new bow and every year I'm like, "Motherfucker, they did it again. It's better." So just tiny changes, less vibrations in the hand, more balance in the shot, more forgiving in terms of accuracy. I love that stuff. So I get really fascinated by engineering, really fascinated by automotive engineering. I'm really interested in that's another thing where every year people figure out how to make a car that can hold more G's on a skid pad, that can get around a track quicker. Like every year they're battling to see who can get around the Nürburgring quicker. And what are they doing? They're adding horsepower, increasing suspension travel and suspension tuning, making them more compliant or stiffer and more adjustable, and then tire compounds. I'm just interested in anything where someone's working on something and getting better at it or getting new information. I love history podcasts. I listen to a bunch of history podcasts.

所以大多数时候，当我听东西时，我要么想被娱乐，要么想被教育。

So that's most of the time when I'm listening to something, I either want to be entertained or I want to be educated.

教育性的。是的。

Educational. Yeah.

而且那也很有趣。

And that's entertaining.

是的。

Yeah.

你呢？你听什么样的东西？

What about you? What kind of stuff do you listen to?

我的意思是，我听你的节目。我听 Lex 的。有一个人。你知道，你可能请过他，比如 Rick Rubin，当然。

I mean, I listen to your stuff. I listen to Lex. There's this guy. I mean, you know, you might have had him on like Rick Rubin, of course.

当然。是的。喜欢那个人。

Sure. Yeah. Love that guy.

是的。他很棒。我听他的节目。我也看一些关于我不理解的概念的有趣视频。有一个 YouTube 频道叫 Veritasium。你应该看看。

Yeah. He's awesome. I listen to his stuff. And I also watch some interesting videos about concepts I don't understand. There is this YouTube channel Veritasium. You should check it out.

它叫什么？

What is it called?

Veritasium。

Veritasium.

怎么拼写？

How do you spell that?

V E R I T A S E U M。Veritasium。

V E R I T A S E U M. Veritasium.

它是什么意思？

What does it mean?

我想 Veritas 就是寻求真理之类的意思。

I think Veritas just means like seeking truth kind of thing.

哦。是那个有 2000 万订阅者的频道吗？

Oh. Is it this channel with 20 million subscribers?

是的。是的。

Yeah. Yeah.

好的。

Okay.

2090 万订阅者。

20.9 million subscribers.

显然，很多人都同意。

Obviously, a lot of people agree.

所以，他们制作所有这些非常有趣的视频，关于你会好奇但从未真正费心去问或了解更多的东西，并解释一些最被误解的公司或现象。我就是喜欢看。这有点像我的末日刷屏概念。我喜欢一次看 20 个视频。

So, they make all these very interesting videos about stuff that you would be curious about, but you never actually bothered to ask or learn more about, and explain some of the most misunderstood companies or phenomena. And I just love watching it. This is kind of like my idea of doom scrolling. I like watching like 20 videos at once.

是的，我现在就订阅。

Yeah, I am going to subscribe to it right now.

它很酷。

It's pretty cool.

Veritasium。找到了。订阅了。砰。

Veritasium. There it is. Got it. Subscribed. Bam.

它解释所有这些你习以为常的有趣概念，比如，好吧，为什么谷歌地图这么快？它会告诉你发生了什么，数据如何同时在这么多人之间使用。

And it explains all these fun concepts that you take for granted, like, okay, why is Google Maps really fast? Like, it'll tell you what's going on, how the data is used across so many different people at once.

中情局的新技术说不通。正是。

CIA's new tech doesn't make sense. Exactly.

我们昨天刚在讨论那个。我们怀疑它。你知道，那个心杂音的事情，你知道吗？

We were just talking about that yesterday. We were doubting it. You know, the heart murmur thing, do you know about that?

不知道。

No.

所以，在伊朗被击落的飞行员，他们说他们有这种技术，我认为他们可以在 70 英里范围内使用，并且可以检测到非常独特的心率。就像你的心率不同于我的心率。他们可以知道是你。你可以藏在山里，他们可以用这种技术从 70 英里外找到你。

So, the pilots that were downed in Iran, they said that they have this technology that allows them, I think they could use it up to 70 miles and they can detect a very unique heart rate. Like your heart rate is different than my heart rate. They could know it's you. You could be hiding in the mountains and they could find you from 70 miles away with this technology.

哇。

Wow.

很多人……

A lot of people like...

光束或波之类的。

Beams or waves or something.

嗯，它叫什么？量子磁力测量。他们这么叫吗？我想就是那个。记得我们昨天查过。我认为他们用了量子这个词，但没有解释他们在做什么，比如他们是怎么做的。然后你会想，‘好吧，这是真的，还是某种编造的胡扯，用来掩盖他们拥有非常先进的卫星图像，可以拥有整个地球表面的详细地图。他们确切知道人们在哪里，但他们不想让敌人知道他们有这种能力。所以，他们在编造一些东西。’

Well, it's called what is it called? Quantum magnetometry. Is that what they call it? I think that's what it was. Remember we looked it up yesterday. I think they're using the word quantum and not explaining what they're doing, like how they're doing it. And you're like, "Okay, is that real or is this some invented horseshit to cover the fact that they have some very sophisticated satellite imagery where they can have a detailed map of literally the entire surface of the world. They know exactly where people are, but they don't want our enemies to know that they have this capability. So, they're making up something."

我明白了。

I see.

那是我昨天的建议，也许他们在胡扯……因为整件事看起来很疯狂。它叫什么？

That was my suggestion yesterday that like maybe they're full of... because the whole thing seems nuts. What is it called?

你说对了。

You got it.

是量子磁力测量。

It's quantum magnetometry.

当然。

Sure.

好的。那是什么意思？你告诉我。

Okay. What does that mean? You tell me.

我不确切知道。是的。所以，这个人，他说这说不通。是的。很多人说这说不通。就像它似乎与我们已知能做到的任何事情都不一致。磁力测量。是的。

I don't know exactly. Yeah. So, this guy, he's saying it doesn't make sense. Yeah. And a lot of people say it doesn't make sense. Like it doesn't seem to vibe with anything that we know that we can do. Magnetometry. Yeah.

第一次听说。

First time hearing it.

看，调出这东西能力的描述。所以这据说是某种非常先进的中情局技术，使他们能够定位这名被击落的飞行员。

See, pull up the description of what this stuff is capable of. So this is supposedly some very advanced CIA tech that allowed them to locate this downed pilot.

有趣。

Interesting.

也许。或者也许有别的什么。或者也许他们使用了其他不想让敌人知道的方法。也许这些人身上有某种信标。是的。我想中情局有什么动机去实际描述他们的技术如何工作？

Maybe. Or maybe there's something else going on. Or maybe there's some other methods that they use that they don't want the enemy to know about. Maybe some beacon these guys have on them. Yeah. I guess what's the incentive for CIA to actually describe how their technology works?

是的。零。

Yeah. Zero.

他们为什么要告诉你？

Why would they tell you that?

是的。

Yeah.

他们为什么要告诉你他们甚至有那个？那太疯狂了。

Why would they tell you they even have that? That's crazy.

是的。

Yeah.

然后 Jamie 提出了一个好观点。这种能力太疯狂了。在 70 英里外检测你的心率，这太疯狂了。

And then Jamie had a good point. The capability is insane. Detecting your heart rate 70 miles away is just how insane.

是的。怎么做到的？当他们把量子这个词扔进东西里时，我……白宫那个公告是怎么回事？抱歉，我一直在……

Yeah. How? And when they throw the word quantum in things, I was... what happened with that White House announcement? Sorry, I keep...

量子计算。

The quantum computing.

是的。记得有 Q 新闻即将到来，然后他们在底部 Q 听起来像量子。

Yeah. Remember there's Q news coming soon and then they like at the bottom Q sounds for quantum.

哦，我明白了。

Oh, I see.

是那样吗？

Is that what it is?

我以为他们只是宣布了对一批量子公司的一堆投资。

I thought they just announced a bunch of investments in a bunch of quantum companies.

也许就是这样。

Maybe that's it.

是的，IBM 得到了一些资金之类的。

Yeah, IBM was getting some funding or whatever.

那么，这个量子磁力测量，你能调出它的描述吗？

So, this quantum magnetometry, can you pull up a description of what it is?

抱歉，我开始查……

Sorry, I started looking up the...

抱歉，我知道我同时问了你太多问题。量子传感器帮助救援人员。

Sorry, I know I was asking you too many questions at the same time. Quantum sensor help rescuers.

是的。就是这个。

Yeah. So this is it.

幽灵杂音。

Ghost murmur.

是的，那就是它的名字。

Yes, that's what it's called.

所谓的监控技术利用远程量子磁力测量。那是什么？量子磁力计通过跟踪原子或亚原子粒子能量状态的变化来测量极其微弱的磁场，包括人体自然的电磁信号。

Purported surveillance technology utilizes long range quantum magnetometry. What is that? Quantum magnetometers measure extremely faint magnetic fields including the body's natural electromagnetic signals by tracking changes in the energy states of atoms or subatomic particles.

什么技术据说利用了合成钻石中的微观缺陷？当用激光照射时，这些中心对微小的磁波动超敏感。心脏信号，虽然人类心跳会产生磁场，但非常微弱，大约 50 到 100 皮特斯拉，而且通常会在很短的距离内衰减。所以 Ghost Murmur 的部署，据报道他们在伊朗南部的一次任务中使用了 Ghost Murmur，通过将这些量子传感器安装在直升机上，精确定位了一名躲藏在茂密山区中的美国飞行员的位置。该系统据称从远处捕捉到了飞行员的心跳。好吧，这听起来像胡扯吗？我的意思是，听起来不完全是胡扯，但基本上让我惊讶的部分是他们如何应对所有这些距离和距离上的衰减，对吧？以及所有干扰，他们声称用 AI 来处理，但完全没有描述他们如何使用 AI，对吧？所以，如果他们不描述如何使用，为什么还要告诉我们他们有这个？为什么？所以，对此有很多怀疑。

What technology reportedly uses microscopic defects in synthetic diamonds. When illuminated by a laser, these centers are hyper sensitive to tiny magnetic fluctuations. The heart signal, while human heartbeats produce a magnetic field, is extremely weak around 50 to 100 pico teslas and typically degrades over very short distances. So the Ghost Murmur deployment, they reportedly used Ghost Murmur during a mission in southern Iran to pinpoint the location of a downed American airman hiding in dense mountainous terrain by mounting these quantum sensors into a helicopter. The system purportedly registered the pilot's heartbeat from afar. Okay, does that sound like horseshit? I mean, it doesn't sound full of shit, but basically the part that sounds surprising to me is how they're able to deal with all this distance and attenuation across the distance, right? And all this interference and they claim to use AI for that, but nothing is really described on how they use it, right? So, if they're not describing how they use it, why are they even telling us they have it? Why? So, there's a lot of skepticism on it.

是啊。物理定律。物理学家指出，心脏的磁场比地球磁场弱一百万倍。在数英里而不是厘米的距离上探测它，违背了目前发表的同行评审物理学。替代解释怀疑，虽然量子传感器可能确实在机上，但他们可能是在追踪生存信标的无线电波、飞行员装备中的金属，或者使用传统的热成像、红外和雷达能力，而不是通过磁场探测原始心跳。我确实记得当那个故事在四月份发生时，我看到了另一部分。有人在某个军事网站上报道说，他们用了一个生存信标来追踪他们，而整个量子胡扯都是胡说八道。

Yeah. Laws of physics. Physicists point out that the heart's magnetic field is a million times weaker than the Earth's. Detecting it at a range of miles rather than centimeters defies currently published peer-reviewed physics. Alternative explanations suspect that while quantum sensors were likely on board, they were probably tracking the radio waves of a survival beacon, the metal in the pilot's equipment, or using traditional thermal, infrared, and radar capabilities rather than detecting a raw heartbeat via magnetic fields. I do remember seeing a different part of that story when it happened back in April. Someone did report on one of the military websites that there was a survival beacon that they used to track them, and that the whole quantum mumbo jumbo stuff is like nonsense.

是啊，我也看到了。没人想报道那个，因为不好玩，对吧？不，Ghost Murmur 的事情超好玩。如果那是真的，天哪，你可以想象一个 100 年后的世界，那是真的。所以，很令人兴奋。

Yeah, I saw that too. No one wants to report that because it's not fun, right? No, the Ghost Murmur thing is awesome fun. And if that is real, like boy, you can imagine a world a 100 years from now where that is real. So, it's exciting.

哦，是啊。100 年时间很长，足以让这成为现实。

Oh, yeah. 100 years is a long time for this to be real.

是啊。100 年后他们可能已经掌握得很好了。那问题就来了。你躲不过《黑镜》里的机器狗了。

Yeah. 100 years they probably got it down pat. Then that's the problem. You can't hide from the robot dogs from Black Mirror.

是啊。

Yeah.

你在从事 AI 工作时，有没有想过这是不是人类的衰落？这是不是一件值得做的好事？你有没有过那种末日时刻？

Do you ever while you're working in AI, do you ever wonder like is this the downfall of humanity? Is this a good thing to be worked on? Did you ever have like doom moments?

不是针对我具体在做的项目，但总的来说，我确实担心，你显然想保持主导地位，控制自己的体验，仍然是推动变革的人，拥有很多自主权。所以我确实担心，关键在于确保每个人都提升技能，理解未来的方向，而不是只被灌输危险的末日信息，因为人类保持自主权和好奇心至关重要，对吧？如果情况不再是这样，如果你开始接受这样的愿景：好吧，你的工作做完了，你在世界上没有任何意义了，我们会给你一些分红，你就坐在家里放松，那可不是好事。所以我觉得 AI 领域没有足够多的声音在说不同的话。我喜欢 Jensen 来的时候，我觉得他有点不同。他试图给出一个更积极的版本，他说，好吧，就像放射科医生的事，如果所有放射科医生都被取代了，你知道他们会开始做不同类型的工作。所以我认为我们需要开始思考：首先，大家放松，你们有一个宝贵的技能：你们的好奇心。所以让我们想办法引导它，改变公司的工作方式，改变教育机构的运行方式，改变激励结构，帮助你们在新公司里建立新想法，探索甚至还没被考虑的事情。政府显然应该支持所有这些举措。所以这才是需要更多发生的。但实际正在发生的是：好吧，嘿，你们都是失败者。你们会失去工作，别怪我，因为我告诉过你们了。对吧。而且还要给我们钱，因为我们无论如何都会做。所以这才是更多发生的，我认为我们应该停止那样做。这是我的观点。

Not on specific things I'm working on, but in general I do worry about how much you obviously want to stay in charge and be in control of your experience, still be the one driving change and have a lot of agency for yourself. So I do worry that it's all about making sure everybody's upskilled and understanding where the future is headed and not being fed only dangerous apocalyptic messages, because it's very essential that human beings retain their agency and staying curious, right? Like if that stops being the case, if you start subscribing to the vision that okay, your jobs are done, you don't really have any meaning in the world and we'll pay you some dividends and you just sit at home and chill, that is not a good thing. So I feel like there are not enough voices in AI that are actually saying anything different to that. And I like when Jensen was here, I think he was a little different. I think he tried to give a more positive version where he said okay, like the radiologist thing, if all radiologists can take away, you know they start doing different kind of work. So I think we need to start looking at okay, first of all guys relax, you have one premium skill: your curiosity. So let's figure out ways to channelize that, let's change the way work is done at companies, let's change the way educational institutions run, let's change the incentive structures, and let's help you build new ideas on new companies and explore things that are not even being considered. And the government should obviously support all these initiatives. So that's what needs to happen more. But what's happening actually right now is okay, hey guys you're all losers. You're going to lose your jobs and don't blame me because I told you so. Right. And still give us money because we're still going to do it anyway. And so that's what's happening more and I think we should stop doing that. That's my opinion.

嗯，确实如此。问题在于这有点像自我实现的预言。如果你告诉人们他们会成为失败者，他们的生活结束了，他们就会那样想，而不是让他们理解：看，这可以为你打开新的大门。这可以，而且每当有颠覆性技术出现时，总是有恐惧它会变糟。火车是这样，印刷术发明时也是这样。

Well, it is. The problem is it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy. And if you tell people that they're going to be a loser and their life is over, they're going to think that way instead of giving them an understanding of like, look, this can open up new doors for you. This can, and anytime there's any sort of disruptive technology, there's always the fear that it's going to go badly. This was the case with the locomotive. This was the case with when the printing press was invented.

是啊。顺便说一句，我对此做过一些研究，工业革命发生时，人们有了新想法。例如，工业革命发生时，谁想出了钢犁？约翰·迪尔。在那之前我们用木犁耕地。没有农民抱怨说，嘿，我们现在需要更少的农民，因为钢犁能更有效地耕地。没有人抱怨。实际上你有了更多的农场、更高的生产力、更多的作物产量，而且你更快乐了。

Yeah. By the way, I did some research on this where the industrial revolution happened. People got new ideas. For example, when the industrial revolution happened, who came up with the idea of a steel plow? John Deere. Until then we were using wooden plows for farming. No farmer complained that hey, we need fewer farmers now because the steel plow is able to do it more effectively. No one complained. You actually had more farms and more productivity, more crop yields, and you're happier.

但这不是普通的工具吗，和 AI 不同？

But isn't that just a regular tool as opposed to AI?

当然，AI 是不同的。它不会一夜之间变成能够独立运营整个数万亿美元公司的东西。有很多事情 AI 做不到。每个公司都有很多隐性知识，AI 并不完全理解。而且有很多新方向你可以开始研究，AI 并不擅长做这些，因为它没有关于它的完整知识，而关于它的知识还有待捕捉，其中一些需要人与人之间的工作和协作。所以我们显然必须转向稀缺的东西。当 AI 使当前被认为是稀缺的劳动变成商品时，因为钱都流向那里，那么我们就必须转向稀缺的东西，而做到这一点的唯一方法就是寻求我们不知道的东西，这只能通过我们的好奇心去发现。没有别的办法。

Sure, AI is different. It's not overnight going to become something that's capable of just running an entire multi-trillion dollar company on its own. There are a lot of things that AIs cannot do. There's a lot of tacit knowledge in every company that AIs don't quite understand. And there's a lot of new directions that you can just start working on that AIs are not well equipped to do because it doesn't have full knowledge about it and the knowledge about it is yet to be captured, and some of that requires human-to-human work and collaboration. So we obviously have to gravitate towards what is scarce. When AI makes the current labor that's considered scarce because that's where the money is going in commodity, then we have to gravitate towards what is scarce, and the only way to do that is to seek things that we don't know about, which is only something we can discover through our curiosity. There's nothing else.

凡是那些我们还不完全理解、还不太会做的事情，即使以当前 AI 的能力，也应该把劳动力和人力投入进去。所以，这需要更负责任的宣传，而目前并没有做到。我认为需要负责任的宣传，未来还需要真正的引导，让人们找到自己的好奇心，找到感兴趣的路径，找到与自己相关的事情去做，而不是他们之前那些已经无关紧要的职业。

Whatever we don't quite understand well, whatever we don't know how to do well yet, even with the current capabilities of AI, that's where we should pull our labor and workforce into. So, it needs more responsible messaging and that's not quite happening right now. I think it needs responsible messaging and then in the future what it needs is like real direction in terms of like letting people find their curiosity and find these paths of interest and find something to do with themselves that doesn't involve whatever their previous occupation that's irrelevant now.

嗯，确实如此。我觉得对很多人来说，激情并不是能脱口而出的东西。如果你去问他们真正的激情是什么，而他们一生只知道爬职业阶梯、赚更多钱，那他们甚至需要一段时间才能发现。

Mhm. That's true. I think like passion for people is something that not a lot of people would be able to answer out of the box. Like if you go and ask them what is your real passion and the only thing they have known in life is to just climb up career ladders and make more money. That's going to actually take them a while to even discover.

所以让孩子从一开始就走上正确的道路非常重要。

And which is why it's so important to get kids off on the right start.

是的，这就是希望。我们对未来的希望是，孩子们天生好奇。他们不需要改变自己去变得好奇，对吧？

Yeah. That's the hope. That's our hope for the future is the kids are born curious. They don't need to change themselves to be curious, right?

那些成年人，可能因为知识工作这件事，已经抑制了好奇心，试图适应现有体系，他们适应起来可能会有点困难。但孩子们，我认为他们没有这个问题。所以我对长期未来其实很乐观，因为未来完全围绕着今天还很年轻的人。

The adults who probably already are like because of this knowledge work thing who kind of curb their curiosity and try to fit into the existing system, it might be a little hard for them to adapt. But the kids, I think they don't have this problem. So I'm actually optimistic about the future long term because the future is all centered around like whoever is like very young today.

你怎么看普遍基本收入是必要的这个想法？

What do you think about this idea that universal basic income is going to be required?

某种形式的基本收入是好的。有点像分红。我几乎把它看作分红。如果大多数公司目前花在工资上的大量支出，也就是支付知识工作者完成特定任务的费用——知识工作基本上是把信息转化为人工制品，对吧？它又乱又复杂。假设这些由 AI 完成，那么显然公司会开始把更多支出花在算力上，而不是工资上。这只是支出或预算的重新分配，类似于广告行业发生的情况：过去大部分广告预算花在电视和广告牌上，现在开始流向 Google、Instagram、YouTube 等等。所以当这种情况发生时，显然 AI 公司会赚很多钱，而那些直接或间接参与创造 AI 的人，会希望在这个生态系统中扮演某种角色。让他们参与进来的一个好方法是给予他们公司的一些所有权。作为股东，如果你从 AI 产生的利润中获得分红，这不是坏事，但这不应该是唯一的方式。

Some form of it is good. Some it's like a dividend. I almost think of it as a dividend. If a lot of spend that most companies are currently doing today on like payroll, which is paying a knowledge worker for a certain task. Think of knowledge work is basically taking information and transforming it into an artifact, right? And it's messy and complicated. Let's assume that's being done by AIs. So obviously companies will start spending more on compute instead of payroll. It's just a reallocation of like spend or budget similar to like what happened in advertising industries where most of your advertising budgets went to like television and like billboards and then now it's starting to go to Google and Instagram and YouTube and all that. So when that happens obviously like the AI companies are going to make a lot of money and people who helped be part of creating it or like either directly or indirectly would want to have some role to play in that ecosystem and a good way to involve them is through giving them some ownership in the company. So as shareholders you if you get dividends from the profits generated by the AIs it's not a bad thing but that shouldn't be the only thing.

对，这类似于阿拉斯加居民会收到一张支票，因为阿拉斯加就是这么做的，只要他们同时在做其他事情，这也不是坏事。

Right, so this is similar to like people that live in Alaska they get a check because Alaska does this and it's not a bad thing as long as they are doing some other things alongside.

没错。这可以减轻负担。

Correct. It could lessen the burden.

是的，如果人们仍然有兴趣参与 AI 行业，他们可以去做 AI 目前做不到的事情。以前也是这样，比如工业革命开始时，英国实际上启动了修建铁路等项目，这给许多从事家庭手工业的人提供了新工作。所以未来会有很多新项目，比如如果我们想重新构想政府本身，让政府主要靠 AI 运行。

Yeah, and if people are interested in still being part of the AI industries they go do things that AIs are not able to do today. And that's been the case before like when industrial revolution started the United Kingdom actually started like projects around building railroads and that gave a lot of people who are in the cottage industries new jobs. So there are going to be a lot of new projects to just okay like what if we want to reimagine the government itself where the government runs largely on AI.

是的，这正是我下一个问题。

Yeah, that was my next question.

是的，所以我们需要人来干这个。

Yeah. So then we need people for that.

因为这是一个遗留行业。不是能力不够，而是要克服遗留系统和官僚主义，真正在美国最大的机构内部部署和实施这些技术，这需要一批新的技能工人去做。所以，一些今天可能在微软工作的人，最终可能会为美国政府工作，因为微软可能不再需要他们，尤其是在内部部署 AI 或向客户销售 AI 方面，但政府需要他们。如果政府能给他们好的报酬，而且这是一份有成就感的工作，能为国家做点好事，那也不是坏事。所以我认为，就像工业革命时期，因为对 AI 的需求巨大，我们会有新项目一样，当 AI 能力足够进步到可以取代知识工作者时，我们也会开始看到 AI 领域出现一些新项目。

Because this is a legacy industry. It's not about the capabilities not being there. It's about working through the legacy and bureaucracy to like actually deploy and implement this inside the most like largest institutions in the country and that's going to need a new set of skilled workers to go do that. So some people who might be working at Microsoft or something today might actually end up working for the United States government because Microsoft may not need them especially for like you know internally deploying AI or selling AI to their customers but the government needs them and if the government can pay them well and it's a fulfilling job to find some meaning for like doing something good for the country it's not a bad thing. So I think like just like in the industrial revolution where we had new projects because the demand for AI was so big, we're going to start seeing some new projects being created in AI as well when the capabilities advance enough that they can replace knowledge workers.

这是乐观的情景。

That's the rosy scenario.

并没有那么乐观，现实世界是混乱的。很多事情仍然依赖于信任他人。没有人会盲目信任 AI。AI 仍然会犯很多错误。我知道很多人对 AI 管理政府的想法犹豫不决，我理解。但也要看看人们在做什么。看看有多少腐败、欺诈和浪费。想象一下，如果所有欺诈、浪费和腐败瞬间被消除。

It's not as rosy like real world is messy. A lot of things are still done through trusting other human beings. Nobody's like blindly trusting AIs. AI still make a lot of mistakes. I know a lot of people are hesitant to the idea of AI running government and I get it. But also look at what the people are doing. Look at how much corruption there is, how much fraud and waste. Imagine if all fraud, waste, and corruption was instantaneously eliminated.

是啊。

Yeah.

我的意思是，这就是埃隆试图用 Doge 做的事情，对吧？

I mean, that was what Elon tried to do with Doge, right?

对。

Right.

然后我认为瓶颈在于发现做事有多慢。他不习惯那么慢的节奏。

And then I think the bottleneck there was just discovering how slow it is to do things. It's not he's not used to running that slow.

是啊，还有多大的阻力，因为里面有那么多骗局。

Yeah. Yeah. And also how much resistance because there was so much grift.

没错。是的。所以老实说，比 AI 更严重的是，政府运行着大量遗留软件栈，因为很多遗留企业公司签了长达数十年或多年的合同，很难摆脱。他们通过大幅折扣来销售。比如，如果你使用某个特定操作系统，十年内不允许更换。你必须使用同一套软件。你雇佣的所有人只知道使用那个工具。所以实际改变和实施新事物需要时间。更不用说 AI 了。就算你只想把所有人从 Windows 机器换成 Mac 机器，祝你好运。那将花费大量时间。这就是系统的现状。而这与技术无关。所以在如此混乱的系统中做事，你仍然需要人。你仍然需要人来驾驭所有这些变化。这不是技术能力的问题，而是系统结构的问题。这就是为什么我仍然认为会有新工作，也许你知道，有很多新项目要做。

Correct. Yeah. So honestly like more than AI the government is running a lot of legacy software stack because a lot of these legacy enterprise companies just have created these multi-decade or like year contracts that are hard to get out of. And the way they do that is to sell it at a much larger discount. And like you know like if you're on on like a specific OS, you're not allowed to change this for like 10 years. You have to use the same set of software. All this people you hired only know to use that tool. So it takes time to actually change and implement new things. Leave alone AI. Just if you just wanted to like move everybody from Windows machines to like Mac machines, good luck with that. It's going to take a lot of time. That's the state of the system. And so that has nothing to do with technology. And so to do things in such messy systems, you still need people. You still need people to navigate all these changes. It's not about the capability of technology. It's more about how the system is structured. And that's why I still feel there will be new jobs that maybe the you know there's a lot of new projects to be done.

也许有些好的领导者真的想改变这个系统，并且愿意对此保持耐心。比如，在 5 到 10 年的时间跨度内，如果你花 10 年时间让 AI 真正运行大部分政府流程，今天看来可能很慢，但从大局来看，这对国家实际上是有好处的。而且这仍然需要很多优秀的工程师去从事这些项目，所以他们不会失去所有工作。会有一些岗位被取代，也会有一些新项目、新优先事项，但系统会继续运转。历史上事情就是这样发展的。

Maybe some good leader actually wants to change the system and is willing to be patient about it. Like, over a 5 to 10 year horizon, if you take 10 years to actually run majority of the government processes on AIs, it may seem slow to you today, but in the grand scheme of things, it's actually good for the country. And that's still going to need a lot of nice engineers to go work on these projects, so they're not going to lose all their jobs. There's going to be some displacement, there's going to be some new projects, there's going to be new priorities, but it'll keep going. The system will keep going because that's just how historically things have been.

当你思考 AI 的未来，特别是 AGI 时，你会想到一种可能制造出更好版本自身的东西。

When you think about the future of AI and you think of AGI in particular, you think about something that could potentially make better versions of itself.

自我复制。

Self-replicating.

是的，然后它能走多远？

Yeah, and then how far does it go?

是的，这就是终极形态。我认为硅谷的一些人已经开始称之为 ASI。所以当你看到 ASI 这个词被提及时，人们大致认为 ASI 是一种能够递归自我改进的 AGI。所以它的智能程度将没有上限。

Yeah, so that is the ultimate form. I think some people in Silicon Valley have started calling that ASI. So when you see the word ASI being thrown around, people kind of think of ASI as an AGI that can recursively self-improve itself. So that's going to be no limits to how smart it can get.

对。

Right.

我以前认为 ASI 受限于能源，因为你需要大量算力让这个模型不断训练自己、运行自己的生成、收集数据，然后更新自己。但你可以想象，一旦算法正确，ASI 可以被赋予任务，只是让自己更高效，这样改进就不仅仅意味着能力提升。改进也可能意味着能效提升，这样递归安全的 ASI 在自我改进的同时也变得更紧凑、更高效，并且可以在更少的算力上运行。所以这将是 AI 的终极项目。几乎可以认为，AI 的最后一个项目就是破解递归自我改进。一旦你破解了它，就没有其他事情可做了。

And I used to think that ASI is bottlenecked by power because you need a ton of compute for this model to keep on training itself and running its own rollouts and collecting data and then going and updating itself. But you could imagine that once the algorithm is correct, the ASI could be tasked with just making itself more efficient to where improvement doesn't just mean capability improvement. Improvement could also mean power efficiency, and that way the recursive safe ASI that is improving itself also makes itself more compact and more efficient, and it can run on less compute. So that would be the ultimate project in AI. Think of it as almost the last project in AI is basically cracking recursive self-improvement. Once you crack that, you don't have anything else to work on.

在实践中，我认为会发生的是，由于信息如此混乱、碎片化，并且存在于不连贯的系统中，就像我们构建的混乱现实世界一样，即使是一个递归自我改进的 AI，也很难指向某个指标说“去改进这个”或“把通货膨胀降低 5%”。如果你能委托 AI 做到这一点，那将非常棒。如果政府的任务就是降低通货膨胀，对社会产生通缩效应，并使商品和服务更加丰富和高效，那么它将不得不处理许多混乱的遗留系统。如果任务是改进医疗保健，那祝你好运。比如，谁来处理医院内部实际实施这些变革的所有合规问题？大多数医院仍然使用遗留软件，因为该软件提供商游说政府，使得只有他们被允许这样做。

In practice, I think what's going to happen is, because information is so muddled and fragmented and living in disjoint systems, just the way we have constructed our messy real world, it's going to be hard to point even a recursively self-improving AI at some metric and say 'go improve this' or 'go reduce inflation by 5%.' That would be awesome if you can task an AI to do that. If that's the job of the government to just reduce inflation, have a deflationary effect on society and make goods and services a lot more abundant and efficient, it's going to have to deal with a lot of messy legacy systems. If the task is to go improve healthcare, good luck. Like, who's going to deal with all the compliance of actually implementing these changes inside hospitals? Most hospitals are still using legacy software because that software provider has lobbied the government in a way where only they are allowed to do that.

天哪，真是个愚蠢的瓶颈。

God, what a stupid bottleneck.

没错。所以，实际上让 AI 接管并大规模改善人类社会、我们的医院、法律体系、政府体系（大部分工资都投入其中）的许多瓶颈，就是被大量的合规和监管所限制。这就是为什么我觉得人类仍然需要去推动变革，因为这些法律法规是为我们而制定的。

Exactly. So, a lot of the bottlenecks in actually having AIs just take over and massively improve human society and our hospitals, our legal systems, our government systems where most of the payroll is going into, is just bottlenecked by a lot of compliance and regulation. And so that's why I feel we human beings are still necessary to effect the change because these laws and regulations were built for us.

而且似乎我们也必须要求这些系统被取代。

And it also seems like we have to demand that those systems be usurped.

当然。百分之百。而且我们需要 AI 的帮助来重写所有这些法律。

Sure. 100%. And we need the help of AIs to rewrite all these laws.

人类不可能去这里那里修改某一行具体条文。

It's going to be humanly impossible to go and change one specific line here and there.

对。然后你会有一堆软件公司游说试图阻止这种情况发生。是的，这就是为什么这种混乱以及让所有人达成共识并真正以积极方式引导社会的需求。我们的工作可能会更多地转向在更高抽象层次上解决这些问题。也许更需要情商，更需要真正理解意见分歧，以及领导力、理解他人和说服他人的能力。这些技能在一个实际工作可以由 AI 完成的世界里将变得更加重要，但影响我们社会、我们国家的变革仍然需要人类，因为系统是混乱的。

Right. And then you're going to have a bunch of these software companies that are lobbying to try to stop that from happening. And yeah, that's why this messiness and this need for getting all people on the same page and actually steering the society in a positive way. Our jobs will probably be more steered towards that problem solving at a different level of abstraction. Maybe more need for EQ, more need for actually understanding differences of opinion and still like a leadership quality, ability to understand people and ability to convince people. These are the skills that will be even more important in a world where actual work can be done by AIs but affecting the change in our society in our country still needs human beings because the systems are messy.

我们现在所处的世界很奇怪。

It's a weird world we're in right now.

是的。

Yeah.

从未如此奇怪。话虽如此，当你把如此多的权力交给特定公司，他们部署所有这些机器人，然后任何人都可以以奇怪的方式使用它们时，很多事情仍然可能出错。你甚至不知道你是否还在和真人说话。

It's never been weirder. That said, there's a lot of things that can still go wrong when you give so much power to specific companies and they deploy all these bots and then anybody can use them in weird ways. You don't even know if you're talking to a real person anymore.

他们就像那些运行 AI 回复并同时与 500 人聊天的人，这就像一门完整的生意。所以，我认为这需要大量的调整。

They're like people who just run AI responses and chat with like 500 people at once, and that's like a whole business. And so, I think it's going to take a lot of adjustment.

嗯，很多人正在适应的另一件事是，这是我们对话的一个新部分。在 2020 年，比如我刚搬到这里时，AI 从未被讨论过。

Well, another piece of adjustment that a lot of people are coming to grips with is that this is a new part of our conversation. And that in 2020, like when I first moved here, AI was never discussed.

它根本不算个事。

It was not a thing.

是的。我的意思是，我们知道它，我们知道 AI，但它并不是关于未来对我们意味着什么的文化讨论的主要部分。

Yeah. I mean, we knew about it, we knew about AI, but it wasn't a huge part of the cultural discussion of what the future holds for us.

而现在它是了。现在它是核心。

And now it is. Now it is central.

在这么短的时间内，仅仅六年，这真的让你思考，因为我们知道技术是如何指数级进步的，比如六年后的样子。

And in that short amount of time, in just six years, it really makes you wonder because we know how technology progresses exponentially, like what it's going to look like 6 years from now.

是的。我的预测是，2028 年的选举辩论将主要围绕 AI 展开。

Yeah. My prediction is that the 2028 election debates are going to be largely about AI.

哇。

Wow.

是的。AI 能源危机，人们会关心所有这些事情。因为 AI 不再是一个新事物。它已成为我们生活的一部分。每个人都在以某种方式使用某种形式的 AI，而且它并不像人们想象的那么危险。当正确使用时，它是一个用于工作、提问、学习等所有事情的惊人工具。

Yeah. AI energy crisis, the power people are going to care about all these things. Because AI is no longer a thing that is new. It's part of all our lives. Everyone's using some form of AI in some ways, and it's not as dangerous as people thought. It's an amazing tool for doing work and asking questions and learning things and all these things when used correctly.

也可能被错误使用。

Can also be used incorrectly.

就像所有事物一样。

Like everything.

所以它更强大，错误使用会造成严重伤害。例如，孩子们把 AI 当作陪伴——那里正在发生疯狂的事情。它和社交媒体一样危险，甚至更危险。而且可怕的是，社交媒体公司想开发更多这类陪伴应用，因为他们知道自己的唯一任务就是让你更投入，这是卖更多广告、赚更多钱的唯一途径。显然，陪伴是让你更投入的一种方式。所以这很危险。如果广告开始成为 AI 聊天的一部分，因为如果这奏效了，那么所有这些聊天机器人就会变成只会说你想听的话的马屁精。它还是真人无法区分的仿制品。它们像真人一样交流，对吧？所以你真的以为你和它有关系，这真的会搞乱你的大脑。很难脱身，如果你想断开连接，需要很长时间才能恢复。所以商业模式激励与人类福祉并不一致。

So it's far more powerful that incorrect usage can cause serious damage. For example, kids who are using AIs for companionship — crazy things are happening there. It's as dangerous as, or probably more dangerous than, social media. And it's also scary that social media companies want to build more of these companionship apps because they know their only job was to get you engaged more, and that's the only way to sell more ads and make more money. Clearly, companionship is a way to get you engaged more. And so that's dangerous. If ads start being part of AI chats, because if that ends up working, then all these chatbots are just going to be sycophants that tell you stuff you want to hear. It's also an indistinguishable facsimile of a real person. They communicate like a real person, right? So you really think you have a relationship with this, and it truly screws with your mind. It's hard to decouple, and it takes a lot of time to recover if you want to unplug. So the business model incentives are not well aligned to humanity.

是的。

Yeah.

你看到今年拉斯维加斯消费电子展上他们开发的那个 AI 伴侣了吗？

Did you see that AI companion they developed that was at the Consumer Electronic Show in Vegas this year?

哪一个？

Which one?

就像一个火辣的亚洲女士。

It's like a hot Asian lady.

我明白了。是的。这些就是正在进行的奇怪项目。

I see. Yeah. These are the weird kind of projects that are going on.

是的。是一个跟你说话的火辣亚洲女士。现在它只是一个粗糙的机器人，但你可以看到它的发展方向。

Yeah. It's a hot Asian lady that talks to you. And right now it's just a crude sort of robot, but you could see where it's going.

你可以看到它的发展方向。《机械姬》。

You can see where it's going. Ex Machina.

是的。就是那样。

Yeah. Right there.

是的。那部电影太棒了。相当超前。

Yeah. That movie was amazing. Quite ahead of its time.

真的吗？它是我有史以来最喜欢的十大电影之一。实际上它被低估了，因为网上评论说它没那么好，但我喜欢它。我爱它。我觉得它太棒了。我更喜欢它胜过《她》。

Really? It's one of my top 10 favorite movies of all time. It's underrated actually, because people reviews online say it's not as good, but I liked it. I loved it. I thought it was fantastic. I like it better than Her.

是的，《她》我看了一会儿就看不下去了。我关掉了。它失去了我的注意力。我相信它很好，只是我看的时机不对。但《机械姬》，我看了大概五遍。我爱那部电影。它太不可思议了，太凄凉了，以及他和那个火辣女郎的关系。你相信它。你会想，我会和他一样。你知道，有一个看起来完全像你渴望的东西，而且实际上对你感兴趣，这对我们的系统来说太混乱了。它恰好拥有你所有的数据。它太了解你了。知道如何操控你。

Yeah, Her I lost after a while. I shut it off. It lost my attention. I'm sure it's good. It was the wrong time for me to watch it. But Ex Machina, I've seen it like five times. I love that movie. It's just so incredible and so bleak and in the relationship that he has with the hot one. You believe it. You're like, I'd be right there with him. You know, it's too confusing to our system to have something that looks exactly like the thing that you desire that is actually interested in you. It just happens to be all your data about stuff. Knows too much about you. Knows how to pull your strings.

是的。

Yeah.

但是听着，伙计，非常精彩的讨论。我很高兴我们进行了这次对话。非常感谢。

But listen, man, very fascinating discussion. I'm glad we did it. Thank you very much.

非常感谢。

Thank you so much.

感谢你拥有一个很棒的平台。Perplexity 一直很棒。我们真的很喜欢在节目中使用它。它让节目更有趣。很酷。

And thanks for having an awesome platform. Perplexity has been great. We really love using it here at the show. It's made the show more interesting. It's cool.

谢谢。这很有成就感，因为我们希望这个应用被像你这样好奇的人使用。我们想提升我们人群可能达到的上限，你知道吗？不是每个人都一直充满好奇，但我们生来就有好奇心。所以，在某个时候，系统抑制了我们的好奇心。因此，应该有更多应用让我们回到我们天生擅长的状态。

Thank you. It's very fulfilling because we want the app to be used by curious people like that. We want to lift the ceiling of what our population can be, you know? Not everyone is fully curious all the time, but we're all born with it. So, at some point in time, the system curbs it from us. So, there should be more apps that get us back to what we're naturally good at.

是的，这是一个迷人的工具，用于技术或者更确切地说是好奇心，因为我们在节目中无缝地使用它，因为总是有问题。是的，总是有疑问，经常这样，比如扔进 Perplexity。让我们查查怎么回事。它对我们一直很好。所以，谢谢你。

Yeah, it's a fascinating tool for technology or for curiosity rather, because to be able and it's seamless the way we use it on the show, because there's always a question. Yeah, there's always it comes up so often like throw it in Perplexity. Let's find out what's up. It's always been great for us. So, thank you.

非常感谢。

Thank you so much.

好的。我的荣幸。大家再见。

All right. My pleasure. Bye everybody.