移动之后是什么？Meta 的 Andrew Bosworth 谈 AI 与消费科技

Bos，感谢你来到这里。

Bos, thanks for being here.

感谢邀请。很感激。

Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.

好的，我想直接进入正题。5 年后和 10 年后，我们大家会如何消费内容？

Okay, I want to jump right in. How are we all going to be consuming content 5 years from now and 10 years from now?

10 年后，我相当有信心，我们将有更多方式将内容带入我们的视野，而不仅仅是拿出手机。我认为增强现实眼镜显然是一个真实的可能性。我也希望我们能在真正引人入胜和沉浸式体验方面做得更好。现在你必须去像 Sphere 这样的地方，那很棒，但只有一个，在拉斯维加斯，而且有点麻烦。如果我们真的想要参与某件事，不仅仅是沉浸式，还有社交性，有没有更好的方式让我们能够访问？比如，“哦，我想看比赛。我想和我爸爸一起看。我想感觉我们就在场边。”当然，我们可以花很多钱买票。有没有更好的方式？我认为有。所以，10 年后我对所有这些替代内容交付载体感觉非常好。5 年则更棘手。例如，我认为 5 年后我们将拥有的眼镜、智能眼镜、AI 眼镜、显示眼镜会很好。有些会非常高端且相当出色。有些会很小，甚至分辨率不是特别高，但它们会始终可用并戴在脸上。好吧。我不会在那上面工作，但如果我只是在间隙时刻抓取简单内容，那相当不错。所以，我认为我们正在看到的是，正如你所料，我们现在正处于一个超级高端但可能非常昂贵的体验谱系的起点，这些体验不会均匀分布在人群中。还有一套更广泛可用的体验，它们足够丰富，足以取代我们今天拥有的设备。然后希望越来越多的人正在获得今天无法以其他方式获得的体验。这就是你在思考混合现实和虚拟现实可以做什么。

10 years I feel pretty confident that we will have a lot more ways to bring content into our view shed than just taking out our phone. I think augmented reality glasses obviously are a real possibility. I'm also hoping that we can do better for really engaging and immersive things. Right now you have to travel to like the Sphere, which is great, but there's one of them, it's in Vegas, and it's kind of a trip. Are there better ways that we can have access to if we really want to be engaged in something, not just immersively, but also socially? So, it's like, "Oh, I want to watch the game. I want to watch it with my dad. I want to feel like we're courtside." Sure, we can go and pay a lot for tickets. Is there a better way? I think there is. So, 10 years I feel really good about all these alternative content delivery vehicles. 5 years is trickier. For example, I think the glasses, the smart glasses, the AI glasses, the display glasses that will have in 5 years will be good. Some of them will be super high-end and pretty exceptional. Some of them will be actually little and just kind of not even tremendously high-resolution displays, but they will be always available and on your face. Okay. I wouldn't be doing work there, but if I'm just trying to grab simple content in moments between, it's pretty good for that. So, I think what we are seeing is, as you would expect, we're at the very beginning now of a spectrum of super high-end, but probably very expensive experiences that will not be evenly distributed across the population. A much more broadly available set of experiences that are really rich enough to replace the devices that we have today. And then hopefully a growing, continually growing number of people are having experiences that really could not be had any other way today. That's what you're thinking about what you could do with mixed reality and virtual reality.

是的，好的。然后我们会逐步构建很多这些东西。所以，在你的职业生涯中，我想我的一个观察是，你特别擅长将各种重大技术转变拼凑成新的产品体验。所以，比如 Facebook 早期，你显然是创造 News Feed 的团队的一员。那是社交体验、社交媒体、移动体验的结合，并应用你老派的 AI 来创造产品。但那很酷，而且很多时候这些趋势会成批出现，然后这就是创造突破性产品的原因。所以，也许把这个应用到我们今天所处的位置，以及你面前的主要趋势。

Yeah, okay. And then we're going to build up to a lot of that stuff. So, throughout your career, I would say one of the observations I would have is you've been uniquely good at sort of piecing together various big technology shifts into new product experiences. So, in the case of, you know, Facebook early days for you, obviously you famously were part of the team that created the News Feed. And that's combination of, you know, social experience, social media, a mobile experience, and applying your like old school, you know, AI to create the product. But that's pretty cool and like, you know, these a lot of times these trends like they kind of come in bunches and then that's what creates the breakthrough products. So, maybe take that and apply to where we are today with the major trends that they're in front of you.

是的，我的意思是，让我就此说两点。第一，我认为如果说有什么事情，不是特别指我，而是我和我在 Meta 的同事们真正擅长的，就是我们真正沉浸在问题中。比如人们试图做什么？他们想做什么？当你这样做时，你会伸手去拿任何可用的工具来实现那个目标。这让你能够真正诚实地面对可用的工具并看到趋势。我认为更偏向技术方面的人，你会陷入技术浪潮中，当浪潮结束时你不想承认，你不想拥抱下一个浪潮。你为了技术而构建技术，而不是解决产品问题。你拥抱人们生活中真正经历的问题，它们不必深刻。我提起这个只是因为我认​​为我们正处于一个有趣的时刻，我们，我认为我们所有人都经历过一个阶段，很多人希望新浪潮到来，因为那对他们有利。但那些东西并没有解决普通人的问题。我认为我们对当前 AI 革命如此热情的原因，是它真的感觉切实。这些是正在被解决的真实问题，它并没有解决所有问题。它创造了新问题。那没关系。所以感觉我们拥有了一种实质性的、真正的新能力。不寻常的是它可以被广泛应用。虽然它今天在事实性、算力、成本和推理方面有一些有趣的缺点。这些类型的权衡感觉真的可以解决，而且它适用的领域非常广泛。这非常不寻常。在我的职业生涯中，几乎总是当这些技术突破发生时，它们几乎总是非常特定于领域。这个会变得更快，或者那个会变得更便宜，或者现在成为可能。这感觉像是哦，一切都会变得更好。就像我交互的每一个界面，我试图解决的每一个问题空间，都会因为这项新技术而变得更容易。这相当罕见。

Yeah, I mean, let me say two things about this. The first one is I think if there was a thing that not me specifically, but I think me and my cohorts at Meta were really good at was we really immersed in what the problem was. Like what were people trying to do? What do they want to do? And when you do that, you are going to reach for whatever tool is available to accomplish that goal. That allows you to be really honest about what tools are available and see trends. I think the more oriented technology side, you get caught in a wave of technology and you don't want to admit when that wave is over and you don't want to embrace the next wave. And you're building technology for technology's sake as opposed to solving a product problem. You're embracing what are the issues that people are really going through in their life and they don't have to be profound. I bring that up just because I think we're in this interesting moment where we, I think all of us have been through a phase where a lot of people wanted a new wave to be coming because it would have been advantageous to them. But those things weren't solving problems that regular people had. I think the reason we're all so enthusiastic about the AI revolution that's happening right now is it really feels tangible. These are real problems that are being solved and it's not solving every problem. It creates new problems. That's fine. So it feels like a substantial real new capability that we have. And what's unusual about it is how broad-based it can be applied. And while it has these interesting downsides today on factuality and certainly compute and cost and inference. Those types of tradeoffs feel really solvable and the domains that it applies to are really broad. And it's that's very unusual. In certainly in my career you almost always when these technological breakthroughs happen, they're almost always very domain specific. This is going to get faster or that's going to get cheaper or that's now possible. This kind of feels like oh everything's going to get better. Like every single interface that I interact with, every single problem space that I'm trying to solve are going to be made easier by virtue of this new technology. That's pretty rare.

你知道，马克和我一直相信这场 AI 革命会到来。我们只是认为它需要更长时间。我们认为在这一点上我们可能还有 10 年。但我们认为会更早发生的是计算界面的革命。你知道，10 年前我们真的开始感觉到，手机形态尽管很棒，这是 2015 年，已经饱和了。那就是它将要成为的样子。一旦你超越了手机，再次强调，手机是我们所有人迄今为止使用过的最伟大的计算设备。那么好吧，它必须在如何将信息输入你的身体方面更自然，你知道，显然通常是通过我们的眼睛和耳朵。以及我们如何将意图表达回机器。你不再有触摸屏，你不再有键盘。所以一旦你意识到这些是问题，那就好，我们需要在脸上，因为你需要接触眼睛和耳朵，将信息从机器传递给人。你需要这些神经接口，试图让人们在沒有键盘或鼠标或触摸屏时操纵机器，向它表达他们的意图。

You know, Mark and I always believed that this AI revolution was coming. We just thought it was going to take longer. We thought we were probably still 10 years away at this point. But what we thought would happen sooner was this revolution in computing interfaces. And you know, we really started to feel 10 years ago like the mobile phone form factor as amazing as it was, this is 2015, was like already saturated. Like that was what it was going to be. And once you get past the mobile phone, which is again the greatest computing device that any of us have ever used to this point. It's like okay, well it has to be more natural in terms of how you're getting information into your body, which is you know, obviously I did usually through our eyes and ears. And how we're getting our intentions expressed back to the machine. You no longer have a touchscreen, you no longer have a keyboard. So once you like realize those are the problems, it's like cool, we need to be on the face cuz you need to have access to eyes and ears to bring information from the machine to the person. And you need to have these neural interfaces to try to allow the person to manipulate the machine, express their intentions to it when they don't have a keyboard or mouse. Or touchscreen.

所以，过去 10 年我们一直秉持着极其清晰的愿景。但我们确实是在整整一代工程师中成长起来的，对他们来说，系统是固定的。比如应用模型是固定的。交互设计也是。当然，我们从鼠标过渡到了触摸屏，但它仍然是直接操作界面，这 literally 就是 20 世纪 60 年代开创的东西。所以我们其实并没有改变这些模式。而改变这些模式是有代价的，因为我们作为一个社会，已经学会了通过这些工具来操作这些数字产品。

And so, that has been an incredibly clear-eyed vision we've been on for the last 10 years. But we really did grow up in an entire generation of engineers for whom the system was fixed. Like the way the application model was fixed. The interaction design. Sure, we went from a mouse to touchscreen, but it's still direct manipulation interface, which is literally the same thing that was pioneered in the 1960s. So we really haven't changed these modalities. And there's a cost to changing those modalities because we as a society have learned how to manipulate these digital artifacts through these tools.

所以我们的挑战是，好吧，你必须打造这个硬件，它得做到所有这些了不起的事情，还得有吸引力，还得轻，还得价格亲民。而这些以前都不存在。我经常跟团队说，这还只是一半的问题。另一半的问题是，好，我怎么用它？我怎么让它对我而言感觉自然？我现在用手机太顺手了。它已经是我身体的延伸，是我意图的延伸。

So the challenge for us was, okay, you have to build this hardware which has to do all these amazing things and also be attractive and also be light and also be affordable. And none of these existed before. And what I tell my team all the time is, and that's only half the problem. The other half of the problem is, great, how do I use it? How do I make it feel natural to me? I'm so good with my phone now. It's an extension of my body, of my intention at this point.

是的。

Yeah.

我们怎么让它更简单？

How do we make it even easier?

对。

Yeah.

所以，我们当时面临这些挑战。然后，真是天赐良机，AI 在两年前到来了，比我们预期的要早得多。这是一个巨大的机会，能让我们更轻松，因为今天的 AI 在理解我的意图方面能力更强了。我可以给出模糊的指代，它就能处理可用的信息语料库，从中得出具体的结果。要真正适配它还有很多工作要做。而且它还不是一个控制界面。比如我还没法可靠地用它来操作我的机器。我们有很多事情要做，但我们知道那些事情是什么。

And so, we were having these challenges. And then, what a wonderful blessing, AI came in 2 years ago and became much sooner than we expected. And is a tremendous opportunity to make this even easier for us because the AIs that we have today have much greater ability to understand what my intentions are. I can give vague reference and it's able to work through the corpus of information available to make specific outcomes happen from it. There's still a lot of work to be done to actually adapt it. And it's still not yet a control interface. Like I can't reliably work my machine with it. There's a lot of things that we have to do, but we know what those things are.

所以，现在其实处在一个更令人兴奋的位置。以前我们想，好吧，硬件上有一座大山要爬，交互设计上有一座大山要爬，但我们觉得能做到。而现在我们有了一个美妙的顺风，至少在交互设计方面，有潜力拥有这个更智能的智能体，它不仅让你能自然地与它对话并从中获得结果，还能通过上下文知道你看到什么、听到什么、周围发生什么，并基于这些信息做出智能推断。

And so, now you're in a much more exciting place, actually. Whereas before we thought, okay, we've got this big hill to climb on the hardware, you've got this big hill to climb on the interaction design, but we think we can do it. And now we've got a wonderful tailwind, where on the interaction design side at least, there's the potential of having this much more intelligent agent that now has not only the ability for you to converse with it naturally and get results out of it, but also to know by context what you're seeing, what you're hearing, what's going on around you, and make intelligent inference based on that information.

我们来聊聊 Reality Labs 和产品系列，也就是它今天的样貌。你们有 Quest 头显，有智能眼镜，然后，你知道，最远端是 Orion 和我演示过的一些东西。所以，请谈谈这些努力的演变，你认为它们的市场是什么，以及它们如何随时间融合或不融合。

Let's talk about Reality Labs and the suite of products, so what it is today. So, you have Quest headsets, you have the smart glasses, and then, you know, on the far end of the spectrum is, you know, Orion and some of the stuff that I demoed. So, just talk about sort of the evolution of those efforts and what you think the markets are for them and how they converge versus not over time.

所以，当我们启动那个项目时，Ray-Ban Meta 项目，它们原本是智能眼镜。事实上，它们已经完全造好了，我们距离量产还有 6 个月时，Llama 3 发布了。团队说：“不行，我们得做这个。”于是我们加上了，现在它们是 AI 眼镜，对吧？它们并不是一开始就是 AI 眼镜，但形态已经对了。我们已经能完成计算，我们已经有了能力。所以，现在你有了这些眼镜，你可以向它们提问，而在今年 12 月我们推出的早期访问计划中，我们称之为 Live AI。所以，你可以用你的 Ray-Ban Meta 眼镜启动一个 Live AI 会话，在 30 分钟内，直到电池耗尽，它都能看到你所看到的。

So, when we started that project, the Ray-Ban Meta project, they were going to be smart glasses. And in fact, they were entirely built, and we were 6 months away from production when Llama 3 hit. And the team was like, "No, we got to do this." And so, we added now they're AI glasses, right? They didn't start as AI glasses, but the form factor was already right. We could already do the compute, we already had the ability. So, yeah, now you have these glasses that you can ask questions to, and in this December to the early access program we launched, we call Live AI. So, you can start a Live AI session with your Ray-Ban Meta glasses, and for 30 minutes until the battery runs out, it is seeing what you're seeing.

有趣的是，从纸面上看，Ray-Ban Meta 看起来像是 Ray-Ban Stories 的渐进式改进。而这正是我想讲的故事：两者的硬件并没有那么大不同，但我们让使用者能够进行的交互现在丰富多了。

And it's funny because on paper, the Ray-Ban Meta looks like an incremental improvement to Ray-Ban Stories. And this is kind of the story I'm trying to tell, which is the hardware isn't that different between the two, but the interactions that we enable with the person using it are so much richer now.

当你使用 Orion，当你使用全功能 AR 眼镜时，你可以想象一个后手机世界。你会想：“哦，哇，如果这个足够有吸引力、足够轻能戴、电池续航足够戴一整天，我就可以……这会有我需要的所有东西。一切都会在这里。”而当你开始把它和我们所拥有的 AI 能力的图景结合起来。你做了那个我们给你看早餐的演示吗？

When you use Orion, when you use a full AR glasses, you can imagine a post-phone world. You're like, "Oh, wow, if this was attractive enough and light enough to wear and had battery life enough to wear all day, I could just like this would have all the stuff I need. It would all be right here." And when you start to combine that with images that we have of what AI is capable of. Did you do the demo where we showed you the breakfast?

是的，我做了。

Yeah, I did.

不管怎样，我来解释一下，因为非常酷。你走过去，那里摆着一堆早餐食材，你知道，我看着它说：“嘿 Meta，用这些食材能做哪些食谱？”

And for what it's worth, I'll explain it because it's very cool. You got to walk over and there's a bunch of breakfast ingredients laid out and you know, I look at it and I say, "Hey Meta, what are some recipes with these ingredients?"

没错。

That's right.

所以，至少对我来说，当我们想到 Orion 时，最初我们设想它时并没有那个 AI 组件。它有一个非常直接操作的组件。所以，它非常像我们在手机上都熟悉的应用模型。我认为会有那样的版本。当然，你会想打电话，能处理邮件，能发短信，还想玩游戏。我们有观星游戏，你知道，你想刷 Instagram Reels。我们现在兴奋的是，好吧，把所有这些部分拿来，再叠加一个交互式助手的能力，它真正理解的不只是你设备上发生的事，比如邮件进来，

So that is, for me at least, when we think about Orion, initially it didn't have that AI component when we first thought about it. It had this component that was very direct manipulation. So, it was very much the model on the app model that we're all familiar with in the phone. And I think there's a version of that. Of course you're going to want to do calls and you're going to be able to do your email and be able to do your texting and you want to be able to play games. We have our stargazing game and you know, you want to do your Instagram reels. What we're now excited about is, okay, take all those pieces and layer on the ability to have an interactive assistant that really understands not just what's happening on your device and what you know, emails coming in,

是的，当然。

Yeah, of course.

还有你周围物理世界中正在发生的事。并且能够把你此刻需要的东西和正在发生的事联系起来。所以这些概念会让你想：“哇，如果整个应用模型都颠倒过来呢？如果不再是‘嘿，我现在想去打开 Instagram’，而是‘嘿，设备意识到你在会议间隙，有点无聊。嘿，你想看看你最喜欢的篮球队的最新集锦吗？’这些事情就变得可能了。”

but also what's happening in the physical world around you. And is able to connect what you need in the moment with what's happening. And so these are concepts where you're like, "Wow, what if the entire app model is upside down? What if it isn't like, 'Hey, I want to go fetch Instagram right now.' It's like, 'Hey, the device realizes that you have a moment between meetings, you're a little bit bored. Hey, do you want to catch up on the latest highlights from your favorite basketball team?' Those things become possible.

话虽如此，硬件问题很难，而且真实存在，成本问题也很难，而且真实存在。你知道，你不能——你知道，来挑战王者，最好别失手。手机是我们今天生活中不可思议的核心。我用它操作我的家。我在车里用它。我用它工作。它无处不在，对吧？世界已经适应了手机。所以我的制冰机有个手机应用很奇怪，但它确实有。我不知道，我不确定。似乎过分了，但多余。所以今天有人想，我得做个制冰机。第一要务，得有个应用。

Having said that, the hardware problems are hard and they're real and the cost problems are hard and they're real. And you know, you can't come—you know, come for the king you best not miss. The phone is an incredible centerpiece of our lives today. It's how I operate my home. It's how I use it in my car. I use it for work. It's everywhere, right? And the world has adapted itself to the phone. So it's weird that my ice maker has a phone app, but it does. I don't know, I'm not sure. Seems excessive, but superfluous. So somebody today was like, I got to make an ice maker. Number one job, got to have an app.

是啊，就像智能冰箱。你会说，我不需要这个。把它从我这儿拿走吧。我确实觉得这会是一个漫长的……这就是我说过的，对我来说，10 年视角要清晰得多。我认为这些东西会变得可用、被广泛接受、越来越多人采用。5 年视角更难，因为，天哪，这些东西……即使 5 年内手机会有惊人的主导地位，那看起来也太难了。对我们来说简直不可想象，对吧？这就是我说过的，Orion 是第一次让我觉得也许。就像第一次戴上 Orion，我感觉，好吧。好吧。我当时想，好吧，这有可能发生。我们作为一个物种，在手机之后确实存在一种生活。

Yeah, it's like the smart refrigerator. You're like, I don't need this. It's like take it out of me. I do think it's going to be a long... This is what I said, like the 10-year view for me is I think much clearer. I think these are things that are going to be available, widely accepted, increasingly adopted. The 5-year view is harder because it's like, man, these things... even if it's amazing dominance of the phone in 5 years, it just seems so hard. It's like unthinkable for us, right? That's what I said, like the Orion was the first time I thought maybe. Like the first Orion, like putting it on, I have like okay. Okay. I was like, okay, like it could happen. Like there does exist a life for us as a species past the phone.

是啊。是啊，仍然有……它仍然有整个动态，就是，我如何设想没有我如此习惯的操作系统的生活。所以显然是你做的那些物理上的事情，但只是那种熟悉感以及里面运作的所有东西。那么你怎么看这个过渡期？实际上，也许你到了硬件已经足够强大、市场可及的地步，但你会……你会拴在手机上吗？你会采取强硬立场，说你永远不会那样做，让产品独立吗？你怎么考虑这一块？

Yeah. Yeah, there's still... it still has the whole dynamic of like, well, how do I envision my life without the operating system that I'm so accustomed to. So obviously it's the physical stuff that you do, but just the familiarity and all the stuff that's working in there. So what do you think of like the interim period? Actually, so maybe you get to the point where the hardware is capable, you know, it is market accessible, but do you... do you tether to the phone? Do you take a strong view that you will never do that and let the product stand? Like how do you think about that piece?

我认为手机有巨大的优势和劣势。巨大的优势是手机已经是我们生活的中心。它已经有了这个，你知道，庞大的开发者生态系统。所以它是一个锚定设备，而且是一个很棒的锚定设备。劣势是，我实际上认为我们发现，当应用不是通过触摸屏控制时，它们想要变得不同。嗯，这并不特别新颖。很多人在移动端早期失败了，包括我们，嗯，只是把我们的网页东西放到手机上，然后说，“哦，手机就像，我们就把网页放上去。”是的。但因为它不是手机原生的，我的意思是从交互设计到实际设计、布局、感觉，因为我们在做非手机原生的事情，我们失败了。就像网页历史上最受欢迎的产品之一。这就像主要的，你知道，设计领域，拟物化理念与原生理念，对吧？是的，我认为拥有开发者是真正的价值，拥有所有这些应用功能是真正的价值，但一旦你实际上把它重新投射到空间中，你用像这样的手指而不是触摸屏来操作它，你的精度就低得多。嗯，它不响应语音命令，因为没有工具。就像没有为此进行设计整合。嗯，它也……所以，今天拥有一个手机平台感觉就像，“哇，我在硬件方面有巨大的基础可以依托，但我在软件方面实际上也有一个巨大的锚要拖。”嗯，所以我们不反对这些合作。我认为一旦硬件稍微更发达，看看合作伙伴怎么想会很有趣。嗯，你知道，我希望他们继续支持那些花 1200、1300 美元买这些手机的人，能够带上他们想带的任何硬件，然后当然把全部功能也带过去。

I think it is like the phones have this huge advantage and disadvantage. Huge advantage is just like the phone is already central to our lives. It's already got this, you know, huge developer ecosystem. So like it's an anchor device and it's a wonderful anchor device for that. The disadvantage is like I actually think what we found is the apps want to be different when they're not controlled via touchscreen. Um and that's not super novel. A lot of people failed early in mobile, including us, um by just taking our web stuff and putting it on the mobile phone and being like, "Oh, like the mobile phone is just like we'll just put the web there." Yeah. But because it wasn't native to what the phone was, and I mean everything from interaction design to the uh if it actual design to the layout to how it felt, like because we weren't doing and phone native things, we were failing. Like with with one of the most popular products in the history of the web. it's it's it's like the major, you know, like design field, like the skeuomorphic idea versus the native idea, right? Yeah, and and and I think having the developers is a true value and I think having all this application functionality is a true value, but then once you actually reproject it into space and you're manipulating it with your like fingers like this as opposed to a touchscreen, you have much less precision. Um it doesn't respond to voice commands because there's no tools for that. Like there was no there was no design integration for that. Um it also So, having a phone platform today feels like, "Wow, I've got this huge base to work from on the hardware side, but I've also actually got this kind of huge anchor to drag on the software side." Um and so we're not opposed to these partnerships. I think it'll be interesting to see once the hardware is a little bit more developed how partners feel about it. Um and, you know, I I hope they continue to support people who buy these phones for $1,200, $1,300, being able to bring whatever hardware they want to bring then take the full functionality of that, of course, with them.

我最大的问题是，整个应用模式是否……因为我们为这些设备设想了一种非常像手机的应用模式。你知道，诚然，交互设计、输入和控制方案非常不同，这需要开发者额外关注。我想知道，未来几年 AI 的进展是否会把应用模式彻底颠覆，变成这样：现在我要做一件事，是一件很不寻常的事，比如我想播放音乐。在我脑子里，我把它翻译成我必须打开 Spotify 或打开 Tidal，我首先想到的是，我的服务提供商是谁，而不是我想要的。我想要的只是播放音乐，我只想去找 AI，说，酷，给我播放这个音乐，它应该知道，哦，你已经在用这个服务了，所以我们就用那个，或者这两个服务你都可以用，但这个音质更好，或者这个延迟更低，不管是什么，或者它说，嘿，你想要的歌在这些服务上都没有。你想注册另一个有你想要的歌的服务吗？我不想负责协调我要打开哪个应用来做一件事。我们不得不这样做，因为整个数字计算历史上事情就是这样做的。你有基于应用的模型，你知道，那当然是系统。所以我确实想知道 AI 会在多大程度上颠覆事情。

The biggest question I have is whether the entire app model... cuz we were imagining a very phone-like app model um for these devices. You know, admittedly a very different interaction design, input, and control schemes are very different and that demands like a little extra developer attention. I am wondering if like the progression of AI over the next several years doesn't turn the app model on its on its head to where it's like instead of me being a great now it's a very kind of an unusual thing where I'm like ah like I want to play music. So in my head I translate that to I have to go open Spotify or open title and the first thing I think of is like who is my provider going to be of course as opposed to like that's not what I want. What I want is to play music and I just want to be like go to the AI and like cool like play this music for me and it should know oh like you're already using this service so like we'll use that one or these two services are both available to you but this one has a better quality song or this one has lower latency whatever thing is or it's like hey the song you want isn't available on any of these services. Do you want to sign up for this other service that does have the song that you want? I don't want to have to be responsible for orchestrating like what app I'm opening to do a thing. We've had to do that because that's how it things were done in the entire history of digital computing. You had like an application based model that was you know that was of course the system. So I do wonder how much AI inverts things.

这是一个相当大胆的观点。

That's a pretty hot take.

是的，这是一个大胆的观点。颠覆事情，这不是关于可穿戴设备。这不是关于任何东西。这只是，即使在手机层面，如果你今天要造一部手机，你会像历史上那样建应用商店吗，还是你会说，嘿，作为消费者，表达你的意图，表达你想完成什么，让我们看看我们有什么。让系统看看它能为你产生什么。是的。但我确实认为，如果你今天从零开始，你可能不会建立这种以应用为中心的世界，我作为消费者试图解决问题，首先必须决定我要用哪个提供商来解决那个问题。

Yeah that's a hot take. Inverts things and and that's not a that's not about wearables. That's not about anything. That's just like even at the phone level if you were building a phone today would you build an app store the way you historically build an app store or would you say like hey you as a consumer express your intention like express what you're trying to accomplish and let's like see what we have. Let the system see what it can produce for you. Yeah. But I do think if you were starting from scratch today you probably wouldn't build this like app centric world where I as a consumer I'm trying to solve a problem and first have to decide which of the providers I'm going to use to solve that problem.

是的，当然。

Yeah of course.

是的。这很迷人，而且我认为这取决于今天的能力在哪里，以及我们对编排能力的视线所及。因为我会说，在知识方面，今天可能已经能够做到。我认为在编排方面，我们可能还有点距离，然后你知道，当然你必须建立开发者生态系统来在平台上开发。这非常难。这就是我想在这个领域看到的，对吧？这是最难的部分。

Yeah. That's fascinating and again I think it's a function of like where the capabilities are today and I think where we have line of sight into orchestration capabilities. Because I'd say knowledge wise that is probably capable today or capable today. I think orchestration wise it's probably we're a little bit away and then you know of course you got to build the developer ecosystem to develop on the platform. Which is incredibly hard. That that's the thing I I would to see the in this space, right? That's the hardest piece.

是的。我们在智能体式推理和能力方面越强，我就越能依赖我的 AI 在我不在时做事。当然，一开始会是知识工作。那没问题。嗯，但是一旦你有消费者流经过这里，你会发现他们会有一堆死胡同。他们会问 AI，“嘿，你能帮我做这件事吗？”它会说，“不，我不能。”这就是你带给开发者的金矿，你说，“嘿，我每天有 10 万人在试图解决这个问题，来用你的应用。”

Yeah. The stronger we get at agentic reasoning and capabilities, the more I can rely on my AI to do things in my absence. And at first it will be knowledge work, of course. Like that's fine. Um the the but once you have a a flow of consumers coming through here, what you're going to find is that they're going to have a bunch of dead ends. Where they're going to ask the AI, "Hey, like can you do this thing for me?" And it's going to say like, "No, I can't." That's the gold mine that you take to developers and you're like, "Hey, I've got 100,000 people a day trying Trying to solve this problem, yeah. to use your app.

他们不知道自己在这么做，但他们正试图使用你的应用。看，这就是查询流。这就是正在涌来的需求，而今天我们只能对他们说不。如果你把这些钩子建好，今天就会有 10 万人在为某样东西而呼唤，涌向你的服务。

They don't know they are, but they're trying to use their app. Look, here's the query stream. Here's what's coming through and we're having to tell them no today. If you build these hooks, you got 100,000 people clamoring for something today, coming in for your service.

是的。

Yeah.

而我们的 AI 完全可以回来说：“嘿，你得为此付费。有个人能帮你做这个，但你得付钱。”顺便说一句，我说的不只是应用。我说的是水管工。这里会涌现出某种市场，我认为会随时间出现。所以这就是我看到的演变方式。我不认为会是某个人走进小黑屋，然后想出一个应用平台。不。将会发生的是，人们使用 AI 做事的查询流会出现，而 AI 会在某些领域反复失败，因为那类功能目前被某种应用壁垒挡着，没有建起桥梁。每个人都想建这座桥，他们会说：“不，不，我们要操纵像素，要操纵……”好吧，它可以做这些。我不是说 AI 不能跨越这些边界。但我认为，随着时间推移，如果这成为人类与软件交互的主要界面，而不是从应用花园里挑选……

And it's totally fine for our AI to go back and say like, "Hey, you got to pay for this. There's a guy who does this for you, but you got to pay for it." And by the way, I'm not just talking about apps. I'm like, it's a plumber. It's like there's some kind of a marketplace here that I think emerges over time. So that's how I see it playing out. I don't see it playing out as like someone goes into a dark room and comes up with this app platform. No. What's going to happen is there's going to become a query stream of people using AI to do things and the AI will fail repeatedly in certain areas because that's a type of functionality that is currently behind some kind of an app wall and there's no bridge that's been built. And everyone wants to build the bridge and they're like, "No, no, we're going to manipulate the pixels and it's going to manipulate..." It's like, fine, it can do those things. I'm not saying the AI can't cross those boundaries. But I think over time if that becomes the primary interface for humans interacting with software as opposed to picking from the garden of applications...

是的，我明白了。是的，这非常合理。那是一种非常诱人的状态。而且作为消费者，对吧？这很混乱。我认为，你知道，它在 AI 内部创造了非常令人兴奋的功能市场。它抹去了许多公司的品牌名称，我认为这对整整一代品牌来说将非常艰难。

Yeah, I got it. Yeah, it makes a ton of sense. That's a very alluring state. And just as a consumer, right? It's messy. And I think, you know, it creates these very exciting marketplaces for functionality inside the AI. It abstracts away a lot of companies' brand names, which I think is going to be very hard for an entire generation of brands.

是的。就像我不在乎它是在这两个音乐服务中的哪一个上播放的，这对那些非常想让我在乎的音乐服务来说很难。他们想让我对此有更强烈的看法。他们想让我有情感依附。我不想有情感依附。有些事情你可能看重依附，那……随便吧。在那种“这是一个应用花园，这两个在争夺我的眼球”的世界里，他们建立的品牌是极其宝贵的资产。在那种“我只在乎歌曲能否播放、是否好听”的世界里，另一套优先级才重要。我认为这是净积极的，因为现在重要的是工作表现。是实际的产品体验。价值、价格和性价比非常重要。我想很多公司不会喜欢这样。

Yeah. Like the fact that I don't care if it's being played on one of these two music services, that's hard for those music services who really want me to care. And they want me to have a stronger opinion about it. And they want me to have an attachment. I don't want to have an attachment. There are some things where you may value the attachment and it's... whatever. In the world where I'm like here is an app garden and these two are competing for my eyeballs, the brand that they've built is a hugely valuable asset. In the world where I just care if the song gets played and sounds good, a different set of priorities are important. I think that's net positive because what matters now is performance on the job. It's actual product experience. And value and price and price per performance matters a lot. I think a lot of companies won't love that.

嗯，抹去……这实际上是在阐明提取……就像抹去利润池，这就像，你知道，给我们信任 AI 或 AI 分销商带来了更大的压力。对吧。所以，只要我在提供 AI 的不同公司之间漂浮，我信任他们不在后端被收买和付费的程度，或者他们不只是给我最好的体验或最好的价格。他们给的是让他们赚最多钱的那个。

Well, abstracting away... That's like effectively articulating extract... like abstracting away margin pools, which is like, you know, puts a lot more pressure on us trusting the AI or the distributor of the AI. Right. So insofar as I'm floating between different companies that are each providing AIs, like the degree to which I trust them to not be bought and paid for in the back end, or they're just not giving me the best experience or the best price providing. They're giving the one that gives them the most money.

是的，当然。所以这是今天的选择体验，对吧？不同的世界。这是一个非常不同的世界。但你现在实际上可以看到它的端倪，对吧？所以，你知道，某些公司愿意与新的 AI 提供商在智能体式任务完成上合作。然后他们会说，嗯，实际上，等一下。我不只是想让机器人执行这些东西。我想让人类来找我。我觉得我需要这个。对吧？所以，我直接与需求方建立品牌关系是生死攸关的。所以，是的，这可能会很混乱，但你知道，一个光明的未来，尤其是如果我们不必支付那种品牌税。是的，会非常混乱。我不知道这是否可避免。因为我认为一旦消费者开始进入这些紧密的循环，他们越来越多的互动由 AI 来调节，你就没有选择了。就像，你的客户会去……那就是你的客户将会在的地方。但这将是一个相当不同的世界。

Yeah, of course. So it's the experience of choice today, right? Different world. It is a very different world. But you can actually see inklings of it today, right? So, you know, certain companies are willing to work with the new AI providers in agentic task completion. And then they're like, well, actually, wait a minute. I don't just want the bots executing this stuff. I want the humans coming to me. I think I need that. Right? So it's existential that I have this brand relationship directly with the demand side. So, yeah, that's potentially messy, but you know, a bright future if especially if we don't have to pay that brand tax. Yeah, it'll be very messy. I don't know if it's avoidable. Because I think once consumers start to get into these tight loops where more and more of their interactions are being moderated by an AI, you won't have a choice. Like, your customers are going... That's like where your customers will be. But it's going to be a pretty different world.

是的，这将是一个不同的世界，可能会有一些团体试图快速转向它，以此与品牌化的东西竞争。就说我要在性能和价格上竞争。

Yeah, it'll be a different world and there'll probably be some groups that try to move fast to it as a way to compete with things that are branded. And just say I'm going to compete on performance and price.

是的，没错。

Yeah, that's right.

你认为这最有可能首先发生在哪里？

Where do you think that could potentially happen first?

是的，这是个好问题。它可能会镜像查询量。实际上，我经常思考这个。我实际上认为我们确实有一个模型，那就是网络时代谷歌成为主导搜索引擎的时候。所以，在那之前，网络时代非常基于索引。就像雅虎，是链接，让主要流量来源链接到你是游戏规则。然后一旦谷歌占据主导，我觉得这发生得非常快，可能就几年。那时重要的只是 SEO。重要的只是你在查询流中的位置。查询流决定了哪些企业会过来并成功。因为最频繁的查询，那些是最先出现的。所以，就像旅游方面。旅游是马上发生的，对吧？就像旅行社的巨大颠覆。旅行社从存在的东西变成了不存在的东西，相对较短的时间内立即消失，一切都基于以无缝方式执行最佳交易、最高转化率的竞争。我认为 SEO 现在已经到了有点糟糕的地步。就像它让事情变得更糟。现在每个人都太擅长它了。这就像游戏。每个人都太擅长它了。尤其是现在有了 AI。

Yeah, it's a good question. It probably will mirror query volume. Actually, I think of this a lot. I actually think we do have a model of this, which was in the web era when Google became the dominant search engine. So, before that, the web era was very index-based. It was like Yahoo, and it was like links and getting major sources of traffic to link to you was the game. And then once Google came to dominance, which happened very quickly over maybe a couple years, I feel like. All that mattered was SEO. All that mattered was where you were in the query stream. And the query stream dictated what businesses came over and succeeded. Because the queries that were the most frequent, those were the ones that came first. And so, like, travel side of things. Travel's the one that's right away, right? Like, it was a huge disruption in travel agencies. Travel agents went from a thing that existed to a thing that didn't exist in a relatively short immediately and it all competed on the basis of execution of the best deal in a seamless fashion with the highest conversion. I think SEO's gotten to a point now where it's kind of a bummer. Like it's made things worse. Now everyone's gotten so good at it. This is like game. Everyone's gotten so good at it. Especially with AI actually now.

没错。不，我认为是这样。我实际上认为，就像我们经历了一个令人难以置信的扁平化曲线，现在它开始上升，在付费 placement 方面也是如此。那太主导了。就像，没错。这可能是 AI 中如何演变的警示故事。

That's right. No, I think so. I actually think it's like we've gone through a we had this incredible flattening curve and now it's starting to kind of rise up in terms of with paid placement, too. That's so dominant. And like that's right. And this is like probably the cautionary tale for how this plays out in AIs as well.

我认为会有一个相当不错的黄金时代，查询流将决定哪些业务先出现，因为那些查询量大的领域，人们对其现有解决方案不满意。否则他们就不会问。提供商和开发者会跟随这一点，专门构建解决方案来解决这些问题。一旦在每个垂直领域取得突破，我们就会很快取得大量进展，为消费者提供更好的解决方案。然后一旦进入稳定状态，就开始变成博弈。这就是我们要对抗的东西。那就是衰退时代。那将是对 AI 的真正考验。那将是真正的考验。它能通过吗？它能避免落入那个陷阱吗？

I think there will be a pretty good golden era here where the query stream will dictate what businesses come first, because those are the queries that have the volume of people unsatisfied with the existing solutions that they have. Otherwise they wouldn't be asking about it. Providers and developers will follow that and build specifically to solve those problems. And it snaps into a really—and we get a lot of progress once it tips in each vertical. We get a lot of progress very quickly towards better solutions for consumers. And then once it's a steady state, it starts to be gamesmanship. And that's the thing we fight. And that's the decaying era. That'll be the true test of AI. That'll be the true test. Can it get through that? Can it avoid falling into that trap?

嗯，其中很多是商业模式驱动的，我们也会看看随着时间的推移它会如何演变。

Well, a lot of that is sort of business model driven and we'll see how that evolves over time, too.

没错。

That's right.

你们在开源这个理念上也一直走在前列。所以谈谈你们在业务这一侧的一些努力，然后对你们来说，AI 模型侧理想的市场结构是什么样的？

You guys have also been kind of leading from the front on this idea of open source. And so talk about some of your efforts on that side of the business and then what is the ideal sort of market structure of the AI model side for you guys?

是的。是的，这实际上有两个部分结合在一起。第一部分是，你知道，Llama 出自 FAIR，我们的基础 AI 研究小组，从一开始就是一个开源研究小组。自从 Yann LeCun 加入并确立这一点以来。它让我们吸引了那些真正相信我们作为一个社会，跨越各个实验室的边界合作，会比不合作取得更多进展的杰出研究人员。公平地说，不仅仅是我们。显然 Transformer 论文是在 Google 发表的。而大型自监督学习算是我们的贡献。每个人都在为知识库做贡献。但是当 Llama——当我们开源 Llama 时，那时所有模型都是开源的。唯一不寻常的是——其他一切随着时间推移都变成了闭源。在那之前，每次有人构建模型，他们都会开源，以便其他人可以使用该模型并看到它有多棒。如果它有价值的话，这基本上是当时的做法。所以一些专门的翻译等模型确实保持闭源。但如果是通用模型，那就是当时的做法。Llama 2 可能是我们的大决策点。Llama 2，我认为第二件事进来了——我相信这一点，我在内部非常努力地推进，马克也真的相信。他为此写了一篇文章。那就是这些模型——首先，如果这些模型是开源的，我们将取得更大的进展。因为很多贡献不会来自这些大实验室。它们会来自这些小实验室。我们已经在中国 DeepSeek 身上看到了这一点，它被置于艰难境地，然后在内存架构和其他几个地方进行了令人难以置信的创新，真正取得了惊人的成果。所以我们真的相信我们集体会取得最大的进展。第二件事是，在这个部分内——这是经典的——我相信这些将成为商品。而你想让你的互补品商品化。我们处于一个独特的战略位置，我们的产品通过 AI 变得更好，这就是为什么我们要投资 Priscilla。无论是推荐系统在你看到的 feed 或 reels 中，还是简单的事情，比如当你输入想要发新消息时，我把哪个朋友放在顶部，我认为你现在会发消息给谁？像这样的小事到真正宏大的事情，比如嘿，这里有一个完整的——在 WhatsApp 中。

Yeah. Yeah, this really there's two parts that kind of came together. The first one is, you know, Llama came out of FAIR, our Fundamental AI Research group, and that's been an open source research group since the beginning. Since Yann LeCun came in and they established that. It allowed us to attract incredible researchers who really believe that we're going to make more progress as a society working together across boundaries of individual labs than not. And to be fair, it's not just us. Obviously the Transformer paper was published at Google. And big self-supervised learning was kind of our contribution. Everyone's contributing to the knowledge base. But when Llama was—when we open-sourced Llama, that's how all models were open-sourced at that point. The only thing that was unusual was—everything else just went closed source over time. Before that, every time someone built a model, they open-sourced it so that other people could use the model and see how great that model was. That was mostly how it was done, if it was worth anything. So some certainly some specialized models for translations and whatnot were kept closed. But if it was a general model, that was what was done. Llama 2 was probably the big decision point for us. Llama 2 and this is where I think the second thing that came into—something I believe that I've had that I was advancing really strenuously internally that Mark really believes in, too. And he's written his post about this. Which is like these models—first of all, we're going to make way more progress if these models are open. Because a lot of these contributions aren't going to come from these big labs. They're going to come from these little labs. And we've seen this already with DeepSeek in China, which was put in a tough spot and then innovated incredibly on the memory architectures and a couple of other places to really get amazing results. And so we really believe we're going to get the most progress collectively. The second thing is inside this piece is—this is a classic—I believe these are going to be commodities. And you want to commoditize your complements. And we're in a unique position strategically where our products are made better through AI, which is why we're going to invest in Priscilla. Whether it's recommendation systems in what you're seeing in feed or reels, whether it's simple things like what friend do I put at the top when you type you want to make a new message, who do I think you're going to message right now? Little things like that to really big expansive things like hey, here's an entire—in WhatsApp.

是的，是的，是的。是的。是的，当然。是的，作为应用提供商，超级粉丝。是的，你们是一致的。这是一种强对齐。

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, of course. Yeah, you as the application provider, huge fan. Yeah, you guys are aligned. It's a strong alignment.

是的，是的。是的，所以社会进步加上商业模式对齐。太棒了。

Yes, yes. Yeah, so societal progress plus business model alignment. That's awesome.

我想换个话题，谈谈进步的障碍，以及你认为哪些是线性的，哪些不是。所以，你知道，对你所阐述的愿景的风险，总体愿景的风险，显然是硬件，AI 能力，视觉能力和屏幕等等，分辨率。我们谈到了生态系统和开发者。巨大的。还有你知道，有点像原生应用。所以，也许就谈谈你认为哪些是线性路径的事情，哪些可能更难或更有风险。

I want to shift gears to talking about like the impediments to progress and like what you think, you know, are kind of linear versus not. So, you know, the risks to the vision, to the overall vision that you articulated, obviously hardware, AI capabilities, vision capabilities and screens and all that, resolutions. We talked about the ecosystem and developers. Huge. And you know, sort of like native products. So, maybe just talk about like what you see are kind of the linear path things and the things that maybe, you know, harder or riskier.

我们有真正的发明风险。存在这样的风险：我们想建造的东西，我们作为一个社会、一个物种还没有能力建造。这不是保证。我认为我们有窗口。我认为我们——你见过 Orion，所以它是可以做到的。感觉像是一个降低成本的努力，一个材料改进的努力，但它是可以做到的。仍然有一些发明风险。比发明风险大得多的是采用风险。它被认为社会可接受吗？人们愿意学习一种新的交互方式吗？就像我们小时候都学会了打字。就像我们——你知道，我们出生时手里就有手机。人们愿意学习一种新的交互方式吗？对他们来说值得吗？比那更大，比那更大的是，就像是的，你建造了这个东西，但如果它只是处理你的电子邮件和 reels，那可能不够。就像它是否——人们是否把与现代人类社会互动所需的软件套件带到设备上？这些都是巨大的风险。我会说，我们对硬件和可接受性的进展感觉相当不错。我们认为我们可以做到这些事情。这在以前不是保证。我认为有了 Ray-Ban Meta 眼镜，我们感觉我们可以通过——

We have real invention risk. Like there exists risk that the things that we want to build we don't have the capacity to build as a society, as a species yet. And that's not a guarantee. I think we have windows to us. I think we're—you've seen Orion so like it can be done. It feels like it was a cost reduction exercise, it's a materials improvement exercise but like it can be done. There is still some invention risk. Far bigger than the invention risk, I think is the adoption risk. Is it considered socially acceptable? Are people willing to learn a new modality? Like we all learned to type when we were kids at this point. Like are we—you know we're born with phones in our hands at this point. Like are people willing to learn a new modality? Is it worth it to them? Even bigger than that, even bigger than that which is like yeah like great you build this thing but if it just does like your email and reels it's probably not enough. Like does it do—do people bring the suite of software that we require to interact with modern human society to bear on the device? Those are all huge huge risks. I will say we feel pretty good about where we're getting on the hardware on acceptability. We think we can do those things. Like that was not a guarantee before. I think with the Ray-Ban Meta glasses we're feeling like okay we can get through the—

你觉得可接受性已经具备了吗？人类会接受——会接受我正在使用技术。

You feel like the acceptability is there? Humans will accept—will accept that I'm using technology.

嗯，其中有一些超级有趣的监管挑战。我这里有一个始终开启的机器，给我超人的感知。我的视力更好。我的听力更好。我的记忆力更好。这意味着几年后当我见到你，而我已经有一阵子没见你时，我会想啊，我得记住那家伙。我们一起做过播客。

Um there are like within that super interesting regulatory challenges. Here I have an always-on machine that gives me superhuman sensing. My vision is better. My hearing is better. My memory is better. That means when I see you a couple years from now and I haven't seen you in a minute I'm like ah I got to remember that guy. We did a podcast together.

那个人叫什么名字？我能问那个问题吗？我被允许问那个问题吗？你的费率是多少？就像你的脸，你给我看了你的脸。是的。如果我记性更好，我就能记住那张脸。所以就像那样发生了，但我记性不好，那么我被允许使用工具来辅助我吗？所以这里真的嵌入了一些非常微妙的监管、隐私、社会接受度问题，这些问题单独来看都非常深刻，并且可能让整个事情脱轨。就像你很容易让整个事情脱轨，减缓进展。

What was that guy's name? Can I ask that question? Am I allowed to ask that question? What's your rate? Like it's your face you showed me your face. Yeah. And if I was somebody with a better memory I could remember the face. So like that happened but I don't have a great memory so am I allowed to use a tool to assist me or not? So there's really subtle regulatory, privacy, social acceptability questions that are like embedded here that are super deep individually and can derail the whole thing. Like you can easily derail the whole thing and slow progress.

这就是问题所在，我认为我们行业有时会想，就像《梦幻之地》里说的，如果你建好了，他们就会来。但事实并非如此，很多事情必须发生才行。

That's the thing is I think we kind of sometimes think in our industry it's like Field of Dreams if you build it they will come. And it's like no like a lot of things have to happen right.

嗯，你也可能冒险踩到社会红线。这就是全部，这就是风险，就像是的，当然你可以被拍手，但就像你长期踩到社会红线。核电被脱轨了，是不是绝对是因为愚蠢的原因。是的。70 年来因为糟糕的原因。我们现在知道它们是糟糕的，就像他们只是玩错了。是的，当然。他们就像啊忽略这个，就像不，因为人们实际上有这种感觉。

Well, you could also risk step too. That's the whole That's the risk is like Yeah, sure you can get your hand slapped but like you step social for long periods of time. Nuclear power got derailed was it for absolutely for stupid reasons. Yeah. For 70 years for the for bad reasons. We know they're bad now and it's like they just like played it wrong. Yeah, of course. And they were like ah ignore this it's like no because people actually feel this way.

不，所以所以所以嗯所以我认为是的，我对发明风险感觉相当好。接受度风险看起来比过去好，但就像我认为那里仍然有很多大障碍要跨越。我实际上认为生态系统风险是我之前会说最大的一个。但 AI 现在是我潜在的银弹。如果 AI 成为主要界面，那么它几乎就免费了。是的。

No, so so so um so I think yeah, I feel pretty good about the invention risk. Acceptability risk is looking better than it has been but like I think there's still a lot of big hurdles to cross there. I actually think the ecosystem risk was one I would have said previously was the biggest one. But AI is now kind of my potential silver bullet there. If AI becomes the major interface then it kind of comes for free. Yeah.

我还要说，我们得到了如此积极的回应，甚至撇开 Orion 不谈，就连 Ray-Ban Metas 公司也想为我们工作并在那个平台上构建。它还不是一个平台。我们它是一台如此小的电脑，它是一台如此小的电脑，你只需连接，你只需连接一个应用，对吧，我们实际上还没有任何空间，但我们确实与 Be My Eyes 合作，这就像帮助你知道盲人和视力障碍者导航，这真的很壮观。所以有一个小窗口，我们可以开始构建。所以所以是的，我会说反应比我今天预期的更积极。所以所以现在一切顺风盛行。老实说，在你知道八年的逆风之后，逆风，已经很多了，九年的逆风。有一年的顺风是好的。我会接受它，我会接受它。我不会，我不会正视它。是的，是的，不，不，还没有胜利 laps，但那是好的。好的。但这一切都很难。是的，是的，是的，我明白。它可能，在每一个点，它都可能失败。

And I will also say that we've had such a positive response from even just set aside Orion even the Ray-Ban Metas companies that want to work for us and build on that platform. It's not a platform yet. We It's so little computer It's so little computer You just connect you just connect an app right We literally don't have any space yet but we did do a partnership with Be My Eyes which is like helps you know blind and and hard of vision people navigate and it's really spectacular. And so there's a little window there where we can start to like start building. So So yeah, I would say the response has been more positive than I had expected today. So So everything right now tailwinds abound right now. And to be honest after you know eight years of headwinds Headwinds It's been a lot of Nine years of headwinds. Having a year of tailwinds is nice. I'll take it I'll take it. I'm not going to I'm not going to look it in the face. Yeah, yeah, no no victory laps yet but that's good. Okay. But it's all hard. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I get it. It could all at every point it could all fail.

我喜欢你一开始就说这是发明风险。就像我不知道，就像有很多方式这行不通。你知道即使它行得通，你知道，它可能不会被接受。

I like that you just started with like it's invention risk. It's like I don't know it's like there's many ways this just won't work. You know even if it does work, you know, it might not take.

嗯，关于这一点我会说两件事，这就是马克值得如此多赞誉的地方，我们是真正的信徒。就像我们有实际的信念。是的。马克相信这是下一件大事。它需要发生，而且它不会免费发生。就像我们可以成为做这件事的人。你知道，我们的首席科学家迈克尔·阿布拉什，他是我有机会合作过的最喜欢的人之一。他经常谈论技术终结论的神话。它不会最终发生。科技界有很多人会说，“是的，AR 最终会发生。”但事实并非如此。不，不是那样，实际上需要有人去做。AR 是一个特定的例子，它绝对不会。需要停下来投入金钱和时间去做。就像有人必须停下来去做。这就是区别。所以，我会说的第一件事是，我们和其他任何人的区别在于我们从骨子里相信这些东西。就像这是我有机会做的最重要的工作。这是施乐帕克研究中心级别的新东西，我们正在重新思考人类如何与计算机互动。就像 JCR 利克莱德和人在回路计算。我们在 AI 中看到了这一点。就像这是一个罕见的时刻。这是一个罕见的时刻。我认为它甚至不是每一代都会发生。它可能每隔一代或每三代发生一次。就像你不会一直有机会做这件事。所以，我们不会错过它。我们就像我们要去做。我们可能会失败。就像这是可能的。但它是我们不会因为缺乏努力或信念而失败。

Well, I'll say two things about this and this is where Mark just deserves so much credit is we're true believers. Like we have actual conviction. Yeah. Mark believes this is the next thing. It needs to happen and it doesn't happen for free. Like we can be the ones to do it. You know, our chief scientist Michael Abrash, who's one of my favorite people I've ever gotten a chance to work with. He talks a lot about the myth of technological eventualism. It doesn't eventually happen. There's a lot of people in tech who are like, "Yeah, AR will eventually happen." That's not how it works. No, not that would actually do it. AR is a specific one that would just absolutely not. to stop and put the money and the time and do it. Like somebody has to stop and like do it. And that is the difference. So, that's the the number one thing I'd say is like the difference between us and anybody else is we believe in this stuff in our cores. Like this is the most important work I'll ever get a chance to do. This is Xerox PARC level new stuff where we're rethinking how humans interact with computers. It's like JCR Licklider and the human in the loop computing. We're seeing that with AI. It's like this is where it's a rare moment. It's a rare moment. Doesn't even happen once a generation, I think. It may happen every other generation every third generation. Like you don't get a chance to do this all the time. So, we're not missing it. We're just like we're going to do it. And we may fail. Like it's possible. But it's We will not fail for lack of effort or belief.

太好了。非常感谢，老板。是的，干杯。

Great. Thanks ton, boss. Yeah, cheers.