Dylan Field：设计即新代码，AI 正在让创造力民主化

Dylan Field，欢迎来到 All In 访谈。

Dylan Field, welcome to the All In interview.

谢谢。感谢邀请。

Thank you. Thanks for having me.

我们此刻在美丽的加州纳帕谷扬特维尔。

We are here in beautiful Napa, Yountville, California.

是啊，你们都喝了三杯了。

Yeah, you're three drinks in.

我们喝了几杯，然后决定上镜聊聊。

We're a couple drinks in and we decided to go on camera.

是啊，为什么不呢？

Yeah, why not?

为什么不呢？不过，你在这里做什么？

Why not? Well, but what are you doing here?

随着财富增长，你是否注意到事情变得复杂得多？在投资、税务策略和遗产规划之间，管理这一切成了一项你并未要求的全职工作。Creative Planning 可以帮到你。他们由投资经理、注册会计师和附属遗产律师组成的协调团队可以承担大部分繁重工作，让你不必亲力亲为。Creative Planning，让财富协同运作。请访问 creativeplanning.com/allin。

As your wealth grows, have you noticed how much more complex things get? Between investments, tax strategy, and estate planning, managing it all is a full-time job you didn't ask for. Creative Planning can help. Their coordinated team of investment managers, CPAs, and affiliated estate attorneys can do much of the heavy lifting so you don't have to. Creative Planning, where wealth works together. Go to creativeplanning.com/allin.

我是来参加你们明天也会出席的这个活动。

I was uh for this event that you're going to be at tomorrow as well.

我明天有个活动。

I'm at an event tomorrow.

同一个活动，我们基本上在聊设计、产品开发，我还稍微提了点安全，觉得那样挺好。但总的来说，很多是关于产品开发如何演变，而在我看来，你们可能也预料到我会说，设计就是新的代码。现在发生的是，随着编码模型变得更好，我不是说不需要工程师。Figma 绝对需要工程师。我们爱我们的工程师，但编程的本质也在改变。随着这种改变，差异化的价值正在向顶端上升。

Same event and we were basically talking about design, product development, uh I stuck in a little bit of security, thought that'd be nice. Uh but overall, a lot about just like how product development is evolving and in my point of view, the thing you'd expect me to say, too, is that design is the new code. Uh and what's happening right now is as coding models get better, I'm not saying that you don't need engineers. We definitely need engineers at Figma. We love our engineers, but also the nature of programming is changing. And as it changes, the value is rising in terms of differentiation to the top.

对。

Right.

那就是设计，是品牌，是作为观点的营销，是大胆，是你能引发的情绪反应。我觉得很多人都忽略了这一点。我们还聊了很多关于 AI 和那种

That's design, that's brand, it's marketing as point of view, it's being bold, uh and it's like the emotional reaction you're able to elicit. Uh and I think that a lot of people are missing that. We also talked a lot about like AI and just kind of like

好的，那你今天在台上做了个活动。你和 Nikesh 聊了。

Okay, so you did a thing on stage today. You talked with Nikesh.

我只是在这里回顾一下采访。抱歉。

I'm just recapping the interview here. Sorry.

很棒。挺好的。我们可以快进。但我想回溯一下。你是 Figma 的 CEO，公司已上市。也许你可以简单介绍一下 Figma，以及你什么时候开始创业的？

It's great. Like it's good. Like we can fast forward. But I want to back up. You're the CEO of Figma, publicly traded. Maybe you can just give the quick elevator pitch on Figma and when did you start the business?

是的，我们 2012 年 8 月创立了 Figma。简单来说，我们希望让世界上最好的团队能够设计、创造和构建世界上最好的软件。我们也用于各种用途。比如营销、广告、幻灯片、白板、图表，你能想到的。只要跟视觉有关，可能就有人在 Figma 里做，即使那不是它的本意。

Yeah, we started Figma back in August 2012. And the quick pitch is this is where we want to make it so that the best best teams in the world can design and create and build the world's best software. Uh we're also used for all sorts of stuff. So marketing, uh advertising, slides, whiteboarding, diagramming, uh you know, you name it. Like if it's visual at all, someone's probably doing it in Figma even if it's not meant for that.

人们称它为设计软件。这个说法公平吗，还是它没有涵盖服务的全部范围？

People call it a design software. Is that a fair characterization or does it not capture the full spectrum of what the service is?

不，我认为设计确实是我们的中心和核心。当我在产品评审中和团队交谈时，我们谈论设计师。我们谈论他们想要什么。设计这个词也很有趣，因为设计有一百种定义。

No, I mean I think that design is really our center and our core. Uh and like when I'm in a product review and talking with the team, we talk about designers. We talk about what they want. Uh design is also a term that's like so interesting because there's like a hundred definitions of design.

对。

Right.

我经常思考它的定义，也许是创造力与问题解决的结合。但你可以找到很多其他定义。而且设计可以指从室内设计到工业设计、产品设计、品牌设计等等。所以人们想到设计时会想到很多方面。

I think about a lot about the definition of like it's uh maybe creativity meets problem solving. Um but there's like so many others you can find. And then also design can refer to everything from interior to industrial to product design to brand design and so on. And so people think about a lot of things they think about design.

我们来回顾一下公司的历史。你 2012 年起步，筹集了一些风险投资，业务起飞，销售企业软件。你做得非常好。然后 Adobe 提出以 200 亿美元收购公司。

Just to get caught up on the history of the business. You started in 2012, you raised some venture money, the business takes off, you're selling enterprise software. You're doing really well. And then Adobe offers to buy the business for $20 billion.

是的，没错。真是快进。

Uh yeah, correct. Quite the fast forward.

那是哪一年？

What year was that?

那是几年前了。而且

Uh it was a few years back now. And

我直接跳过了建立业务的过程。就像

I'm skipping through literally building the business. Like

是啊，你知道，大概 10 到 11 年。但是，不，我的意思是我们一直尊重 Adobe，现在也是。那是一家世代级的了不起的公司，从印刷到打造 Photoshop，以及整个平面设计革命。

Yeah, you're like uh you know, 10 11 years in. But the um No, I mean we uh have always respected Adobe, still do. And I mean a generational incredible company that like started everything from printing to making Photoshop what it is and like the entire graphic design revolution.

顺便说一句，我从 1990 年就开始用 Adobe Photoshop。我做平面设计

Uh by the way, I was on Adobe Photoshop since 1990. I did graphic design

图层之前？

pre-layers?

其实，你和我还没聊过

Actually, you and I haven't talked about

图层之前？

pre-layers?

是的。所以我小时候在电脑上做图层之前的平面设计，还把它当作服务提供给邻居和小企业之类的。

Yes. So, I did graphic design pre-layers as a kid on computers and I did it as like a service for like people in the neighborhood and small businesses and stuff.

太酷了。那你是怎么接触到它的？

So cool. So, how did you get access to it?

比如在学校，然后我有……嗯，我用的是 Macintosh。我拿到了 1984 年的第一台原版 Mac。我一直对平面设计着迷。那是我作为爱好喜欢做的事情。你和我其实从没聊过这个。然后我用了 Bryce 3D 和所有这些早期 3D 工具，然后当 Kai's Power Tools 出现时

like I at my school and then I had Well, I was on a Macintosh. I got the first Mac original 1984. And um I was always fascinated with graphic design. It was like something I loved doing as a literally a hobby. You and I actually never talked about this. And then I used like Bryce 3D and all these early 3D tools and then when Kai's Power Tools came out

Kai's Power Tools 真的很酷。

Kai's Power Tools is really cool.

它重塑了 Adobe Photoshop。对我来说，它极大地扩展了用 Photoshop 能实现的创意潜力。所以我从最早就是 Photoshop 的忠实粉丝，作为个人爱好大量使用，还靠做平面设计之类赚了些外快。

It reinvented Adobe Photoshop. And for me, it was like this incredible like expansion of creative potential on what you could do with Photoshop. So, I've been a big Photoshop fan since the earliest days and a big user as a personal hobby and like I made money on the side doing graphic design and stuff.

太棒了，伙计。

That's awesome, man.

是啊。

Yeah.

是啊。当然，Photoshop 是一个非常成熟的产品。也许甚至过于成熟，因为它多年来添加了太多不同的部分。我认为这是很多软件的本质。如果不小心，它会随着时间变得臃肿。但它能做的事情太多了。而且 Adobe 作为一家公司一直很有创造力。所以我从小就一直很尊重它。

Yeah. I mean, Photoshop, of course, is like a product that is very mature. I mean, maybe beyond mature, too, in that it has so many different parts of it that have been added over the years. Uh which I think is the nature of a lot of software. Uh it gets more bloated over time if you're not careful. But, there's just so much that's possible with it. And uh you know, Adobe as a company has been very inventive. So, I've always had a respect since I was a kid, too.

完全同意。

Totally.

感觉那时候，你知道，我们可以加入而不被完全吸收。如果我们规模更小，我觉得可能就会消散。是的，我们签署了协议，我们同意了，然后各国政府决定他们不喜欢这个交易。

And it felt like it was a time when, you know, we could join and not be totally absorbed. Uh like if we were smaller, I felt like maybe we would just kind of dissipate. And yeah, we we signed the agreement, we said yes, and then uh various world governments decided that they didn't like it.

对。

Right.

而且

And uh

比如反垄断机构介入，他们阻止了交易。

Like anti-trust got involved and they blocked the deal.

是的，反垄断是一个宽泛的说法，但涉及美国、欧盟、CMA。你知道，几年前的气氛和今天很不一样。

Yeah, I mean, it's it anti-trust is kind of like a broad way to refer to it, but you have the United States, European Union, CMA. And you know, it's very different vibe in a few years ago than today.

Adobe 会消除一个大的竞争对手。

Adobe would be taking out a big competitor.

他们说了很多。但对我们来说最重要的是我们继续踩油门。你知道，我以为我们会直接通过。但一两个月后，很明显情况并非如此。

They said a lot of things. But, the I think most important part for us was that we just kept putting our foot on the gas. I mean you know, I thought it would be like sort of we would just go right through. And as soon as a month or two in, it was clear that was not the case.

是啊。

Yeah.

情况变成了，好吧，我们作为一个组织必须真正挺过去。

It kind of became okay, like we got to like really power through as an organization here.

是啊。

Yeah.

并发布和构建接下来的东西。

And ship and build like the next stuff.

是啊。

Yeah.

所以这是 2023 年。当时你们有多少员工？

So this is 2023. How many employees did you have?

我想说大概在 500 到 1200 人之间。我得再确认一下。

I want to say it was about 500 to 1,200. I have to double-check.

好，所以当我听到这个故事时，我非常着迷，我想我在 2024 年 3 月见过你。不知道你还记不记得我跟你提过这件事。但对我来说，告诉一家初创公司的 1200 名员工，我们有一个史上最不可思议的退出机会——这家公司 200 亿美元的退出——而且它不会发生了。当你站在所有人面前告诉大家“伙计们，这不会发生了”时，那场全员大会是什么样的？当对一些人来说，感觉脚下的地板好像塌陷了的时候，你如何让所有人重新对齐到建设业务并继续前进上？

Okay, so when I heard this story, I was fascinated by it, and I think I saw you in March of '24. I don't know if you remember I mentioned this to you. But for me, the story of telling 1,200 employees of a startup we have one of the most incredible exits in history—a 20 billion-dollar exit of this company—and it's not going to happen. What was the all-hands like when you get in front of everyone and you tell everyone, guys, this isn't going to happen? And how do you get everyone to realign on building a business and continuing forward when it feels like the floor for some people may have felt like the floor fell out from under them?

嗯，我觉得你得记住监管审查的时长。这肯定需要以某种方式解决，因为——你知道，如果你真的处于反竞争的情况，而我仍然不认为 Adobe 那件事是反竞争的，不管怎样。互联网上很多人可能会说是，或者至少当时是这么说的，但我认为他们的论点很糟糕。他们在打过去的仗，没有看到未来以及这一切会变成什么。但是——我说这话不是因为——我也很兴奋能保持独立。我很兴奋能经营 Figma。Adobe 的计划本来就是只经营 Figma。不管怎样，经营 Figma，我很开心。独立地，我们确实行动很快。我对此很感激。但回到你的问题，就像我们经历了 16 个月的监管审查。对任何公司来说，16 个月的监管审查都是惩罚性的。而在真正的反竞争情况下，那对其中一方可能非常有破坏性。或者双方。而且我认为 Roomba 其实是个很好的例子。Roomba 当时要被收购。

Well, I think you have to remember the length of the regulatory review. Which definitely needs to be fixed somehow because it's—you know, if you're in a situation where it's actually anti-competitive, which I still don't believe the Adobe thing was, for what it's worth. A lot of people on the internet probably would say it is, or at least they did back then, but I thought their arguments were poor. And they were fighting past battles, not looking at the future and what this all would become. But—and I say that not because—I'm stoked to be independent, too. I'm stoked to be running Figma. That was the plan for Adobe was just run Figma. Either way, running Figma, I'm happy. Independently, we do move fast. I'm grateful for that. But going back to your question, it's like we had 16 months of regulatory review. 16 months of regulatory review for any company is punishing. And in an actual anti-competitive situation, that could be very destructive for one of the parties. Or both. And I think Roomba's a great example, actually. Roomba was going to be acquired.

小交易。

Small deal.

是的，不是什么疯狂的大交易。

Yeah, it wasn't like a crazy deal.

小交易，

Small deal,

所以他们没让它通过。正因为如此，Roomba 破产了。当时整个市场基本上都去了中国。所以从美国的角度来看，这毫无意义。

so they did not let it go through. And because of that, Roomba went bankrupt. And the entire market at the time basically went to China. So from the United States standpoint, it made no sense.

对。

Right.

总之，我跑题了，但我确实认为这是个重要的点。这里有一些政策上的东西，就像当你追求理想、理想主义时，它并不总是实际地帮助美国。但这也是一个重要的一点，那就是现在几乎所有市场都比历史上更广阔。几乎任何看起来像是“哦，这就是市场”的东西——那实际上不是市场。市场是 AI。

Anyway, I go on a tangent, but I do think it's an important point. There's some policy stuff here that's like when you go for the ideals, idealism, it doesn't always practically help America. But it's also an important point, which is almost all markets now are more expansive than they have been historically. And nearly anything that looks like oh, it's the market—that's not actually the market. The market is AI.

是的，我是说，没错。

Yeah, I mean, exactly.

是这个巨大的市场，而这笔交易只占市场的 1% 和 0.2%。

is this massive market and this deal is 1% and 0.2% of the market.

就像你是回顾历史来定义市场，这可能是作为监管者唯一合乎逻辑的方式，还是你作为技术专家向前看？这在你怎么考虑市场规模方面可能非常不同，但总之，那是全员大会。实际上那是寒假的第一天，挺有趣的。所以我们告诉所有人：好，享受假期。我们在假期期间流量其实少得多，因为我们是工作产品。那天是周五，然后周末意识到，好，这要有个结论了。周一早上，给所有人发消息说：“嘿，中午全员大会。”想的话就拨进来，这是正在发生的事，这是完整的细节。所以，首先，公司那么多人出席了。看到出席率真是太棒了。你知道，真的是假期第一天。其次，我想说情绪是解脱，因为不是对摆脱 Adobe 的解脱，而是对不再有不确定性的解脱。那么长时间的不确定性真的很紧张。人们不得不在脑子里装两个世界，他们不完全确定未来会怎样。所以，那是当时的情绪。就是有点轻松了。然后从那里开始，是的，我认为你问的问题是对的。你如何确保每个人都全力以赴？我们做的方式是，我们说：“看，我就在公司 Slack 里发了个视频，给所有人发了邮件，说：‘嘿，如果你在非常努力地工作后累了，如果你是这段时间加入的，以为要去 Adobe 工作，而实际上创业公司不适合你，请知道，我们会非常努力地工作，拼命干，没有羞耻，我们仍然关系良好。如果你想离开，这里有几个月的薪水。欢迎你告诉我们，我们会让它超级容易。’”

like do you define the market looking back at the history, which is like the only logical way you do it as a regulator, or do you do it as a technologist looking forward? And that could be very different in terms of how you think about markets by sizes, but anyway, it's all hands. It was actually the first day of a winter break, which is pretty funny. So, we had told everybody okay, enjoy the holidays. We actually have way less traffic during the holidays cuz we're work product. And that was a Friday, and then realized sort of over the weekend, okay, this is going to come to a conclusion. And on Monday morning, sent a message to everybody saying, "Hey, all hands at noon." And dial in if you like, and here's what's going on, and here's like the full sort of details. And so, first of all, so much of the company showed up. That was awesome just to see the turnout. You know, first day of break, really. And secondly, I'd say just like the mood was relief because it wasn't about relief of not Adobe, it was relief of not having ambiguity. To have ambiguity that long is really intense. And people have to kind of have two worlds in their head, they're not exactly sure the future holds. So, that was the immediate mood. It was just kind of like lighter. And then from there, yeah, I think that the question you asked is right. How do you make sure everyone's all in? And the way that we did it was we said, "Look, I just kind of put a video out into the company Slack and emailed everybody and said, 'Hey, if you're tired after working really hard, if you're someone who joined during this period thinking you're going to go work at Adobe, and actually the startup thing is not for you, like please know, we're going to be working very hard, hustling hard, and no shame, like we're still on good terms. If you want to leave, here is a few months' pay. And you're welcome to just let us know, we'll make it super easy.'"

从那里开始，六个月后才能重新申请。这是唯一的条件。

And from there, you six months before you can reapply. That's the only condition.

六个月后，你可以重新申请，我们会重新面试你。接受这个提议的人比例相当小。但总的来说，这是健康的，有些人实际上最终做了彻底的职业转型，以疯狂的方式，走上了不同的人生道路。我觉得这对每个人都是健康的。

After six months, you can reapply and we'll re-interview you. And it was a pretty small percentage of people that took us up on that. But overall, it was healthy, and some people actually ended up doing total career pivots, like in wild ways, went on different life paths. Like I think it was healthy for everyone.

你继续建设业务，它增长了，你们上市了。我只想快进到今年早些时候。你们宣布了与 Anthropic 的合作，Claude 设计。

You continue to build the business, it grows, you go public. And I just want to fast-forward to earlier this year. You guys announced a partnership with Anthropic, Claude design.

我们不完全是这样。我们一直与 Anthropic 作为合作伙伴合作，而 Anthropic 单独宣布了 Claude 设计，是的。

We not quite. We've been working with Anthropic as a partner and Anthropic separately announced Claude design, yes.

哦，抱歉。是的，没错，但你们今年早些时候宣布了一个与他们的连接器。

Oh, sorry. Yeah, that's right, but you had a connector with them that you announced earlier in the year.

是的，我们有一个 MCP。我们与许多公司合作，但是的。

Yeah, we have an MCP. We are partnered with many companies, but yeah.

然后他们宣布了 Claude 设计。他们这么做时你感到惊讶吗？当他们推出 Claude 设计相对于你们提供的东西时，你有多担心？因为市场看了说：“天哪，Figma 死了。Claude 要碾压 Figma 了。”

Then they announced Claude design. Was that surprising to you when they did that? And how worried were you when they came out with Claude design relative to what you guys were offering? Cuz the market looked at it and said, "Oh my god, Figma's dead. Claude is going to crush Figma."

我是说，现在网络话语的本质是“我们回来了”、“它完了”。这只是一个循环，对吧？我是说，过去一个月里你被“完了”多少次了？

I mean, the nature of online discourse right now is we're so back, it's so over. And it's just a cycle, right? I mean, how many times have you been all over in the last like month?

是的。

Yes.

大概有好多次我甚至都不知道。

Probably a bunch times I don't even know about.

是的。

Yes.

那时大家都有点习惯了，因为你知道，当你“死”了那么多次，然后你实际上并没有死。对吧。你在某个时候会意识到，也许这不是真的。社交媒体实际上不是现实，但是的，我对那种沟通方式总体上感到惊讶。

And everyone was kind of used to that at that point cuz you know, when you kind of die so many times and then you're actually like not dead. Right. You kind of realize at some point maybe this is like not the truth. Social media is actually like not reality, but yeah, I was overall surprised at the way that kind of communication happened.

我觉得，你知道，看，通常每个人都想做好事。我的意思是，有一些例外，但大多数情况下，这就是我对人们的假设。他们想赢，他们想做好事。我认为那些快速扩张的组织，比如 Anthropic，历史上有没有任何组织扩张得那么快的例子？

I think that, you know, look, everybody wants to do good usually. I mean, there's some exceptions, but for the most part that's what I assume for people. They want to win, they want to do good. And I think that organizations scaling really fast, Anthropic, like are there any examples of organizations scaling that fast ever?

从来没有。

Ever.

内部可能会变得非常混乱和混淆。因此，奇怪的事情可能会发生。我认为情况就是这样，是的，我们正处于一段奇怪的沟通风波之后。

Can get very confused and mixed up internally. And due to that, weird stuff can happen. And I think that it's just the case that yeah, we're on the other side of kind of like a weird bout of communication there.

它影响了你的业务吗？

Did it affect your business?

哦，没有。没有达到任何显著的程度。

Oh, no. Like not to any degree that was significant.

因为我在那个公告之后读了你们的季度报告，你们同比增长了 48%。业务基本上加速增长了。

Cuz I read your quarterly report after that announcement, you guys grew 48% year-over-year. And the business basically accelerated its growth.

是的。

Yeah.

所以，我看着那个，你知道，这是每个人都普遍持有 SaaS 末日论的时候，我是 SaaS 末日论的忠实信徒。但我确实认为有很多方法可以区分 SaaS 公司，其中之一我认为是创始人领导。我认为用户体验很重要，嵌入式用户体验以及在此基础上构建的能力，特别是如果你知道如何使用 AI 来加速和重塑你的业务，尤其是作为创始人。但你的业务加速了。

So, I'm looking at that and I'm, you know, this is when everyone had the SaaS-pocalypse thesis in general, and I was a big subscriber to SaaS-pocalypse. But I do think that there's a bunch of ways to distinguish SaaS companies, one of which I think is founder-led. And I think that there's user experience that matters a lot embedded user experience and the ability to kind of build from there, especially if you know how to use AI to accelerate and reinvent your business as a founder, particularly. But your business accelerated.

是的。嗯，不，它一直表现良好。我认为，看，模型公司和产品的难点在于，产品是什么？是模型吗？是上面的 UI 吗？还是两者的混合？如果是混合，如何加权？而且无论如何，

Yep. Um, no, it's been continued to do well. And I think that look, the hard part about model companies and product is like, what is the product? Is it the model? Is it the UI on top? Is it some hybrid of both? If it's a hybrid, how is it weighted? And uh in any case,

你是在说像 Anthropic 和 Open AI 这样的公司。

You're talking about like an Anthropic and Open AI.

是的，我是说

Yeah, I mean

Gemini。

Gemini.

比如无论是编码工具还是像你刚才提到的 CoDesign 这样的产品。我认为很容易将模型进步误认为是产品进步。

Like whether it's a harness for coding or it's a product like CoDesign which you just mentioned. I think it's easy to mistake model progress for product progress.

对。

Right.

现实是，像 Figma 这样的工具，你知道，花了很长时间来构建。呃，花了很长时间来确保我们为用户正确设置工作流程，我们还有工作要做。我们的用户会告诉你这一点。呃，我，我们一直在努力让它变得更好。所以，我认为这并不奇怪，它没有一炮而红，因为实际上在核心用户旅程工作流程方面有很多工作要做，以满足专业人士的需求。现在，他们呃，他们把 CoDesign 做成了一个广泛的产品。所以，它试图做所有这些事情，比如你会看到海报之类的，我相信，当你去他们的主页时，有平面设计场景。而且，也许他们在某些领域会做得好，在其他领域像

The reality is a tool like Figma, you know, has taken a very long time to build. Uh and a very long time to make sure that we get the workflows right for our users and we still have work to do. Our users will tell you that. Uh and I and we're always trying to make it better. So, I think that like it's it's sort of um not surprising that it wasn't an instant hit or something when there's actually quite a lot of work on the just core user journey workflow side that you have to do to meet the needs of professionals. Now, they're uh they made CoDesign into a product that is is broad. So, it's trying to do all these things like you'll see like posters and stuff as well, like graphic design scenarios, I believe, when you go to their homepage. And And like maybe they'll do well in some areas and on others like

嗯。我对这个产品既不看好也不看衰。我认为只是为专业人士制作好的设计工具很难。

Mhm. I'm not bullish or bearish on the product. I think it's just like hard to make good design tools for professionals.

是的，有很多东西要设计。设计类别也很多。

Yeah, there's a lot of things to design. And a lot of categories of design.

它就像一种乐器。你必须把感觉做对。你必须把机制做对。

of it is like an instrument. You have to get the feel right. You have to get the mechanics right.

是的。

Yeah.

我们已经强调了每一个细节，多年来收到了很多关于人们喜欢和不喜欢的反馈。这取决于他们来自哪里。这取决于他们的任务以及他们总体上想做什么。有太多场景了。但总的来说，你知道，我认为软件的模式比 SaaS 末日论所暗示的要多，软件作为一个类别并不是二元的非好即坏。呃，还有很多其他方式可以确保你能够长期维持自己，作为软件公司或应用层公司长期拥有增长的业务。呃，其中一部分是，是的，如果你尽可能专注于目标受众，了解你的受众，并为他们构建，这是很重要的。

And we've stressed every detail of that and have had a lot of feedback over the years about what people like and don't like. It depends on where they're coming from. It depends on uh their task and sort of like what they're trying to overall do. And there's so many scenarios. But overall uh you know, I think that um there are more modes for software than are implied by the SaaS-pocalypse and it's not like software as a category is binary good or bad. Uh there are plenty of other ways that you can um make sure that you're able to sustain yourself long-term and have a growing business long-term as a software company or app layer company. Uh and you part of it is yes, if you're as specialized as possible on a target audience and you know your audience and you're building for them, that is something that matters.

对。

Right.

呃，我认为一个很好的例子是 Cursor。嗯，Cursor 无论如何都不应该以那种方式增长。在 Cursor 拥有任何模型之前，所有这些前沿实验室都在用自己的模型追赶他们。但 Cursor 真正痴迷于用户。他们看到了自己的角落。他们制定了策略。他们确保为客户做正确的事情。他们取得了令人难以置信的成功。

Uh and I think a great example of this is Cursor. Um Cursor like by all means should not have grown the way they did. You've got all these Frontier Labs that are chasing them with their own models before Cursor had a model of any kind. But yet Cursor really obsessed over the user. They saw their own corners. They strategized. They made sure they were doing the right thing for the customer. And they've had an incredible success.

是的。

Yeah.

我认为这很棒，我认为这是一个将在许多不同类型的公司中重复的例子。

And I think it's amazing and I think it's an example that will be repeated uh across many different types of companies.

SaaS 没有死。

SaaS is not dead.

嗯，我认为所有 SaaS 公司都很好是不对的，所有 SaaS 公司都死了也是不对的。

Well, I think that it's not true that all SaaS companies are fine and it's also not true that all SaaS companies are dead.

有道理。

Fair enough.

保护自然常被贴上反增长的标签。The Conservation Fund 不同意。他们认为保护土地、野生动物和户外通道与经济机会齐头并进。40 年来，他们以市场速度行动，保护濒危土地，同时支持当地社区。在全美 50 个州保护了 900 万英亩土地，The Conservation Fund 证明他们能带来惠及社区和自然的持久成果。了解更多请访问 conservationfund.org。

Protecting nature is often labeled anti-growth. The Conservation Fund disagrees. They believe protecting land, wildlife, and outdoor access goes hand in hand with economic opportunity. For 40 years, they've moved with market speed to protect at-risk land while supporting local communities. With 9 million acres protected across all 50 states, The Conservation Fund is proving that they deliver lasting outcomes that benefit communities and nature. Learn more at conservationfund.org.

在 AI、智能体式 AI 的世界里，作为人类，我有能力提示说：“我想做一个看起来、感觉起来、做起来像 X 的东西。”然后这项神奇的技术启动并完成它。我最终得到一个产品。有时产品很棒。有时产品很烂。但它正在提高这些工具做到这一点的能力。历史上，我需要一个产品经理、一个设计师、一群工程师来实际构建产品，无论是软件产品还是硬件产品。然而，越来越多地，AI 似乎在完成越来越多的这些工具。你能就这个时代、我们正步入的未来时代、我们正坠入的奇点中人类创造力的未来，给我你的看法吗？人类创造力在哪里发挥作用？在将人类创造力带到实现时刻的过程中，哪些差距仍然需要填补？

In a world of AI, agentic AI, I have this capacity to prompt as a human and say, "I want to make something that looks like, feels like, and does X." And this magical technology takes off and does it. And I end up with a product. Sometimes the product is great. Sometimes the product sucks. But it's improving the ability for these tools to do that. Historically, I would have needed a product manager, a designer, a bunch of engineers to do the actual building of the product, whether it's a software product or a hardware product. Increasingly, though, it seems like AI is doing more and more of those tools. Can you just give me your view on the future of human creativity in this era, this future era that we're waltzing into, the singularity we're falling into? Where does human creativity play a role? And where do the gaps still need to be filled for taking human creativity to the realization moment?

我认为情况是，呃，我们正在用 AI 降低门槛，使得所有的生产，无论是代码还是呃，动态、视频、设计，无论你说什么，呃，如果是数字的，你都在降低实现它的门槛。嗯，每个人都可以参与其中，它更加民主化。讽刺的是，我过去相信，甚至几年前我在我们的年度用户大会 Config 上说过，我说天花板会被 AI 提高。你以前能够做更伟大的事情。那是错的。呃，天花板保持不变。AI 没有提高天花板。不过，人类正在提高天花板。

It's the case, I think, that uh we're lowering the floor with AI, making it so that all of the production, whether it's code or it's uh motion, video, design, whatever you name it, uh if it's digital, you're lowering the floor to make it happen. Um everyone can be part of that and it's more democratized. Ironically, and I I used to believe uh even a few years ago I said it at our annual user conference Config, I said the ceiling will be raised by AI. You'll be able to do greater things before. That was wrong. Uh the ceiling has stayed the same. AI is not raising the ceiling. Humans are raising the ceiling, though.

创意人士、设计师们，当他们选择专注、投入时间、大胆尝试去做别人从未做过的事情时，我们才能看到天花板被抬高。而到了那个节点，问题就变成了：你在意的是处于分布的中心吗？你在意的是平均或普通的结果吗？这对你的任务来说足够吗？还是你需要一些能表明你在意、你花了时间去真正做出这个东西的东西？你需要超越最低标准吗？在软件设计和产品领域，我们看到的软件数量呈指数级增长，比以往任何时候都多。这正是你会预测到的。指数增长在继续。你看看 App Store 的数据。App Store 的数据正是同样的指数增长。而我们看到应用的使用率和利用率却持平了。所以，人们使用的应用数量不变，但你能获取的应用数量却比以往任何时候都多，而且在增长。我认为这恰恰说明，如果你在构建任何类型的软件，就需要让自己与众不同。那么，如何做到呢？不是代码，因为现在任何人都能写代码。那不再是难的部分了。所以，我的观点是：设计是新的代码。它是更高的一层。你必须让你的设计与众不同。你必须有自己的观点，以及好的品牌和营销。而观点，我认为可能是最被忽视的部分。

The creatives, the designers out there, when they choose to focus, invest their time, and to be bold, and try to do something no one else has ever done before, that's when we see the ceiling raised. And at that point it's a question of: do you care about being in the center of distribution? Do you care about a mean or average result? Is that sufficient for your task? Or do you need something that shows that you care, that you took the time to actually go make this thing? Do you need to go and be beyond what is the minimum bar? And in the world of software design and product, we're seeing exponentially more software than ever before. It's exactly what you'd predict. The exponential continues. You look at App Store numbers. The App Store numbers are exactly that same exponential. And we're seeing that the usage and utilization of apps flat. So, people are using just the same amount of apps, but the amount of apps that you can get, it's bigger than ever and growing. And I think it just speaks to, okay, there's a need to differentiate yourself if you're building any kind of software. Well, how do you do that? It's not code because anyone can create code now. That's not the hard part anymore. So, my view is design is the new code. It's the layer above. You have to make it so that your design is differentiated. And you have to have a point of view, and a good brand and marketing. And the point of view I think is the part that is probably missed the most.

那是人的部分。

That's the human part.

不仅仅是人的部分，也是人类感到不适的部分。我认为人们害怕说出非共识的东西。

It's not just the human part, it's also the part that humans are uncomfortable having. I think that folks are scared to say something that's not consensus.

太对了。我的意思是，这就是最伟大的艺术家、最伟大的商业领袖、最伟大的政治家一直展现的：勇于说和做别人不会说或做的事，这正是改变世界的原因。

It's so true. I mean, this is what the greatest artists, the greatest business leaders, the greatest politicians have always demonstrated is the willingness to be brave to say and do the things that no one else would say or do, and that's what changes the world.

我还要把喜剧演员也加进去。

And I would also add comedians to the mix, too.

喜剧演员。

Comedians.

喜剧演员被低估了。

Comedians are underappreciated.

去年我请了 Tony Hinchcliffe 来我们的活动，因为他是如今取消文化时代少数愿意说和做的人之一。

I had Tony Hinchcliffe at our thing last year, because he's like one of the few guys that is willing to say and do things nowadays in the cancel culture era.

但喜剧演员常常以人们 otherwise 听不到的方式说出真相。

But comedians often speak truth in a way that people otherwise couldn't hear.

愿意说出来。

Willing to say things.

这不是关于政治正确，而是关于你是否有能够超越噪音的信息，并且以持续的方式做到？因为看看现在的社交媒体。每一个独特的观点，每一件有趣的事情，都会瞬间扩散到社交媒体的以太中。所以，除非你有某种东西能让你不断产生内容和信息，而且因为如此超出奥弗顿窗口而真正永不过时，否则你无法真正突破并获得任何关注。注意力经济是残酷的。

And it's not about political correctness, it's about do you have a message that can rise above the noise, and do so in a sustained way? Because look at social media right now. Every unique point of view, everything interesting, it gets diffused into the ether of social media instantly. And so, unless you've got something that allows you to keep generating content and a message that is really evergreen because it's so outside of the Overton window, you're not going to be able to actually break through and have any attention. And the attention economy is ruthless.

这也是人类创造力的本质吗？如果你没有做从未做过的事情，你就不是在创造，而是在模仿、复制、复印。但做新的事情就是创造。而新意要求做从未做过的事情。

Is this also what human creativity is? If you're not doing something that's never been done before, you're not creating something, you're mimicking something, you're copying something, you're xeroxing something. But to do something new is to create. And newness requires doing things that have never been done before.

从定义上讲。

By definition.

从定义上讲。

By definition.

因此，你是在这个训练分布之外运作。甚至不是关于在分布均值之外运作，如果你只是提示而没有围绕它的任何高级脚手架，那就是你的起点。但你实际上在做一些突破性的、独特的事情。我确实认为这会得到市场的回报。每个人都会看到。我认为它甚至会得到组织的注意力市场的回报。我已经听到很多人说：‘唉，我今天又收到一份 AI 做的演示文稿。’

And therefore you are operating outside of this distribution of training. It's not even about operating outside the mean of the distribution, which is where you start if you're just prompting without any kind of advanced scaffolding around it. But you're actually doing something that is breaking through and it's unique. And I do think that will be rewarded by the market. Everyone's going to see it. I think it's even rewarded by the attention market of organizations. I'm already hearing from so many like, 'Ugh, I got another deck made by AI today.'

完全同意。

Totally.

我甚至不知道做这个的人——我不知道是不是他们写的。他们甚至知道自己的演示文稿里有什么吗？在 Figma，我们实际上做了一个简单的设置，我们说：‘嘿，如果你在任何写作中使用 AI，就在顶部写上“由 AI 撰写”。’非常简单，非常容易遵循。内部有人开玩笑，但人们确实这么做了。这样我们都能信任，当我们看到某个东西时，我们知道它被足够用心地对待，值得你花时间处理。我认为我们会在信任方面看到一些分化。获得信任的一种方式是用手做东西。另一个重要点是，如果你有愿景，或者你头脑中有关于某物应该如何设计、美学上或体验上应该是什么样子的观点，我认为从用 AI 构建开始很好。它让你越过空白页、空白画布的问题。然后你可以对它做出反应，说：‘这些是所有我不喜欢的东西。我要去修复这些。我要改变它们。’因为来回反复非常有帮助。但如果你有自己的愿景，却信任 AI 来实现它，你是在通过 AI 的镜头来做。而 AI 有它自己的分布。

And I don't even know if the person who made it—I don't know if they wrote it. Do they even know what's in their deck? And at Figma we actually made it so that it was just a simple thing, but we said, 'Hey, if you are using AI in your writing of any kind, just put at the top written with AI.' Very simple, very easy to follow. And people made jokes about it internally, but people do it. And it makes it so that we can all trust that when we see something, we know that it's been cared for enough that it's worth your time to process. And I think that we're going to see some bifurcation here around trust. And one way to get trust is to do something with your hands. The other point that's important is if you have a vision or if you have a point of view in your head of how something should be designed or look aesthetically or from an experiential standpoint, I think it's great to start with building with AI. It gives you something to get past the blank page, blank canvas problem. You can then react to it and say, 'Here are all the things I don't like. I'm going to go fix these things. I'm going to change them up.' Because it's really helpful to have a back and forth. But if you have your own vision and you're trusting AI to implement it, you're doing it through the lens of AI. And AI has kind of its own distribution.

模型拟合它，是的。

The model fit by it, yeah.

是的。所以你不会得到完全你想要的东西。现在，如果你能两者兼顾，这就是我们在 Figma 试图实现的：让代码成为画布上的一种材料，让你可以从构建开始。如果你愿意，你可以构建一个东西。但当你想要思考和动手工作时，你也可以这样做。

Yeah. And so you're not going to get exactly what you want. Now, if you are able to do both, and that's what we're trying to enable in Figma, make code a material on the canvas, make it so that you can go start by building. You can build a thing if you like. But also when you want to think and work with your hands, you can do that, too.

对。

Right.

快速来回切换。

Go back and forth rapidly.

对。我记得 Photoshop 的早期，我从早期就是 avid 用户。图层出现时人们吓坏了，然后所有滤镜出来时、Kai's Power Tools 出来时，大家又说：‘摄影师的角色现在是什么？这像是在摧毁摄影艺术、摄影的创造力。’但它开启了一个新的创造力时代，因为现在出现了新的艺术家，他们可以使用这些滤镜、这些图层工具和能力来重新想象画布上的可能性。它基本上是一个新的工具包。这并不意味着旧的创意人士完美地映射到新的创意系统和工具。但由此产生了创造力和人类潜力的爆发，我们在各个方面推动了边界。感觉我们可能再次进入那个时代。

Right. I remember the early days of Photoshop just having been an avid user from the early days. People freaked out when layers happened and then they freaked out when all the filters came out and when Kai's Power Tools came out and everyone was like, 'What's the role of the photographer anymore? It's like you're destroying the art of photography, the creativity of photography.' But it unleashed a new era of creativity because now these new artists emerged that could use these filters and use these layering tools and capabilities to reimagine what's possible on a canvas. And it was basically a new toolkit. It doesn't mean that the old creatives mapped perfectly to the new creative system and tools. But there was an explosion in creativity and human potential that arose from this and we pushed boundaries in all sorts of ways. Feels like we might be entering that era again.

我对此深信不疑，我认为部分原因就是我描述的关于市场动态的内容。为了获得关注、参与度，为了让人们在意，你必须做一些新的事情。

I'm a big believer in that and I think that part of it is what I described about market dynamics. In order to get attention, in order to get engagement, in order to get people to care, you have to do something new.

你必须真正敢于冒险，尝试大胆的事情。对变革的抵制是真实存在的，关于你的观点，有一件很棒的事你可以用谷歌搜到。查一下 layers 被引入时的邮件列表。人们会说：“这是史上最糟糕的东西。”你能找到。如果你谷歌一下，它就在一个公开可用的邮件列表上。你可以看到所有的反应。

You have to actually be daring and try things that are bold. The resistance to change is real, and there's a great thing you can Google for your point. Look up the mailing list for when layers was introduced. And it's like people going, "This is the worst thing ever." You can find it. If you Google, it's on a mailing list that's publicly available. And you can see all the reactions.

完全同意。

Totally.

但显然它成为了未来。我认为世界上仍然有摄影师在做着令人难以置信的工作，但更大的颠覆，如果我们说实话，是拍照手机。正是它让人们不再购买专门用于摄影的相机，因为最好的相机是随身携带的那个。人们开始用 Instagram 和拍照手机以不同的方式对待摄影。所以对很多人来说它发生了转变，我无法告诉你结果是好是坏。但确实发生了变化。

But obviously it became the future. And I think that there are also still photographers in the world who are doing incredible work, but the bigger disruption, if we're going to be real, it was the camera phone. That was what made it so that people stopped buying cameras that were dedicated to the task of photography because the best camera is the one that's on you. And started treating photography in a different way with Instagram and their camera phone. So it transformed for a lot of people and I can't tell you if it's better or worse as a result. But there was change.

有一种关于人类创造力的观点认为，人类创造力基本上是在无意识中连接点，你在生活中或在你的一组输入、感官输入中看到或经历过所有这些事情，从这些输入中你连接点，然后你推断出世界上可能从未见过的事物的前瞻性观点。你同意这种创造力观点吗？它与 AI 实际所做的有区别吗？而且，我想再次回到 AI 时代人类的独特性。

There's one view on human creativity that human creativity is basically connecting dots in the unconscious that you've seen or experienced all of these things in your life or in your set of inputs, sensory inputs, and from those inputs you connect dots and then you extrapolate a forward view of things that hasn't perhaps been seen in the world before. Do you agree with that view on creativity and is it distinct from actually what AI does? And again, I want to go back to the uniqueness of the human in an AI era.

嗯，我认为人类的一个特点是他们总是在寻求新奇。就像我们的奖励函数与 AI 的不同。我们的损失函数也不同。比如如果我打开这瓶水泼你一身，你对我发火，你赌我肯定不会再做一次。但 AI 呢，你知道，用强化学习你得真的告诉它很多次，你知道，不要那样做。

Well, I think that one thing that happens with humans is they're always seeking novelty. Like our reward function is different than an AI's. Also our loss function. Like if I was to open this bottle of water and splashed all over you and you got mad at me, like you bet I'm not going to do that again. But an AI like, you know, with RL you got like really tell it a bunch of times that you know, you don't do that.

机器人，别踢我。

Robot, stop kicking me.

是的，也许随着架构的演变，这种情况会改变，但总的来说，大脑与我们用 AI 创造的当前系统是不同的。我认为这是未知的。我们对神经科学整体了解不多。我希望我们能达到对神经科学了解更多的那一天，但在创造力方面，那里有根本性的不同。我还认为设计不同于创造力。它不仅仅是创造力，还是解决问题，就像我之前提到的。而两者的结合，我只是觉得它很迷人，因为你有一个用户，你试图解决他们的需求，你试图以一种脱颖而出、富有创意的方式做到这一点，并与他们产生联系。而且，你还必须连接到更广泛的系统。营销和品牌、文化、商业问题等等，并在不同的抽象层次上把所有这些都记在脑子里，同时试图交付一个屏幕或一个流程，从搜索空间的角度来看，这可能是一个组合爆炸，这真的很酷。非常迷人。

Yeah, well, and maybe that'll change with architectures over time, but like overall the brain is different than the current systems that we've made with AI. And I think that it's unknown. We don't know much about neuroscience overall. I'd love to get to the point where we all know more about neuroscience, but something is fundamentally different there when it comes to creativity. And I also think design is different than creativity. It's not just creativity, it's also problem solving like I mentioned earlier. And the combination of the two is I just find it fascinating because you have a user, you're trying to solve their needs, you're trying to do so in a way that stands out as creative and it connects with them. And also, you have to connect to wider systems. The marketing and brand, the culture, the business problems, and so on, and holding all that in your head at different levels of abstraction while trying to deliver a screen or a flow that from a search space standpoint can be a combinatorial explosion is just pretty cool. It's pretty fascinating.

我个人其实非常兴奋于重新发明现有艺术形式和媒体的想法，AI 可以实现更动态的生成，创作者提升一个层次，设置一堆参数，但不一定实际渲染最终产品，而最终产品，就像在电子游戏中一样，是在用户面前实时渲染的。但创作者，比如电子游戏背后的创意团队，正在构建所有对象。他们正在构建故事情节。他们正在构建叙事流程。而它的实现要动态得多，但我觉得它会找到自己的方式。它会渗透到许多完全不同的媒体中。

I'm actually personally really excited about the idea of reinventing existing art form and media where AI can enable more dynamic generation, where the creator steps up a level, sets a bunch of parameters, but doesn't actually necessarily render the final product, but the final product, sort of like in a video game, is rendered on the fly with the user in front of it. But the creator, the creative team behind a video game, for example, is building all of the object. They're building the storyline. They're building the narrative flow. And the realization of that is much more dynamic, but I feel like it's going to find its way. It's going to leech its way into many more totally different media.

我们也有围绕这个的产品。比如在 Figma 设计中，你可以有生成工具和着色器，你可以做很多那样的事情。或者我们有一个叫 Weave 的产品。Weave 基本上是一个基于节点的系统。你可以将模型输出连接到其他输入等等。整个想法是，用 AI 生成并不坏，但你需要一种方法来塑造那个黏土。你需要一种方法来塑造它。而用 Weave，人们做出最惊人的视频和照片作品，总的来说，用它可实现的结果是不可思议的。所以是的，我认为如果你有意图，如果你真的在乎做这项工作，你总能得到更好的结果。而人们，你知道，新模型发布时，人们会有几天的 AI 精神病时刻。而且我认为这也得益于算法推送，最好的结果会浮到顶部。每个人都觉得，这个模型就是一切。然后几天后，好吧好吧，我知道了模型的主要套路。你适应得很快。新奇感消失了。它不再是一种奖励你或激发你多巴胺系统的东西。相反，你会说，好吧，是的，它总是做那件事。我如何超越它？这似乎是我们所处的持续循环。这有点迷人，因为模型在形式领域，数学、网络安全方面越来越好。就像智商点数不断堆叠。然后，对于创造力和设计，整体进展非常渐进。也许某个时候会改变，但我认为这些是不可验证的领域这一事实与此有关。

We have products around that, too. Like in Figma design, you can have generative tools and shaders where you can do very much that. Or we have a product called Weave. And Weave is basically a node-based system. You can connect model outputs into other inputs and such. And the whole idea is like it's not bad to generate with AI, but you need a way to craft that clay. You need a way to mold it. And with Weave, people do like the most amazing video and photo work and overall just like the outcomes that are achievable with it are incredible. So yeah, I think that if you've got the intention, if you actually care to do the work, you can always get to a better result. And people, you know, new model drops, there's like this AI psychosis moment that people are in for a few days. And it's like, I think also aided by algo feeds, the best results rise to the top. Everyone's like, this model is everything. And then a few days later, it's okay, okay, I know the kind of like main tropes of the model. And you adapt fast. Like, the novelty's gone. It no longer is a thing that's kind of like rewarding you or firing off your dopamine system or whatever. And instead, you're like, okay, well, yeah, it always does that thing. How do I move past it? And that seems to be the continued loop we're in. Which is sort of fascinating because models keep getting so good when it comes to these formal domains, math, cybersecurity. Like the IQ points just stack and stack and stack. And then, for creativity and for design, it's very incremental progress overall. Maybe that will change at some point, but I think the fact that these are non-verifiable domains has something to do with it.

这可能是因为，也许这就是人类在 AI 工具包中的角色，即构思、创造、设计，让 AI 做更多的工作，但它让你有能力做更多的工作。你现在特别兴奋或感兴趣的任何艺术或媒体正在涌现吗？

And it's probably the fact that maybe that is the human role in the AI toolkit, which is conceive, create, design, and let the AI do more of the work, but it gives you the ability to do much more work. Any art or media that you're particularly excited about or interested in that's kind of emerging right now?

你知道，当人们做新的 AI 实验时，我觉得很迷人。例如，把它归入媒体类别。前几天有一个设计师艺术家类型的人做了一个网页，实际上它像是一封给 Figma 的信。所以它引起了我的注意，因为你知道，我在算法推送中看到了 Figma 的热门内容。

You know, I find it fascinating when people do sort of like new AI experiments. For example, it puts it in the media category. There was a designer artist type that made a webpage the other day, and it was like a letter to Figma, actually. So, it caught my attention cuz I was, you know, getting the Figma hit on the algo feed.

每次你离开它，再回来，它就会稍微退化一点。它基本上是对注意力的一种评论。但我觉得那真的很酷。

And every time you moved away from it, and came back, it got slightly more degraded. And it was basically a comment on attention. But thought that was really cool.

哦，酷。那是一件艺术品。

Oh, cool. That was a piece of art.

我也这么认为。那是一个网页。

I thought so. It was a webpage.

是的。但我觉得他们的技巧和方式真的很巧妙，不是很多人做过的事情。我见过其他一些类似的东西，但总的来说，我认为这是一种非常酷的做法。它也是一封写得非常好的信。我也喜欢那封信。

Yeah. But like I thought that the technique and the way that they went about it was really neat and like not something that many others have done. I've seen a few other things like that, but overall I thought it was a very cool way to do it. It was also just a very well-written letter. I liked the letter, too.

但没错，我见过类似的东西，我记得以前 NFT 还流行的时候，有人用 AI 做 NFT 艺术，大概是 2019 年左右。但他们有时做的方式真的很了不起。我是说，Holly Herndon 的作品，她把自己的声音变得几乎开源，让人们可以使用。那相当不可思议，而且超前于时代。我觉得这种在“什么是我、什么是集体、什么是独特且可拥有的、什么不是”之间的博弈非常迷人。我一直对那个交叉点很着迷。

But yeah, I see stuff like this, and back in the day I remember seeing people do like NFT art with AI when NFTs were a thing, you know, so it's like 2019 or something like that. But the way they did it sometimes was really remarkable. I mean, Holly Herndon's work around taking her voice and making it so that her voice was something that people could use in an almost open-source way. That was quite incredible and ahead of its time. And I think this sort of play between what is me, what is the collective, and what is it that is unique and ownable versus what is not is quite fascinating. I've always been fascinated by that intersection.

是的，那很酷。就在我们收尾的时候，很多关于 AI 的负面评论是说它剥夺了人的能动性，人的潜力被限制了。你能谈谈你对每个人都有潜力成为创作者、成为设计师的看法吗？以及 AI 可能如何放大每个人，不仅仅是那些所谓的创作者——他们属于某个精英艺术家阶层，在某个特殊建筑里——而是每个人创造的能力，每个人设计和生产世界上事物的能力，以及你现在对此的立场。

Yeah, that's cool. Just as we wrap up, a lot of the commentary on AI that's negative is that it takes away human agency, human potential gets capped out. Can you just talk a little bit about your view on the potential of every human to be a creative, to be a designer, and how AI might perhaps magnify every person, not just the quote creatives where they're in some elite class of artists in some special building, but the ability for every human to create and the ability for every human to design and produce things in the world, and where you sit with that right now.

我觉得这甚至更广泛。我认为作为一个人，无论前 AI 时代还是后 AI 时代，你都有选择。你想消费还是创造？你想走容易的路还是想攀登高山？我现在看到很多的是人们让 AI 替他们思考。在 Figma 少一些，但在我与世界的互动中，我此刻看到很多这种情况。这是一条你可以走的路，但另一条是真正用 AI 来加深你对世界的理解，去学习，去做你以前不敢做的事情，因为那些事情要花太多时间去学或者太难了。并且真正扩展你作为人类生活的潜在方式。对我来说，后者才是有趣的部分。

I think it's even broader. I think it's as a human in general, pre-AI, post-AI, you have a choice. Do you want to consume or create? Do you want to take the easy path or do you want to climb the mountain? And what I'm seeing happen right now a lot is people are letting AI think for them. Less at Figma but more just in my interactions with the world, I just see a lot of this at the moment. And that's one path you can take, but the other one is actually use AI to further your understanding of the world, to learn, to do things you never would have dared to do before because they would have taken so much time to learn or it's so hard. And to really expand the potential ways that you can live as a human. That to me, the latter, is the interesting part.

是的。

Yeah.

前者，我为什么想让别的东西替我思考？我的一生都在琢磨如何思考。我不知道，我只是希望人们用 AI 来创造美好，成为一股力量，而不是仅仅加入蜂群思维。

The former, like why would I want something else to think for me? Like my entire life has been about figuring out how to think. And I don't know, I just hope that people use AI to create good and to go be a force for it rather than just kind of joining the hive mind.

每个人都可以成为创造者。

Everyone can be a maker.

每个人都可以成为创造者。每个人都可以去做这两件事。这关乎意志力和好奇心。如果你好奇并且愿意付出努力，我相信

Everyone can be a maker. Everyone can go do both things. It's about willpower and it's about curiosity. And if you're curious and you're willing to do the work, I believe

你的真理。

your truth.

没错，正是如此。然后我认为你可以去做不可思议的事情。未来我们可能会看到截然不同的格局，我们无法想象的事情成为可能，而我们习以为常的事情不再属于人类日常所做的范畴。具体会是什么样子，我想我们俩都说不准。但事实是，我们都处在巨大变革的边缘，而昨晚 OpenAI 发布的 700 多篇关于各种著名问题的数学论文，对我来说再震撼不过了。那展示了某种东西。我有很多情绪。我不知道如何处理它们。

Yeah, exactly. And then I think that you can go do incredible things. We will probably see a vastly different setup in the future where things that we can't imagine are possible and things we take for granted are no longer in the realm of what humans do every day. How exactly that will look, I don't think either of us can tell. But it is the case that both were on the precipice of great change and nothing hit home for me more than the math drop last night from OpenAI of 700 plus papers on all sorts of very famous problems. That was a show of something. I had a lot of emotions. I don't know how to process them.

我认为那是人类历史上最伟大的发现日。

thought it was the greatest day of discovery in human history.

哦，我是说，事实上，是的。

Oh, I mean, factually, yes.

是的。而且它有些方面是辉煌而激动人心的，有些方面又有点悲伤。

Yes. And also like something about it was like brilliant and exciting and something about it was kind of sad.

是的。

Yeah.

我不知道如何表达这种悲伤，但感觉我们同时失去了一些东西，也得到了一些东西。

And I don't know how to articulate the sadness, but it felt like we lost something and gained something at the same time.

我知道。我抬起头，看向下一个前沿，我认为这些前沿比以往任何时候都更明亮、更广阔、更易触及。所以，我相当兴奋。

I know. I lift my head up and I look at the next frontier and I think that the frontiers are brighter and wider and more accessible than they've ever been. So, I'm pretty excited.

哦，我也很兴奋。我认为世界会看起来很棒，我是个乐观主义者。我认为会有很多挑战，我们会解决它们。

Oh, I'm excited, too. And I think that the world will look amazing and I'm an optimist. I think there's going to be a lot of challenges and we'll figure them out.

是的。

Yeah.

具体如何以及挑战的完整形态，我们还未看到。但没错，我确实认为数学有某种神秘的特质，就像一个未解决的问题。你知道，这个猜想是真的还是假的？如何？为什么？与那种神秘搏斗是件特别的事情。我既对进步和它将使一切成为可能感到兴奋，也认为为失去一点神秘而哀悼并没有错。

How exactly and what the challenges will be in their full form, we have yet to see. But yeah, I do think that math is something that somehow has a quality of mystery like an unsolved problem. Is it, you know, is this conjecture true or false? How? Why? Grappling with that mystery is something that is special. And I'm both excited for the progress and all the things it'll make possible. And also I don't think it's wrong to mourn the loss of a little mystery.

对。说得对。Dylan，这是一次很棒的聊天。我们再去喝一杯吧？

Right. Fair enough. Dylan, this has been a great chat. Should we go over another drink?

听起来不错。

Sounds good.

走吧。

Let's do it.

谢谢，伙计。

Thanks, man.

谢谢。

Thanks.

我全力以赴。我全力以赴。

I'm going all in. I'm going all in.