Naval Ravikant 谈财富、幸福与工作的未来

本期节目由 Tonal 赞助。我对这个产品超级兴奋，一开始我还持怀疑态度。Tonal，引用官网的话，是‘世界上最智能的家庭健身房和私人教练’。一句话总结：这个设备——其实是一套系统——非常适合那些希望将家庭锻炼提升到新水平的人，或者那些只想在极小空间内获得最大性价比的人。Tonal 经过精密设计，成为世界上最先进的力量训练室和私人教练。它利用各种突破性技术帮助你更快地变得更强。我是通过三个不同的朋友了解到 Tonal 的。他们都精通科技。其中一位是前竞技滑雪运动员，尽管他有很长的运动背景，但使用 Tonal 后，他在多项动作中的力量翻了一番。我来描述一下：通过摒弃传统的金属配重、哑铃和杠铃，Tonal 可以提供 200 磅的阻力——听起来不多，但在高端感觉要多得多——而设备比平板电视还小。你可以进行至少 150 种不同的练习。这些独特的技术是 Tonal 独有的，你可以通过触摸按钮以 1 磅的增量调节重量，利用磁铁和电力，因此运动非常流畅。尽管我的车库里已经有一个家庭健身房，但我还是安装了一台 Tonal。我已经用 Tonal 进行了多次锻炼，做了一些在家庭健身房无法做到的事情，比如《4 小时身体》中的砍举练习，各种通常需要更大设备的缆绳练习。例如，离心训练——举个简单的例子，二头肌弯举时，你双手各举 20 磅向上，然后 Tonal 会自动增加重量——因为你可以放下比举起更重的重量——在下降过程中增加到 25 或 30 磅。我还做壶铃摆荡、各种硬拉等等。在一次专注于拉力的 Tonal 锻炼后，我整整一周都感到肌肉酸痛。离心训练的效果真是不可思议。它们还有许多其他非常酷的优势，可以应用到任何你喜欢的动作中。Tonal 会学习你的力量，并为每个动作提供建议的重量推荐，还有详细的进度报告帮助你看到力量的增长。Tonal 还有一个不断增长的专家指导锻炼库，由激励人心的教练带领，从力量训练到有氧运动，你几乎可以做任何事情。每个程序都利用人工智能和其他工程与智能功能，根据你的身体进行个性化定制。实时检查你的姿势，就像私人教练一样。所以试试吧。至少去了解一下，在 YouTube 上看视频，看看你是否能认出某个熟悉的声音。那不是我，我保证。但试试 Tonal，世界上最智能的家庭健身房，在家试用 30 天。如果你不喜欢，可以全额退款。访问 www.tonal.com，结账时使用优惠码 TIM，即可获得 100 美元的智能配件折扣。网址是 www.tonal.com，优惠码 TIM。Tonal：做最强的自己。

This episode is brought to you by Tonal. I'm super excited about this one, and I was skeptical of it in the beginning. Tonal, quote, 'is the world's most intelligent home gym and personal trainer,' end quote. That's the tagline from their website, folks. To give you the one-sentence summary, this device—really a system—is perfect for anyone looking to take their home workouts to the next level, or someone who just wants to get maximum bang for the buck in a tiny, tiny footprint of space. Tonal is precision-engineered to be the world's most advanced strength studio and personal trainer. It uses breakthrough technology of all different types to help get you stronger faster. I was introduced to Tonal by three different friends. All of them are tech-savvy. One of them is a former competitive skier who's doubled his strength in a number of movements using Tonal, even though he has a long athletic background. And I'll paint a picture for you: by eliminating traditional metal weights, dumbbells, and barbells, Tonal can deliver 200 pounds of resistance—which doesn't sound like a lot, but it actually feels like a lot more at the high end—in a device smaller than a flat-screen TV. And you can perform at least 150 different exercises. These different technologies are exclusive to Tonal, and you can dial weights up and down with the touch of a button in one-pound increments using magnets and electricity, so the movement is extremely smooth. And even though I have a home gym already in my garage, I'm still getting a Tonal installed. I've used Tonal for multiple workouts now to do things I just cannot do in my home gym, such as the chop and lift exercises from The 4-Hour Body, all sorts of cable exercises that would usually involve much, much bigger pieces of equipment. Eccentric training, for instance—you can do, to give a simple example, bicep curls where you are lifting, let's just say, 20 pounds in each hand up, and then Tonal will automatically increase the weight—because you can lower more than you can lift—to say 25 or 30 pounds on the way down. And I do kettlebell swings, I do all sorts of deadlifts, this, that, and the other thing. And after one workout on Tonal focusing on pulling, I was blasted for a full week. It's really incredible what you can do with eccentrics. They also have all sorts of other really, really cool advantages that you can apply to any of your favorite movements. Tonal learns from your strength and provides suggested weight recommendations for every move, with detailed progress reports to help you see your strength grow. Tonal also has a growing library of expert-led workouts by motivating coaches, from strength training to cardio, so you can do really just about everything. Every program is personalized to your body using artificial intelligence and other aspects of the engineering and smart features. Check your form in real time, just like a personal trainer. So try it out. Try Tonal—at least check it out, watch the videos on YouTube, and see if you can pick out a familiar voice. It's not me, I'll say that. But try Tonal, the world's smartest home gym, for 30 days in your home. And if you don't love it, you can return it for a full refund. So visit www.tonal.com for $100 off of smart accessories when you use promo code TIM at checkout. That's www.tonal.com, promo code TIM. Tonal: be your strongest.

本期节目由 ShipStation 赞助。假期快到了，我们知道人们会比以往任何时候都更多地在线购物。由于疫情等原因，这些电子商务趋势都加速了。如果你是一个电商卖家，你准备好迎接创纪录的在线购物季了吗？用 ShipStation 做好准备。ShipStation.com 是管理 and 发货最快、最简单、最实惠的方式。只需点击几下，你就可以管理订单、打印折扣运单，并快速发货。让你和你的客户都过个更愉快的假期。ShipStation 消除了假期发货的麻烦。无论你在哪里销售——亚马逊、Etsy、通过 Shopify 的网站或其他平台——ShipStation 都能将所有订单整合到一个简单的界面中。ShipStation 与所有主要承运商合作：USPS、FedEx、UPS，甚至国际承运商。你可以每次比较并选择最佳的运输解决方案。而且你可以享受通常只留给大型财富 500 强公司的邮费折扣。难怪 ShipStation 是在线卖家的首选。现在，我的听众——也就是你们——可以使用优惠码 TIM 免费试用 ShipStation 60 天。只需前往主页 ShipStation.com，点击主页顶部的麦克风，然后输入 TIM。就这么简单。前往 ShipStation.com，然后输入优惠码 TIM。ShipStation.com：让发货成为现实。

This episode is brought to you by ShipStation. The holiday season is fast approaching, and we know that people will be buying more stuff online than ever before. All of these trends to e-commerce have been accelerated due to COVID and much more. If you're an e-commerce seller, are you ready to meet the demands of a record-breaking online shopping season? Be ready with ShipStation. ShipStation.com is the fastest, easiest, and most affordable way to manage and ship your orders. In just a few clicks, you're managing orders, printing out discounted shipping labels, and getting your products out fast. Happier holidays for you and your customers. ShipStation takes the hassle out of holiday shipping. No matter where you're selling—on Amazon, Etsy, your website via Shopify, or other platforms—ShipStation brings all of your orders into one simple interface. And ShipStation works with all of the major carriers: USPS, FedEx, UPS, even international. You can compare and choose the best shipping solution every time. And you can access the same postage discounts that are usually reserved for large Fortune 500 companies. It's no wonder that ShipStation is the number one choice of online sellers. And right now, my listeners—that's you guys—can try ShipStation free for 60 days when you use offer code TIM. Just go to the homepage, ShipStation.com, click on the microphone at the top of the home page, and type in TIM. That's it. Go to ShipStation.com, then enter offer code TIM. ShipStation.com: make ship happen.

在这个高度，我可以全速跑半英里，然后手才开始抖。我能问一下吗？我是一个电子有机体，活体组织。大家好，男孩女孩们，女士们，细菌们。我是蒂姆·费里斯，欢迎收听另一期《蒂姆·费里斯秀》，我的工作始终是采访和解析来自不同领域的顶尖表现者。我今天的嘉宾是一位亲爱的朋友。他很少做播客。我们稍后会对此做一个免责声明。纳瓦尔·拉维康特。你可以在 Twitter 上找到他，账号是 @naval。他是 AngelList 的联合创始人兼董事长。他是一位天使投资人，投资了 200 多家公司，包括许多超级成功的公司，如 Twitter、Uber、Notion、OpenDoor、Postmates 和 Wish。名单很长很长。你可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或任何你收听播客的地方订阅纳瓦尔关于财富和幸福的播客。你也可以在他的博客 nav.al 上找到更多纳瓦尔的内容。还有蒂姆——也就是我——去看看我在 2015 年对他做的非常受欢迎的采访，那次采访被提名了年度播客。你可以在 tim.blog/naval 找到那期节目以及资源和更多内容。纳瓦尔，欢迎回到节目。

At this altitude, I can run flat out for a half mile before my hands start shaking. Can I ask? I'm a cybernetic organism, living tissues. Hello boys and girls, ladies and germs. This is Tim Ferriss, welcome to another episode of The Tim Ferriss Show, where it is always my job to interview and deconstruct world-class performers from all different fields. My guest today is a dear friend. He does very few podcasts. We're going to get into a disclaimer around that. Naval Ravikant. You can find him at @naval on Twitter. He is the co-founder and chairman of AngelList. He's an angel investor and has invested in more than 200 companies, including many mega successes such as Twitter, Uber, Notion, OpenDoor, Postmates, and Wish. It is a long, long list. You can subscribe to Naval's podcast on wealth and happiness on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. You can also find his blog at nav.al for even more Naval. Plus Tim—that's me—check out my wildly popular interview with him from 2015, which was nominated for Podcast of the Year. You can find that and resources and much more at tim.blog/naval. Naval, welcome back to the show.

嗯，谢谢邀请。如果我没记错的话，我在年度播客评选中被杰米·福克斯碾压了。没错，这次我需要弱一点的对手。如果你今年能低调一点，拜托了。我会尽力的。

Yeah, thanks for having me. If I recall correctly, I was crushed in Podcast of the Year by Jamie Foxx. So that's right, I need weaker competition this time around. If you could just tone it down this year, please. I will do my best.

是啊，杰米基本上——只要设备还能运转，我完全可以是一个毫无反应的重症监护病人。杰米·福克斯是完美的表演者，所以他在播客界是强大的对手。但你是另一种类型，我知道你经常被邀请做播客。那么你想要什么样的免责声明呢？

Yeah, Jamie basically—I could have been a completely non-responsive critical care patient as long as the equipment functioned. Jamie Foxx is the consummate performer, so he is formidable competition in podcast. But you are a different breed, and I understand that you get asked to do podcasts a lot. So what type of disclaimer would you like?

嗯，我不再上别人的播客了。我必须为你破例，因为你是 OG（元老）。你让我出名了。你是个好朋友，坦率地说，如果不是你，我根本不会被人知道。所以我必须感谢你，并满足你让我回来的请求。我通常不再做播客了，或者至少不做别人的播客，有几个原因。首先，我不相信续集。我觉得续集都很烂。

Yeah, I don't go on other people's podcasts anymore. I had to make an exception for you because you're the OG. You put me on the map. You're a good friend, and frankly, I wouldn't even be known if it weren't for you. So I definitely have to thank you and honor your request to have me back. I generally don't do podcasts anymore, or at least other people's podcasts, for a couple of reasons. First is, I just don't believe in sequels. I think sequels suck.

你看电影续集之类的，通常都很糟糕。成本翻三倍，冗长拖沓，创作者有了自负和名声要维护。他们已经把想说的说完了，所以在某种程度上只是重复自己。也许第一部时，他们把一个酝酿了十年或三十年的想法阐述出来，听起来很棒。但到了续集，无论是书还是电影，他们必须拿出同样好的东西，却只有两年时间。这真的很难。所以我认为续集只会让所有人难堪，我不喜欢续集。但我们还是来了。续集的好处是：赚钱，人们想要，人们渴望，因为有一种熟悉感。但希望我们不会太丢脸。是的，我不做续集。这次破个例，看看效果如何。只是别让杰米·福克斯再来了，至少今年别。

Right, you look at sequels in movies and whatnot, and they're usually pretty bad. They cost three times as much, they're long-winded, the person now has an ego and a reputation to defend. They've already said what they were going to say, so they're just repeating themselves to some level. Maybe the first run they took an idea they've had for a decade or three decades and expounded on it, and it sounded great. Then in the sequel, whether it's a book or a movie, they have to come up with something equally good but only have two years to do it. It's just really difficult. So I think sequels just make everybody look bad, and I'm not a fan of sequels. Yet here we are. The thing about sequels: they make money, people want them, people crave them because there's a certain familiarity. But hopefully we won't embarrass ourselves too much. So yes, I don't do sequels. We'll make an exception here and kind of see how it goes. Just don't have Jamie Foxx back on, at least not this year.

嗯，我现在看着你的推特账号，作为开启对话的框架。这对我来说可能是个奇怪的起点。经常听这个节目的人会知道我不常这么做。但我想知道两件事：你在推特上关注了零个人，却有近百万粉丝。还有，美国现在 trending 的是杰米·福克斯 hilarious。他就在你旁边，他提醒我这个人压不住。所以让我们谈谈你的账号。我觉得你的账号很迷人，你对推特的使用很迷人，我想从你个人资料头图里那张教授在黑板的照片开始。照片里的人是谁？我想我认出了这个人，但我想听你描述为什么选这张照片，以及他是谁。

Well, I am looking right now, as a framework for starting this conversation, at your Twitter account. That might seem like an odd place for me to start. People who listen to this show a lot will know that I don't often do that. But I want to know two things: you follow zero people on Twitter, yet you have almost a million followers. Also, trending right now in the United States is Jamie Foxx hilarious. He's right next to you, he's reminding me this cannot keep this guy down. So let's talk about your account. I find your account fascinating, I find your use of Twitter fascinating, and I'd like to begin with a photograph of a professor at a blackboard that you have as your profile header. Who is the person in the photograph? I think I recognize this person, but I want to hear you describe why you chose this photograph and who it is.

是的，那是理查德·费曼教授。他是量子电动力学领域的先驱，参与了曼哈顿计划。他因《别闹了，费曼先生！》等书而广为人知。他在物理学界备受尊敬。他去世有一阵子了，但他发明了很多量子电动力学，费曼路径积分。他参与了曼哈顿计划。非常非常聪明的人。我喜欢他，因为费曼是我遇到的第一个既做科学和严肃工作、在所谓现实生活中有所成就，同时又是个有趣角色的人。他是个快乐的人，深具哲学思想，不把自己或生活太当回事。他欣赏生活的奥秘，享受生活，一路上乐趣无穷。对我来说，他就像一个全栈的知识黑客，对我小时候的成长非常有启发。尽管我读了很多哲学和普通非虚构作品，我的英雄——尽管我在商界、科技界——我的英雄是科学家。我认为应用科学是推动人类前进的引擎。它最终变成技术，技术让我们能够从事文明的各种追求，而不是为基本生存而挣扎。所以我认为科学家仍然是人类历史上最被低估的英雄，费曼是伟人之一。他在生活方式上有很多值得钦佩的地方，尽管最近有人试图取消他，但他们试图取消所有人。

Yeah, that's Professor Richard Feynman. He was a pioneer in the field of quantum electrodynamics, part of the Manhattan Project. He's known colloquially for his book 'Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!' and a couple of related ones like 'What Do You Care What Other People Think?' But he's also very well regarded in the field of physics. He passed away a while back, but he invented a lot of quantum electrodynamics, Feynman path integrals. He was part of the Manhattan Project. Brilliant, brilliant guy. I loved him because Feynman was one of the first characters I encountered that did science and serious work and was accomplished in so-called real life, but was also a character. He was a happy person, deeply philosophical, didn't take himself nor life too seriously. He appreciated the mysteries of life, appreciated living life, and had a lot of fun along the way. To me, he was like a full-stack intellectual hacker of life, and was very inspirational to me as a kid growing up. Even though I read a lot of philosophy and normal non-fiction, my hero—and even though I'm in the business world, the tech world—my heroes are scientists. I think applied science is the engine that pulls humanity forward. It eventually becomes technology, and technology allows us to engage in all kinds of pursuits around civilization rather than scrapping for basic subsistence and survival. So I think scientists are still the most unsung heroes of human history, and Feynman was one of the greats. He was admirable in many regards as to how he lived his life, although I think recently they tried to cancel him, but they try to cancel everybody.

费曼是个角色，当然。他是一个让我着迷了几十年的人物。实际上，我很少收藏东西，但几年前在拍卖会上买了他的一些论文和画作，因为那是它们首次公开。我可以给你看一些他在曼哈顿计划中的方程，想想就觉得疯狂。不过，我的迷恋在很多方面是信息不足的，因为我没有足够的科学素养来充分欣赏他在物理学上的天才。但我能欣赏他的聪明、他对假设的质疑，以及他对制服和其他荣誉的厌恶，尤其是他获得的一些奖项，他似乎特别不喜欢。他有一句名言：'科学是对专家无知的信仰。' 这很有趣，因为现在很多人在推特上说'相信科学'或'根据科学'，你必须意识到没有大写的科学这种东西。科学的基础是怀疑；它完全关乎可证伪性。大卫·多伊奇是我目前现代在世物理学家中的英雄之一，他是波普尔主义者——他信奉卡尔·波普尔的哲学。他基本上说，如果不可证伪，就不是科学。如果你无法证明它是假的，如果它无论上下左右都是真的，那就不是科学。它不需要信仰。你应该随时能够挑战它。它应该做出不明显的、有风险的预测，然后这些预测应该被检验。你不能事后改变目标、移动球门柱，或改变预测的设置方式。这些是优秀科学的标志：可证伪性、独立可验证性，以及做出有风险且狭窄的预测，细节在事前事后都难以改变。这样你才能得到好的科学和好的解释，而不是靠推特上的人投票。那是政治。就像现在一切都变成了政治。科学也变成了政治。人们被政治化，有大科学。但我认为费曼会对此非常不满。他通常是个快乐的角色，非政治化，有意不卷入这些事情。但我想他会意识到那实际上不是科学，而是伪装成科学。它几乎变成了社会科学。至于推特，纳西姆·塔勒布是我最喜欢的推特关注者之一，尽管他有点暴躁。

Feynman is a character, certainly. He is a figure who has fascinated me for decades. Actually, I collect very few things, but managed to buy some of his papers and drawings at auction a handful of years ago because it was the first time they had been made available. I can show you some of his equations from the Manhattan Project, which is wild to think about. My fascination, though, is in many respects uninformed because I don't have the scientific literacy to fully appreciate the genius he brought to bear on physics. But I could appreciate his cleverness, his questioning of assumptions, and also his distaste for uniforms and other accolades, most notably some of the prizes he was awarded that he seemed to have a particular dislike for. He famously said, 'Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.' It's so funny because these days so many people on Twitter are saying 'believe in science' or 'according to science,' and you have to realize there's no such thing as science with a capital S. The foundation of science is doubt; it is all about falsifiability. David Deutsch, who is one of my current modern living physicist heroes, is a Popperian—he subscribes to Karl Popper's philosophy. He basically says that if it's not falsifiable, it's not scientific. If you can't prove it false, if it's true up or down or left or right, it's not science. It doesn't require belief. You should be able to challenge it at all times. It should make risky predictions that are not obvious, and those predictions should then be tested. You shouldn't be able to after the fact change the goal, move the goalpost, or change how the predictions were set up. Those are the hallmarks of good science: falsifiability, independent verifiability, and making risky and narrow predictions with details that are hard to vary both before and after the fact. That's how you end up with good science and good explanations, not by people on Twitter voting. That's politics. Like everything has become politics now. Science has become politics too. People are politicized, and there's big science. But I think Feynman would be very unhappy with that. He was just a generally happy character and non-political, intended not to get involved in these things. But I think he would realize that that is not actually science, but it's masquerading as science. It's almost becoming social science. And going to Twitter, like Nassim Taleb is one of my favorite Twitter followers even though he's a bit cantankerous.

他脾气暴躁，是的。

He's cantankerous, yeah.

是的，他脾气暴躁。他肯定惹恼了很多人。但你知道，你想听真话，就得准备好受点伤。他最近发了一条很棒的推文，我转发了，肯定让很多人恼火，他说：'教育的对立面不是无知。教育的对立面是接受社会科学教育。' 我觉得这很搞笑。但这话伤人，因为其中有些道理。如果完全没有道理，就不会伤人。如果我说'蒂姆·费里斯很胖'，那只会从你身上弹开。但如果我说'蒂姆·费里斯和所有假大师'，那可能会击中我们，因为我们……

Yeah, he's cantankerous. He annoys people for sure. But you know, you want to hear the truth, you gotta be prepared to be hurt a little bit. He had a great tweet recently that I retweeted, which I'm sure made a lot of people mad, where he said: 'The opposite of education is not ignorance. The opposite of education is an education in social science.' I thought that was hilarious. But it hurts because there's some truth to it. If there was no truth to it, it wouldn't hurt at all. If I said 'Tim Ferriss is fat,' that would just bounce right off of you. But if I said 'Tim Ferriss and all of the fake gurus,' that might hit us right because we...

我怀疑在某个深层面上，有一部分是真实的。所以我认为，就像社会科学一样，它确实会把你引向无知的道路，因为它关乎社会，而任何社会性的东西都关乎群体思维和群体行为。个体可以追求真理，但群体追求的是共识，因为如果一个群体没有共识，就无法和睦相处。如果无法和睦相处，它就会分崩离析，产生冲突。所以，你最后能找到真理的地方就是大群体。一旦你把科学变成关于大群体、关于投票和共识的东西，你就不是在真正实践科学了。

I suspect there's some deep level, there's a part of that that's true. So I think the same way, like with social science, it does kind of lead you down the road to ignorance because it's about social, and anything social is about groupthink and group behavior. Individuals can search for truth, but groups search for consensus, because if a group doesn't have consensus, it can't get along. If it can't get along, it falls apart and there's conflict. So the last place you're going to find truth is in large groups. And the moment you make science about large groups and about voting and about consensus, you're not really practicing science anymore.

是的，大写 S 的科学是危险的，非常危险。那是宣传。它又变得像宏观经济学一样。另一句名言是：‘宏观比微观容易。’所以大科学相当于宏观经济学，而小科学相当于微观经济学，就是我在实验室里或电脑前尝试各种东西。就像宏观经济学一样，你可以挑选任何数据来证明任何观点。对于大科学，你可以挑选任何论文。看看现在互联网上关于 COVID 含义的争论。你可以走进那个镜子大厅，找到所谓的科学证据来支持许多观点，取决于你选择哪些论文来摘樱桃。于是我们又回到了共识。但科学不是靠共识来做的。它应该通过实验、可验证性、可证伪性、严格测试来完成。在理想的科学世界里，你不会去调查一万名科学家，而是挑选最聪明的那一位。但现在这很难做到。没人能就谁是最聪明的科学家达成一致。所以不幸的是，我认为科学的本质正在被腐蚀，这始于我们让所谓的社会科学伪装成科学的那一天。当我们说心理学是一门科学，政治学可以是一门科学，等等，并且你可以把科学方法应用到这些东西上时，我认为那就是我们开始腐蚀科学，或者至少是‘科学’这个词的那一天。所以真正的科学如今被局限在一个很小的角落里：物理学，也许还有分子生物学、化学、数学、计算理论。但这是一个相当有限的集合。

Yeah, and the science with a capital S is dangerous, very dangerous. It's propaganda. It then becomes like macroeconomics again. Another quote: 'It's easier to macro than it is to micro.' So big science is the equivalent of macroeconomics, whereas the equivalent of microeconomics is little science, which is me in a lab or me with my computer trying out various things. Just like with macroeconomics, you can pick and choose whatever data you want to prove whatever point you want. With big science, you can pick or choose whatever papers you want. Look at the fights right now on the internet about what COVID means. You can go down that hall of mirrors and find scientific, quote-unquote, substantiation for many points of view, depending on which papers you choose to cherry-pick. So then we reduce back to consensus. But again, science isn't done by consensus. It should be done by experimentation, verifiability, falsifiability, rigorous testing. In an ideal science world, you don't go and survey 10,000 scientists; you actually pick the one smartest scientist. But that's very hard to do now. No one can agree on who the smartest scientist is. So unfortunately, I think the nature of what science is is being corrupted, and that started the day we let the so-called social sciences masquerade as sciences. The day we said psychology is a science, and politics can be a science, and so on, and you can apply the scientific methods to those things, then I think that's the day we start to corrupt science, or at least the word science. So real science these days is relegated to a very small corner: physics, maybe molecular biology, chemistry, mathematics, theory of computation. But it's a fairly limited set.

是的，是的。我有一位非常精通定量分析的朋友曾说过：大多数以‘科学’结尾的学科实际上并不是科学。好吧，有些例外。计算机科学？如果它是硬科学，那就是科学。神经科学可能是个例外。但很多时候，如果后面加了‘科学’，它实际上并不是像卡尔·波普尔所说的那样可证伪的。它无法通过实验被证明或证伪。至少这是对的。如果不存在某种理论上可以证伪它的实验，那它就不是科学。

Yeah, yeah. A very quantitatively literate friend of mine said at one point: most of the disciplines that have 'science' at the end of them are not actually science. All right, some exceptions. Computer science? Computer science is science if it's hard. Neuroscience might be an exception. But very often, if there's 'science' appended to it, it is not in fact something that is falsifiable according to someone like Karl Popper. It cannot be proven or disproven using experiment. At least that's right. If there isn't some experiment that could theoretically disprove it, then it's not science.

这就像‘诚实的亚伯’律师事务所。如果他需要在名称里加上‘诚实’，那你就得怀疑了。同样，如果他们在词里加上‘科学’，除了你说的计算机科学和神经科学，你也得怀疑。

It's like Honest Abe's law firm. If he needs to put 'honest' in the title, then you have to wonder. So the same way, if they put 'science' in the word, other than as you said computer science and neuroscience, you sort of have to wonder.

我们来看看费曼的几句名言。有几句话我经常思考。第一句，我认为这非常适用于媒体中的科学，尤其是一个让我很困扰的术语：‘研究证明’或‘研究表明’，就像大写 S 的‘科学表明’，这其实不是一回事。事实可以被严重扭曲。费曼的这句话是：‘我很早就学会了知道某物的名字和知道某物之间的区别。’

Let's look at a couple of quotes from Feynman. There are a few that I think about a lot. Number one, and I think this is really applicable with respect to science in media, particularly a term that bothers me a lot: 'studies prove' or 'studies show,' just like capital-S 'science shows,' which isn't really a thing. The facts can get contorted quite a lot. The quote from Feynman is: 'I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.'

是的，这是一个非常深刻的观点。我认为很多时候我们只是用另一个定义来定义某物，或者只是抛出一个术语，好像那就意味着我们知道某物。这是记忆和理解之间的区别。理解才是你想要的。你希望能够用简单的句子从基础开始用十种不同的方式描述它，并重新推导出你需要的任何东西。如果你只是记忆，你就迷失了。所以我认为这是我经常纠结的事情之一：不断回头，一遍又一遍地阅读基础，试图理解它们。不一定非要拥有那种在学术界非常诱人的知识大厦。但任何在现实世界中运作过的人都知道，在现实世界中，你因为基于基础做出良好的判断和决策而获得报酬。例如，如果你高水平地掌握算术、统计学、概率论，并且理解一些基础数学，你就拥有了在生活中成功所需的所有数学。你不需要微积分，甚至不需要三角学、数论或集合论之类的东西，除非你进入一个深度技术领域或数学。然而，我们在学校里花了那么多时间学习微积分预备和微积分，而选修这些课程的学生甚至不擅长基础数学。所以基础非常重要。那是钢铁框架，是你一生所需的理解基础。太多东西被简化为记忆，以及把事物理解为名称和定义。我认为费曼的例子：他父亲会带他散步，他们会看到鸟。他父亲会说，‘这只鸟是某种莺。’但这并没有告诉你任何关于鸟的事情。它告诉你的是关于人类的事情。人类给那只鸟起了那个名字。实际上，那只鸟喜欢在这个时候单腿站立，喜欢从羽毛里捉虱子，喜欢吃这些东西，它这样飞是因为那个原因，这些是它的天敌，这些是它的猎物。这些才是真正让你理解的东西。谁在乎那只鸟叫什么？鸟的名字无关紧要。你在职业生涯中看到很多行业都经常发生这种情况：行话。人们试图通过说‘嗯，我理解这个术语和那个术语以及这个术语的意思’来保护他们的知识。但现实是，大多数人实际上并不了解这些事物底层的含义。我发现这在会计中非常常见。很多商业人士不懂会计，甚至很多会计师对事物有花哨的词汇，但当你深入挖掘时，他们并不真正理解底层的原理。如果你只是理解原理，即使你不懂那些词汇，你也会在例如谈判交易中拥有优势，因为你会理解底层棋子实际上是如何在棋盘上移动的，而不是它们叫什么。

Yeah, this is a very deep point. I think that a lot of times we just define something with another definition, or we just throw out a piece of jargon as if that means we know something. It's a difference between memorization and understanding. Understanding is the thing that you want. You want to be able to describe it in ten different ways in simple sentences from the ground up, and rederive whatever you need. If you just memorize, you're lost. So I think this is one of the things that I get stuck on a lot: just keep going back and reading the basics over and over, trying to understand them. Don't necessarily have that tall edifice of knowledge that is very seductive in academia. But as anyone who's operated much in the real world knows, in the real world you get paid for making good judgments and decisions based on the basics. For example, if you know arithmetic, statistics, probability at a high level, and you understand some basic math, you have all the math that you need to succeed in life. You don't need calculus or even trigonometry or number theory or set theory or any of these kinds of things, unless you're going into a deeply technical field or mathematics. Yet we spend so much of our time in school covering pre-calc and calculus when the kids who are taking those courses aren't even that good at basic math. So the basics are really important. That's the steel frame, the foundation for understanding that you need to get through life. Too much of it is reduced to memorization and understanding things as names and as definitions. I think the Feynman example: his dad would take him for walks and they would see birds. His dad would say, 'This bird is such and such a warbler.' But that doesn't tell you anything about the bird. That tells you about humans. Humans gave that bird that name. Really, the bird likes to stand on one leg at this point, it likes to pick lice from its feathers, it likes to eat these kinds of things, it flies this way for that reason, these are its predators, these are its prey. Those are the kinds of things that really give you understanding. Who cares what the bird is called? The name of the bird is irrelevant. You see a lot of professions in professional life where this happens a lot: jargon. People try to protect their knowledge by basically saying, 'Well, I understand this term and that term and what this term means.' But the reality is most people don't actually know what these things mean underneath. I find this very common in accounting. A lot of business people don't know accounting, and even a lot of accountants will have fancy words for things, but when you dig underneath, they don't really understand the principle of what's going on below it. If you just understand the principles, even if you don't understand the words, you will have an advantage in, for example, negotiating deals, because you'll understand underneath how the pieces are actually moving on the board, as opposed to what they're called.

我只想指出，培养那种……

I just want to point out that developing that...

基础知识就像学习篮球罚球的基本动作，而不是成为迈克尔·乔丹。用非常有限的色彩作画，如果你花几周——甚至不用几周，几天——通过一个不错的 YouTube 教程或一本书掌握会计基础，你就能做出明显更好的决策。我想强调，这不需要硕士学位或博士学位，也不需要任何那种能让你脱颖而出的承诺。经营企业比教科书更能教会你会计。不过，你可能需要学习某些惯例，因为你需要它们来与他人高效沟通。当你说一件事时，他们能理解。这就是行话有用的地方，因为它可以压缩知识，而不必每次都从头解释。但行话没用的时候，是当它成为理解的替代品时。理解才是关键。那是人类区别于其他动物的地方，也是我们区别于机器人的地方：我们真正理解表面之下的东西。例如，在人工智能领域，有一个新算法 GPT-3，它很热门，用于文本补全。所以人们说：“嘿，我能写出非常逼真的文章，AI 来了，它会抢走所有工作。”不，因为 AI 并不真正理解表面之下的东西。如果我问：“你为什么写这个？”或“这是什么意思？”它很快就会露馅。所以你总是要追求理解，而不是死记硬背。你应该能用你知道的每种语言以五种不同方式重新表述它；否则，你并没有真正理解它。好消息是，你不需要理解太多东西。

Foundational knowledge is akin to learning the basics of shooting foul shots in basketball. It is not becoming Michael Jordan. With a very limited set of colors with which to paint, if you spend a few weeks—maybe not even a few weeks, a few days—with a decent YouTube tutorial or book gathering the basics of accounting, you will be able to make significantly better decisions. I just want to underscore that this is not a master's degree or PhD or any type of commitment like that that can separate you from the pack in terms of advantage. Running a business will teach you better accounting than a textbook. Now, you may need to learn certain conventions because you need those to communicate with other humans so that there's efficient communication. When you say one thing, they understand that thing. That's where jargon can be useful because it can be a compressed way of communicating knowledge rather than having to try and explain it from first principles every time. But when it's not useful is when it becomes a substitute for understanding. Understanding is a thing. That's what separates humans from other animals. That's what separates us from the robots: that we actually understand what's going on underneath. For example, in the artificial intelligence world, there's a new algorithm, GPT-3, which is the rage, which is text completion. So people are saying, "Hey, I can make up really plausible-sounding writing, and so the AI is here and is going to take all the jobs." Well, no, because the AI doesn't actually know what's going on underneath. If I were to ask a question, "Why did you write that?" or "What does that mean?" it would very quickly fall apart. So you always want to strive for understanding, not for memorization. You should be able to rearticulate it five different ways in every language that you know; otherwise, you don't really understand it. And the good news is you don't have to understand that many things.

说到这个话题，费曼有句名言：“大自然只用最长的线来编织她的挂毯。”他的意思是，要理解物理学的全部知识，你只需要掌握几个基本原理。并不多。随着物理学越来越先进，我们实际上在统一理论，把它们合并成一个东西，就像我们对电和磁，或者统计力学与热力学所做的那样。那些结果证明是一回事。目前我们正试图对引力和量子力学做同样的事，在圈量子引力或弦理论中调和它们。所以你只需要理解几个基本的东西，然后你会看到它们反复出现。例如，我学习物理和计算机科学只是为了娱乐，对我没有实际应用。但我读到过一个非常有趣的理论，叫做所罗门诺夫归纳法。它基本上被形式化为奥卡姆剃刀：最短的答案是正确的。但它比那更高级。它说，如果你想弄清楚某事发生的原因，你列出所有可能的原因，所有不同的理论，然后根据它们的压缩程度、简短程度和可能性来权衡每个理论。这给出了概率，也就给出了为什么那个理论成立的解释。费曼在一个完全不同的领域有一个非常相似且优雅的东西。他说，如果你想理解为什么这个粒子走了那条路径，为什么这个光子走了那条路径，你要看那个光子可能走的所有路径，然后根据每条路径的可能性进行概率求和。这实际上是同一个观察，只不过一个关于光子穿越时空，另一个关于因果关系以及事件发生的原因和背后的理论。这是两个完全不同的领域，两个完全不同的人物思考着完全不同的事情。这些是各自领域非常基础的理论，但深层次上它们其实是相同的。对我来说，这很迷人。它展示了我们视为复杂的东西有多少实际上是从一组非常简单的规则中涌现出来的。所以理解是值得追求的东西，而不是词汇。即使你使用像所罗门诺夫归纳法和费曼路径积分理论这样的花哨词汇——不管它叫什么，我甚至不知道确切的名字——名字无关紧要。概念本身才迷人。

While we're on the topic, Feynman has a quote: "Nature uses only the longest threads to weave her tapestry." What he means is that there are only a few basic principles you have to understand to grasp the sum total of our knowledge in physics. There's not a lot. And as physics becomes more advanced, we're actually unifying theories, collapsing them into one thing, like we did with electricity and magnetism, or statistical mechanics and heat and thermodynamics. Those turn out to be one thing. We're trying to do that currently with gravity and quantum mechanics, reconciling them in quantum loop gravity or string theory. So you just have to understand a few basic things, and then you'll see them recurring over and over. For example, I study and read physics and computer science just for entertainment. There's no practical application for me. But there's this really interesting theory I was reading about called Solomonoff induction. It's basically formalized as Occam's razor: the shortest answer is the correct one. But it's more advanced than that. It says if you want to figure out why something happened, you take all the different reasons it could have happened, all the different theories, and then you weigh each of them based on how compressed they are, how short they are, how likely they are. That gives you the probability, which gives you the explanation for why that theory happened. Feynman has a very similar and elegant thing in a completely different field. He says if you want to understand why this particle took that path, why this photon took that path, you look at all the possible paths that photon could have taken and you weigh them, summing them probabilistically based on how likely that path was. It's actually the same observation, except one is about photons traveling through space-time and the other is about causality and why an event may have happened and the theory behind that. These are two completely different fields and two completely different characters thinking about two completely different things. These are very fundamental theories in their fields, but deep down they're actually the same. To me, that's fascinating. It just shows how much of what we look at as complexity actually emerges from a set of very simple rules. So understanding is a thing to strive for, not the words. Even though you use fancy words like Solomonoff induction and Feynman's path integral theory—whatever it's called, I don't even know the actual name—the name is irrelevant. It's the concept that's fascinating.

你谈到了通过经营企业来学习会计。我们转到商业话题。你的置顶推文是一个推文风暴，一系列推文，标题是“如何致富（不靠运气）”。在我们录制时，它有 44,800 次转发，超过 11 万次点赞。我们不打算全部过一遍；它相当长。但我很好奇，你认为人们过于关注或过度强调其中的哪些部分？你希望人们更关注哪些部分？

You spoke to learning accounting through building a business. Let's segue to business. Your pin tweet is a tweet storm, a series of tweets, the headline of which is "How to Get Rich (Without Getting Lucky)." It has, as we record this, 44,800 retweets, 110,000-plus favorites. We're not going to go through this whole thing; it's quite long. But I'm curious to know what parts of it you think people are paying too much attention to or overemphasize, and what parts do you wish people would pay more attention to?

那个推文风暴是一系列原则，我 13 岁时在脑子里为自己写的，试图弄清楚如何赚钱。我提出了一个如何致富但不是偶然致富的框架，以一种可以重复的方式，几乎不留给运气。因为我认为有一种信念——不完全是神话——要赚钱，你要么生来富有，要么有特权，要么在合适的圈子里，要么走运。我认为仍然有办法实现最初的美国梦：赚钱，但以深思熟虑、系统的方式。当我说钱时，我指的是财富。我不是指像律师事务所那样每小时赚几百美元，但仍然被时间束缚。我指的是你想醒就醒，想睡就睡，想住哪就住哪，拥有自由。对我来说，钱的目的就是自由。为此，你需要创造财富。你能合乎道德地做吗？能可持续地做吗？能可靠地做吗？能和你喜欢的人一起做吗？能做你喜欢的事情吗？我认为这完全可能。我愿意相信我是众多活生生的例证之一。沃伦·巴菲特和查理·芒格是其他人的例子——不是说我有他们的地位。

That tweet storm is a series of principles that I kind of wrote for myself in my head when I was 13, trying to figure out how to make money. I came up with a framework of how to be rich but not by accident, to do it in a way that I could repeat over and over, leaving very little up to chance. Because I think there's this belief—it's not completely mythology—that to make money you either have to be born rich, or privileged, or in the right circles, or get lucky. I think there are still ways to accomplish the original American dream: make money, but do it in a deliberate, systematic way. When I say money, I mean wealth. I don't mean like a law firm where you make a couple hundred bucks an hour but you're still tied to the clock. I mean when you wake up when you want, go to sleep when you want, live where you want, and have freedom. To me, the purpose of money is freedom. For that, you need to create wealth. Can you do it ethically? Can you do it sustainably? Can you do it reliably? Can you do it with people that you like? Can you do it doing things that you enjoy? I think it's absolutely possible. I'd like to think that I'm at least one of many living proof points for that. Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger are examples of others—not that I'm in their status.

他们不在一个水平上，但你知道，其他人已经做到了。所以这就是那个框架和推文风暴的全部意义。我只是某天把它写了下来。有趣的是，显然我在推特上有些经验，所以我知道如何精心设计内容。但我认为那是在推文字符限制还是 140 个字符的时代写的，所以更难。但我只是某天晚上醒来，一直在想这件事，然后几乎一字不差地写下了整个推文风暴。而且有很多很多缺失的部分。显然，那只是一个非常高层、非常禅意、或俳句式、甚至贺卡式的框架。它缺少了大量细节，我后来在关于同一主题的播客系列中试图阐述这些细节。

Of their league, but you know, other people have done it. So that was the whole point of that framework and the tweetstorm. I just wrote it down one day. And it's funny because obviously I have some experience at Twitter, so I know how to craft things. But I think that was written back in the day when the tweet limit was 140 characters too, so it's harder. But I just woke up one night when I've been thinking about it, and I wrote up the whole tweetstorm almost exactly like you see it. And there are lots and lots of missing pieces. Obviously, that is just like a very high-level, very zen-like, or haiku-like, or even Hallmark card-like framework. It's missing a ton of details, which I then tried to extrapolate on in my podcast series on the same topic.

人们过度强调什么，又忽略了什么？实际上，让我暂停一下，读几个例子。这是 2018 年 5 月 31 日的。所以有几个例子，你不必评论这些具体的例子，但只是为了给没看过的人一个概念。这一系列推文中的第二条是：‘理解道德财富创造是可能的。如果你暗中鄙视财富，它会避开你。’那条推文到此结束。然后还有一条：‘你不会通过出租时间致富。你必须拥有股权——企业的一部分——才能获得财务自由。’那一条是最重要的。

What do people overemphasize and what are people missing? And actually, let me pause to just read a few of them. This is from May 31, 2018. So a few examples, and you don't have to comment on these specific examples, but just for people who haven't seen this, I want to give them an idea. So the second of these various tweets in this sequence is: 'Understand that ethical wealth creation is possible. If you secretly despise wealth, it will elude you.' End of that particular tweet. And then there's another one: 'You're not going to get rich renting out your time. You must own equity — a piece of a business — to gain your financial freedom.' That one right there is the most important one.

基本上，在现代生活中，发生的事情是：世界上在某方面最擅长的人，将通过杠杆和分销、问责制和特定知识的结合，为整个世界做这件事——我在推文风暴中都谈到了。如果你是世界上最擅长做某事的人——比如你是世界上最好的数学老师，你应该教全世界的数学。如果你是最好的播客采访者，你应该做所有顶级采访。回报将归于你，尤其是在我们这个高度数字化的世界里，分销成本几乎为零。所以你想做的是，把自己产品化成一个企业，然后拥有那个企业。这就是创造财富的方式。

Which is, you basically, in modern life, what happens is the person who is the best at doing something in the world will get to do it for the entire world through a combination of leverage and distribution, accountability, and specific knowledge, all of which I talk about in the tweetstorm. If you're the best in the world at doing something — like if you're the best teacher in the world at math, you should be teaching the entire world math. If you're the best podcast interviewer, you should be doing all the top interviews. And the returns will accrue to you, especially in this highly digital world where we live in, where the cost of distributing something is very close to zero. And so what you kind of want to do is you want to productize yourself into a business, and then you want to own that business. That is the way to make wealth.

一个明显的例子是蒂姆·费里斯的播客，蒂姆·费里斯品牌，对吧？这是一个同名品牌。你的名字在上面。你通过这个播客、你写的书以及你在各个媒体平台上拥有的粉丝大军获得了杠杆。你承担了巨大的责任，并且有特定知识：只有你知道如何成为蒂姆·费里斯，这个学习机器，然后连接其他学习者，从中提取价值并与观众分享。所以这是一个你将自己产品化的例子，但最终你拥有蒂姆·费里斯这个企业。

A clear example is the Tim Ferriss podcast, the Tim Ferriss brand, right? It's an eponymous brand. Your name is on it. You're leveraged through this podcast and through the books that you write and through the army of followers that you have on the various media platforms. And you're taking on big accountability, and there's specific knowledge: only you know how to be Tim Ferriss, the learning machine, who can then connect to other learners and extract value out of them and share that with the audience. So that's an example of you having productized yourself, but ultimately you own the Tim Ferriss business.

现在你可以从那里往下走。你不必拥有整个企业。你可以是公开股票或私人股票的投资人。你可以是私营企业的合伙人。你可以是初创公司的员工，拥有股票期权。但如果你不拥有一部分企业，致富将极其困难。几乎不可能，几乎不值得走那条路。所以我认为那是最重要的基础推文。

Now you can go lower levels down from that. You don't have to own the entire business. You could be an investor in public equities or private stocks. You could be a partner in a private business. You could be an employee at a startup where you have stock options. But if you don't own a piece of a business, it's going to be extremely hard to get wealthy. It'll be nearly impossible, almost not worth that route. So I think that is the most important foundational tweet.

我认为人们最误解的地方在于，我们在生活中会避免痛苦。我们不想面对那些明显做出错误决定的事情。因为痛苦的一个很好的定义是：当你清楚地看到事情本来的样子，而你不喜欢你所看到的那个时刻。例如，如果你和你的配偶争吵了很久，你知道你一直在掩盖问题，你一直在忍受，但你把它掩盖了。然后你们离婚了。那一刻，你再也无法忽视关系中所有的伤害以及所有的后果。它们是真实的。同样，如果你没有照顾好自己的健康，但突然你发现自己已经跌下悬崖，发生了不可逆转的坏事，痛苦的时刻到来了，你感到痛苦，因为你再也无法忽视这件事，再也无法逃避它。

I think where people kind of all miss the plot the most, though, is we have pain avoidance in life. We don't want to face things where it's clear we've made bad decisions. Because one good definition of suffering is that's the moment when you see things as they clearly are, and you kind of don't like what you see. For example, if you and your spouse have been fighting for a long time, you know you've kind of been sweeping it under the rug, and you've sort of been suffering along, but you're sweeping it under the rug. And then you get divorced. At that moment, you can no longer unsee all the damage that was in the relationship and what all the consequences are. They're real. The same way, if you haven't been taking care of your health, but then suddenly you find out that you've just fallen off a cliff and something irreversibly bad has happened, the moment of suffering arrives and you're in pain because you can no longer unsee this thing, you can no longer avoid it.

所以我认为同样如此。不幸的是，很多这些原则是为年轻人写的，因为你可以更早地让自己走上某条人生轨迹。所以，例如，如果你已经获得了社会科学的博士学位，而我现在基本上说，‘嘿，学编程吧’，你会回避。你不想看到这一点，因为你在学位上投入了这么多沉没成本。所以我认为很多人不想学习必要的新技能，或者他们不想，例如，搬家，或者他们不想让现有关系中的人失望，以便为新关系腾出空间。所以每个人都想从他们所在的地方开始。没有人想下山去寻找通往山顶的路。每个人都想留在他们现在的路上，也许做一些调整，然后到达山顶。或者像查理·芒格开玩笑说的：‘人们总是问我，我怎么才能像你一样富有，只是更快？我不想成为老富翁，我想成为年轻的富翁。’

So I think the same way. The unfortunate part is that a lot of these principles are written for young people, because you can set yourself on a certain trajectory in life earlier. And so, for example, if you went and got a PhD in a social science and now I'm basically saying, 'Hey, learn to code,' you're going to avoid that. You're not going to want to see that because you have all this sunk cost in the degree. So I think a lot of people don't want to pick up the new skills that are necessary, or they don't want to, for example, physically move, or they don't want to disappoint the people in the relationships that they already have to make room for new relationships. So everybody wants to start where they are. Nobody wants to go back down the mountain to find the path going to the top. Everybody wants to stay on the path they're on, maybe make a few tweaks, and get to the top. Or like Charlie Munger jokes: 'People always ask me, how do I get to be rich like you, except quicker? I don't want to be the old rich guy, I want to be the young rich guy.'

所以我认为这些是困难的部分。困难的部分不是学习，而是忘却。不是爬山，而是下山回到山脚重新开始。这是每个伟大艺术家或伟大商人都拥有的初学者心态，即你必须愿意从零开始。你必须愿意重置并回到零，因为你必须意识到你已经知道的和已经在做的事情实际上是你充分发挥潜力的障碍。而大多数人就是不想承认这一点。我也犯过这个错。这只是人性。我不是在责怪任何人，但这只是人性。

So I think these are the hard parts. The hard parts are not the learning, it's the unlearning. It's not the climbing up the mountain, it's the going back down to the bottom of the mountain and starting over. It's the beginner's mind that every great artist or every great business person has, which is you have to be willing to start from scratch. You have to be willing to hit reset and go back to zero, because you have to realize that what you already know and what you're already doing is actually an impediment to your full potential. And most people just don't want to acknowledge that. And I'm guilty of that too. That's just human nature. I'm not faulting anybody for it, but it's just human nature.

快速感谢我们的一个赞助商，我们马上回来继续节目。本期节目由 Wealthfront 赞助。你知道吗，如果你错过了 2008 年危机后表现最好的 10 天，你就会错过 50%的回报？不要错过市场最好的日子。保持投资于长期自动化投资组合。Wealthfront 开创了自动化投资运动，有时被称为机器人顾问，他们目前为客户管理着 200 亿美元的资产。Wealthfront 可以帮助你分散投资组合、最小化费用并降低税收。注册大约需要三分钟，然后 Wealthfront 会根据你的风险偏好为你建立一个全球多元化的 ETF 投资组合，并以极低的成本为你管理。Wealthfront 的软件日复一日地持续监控你的投资组合。

Just a quick thanks to one of our sponsors, and we'll be right back to the show. This episode is brought to you by Wealthfront. Did you know if you missed 10 of the best performing days after the 2008 crisis, you would have missed out on 50% of your returns? Don't miss out on the best days in the market. Stay invested in a long-term automated investment portfolio. Wealthfront pioneered the automated investing movement, sometimes referred to as robo-advising, and they currently oversee $20 billion of assets for their clients. Wealthfront can help you diversify your portfolio, minimize fees, and lower your taxes. It takes about three minutes to sign up, and then Wealthfront will build you a globally diversified portfolio of ETFs based on your risk appetite and manage it for you at an incredibly low cost. Wealthfront's software constantly monitors your portfolio day in and day out.

你不必操心；他们会寻找再平衡和税收损失收割的机会，以降低你投资收益的纳税额。他们的最新服务叫 Autopilot，可以监控任何支票账户，将多余现金转入储蓄或投资账户。他们考虑得非常周全，满足了很多需求。明智的投资不应像坐过山车。让专业人士为你代劳。访问 wealthfront.com/tim，今天开设 Wealthfront 投资账户，你的前 5000 美元将终身免费管理。网址是 wealthfront.com/tim。Wealthfront 会为你的长期投资自动化管理，今天就可以在 wealthfront.com/tim 开始。

You don't have to; they look for opportunities to rebalance and tax loss harvest to lower the amount of taxes you pay on your investment gains. Their newest service is called Autopilot, and it can monitor any checking account for excess cash to move into savings or an investment account. They've really thought of a ton; they've checked a lot of boxes. Smart investing should not feel like a roller coaster ride. Let the professionals do the work for you. Go to wealthfront.com/tim and open a Wealthfront investment account today, and you'll get your first $5,000 managed for free for life. That's wealthfront.com/tim. Wealthfront will automate your investments for the long term, and you can get started today at wealthfront.com/tim.

那么，看看你个人的情况，关于股权，你提到拥有企业的一部分。你还在这次对话中提到了‘把自己产品化’。那么，你认为自己遵循这一原则的成功主要体现在哪里？比如，你在 AngelList 这样的公司拥有的股权，还是你作为 Naval 这个人建立的身份和品牌，即各种关联，还是作为‘斜杠投资者’因而被追捧？还是其他方面？你如何看待这一原则在你生活中的应用？因为你不仅通过 AngelList 的股权创造了财富，还通过许多成功的投资，我相信还有其他方式可以识别出财富来自你的道路。

And if we look at your specific case as it relates to equity, you mentioned owning part of a business. You also mentioned in this conversation productizing yourself. So would you view your success in following that principle predominantly in, for instance, the equity that you own in a company like AngelList, or is it the identity and the brand, meaning associations that you've built as Naval the human, or is it 'slash investor' therefore being sought after as an investor? Or is it something else? How would you think of that principle as applying most in your own life, because you've created wealth not just through, say, your equity in AngelList, but also through many successful investments, and then I'm sure there are other ways that we could identify wealth as coming from your path.

是的，我喜欢自己道路的一点是，我通过许多不同的小事赚到了钱。所以我持续地赚到中小额度的钱。我没有那种一次性的巨额收入让我一劳永逸，尽管这取决于你的标准，对吧？我是按硅谷的标准说的。显然，对世界大部分地区来说，我已经有过很多次那样的巨额收入了，但它们一直持续且多样化。多样化是指完全不同的投资和努力，但持续是指每几年就有一笔。

Yeah, what I like about my path is that I've made money doing a lot of different little things. So I've made money consistently in sort of small to medium-sized chunks. I haven't had like one gigantic payday that set me up forever, although it depends on your standards, right? I'm talking about by Silicon Valley standards. Obviously, for most parts of the world, I've had many of those gigantic paydays, but they've been consistent and they've been varied. Varied in the sense that there are completely different kinds of investments and endeavors, but consistent in that I get one every couple of years.

这似乎表明有原则在指导你的方法，或者……

Which would seem to suggest that there are principles guiding your approaches, or...

完全正确。因此，是的，你不是靠中强力球彩票或类似的东西。

Absolutely right. Therefore, yeah, you're not relying on winning the Powerball lottery or that equivalent.

不，完全不是。

No, not at all.

不，这里没有彩票。中彩票是给失败者的。彩票只是对不会算数的人的攻击。而快速致富的计划只是别人从你身上致富。没有捷径。所以我所做的是，运用我的特定知识，即我深入理解技术概念并将其传达给世界的能力，成为优秀程序员、开发者、设计师与资本市场和消费者之间的接口，并利用这一点将自己置于能够识别新兴趋势的位置，投资或帮助创办这些公司，拥有股权，帮助它们推向市场，制定融资、退出、招聘、公司建设、文化和技术发展等战略，并围绕它建立品牌。我用这个来赚钱。这只是其中一种方式。你知道，我还通过早期投资公开市场、加密货币、创办基金等各种方式赚钱。但有趣的是，我不再真正遵循自己的原则了。比如，整个播客和 Twitter 的事情，尽管我有相当不错的品牌和粉丝，但我完全没有将其货币化。我不向任何人收费，因为我不再试图赚钱了。对我来说，赚钱就像你成为那种会赚钱的人，然后把自己置于长期能赚钱的境地。所以我有了品牌，与十几个我认识且信任的人建立了深厚关系，我可以和他们做一辈子生意，他们是非常正直、非常有能力的人，这让事情变得容易。我已经建立了这个基础设施。现在钱随着我的生活自然而然地来了。我不想努力工作。我不必在某个时间起床。我不必向任何人汇报。所以我优化的是独立和自由。我本可以通过筹集巨额基金、早期加入大型风投公司或成为硅谷大公司的高管来赚更多的钱，但我总是优化独立。我很懒，你知道。我早上 7、8、9、10 点起床，凌晨 2:30 睡觉。我很多天不工作。有些天我从早工作到晚，但那只是基于我好奇什么。我永远不想向老板汇报。没有人能告诉我该做什么。我不想指挥别人。我不想有人向我汇报，总是问我该做什么。我想要对等的关系。我想要流动。我想要能一边走路一边做生意，比如在森林里打电话，或者坐在会议室或电脑前，或者我想在海滩上。如果我不想，理想的情况是用头脑赚钱，而不是用时间。所以如果我一年只做一个好的决定，就能赚到那一年需要的所有钱，那就完美了。而且应该是这样的，因为我们生活在一个无限杠杆的时代，你的判断力通过代码、资本、社区、劳动力等巨大的力量倍增器被放大。所以如果你聪明，你知道自己在做什么，你不需要努力工作。努力工作是最后、最不重要的事情。你必须付出代价，你必须进行所有迭代，一万次迭代，而不是一万小时，来弄清楚该做什么以及如何做好。但一旦你知道，你就不再需要投入时间了。这是你的判断力，而判断力来自清晰的思考。清晰的思考来自有时间反思和追求你真正的好奇心。你会看到很多伟大的投资者，例如，大部分时间只是坐着阅读，或者沃伦·巴菲特以打桥牌闻名。显然，不是每个人都能只做投资者，尽管这变得越来越民主化。我选择了适合我性情和特定能力的事情。但如果你用心去思考，赚钱的方法有很多很多。所以我不是为了赚钱而工作。我的意思是，如果我赚了太多钱，以至于我在捐赠医院侧翼和大学之类的东西，那我就过头了。我不是想通过金钱对世界产生影响。讽刺的是，我通过像这样的播客对世界产生了更大的影响。所以，你知道，赚更多的钱……

No, there's no lottery here. To win the lottery is for losers. Lotteries are just attacks on people who can't do math. Yet rich get rich quick schemes are just other people getting rich off of you. There are no shortcuts. So what I'm doing is I'm taking my specific knowledge, which is my ability to understand deeply technical concepts and communicate them to the rest of the world, to be an interface between great programmers and developers and designers and the capital markets and consumers, and using that to put myself in a position where then I can identify great trends as they're emerging, invest in those companies or help start those companies, own equity in those things, help bring them to market, help do the strategy on how to navigate the worlds of fundraising and exiting and recruiting and company building and cultures and technology development and all that, and have a brand around it. And I use that to kind of make money. And that is just one of several ways. You know, I've also done it by investing early on in public markets and cryptocurrencies and starting funds and all kinds of things. But I don't, it's funny, I don't really follow my own principles anymore. Like, for example, the whole podcast thing and the whole Twitter thing, even though I've got reasonably good brands and followers and those, I'm not monetizing them at all. I'm not charging anybody for anything, because I'm not trying to make money anymore. To me, like making money is like you become the kind of person that makes money, and you put yourself in long-term situations where you're always going to make money. So I have the brand and I have deep relationships with a dozen people who I know and I trust that I can do business with for the rest of my life, and they're very high integrity people, they're very capable people, and just makes it easy to do things. So I've set up that infrastructure. Now the money just kind of makes itself as I go about my life. I don't want to have to work hard. I don't have to roll out of bed at a certain time. I don't have to answer to somebody. So I optimize for independence and freedom. I could have made a lot more money by raising a huge fund or joining a big VC firm early on or being exec at one of the massive companies in Silicon Valley early on, but I always optimize for independence. I'm lazy, you know. I wake up at 7, 8, 9, 10 a.m., I go to sleep at 2:30 a.m., you know. I don't work a lot of days. Some days I work morning to night, but it's just based on whatever I'm curious about. I never want to have to answer to a boss. No one's ever going to tell me what to do. I don't want to order people around. I don't want to have someone reporting to me and kind of asking me all the time what to do. I want peer relationships. I want to flow. I want to be able to do business while walking, you know, in a forest talking on a cell phone, or sitting in a meeting or in front of a computer, or I want to be on a beach. If I don't feel like it, the ideal would be to make money with your mind, not with your time. So if I can just make one good decision a year and that makes me all the money that I need for that year, then that's perfect. And that's the way it should be, because we're living in an age of infinite leverage, and your judgment just gets multiplied through this massive force multiplier through code, capital, community, labor, what have you. So if you're smart and you kind of know what you're doing, you don't need to work hard. Working hard is the last, least important thing. You have to pay your dues, you have to put in all the iterations, ten thousand iterations, not ten thousand hours, to figure out what to do and how to do it well. But once you know, you don't have to put in the time anymore. It's your judgment, and the judgment comes from clear thinking. The clear thinking comes from having time to reflect and to pursue your genuine intellectual curiosity. And you'll see that a lot of the great investors, for example, just sit around reading most of the time, or Warren Buffett famously plays a lot of bridge. Obviously, not everyone can be just an investor, although that is becoming more and more democratized. And I've picked something that suits my temperament and particular capabilities. But there's lots and lots of ways to make money if you apply your mind to it. So I don't work to make money. I mean, if I make so much money that I'm donating hospital wings and universities and all that stuff, I overshot, you know. I'm not trying to have some influence on the world through money. And ironically, I have more influence on the world through podcasts like this. And so, you know, making more money...

我们来聊聊你的一些言论吧。“言论”可能不太准确。

Let's talk about a few of your missives. Missives is probably not the right word.

我并没有在教导什么，也不是想说服任何人。如果有人不喜欢，有些人会在推特上被激怒然后开始争论。那就别听好了。

I'm not telling you anything. I'm not trying to persuade anyone of anything. So if people don't like it, some people get triggered on Twitter and they start arguing. It's like just leave, just don't listen to it.

我要读的这条可能会让很多人非常不爽，或者我觉得看那些生气的评论会很有趣。这句话是：‘想象一下，如果你不是一直焦虑，你会变得多高效。’你为什么发这个？你有没有见过高度焦虑的人变成几乎不焦虑的人？你见过这种情况吗？但首先，你为什么发这个？背后的原因是什么？然后你有没有见过焦虑的人变得基本上不焦虑了？

The one I'm going to read would be a great one for people to get really upset about, or I would find it comical to look at the comments people are upset. But the line is this: 'Imagine how effective you would be if you weren't anxious all the time.' Why did you put this out? And have you seen highly anxious people become people who experience very little anxiety? Is that something you've seen? But first, why did you put this up? What was behind it? And then have you seen anxious people become largely unanxious or non-anxious people?

我的大多数推文都不是深思熟虑的。实际情况是，我一直在思考某个概念，几个月、几年，一直在酝酿。然后突然灵光一现，变成一句精炼的话，我就想：‘哦，这就是我记住这件事的方式。这就是我把它提炼成一个指向标的方法，这样当我需要做决定时，就能回忆起整个推理过程。’所以这条推文的来源是，基本上每个人到了一定年龄，都要为自己的幸福、平静和生活质量负责。赚钱后你学到的一件事是，钱不会让你更快乐。它解决了你的金钱问题，但不一定会让你一直处于某种幸福状态。事实上，没有什么能让你永远快乐。所以你必须负责引导自己，让你的精神状态达到你想要的境地。所以我一直在调整我的精神状态——‘调整’这个词可能有点重，我不想说我在‘努力’，但我的精神状态确实比以前好多了。人们常说：‘我不想那样做，因为那会削弱我的野心。我现在就想成功。’所以我对此思考了很多。这是真的吗？对我来说，过去几年我变得更平静后，效率确实突飞猛进，也更成功了。但很难排除另一种可能：‘也许只是因为你职业生涯后期，处境更好了。’这是个合理的质疑。所以我一直在想，如果我没有那么焦虑，我还会一样成功吗？显然，反事实很难验证。焦虑源于恐惧，它也是一种动力。它让你行动起来。缓解焦虑的方法之一——至少在下一波焦虑到来之前——就是去做点什么。那么焦虑的作用是什么？首先，我注意到几乎每个人都在焦虑。不焦虑的人很少见。这很合理：我们是顶级捕食者。我们统治了地球，驯化或杀死了所有其他动物，靠的就是成为这个星球上最偏执、最恐惧、最愤怒的捕食者。所以焦虑是我们核心的一部分。事实上，你可以说大脑整天做的就是基于恐惧的生存情景规划，再加上一点繁殖的贪婪。所以焦虑是我们的核心。但有些人确实比其他人更焦虑，这毫无疑问。有些人则显得平静得多。那么对于效率来说，哪种更有用？假设你的目标是内在驱动的——你做事是因为热爱或真心想要——并且你能把这种动力和焦虑分开，那么我认为你就能获得某些超能力。我们内心都知道这一点。看看武士，宫本武藏和别人决斗时，更冷静的人会赢。在所有那些电影里，赢家都是那个极其镇定、然后极快挥剑、然后又恢复镇定的人。那就是赢家，拥有禅宗心态的人。同样，在《终结者》电影里，你害怕终结者的部分原因是他是个机器人。他不可阻挡，冷酷无情。你无法和他争辩，无法沟通，无法让他慢下来，他没有悔意。他只是一直前进。或者在那部老克林特·伊斯特伍德的电影《不可饶恕》里，赢得枪战的人是那个不退缩的人。他装枪和射击时保持冷静，而不是到处乱跑。所以我认为我们通过焦虑浪费了太多能量，如果你能保持冷静并继续做事，那是一种超能力。我最近自己意识到了这一点，当时我在商业上遇到一个冲突局面。那是一个高度冲突的局面，很不幸。我想我们已经解决了。但在经历这个高度冲突的过程中，我几年前经历过类似的情况，那时我焦虑得多。我记得那段时间，记得我有多紧张，多害怕，经历了恐惧和愤怒的波动，整个人一直很激动，紧张，睡不好。但这次我异常冷静，甚至有点享受，因为就像在练习我的手艺。当然，现在更容易做到，因为我更有钱了，但与此同时，它并没有困扰我。它非常机械。正因为如此，我可以非常高效地处理它，同时还能做很多其他事情。我的大脑没有一直像漩涡一样旋转，处理 10 个不同的问题，整天基于恐惧地胡思乱想。这些事情大多数永远不会发生。所以我确实相信，保持冷静并继续做事是一种超能力。当然，如果焦虑是你唯一的动力，那你就有问题了。但我认为纯粹的动力并非来自焦虑。

Most of my tweets are not very deliberate or thought through. What's happening is I've been thinking about some concept for months, years, whatever, it's been percolating. Then all of a sudden it'll come to me in one spiffy sentence where I'm like, 'Oh, this is how I will remember this thing. This is how I can distill this down into a pointer for myself so that when I need to make decisions, I can retrieve that whole line of reasoning.' So where this comes from is basically like everybody after a certain age, I am taking responsibility for my own happiness and peace and quality of life. One of the things you learn after you make money is that money doesn't make you happier. It takes care of your money problems, but it's not necessarily going to put you in a place where you're in some kind of bliss all the time. In fact, there's nothing out there that will make you happy forever. So you sort of have to take responsibility for guiding yourself in such a way that your mental state ends up where you want it. So I've been working on my mental state, and I have—working is a big word, I don't want to say I've been working on it—but I would say my mental state has gotten to a place which is much better than it used to be. People will often say, 'Well, I don't want to do that because it will take away my ambition. I want to succeed right now.' So I've thought about that a fair bit. Is that true or not? Certainly for me, in the last few years since I've become calmer, my effectiveness has gone through the roof, and I've been more successful. But it's hard to disambiguate that from, 'Well, also maybe you're just later in your career, you're in a better position for it.' And that's a valid criticism. So one of the things I've been trying to figure out is, would I have been as successful? And it's hard to do the counterfactual, obviously. If I wasn't as anxious, because anxiety comes from fear, it's also a motivator. It makes you get off your butt. One of the ways to make the anxiety go away, at least until the next piece of anxiety comes along, is to go do something about it. So what is the role of anxiety? Well, firstly, I noted that pretty much everybody's anxious all the time. It's a rare human being who isn't anxious. And it makes sense: we're alpha predators. We took over this earth and domesticated or killed all the other animals, and we did that by being the most paranoid, the most fearful, the most angry predators this world has ever seen. So anxiety is built into the core of who we are. In fact, you could argue that all the mind does all day long is fear-based scenario planning for survival, and then maybe a little bit of greed for replication. So anxiety is at the core level of who we are. But certainly some people are more anxious than others, there's no question. And some people seem to be much calmer about it. So which is more useful for effectiveness? Assuming that your goal is your motivation is intrinsic—you're doing the thing because you love it or because you really want it—and you can separate that motivation from anxiety, then I think you can take on certain superpowers. And we kind of all intrinsically know this. If you look at samurai warriors, Miyamoto Musashi is in a duel with somebody else. The person who is calmer is going to win. In all those movies, it's the one who is incredibly still, then swipes with a sword incredibly quickly, and then still again. That's the winner. The one who has a zen state of mind. Similarly, in the Terminator movies, part of the reason you fear the Terminator is because he's a robot. He's unstoppable, he's implacable. You can't argue with him, you can't communicate with him, you can't make him slow down, and he has no remorse. He just keeps coming. Or in that old Clint Eastwood movie Unforgiven, the guy who wins the gunfight is the one who doesn't flinch. He's just keeping his cool while he's loading his gun and shooting. He's not all over the place running around. So I just think we waste so much energy through anxiety that if you can be calm and still go about your business, it's a superpower. I realized this myself recently where I was in a conflict situation in business. It was a high conflict situation, it was unfortunate. I think we've solved it. But as I went through this high conflict situation, I'd been through one like it years before where I was much more anxious. I remember that time period, I remember how much I was sweating it and how nervous I was, and how I went through bouts of fear and anger, and how kind of worked up I was the entire time, intense and didn't get much sleep. But this time I was incredibly calm, and I was almost enjoying it because it was like practicing my craft. Now, of course, it's easier to do now because I have more money, but at the same time it just didn't bother me. It was just very mechanical. And because of that, I could be very effective about it, and I could be effective about it while doing lots and lots of other things. My mind wasn't constantly spinning in a whirlpool, taking on 10 different problems and just fear-based airplane-ing all the time. Most of these things were never going to happen. So I do believe that being calm and still going about your business is the superpower. Now, yes, if anxiety is your only motivator, then you have a problem. But I would argue the pure motivations don't come out of anxiety.

我们来谈谈归因。你会把什么归因于——我知道很难隔离变量——但假设你有一个家庭，假设你的一个孩子来找你说：‘爸爸，我很焦虑。我该怎么办？’或者你观察到并想帮助你的孩子。你会给出什么样的建议？或者如果你更喜欢另一个问题：是什么帮助你从……

Let's talk about attribution here. What would you attribute the—and I know it's difficult to isolate variables—but if let's just say you have a family, so let's just say one of your kids comes to you and says, 'Dad, I'm suffering from a lot of anxiety. What should I do?' Or you observe it and you want to help your kid out. What types of recommendations would you make or might you make? Another question if you prefer it: what has helped you to go from the...

真的很难把所有东西分开。它来自哲学、瑜伽、冥想、变老、有孩子等等的组合。像你一样，我也有过一些迷幻体验，但那都是很久以前的事了，现在只是遥远的记忆。但我要说，对我而言最重要的一件事就是冥想。这说起来很傻，因为太老套了，现在每个人都在说。但我说冥想，不是指坐在那里观察呼吸或念咒语。我指的是自我审视。冥想是进行自我疗愈的好方法。就是和你的想法待在一起。焦虑，这种无处不在的非特定焦虑，我们总是对一切感到紧张，这来自于未经审视的生活。我记得苏格拉底说过类似‘未经审视的生活不值得过’的话。我忘了是谁说的，大概是那样。但这是对的。正是你未经审视的生活导致了问题。你可以通过多种方式审视它。你可以有一次疯狂的蘑菇之旅，一夜之间全部爆发。你可以做很多冥想，和自己待在一起，让思绪疯狂，然后看看你的内心到底有什么，你的内心想告诉你什么，想让你倾听并解决那些未解决的问题。也可以通过治疗，通过阅读大量哲学著作和反思，通过长时间的散步。有很多很多方法可以解决。但关键是要花时间与自己相处，审视为什么你会有这些想法。这样想：我们在人际关系上花了那么多时间——与妻子的关系，与同事的关系，与商业伙伴的关系，与朋友的关系。但最重要的关系是你和自己的关系。是和你脑海中那个在每个清醒时刻都喋喋不休的声音的关系。那是你内心中的一个疯狂室友，总是喋喋不休，从不闭嘴。你无法控制这些想法；它们就这样冒出来，你甚至不知道它们从何而来。那些你脑海中不断进行的对话的质量——那就是你的世界。那是你生活的世界。那是你的世界观，是你透过它看世界的镜头。而这将比任何其他东西都更能决定你生活的质量。如果你想知道你生活的真实质量，放下酒杯，放下电脑，放下智能手机，放下书，放下耳机。就自己坐着，什么都不做。然后你就会知道你生活的真实质量，因为那正是你一直在逃避的东西。这就是为什么人们尝试冥想时，坐下来会说‘我讨厌它，我坐不住。’为什么？因为你的内心在吞噬你。你的生活未经审视。你的思绪在未解决的事情上循环。因为它们没有解决，当你在日常生活中忙碌时，并不是那些问题消失了；它们只是在那里。它们在那里，但它们在引发焦虑。而你认为那种消耗你、你找不到来源的焦虑——那只是冰山一角，露出水面的一小部分。下面是一大堆垃圾：未经深思熟虑做出的决定，你尚未解决的处境，你未满足或未实现的欲望，你生活中的矛盾，或者你感到被困住的方式。所以，真正的冥想，真正的审视，应该摧毁你目前的生活。它应该让你离开某些关系，它应该让你与家人、同事重新建立边界，它应该让你辞职，它应该让你改变饮食习惯，它应该让你花更多时间与自己相处，它应该让你改变读的书，它应该让你改变你的朋友。如果它没有做到这些，那就不是真正的审视。如果它不伴随着对当前生活的破坏，那么你就无法创造没有焦虑的新生活——至少是部分没有，不一定是全部。

It's really hard to separate all the pieces out. I mean, it comes from a combination of philosophy, yoga, meditation, getting older, having kids. You know, like you, I've had some psychedelic experiences, but those are very far back in the past, just a distant memory at this point. But I would say the number one thing that has been very, very important for me is meditation. And it's a stupid thing to say because it's so trite, everybody just says it now. But when I say meditation, I don't mean sitting there and watching your breath or chanting a mantra. I mean self-examination. And meditation is a great way to do that self-therapy. It's sitting there with your thoughts. So anxiety, this pervasive non-specific anxiety, we're just constantly on edge about everything, that comes from an unexamined life. I think Socrates said something like 'An unexamined life is not worth living.' I forget who said that quote, something like that. But it's correct. It's your unexamined life that is causing the problems. And you can examine it in multiple ways. You can have some crazy mushroom trip where it all comes out one night. You could do a lot of meditation, sitting there with yourself and letting your mind run crazy, and then seeing what's actually in your mind that your mind wants to tell you and have you listen to and have you resolve that is unresolved. It could be through therapy, it could be through reading lots of philosophy and reflection and long walks. So there are many, many ways to tackle it. But it's that spending that time with yourself to examine why you are having these thoughts. Think about it this way: we spend so much time in our relationships—our relationship with our wives, our relationship with our colleagues, our relationship with our business partners, our relationship with our friends. The most important relationship you have is with yourself. It's with this voice in your head that is constantly rattling every waking hour. It's this crazy roommate living inside your mind who's always chattering, always chattering, never shuts up. And you can't control these thoughts; they just come up out of you, you don't even know where from. That quality of those conversations you're having in your head all the time—that is your world. That is the world you live in. That's the worldview you have, that's the lenses you see through. And that's going to determine the quality of your life more than anything else. And if you want to see what the quality of your life actually is, put down the drink, put down the computer, put down the smartphone, put down the book, put down the headphones. Just sit by yourself doing nothing. And then you will know what the quality of your life actually is, because that's what you're always running away from. That's why people, when they try to meditate, sit down and say 'I hate it, I can't sit still.' Why? Because your mind is eating you alive. Your life is unexamined. Your mind is running in loops over things that it has not resolved. And because they're not resolved, when you run around in your normal life, it's not that those problems have gone away; they're just there. They're there, but they're provoking anxiety. And what you think of as the anxiety that's kind of consuming you and you can't identify the source—that's just the tip of an iceberg poking out from underneath the water. And underneath is this giant pile of garbage: decisions that were made without too much thought, situations that you're in that you haven't resolved, problems that you have or desires that you have that have gone unmet or unmanifested, contradictions that you're living in, or ways in which you feel trapped. So proper meditation, proper examination, should ruin the life that you're currently living. It should cause you to leave relationships, it should cause you to re-establish boundaries with family members, with colleagues, it should cause you to quit your job, it should cause you to change your eating patterns, it should cause you to spend more time with yourself, it should cause you to change what books you read, it should cause you to change who your friends are. If it doesn't do that, it's not real examination. If it doesn't come attached with destruction of your current life, then you can't create the new life in which you will not have the anxiety—or at least parts of it, not necessarily whole cloth.

那么让我们深入探讨冥想。因为正如你提到的，这个词被广泛使用，在大多数人心中，它代表的是你刚才说你不做的事情，比如基于咒语的冥想或跟随呼吸。你和我以前一起冥想过。我不知道你的方法是否还类似，但这是一种——我不想说陈词滥调的范式转变，至少在我曾经和你一起体验的方式中，就是长时间什么都不做。我不知道现在是否还是这样，但你能描述一下这个练习吗？因为当通过/失败的标准被移除时，在某种意义上是一种负担的解脱。我每天做两次，坚持一周后的体验——虽然这不一定是人们在正常生活中会做的——但相当深刻。所以你能描述一下你现在的练习吗？可能和我体验过的不同。

So let's dive into meditation. Because as you mentioned, it's a term that is used a lot, and in the minds of most, it is represented by things that you just said you do not do, like the mantra-based meditation or following the breath. And you and I have meditated before. I don't know if your approach is still similar, but it is quite a—I'd hate to talk about trite paradigm shift in a sense, at least in the way that I experienced it alongside you at one point, which was literally doing nothing for extended periods of time. I don't know if that's still the case, but could you describe the practice a bit? Because it was such a burden lifted in a sense when the pass/fail is removed. And the experience that I had after say a week of doing this twice a day—which is not necessarily what people do in normal life—but it was pretty profound. So could you describe the current practice, which may be different from what I experienced?

是的，我实际上做两件不同的事情。我几乎讨厌称之为冥想，因为每个人心中都有对冥想的先入为主的观念。我们甚至不这么叫它。我会说我有两种自我审视的练习。我甚至不再称它们为练习，因为有时我做它们是因为我想做，我喜欢它们，或者因为感觉对了，有时我不做。因为任何例行公事的事情都会变成它自己的陷阱，不会让你有任何进展。它只会变成另一种精神高潮，另一个复选框。

Yeah, I actually have two different things that I do. And I almost hate calling it meditation because everyone has in their mind a preconceived notion of what meditation is. Let's not even call it that. I would say that there are two self-examination practices that I do. And I don't even call them practices anymore, because sometimes I do them because I feel like them and I enjoy them, or because it feels right, and sometimes I don't. Because anything done routinely sort of becomes its own trap and is not going to get you anywhere. It just becomes like another spiritual high, another checkbox.

但这样说公平吗：你现在能够选择做或不做，是因为你之前有一段持续做的前置期？

Is it fair though to say that you're able to opt in and out now because you had a certain front-loading period doing it consistently?

实际上，我会说我有三件不同的事情要做，我来逐一说明。第一件是我大量阅读哲学，尤其是在晚上睡觉前。哪些？叔本华，《箴言》？我们在说谁？对，叔本华。西方哲学是我目前的最爱，虽然我在这方面也换过很多。东方哲学，我读奥修的所有东西——我知道他被质疑、被取消，但很精彩，这让我更喜欢他。克里希那穆提，我不知道，卡皮尔·古普塔，鲁伯特·斯皮拉，我的意思是五花八门。安东尼·德·梅洛，他很棒。实际上，我要从一本书开始：从安东尼·德·梅洛的《觉醒》开始。

Actually, I'll say there are three different things that I do, and I'll go through them. The first is I just read a lot of philosophy, especially at nighttime before I go to bed. Which ones? Schopenhauer, Maxims? Who are we talking about? Yeah, Schopenhauer. Western philosophy is my current favorite, although I've definitely moved around on that one. Eastern philosophy, I'll read everything from Osho—I know he's discredited and been canceled, but fantastic, that makes me like him even more. Krishnamurti, I don't know, Kapil Gupta, Rupert Spira, I mean it's all over the place. Anthony de Mello, he's fantastic. Actually, I'm gonna start with one book: start with Anthony de Mello's.

《爱的方式》或者他的《觉知》那本书，都很好。但还有很多。我基本上读很多哲学家的书：悉达多、瓦西斯塔瑜伽、薄伽梵歌、道德经。你知道，我随时都在读这些书中的一本，而且通常是重读以获取灵感。我晚上读这些书。通常我会抓住一两个点，在睡前反思。所以这是一种自我审视。这不是因为某种公式而做，而是因为我真的对这些东西感兴趣。所以对我来说不是工作，是乐趣。

Way to Love, or his book Awareness, they're both really good. But there's a ton of them. I basically read a lot of philosophers: Siddhartha, Vasistha's Yoga, Bhagavad Gita, the Daodejing. You know, I'm always going through one of these books at any given time, and usually rereading for inspiration. I'll read these at night. Usually there'll be one or two things I'll catch on to, I'll reflect on it before I go to sleep. So that is a form of self-examination. And it's not done because it's a formula; it's done because I'm genuinely interested in these things. So it's not work to me, it's fun.

我做的第二件事，我已经做了很久了，就是试着觉察我的念头。不是那种‘坐在那里，哦，我要觉察我的念头’的方式，而是意识到很多冒出来的念头并不是不请自来的。我控制不了它们。并不是我决定要有这个念头。我甚至不知道我现在在跟你说什么；它从我嘴里说出来，同时我也在想它。所以这从哪来的？这个人是谁？这个人在说什么？这是真的吗？正确吗？过去正确过吗？他现在只是偏执吗？他疯了吗？他潜在的动机是什么？我甚至不是在质疑那么多，而更多是看着它。过了一段时间，当你看着它，你开始看穿你自己的胡扯。你开始看到你主要只是在为你想要相信的任何东西辩护，因为它有利于你的生存，有利于你的繁衍，或者有利于你的钱，或者能让你上床，或者各种这类东西。

The second thing I do, which I've been doing for a long time now, is just trying to be aware of my thoughts. Not in a 'sit there and be like, oh, I'm gonna be aware of my thoughts' kind of way, but just realizing that a lot of these thoughts that come up aren't unbidden. I don't control them. It's not like I decided to have this thought. I don't even know what I'm saying to you right now; it's coming out of my mouth at the same time as I'm thinking it. So where is this coming from? Who is this person? What is this person saying? Is this true? Is it correct? Has it been correct in the past? Is he just being paranoid now? Is he being crazy? What are his underlying motivations? And I'm not even questioning so much, but more just kind of seeing it. And after a while, when you see it, you start seeing through your own BS. You start seeing how you're mainly just justifying whatever the heck you want to believe because it's good for your survival, it's good for your replication, or it's good for your money, or it's going to get you laid, or any of these various things.

当你做这种反思时，是坐在桌前用纸笔吗？是半莲花坐闭着眼睛吗？是什么？不，其实就是到处走走。就是到处走走。很好。就是生活。如果你对我说什么，我总是会带着一点批判的滤镜去听，因为你是外在于我的。把同样的滤镜用在我自己的念头上，让我对它们有了一种平静和距离感，以及看穿自己胡扯的能力，我觉得这让我的生活更好了。所以我发现这是一个有用的生活方式。但很多时候我会忘记做。我会陷入一些情绪，一些失控的思绪列车。但通常现在我能抓住自己，然后说，‘哦好吧，我又进入那种心态了。我又在那种反应模式了。’当头脑看到我在喋喋不休时，它会安静一点。对吧？就像我说的，这又回到了那个疯狂室友的类比，顺便说，我最初是从迈克尔·辛格那里学来的。他有一本好书叫《不羁的灵魂》。但你知道，疯狂室友的类比：就像你最终会让你的室友闭嘴，或者你会让他们开始为自己的说法辩护，或者至少在一定程度上你会开始无视他们，因为他们总是处于这种恐惧偏执的模式中喋喋不休。所以我认为把你的念头看作这些不请自来的东西，它们从你内心升起，但不一定是全部真相，应该用你对外部观察者同样的怀疑态度来看待。我认为这个框架很有帮助。如果你发现它是真的，那么你会发现自己更经常这样做。如果你发现它不是真的，如果你觉得，‘不，实际上我选择了这些念头，我想要它们，这就是我，这一切对我来说都有道理，’那么你可以停止用批判的眼光看待它。这取决于你。

And when you're doing that reflection, is it sitting at a table with pen and paper? Is it half lotus with your eyes closed? What is it? No, it's literally just walking around. It's just walking around. It's nice. It's just life. Just if you say something to me, I'm always going to listen to it with a slightly critical filter because you're external to me. Applying that same filter to my own thoughts gives me a level of peace and distance from them, and the ability to see through my own BS, which I think makes my life better. So I've just found that to be a useful way of life. But there are lots of times where I forget to do it. I get caught up in some emotions, some runaway train of thought. But usually these days I can catch myself and be like, 'Oh okay, I'm in that mindset again. I'm having that mode of reactions again.' And when the mind sort of sees me chattering, it quiets down a bit. Right? And like I said, it's back to that crazy roommate analogy, which I originally picked up from Michael Singer, by the way. He has a good book called The Untethered Soul. But you know, the crazy roommate analogy: like you would eventually tell your roommate to shut up, or you would tell them to start justifying their claims, or you would at least at some level start dismissing them for just kind of rambling all the time in this fear paranoia mode. So I think just kind of viewing your thoughts as sort of these unbidden things that arise from within you but aren't really necessarily the whole story, and should be viewed with the same level of skepticism that you would apply to an outside observer. I think that framework is helpful. And if you find it to be true, then you'll find yourself doing it more often. If you find it not to be true, if you're like, 'No, actually I choose these thoughts and I want to have them and that's who I am and this all makes sense to me,' then you can stop viewing it with a critical eye. That's up to you.

最后一种是我认为人们更传统地认为是冥想的方式，那就是坐下来冥想。关于这个，我从一位印度绅士那里学到的，就是你从同一个人那里学的，他有一个非常简单的系统。我发现这是我试过的最有说服力的冥想形式。那就是：你坐在那里 60 分钟。所以不幸的是，一次不能少于一个小时，因为需要 30 到 40 分钟才能沉下去，越过最初的喋喋不休，这样你才能进入好的部分，或者所谓的跑步者高潮的等价物。你每天坐 60 分钟，至少坚持 60 天。而且你早上第一件事就做，那时你的头脑清醒，警觉，而且睡了一晚好觉。你坐直，背挺直，可以用垫子或椅子什么的。没有神奇的姿势。然后发生什么就是什么。你的头脑想做什么，你就让它做。如果它想说话，你就让它说。如果它想打架，你就让它打。如果它想安静，你就让它安静。如果它想念咒语或注意呼吸，你也可以那样做。但你不强迫任何事。你就让它发生。所以你不与它斗争，不抵抗它，不争论，不加倍投入。你就让事情发生。当你这样做至少 60 天，我的经验是你会清空你的精神收件箱。所有那些疯狂的事情，所有的喋喋不休，都会出来。一些问题会得到解决。你会有一些顿悟。你会对你的生活做出改变。有些是自我审视。有些只需要被听到一次，然后就消失了。最终你会达到一种精神收件箱为零的状态，那时你只是在想昨天发生了什么，你有点跟上了，你的头脑相对清晰。你的焦虑水平下降了。你活得更平静了。

The last one is the one that I think people think of as more traditionally meditation, which is sitting down and meditating. On that one, I learned from an Indian gentleman, same character you learned from, who had a very simple system. And I just found it the most compelling form of meditation I've ever tried. Which is: you sit there for 60 minutes. So unfortunately, not less than an hour at a time, because it takes 30 to 40 minutes to sink in past the initial chattering, so you get to the good part, or the so-called runner's high equivalent. And you sit for 60 minutes every day, and you do it for at least 60 days. And you do it first thing in the morning, when your mind is clear and you're alert and you've had a good night's sleep. And you sit up with your back straight, and you can use cushions or you can use a chair or whatever. There's no magic position. And just whatever happens happens. Whatever your mind wants to do, you just let it do. If it wants to talk, you let it talk. If it wants to fight, you let it fight. If it wants to be quiet, you let it be quiet. If it wants to chant a mantra or pay attention to breathing, you can do that. But you don't force anything. You just kind of let it happen. And so you don't fight it, you don't resist it, you don't argue with it, you don't double down on it. You just kind of let things happen. And when you do that for at least 60 days, my experience has been that you kind of clear out your mental inbox. And all the craziness that was going on, all the chattering, will come out. Some problems will get resolved. You will have some epiphanies. You will make changes to your life. Some will be self-examination. Some of it just needs to be heard once and then it goes away. And eventually you'll get to a mental state of inbox zero, where now you're just thinking about what happened yesterday, you're kind of caught up, and your mind is relatively clear. And just your anxiety level goes down. You're living more peacefully.

我已经这样做了大约两年半了，总共可能错过了大约十二天。但有些日子我每天做两个小时或更多。我会告诉你这是我做的最重要的一件事。这是一种纯粹的快乐。很多时候它非常有趣，令人愉悦。有时它很平淡，是虚无。我甚至无法告诉你我为什么做。我甚至无法告诉你那种状态里发生了什么。但我会告诉你，那些独处的时间是我拥有的最重要的时间。多亏了它，我现在更加自足。我不觉得我需要别人。我不需要总是从外部获得快乐或幸福。我喝得更少了。我对尝试任何毒品都不感兴趣。生活更轻松，更愉快。我不再把事情看得那么严重。我不再那么害怕死亡。我不害怕衰老。我不渴望东西。我没有那种持续不断的、无处不在的需求，要去外面找什么东西让我的生活更好。当我一天中最好的时光是独自度过时，世界能给我的就很少了。我仍然可以参与其中，但它不再像以前那样抓住我。我不害怕单独监禁。我认为这是一种超能力。我认为每个人都应该拥有它。每个人都拥有它。它很容易。它不需要做任何事。这是你与生俱来的权利。你不可能失败。没有……

I've been doing this for about two and a half years now, and I probably missed about a dozen days total. But there are some days where I've done two hours a day or more. And I will tell you that is the single most important thing that I do. It is a sheer joy. Much of it is highly entertaining, pleasurable. Sometimes it's just flat, it's nothingness. I can't even tell you why I do it. I can't even tell you what's going on in that state. But I will tell you that that time spent by myself is the most important time that I have. And thanks to that, I am now much more self-contained. I don't feel like I need other people. I don't need external sources of pleasure or happiness all the time. I drink less. I'm not attracted to trying any drugs whatsoever. It's just life is easier, it's more pleasant. I don't take things as seriously. I'm not afraid of my mortality as much anymore. I don't fear aging. I don't lust after things. I don't have this constant pervasive need to find something outside of me to make my life better. When the best hour of my day is spent by myself, then the world has very little to offer me. And I can still participate in it, but it doesn't have that grip on me that it used to. I don't fear solitary confinement. And I think that is a superpower. And I think everyone should have it. Everyone does have it. It's easy. It requires doing nothing. It's your birthright. You can't fail at it. There's no...

这件事不可能失败。你只需要坐下来，闭上眼睛，放空自己，每天给自己一小时的休息，从世界中抽离出来。

There's no way to fail at it. Literally all you have to do is just sit down and close your eyes and just be, give yourself a break for an hour every day, just take the time off from the world.

几个后续问题。克里希那穆提，你有他喜欢的作品或建议初学者从哪里开始吗？我也推荐安东尼·德·梅洛。

A few follow-ups. Krishnamurti, do you have any favorites of his or anything that you would suggest someone start with if they have no familiarity with Krishnamurti? And I'll second Anthony De Mello also.

是的，我确实是从克里希那穆提开始的。他很难懂，但如果你要开始，我从一本叫《从已知中解脱》的书开始的。还有《生命之书》。他非常理智、非常知性，有点令人困惑，但他确实说真话，并且言行一致。安东尼·德·梅洛的《爱的道路》，奥修的书《伟大的挑战》。我知道有人认为奥修是假大师之类的，但他也有一些真东西。他很有口才，理解了很多。SoundCloud 上有一段他的精彩片段，叫《生命没有目标，没有目的》。我经常听。还有很多这样的资源。一旦你开始深入这个兔子洞，你就会找到它们。经典作品：《薄伽梵歌》，找个好译本。斯蒂芬·米勒，我想他有个好译本。他也有《道德经》的好译本。这两本都很有趣。再说一次，只有当你感兴趣时才读。我的意思是，里面有古老的智慧。叔本华的《人生的智慧》。你知道，这些都是聪明人的自我反思。但总的来说，重点不是阅读，重点是激发你自己去反思。还有 Twitter 上的 Kappa Gupta，他有两本很棒的书。《直接真理》是一本很棒的书，最近写的，毫不留情。但你知道，所有这些基本上都是为了激发你自我反思。如果你对自我反思不感兴趣，如果你还没到那个阶段，那就别做。那是浪费时间。事实上，我认为做这些事情的原因只是它们能让你的生活更好，让你更有效率，对你有用。如果它们对你没用，不能改善你的生活，那就放弃。它毫无用处。

Yeah, I actually remember starting with Krishna. He's a tough one, but if you're going to start somewhere, I started with this book called Think on These Things. There's also The Book of Life. He's very cerebral, very intellectual, and a little confusing, but he definitely speaks truth and he walks the walk. Anthony De Mello's The Way to Love, Osho's book The Great Challenge. And I know people think Osho is a fake guru and all that, but he had some real stuff too. He's very articulate, he understood a lot. There's a great clip from him on SoundCloud that says, it's called 'Life Has No Goals, No Purpose.' I listen to that one a lot. There's a lot of them out there. Once you start going down this rabbit hole, you'll find them. The classics: the Bhagavad Gita, get a good translation. Stephen Miller, I think, has a good translation. He also has a good translation of the Tao Te Ching. Those are both really interesting. Again, only if it appeals to you. I mean, there's ancient wisdom. In Schopenhauer, read Councils and Maxims. You know, these are smart people self-reflecting. But overall, the point is not to read, the point is to inspire so that you yourself can reflect. And Kappa Gupta is an account on Twitter, he has a couple of great books. Direct Truth is a fantastic book, written very recently and pulls no punches. But you know, all of these are basically there to inspire you to self-reflect. And if you're not interested in self-reflection, if you're not at that stage in life, then don't do it. It's a waste of time. In fact, I would say the reason to do these things is just because they make your life better, because they make you more effective, because they have some utility to you. If they do not have utility to you, if they don't make your life better, then drop it. It's useless.

我也推荐阅读哲学。这不是为了那种无聊或抽象的语义追逐，对吧？而是出于某种原因，在非常务实的层面上，阅读那些思考非今日、非本周、非本月之事的人的见解和观察，会让人深感安慰。它们涉及更广阔的时期，或在某种程度上是永恒的，对吧？它缓解了我们被各种输入强加的、人为制造的紧急和紧迫感。

I will also second the reading of philosophy. And this is not for kind of idle or abstract like semantic tail-chasing, right? It's for whatever reason on a very pragmatic level, deeply soothing to read the insights and observations of those who are considering things that are not of today, they're not of this week, they're not of this month. They are for much broader periods of time or timeless in some capacity, right? It alleviates some of the manufactured emergency and urgency that is upon us by every possible input.

哦，是的，新闻和 Twitter 太有毒了。人类大脑不是用来实时管理世界上每一个紧急事件的。我们不是用来在脑子里处理地球上所有突发新闻的。这是我最近的一条推文，但如今媒体的目标是把每个问题都变成你的问题。他们就是这样吸引注意力、获取点击量的。你知道，有部落战争在进行，僵尸互相争斗，他们想把你拉进去，连不参与都不被允许了。中立旁观者不被允许。所以外面是个疯狂的世界。有一场马戏表演，猴子们互相扔粪便，他们想把你拖进战斗。真正你应该关注的是永恒的东西。永恒很棒。你知道，老问题都有老答案，最好从老实践者那里获取，因为他们对此头脑清晰。他们没有忙着适应这个时代的政治；他们适应的是那个时代的政治，但这对我们来说已经消失了。所以实际上，另一个很好的资源是，我在 Audible 上有你的《道·塞内卡》系列，我锻炼时经常反复听。那真是太好了。是的，那些《道德书简》，太棒了，太棒了。每次我读它，都能学到新东西。

Oh yeah, the news and Twitter are so toxic. The human brain is not designed to manage every emergency in the world in real time. We're not designed to process all the breaking news on the planet in our heads. And this is one of my recent tweets, but the goal of the media these days is to make every problem your problem. That's how they get attention, it's how they get clicks. You know, you have tribal wars going on, zombies battling each other, and they want to pull you in, where even non-participation is not allowed anymore. Neutral bystanders are not allowed. So it's a crazy world out there. There's a circus going on with the monkeys flinging feces at each other, and they want to drag you into the fight. Really, what you want to focus on is what's timeless. Timeless is great. You know, the old questions all have old answers, and they're best consumed from the old practitioners because they were very clear-minded about it. They weren't busy trying to fit into the politics of this time; they were fitting to the politics of that time, but that's lost to us now. So actually, another great source is I have your Dao Seneca series on Audible, and I listen to it on repeat when I'm working out a lot. So that's very kind. Yeah, those Letters to Lucilius, amazing, amazing stuff. And every time I go through it, I learn something new.

是的，塞内卡的《道德书简》。如果人们想在公共领域资源中查找，可以找到这些信件，塞内卡的《道德书简》，也可以拼写为 Lucilius。这是我制作的一个有声书系列，你也可以在网上免费找到 PDF 版本。

Yeah, the town of Seneca, the Moral Letters to Lucilius. If people want to look on public domain sources, you can find these letters, the Moral Letters to Lucilius, also spelled as you might read Lucilius, by Seneca. And so that's an audiobook series that I produced, and you can find the PDFs for free online as well.

我们来谈谈一些实际的东西，因为我想人们会非常感兴趣。你提到了猴子扔粪便、部落主义。在这样的时代，这是 2020 年 10 月 1 日录制的。很多人对价值储存感兴趣。他们担心可能发生的事情，并考虑投资黄金或加密货币。我想让你解释一下你最近的一条推文，就是最近几天的，内容是：“加密稳定币：dash，在爆雷风险、审查风险和欺诈风险之间选择。”什么是加密稳定币？这条推文是什么意思？

Let's talk about some brass tacks stuff, since I think people will be very interested. You mentioned monkeys throwing feces, tribalism. In times like this, this is being recorded in 2020, first day of October. A lot of folks are interested in stores of value. They are fearful of what could happen and considering investments like gold or cryptocurrency. And I wanted you to explain one of your recent tweets, this is just from the last few days, and it is: 'Crypto stable coins: dash, choose between blow up risk, censorship risk, and fraud risk.' What are crypto stable coins and what does this tweet mean?

是的，先退一步。我认为加密货币可能是人类历史上最伟大的发明之一。它们有趣的原因在于，如果你看看科技行业，科技是在不受监管的空间中运作的。科技很难改变受监管的空间，正如 Uber 和 Postmates 等公司发现的那样。但一般来说，科技之所以有效，是因为它创造了自己的前沿。这是一个被创造出来的数字前沿。物理前沿都已关闭，新世界已被殖民，狂野西部已被驯服。你去哪里创造不受干扰和监管的新事物，并发挥最大的创造力？这主要在科技领域完成。而一个受到技术创新保护、免受技术创新影响的领域是华尔街，因为他们有监管俘获，非常官僚。你知道，那个运行我们大部分经济和华盛顿特区的货币工业复合体，我们 GDP 的 20%用于金融工程和华尔街赌场。所以加密货币是我们绕过这一点的方式。因此，它们具有主权抵抗力。它们被设计成完全去中心化。你不需要国家的暴力力量来强制执行加密货币的价值。它允许人与人之间真正无需信任的交易，而无需任何国王、权威、政府或公司居中。因此，将财富创造、财富储存和财富保护与国家脱钩是非常解放的。这就是加密货币真正实现的东西。

Yeah, just backing up for a second. Like, I think cryptocurrencies are probably one of the greatest inventions in human history. And the reason why they're interesting is because if you look at the technology industry, technology plays in unregulated spaces. It's very hard for technology to change regulated spaces, as Uber and Postmates and companies like that find out. But generally, the reason technology works is because it creates its own frontier. It is a digital frontier that has been created. The physical frontiers are all closed, and the new world has been colonized, and the Wild West has been tamed. Where do you go to create new things free of interference and regulation and kind of exercise maximum creativity? And so that's been done mostly in the technology space. And one of the areas that has been protected by technological innovation from technological innovation is Wall Street, because they're, you know, they have regulatory capture, very bureaucratic. You know, the money industrial complex that runs a lot of our economy and runs a lot of Washington DC, where 20% of our GDP goes into financial engineering and into the Wall Street casino. And so cryptocurrencies are kind of how we get around that. And so they're sovereign resistant. They're designed to be completely decentralized. You don't need the violent power of the state to enforce the value of a cryptocurrency. And it allows for truly trustless transactions between humans without some king or authority or government or corporation having to be in the middle. And so it's very liberating to disconnect wealth creation, wealth storage, and wealth protection from the state. And that's what cryptocurrencies really enable.

等一下，让我暂停一下，说一句，有一次你和我与一位领域超级专家 Nick Szabo（S-Z-A-B-O）进行了一次非常深入的加密货币 101 对话，人们也可以找到它，了解更多关于加密货币的历史和基础知识。

One second, let me just pause to say that at one point you and I did a very thorough cryptocurrency 101 conversation with a domain super expert named Nick Szabo, S-Z-A-B-O, which people can also find for more on kind of the history and basics of some of the crypto.

是的，Nick 是真正的天才，是这个领域的先驱。

Yeah, Nick is a bonafide genius and a pioneer in the space.

他还有一个很棒的博客叫 Unenumerated，我强烈推荐。总之，最知名的加密货币是比特币，比特币试图成为新黄金或新瑞士银行账户的结合体。作为价值储存手段，它有一些优势：可以数字存储，因此难以被没收；技术上非常容易验证，不像黄金；可以轻松通过互联网跨国界电子传输；易于分割和验证真伪，而黄金很难做到；可以非常容易地分割到百万分之一甚至万亿分之一比特币；它具有一定可编程性，因此可以放入智能合约中，做一些智能的事情。所以作为价值储存手段，它有很多优点。

He also has a great blog called Unenumerated that I highly recommend. But anyway, the best known cryptocurrency is Bitcoin, and Bitcoin is trying to be the new gold or the new Swiss bank account all rolled into one. It has some advantages as a store of value: it can be stored digitally, so it's hard to seize; it's very easy to verify technologically, unlike gold; it's easy to send across national boundaries electronically over the internet; it's easily divisible and verifiable down to its authenticity, where gold is hard to do; it can be divided down to millions and trillions of a Bitcoin very easily; it is somewhat programmable, so you can put it inside smart contracts and do some intelligent things with it. So it has a lot going for it as a store of value.

它的困难之处在于它并不真正隐私。虽然有些部分是私密的，但并非完全隐私。而且它不受信任；作为价值储存手段，它是全新的，仅始于 2009 年。所以人们不知道它是否会永远存在，以及它在多大程度上依赖互联网。人们对此并不确定。它不像工作量证明挖矿算法那样使其成为可能，而且它是否会被劫持、被中心化、有漏洞、崩溃？每一年比特币存活下来并经历各种挑战，随着人们越来越信任它，它变得更有价值。但它极其波动。你买入比特币，你目前买入的是一种高度投机的资产，你是在投机它会成为数字黄金，甚至可能成为所有价值储存手段，因此变得极其有价值。但在此过程中，有很多障碍。任何时候它都可能崩溃，可能归零。

What's difficult about it is it's not really private. Although there are parts of it that are private, it's not completely private. And it's untrusted; it's brand new as far as stores of value go, only from 2009. So people don't know if it'll be around forever, and how dependent it is on the internet. People aren't really certain about it. It's not like the proof-of-work mining algorithm that makes it possible, and can it be hijacked, can it be centralized, can it have a bug, can it break? Every year that Bitcoin survives and goes through one of the various challenges facing it, it gets more valuable as people entrust it a little bit more. But it is extremely volatile. You buy Bitcoin, you're buying a very speculative asset at the moment, and you're speculating that it will become digital gold or possibly even all store of value, and so be incredibly valuable. But along the way, there are lots of hiccups. At any point it could break, it could go to zero.

很多现在参与加密世界的人正在构建一个去中心化的华尔街。他们称之为 DeFi，即去中心化金融。但我实际上认为这更像是‘反抗’——就是反抗政府，反抗。所以我认为我们看到一个比华尔街更好的全新赌场正在兴起。而去中心化金融与华尔街不同，它是 24/7 开放的，一年 365 天，全世界每个人都可以使用。它是无需信任的，因为底层是数学、算法和代码，而不是高盛抢先交易你的订单之类的。我不是说他们这么做，但确实有‘闪电小子’之类的疯狂事情发生。而且你可以编程让它做事情，进行华尔街甚至无法做到的押注、对冲或看涨。所以我认为我们正在用加密货币建造一个更好的华尔街。

A lot of people who are now participating in the crypto world are building a decentralized Wall Street. They call it DeFi, for decentralized finance. But I actually think it's more like 'defy' — just defy the government, defy. So I think we're seeing a whole new casino that's better than Wall Street spring up. And decentralized finance, unlike Wall Street, this one is 24/7 open, it's 365 days a year, it's available around the world to everybody. It's trustless in that there's math and algorithms and code underneath, not Goldman Sachs front-running your trades or whatever. Not that I'm saying they do, but there's flash boys and all that kind of craziness that goes on. And you can program it to do things and to make bets or hedges or calls that you just can't even do on Wall Street. So I think we're building a better Wall Street using cryptocurrencies.

每个参与其中的人不一定都想承担这些加密货币的波动性。所以我们创造了所谓的稳定币，它们追踪美元的价值，这样当你交易时，例如，你仍然可以用美元计价。这是一件棘手的事情，因为一旦你试图追踪现实世界中的某种资产（比如美元），那么你基本上必须将价值与现实中存在的东西挂钩。而加密货币在一切都上链、一切都电子化数字化并由云端计算机控制时表现最好。所以这些稳定币出现了，它们模仿美元的价值。最知名的是 Tether、Coinbase 的 USDC，以及 Maker 或 DAI，这是一种算法稳定币。

Everyone who participates in that doesn't necessarily want to take on the volatility of these cryptocurrencies. So we've created these things called stablecoins, which track the value of the US dollar, so that when you're trading, for example, you can still do it in dollar-denominated terms. This is a tricky thing because the moment you're now trying to track some asset in the real world like dollars, then you have to basically peg the value somehow to something that exists in the real world. And cryptocurrencies do best when everything is on the blockchain, when everything is electronic and digital and controlled by computers in the cloud. So these stablecoins have come along that mimic the value of the US dollar. The best known ones are Tether, USDC which is Coinbase's coin, and Maker or DAI which is an algorithmically stable coin.

没有免费的午餐吗？

Is there no free lunch?

嗯，这是人们应该考虑的吗？有什么人们更熟悉的类似物吗？它不是指数，像 ETF？或者你怎么看？有另一种数字美元吗？这些稳定币的设计是为了让你可以生活在加密世界。这是生活在区块链上，基于数学的代码，但你的价值实际上与美元挂钩，所以它不会随比特币涨跌。它始终只值一美元。所以如果你想在加密世界持有美元，方法就是购买这些所谓的稳定币之一。但我那条推文只是观察到没有免费的午餐。你实际上在做的是，你拥有加密货币，而加密货币极其波动，你试图将波动资产转换为稳定资产，所以这必然有成本。

Well, is this something people should think of? What would be a comparable that people might be more familiar with? It's not an index, it's like an ETF? Or how would you think about it? Is there another digital dollar? These are designed so that you can live in crypto land. This is living on a blockchain, it's math-based code, but really your value is pegged to dollars, so it's not going up or down with Bitcoin. It's just worth a dollar all the time. So if you want to hold a dollar in crypto land, the way you do it is by buying one of these so-called stablecoins. But all my tweet was observing is that there's no free lunch. What you're actually doing underneath is you have crypto, and crypto is incredibly volatile, and you're trying to convert a volatile asset into a stable asset, so there has to be a cost for that.

那叫什么？像次贷危机？

What is that called? Like the subprime mortgage crisis?

没错，正是如此。没有免费的午餐。那么成本是什么？我只是说，今天三种主要类型的稳定币，每一种都施加了一种或多种成本。一种成本是欺诈风险，人们怀疑 Tether 就是这样：实际上这个东西声称由美元支持，但实际上并非如此。我不知道这家公司是否有美元支持，所以你只能相信他们的话。所以现在你在信任他们。意思是他们会有实际的物理美元，就像你拥有实物黄金一样？正确。所以他们每发行一个 Tether，就声称在某处有一美元，但如果没有呢？而你无从知晓。所以你信任他们，背后可能存在欺诈。我不是说一定有，我没有证据，但你基本上回到了信任第三方模式，就像把钱存在银行一样。

That's right, exactly. There's no free lunch. So what does that cost? And all I was saying is that the three main categories of stablecoins today, they each impose one or more of these costs. One cost is fraud risk, where people suspect this of Tether: like actually this thing says it's backed by dollars but it's not actually backed by dollars. I don't know if this company has dollars underneath, so you have to kind of take their word for it. So now you're trusting them. Meaning they would have actual physical dollars, like you would have physical gold? Correct. So for every Tether they issue, they claim to have a dollar somewhere, but what if they don't? And you just don't know. So you're trusting them, and there could be fraud underneath. I'm not saying there is, I have no evidence, but you're basically now back to the trusted third-party model that exists in just putting your money in the bank.

第二种是你与像 Coinbase 这样知名、受信任且受监管的公司打交道，但这与持有普通美元没有区别。存在审查风险：如果政府说‘嘿，我们不喜欢这个人，没收他们的银行账户’，Coinbase 可以关闭你的 USDC 账户，你的稳定币基本上就被没收了。你不再像持有比特币那样去中心化和自主。

The second kind is where you're dealing with someone like Coinbase or some company that is well known and trusted and is regulated, but then it's no different than holding normal dollars. There's censorship risk: if the government says 'hey, we don't like this character, seize their bank account,' Coinbase can turn off your USDC account, and your stablecoin has basically been seized. You're no longer decentralized and sovereign like you are with Bitcoin.

最后一种风险是崩盘风险。像 Maker 这样的：它有抵押品，但抵押品是比特币和以太坊。所以他们希望的是比特币和以太坊的价格不会剧烈波动，以至于脱钩，你会在所谓的稳定币上亏损。这只是一个观察：没有免费的午餐。所以如果你试图在一个本质上非常波动的空间中凭空创造出这种神话般的稳定货币，你必须为此付出代价。而人们今天认为他们没有付出代价，他们只是免费获得这些加密稳定美元，或者免费获得稳定性。但事实并非如此。他们要么承担欺诈风险，要么承担审查风险，要么承担崩盘风险，或者它们的某种组合。

The last kind of risk is a blow-up risk. Something like Maker: it's collateralized, but it's collateralized with Bitcoin and Ethereum. So what they're hoping is that the price of Bitcoin and Ethereum won't move so drastically that the peg breaks and you lose money on your so-called stablecoin. It's just an observation: there's no free lunch. So if you're trying to create this mythical stable currency out of thin air in what is inherently a very volatile space, you have to pay for it. And people think today they're not paying for it, they're just getting these free crypto stable dollars, or they're getting the stability aspect for free. But they're not. They're either taking on fraud risk, or censorship risk, or blow-up risk, or some combination of them.

所以如果你在提供建议——这不是财务建议，只是两个朋友聊天，显然仅供信息参考——但如果你和一个有相当多储蓄或可投资资本的朋友聊天，他们说：‘Naval，我想做点加密货币相关的事。我该如何开始？’

So if you're advising — and this is not financial advice, this is just two friends talking obviously for informational purposes only — but if you're talking to a friend who has a fair amount of savings or investable capital and they say, 'Naval, I want to do something with crypto. How can I get started?'

我应该开始吗？你怎么跟他们说？因为选择范围太广了。尽管已经简化了很多，但加密货币仍然相当令人困惑。它非常复杂。

Should I get started? What do you say to them? Because there's such a broad spectrum of options. It's still, even though it's been simplified a lot, crypto is still quite confusing. It's very complicated.

绝对如此。即使是非常聪明的人，我也认为它仍然相当令人困惑。极其令人困惑。这是一个数学家、黑客、科技企业家和少数真正深入研究的人的领域。但它仍然太难处理了。它很危险。我不能自己持有加密货币；我必须把它放在基金和托管人那里，因为我是知名公众人物，而且它是一种不记名资产。所以讽刺的是，我实际上不能持有它。

Absolutely. For people who are very smart, I would consider it's still quite confusing. Incredibly confusing. It's a domain of mathematicians, hackers, tech entrepreneurs, and a few people who really dig in. But it's still too hard to handle. It's dangerous. I can't hold my own crypto; I have to stick it inside funds and custodians because I'm a known public figure and it's a bearer asset. So ironically, I can't actually hold it.

你不持有它是因为你会……

You don't hold it because you would be...

是的，没错。它是一种不记名资产，所以你不想要持有不记名资产。你必须把它放在金库里，相当于这个领域的 Goldman Sachs。所以有像 Anchorage（很棒）、Coinbase 或 CoinList（我帮助创立的公司）这样的托管人可以为你持有加密资产。但这并不是加密货币的真正意义。加密货币的意义在于成为你自己的银行。所以如果政府要来没收资金，或者他们大量印钞，你总是可以从这些组织中提取你的加密资产，自己携带。你可以把它放在笔记本电脑上，这有点疯狂、有风险且困难。你可以通过硬件钱包来做，比如 Ledger 或 Trezor，这些是知名的硬件钱包，有一个专门用于携带加密货币的小型特定设备。但你必须明白：你正在取代银行系统。你实际上是在取代政府，以及支持银行系统的所有枪支和警察。你正在取代所有这一切以及随之而来的所有控制。所以当然需要一定程度的 sophistication。你实际上是在建立你自己的瑞士银行。所以它确实相当复杂。

Yeah, exactly. It's a bearer asset, so you don't want to bear a bearer asset. You have to put it inside vaults, the equivalent of Goldman Sachs in the space. So there are custodians like Anchorage, which is amazing, Coinbase, or CoinList, a company I helped start, who can hold on to your crypto assets for you. But that's not really the point of crypto. The point of crypto is to be your own bank. So if the government is coming to seize money or if they're printing lots of it, you can always withdraw your crypto assets from these organizations and carry it yourself. You can put it on your laptop, which is kind of crazy and risky and hard. You can do it through a hardware wallet like a Ledger or a Trezor, which are well-known hardware wallets where you have a small specific device designed just for carrying crypto. But you have to understand: you're replacing the banking system. You're literally replacing the government, all the guns and the police that back up the banking system. You're replacing all that and all the control that comes with it. So of course it's going to require some level of sophistication. You're literally building your own Swiss bank. So it is quite complicated.

从哪里开始？

Where to start?

嗯，我不喜欢给人们买入信号，因为如果你想成为一个好的投资者，你也必须有自己的信念。这样你才会知道何时卖出。如果你打电话问我什么时候买入，你会每天打电话问‘我应该卖吗？我应该卖吗？’不会的。你不知道。这非常重要。你必须自己从根本上理解它。所以我会说第一件事是深入加密货币的兔子洞。听我们与 Nick Szabo 的访谈。上网开始阅读关于比特币、以太坊、以及像 Zcash 和 Monero 这样的隐私币。了解加密领域不同的高级内容。决定你想要多少 exposure。去 CoinList 或 Coinbase 之类的地方购买。弄清楚你想用哪个托管人。把它放在安全的地方，可能是在云端，除非你真的知道自己在做什么。如果你真的知道自己在做什么，那么你可以使用硬件钱包或离线方案之一。确保它受到保护，以防你被攻击、绑架、有人闯入你家或偷走你的电脑。你必须覆盖所有这些基本情况。所以这并不容易。但你实际上是在创造额外的自主货币。你在创造一种货币，如果你不得不逃离这个国家，就像 1930 年代犹太人不得不离开维也纳一样，你不需要争抢黄金。你使用加密货币。如果你生活在某个倾向于没收你银行账户里所有钱的国家，那么你拥有不可没收的钱。如果你担心我们印太多美元导致恶性通胀，那么你有一个对冲 MMT 以及他们用来印钱的各种借口的工具。

Well, I don't like giving people buy signals because if you're going to be a good investor, you also have to have your own conviction. Then you'll know when to sell. If you call me and ask me when to buy, are you going to call me every day and say 'Should I sell? Should I sell?' No. You don't know that. It's really important. You have to fundamentally understand it yourself. So I would say the first thing is go down the crypto rabbit hole. Listen to the interview we do with Nick Szabo. Go online and start reading up on Bitcoin, read up on Ethereum, read up on the privacy coins like Zcash and Monero. Learn about the different high-level stuff in the crypto space. Decide how much exposure you want. Go buy it at a CoinList or a Coinbase or what have you. Figure out which custodian you want to use. Put it somewhere safe, probably in the cloud, unless you really know what you're doing. And if you really know what you're doing, then you can use one of the hardware wallets or one of the offline schemes. Make sure that it is protected in case you're attacked or kidnapped or someone comes to your house or steals your computer. You have to cover all those base cases. So it's not easy. But you're literally creating extra sovereign money. You're creating money where, if you ever have to flee the country, like the Jews had to leave Vienna back in the 1930s, you're not scrambling for gold. You're using crypto. If you're living in some country where they tend to seize all the money in your bank account, then you have unseizable money. If you're worried about hyperinflation as we print too many dollars, then you have a hedge against MMT and all the various excuses they're going to use to print money.

我的意思是，从金融角度来看，2020 年发生的最可怕的事情可能是共和党和民主党都发现，哦，实际上我们可以大量印钞。而美国拥有美元储备货币地位，其中大部分美元——我认为大约 70%——由外国人持有，因为它是世界信任的储备货币。他们用它来交易石油、结算国际转账、隐藏资金、保护资金免受当地通胀当局的影响。因此，当我们印一美元时，70% 的通胀影响成本由世界其他地区承担，而不是我们。所以美国政府有点明白了这一点，我们印了六万亿美元来对抗冠状病毒。现在两党都同意他们可以通过印钞来解决任何问题。我看到一条很棒的推文，有人写道，现在我们知道了如果外星人入侵地球会发生什么：美联储只会降低利率。美联储会降息，对吧？不幸的是，这就是我们目前的处境。所以他们会继续这样做，直到某个时候世界其他地区认输，说‘美元这玩意儿对我们不管用了’。我们所依赖的是欧元、人民币等其他货币的情况更糟。但这并不总是正确的。我认为有一些管理良好的货币，比如瑞士法郎和新加坡元。还有像黄金、加密货币和房地产这样的硬资产，甚至科技股在某种程度上也在上涨，因为股票是一种税收高效的通货膨胀对冲工具，或者相对税收高效的通货膨胀对冲工具。因为像 Google 这样的公司可以涨价，而且他们不需要雇佣更多人，因为他们是垄断企业。他们可以解雇一半的工程师，公司照样运转良好。所以人们意识到了这一点，资金正在涌入硬资产以逃避通胀。而加密货币是少数几个真正可以投入资金并防御美元失去储备货币地位之类情况的地方之一。这些是黑天鹅事件。谈论黑天鹅事件非常困难，因为显然自从美元成为美国储备货币以来，它从未失去过这一地位，即使我们脱离了金本位。但与此同时，英镑曾经是世界储备货币，它在某个时候失去了这一地位。货币曾经是黄金，而黄金也消失了。所以这种情况并非不可能发生。如果发生，那么基本上就会迎来真正的清算。那么我们通过印钞摆脱衰退的能力就会消失。美国可能会出现通胀崩溃，我们的全球经济体系就会开始崩溃。在这些情况下，加密货币表现良好，假设互联网保持正常。也存在互联网瘫痪的情况，那时一切都会乱套。

I mean, probably the scariest thing that happened in 2020 from a financial perspective is both the Republican and the Democratic party figured out that, oh, actually we can just print lots and lots of money. And the US has this reserve dollar, reserve currency status with the dollar, where most of our dollars—I think something like 70%—are held by foreigners because it's the trusted reserve currency of the world. They use it for trading oil, settling international transfers, just to hide money, to protect money from their local inflationary authorities. So because of that, when we print a dollar, 70% of that inflation effect cost is borne by the rest of the world, not borne by us. And so the US government kind of figured this out, and we printed six trillion dollars to fight the coronavirus. And so now both parties can agree that they can just print money to get out of any problem they're in. A great tweet I saw was somebody wrote that now we know what would happen if aliens were to invade the earth: the Fed would just lower interest rates. The Fed would cut interest rates, right? And so unfortunately, that's just the situation we're in. So they're going to keep doing that until at some point the rest of the world throws in the towel and says, 'This dollar thing is not working for us.' And what we rely upon is that the European euro or the Chinese renminbi and these other currencies are in worse situations. But that's not necessarily always true. I think there are well-managed currencies like the Swiss franc and the Singaporean dollar. There's also hard assets like gold and crypto and real estate, and even the run-up in tech stocks at some levels, because equities are a tax-efficient inflation hedge, or relatively tax-efficient inflation hedge. Because someone like Google can just raise prices, and they don't have to hire more people because they're a monopoly. They can lay off half their engineers and the company will work just fine. So people are realizing this, and there's a flight into hard assets to get away from inflation. And crypto is one of the few places where you can really put your money in and defend against something like the dollar losing its reserve currency status. And these are black swans. It's very hard to talk about black swans because obviously since the dollar became the US reserve currency, it hasn't lost the status, even when we went off the gold standard. But at the same time, the pound sterling used to be the reserve currency of the world, and it lost its status at one point. Money used to be gold, and that went away. So it's not inconceivable that'll happen. And if it were to happen, then you would basically have the true reckoning. Then our ability to print our way out of recessions would go away. You would probably have an inflationary collapse in the US, and you would just see our global economic system start breaking down. In those scenarios, crypto does really well, assuming the internet stays up. There are scenarios where the internet goes down too, and then all hell breaks loose.

你最好有金枪，但我们不是在说那个。香烟和卫生棉条，对你的水有好处。没错。子弹是终极的，对吧？正如我们在 2020 年也看到的，美国有 500 万新枪主。但这取决于你有多准备、多想偏执，以及你想处理多少个标准差的风险。但我认为今年很多人觉得那些曾经不可想象的风险突然被拉近了。

You better have golden guns but we're not talking about that. Cigarettes and tampons, that's great for your water. Yeah, that's right. Well, bullets are the ultimate one, right? As we also saw in 2020, we have 5 million new gun owners in the US. But it just depends how much of a prepper you are, how paranoid you want to be, and how many standard deviations out you want to handle risk. But I think this is the year where a lot of people feel like risks that were inconceivable have suddenly gotten pulled in.

让我问一个愚蠢的新手问题，作为假设。作为一个能用加密货币相关词汇但根本没有基本理解的人，我是很好的例子。我就是那个指着鸟、以为自己全懂了的人，因为能说出黄喉莺的名字。我不认为我全懂了。但假设我 somehow 像无限时间下一百万台笔记本电脑上一千只猴子打出莎士比亚那样， somehow 把一堆加密货币弄到了一个硬件账本或硬件钱包上。所以我有这个东西。美国正在走向毁灭。我 somehow 把它弄到空白处，我就随便选西班牙。比如我降落在西班牙，我想‘天哪，太险了，谢天谢地我及时逃出来了。’我成功过来了。你怎么用加密货币买公寓或付房租之类的？因为感觉加密货币领域和工具还是像图形用户界面之前的电脑。你懂我的意思吗？即使聪明人也搞不太明白。但如果那是两年后，你会怎么做？

Let me ask a dumb newbie question as a hypothetical. So speaking as someone who is a great example of someone who can use words associated with crypto but really has no fundamental understanding. I'm the guy pointing at the bird who thinks he's got it all figured out because he's able to name the yellow-throated warbler. I don't think I have it all figured out. But let's just say I managed somehow, like a thousand monkeys typing out Shakespeare on a million laptops given infinite time, I somehow manage to get a bunch of cryptocurrency onto a hardware ledger, or a hardware wallet rather. So I have this thing. US is going to hell in a handbasket. I somehow manage to get that to fill in the blank, I'll just arbitrarily choose Spain. Like I land in Spain, I'm like 'Oh my god, that was so close, thank god I got out in time.' I managed to make it over. How the hell do you buy an apartment or pay your rent or anything like that with crypto when it still feels like the crypto landscape and the tools are kind of computers pre-graphical user interface? Do you know what I mean? Even smart people can't quite figure it out. But what would you, how would you if that were two years in the future?

我的意思是，我认为那不太可能，但假设如此。对我的大多数朋友，我推荐的场景是：你在 Coinbase、CoinList 之类的地方买。然后把它转移到像 Anchorage 或 BitGo 这样的专用托管机构。然后你就把它放在那里。如果事情变得糟糕，你决定要离开城镇，那么你联系你的代表，把它转移到硬件钱包，然后逃离国家，对吧？或者去你要去的地方。当你到达另一边时，现在你的硬件钱包里有这些加密货币。理论上，你可以登录当地的加密货币交易所，通过他们的验证流程，然后上传。现在你有了可以兑换成现金的比特币。或者你可以去找任何当地的比特币聚会人群和团体，那些爱好者、所谓的 maximalists、死忠信徒和持有者，你可以和他们中的任何人用比特币兑换现金。在遥远的未来，人们可能会直接接受比特币，因为它是一种可互换、高质量的硬资产，可以像现金一样运输和持有。但如果你做不到，你总能找到当地的信徒或加密货币交易所来兑换。

I mean, I think that's unlikely, but let's just say. For most of my friends, the scenario I recommend is like: you go buy it on something like Coinbase, CoinList, whatever. You move it into a dedicated custodian like an Anchorage or a BitGo. Then you kind of hold it there. Now if the stuff is hitting the fan and you decide you want to get out of town, then you contact your rep there, you move it into a hardware wallet, and then you flee the country, right? Or go wherever you're going. And when you land on the other side, now you have this crypto in your hardware wallet. In theory, you can log into a local crypto exchange, go through their verification processes, and upload it. Now you've got Bitcoin that can be traded for cash. Or you can go find any of the local Bitcoin meetup people and groups, the enthusiasts, the so-called maximalists, the die-hard believers, and the holders, and you can trade any of them Bitcoin for cash. Now in the distant future, it's possible that people will just take Bitcoin directly because it is a fungible, high-quality hard asset that can be transported and held like cash. But if you can't do that, you can always find either a local believer or you can find a crypto exchange where you can convert it.

比特币之所以如此有趣，并不一定是因为它是最好的技术。它确实很稳健，而且是 OG。真正有趣的是它拥有最死忠的信徒。正因为有最死忠的信徒，只要有五千或五万富有、聪明的人——富有这部分非常重要——他们总会为你交易，用硬资产和你交易。你知道，最近 MicroStrategy 这家公司开始将其一半的国库转移到比特币。CEO Michael Saylor 被引述说‘我不敢相信有人愿意把比特币卖给我。’对吧？他搞清楚了它是什么，然后他就想‘我要尽可能多地得到它。’所以，给你，拿我的公司股份，但给我比特币。有很多像他这样的人。有很多很多像他这样的人，他们存在于世界上每个主要国家。只要有信徒——因为它既是一场运动或宗教，也是一种货币——因为货币归根结底是什么？钱只是一个永远不会破灭的泡沫，对吧？如果我们明天都同意，如果我们明天都达成共识，说不是美元，而是欧元才是真正的钱，那么世界就会转向欧元。见鬼，如果我们同意蛤壳是钱，世界就会转向蛤壳。当然，有一些底层特征使欧元和美元优于蛤壳，所以我们趋同于它们。但如果世界决定比特币比美元更好，世界就会转向比特币。这是一个故事，一个共识信仰。比特币的美妙之处在于有这些死忠的 maximalists。我一直在网上和他们争论。顺便说一句，他们不喜欢我，所以我一直在和他们进行 Twitter 大战。但我仍然非常感激他们的存在，因为他们实际上是比特币始终可交易、始终有价值的核心。世界上某个地方总有一个人会用他的房子换比特币。只要这是真的——我看不出它会停止成为真的，因为实际上每天都有越来越多的人加入这个名单——它就有真正的价值，有可赎回的价值。

The thing that makes Bitcoin so interesting is not that it's necessarily the best technology. It is definitely robust and it's the OG. What makes it really interesting is it has the most die-hard believers. And because it has the most die-hard believers, as long as there's five thousand or fifty thousand wealthy, brilliant people who—just that the wealthy part is really important—they will always trade it for you, trade it with you for hard assets. You know, I think recently MicroStrategy started, it's a company, it started moving half of its treasury into Bitcoin. And the CEO Michael Saylor was quoted as saying something along the lines of 'I can't believe people are willing to sell me Bitcoin.' Right? He figured out what it was and then he was just like 'I want to get as much as possible.' So you know, here, take pieces of my company but give me Bitcoin. And there are lots of people like him. There are lots and lots of people like him, and they exist in every major country in the world. And as long as there are believers—because it's as much a movement or religion as it is a currency—and because what is a currency at the end of the day? Money is just the bubble that never pops, right? It's just if we all agree tomorrow that if we all manage to come upon the story tomorrow that it's not the US dollar, it's actually the Euro that is really money, then the world will switch to the Euro. Heck, if we agreed that clamshells were money, the world would switch to clamshells. Now obviously there are underlying characteristics that make Euros and dollars better than clamshells, and so therefore we converge upon those. But if the world were to decide that Bitcoin is better money than US dollars, the world would switch to Bitcoin. It's a story, it's a consensus belief. And the beauty of Bitcoin is that there are these die-hard maximalists. And I fight with them on the internet all the time. They don't like me, by the way, so I've had Twitter battles with them running. But I still really appreciate that they exist because they are actually the core of what makes Bitcoin always tradeable, always valuable. There's always some guy in some location somewhere in the world who will give you his house for Bitcoin. And as long as that is true—and I don't see why it will stop being true because if anything, more and more people are being added to that list every day—it has real value and has redeemable value.

你认为随着更多机构投资者可能进入，可预见的近期会是什么样子？换句话说，如果我们看到——让我问一个更好的问题。当 Paul Tudor Jones 写备忘录详细说明他为什么投资时，这非常引人注目，我想是大约 1 亿美元投入比特币或类似比特币的等价物，某种加密货币等价物，如果不是加密货币本身的话。你预计会有更多机构投资者、主权财富基金等进入吗？你认为未来几年故事和格局会如何变化？

What do you think the conceivable near term looks like with the possible entrance of more institutional investors? In other words, if we see—let me ask a better question. It was very noteworthy and newsworthy when Paul Tudor Jones wrote his memo detailing why he was investing, I think it was something like 100 million into Bitcoin or Bitcoin-like equivalence, some type of crypto equivalent, if not crypto itself. Do you anticipate that more institutionals are going to come in, sovereign wealth funds, things like that? And how do you think the story and the landscape could change over the next handful of years?

我认为这是不可避免的。看，比特币和加密货币仍然有风险，对吧？很多这些算法和方案都是新的。即使是比特币通过这种工作量证明机制，你可以说它倾向于中心化，因为它由这些匿名矿工和数据中心管理，而数据中心有规模经济，所以它最终会比人们希望的更中心化。有像以太坊这样的后起之秀。还有隐私问题——你知道，在比特币区块链上，你可以被永久追踪，所以它并不完美。你知道，人们谈论量子计算会破解它。我不认为这是真的；我认为你可以升级加密算法，同样好或更好。但总是有潜在的问题，对吧，这些问题没有完全解决。但每次我们面对这些清算，问题得到解决时，价值就会上升，故事就会变得更强大。所以同样，当 Paul Tudor Jones 或……

I think it's inevitable. Look, Bitcoin and crypto still have risks, right? A lot of these algorithms and schemes are new. Even Bitcoin through this proof-of-work mechanism, you could argue that it tends towards centralization because it gets managed by these anonymous miners and data centers, and data centers of economies of scale, and so it will end up being more centralized than people would like. There are up-and-coming competitors like Ethereum. There's privacy issues—you know, on the Bitcoin blockchain, you can be tracked forever, so it's not perfect. You know, people talk about quantum computing breaking it. I don't think that's true; I think you can upgrade the encryption algorithm just as well or better. But there are always potential problems, right, which are not completely resolved. But every time we face one of these reckonings and that problem gets resolved, the value goes up, the story becomes stronger. And so the same way when Paul Tudor Jones or...

MicroStrategy 通过比特币，这个故事越来越强。信徒群体在扩大，验证在增加，现在更多人能加入并以此为据，说：‘好吧，如果保罗·都铎·琼斯同意，迈克尔·塞勒也同意，那我也同意成为相信这将是新的价值储存和财富方式的人群中的一员。’所以我现在加入他们的财富存储计划，早期的人因此得到回报。

MicroStrategy by Bitcoin, the story is becoming stronger. The set of believers is increasing, the validation is increasing, and now more people can come in and hang their hat on this and say, 'Okay, if Paul Tudor Jones agrees and Michael Saylor agrees, then I agree to be in that set of people who believe that this is going to be the new way to store value and wealth.' So now I'm joining their wealth storage scheme, and the early people then get rewarded for it.

所以思考比特币，甚至任何加密货币的一种方式，就是它是一个瑞士银行账户，但这是一个空间有限的瑞士银行账户。如果你想在那个空间有限的瑞士银行账户中获得货架空间，你必须从现有的持有者手中买下那个空间。想象一个坚不可摧的瑞士银行账户，一个全新的，没有政府能闯入，它由全球数百万人使用巨大算力达成的共识来保障安全。如果你想要其中一个保险箱，你必须从已经在那里的人那里购买。所以只要想进入这个瑞士银行账户的新人需求大于想离开这个账户的供应，你就要为那个箱子支付更多，这就是其投机力量的来源。

So one way to think about Bitcoin in particular, or even actually any of the cryptocurrencies, is it's a Swiss bank account, but it's a Swiss bank account with finite space. And if you want shelf space in that Swiss bank account with finite space, you have to buy out one of the existing holders in that space. So imagine a Swiss bank account that's impregnable, it's a new one, no government can break into it, it's secured by consensus across millions of people using massive computation power on the globe. And if you want one of those safety deposit boxes, you got to buy it from someone who's already there. So as long as the demand for new people trying to get into the Swiss bank account is greater than the supply of people who are trying to get out of that Swiss bank account, then you're going to pay more for that box, and that's where the speculative power of it comes from.

我认为需要一场真正的危机才能看清加密货币的价值。实际上到目前为止很奇怪，因为人们说加密货币在新冠疫情中未能通过危机测试，对吧？我的意思是，它没有像所有人逃离美元那样飙升。比特币没有涨到 10 万美元。但这恰恰显示了美元的韧性，以及我们距离失去全球储备货币地位还有多远。但与此同时，它也没有崩溃。它短暂下跌，因为人们需要现金来满足各种追加保证金和贷款，但总体上保持非常稳定。我要说，最近参与加密货币作为真正财富保护机制的人数是我见过最多的。所以我确实认为持有者基础已经上升。

And I think it's going to take a good crisis to really see what crypto is worth. And actually so far it's been weird because people have said that crypto failed the crisis test with COVID, right? I mean, it didn't skyrocket as everybody fled the US dollar. Bitcoin didn't go to $100k. But that kind of shows you how resilient the dollar is and how far we are from losing global reserve currency status. But at the same time, it didn't collapse either. It went down briefly as people needed cash to meet various margin calls and loans, but overall stayed very stable. And I would say the number of people who have gotten involved in crypto recently as a true wealth protection mechanism is the largest I've ever seen. So I do think that the holder base has gone up.

我不知道在我有生之年是否还会看到真正的 3000 美元比特币。如果某些东西完全崩溃，我们可能会看到零，但我不认为会看到很多人离开并失去信心，从而导致它跌到 3000 美元。比特币往往会达到这些高点，然后暴跌回一个平台，在平台上停留一段时间，然后再回到新高。我感觉我们大概在 1 万美元水平，谁知道呢？我不想做价格预测，但我觉得现在的持有者基础比以往任何时候都更强大。

I don't know if we're going to see like real $3,000 bitcoin ever again in my lifetime. We might see zero if something breaks completely, but I don't think we're going to see a bunch of people leaving and losing faith in it, and that's why it goes to $3k. Bitcoin tends to hit these highs, then crash back down to a plateau, hang out in a plateau for a while, and then go back to a new high. And I kind of feel like we're around the $10k level, who knows? I don't want to make price predictions, but I feel like there's a stronger base of holders now than there's ever been.

所以这些人一个个都来验证它。保罗·都铎·琼斯为其他对冲基金经理验证，对冲基金经理为主权财富基金验证，主权财富基金为中央银行验证。最终某个国家会说：‘实际上，我们货币通胀太严重，货币崩溃了，没人再信任我们，我们必须采用一种新的国家货币。与其盯住美元，不如盯住比特币，或者使用比特币，或者使用其他加密货币，或者聪明点，买进一堆比特币，然后宣布我们要使用比特币，这样比特币就会飙升，我们都发财了。’所以我认为还有其他场景，最终它会变得更有价值，但过程会是跌跌撞撞，前进后退。不会一蹴而就，直到它发生，对吧？这就是黑天鹅的本质：你无法预测，发生时突然发生。

So each one of these people comes and validates it. Paul Tudor Jones validates it for other hedge fund managers, hedge fund managers validate it for sovereign wealth funds, sovereign wealth funds validate it for central banks. Eventually some country out there is going to say, 'Actually, we inflated our currency too much, our currency collapsed, nobody trusts us anymore, we have to adopt a new national currency. Instead of pegging to the dollar, let's peg to Bitcoin, or let's use Bitcoin, or let's use some other cryptocurrency, or let's be clever and buy up a bunch of Bitcoin and then announce we're going to use Bitcoin, and then Bitcoin will skyrocket and we're all rich.' So I think there are other scenarios where it ends up being a lot more valuable, but it's going to be stumbling steps forward and backward. It's not going to be in one fell swoop until it is, right? That's the nature of black swans: you can't predict them, when it happens it happens suddenly.

我有一个朋友曾经告诉我——他现在是核心比特币信徒，实际上还帮忙写了一本关于比特币的书——但多年前我第一次谈论比特币时，他说：‘有什么大不了的？如果我不得不逃离这个国家，我到时候买比特币就行了。’我说：‘是啊，当你不得不逃离时，你全部财产只能买一个比特币，对吧？’问题就在这里：这是供需关系。所以你不能等到最后一刻。我确实认为每天都有越来越多的聪明人加入进来。

I had a friend who used to tell me—he's now a hardcore Bitcoiner, he actually helped write a book on Bitcoin now—but when I first talked about Bitcoin years ago, he said, 'What's the big deal? If I ever have to flee the country, I'll just buy Bitcoin then.' And I said, 'Yeah, when you have to flee the country, your entire fortune's going to buy you one Bitcoin, right?' That's the problem: it's supply and demand. So you can't wait till the last second. And I do think more and more smart people are coming into it every single day.

我认为加密货币波动的心理动态很像赌场的老虎机：高变异性的可变奖励，你会看到价格飙升和下跌，然后持平，然后再次飙升和下跌，这种方式不同于你我会在公开市场上购买的大多数股票。甚至华尔街在某种程度上也是一个大型赌场，具有潜在的正期望值，为社会创造一些价值，比如对冲和为公司融资提供流动性等等。加密货币也在做同样的事情：它是一个全球 7 天 24 小时 365 天的赌场，世界上任何人都可以参与。但通过底层的去中心化金融，你实际上在发放贷款、保护财富、存储财富、让人们购买衍生品、让人们进行对冲。所以所有这些都在涌现：我们现在有加密货币市场的保险，有借贷，有做空，有需要底层加密货币的计算。

And I think the psychological dynamics of crypto volatility are a lot like a casino slot machine: variable reward with high variability, where you just see things spiking and dropping, and then they stay flat, and then they spike and they drop, in a way that is unlike most equities that you or I would buy on the public markets. Even Wall Street at some level is a big casino with a potential positive expected value, creating some value for society in terms of hedging and liquidity for companies raising money, and so on. And crypto's doing the same thing: it's a global 24/7/365 casino where anybody in the world can play. But through decentralized finance underneath, you're actually making loans, protecting wealth, storing it, letting people buy derivatives, letting people hedge. So all of these things are coming up: we now have insurance in the crypto markets, we now have lending in the crypto markets, we have shorting in the crypto markets, we have computation going on that requires crypto underneath.

看，如果两台计算机在互相通信，如果两个迷你 AI 在高速通信，交换资源来运营一家公司，它们将如何交换货币？你认为它们会通过 PayPal 或 Fedwire 发送美元吗？绝对不会，它们会使用加密货币。加密货币是互联网的原生货币。互联网当然会有自己的货币。否则就像说互联网将通过美国邮政服务使用电子邮件一样。它将有自己的原生链上、在线协议来传输数据。

Look, if two computers are talking to each other, if two mini AIs are talking to each other at high speed, exchanging resources to run a company, how are they going to exchange money? You think they're going to send US dollars through PayPal or through Fedwire? Hell no, they're going to use crypto. Crypto is the native currency of the internet. Of course the internet is going to have its own currency. Otherwise it's like saying the internet's going to use email through the USPS. It's going to have its own native on-chain, on-wire protocol for communicating data.

所以加密货币真正是什么：比特币不是一个东西，不是像有一枚硬币放在某处。比特币是虚拟账本中的一个条目，而这个虚拟账本由全球运行的大量机器维护。你所做的是在互联网上安全地传输价值，中间没有第三方验证这是正确的通信。它由整个网络一次性完成。你在向互联网传输稀缺性和价值，这是一件新事物。互联网之前给我们的是数字丰裕：我可以复制一切。这是一个非常伟大的想法：我可以制作一个播客并发送给所有人，我可以制作一个网页并发送给所有人。这创造了巨大的财富和巨大的革命。同样，数字稀缺性也是一个非常伟大的想法。

And so what cryptocurrencies really are: Bitcoin isn't a thing, Bitcoin is not like there's a coin sitting somewhere. Bitcoin is an entry in a virtual ledger, and that virtual ledger is maintained by tons of machines running across the world. And what you're doing is you're communicating value securely across the internet with no third parties in the middle validating that that is the correct communication. It's done by the entire network at once. And you're communicating and transmitting scarcity and value to the internet, and that's a new thing. What the internet gave us before was digital abundance: I can make copies of everything. And that was a very big idea: I can make one podcast and ship it to everybody, I can make one web page and ship it to everybody. That was a very big idea and created huge fortunes and huge revolutions. The same way digital scarcity is a very big idea.

稀缺性同样是一个有趣的概念。它意味着我只能拥有这个东西的一份。如果 Naval 有一个比特币，那么 Tim Ferriss 就没有那个比特币，反之亦然。通过互联网创造稀缺性并传递稀缺性和价值的能力，与创造丰裕并通过互联网传递丰裕的能力同样重要。因此，互联网在关于有价值事物的通信和协议以及金融方面的原生语言将是加密货币。没有其他方式。

Scarcity is an equally interesting idea. It means I can only have one of this thing. If Naval has a bitcoin, then Tim Ferriss doesn't have that bitcoin, or vice versa. That ability to create scarcity and transmit scarcity and value through the internet is just as important as the ability to create abundance and transmit that through the internet. So the native language of the internet in communications and protocols around valuable things and on finance is going to be in cryptocurrencies. It's not going to be any other way.

我想再提两条推文，然后我们就可以收尾了。首先，我想再次提到——我很少这样做——但我对这次讨论的结果非常满意。如果有人想了解更多关于加密货币的历史和设计，这非常迷人，只需谷歌 Nick Szabo，S-Z-A-B-O。如果你对音频感兴趣，Naval 和我与他们聊过。

I want to bring up two more tweets and then we can bring this to a close and put a bow on it. First, I just want to mention again—and I very rarely do this—but I am very happy with how this discussion turned out. If people want more of the history and the design of cryptocurrency, which is endlessly fascinating, just Google Nick Szabo, S-Z-A-B-O. And then if you're interested in diving into audio, Naval and I spoke with them.

两条推文，都是九月份的。我要读一条，因为我非常同意它，而且我也观察到你在很好地遵循这个建议。那就是：所有自助归根结底就是选择长期而非短期。不过我会修改这条推文：所有真正有效的自助归根结底就是选择长期而非短期。我的意思是，这就是全部的挑战。长期思维带来长期结果。我已经用一千种不同的方式说过：在商业中，你想与长期的人玩长期游戏。在现代生活中，成瘾和应对大量抛给你的丰裕事物——电子游戏是一个陷阱，一个替代你真正职业的影子职业。吸大麻或喝酒替代了通过更简单的事物如阳光和散步获得的快乐。色情替代了性。这可以一直列下去。

Two tweets, both from September. One I'm going to read just because I agree with it super strongly, and I also have observed you following this advice very well. Which is: all self-help boils down to choose long-term over short-term. I would modify the tweet to say though: all truly effective self-help boils down to choose long-term over short-term. And I mean that is the entire challenge. Long-term thinking gets you long-term results. I've said this a thousand different ways: in business, you want to play long-term games with long-term people. In modern life, addictions and dealing with the avalanche of abundance of things thrown at you—video games are a trap, a shadow career that substitutes for your real career. Smoking weed or drinking alcohol substitutes for pleasure through simpler things like sunlight and walks. Porn substitutes for sex. This goes on and on.

我以为你在说散步、阳光和色情。我当时想，是啊，这听起来像是三件套。

I thought you were saying walking, sunlight, and porn. I was like, yeah, that sounds about the trifecta.

但看看我发的相关推文：现代的魔鬼是廉价的多巴胺。推特上一些有趣的人指出，实际上古代的魔鬼也是廉价的多巴胺。但在现代，我们只是把它超加速了。现代的大脑过度刺激，现代的身体刺激不足。我们把所有的舒适享受都放大了一千倍。所以实际上，生活中所有的成功都归结为棉花糖测试的一个变种：孩子能否忍住 15 分钟不吃棉花糖？然后他们得到两个棉花糖。据说这能很好地预测未来的成功，尽管像许多心理实验一样，我不认为它能很好地复制。但无论如何，这归结为长期与短期。如果你能在心态上采用长期思维，你的生活就会轻松得多。或者像我们最喜欢的教练 Jocko Willink 说的：艰难的选择，轻松的生活；轻松的选择，艰难的生活。就是这样。所以，你能对任何事情采取长期视角吗？复利无处不在：在关系中，在金钱上，在健康和健身中。你能改变你的习惯，去读那些长期对你最有帮助的书，那些基础书籍吗？你能改变你的饮食习惯，吃健康食品而不是不健康食品吗？你能建立一个每天或每隔一天都能做的锻炼计划，让它成为你生活中持续的一部分吗？我认为很多归结为只是选择长期或短期。所有好的技巧基本上都是帮助让长期选择变得可口，或者帮助激励你保持专注于长期。

But look at the related tweet I had: the modern devil is cheap dopamine. And some interesting people on Twitter pointed out to me actually the ancient devil is cheap dopamine as well. But in modern times, we've just hyper-accelerated it. The modern mind is overstimulated, the modern body is understimulated. We've taken all the creature comforts and maximized them a thousand times. So literally all success in life boils down to a variation of the marshmallow test: can the kid hold off eating the marshmallow for 15 minutes? Then they get two marshmallows. The claim is that turned out to be a big predictor for future success, although like many psych experiments, I don't think it replicates well. But anyway, it just boils down to long-term versus short-term. If you can just adopt long-term thinking in your mindset, you're going to have a much easier life. Or as our favorite trainer, Jocko Willink, says: hard choices, easy life; easy choices, hard life. That's it. So can you take a long-term view on anything? Compound interest applies everywhere: in relationships, in money, in health and fitness. Can you change your habits to read the kinds of books that will serve you best in the long term, the foundational books? Can you change your eating habits so that you're eating healthy food as opposed to unhealthy food? Can you create an exercise routine that you can do every day or every other day so that it's a consistent part of your life? I think a lot of it boils down to just choosing the long term or the short term. And all the good hacks basically help make the long-term choice palatable or help inspire you to keep your eyes focused on the long term.

一个例子是，如果你在做你热爱的事情，如果你在经营一家你喜欢的公司，那可能比玩电子游戏更有趣。如果你晚上下班回家，第一反应是玩电子游戏，那说明你在工作中很痛苦。你在电子游戏中同样努力，但奖励都是假的，因为规则会变，或者网上某个 13 岁的孩子会打败你，因为他们整天都在玩那个游戏。我曾经是一个铁杆游戏玩家；我玩得很开心，也确实从游戏中有所学习。但到了这个年纪，如果我拿起一个电子游戏，我是为了逃避痛苦，而且我并没有真正从中得到什么。我可以玩投资这个游戏，或者我可以玩创业这个游戏，或者我可以玩打网球这个游戏，这对我的健康有好处。所以我认为很多是关于找到你能做的事情，它对你来说很有趣，看起来像玩，感觉像玩，但对别人来说像工作，你能长期做下去并维持自己。

An example is if you're doing something that you love, if you're running a business that you enjoy, it's probably going to be more fun than playing a video game. If you come home at night from work and your first instinct is to play a video game, you're suffering at work. You're working just as hard in the video game, but the rewards are all fake because they're going to change the rules on you, or some 13-year-old kid on the internet will destroy you because they play that video game all day long. I used to be a hardcore video gamer; I had a lot of fun doing it, and I did learn playing games for sure. But at this age, if I pick up a video game, I'm doing it to get away from suffering, and I'm not really getting anything out of it. I could play the video game of investing, or I could play the video game of starting companies, or I could play the video game of going and playing tennis, and that would be good for my health. So I think a lot of it is about finding the thing that you can do that is fun for you, that looks like play, feels like play to you, but looks like work to others, that you can do that sustains you for the long term.

例如，在食物方面，你想找到的是别人认为健康、营养健康但你觉得美味的健康食品。因为如果我能做出这些食物，如果我能成为一个好厨师，做出我喜欢吃的美味食物，并且我能经常吃，但它们实际上非常健康，那就太棒了。那是一个技巧。现在我在为长期而吃，但我没有放弃太多的短期快乐。同样，一段好的关系会比看色情片更好。拥有一个好的职业或一份愉快的工作，或者编写一些我喜欢的代码，会比玩电子游戏高效得多。我不想显得说教，但我要说，我对阅读的热爱来自于我的另一条推文：读你喜欢的，直到你喜欢阅读。所以，只要爱上阅读本身。读垃圾食品类的东西也没关系；只要爱上阅读。最终，你会对简单的东西感到厌倦，然后转向更有趣的东西。我非常喜欢阅读，以至于我不喜欢看电视，我不看电影。人们开始谈论他们在 Netflix 上看的节目，我给他们一个茫然的表情。我不看 Netflix 上的节目；它们不有趣。对我来说，散步和冥想有趣得多，我会处于一个非常快乐的状态，或者读一本能激发智力的书。当然，偶尔和朋友或妻子一起看电影，但那是社交活动。我这样做是为了和他们有共同话题。我永远不会一个人看电影，除非我被困在 15 小时的航班上，真的很无聊，而且所有其他事情都做完了。

For example, in foods, what you want to find is the health food that other people consider healthy and has a nutritionally healthy profile, but that I find tasty. Because if I can create those foods, if I can become a good cook and create great foods that I enjoy eating, and I can eat them regularly but they're actually super healthy, that's amazing. That's a hack. Now I'm eating for the long term, but I'm not giving up too much of the short-term pleasure. The same way, being in a good relationship is going to be better than watching porn. Having a good career or working an enjoyable job, or hacking on some code that I enjoy, is going to be far more productive than playing a video game. I don't want to sound preachy, but I will just say that as for my love for reading, it came from another one of my tweets: read what you love until you love to read. So just fall in love with the idea of reading itself. It's okay to read the junk food stuff; just fall in love with reading. Eventually, you'll get bored of the simple stuff and you'll go to the more interesting stuff. I love to read enough that I don't like watching TV, I don't watch movies. People start talking about shows they're watching on Netflix, and I give them this empty look. I don't watch shows on Netflix; they're not interesting. It's far more interesting to me to go for a walk and be meditative, and I'll be in a very happy place, or to read a book which will be intellectually stimulating. Sure, once in a while, watch a movie with friends or with my wife, but it's a social thing. I'm doing it as a way of being on the same common ground as them. I would never watch a movie on my own unless maybe I was trapped in a 15-hour airplane flight, I was really bored, and I ran out of everything else to do.

找到那些相处起来不费劲的人。最好的关系不会让人觉得是负担。你做自己就能让对方开心，他们做自己也能让你开心。每个人都坦诚，没有人在演戏，而且能持续十年。友谊也是如此。最好的友谊是自然形成的——不是因为一起上学，不是因为学同样的东西，不是因为一起工作，也不是因为都喜欢橄榄球什么的。而是因为你们气场相合，性情相似，所以可以做 30 年、50 年的朋友。关系中的复利效应讽刺地意味着，最好的关系——无论是友谊、亲情还是爱情——都是那些不需要你太费力的。这样你就不必一辈子维持那种努力，可以毫不费力地经营。

Find people that doesn't take work to be around. The best relationships don't feel like work. You make the other person happy by being yourself; they make you happy by being themselves. Everyone's honest, no one's putting on an act they can't carry on for the next decade. Same thing with friendships. The best friendships are formed out of nothing—not because you went to school, not because you studied the same things, not because you're working together, not because you enjoy rugby or whatever. It's because your chemistry matches, your temperament is similar, and so you can be friends for 30 or 50 years. The compound interest in relationships part ironically means that the best relationships—whether friendships, family, or love—are the ones where you don't have to work too hard at them. So you don't have to sustain that workload for the rest of your life, and you can do it effortlessly.

完全同意。我经常想起你的一句话——可能是我转述的——'如果你想避免冲突，第一条规则就是避开那些总是卷入冲突的人。'大概是这个意思。

Yeah, totally. One of your quotes that I think of often—and I might be paraphrasing this—is: 'If you want to avoid conflict, rule number one is avoid people who are constantly involved with conflict.' Something along those lines.

比如，在一段关系中，观察对方如何对待他们最坏的敌人，因为最终他们可能会重新把你定义为敌人，你也会感受到那种行为。所以我在关系中寻找的首要标准是，一个人必须善良。他们必须是个好人。因为在某些情况下，你总是可能从朋友被重新归类为敌人。所以你要看清一个人道德的边界。如果你看到有人对服务员态度恶劣，或者有不道德的行为，或者总是起诉别人、跟人吵架，那他们跟你吵架只是时间问题。所以远离这些高冲突的人。每个人都有冲突，没有人是干净的。但话说回来，确实有些人经常卷入冲突，并把它变成生活方式的一部分。走开就好，不值得。有很多低冲突、容易相处的人。

For example, when you're in a relationship, just watch how the other person treats their worst enemy, because eventually they'll just redefine you as an enemy, and you'll get to feel that behavior. So I think the number one criteria I look for in a relationship is that a person has to be kind. They just have to be a nice person. Because eventually, in a certain context, you can always be reclassified from friend to enemy. So you just want to see the boundaries of someone's ethics. If you see someone being bad to a server, or engaging in unethical behavior, or suing other people, or fighting other people all the time, it's only a matter of time before they fight you. So just stay away from these high-conflict people. Everyone has conflict; no one is clean. But that said, there are definitely people who engage in conflict regularly and make it a part of their lifestyle. Just walk away. It's not worth it. There are plenty of people who are low-conflict and easy to get along with.

低冲突、低维护，同时必要时也能直言不讳，对吧？这并不等于高冲突。

Low conflict, low maintenance, who can also be brutally candid when necessary, right? Which doesn't equal high conflict.

我注意到一件事——我还没为此发过推文，因为很难表达——但如今我想花时间相处的人，他们的共同特点是高度自我觉察。他们非常了解自己。他们不是自动驾驶模式。他们不容易生气，不容易不开心，不把自己太当回事。他们与自己的想法和人格保持一定距离，这防止了环境和性格压垮他们。他们没有受害者心态。他们不会陷入小时候发生了什么事的叙事中。他们当然有过那些问题，但他们已经走出来了，并且说'我不想成为那样的人，我不想被困在那样的心态里。'他们不会一直炫耀自己有多重要、认识谁、做过什么、或者有多高尚。他们不进行道德炫耀或自我标榜。他们通常自我意识较低。我可以画一条线：一个人越有自我觉察，我保证，他们对大多数人的吸引力就越大。至于我获得的那一点点名气——名气是个陷阱，我会为此付出代价，我知道我会——但我认为我获得的那一点点名气，是因为我是少数在商业上成功却愿意公开思考的人。因为我愿意公开思考，这是我冒的风险。这改善了我的思考，但别人会说'哦，他有点自我觉察，他在思考自己。'我认为这能激励其他人也说'好吧，我也可以思考自己。'我发现和高度自我觉察的人相处，比和那些像 NPC 一样自动驾驶的人容易得多。

Well, the one thing I've noticed—and I haven't written the tweet on this because I've had a hard time figuring how to say it—but the people I want to spend time around these days, when I look at what the common characteristic is, they're highly self-aware. They're very, very aware of themselves. They're not running on autopilot. They don't get angry easily. They don't get unhappy easily. They don't take themselves too seriously. They have a certain separation from their own thoughts and personality that prevents circumstances and their personality from overwhelming them. They don't have a victim mentality. They're not caught up in some story of what happened to them when they were younger. They've had those issues for sure, but they've just gotten past them and been like, 'I don't want to be that person. I don't want to be trapped in that mindset.' They're not trying to signal all the time how important they are, or who they know, or what they've done, or how virtuous they are. They're not virtue signaling or grandstanding. They have low egos generally. I can literally plot on a line: the more self-aware somebody is, I guarantee you, the more attractive they are to a large number of people. And to the degree that I've achieved any modicum of fame—and fame is a trap, and I'm going to pay for this, I know I will pay for this—but any modicum of fame that I've achieved, I think is because I am one of the few people who has been successful in business that thinks out loud in public. And because I'm willing to think out loud in public, that's a risk that I take. It improves my thinking, but other people say, 'Oh yeah, he's somewhat self-aware, he's thinking about himself.' And I think that helps inspire other people to also say, 'Okay, it's okay for me to think about myself.' I just find hanging around self-aware people is a lot easier than people who are running on autopilot, almost like NPCs.

NPC？那是什么意思？

NPCs? What does that mean?

非玩家角色。这是某些电子游戏里的说法，指电脑控制的角色。他们是可以预测的。

Non-player characters. It's a reference to certain kinds of video games where it's like a computer-controlled character. They're predictable.

好了，说到游戏，这是最后一条推文，最后一期播客。这句话是：'赢得游戏的理由是让你能够摆脱它。'我的问题是——等一下，再说一遍：'赢得游戏的理由是让你能够摆脱它。'我很好奇你摆脱了什么游戏，或者你在玩什么游戏以便摆脱它。

All right, so speaking of games, this is the final tweet, the final podcast. Here it is: 'The reason to win the game is so that you can be free of it.' And my questions about this are—wait, one more time: 'The reason to win the game is so that you can be free of it.' I would be curious to know what game you are free of, or what game you are playing so that you can be free of it.

我觉得自己现在已经摆脱了几乎所有游戏。游戏是什么？生活就是游戏，对吧？你从家庭游戏开始，然后上学游戏、成绩游戏、找男女朋友游戏、结婚游戏、生孩子游戏、赚钱游戏、职业游戏、出名游戏、穿着打扮游戏。很多都是社交游戏。有些不是游戏，比如冥想——如果你在冥想中计分，那你就做错了。瑜伽，这些都是单人游戏。真正让你陷入社会和焦虑的是多人游戏。你多少得玩它们。要获得内心的平静，你有两个选择。一是你可以玩这些游戏并赢得它们，而赢得之后——最难的部分——意识到你已经赢了，不再玩新的，或者不再给自己设定越来越高的目标。就像我那些赚了很多钱的朋友，他们继续只想着赚钱，但看起来并不快乐。如果他们快乐——比如埃隆·马斯克，他看起来玩得很开心，那没问题。但如果这让你痛苦而你还在继续，而且你只有一次生命，却看不到这一点，那我认为你玩得太过了。所以有两种方式可以摆脱陷阱。一是'不想要某样东西和拥有它一样好。'我记得是 Lyad Shabo 在推特上说的，我觉得很好。或者我最近转发了一句苏格拉底的话，故事是他被带到古希腊的一个市场，那里摆满了奢侈品和精美物品，他说：'有太多东西是我并不想要的。'

I like to think I'm free of almost all the games at this point. What are the games? All of life is games, right? You start out with the family game, you do the school game, the grades game, the getting girlfriends and boyfriends game, the getting married game, the having kids game, the making money game, the having a career game, the getting famous game, the dressing well game. You know, so much of it is social games. There are a few that are not games, like meditation—you're not doing it if you're scoring points in meditation, you're doing it wrong. Yoga, these are single-player games. So it's really the multiplayer games that suck you into society and into anxiety. Now, you kind of have to play them. You have two choices towards peace in your life. One is you can play these games and you can win them, and when you win them—this is the hard part—realizing you've won and stopped playing new ones, or setting new goals for yourself that are even higher and higher. It's like my friends who have made so much money and they continue, all they try to do is make money, and they just don't seem very happy about it. It's fine if they're happy—if they're like Elon Musk, seems like he's having a grand old time, that's fine. But if it's making you miserable and you continue doing it, and you only have one life and you kind of can't see past that, then I would argue you're playing the game too far. So there's kind of two ways out of the trap. One is not wanting something is as good as having it. I think it was Lyad Shabo who said this on Twitter, I thought it was really good. Or there's a recent Socrates quote that I retweeted, where he was taken to a market back in ancient Greece and it was full of luxurious and fine items, and he said, 'There are so many things that I do not want.'

发现者说了这么多我不想要的东西，我觉得那就是自由，那就是力量，那就是自足，那是一个找到了自我、不需要外在任何东西的人。这太鼓舞人心了。所以同样地，我看着这个世界说，嗯，我也可以这么说，对吧？你不能就这么说。如果我只是说有很多我不想要的东西，那不是真的。我想要钱，我想要女孩，你知道，我想要名声，否则我就不会上播客，也不会在推特上。在某种程度上这是真的。所以显然有些东西是我想要的。我不是和尚，我没住在道场。但我能做到的是，我已经得到了我想要的东西，而且我小心不去想要更多。我不想要更多名声，我不想要更多钱。或者如果我得到了，那也没关系，那是手艺的一部分，是额外的奖励，你知道。所以我必须小心不要无意识地接受新的欲望。如果我有了新的欲望，我最好去实现它。所以这些都只是我在玩的游戏，你知道，你必须玩一些游戏。你在这个星球上，你活着，你不如玩点什么。现在问题是你玩什么游戏，以及如何退出游戏，这样你就不会永远被困在玩那个游戏里。一种方法是谨慎选择你的游戏。如果你是和尚，你只玩很少的游戏，或者你不玩游戏，你过着满足、幸福、和谐、平静的生活。另一种是你玩游戏并赢得它，然后你说我现在自由了。所以那条推文，那条推文就是玩游戏的理由。所以赢得游戏的理由是为了摆脱它。这是提醒我自己，对于我已经赢得的游戏，是时候放手了，摆脱它们，而不是无意识地通过和别人攀比来加倍下注，继续升级再升级再升级再升级，然后有一天你死了，然后你会想，好吧，那毫无意义。就像，你知道，我做了所有那些工作为了什么？为了什么？所以如果你不再享受它，如果你已经按照你开始玩游戏时的定义赢得了游戏，一个技巧是尽早设定定义，这样当你超过它时你就知道自己赢了，以免永远被困在玩这个游戏里，只是生活在焦虑的未来中，而不是真正享受当下。你必须知道什么时候停止玩游戏。所以对我来说，玩这些游戏的理由是赢得它们，然后你就可以摆脱它们，看看你还想做什么或不想做什么，而不是永远玩同一个游戏。因为这些游戏，成年人的游戏，设计得非常巧妙。你可以无限地玩下去，它们都是起起落落起起落落。我向你保证，每次你得到钱，你会害怕失去它，或者你会和下一个拥有它的人比较。或者每次你出名了，那就是你必须维护的形象，现在侮辱可以伤害你，现在你不再有隐私，就像你写过的。所以所有这些游戏都有缺点。或者如果你，你知道，很擅长约会，你的生活中有很多男人或女人，那么你也会有很多关系创伤，有很多动荡，你知道，很多受伤的人，你的生活中有很多情感戏剧。所以你只需要意识到你什么时候赢了游戏，然后说我已经完成了这个。所以我会向往像苏格拉底一样，说这个世界上有很多我不想要的东西。而且我倾向于认为我大部分时候已经达到了。要么我不想要它，要么我现在已经拥有了。当然，总是有失去它的恐惧，但我不想无意识地接受新的欲望，我不想不断升级我的生活方式和期望来匹配我的环境，否则我会永远在这个跑步机上。我们都在玩游戏，关键是知道你在玩哪个游戏，这样你至少可以尝试有意识地选择游戏。詹姆斯·卡斯写的《有限与无限的游戏》是一本有趣的读物。我想用一句话来结束，然后你当然欢迎添加任何结束语，但有一句让我想起你的名言。这是我最喜欢的费曼名言之一。所以理查德·P·费曼，再一次，这是名言：“首要原则是你不能欺骗自己，而你是最容易欺骗的人。”我喜欢那句话。我喜欢那句话。我九岁或十岁时读到它，从未忘记。它非常重要。我们都不完美。我们都有缺点，我们都有弱点，我们都有恶习。或者我为自己说话，我当然是这样。但纳瓦尔，和任何人一样，也许比我认识的任何人都更努力地变得自我觉察。此外，我认为这是你代表的一个显著特征，变得自我觉察并花时间在永恒的事物上，同时保留能力在现实世界中成为非常高水平的操作者。对吧？因为你可以完全退出这个世界，进入内省的世界，但实际上缺乏与任何真实压力源互动的韧性和情感意识，这当然不吸引我。你也可以如此沉浸于世界而失去自我觉察，你不再意识到你在玩某些游戏，你变得上瘾并与来自共识现实的事物自我认同。那也不吸引人。但你以一种我觉得迷人的方式，将自我觉察的培养与在世界上高水平运作结合起来。我不会说我一定已经达到了，但每年都变得容易一点。

Finders and said so many things here that I do not want, and I thought that is freedom, that is power, that is self-contained, that is a person who has found himself and needs nothing outside of himself. That is so inspirational. So the same way I look upon the world and I say, well, I could just say that right? You can't just say that. If I just said there's so many things that I don't want, it's not true. I want the money, I want the girl, you know, I want the fame, or I wouldn't have gone on podcasts and I wouldn't be on Twitter. At some level that is true. So obviously there's certain things that I want. I'm not a monk, I'm not living in an ashram. But what I can do is I've gotten the things that I want and I'm careful not to want more. I don't want more fame, I don't want more money. Or if I get it, it's fine, it's part of the craft, by the bonus, you know. So I have to be careful about not unconsciously taking on new desires. If I'm taking a new desire, I better go fulfill that. So these are all just games that I'm playing, and you know, you got to play some game. You're on this planet, you're alive, you might as well play something. Now the question is what game do you play and how do you get out of the game so you're not just trapped playing that game forever. And one way is you choose your games very carefully. If you're a monk, you only choose very, very few games to play, or you play no games and you live content, blissful, harmonious, peaceful. Or the other is you play the game and you win it, and then you say I am now free of this. So what that tweet is, that tweet is the reason to play the game. So the reason to win the game is to be free of it. It's a reminder to myself that for the games that I've won, it's time to let go of them and to be free of them, and not to unconsciously double down by comparing myself to the Joneses and continuing to level up and level up and level up and level up, and then one day you die and then you're like, okay, that was pointless. Like, you know, I did all that work for what? For nothing. So if you're not enjoying it anymore, if you've already won the game by the definition you had when you started playing the game, and one hack is to set the definition early on so that when you go past it you know you won, to not get trapped into playing this game forever and just living in some anxious future as opposed to actually enjoying yourself in the present. You have to know when to stop playing the game. And so to me, the reason to play these games is to win them and then you can be free of them, and to see what else then that you want to do or not do, not to keep playing the same game forever. Because these games, the adult games, are very cleverly designed. You can keep playing them infinitely, and they're all ups and downs and ups and downs. And I guarantee you, every time you get money, you'll be afraid you're going to lose it, or you're going to compare it to the next person who has it. Or every time you get famous, now that's, let's say that's the image that you have to live up to, and now insults can hurt you, and now you don't have your privacy anymore, as you've written about. So all of these games have downsides. Or if you're, you know, very, you're good at dating, you have a lot of men or women in your life, then you're also going to have a lot of relationship trauma and you've got a lot of tumultuousness, you know, a lot of hurt people, you got a lot of emotional drama in your life. So you just have to kind of realize when you won the game and say I'm done with this. So I would aspire to be like Socrates and say there are so many things in this world that I do not want. And I like to think that I'm kind of there for the most part. Either I don't want it or I have it now. Of course, there's a fear of losing it which is always there, but I don't want to pick up new desires unconsciously, and I don't want to keep upgrading my lifestyle and my expectations to match my circumstances, otherwise I'll be on this treadmill forever. We are all playing games, and the key is knowing which game you are playing so you can at least attempt to consciously choose the game. Finite and Infinite Games by James Carse is an interesting read. And I just want to close with, and then you're certainly more than welcome to add any closing comments, but a quote that really makes me think of you. It's one of my favorite quotes from Feynman. So Richard P. Feynman, once again, here's the quote: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool." I love that quote. I love that quote. I read it when I was 9 or 10 years old and I've never forgotten it. It is so important. And none of us are perfect. We all have flaws, we all have weaknesses, we all have vices. Or I'll speak for myself, certainly that's true of me. But Naval, as much as anyone else, perhaps more than anyone else I know, have gone to great lengths to become self-aware. Furthermore, and this is I think that one of the distinguishing characteristics for me that you represent, becoming self-aware and spending time on the timeless while also reserving the right with competency to be a very high level operator in the real world. Right? Because you can be not of this world by opting out completely and go into a world of introspection, but in truth lack the resilience and emotional awareness to interact with any type of real stressor, which doesn't appeal to me certainly. And you can be so engulfed by being in the world that you lose self-awareness, you stop realizing that you are playing certain games, you become addicted and self-identified with things that come from sort of consensus reality. That's also not appealing. But you have managed, in a way that I find fascinating, to combine the cultivation of self-awareness with operating in the world at a high level. I wouldn't say I'm necessarily there yet, but it gets a little easier every year.

费曼的名言很精彩。他说得对。我们一直在欺骗自己。我仍然一直在欺骗自己，因为我仍然有强烈的信念和观点。例如，即使我不怎么在推特上谈论政治，我确实有强烈的政治观点。那是一种欺骗自己的形式，因为，你知道，政治是人造的游戏。它在现实世界中并不真正存在。没有树知道政治。而我确实，即使我不喜欢，我的一些信念也是基于我选择的媒体来源等过滤和捆绑在一起的。所以我一直在欺骗自己。但如果你能少欺骗自己一点，那么你就能更好地驾驭现实。这不需要太多。大多数人只是非常无意识地生活，你知道，未经审视的生活。所以这给了你一种优势。我同意你的观点，你可以随时退出游戏，那样更容易，但那样你很脆弱，对吧？你通过努力锻炼来建立韧性。而且很难保持平静，直到你失去很多并赢得很多。就像你必须看到。

The Feynman quote is brilliant. He's right. We fool ourselves all the time. And I still fool myself all the time because I still have strong beliefs and opinions. For example, even though I don't tweet a lot about politics, I do have strong political opinions. And that is a form of fooling myself because, you know, politics is a man-made game. It doesn't really exist in the real world. No tree is aware of politics. And I do, even though I don't like to, even some of my beliefs are filtered and lined up in bundles based on my chosen media sources and whatnot. So I fool myself all the time. But if you can fool yourself a little bit less, then you can navigate reality much better. It doesn't take a lot. Most people are just living very unconsciously, you know, an unexamined life. So it just gives you kind of a leg up. And I agree with you in that you can always check out of the game and it's easier that way, but then you're fragile, right? You kind of build resilience by working out hard. And it's hard to be calm until you've lost a lot and won a lot. Like you have to see.

在追逐多巴胺的过程中，你会经历起起落落，直到厌倦，然后意识到：好吧，现在是低谷，但最终会有高峰；或者有高峰就会伴随低谷——我懂这个游戏规则了。所以我最近一直在做的一件事，就是列一个清单，找出那些本质上非二元、不会在未来制造对立面的活动。追逐金钱确实会在未来带来焦虑和痛苦，因为你会比较、会赢也会输。追逐名声也有坏处，你会对侮辱、攻击和封杀变得敏感。那么，哪些活动本身是内在真实的，是一种免费的午餐呢？这些包括冥想、瑜伽、创作艺术、玩耍、为乐趣而阅读（不一定为了知识或教育）、写作、记日记。你甚至可以创业，只要你是为了手艺本身、为了心流，而不是为了某个特定结果。虽然这很难做到。至少从外部看，埃隆·马斯克似乎就是这样，他造火箭是为了去火星，不是为了赚钱或出名，尽管他得到了这些副产品。所以我认为，不欺骗自己、关注自己、不把自己太当回事、从第一性原理审视自己的思想、以及从事那些内在驱动而非外部驱动的活动，这些都能让你的生活变得更好。我做这些不是为了成为一个斯多葛派的圣人。老实说，斯多葛派的一个缺点是，他们看起来并不怎么快乐。当然，很多内容在翻译中丢失了。我知道他们有呕吐室和狂欢派对什么的，但斯多葛派至少在现代的投射中是这样的，这也是我喜欢奥修的原因之一。人们经常批评奥修，他们也该批评，他在某些方面有点疯狂，但他过得很快乐，他享受生活。你活着，只有一次短暂的生命。当生命结束时，一切归零。对你来说，从你的视角看，你的死亡和世界末日没有区别。世界消失了，因为当你出现时世界出现，当你消失时世界消失。这个事实如此重大，以至于让你生命的其余部分变得无关紧要，而这本身就是一种自由。所以你应该享受自己，不应该在生命中受苦。如果你一直在受苦，那就想办法摆脱痛苦。如果你无法摆脱，那就想办法重新定义你的内心世界观，让你不再把它视为痛苦，至少到足以摆脱它的程度。如今，我们经常为他人背负痛苦。很多人想成为小基督，为他人背负十字架。这是一种悲惨的存在。你实际上也没有帮到他们。你背负他们的十字架并不会让他们的生活变得更好。更好的方式是让自己快乐、成功、健康，然后去拯救他们，真正地拯救他们，而不是仅仅坐在那里为他们受苦。至少这是我选择的生活方式。

The ups and the downs and the ups and the downs before you get tired of the dopamine chase and you sort of realize like okay this is down but eventually there'll be an up or there's an up that'll be a down I know how this game works. So one of the things I've been tracking recently is I've been trying to make a list of what are the activities that are sort of non-dual in nature they don't create their own opposite down the road. So chasing money does create anxiety and suffering down the road as you compare and you win and lose and so on. Chasing fame also has downsides where you're not open to insult and attacks and being canceled and whatnot. So what activities are intrinsically true in and of themselves and are kind of a free lunch? And those include things like meditation, yoga, creating art, playing, reading for fun not necessarily for knowledge or education, writing, journaling. You can even be building a business as long as you're doing it for the craft of it, for the flow of it, not necessarily for a given outcome. Although it's hard to do that. At least externally it seems like Elon Musk is doing that, he's building rockets to get to Mars, not to make money or to be famous, although he's getting those byproducts. So I think this whole not fooling yourself, paying attention to yourself, not taking yourself too seriously, examining your own thoughts from first principles, and doing activities that are drawn intrinsically for you as opposed to for the external world, they just make your life better. I'm not doing these things to be a Stoic sage, right? Honestly, one of the downsides of the Stoics is they don't look like they're having a lot of fun. I still like that right now, obviously a lot has been lost in translation. I know they had their vomitoriums and their orgies and whatnot, but the Stoics, at least the way it's modernly projected, and this is one of the reasons why I do like Osho. People give Osho a lot of flack and they should, he was a little crazy in some ways, but he was having fun, he had a good time. And you're alive, you have one very short life. When your life ends, it goes to zero. To you, it's indistinguishable from your perspective. Your death is indistinguishable from the end of the world as far as you're concerned. The world has disappeared because when you came into existence the world appeared, when you go out of existence the world disappears. And that is so consequential that it makes the rest of your life inconsequential, and that is a form of freedom. And so you should enjoy yourself, you should not suffer in this life. If you are just constantly suffering, then figure out how to get out of that suffering. If you can't get out of that suffering, then figure out how to redefine your internal worldview so that you don't necessarily view it as suffering anymore, to the extent that you need to get out of it. These days we borrow a lot of suffering on behalf of other people. A lot of people want to be a little Christ carrying crosses for others. It's a miserable existence. You're actually not doing them any favors either. You carrying their cross isn't making their life any better. The better way is for you to be happy and successful and healthy and then go save them, like literally save them physically, not necessarily just sit around suffering for them. Or at least that's the life that I choose to live.

我想用一个故事来结尾。我在泰国遇到一个人，叫克雷格，我忘了他姓什么，但他曾为托尼·罗宾斯工作。我们当时在泰国度假，他是最快乐的人。他一直都很开心，似乎总能一笑而过。他的生活不错，有一些成就，但并不是那种让人羡慕到要放弃一切搬到泰国去过他那种生活的程度。他的生活还算可以，但他就是很快乐，不是装出来的，而是发自内心的快乐。所以我问他，你的秘诀是什么？为什么？他说，他以前为托尼·罗宾斯工作，到处飞着为托尼布置活动，他总是坐在第一排，记笔记，布置现场，学习和倾听。然后他开始看穿自己内心的那些废话。他到了那个点，意识到自己一直在欺骗自己，让自己不快乐。有一天他决定，你知道吗，我对这个世界上的任何人都没有责任，除了我自己。或者说，如果我有责任，那种让我们觉得必须活成某个想象中的自己的沉重责任，他意识到的是：这个世界上必须有人一直快乐。那是某人的工作，成为世界的榜样。那为什么不能是我呢？我来当那个人。我来承担那个负担。于是他决定成为那个快乐的人。我觉得这简单又 brilliant，而且他真的做到了。他住在那里。所以我想成为那样的人：成功、平和、快乐、享受生活、幸福、冥想、灵性、成功，尽可能健康，有名有钱，但毫不在意这些。如果我明天失去一切，我仍然想快乐。就是这样。那就是我想达到的状态。我就做这个决定，因为必须有人成为那个人。那为什么不能是我呢？

I'm going to end with one story. There was a guy that I met in Thailand, Craig, I forget his last name, but he used to work for Tony Robbins. I met this guy and we were on vacation in Thailand and he was just the happiest person. He was just happy all the time and he just seemed to be able to laugh it off. As far as he had a good life, he had stuff going for him, but it wasn't like he had this incredibly enviable life where you would drop everything and move to Thailand and adopt his lifestyle. He had an okay life, but he was just happy, and not in a forced way, but he was genuinely happy. So I asked him, I said, you know, what's your secret? Why? And he said that he used to work for Tony Robbins and used to fly around setting up events for Tony, and he was always sitting in the front row and taking notes and setting things up and learning and listening. And he just kind of started seeing through his own internal BS. He got to this point where he was fooling himself into unhappiness, and he just decided one day he said, you know what, I have no responsibility to anybody in this world other than me. Or if I do have a responsibility, this kind of weight of responsibility that goes on where we're like, oh I need to live up to some imagined self, what he realized was he said, somebody in this world has to be happy all the time. That is somebody's job to be that role model for people in the world. That might as well be me. I'll be that guy. I'll take on that burden. And he decided to be the happy one. And I just thought that was simple and brilliant, and he did it. He lived there. So I want to be that guy who is successful, peaceful, happy, enjoying life, blissful, meditative, spiritual, successful, and as healthy as I can be, and famous and rich, and not give a damn about any of it. So if I lose it all tomorrow, I still want to be happy. That's it. That's where I want to be. And I'll just make that decision because somebody has to be that person. It might as well be me.

太棒了，老兄。Naval Ravikant，也就是 Naval Ravikant，Twitter 上是 Naval，N-A-V-A-L。他当然也有播客，就叫 Naval，N-A-V-A-L，你可以在任何播客平台上找到。博客是 nav.al。我们之前有过不少对话，你可以在网站 tim.blog 上搜索 Naval 找到。还有什么想补充的吗？其他资源、人们在网上打招呼的地方、推荐、对听众的请求？

I love it, man. Naval Ravikant, otherwise known as Naval Ravikant, but Naval on Twitter, N-A-V-A-L. And he has the podcast, of course, Naval, N-A-V-A-L, you can find that anywhere you find your podcasts. The blog nav.al. Previous conversations we've had, and we've had quite a few, you can just search Naval on the website tim.blog, forward slash Naval. Anything else you would like to add? Any other resources, places people can say hello on the internet, recommendations, asks of the audience?

我主要在 Twitter 上。Eric Jorgensen 最近出了一本书，收录了我很多语录，叫《Naval Ravikant 年鉴》。他真是太好了。我没从中赚一分钱。它在网上是免费的，你可以直接下载。我觉得叫 'Navalmanack'，挺巧妙的双关。就这些吧。我们网上见。祝大家富有、健康、快乐。去争取吧。

I'm mostly on Twitter. Eric Jorgensen recently put out a book which had a bunch of my sayings called 'The Almanack of Naval Ravikant'. It was very nice of him. I don't make any money off of it. It's free on the internet, you can just download it. I think it's 'Navalmanack', clever little turn of phrase. I think that's it. We'll see you on the interwebs. I wish everybody has a wealthy, healthy, and happy life. Go get it.

非常感谢 Naval 抽出时间。这太棒了。也感谢所有听众的收听。下次再见，不要欺骗自己。坐下来，花点时间与你的内心相处，不要对你脑海中的那个室友太苛刻。嘿，大家好，我是 Tim。在你们离开之前还有几件事。第一，这是 Five Bullet Friday。你想收到我的简短邮件吗？你愿意每周五收到我的一封简短邮件，提供……

Thanks so much, Naval, for taking the time. This is awesome. And to everybody listening, thank you for tuning in. And until next time, don't fool yourself. Sit down, spend some time with your mind, and don't be too hard on that roommate in your head. Hey guys, this is Tim again. Just a few more things before you take off. Number one, this is Five Bullet Friday. Do you want to get a short email from me? Would you enjoy getting a short email from me every Friday that provides...

本期节目由 ShipStation 赞助播出。假期购物季即将来临，我们知道人们会比以往任何时候都更多地在线购物。所有这些电子商务趋势都因新冠疫情等因素而加速。如果你是一个电商卖家，你准备好迎接创纪录的在线购物季的需求了吗？用 ShipStation 做好准备。ShipStation.com 是管理及配送订单最快、最简单、最实惠的方式。只需点击几下，你就能管理订单、打印折扣运单，并快速发货。为你和你的客户带来更愉快的假期。ShipStation 让假期发货不再麻烦。无论你在哪里销售——亚马逊、Etsy、通过 Shopify 的网站或其他平台——ShipStation 都能将所有订单整合到一个简单的界面中。而且 ShipStation 支持所有主要承运商：USPS、FedEx、UPS，甚至国际承运商。你可以每次比较并选择最佳运输方案，并且可以享受通常只留给大型财富 500 强公司的邮资折扣。难怪 ShipStation 是在线卖家的首选。现在，我的听众——也就是你们——可以使用优惠码 TIM 免费试用 ShipStation 60 天。只需前往主页 ShipStation.com，点击主页顶部的麦克风图标，然后输入 TIM。就这样。前往 ShipStation.com，然后输入优惠码 TIM。ShipStation.com。让发货成为现实。

This episode is brought to you by ShipStation. The holiday season is fast approaching, and we know that people will be buying more stuff online than ever before. All of these trends to ecommerce have been accelerated due to COVID and much more. If you're an e-commerce seller, are you ready to meet the demands of a record-breaking online shopping season? Be ready with ShipStation. ShipStation.com is the fastest, easiest, and most affordable way to manage and ship your orders. In just a few clicks, you're managing orders, printing out discounted shipping labels, and getting your products out fast. Happier holidays for you and your customers. ShipStation takes the hassle out of holiday shipping. No matter where you're selling—on Amazon, Etsy, your website via Shopify, or other platforms—ShipStation brings all of your orders into one simple interface. And ShipStation works with all of the major carriers: USPS, FedEx, UPS, even international. You can compare and choose the best shipping solution every time, and you can access the same postage discounts that are usually reserved for large Fortune 500 companies. It's no wonder that ShipStation is the number one choice of online sellers. And right now, my listeners—that's you guys—can try ShipStation free for 60 days when you use offer code TIM. Just go to the homepage, ShipStation.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage, and type in TIM. That's it. Go to ShipStation.com, then enter offer code TIM. ShipStation.com. Make chip happen.

本期节目由 Tonal 赞助播出。T-O-N-A-L。我对这个产品超级兴奋，一开始我还持怀疑态度。Tonal 的标语是：“Tonal 是世界上最智能的家庭健身房和私人教练。”这是他们网站上的口号。简单来说，这个设备——实际上是一个系统——非常适合那些希望将家庭锻炼提升到新水平的人，或者那些只想在极小空间内获得最大性价比的人。Tonal 经过精密设计，成为世界上最先进的力量训练室和私人教练。它利用各种突破性技术帮助你更快地变得更强。我是通过三个不同的朋友了解到 Tonal 的。他们都精通技术。其中一位是前竞技滑雪运动员，他使用 Tonal 在多项动作中力量翻倍，尽管他有着悠久的运动背景。我来描绘一下：通过摒弃传统的金属配重、哑铃和杠铃，Tonal 可以提供 200 磅的阻力——听起来不多，但在高端感觉要多得多——而设备比平板电视还小。你可以进行至少 150 种不同的练习。这些不同的技术是 Tonal 独有的，你可以通过按钮以 1 磅的增量调节重量，利用磁力和电力，因此运动非常流畅。尽管我的车库里已经有一个家庭健身房，但我仍然在安装 Tonal。我已经使用 Tonal 进行了多次锻炼，做了一些我在家庭健身房无法做到的事情，比如《4 小时身体》中的砍举练习，以及各种通常需要更大设备的绳索练习。例如，离心训练。举个简单的例子：二头肌弯举，假设你每只手举起 20 磅，然后 Tonal 会自动增加重量——因为你可以放下比举起更重的重量——比如在放下时增加到 25 或 30 磅。我还做壶铃摆动、各种硬拉等等。在一次专注于拉力的 Tonal 锻炼后，我整整一周都感到肌肉酸痛。离心训练的效果真是不可思议。它们还有许多其他非常酷的优势，可以应用于你最喜欢的任何动作。Tonal 会学习你的力量，并为每个动作提供建议重量，还有详细的进度报告帮助你看到力量的增长。Tonal 还拥有一个不断增长的专家指导锻炼库，由激励人心的教练带领，从力量训练到有氧运动，你几乎可以做任何事情。每个程序都使用人工智能和其他工程及智能功能根据你的身体进行个性化设置。实时检查你的姿势，就像私人教练一样。所以试试吧。尝试 Tonal——至少去看看，在 YouTube 上观看视频，看看你是否能认出某个熟悉的声音。不是我，我可以这么说。但试试 Tonal，世界上最智能的家庭健身房，在家试用 30 天，如果不喜欢可以全额退款。所以访问 www.tonal.com，结账时使用促销码 TIM 可享受智能配件 100 美元优惠。网址是 www.tonal.com，促销码 TIM。Tonal。成为最强的自己。

This episode is brought to you by Tonal. T-O-N-A-L. I'm super excited about this one, and I was skeptical of it in the beginning. Tonal quote: 'Tonal is the world's most intelligent home gym and personal trainer,' end quote. That's the tagline from their website, folks. To give you the one-sentence summary, this device—it's really a system—is perfect for anyone looking to take their home workouts to the next level, or someone who just wants to get maximum bang for the buck in a tiny, tiny footprint of space. Tonal is precision engineered to be the world's most advanced strength studio and personal trainer. It uses breakthrough technology of all different types to help get you stronger faster. I was introduced to Tonal by three different friends. All of them are tech savvy. One of them is a former competitive skier who's doubled his strength at a number of movements using Tonal, even though he has a long athletic background. And I'll paint a picture for you: by eliminating traditional metal weights, dumbbells, and barbells, Tonal can deliver 200 pounds of resistance—which doesn't sound like a lot, but it actually feels like a lot more at the high end—in a device smaller than a flat-screen TV. And you can perform at least 150 different exercises. These different technologies are exclusive to Tonal, and you can dial weights up and down with the touch of a button in one-pound increments using magnets and electricity, so the movement is extremely smooth. And even though I have a home gym already in my garage, I'm still getting a Tonal installed. I've used Tonal for multiple workouts now to do things I just cannot do in my home gym, such as the chop and lift exercises from the 4-Hour Body, all sorts of cable exercises that would usually involve much, much bigger piece of equipment. Eccentric training, for instance. You can do—to give a simple example—bicep curls where you are lifting, let's just say, 20 pounds in each hand up, and then Tonal will automatically increase the weight—because you can lower more than you can lift—to say 25 or 30 pounds on the way down. And I do kettlebell swings, I do all sorts of deadlifts, this, that, the other thing. And after one workout on Tonal focusing on pulling, I was blasted for a full week. It's really incredible what you can do with eccentrics. They also have all sorts of other really, really cool advantages that you can apply to any of your favorite movements. Tonal learns from your strength and provides suggested weight recommendations for every move, detailed progress reports to help you see your strengths grow. Tonal also has a growing library of expert-led workouts by motivating coaches, from strength training to cardio, so you can do really just about everything. Every program is personalized to your body using artificial intelligence and other aspects of the engineering and smart features. Check your form in real time, just like a personal trainer. So try it out. Try Tonal—at least check it out, watch the videos on YouTube, and see if you can pick out a familiar voice. It's not me, I'll say that. But try Tonal, the world's smartest home gym, for 30 days in your home, and if you don't love it, you can return it for a full refund. So visit www.tonal.com for $100 off of smart accessories when you use promo code TIM at checkout. That's www.tonal.com, promo code TIM. Tonal. Be your strongest.